Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IndianaXC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    115

    Maxxlite or Furious Fred?

    Anyone who has used both? Im wanting a super light tire for perfect race conditions this year. I was wondering which has better grip, since they are both almost exactly the same in weight and dimensions.
    Giant XTC Composite 29er, SID XX World Cup fork, AC Race 29 wheels
    Giant TCR advanced with Ultegra Di2

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeShopMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    204
    the maxlite is gonna be more durable as it has more of it's rubber on the top of the tire. both have paper thin sidewalls.

    i would give the grip to the FF only because you can run it at medium or high psi. the side walls seem to conform better to the trail. more supple maybe? if you run them tubless then the FF for sure and it will be faster tubless as well. with tubes only a tiny tiny bit more.

    the maxlite i would only run at high psi. i tore three of these in a row. still have the original set of FF's and the tread is even starting to wear out. never thought they would last this long.


    i tested both on smooth/rough/rocky trails, soft/hard grass and pavement. surprisingly their small volume made them slower than my larger tires on everything(including pavement) in all psi's except for grass. they really did shine on sod...lol.


    thought i would race on them, but their slow rolling resistance compared to a 2.2 or 2.4 RR put me off. not to mention grip. hauling extra weight for me was way better than the slow speed of these tires.

    the gearx barro race tnt is a better choice for a light weight tire IMO.
    so my afro now sticks out of my helmet.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IndianaXC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    115
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeShopMonkey View Post


    thought i would race on them, but their slow rolling resistance compared to a 2.2 or 2.4 RR put me off. not to mention grip. hauling extra weight for me was way better than the slow speed of these tires.

    the gearx barro race tnt is a better choice for a light weight tire IMO.
    Really? Thats weird. Ive only heard the opposite of that before, but i guess i can believe it. Im running 2.4 RR front and 2.25 rear right now, im happy with them and i dont feel like they are holding me back. Maybe they will be my only tire for this season.
    Giant XTC Composite 29er, SID XX World Cup fork, AC Race 29 wheels
    Giant TCR advanced with Ultegra Di2

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    327
    I have seen sidewalls on FF tear WAY open on South Florida shell-rock trails. A tire this flimsy doesn't seen too fast to me

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BikeShopMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaXC View Post
    Really? Thats weird. Ive only heard the opposite of that before, but i guess i can believe it.
    a lot of studies have been done about skinny verses wide tires and rolling resistance. the wider tires float over the rough better and don't bounce up or backwards as much. that is where the speed is lost. not in trail contact. the smoother the trail the less the difference.

    but with the profile of the RR at higher psi, you essentially get less road contact than the squarer FF. the FF had to have a different shape to have enough tire on the trail.


    now there is a trade off as tires get wider they begin to lose speed due to rolling resistance. 2.6 i think was the start of the decline.
    so my afro now sticks out of my helmet.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeShopMonkey View Post
    a lot of studies have been done about skinny verses wide tires and rolling resistance. the wider tires float over the rough better and don't bounce up or backwards as much. that is where the speed is lost. not in trail contact. the smoother the trail the less the difference.
    The problem with reading a "study", in fact a graduate thesis, is assuming that it is informed and complete. A tire like a FF will have lower internal losses due to its construction than a wider, beefier tire. That would suggest the rolling resistance on pavement would be better. There are multiple competing factors contributing to "rolling resistance" as it is referred to in that "study".

    http://www.mtbonline.co.za/downloads...llustrated.pdf

    A paper just as long could be written on how flawed that "study" is.

    Quote Originally Posted by BikeShopMonkey
    I tested both on smooth/rough/rocky trails, soft/hard grass and pavement. surprisingly their small volume made them slower than my larger tires on everything(including pavement) in all psi's except for grass.
    Very hard to believe that. There is nothing about a wider, thicker-sidewalled, heavier MTB tire that would make it roll better on pavement than a super-light, paper-sidewalled, semi-slick, narrow racing tire. On grass that "study" says that wider tires are better and on pavement they are not. I don't accept that result simply because the paper says it, though.

    An interesting result of the "study" is that the smoother the tire, the better. I wonder why people don't ever quote that result? While the Schwalbe paper encourages people to consider wider tires it is ultimately a propaganda piece that contributes to thinking things that are wrong. It is important that a tire be big enough and soft enough to roll well for a given application. Beyond that, going bigger and softer will not be faster just as it is not on the road.

  7. #7
    Lazy People Suck
    Reputation: Fett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    702
    I would highly recommend that you run a higher volume tire especially since you appear to be running a rigid fork. Most of the courses in the DINO series are wooded and twisty with no real long extended climbs. I think the Racing Ralph's are an ideal tire for Indiana courses. I run Maxxis Aspens, but the Racing Ralphs are on my short list.

    I do not think that the Maxxlites or FFs are known for their cornering ability and carrying speed out of the corners is vitally important on the courses I believe that you will be racing on.

    I would also say you would be faster with a suspension fork. You want that front wheel sticking to the ground on bumpy corners.
    "Son, The world needs ditchdiggers, too"-Ted Knight, Caddyshack

  8. #8
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaXC View Post
    Anyone who has used both? Im wanting a super light tire for perfect race conditions this year. I was wondering which has better grip, since they are both almost exactly the same in weight and dimensions.
    I have not used both. I've used the Maxxlites and other lightweight semi-slicks such as the NoTubes Crow and Raven. All of them - tubeless.

    I raced the Maxxlites in some events last season (as a tester) on Crest rims, tubeless front and rear on a full suspension bike (JET 9). Conditions were "perfect" in these races. Namely, the dried clay soil was nearly like cement on most of the course. The Maxxlite up front is a handful to handle corners at speed - even if you get the psi dialed in correctly. Expect some drift and be prepared to ride that drift or alter your technique a bit (like slow down a bit more than you would with other tires). They are amazingly fast out of corners and on the straight sections. They spin up like no other tire I've tried. Makes sense considering the combined weight for my pair is 652g.

    You could run a Maxxlite in the rear and something with a bit more bite (knobs) up front in spite of the weight penalty (something like a Karma 1.9, or a Renegade 1.9, or an Aspen 2.1, etc...). I'm not adverse to racing Crows, Ravens, Maxxlites, Aspens front and rear - but then again, I'm running them on a full suspension bike (the bike's suspension does a good job of keeping the rubber contacting the surface) tubeless with as low a psi as I can get away with on my bike.

    Most other races all season long were wet, muddy and not ideal for something like the Maxxlite. Therefore, they only saw "action" in three races - but will see more in the future.

    Bruce

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    38
    Maxlite!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    186
    Furious Freds are better than maxxlites in my opinion. Have not ridden the 285's yet so cannot compare.

    I would also get something with a little more grip on the front. Makes a lot of difference with slight weight penalty.

    On a side note putting off the last few grams, consider a pair of Continental Race Kings front and back. They are fast and, more importantly, feel fast. Offer sufficient grip and nice weight.

    Chris.

  11. #11
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,800
    Very interested in this topic. I will be doing a race this year that is a mix of fireroad and pavement. The mens pro podium last year was all CX bikes. I unfortunately don't have one of those. I do have a 20lb 29er though . I was thinking of running Ravens but they aren't much lighter than my current RoRo/Aspen set up although the rolling resistance is much better. I really don't need a ton of traction and my new American Classic rims will widen any tire. I haven't ever used a mega lightweight tire. I'll be interested to see your reviews of these tires!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •