Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Infidel
    Reputation: KYMtnBkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    404

    530 gram Conti. Mtn King Supersonics 2.4 on a Nomad, am I just asking for trouble?

    It's time for a new set of tires for my Nomad. I have a brand new set of 530 gram Continental Mountain King Supersonics that I had purchased for another build. Unfortunately, budget constraints have delayed that build and I'm curious how they might work on my Nomad. I would be setting them up tubeless with Stan's sealant. Am I just asking for trouble? I usually do a 25-35 mile ride every weekend and also some light freeride with drops of up to 5 feet. The thing I love most about the Nomad is it coaxes me to push my limits and go bigger. I don't want to do anything to the bike that would discourage me from pushing my limits. However, the temptation of losing a pound of rotational weight is nagging. Has anyone had any experience with these tires, or a similar weight tire on a 6" travel bike that's ridden hard? The other option I am considering is ordering a set of Maxxis High Rollers 2.35. If you've had any experience with these tires please let me know what you think.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rpm100's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    445
    I thought long and hard about running the supersonics on my bike, but after speaking to people who have ran them, decieded to go with the protections. The supersonics are very, very thin and i think you would be pushing your luck running them on your nomad.

    I swapped from high rollers onto the contis, whilst the Mountain kings are lighter and roll MUCH quicker, they dont offer the same grip or sidewall resistance as the High rollers.

    HTH

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 53119's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,517
    have to agree with rpm supersonics are scary thin. sold mine for the protections also.
    don't sweat the petty things & don't pet the sweaty things

  4. #4
    I can't ride 45!
    Reputation: jasonb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Yes...I have never disliked a tire so much.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,652
    I am running a MK SS 2.4 on the front of my Reign X (tubed, not Stans), and I'm quite happy with the grip, and so far no issues (sidewalls and tread knobs are looking good), and I ride rocky/rooty trails a lot (25-30psi and I weigh ~150lbs).
    But, for resort riding I have another wheelset with DH tires, so I'm doing "aggressive trail riding" but not going big, on the MK.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: fixbikeguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    561
    I'm running them on my Yeti 575 with no problems. The terrain here is quite rocky and rooty and I still have yet to slice them up.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    111
    I ride them on my hardtail. No problems with rocks or pinchflats, but be wary of thorns. No resistance whatsoever here .

  8. #8
    Don't be hasty.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    525
    Run them on my 575 as well, like them very much.

  9. #9
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,590
    I have one on the front of my frankenhardtail. Bad choice for tubeless. It is very hard to seat, leaks for weeks before it seals, and squirms around like it has a suuuuuper thin sidewall. Imagine that. I haven't put a hole in one tubeless, which includes 6 runs at downieville, but it's not a good handling tire tubeless. I have one of those heavy 2.4 tubes in it now, and it handles much better.

    I really like highrollers a lot. Who doesn't?
    Hell is eternally climbing manzanita trail on your singlespeed.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: <Steven>'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    172

    Maybe Protections?

    Hi there,

    I ran 2.4 supersonics (tubed, not tubeless converted) front & rear on my Iron Horse MKIII (5 inches of travel) and the rear tyre lasted 2 weeks before I tore through the tread (not the sidewall, tore a 3 inch slash straight through the bottom where the tread is on a rock). The front went perfectly fine.

    I ride very rocky trails, loose over hard, with plenty of eroded granite. These trails are tough on tyres. I also tried a 2.2 protection on the rear and it lasted ages so maybe a 2.4 protection would be right up your alley.

    I love the handling of the Mountain King tyres on my local trails. The only tyre I've found that handles better on my local trails are the 2.35 super tacky Minion DHFs (single ply, wire beads, converted to tubeless with Stans). They Minions are my weekend/hack about/training tyres. If I feel game enough to XC race I switch to the UST Mountain Kings due to their lighter weight.

  11. #11
    The White Jeff W
    Reputation: jeffw-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,278
    There was a thread in the wheels & tires forums where someone had torn off a knob with about 100 miles on theirs & wanted to get it warrantied. The response came back..

    Hi,

    All Continental tires carry a one-year warranty covering manufacturing defects, to be handled thru the original retailer. Supersonic tires, however, are ultra-light race-day only models and generally not warrantable for short life span.

    Thanks,
    Bryan Gibson
    Warranty/Customer Service/Inside Sales

    I've had a pair on my 575 for about a month now & so far so good. I don't think the side wall is stiff enough to run tubeless, though.
    No moss...

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    380
    The MK has worked out ok for me, fantastic grip but punctures easy even with high PSI. I weigh about 180lbs and only do small drops of up to 3' on my Heckler with Fox 36's.

  13. #13
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,936
    Just FYI, I run Maxxis High Rollers sometimes, in the UST variety, and they are pretty low volume small tires.. definitely not a true 2.35.
    Ocala Mountain Bike Association - www.omba.org

Posting Permissions

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