Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,128

    Lighter Big Betty alternative for front?

    My never ending search for the perfect front tire continues.

    I have been running a Big Betty GGC in the front since the fall. It is easily the best tire I have run in terms of cornering traction and general sure-footed-ness in both hardpack and loose, sketchy downhill sections. My overall confidence is much higher when I’m running this in the front around 25 psi.

    The only issue is the weight. On some rides it is totally worth it, but other times (long rides and rides with lots of rolling or flat twisty sections) I am feeling it. So, I am looking for an alternative for long, epic length rides. I really don’t need the extra heavy casing, so I think I want something of similar volume, similar tread manners, but lighter casing. Basically, less FR and more Trail oriented.

    I had a Fat Albert before this (the older 2.35 version) and I was not crazy about the way it handled on corners. There was this transition as I leaned the bike where it lost some traction, then regained it as I leaned farther. Also, I found it to get deflected sideways off of rocks more than I liked. It seemed like the profile was sort of V-shaped, and I think this was why it felt like this. However, I did not give it long before I sold it to a friend when I saw a good deal on the Big Betty, so I did not really give it a chance at lower pressures, and others have said that that could have helped. I’m kinda wishing I had not let it go.

    Has anyone tried the new 2.4 front Fat Albert?

    Any other around 750g I should consider for the front? I would like to keep a 2.4ish volume, and I am not hard on sidewalls or casings. I tend to like tires with a more square profile. I also like tires that grip throughout the lean, rather than tires that force you to lean the bike to get the side knobs to dig. Also, I am not too concerned about rolling resistance in the front (within reason). The Timberwolf I had is more rr than I want, but something like a Nevegal is OK.

    I have run a 2.35 Nev in the front in the past and though it was OK, but not great (although I have liked the 2.1 x 26 as well as the 2.2 x 29 versions on other bikes). I also liked the Specialized Enduro 2.4, but it was a pretty squirmy on the hardpack turns.

    I live and ride on the East Coast.

    Thanks
    Last edited by kapusta; 03-09-2009 at 01:38 PM.

  2. #2
    GAME ON!
    Reputation: saturnine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,971
    big betty fr triple is 780g
    RIP Adam Yauch

    "M.C. for what I AM and do, the A is for Adam and the lyrics; true"

  3. #3
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by saturnine
    big betty fr triple is 780g
    That's what Schwalbe claims, but in reality it is closer to 940g.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    267
    You may want to try the Kenda Excavator. I much prefer it over the Big Betty GGC. The Excavator is also less weight.
    BTW: You may want to weigh the Big Betty if you purchase one again. Mine weighed in at 1040 grams (certified, laboratory scale). Not exactly a light-weight tire.

  5. #5
    GAME ON!
    Reputation: saturnine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,971
    that's hard to believe. are you sure you've got the right casing? they differ by up to 360g across the line. from what i've seen, schwalbe tends to be pretty close to claims. certainly not off by quarter pound to half pound
    RIP Adam Yauch

    "M.C. for what I AM and do, the A is for Adam and the lyrics; true"

  6. #6
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by saturnine
    that's hard to believe. are you sure you've got the right casing? they differ by up to 360g across the line. from what i've seen, schwalbe tends to be pretty close to claims. certainly not off by quarter pound to half pound
    The 780g claim is for the 24" version.

    The GGC and the Triple are claimed to be 850g. Look around, though, most people have found them to be a bit heavier (around 940g give or take). I have not weighed mine, but just picking it up next to a ~750g tire and the difference is pretty clear.

  7. #7
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by 3sigma
    You may want to try the Kenda Excavator. I much prefer it over the Big Betty GGC. The Excavator is also less weight.
    BTW: You may want to weigh the Big Betty if you purchase one again. Mine weighed in at 1040 grams (certified, laboratory scale). Not exactly a light-weight tire.
    Excavator is one I have thought about.

    How does it compare size-wise to a BB? Is it about the size of a Mountain King 2.4 or a Nevegal 2.35?

    What about it makes you prefer it to a BB?

    Thanks.

  8. #8
    Perpetual Hack
    Reputation: mykel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,819
    Schwalbe BB Triple.

    Mine weighs in at 842 grams.

    I have been thinking about trying a Mountain King Protection....

  9. #9
    Off the back...
    Reputation: pinkrobe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,905
    I have heard decent things about the Continental Rubber Queen in 2.4. Not a featherweight, really bad name, but apparently quite a good tire [and a true 2.4]. I will pick up one of those plus a couple Mountain King Protection 2.4s.

  10. #10
    Bicyclochondriac.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    13,128
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkrobe
    I have heard decent things about the Continental Rubber Queen in 2.4. Not a featherweight, really bad name, but apparently quite a good tire [and a true 2.4]. I will pick up one of those plus a couple Mountain King Protection 2.4s.
    Thanks. That does look interesting. I'm looking for something a bit lighter (something in the 700's). I like the BB a lot, and still plan on using it a good deal of the time despite the weight, but I want something for the longer days.

    Plus, $70+ is a bit steep for me at this point.

    I could not believe the name when I read it. I can not help but wonder if that is a direct translation from German, and if they knew how it would sound to English speakers.

    I have been running a Mountain King 2.4 Protection in the rear for a while. Pretty amazing tire in the rear. I am going to try it out in the front once I get something that can go in the back while I try it out (the BB won't fit). I tried it for two muddy rides in the front while I had a Survival Pro in the rear and it did fine, but I think that when things are dryer and harder it might feel a little squirmy in the front, and it is a rounder profile than I usually like in the front. But I do plan to give it a shot.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,985
    I'd consider the Nobby Nic 2.4 (675gm claimed) and the Maxxis ADvantage 2.4 (845gm claimed). Both are pretty big volume tires that are on the lighter side yet get a lot of great reviews as far as hooking up well and rolling well.

    The Maxxis Ardent in the sinlge ply 2.4 (855gm claimed) would be a good option as well. I also liked the Panaracer Rampage 2.35 (730gm claimed) in that category.
    Last edited by KRob; 03-10-2009 at 04:55 PM.

Posting Permissions

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