Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    179

    2.3 Vs. 2.5 tire for FR

    I was wondering what the trade offs are between using a 2.5 and a 2.3 for general FR/DH use. I know that it would be posible to save a couple hundred grams going with a 2.3, but was wondering if the rolling reistance is that much less? Also how much of a diffrence is there in the traction one could get in a 2.3 Vs a 2.5?
    I'm asking because I'm using 2.5's right now (Maxxis high rollers) and am considering switching them out to 2.3s to make the climbing I do a little easyer.

  2. #2
    I'm Rick James B*tch
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42
    Greatly depends on what tires you are looking at really. Different tread paterns roll faster. Some companies 2.5's are really 2.3 and some 2.3's are realy like a 2.1 so it would help if we knew what make of tires you were looking at?
    What did the five fingers say to the face?


    SLAP

  3. #3
    Jm.
    Jm. is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jm.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,137
    Depends on what your personal threshold is. Some people can survive all day on 2.3s, but go to 2.5s and the several hundred gram increase in rotational weight and rolling resistance will kill them and make them bonk. Some people will just ride primarily downhill and 2.5s are no problem. Some people ride primarily downhill and have good enough sills that they can control their bike adaquatly on 2.3s and take advantage of the lighter weight and resistance just going downhill....it all depends.
    I know in my heart that Ellsworth bikes are more durable by as much as double. AND they are all lighter...Tony Ellsworth

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    179

    didn't have any particular one in mind

    I was more just wondering what the general diffrences were, and can see that probably I just need to try some out and find out what I prefer...I'm trying to find a good compromise between traction on the way down and ease of roll on the way up (when going up can't be avoided).

  5. #5
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059

    Here's a good example.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironbar
    I was wondering what the trade offs are between using a 2.5 and a 2.3 for general FR/DH use. I know that it would be posible to save a couple hundred grams going with a 2.3, but was wondering if the rolling reistance is that much less? Also how much of a diffrence is there in the traction one could get in a 2.3 Vs a 2.5?
    I'm asking because I'm using 2.5's right now (Maxxis high rollers) and am considering switching them out to 2.3s to make the climbing I do a little easyer.
    What Jm and Roughrider said is very true. One, tires are not clones of each other, especially when you consider different manufacturer's standards. There are usually subtle and sometimes dramatic differences in the size of similarly rated tires from different companies. You almost have to have tires mounted up to really check how big a tire will look and actually be in use. Michelin makes a 2.8 DH tire and a 2.5 freeride/trail tire, and the differences are really big. The 2.8 looks like a motorcycle tire and the 2.5 looks like a 2.3--this from the same company. I'd suggest you get a tire that fits the terrain you'll be riding on. Check with any riders that you know that are knowledgeable about their bikes, tires, and local riding conditions. See what they're using and make a decision. Generally I'd say you want to use the smallest tire that still provides the most traction for your riding needs. I use that red Hot S pictured in a 2.5 size. It rolls very fast and works great in a tubeless setup with their heavy duty carcass that those models now come with. That tire weighs 800g--not bad for a fairly beefy tire.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    581
    Agree with all comments in this thread but if High Rollers is what you are to remain with specifically, then the answer would be:

    - yes, the 2.3 would be easier to handle when going uphill.
    - yes, to rolling resistance since you have less weight, therefore, more acceleration.
    - yes, you would be giving away a tiny bit of traction only due to tire volume but would be minimal specially since you are already used to this tire. You can perhaps compensate with lower air pressure for more deflection. (tubeless can be a way to go)

    HG is an awesome tire. Great all rounder, and Maxxis makes so many different casings that can also help in terms weight savings, etc.

  7. #7
    Glad to Be Alive
    Reputation: SHIVER ME TIMBERS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    42,292
    I have found 2.3's easier to get to corner edge to corner edge quicker..quicker to accelerate...but loss of traction was the deal breaker ..especially for a guy weighing 210 pounds...no chance I would ever give up traction for the little benefits
    the trick is ENJOYING YOUR LIFE EACH DAY, don't waste them away wishing for better days

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3,706
    Holy JESUS BACK FROM THE DEAD THREAD! I hadn't even joined the forum yet when this was posted, LOL! FWIW HR2's are far better than HR's; there is nothing to see here... carry on!

    G MAN
    Last edited by Gman086; 12-30-2013 at 04:06 PM.
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nvphatty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,519
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    Holy JESUS BACK FROM THE DEAD THREAD! I hadn't even joined the forum yet when this was posted, LOL!

    G MAN
    no seriously doubt

  10. #10
    TNC
    TNC is offline
    noMAD man
    Reputation: TNC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,059
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    Holy JESUS BACK FROM THE DEAD THREAD! I hadn't even joined the forum yet when this was posted, LOL! FWIW HR2's are far better than HR's; there is nothing to see here... carry on!

    G MAN
    LOL!...I haven't been on the forum for quite some time and was surprised to get a notification about this thread being active again. And I was even more surprised to see that Shiver Me Timbers was still alive and not in a nursing home...from old age, not riding bikes...LOL!

  11. #11
    CAN YOU DIG IT??!!??!!!??
    Reputation: man w/ one hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,007
    Good to hear from one of th' OG'z, if you will. Haven't heard wisdom from up on th' mtn. fer awhile...

    Oh & maybe one of the new Holly Roller II'z in a 2.4 will do th' trick for you, it does for me. It rolls great up & down & grips as good or better than th 2.5 Nevy's I have ran on th rear for the last 4-6 yrs...till now.
    Last edited by man w/ one hand; 01-02-2014 at 10:55 AM.
    "Why are you willing to take so much & leave others in need...just because you can?"

Similar Threads

  1. 2.3 rear tire on 2001 sugar?
    By fishercat in forum Trek
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-21-2004, 11:40 AM
  2. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 03-09-2004, 07:26 PM
  3. Blur rear tire choice thread from old boards
    By CraigH in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 04:16 PM
  4. Advice with Stan no tubes sealent ?
    By Johny Rotten in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 02-13-2004, 02:39 PM
  5. Suggestions for WW FAQ section
    By Trevor! in forum Weight Weenies
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-19-2004, 12:22 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
  •