Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 101 to 200 of 362
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by PlutonicPlague View Post
    Thanks Welnic. Sounds like they are a lighter and less bulky spare to haul around. I should give the Q-tubes a try. I've also heard that the Specialized tubes in the same 2.4" - 2.75" size are worth a try. I ride mainly on the beach, and thorns aren't a problem on the trails I ride. I might stay lucky and continue to avoid flats!
    I have been running the Q tubes in both our fat bikes with very good results. The Bontragers are good too. The Surly light tubes are a bit heavier than the Q version even though they are technically the same parent company.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    263
    I rode my wirebead Juggernauts this weekend for the first time. They rolled very fast and hooked up well in soft moondust and dirt in Fruita, CO. Overall, I was very pleased. Pressures ranged from 7.0 on day 1 to 6.3 on day 2, at the lower pressure there was a hint of self-steer. The sidewalls are quite stiff, I suspect I could run them below 5 in these conditions. I ran them tubeless on Hed carbon rims, they were a bit of a fight to seat, but once it was done, no issues. At these pressures, they did not seem to dribble too much in rocky sections, although I did have one big rebound that reminded me of the Scott Unishock.

    Basically, the heavier, wirebead version is pretty good, and at about $60 retail, priced well to be trashed over a summer season. If I can get the Kevlar versions to replace these, I will, and I suspect I have several good months of riding before this pair is done. If I recall correctly, weight was 1100-something grams. The bike is 27.1 with them if I take my KingCage MudFlask off (to refill it, of course, with 12oz of Boathouse Bourbon goodness. For safety).

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Stockli Boy View Post
    I rode my wirebead Juggernauts this weekend for the first time. They rolled very fast and hooked up well in soft moondust and dirt in Fruita, CO. Overall, I was very pleased. Pressures ranged from 7.0 on day 1 to 6.3 on day 2, at the lower pressure there was a hint of self-steer. The sidewalls are quite stiff, I suspect I could run them below 5 in these conditions. I ran them tubeless on Hed carbon rims, they were a bit of a fight to seat, but once it was done, no issues. At these pressures, they did not seem to dribble too much in rocky sections, although I did have one big rebound that reminded me of the Scott Unishock.

    Basically, the heavier, wirebead version is pretty good, and at about $60 retail, priced well to be trashed over a summer season. If I can get the Kevlar versions to replace these, I will, and I suspect I have several good months of riding before this pair is done. If I recall correctly, weight was 1100-something grams. The bike is 27.1 with them if I take my KingCage MudFlask off (to refill it, of course, with 12oz of Boathouse Bourbon goodness. For safety).
    Were they the 4.5 or 4.0 juggernauts?

  4. #104
    Tear it all out! SuperModerator
    Reputation: CraigH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,755
    Quote Originally Posted by CraigH View Post
    If anyone is looking for the 4.5" Sport (Wire bead) AEbike has them in stock here for the best prices I've seen:
    Kenda Juggernaut Tire 26 x 4.5" Steel Bead Black - AEBike.com
    I picked them up yesterday but haven't mounted, ridden or weighed them yet.

    The knobs are taller than I expected based on the photos I've seen.

    Likely be cutting the center knobs off anyway turning them into a budget Endo/BFL sand tire ala Ward.

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    166
    Is there anyone who can tell us how the juggernauts ride in the real world ?

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    31
    I just got a set of 4.5 juggernauts yesterday. They have great grip and braking performance, however, the rolling resistance is relatively bad. The tires exhibit virtually no self steer although I have only run them on higher pressures.
    Last edited by WalrusWrangler; 04-04-2015 at 11:56 PM.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swerny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,758
    Quote Originally Posted by WalrusWrangler View Post
    I just got a set of 4.5 juggernauts yesterday. They have great grip and braking perfirmance, however the rolling resistance is relatively bad. The tires exhibit virtually no rolling resistance although I have only run them on higher pressures.

    ????
    That totally contradicts itself
    Mike
    Toronto, Canada
    2016 Trek Farley 7
    2017 Diamondback Haanjo Trail Carbon
    2016 Scott Solace 10 Disc

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Swerny View Post
    ????
    That totally contradicts itself
    Sorry accidently said rolling resistance twice. Thanks for catching that.

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    166
    I would think no rolling resistance to be a good thing . Amazing quite actually

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by WalrusWrangler View Post
    Were they the 4.5 or 4.0 juggernauts?
    4.0. I like them in the dirt, wouldn't even bother in snow.

    4/11/15 Update: I've tested several pressures, and they seem to self steer pretty badly below 6.5PSI on dirt, but are pretty happy at 7.1-6.9PSI without self steer or dribbling. They did well in loose dirt, moondust, and platy rocks in western Colorado. A bit of tearout when out of the saddle on steep climbs, not much grip on steep off-camber stuff, but overall, for the price, a good pair to chew up until the now flies. These are wirebead 4.0.
    Last edited by Stockli Boy; 04-11-2015 at 04:44 PM.

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IvanMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    224
    Hi,

    Any word when 4.0 Pro version will be available for average peddal pusher?

    Cheers!
    I.
    LoMF syndrome...

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by WalrusWrangler View Post
    I just got a set of 4.5 juggernauts yesterday. They have great grip and braking performance, however, the rolling resistance is relatively bad. The tires exhibit virtually no self steer although I have only run them on higher pressures.
    Just put the 4.5 juggernauts on the front last night (bought one for now as I have to test fitment on the rear). Rode to the bus stop this morning, and agree with your assessment! No self steer, as good as my husker dus, but definitely more rolling resistance, which is to be expected. Measured just shy of 110mm on an 80mm rim. Also agree the knobs are quite pronounced.

    Oh yeah tried my best to weigh, kinda hard being a write bread tire, but came in right around 1500g, not a lightweight.

  13. #113
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IvanMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    224
    So anybody? Anything?

    No word about when Pro wersion will go public?

    Cheers!
    I.
    LoMF syndrome...

  14. #114
    Tear it all out! SuperModerator
    Reputation: CraigH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,755
    Used the 4.5 for a trail ride (loaded with a heavy pack), 2 flats due to thorns (one front, one back). I think the knobs are spaced too far apart so that the tire casing is actually in contact with the ground. Changed to 4.7" Bulldozers for the next day with no flats on the same trail.

    I bought the 4.5 Juggernaut tires to use for beach & sand, they just can't be used for trails.

  15. #115
    Slow is good
    Reputation: Drillbit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    61
    I bought a pair of the 4.5's for my Fatboy before I went on vacation to Florida. I anticipated doing a bit of pavement riding and didn't want to wear out my Ground Controls. They performed well on the beach until the pressure got really low, then there was noticeable self steer. They were fine for pavement. When I got home and hit the trails is when the performance fell off sharply. The first trail I rode was one I hadn't ridden for a couple of years. The tires were very bouncy during a large portion the the ride. I stopped ant let some air out of them and the bounce decreased, but the rolling resistance increased. When I get back to my car I checked the pressures, 3.5 front and 5 rear. Much lower than I had been running on dry trails.

    The second trail was a very familiar trail which I had ridden not too long ago. I increased pressure to 5 front and 10 rear because I know this was a smoother trail. The tires seemed slow to me, even the downhill sections where I knew what to expect the didn't carry the speed as well as the Ground Controls. Felt like I was working much harder to ride at my normal pace. I can only attribute this to greater rolling resistance. I re-mountd the Ground Controls when I returned from the ride.

    I liked the price ($120 for the pair), but I guess $55 tires can't compete with $160 tires.

    I am by no means an expert, just an average rider. But I did notice a huge difference between tires. That's my take, YMMV.

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    106
    They are OEM on my scott big ed, loads of grip, but loads of drag. Mounted a set of maxxis mammoth for summer, and the jumbo jim for winter driving.
    Weight them at 1590 and 1610 grams, 4.5 60tpi sport version
    Scott Scale 710 plus, with guide rs, XX1

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    154
    Has any one run the kenda juggernaut 4.0 folding Pro ?
    Is it available Now?

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeffreyjhsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    226
    I rode a test bike equipped the the 120 tpi 4.0 version. The knobs are very small and the tires are very fast. I don't know their weight as they were already on a test bike.

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    227

    Juggernaut Pro

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Foot View Post
    Has any one run the kenda juggernaut 4.0 folding Pro ?
    Is it available Now?

    I gave up trying to find Jumbo Jims and went on a search for the Juggernaut Pro 4.0 120tpi. Finally tracked down a pair. Here are the weights:
    868gr and 867gr
    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3369.jpgKenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3368.jpg

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    I gave up trying to find Jumbo Jims and went on a search for the Juggernaut Pro 4.0 120tpi. Finally tracked down a pair. Here are the weights:
    868gr and 867gr
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3369.jpg 
Views:	777 
Size:	141.7 KB 
ID:	1021594Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3368.jpg 
Views:	567 
Size:	121.5 KB 
ID:	1021595
    It is my firm belief that unicorns are sacrificed to make these tyres.

    Where oh where did you pur-chase these most elusive of items sir ?

    I have in my extended search , managed to acquire 4 goose eggs (gold) , rocking horse poop (3 sacks) and dentures - hen (7 sets) . Some of which I am willing to exchange for information leading to the actual procurement a pair of these far more scarce fictional pneumatic wonders .


    TIA




    Fat Biker

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    246
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Biker View Post
    It is my firm belief that unicorns are sacrificed to make these tyres.

    Where oh where did you pur-chase these most elusive of items sir ?

    I have in my extended search , managed to acquire 4 goose eggs (gold) , rocking horse poop (3 sacks) and dentures - hen (7 sets) . Some of which I am willing to exchange for information leading to the actual procurement a pair of these far more scarce fictional pneumatic wonders .


    TIA




    Fat Biker
    Monfat.fr bought a pair from them came in at 820/830 grams

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by mortenste View Post
    Monfat.fr bought a pair from them came in at 820/830 grams
    Thanks bud will check them out ASAP


    Fat Biker



    Edit: Well . Not an entirely fruitless exercise . NO Juggernaut Pro's

    Well not much of anything as far as "parts for fat bikes" goes . 1 inner tube and 3 Tyre options and THAT's it

    The good news is though that they DID have my second choice of tyre the Jumbo Jim Liteskin 4.0

    2 ordered and 161 Euros relieved from my bank account

    very happy .


    Double thanks






    Fat Biker
    Last edited by Fat Biker; 10-11-2015 at 03:06 PM.

  23. #123
    Jammin' Econo
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,198
    My Bud and Lou are getting winterized with a fresh set of teef soon, and will become my dedicated winter tires from then on.

    For summer use, I'd like something a little narrower (and a lot lighter), but that will still run fine on my Clownshoes, without having to build up a whole different wheelset. A pair of Jugs have risen to the top of my list for next spring. But I'd love to see a few more offerings in this "mid" size range - kind of like Surly bringing back the ET as a great in-between 2" and 3" option, the 4.5" tire seems ripe for development, particularly with dirt-specific tread designs. But I'm also a horrible businessman, and I realize I probably represent a tiny niche of an already small niche...
    I dream of a day when my children will live in a world without the shackles of cause and effect.” - S. Colbert


  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    106
    Better option is the jumbo jim, juggernaut 4.5 is an anchor and same weight as the bud/lou
    Scott Scale 710 plus, with guide rs, XX1

  25. #125
    Jammin' Econo
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,198
    Quote Originally Posted by Novaterra View Post
    Better option is the jumbo jim, juggernaut 4.5 is an anchor and same weight as the bud/lou
    Yeah, you're right - I was getting my 4.0 and 4.5 weights mixed up, which I'll blame entirely on the painkillers I'm taking right now.

    Well, maybe I'll go back to the Bulldozers for summer use. I'd really like to run something a little skinnier than the Lou/Bud in the summer..
    I dream of a day when my children will live in a world without the shackles of cause and effect.” - S. Colbert


  26. #126
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    506
    Still searching for a reliable source for the 4.0 pro's.
    After purchasing a set of my second choice Jumbo Jim's 4.0 liteskin all I can say is I'm disappointed with the weights of the JJ's. Both marked up as liteskins and both over 1100g (1108g and 1137g) !!!
    I must say though that the mould quality is not what I have come to expect from Schwalbé and the printing on the sides looks second rate too. If I didn't know any better I would say they're fakes, but I've neither heard or seen such a thing with tyres ????

    So, top and bottom of it is . . . . . . Any news on the public pro 4.0 120tpi Juggernauts availability ? Before Christmas, before spring ? Hell before NEXT winter ?


    Fat Biker

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Biker View Post
    Still searching for a reliable source for the 4.0 pro's.
    After purchasing a set of my second choice Jumbo Jim's 4.0 liteskin all I can say is I'm disappointed with the weights of the JJ's. Both marked up as liteskins and both over 1100g (1108g and 1137g) !!!
    I must say though that the mould quality is not what I have come to expect from Schwalbé and the printing on the sides looks second rate too. If I didn't know any better I would say they're fakes, but I've neither heard or seen such a thing with tyres ????

    So, top and bottom of it is . . . . . . Any news on the public pro 4.0 120tpi Juggernauts availability ? Before Christmas, before spring ? Hell before NEXT winter ?


    Fat Biker
    I talked to a Kenda Dir of Sales and Marketing at their booth during the ICEMAN Expo... says the J-Pros are just now in production and due in the USA in 3 weeks. Also, after inspection, said that the the ones I found were pre-production/engineering versions and I should not have been able to get them... will be replacing them with the real McCoy's (minus the nasty self steer I hope!).

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,959
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    I talked to a Kenda Dir of Sales and Marketing at their booth during the ICEMAN Expo... says the J-Pros are just now in production and due in the USA in 3 weeks. Also, after inspection, said that the the ones I found were pre-production/engineering versions and I should not have been able to get them... will be replacing them with the real McCoy's (minus the nasty self steer I hope!).
    Sweeeeet! 3 weeks is only like 6 months in fat bike land!

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by tjdog800 View Post
    I talked to a Kenda Dir of Sales and Marketing at their booth during the ICEMAN Expo... says the J-Pros are just now in production and due in the USA in 3 weeks. Also, after inspection, said that the the ones I found were pre-production/engineering versions and I should not have been able to get them... will be replacing them with the real McCoy's (minus the nasty self steer I hope!).
    That's good to hear , thanks.
    I do hope it's true and they're pretty close to the 880g-900g we've been seeing lately .
    I believe the first pre-production one were coming in under 800g .

    Probably means that we'll be lucky to get them for spring in the UK

    I do wish companies would't reveal or pre-release stuff so far off being production ready though .

    This thread's a year old come next week .




    Fat Biker

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Biker View Post
    That's good to hear , thanks.
    I do hope it's true and they're pretty close to the 880g-900g we've been seeing lately .
    I believe the first pre-production one were coming in under 800g .

    Probably means that we'll be lucky to get them for spring in the UK

    I do wish companies would't reveal or pre-release stuff so far off being production ready though .

    This thread's a year old come next week .

    Fat Biker
    Kenda rep said the production versions were coming in at about 850gr. Not the 750gr pre-pro weights like the ones I got.

  31. #131
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    579
    Yep, just got six more of these. Lightest was 815g, the rest right around 860g.
    Espen Wethe
    www.kindernay.com
    (Kindernay XIV 14 speed internal gear hub with hydraulic sequential shifters)

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,107
    Starting to see the Juggernaut Pro 4" version showing up for sale. At 835g, they're a little heavier than the ill-fated v1 that popped up and disappeared quickly. That's still ridiculously light for a 4" tire. Anyone try these yet?

  33. #133
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    I can find the 4.0, not the 4.5

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    645
    where are people finding the 4.0 pro? I have a race next weekend and would like to set these up tubeless on my Farley 7 for the early no-snow fatbike races.

  35. #135
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    use google, ive seen a couple places with it. Bikeman was one of them, forget the other one.

  36. #136
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    Starting to see the Juggernaut Pro 4" version showing up for sale. At 835g, they're a little heavier than the ill-fated v1 that popped up and disappeared quickly. That's still ridiculously light for a 4" tire. Anyone try these yet?
    Yep, been riding them since May or so. Just got to test them on some snow as well. Works fine, but they are not the best on powder, of course.
    They will be way fast on packed snow.
    Espen Wethe
    www.kindernay.com
    (Kindernay XIV 14 speed internal gear hub with hydraulic sequential shifters)

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,107
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    where are people finding the 4.0 pro? I have a race next weekend and would like to set these up tubeless on my Farley 7 for the early no-snow fatbike races.
    eBay

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    2,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Yep, been riding them since May or so. Just got to test them on some snow as well. Works fine, but they are not the best on powder, of course.
    They will be way fast on packed snow.
    What kind of (non-snow) terrain did you test them on? I'd have to think these are way fragile. Maybe a good beach tire, as long as there's no seashells .

  39. #139
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by SmooveP View Post
    What kind of (non-snow) terrain did you test them on? I'd have to think these are way fragile. Maybe a good beach tire, as long as there's no seashells .
    Hardpack with a multitude of sharp rocks.
    They are more fragile than more standard type fat tires, but held up surprisingly well.
    Espen Wethe
    www.kindernay.com
    (Kindernay XIV 14 speed internal gear hub with hydraulic sequential shifters)

  40. #140
    blood in / blood out
    Reputation: majack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    328
    I just picked up a set of the Jugger Pro 4.0's. But I will have to wait till I use them. We are heading into the early part of winter here in MN, so snow is coming. I like my VanHelgas for the snow and that is what I have mounted on the bike now. But after reading what Espen wrote about the tire, he has me thinking if I should give the JP's a try in the snow.

    Espen, did you reverse the tread pattern on the rear when you had it in the snow?
    RICOH for LIFE
    Pain is Weakness

  41. #141
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by majack View Post
    I just picked up a set of the Jugger Pro 4.0's. But I will have to wait till I use them. We are heading into the early part of winter here in MN, so snow is coming. I like my VanHelgas for the snow and that is what I have mounted on the bike now. But after reading what Espen wrote about the tire, he has me thinking if I should give the JP's a try in the snow.

    Espen, did you reverse the tread pattern on the rear when you had it in the snow?
    Yep, run it reversed on the rear.
    (Tioga Farmer John style)
    Espen Wethe
    www.kindernay.com
    (Kindernay XIV 14 speed internal gear hub with hydraulic sequential shifters)

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,600
    The prices for the 4.0 Pro are crazy low. I'm suspicious. Unless these tires are significantly inferior to everything else on the market, we've been played the fool for years.

    The Fat-B-Nimble has it's own shortcomings, sure, but this proves that its pricing is not an anomaly for decent tires.

    Weights and bead-bead measurements when these start arriving please.

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thickfog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,272
    Quote Originally Posted by bme107 View Post
    The prices for the 4.0 Pro are crazy low. I'm suspicious. Unless these tires are significantly inferior to everything else on the market, we've been played the fool for years.

    The Fat-B-Nimble has it's own shortcomings, sure, but this proves that its pricing is not an anomaly for decent tires.

    Weights and bead-bead measurements when these start arriving please.
    Yeah, but got mine for 60 bucks at treefort. Kinda scares me like you said. We'll see. Hopefully we've simply been suckers for years.
    CRAMBA Chairman

  44. #144
    blood in / blood out
    Reputation: majack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    328
    Quote Originally Posted by Espen W View Post
    Yep, run it reversed on the rear.
    (Tioga Farmer John style)
    Thanks for the reply Espen. I was going to run it in reverse but wanted first hand feed back before I mounted it up.
    RICOH for LIFE
    Pain is Weakness

  45. #145
    Oslo, Norway
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by bme107 View Post
    The prices for the 4.0 Pro are crazy low. I'm suspicious. Unless these tires are significantly inferior to everything else on the market, we've been played the fool for years.

    The Fat-B-Nimble has it's own shortcomings, sure, but this proves that its pricing is not an anomaly for decent tires.

    Weights and bead-bead measurements when these start arriving please.
    Out of many:
    Lightest that I have seen: 815g (latest production run)
    Heaviest: approx 930g (production run from this spring)
    Bead to bead: approx 231mm
    (They measure 4.2'' on a 80mm rim @20psi and 4.5'' on a 100mm at the same pressure)
    Espen Wethe
    www.kindernay.com
    (Kindernay XIV 14 speed internal gear hub with hydraulic sequential shifters)

  46. #146
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thickfog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    1,272
    Mike came in just today. 935 grams. 23mm bead to bead. My Jumbo Jims are almost as light and probably a better overall tire. We'll see.
    CRAMBA Chairman

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thecanoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,177

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)

    I'd like to see the durability of the 4.0's on real life riding before I spring for them. The weight savings must sacrifice some durability.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Last edited by thecanoe; 11-26-2015 at 05:45 PM.
    Santa Cruz Tallboy
    Moonlander

  48. #148
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    Everything is a trade off that's just a given. Saving weight means less material. So they arent going to be as durable as a 1300g tire. Like everything gonna have to choose what is most important.

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    1,959
    How would these do in dry, loose, dusty conditions as a front?
    I'm dissatisfied with my FBN (it seems to wash out a lot).

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    227
    Mine J-Pros came in at 844g and 845g. My first set (returned) came in at mid-750ish. These new ones have a smooth tubeless-ready bead instead of the earlier serrated style.

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DubzOxford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    108
    Look what just came in the mail. Both weigh exactly 882 grams with the rubber band. Note: These are the 4.0's

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_6461.jpg
    Fat and Single

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    211
    Has anyone tried 4.0 or 4.5's in snow yet?
    If so, how did they work?

  53. #153
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    Read the last couple pages, all is answered there

  54. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DubzOxford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    108
    First impressions. The tires mounted up super easy tubeless on my 65mm Light bicycle carbon hoops. Had no leakage anywhere, which was nice for once. I took my Pugs out for the maiden voyage this morning. Dirt roads were solid and the trails were a mixture of leaves, solid dirt and a little mud from the sun drying out the wet spots. Right away I thought the Kenda's made less noise then my Husker Du on the pavement. I was stoked to think maybe they would roll better then the Du's. This was not the case at all. I was getting dropped coasting on the downhills by guys I usually are side by side with. Then when we got into the trails the bike felt very sluggish compared to my Du's. It got to a point I got off the bike to check to make sure my brakes were not applied. We continued to hit more trails and the feeling of high resistance was still there. Once we got off the trail we hit some more dirt roads. I know these roads well and I know how my bike should feel on them. Again, I continued to get dropped on the downhills and the climbs. The tires just don't roll very well. I got home and checked tire pressure. 11 in the rear and 9 in the front, Exactly what I run the Du's at. Maybe I was having an off day in the saddle, I really hope so. The Kenda seems like a great all around tire. I will need to put some more time on them before I condemn them and go back to the Du's.
    Fat and Single

  55. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by DubzOxford View Post
    First impressions. The tires mounted up super easy tubeless on my 65mm Light bicycle carbon hoops. Had no leakage anywhere, which was nice for once. I took my Pugs out for the maiden voyage this morning. Dirt roads were solid and the trails were a mixture of leaves, solid dirt and a little mud from the sun drying out the wet spots. Right away I thought the Kenda's made less noise then my Husker Du on the pavement. I was stoked to think maybe they would roll better then the Du's. This was not the case at all. I was getting dropped coasting on the downhills by guys I usually are side by side with. Then when we got into the trails the bike felt very sluggish compared to my Du's. It got to a point I got off the bike to check to make sure my brakes were not applied. We continued to hit more trails and the feeling of high resistance was still there. Once we got off the trail we hit some more dirt roads. I know these roads well and I know how my bike should feel on them. Again, I continued to get dropped on the downhills and the climbs. The tires just don't roll very well. I got home and checked tire pressure. 11 in the rear and 9 in the front, Exactly what I run the Du's at. Maybe I was having an off day in the saddle, I really hope so. The Kenda seems like a great all around tire. I will need to put some more time on them before I condemn them and go back to the Du's.
    Don't bother, the Husker Du's are way better, those Kenda's are superb in weight, but that's all. Those Kenda's are superb on flat beach conditions or dryland.

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    106
    The 4.5 is a big boat anchor, the 4.0 probably a not so big boat anchor :-)
    Scott Scale 710 plus, with guide rs, XX1

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    24
    Than you need more body weight lol

  58. #158
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    362
    Been riding the 4.0 pros for a few days now. they made my crestone feel way lighter but they don't roll very well at all. switched back to the 4.0 jumbo liteskins today. better tire in every way but weight and price.

  59. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    80
    I just got my pair and here's my initial thoughts:

    1. They are LIGHT. But they are also very low profile in the knobs and very, very thin. I ride mainly beach with sand and rocky Puget Sound areas....we'll see how they hold up.

    My Borealis Yampa with a well warn Knard and a 45N Dillinger up front weighted 26 pounds. The Kendas mounted up on my Marge Lites tubeless super easy. Easier than any tires I have tried prior. The tires are also the most true I have tried...no hops and no wobble.

    My bike now weighs 24.1 pounds...just about two pounds off the bike!

    First ride was on trails with some water and mud. I did not notice the drag some have mentioned. Set up tubeless I felt these rolled faster than my prior set up. They gripped well but in the slimy mud they slip but grab (while the Knard just slips).

    I am looking forward to see how these work on Sand...many of my friends cut their Endos and Larrys down for sand and I think these may be perfect they way they are....especially for a 3 season tire. I am unsure how these would be on snow.

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    175
    I've had the 4.0 Pros for a few weeks now. The posters talking about the tires not rolling well, eh disagree. I've been riding the midwest on them so no snow (i wouldn't ride them in snow) on both river trails and some of the nicest real mountain bike trails wisconsin has to offer. That said these roll fast and climb faster, the 4.0 is rough on the down hills with a rigid fork. I'm still crossing my fingers that a tire with low knobs like the Jugger in a 5" will make production some day. Until that day these are a great fast tire for someone used to riding fast 29er's etc.

  61. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelHumpal View Post
    I've had the 4.0 Pros for a few weeks now. The posters talking about the tires not rolling well, eh disagree. I've been riding the midwest on them so no snow (i wouldn't ride them in snow) on both river trails and some of the nicest real mountain bike trails wisconsin has to offer. That said these roll fast and climb faster, the 4.0 is rough on the down hills with a rigid fork. I'm still crossing my fingers that a tire with low knobs like the Jugger in a 5" will make production some day. Until that day these are a great fast tire for someone used to riding fast 29er's etc.
    What tires were you on before?

    Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk

  62. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    175
    Quote Originally Posted by Negotiator50 View Post
    What tires were you on before?

    Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
    I've owned Ground Controls, Dilly 5s, HuDus, Vanhelgas, demo'd tons more.

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    12
    I'm pretty inexperienced with tubeless but the sidewall leaks seam excessive. I hope 6oz of stans is enough to seal it all and i need to keep adding air and shaking every hour to keep them from going flat and falling off the bead. Did anyone else experience this?

  64. #164
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,124
    Welcome to kenda tires. The 29er tires I had did the same thing. Can't get feather light tires and expect much rubber in the side walls. But that's why I use home brew sealant, so much better at dealing with that problem than stans imo.

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by yeroc40 View Post
    I'm pretty inexperienced with tubeless but the sidewall leaks seam excessive. I hope 6oz of stans is enough to seal it all and i need to keep adding air and shaking every hour to keep them from going flat and falling off the bead. Did anyone else experience this?
    Wow!
    I wouldn't bother going tubeless with these.
    I'll stick with tubes with some sealant in them.

  66. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    362
    I had mine tubeless on nextie rims and they sealed up great, surely did not have seepage like your photos show. I only ran them for a couple weeks and switched back to jumbo jims, the rolling resistance on mine sucked, I see others that say they think they are fast though. I guess it's one of those YMMV.

  67. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    106
    I dont know what tyres you guys were running before mounting the juggernauts, but surely not jumbo jims, even the winter setup, 45nrth flow and dunderbeist have less rolling resistance than the juggernauts. And the beists roll lot heavier then the schwalbe's
    Scott Scale 710 plus, with guide rs, XX1

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    506
    Quote Originally Posted by fagro View Post
    Wow!
    I wouldn't bother going tubeless with these.
    I'll stick with tubes with some sealant in them.
    But the sealant makes such a lovely pattern on the sidewalls.

    Surely it's gotta be worth it just for that ? LOL



    Fat Biker

  69. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    82
    I picked up a pair of the 4.5 Jug sports (couldn't resist, $90 shipped for the pair). On a 93mm rim, the carcass is only a few mm wider than the stock 4.0 Chaoyang, AKA Fat Be Nimble. The 4.0 measures 100mm at the carcass and I didn't get an exact measurement on the Jug. Lug-to-lug measurement is notable wider on the Jug though, which it should be. The specified vs actual measurements of all fat bike tires, even on very wide rims, is maddening.

  70. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bepperb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    195
    Quote Originally Posted by BadgerOne View Post
    I picked up a pair of the 4.5 Jug sports (couldn't resist, $90 shipped for the pair). On a 93mm rim, the carcass is only a few mm wider than the stock 4.0 Chaoyang, AKA Fat Be Nimble. The 4.0 measures 100mm at the carcass and I didn't get an exact measurement on the Jug. Lug-to-lug measurement is notable wider on the Jug though, which it should be. The specified vs actual measurements of all fat bike tires, even on very wide rims, is maddening.
    You need to compare bead to bead measurements.

    Measuring width of the non-flattened (by the ground) section of a snow tire, or really any fat tire, doesn't make much sense to me even though you see it all the time in reviews. If the cross section is taller but the width is the same, the contact patch will still be wider. And if you just put them on, it might change as well as they stretch.

    FWIW, I think the Jugg 4.5 should be 245mm bead to bead, and the FBN somewhere closer to 217. That's a lot more volume even if your width measurements don't indicate it.

  71. #171
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MegaMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    331

    Which tubes for the 4.5" Juggers

    A laugh... and then a quick advice request...

    I got a Moto FB4 Comp a couple weeks ago THIRD hand. Needless to say, I got a pretty good deal on it and have had fun getting it back into top running gear along with moving some hot rod parts from the parts shelf to my green piggy that is destined for winter beater status.

    First thing I bought for the bike was a set of 4.5" Juggernauts. I figure they'll get me around well in the relatively mild winter here in Virginia. Plus, the price was irresistible ($89/pair and free shipping via Trail This on eBay). I'll probably go to a set of 4.0 tires for casual summer trail riding.

    Anyway, I pulled off the Vee Missions and found this tube inside. OMG...LOL... SIX patches! Six!

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3432.jpg

    Surprisingly, this Vee Rubber 4.0 tube has held up to some pretty rough rides I've put it through over the past couple weeks.

    So the Q...

    I know for a 4.0 tire, the usual advice is to go with the Q-tubes 2.4-2.75 tube. But what about for these 4.5 inchers? Have you run the Q-tubes in the bigger tires with good luck, or should I just go ahead and get the Ultra-Light Surly tube (3.0-4.8). Something else?

    Thanks in advance!
    _Matt
    I just wanna ride...

  72. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    1,135
    Quote Originally Posted by MegaMustang View Post
    A laugh... and then a quick advice request...

    I got a Moto FB4 Comp a couple weeks ago THIRD hand. Needless to say, I got a pretty good deal on it and have had fun getting it back into top running gear along with moving some hot rod parts from the parts shelf to my green piggy that is destined for winter beater status.

    First thing I bought for the bike was a set of 4.5" Juggernauts. I figure they'll get me around well in the relatively mild winter here in Virginia. Plus, the price was irresistible ($89/pair and free shipping via Trail This on eBay). I'll probably go to a set of 4.0 tires for casual summer trail riding.

    Anyway, I pulled off the Vee Missions and found this tube inside. OMG...LOL... SIX patches! Six!

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3432.jpg 
Views:	545 
Size:	169.0 KB 
ID:	1040217


    Surprisingly, this Vee Rubber 4.0 tube has held up to some pretty rough rides I've put it through over the past couple weeks.

    So the Q...

    I know for a 4.0 tire, the usual advice is to go with the Q-tubes 2.4-2.75 tube. But what about for these 4.5 inchers? Have you run the Q-tubes in the bigger tires with good luck, or should I just go ahead and get the Ultra-Light Surly tube (3.0-4.8). Something else?

    Thanks in advance!
    _Matt

    Not the Qtubes, but I've run the Specialized 2.3-3.0X24" tubes in the Bud/Lou without issue before I switched to tubeless.
    '17 Cutthroat
    '16 Bucksaw Carbon
    '15 Fatboy Expert

  73. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    152
    I've got the Q-tubes on Snowshoe XL 4.8...so far so good, though only about 30 miles in on easy/moderate terrain. Oh...and that tube is good comedy, thanks!

  74. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,600
    *hangs head in shame*
    Other than that triple patch monstrosity I see no problems with 6.

    I've seated beads on 4.8s with 26x2.3-2.5 but never rode them, only rode in 3.8s.

  75. #175
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Klainmeister's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    388
    Running the 4.5 Sports and feel they are absolutely slow. Compared the 4.7 Bulldozers, a somewhat scientific coasting test informed me that the rolling resistance is hugely worse on the Juggernauts. Considering swapping them at this point. Grip is there, though, for sure.

  76. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    82
    ^^ Exactly how I feel about them. The weight is fine, and the thin sidewalls allow good flex, but they are pigs to ride. If I leave them on, by spring I will be in the best shape of my life.

  77. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    253
    I set my Surly Wednesday up with Juggernaut Pro 4.0. I can't make it out to the woods until this weekend. I will not be riding snow, I live in Tampa. So, the Juggarnauts are just for dirt.

    Testing these tires out on the street, the tire behaves strangly at slow tight turns. It's a form of self steering. I think the rubber is thinner under about 3/4 inch of the tread on each side. It almost seems when you get on that edge that it must flatten out and the bike wants to pull on that edge.

    Has anyone else experienced this on the Juggernaut 4.0 Pro? If so, does it ride better on the dirt trails?

  78. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    964
    All my fat tires feel like shit on the street when run at the pressures I run them on the trail.

  79. #179
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    253
    Matto6,

    Thanks. Your right I won't know anything until I get on the trail and test them out.

    Another question: My digital tire pressure guage sucks with presta valves. I was thinking of either getting a Meiser (analog) 15psi presta or 30psi presta. Anybody using either of these with success on their fat bikes?

  80. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    357
    I think there may be a whole thread on gauges for fatbikes somewhere

    "Buy the ticket. Take the ride." -Hunter S. Thompson
    "Life is too important to be taken seriously." -Oscar Wilde
    "Single speeds should come in cans" -Me

  81. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation: traditiionalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    307
    Okay here's my question..... would the juggernaut 4.5 sport be a good choice for a mud/snow tire? I already have a spring/summer/fall, but are they that slow that I couldn't use them all year long and keep up (actually I am faster) with a group of 26" rider's?

    A ebay seller has them for $89.99 a pair, that seems cheap enough but decent enough for a knobby tire.

    I'm not looking for a speed demon tire, just somthing that I can keep up with my 15mph average speed.


    I do alot of log rides (some up to 140 feet long) and need these tires to have some bite on logs.

  82. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MegaMustang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    331

    Juggs 4.50 Sports grip great, but are real pigs on damp trail

    I bought a set of the 4.5 Sports (probably from same seller -- BTW, very good seller - fast shipping). However, I felt like the tires were like tank tracks. Really solid and confident grip, but took A LOT more effort to go the same speed as I did on 4.0 Vee Missions -- to be expected.

    The Juggs went on very easily and are impressive once on the wheel... especially the big wheels I am using (100mm and 80mm).

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3436.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3437.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3438.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3439.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3440.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3444.jpg

    Kenda Juggernaut 26x4.0 (and 4.5)-img_3445.jpg

    I rode them on a cool, misty day -- mid 40s (Fahrenheit). I set them both at 7.0 psi (with the Vee Rubber tubes). Getting on the bike for the first time after installing, I noticed I had to swing my leg higher and was now an inch or so higher up (probably more BB and pedal clearance). When I rolled around the parking lot, I noticed no self steer (surprisingly). They seemed stable and quite agile for their size.

    As I first dropped in, I was impressed with the grip. Wow! However, within the first few minutes I noticed a big increase in required effort. After 30 minutes or so, I was convinced that these tires were really slow rollers and felt like they were super heavy. After a 2 hour ride, I was pretty sure they were coming off immediately.

    It's probably not a fair comparison, but I put a set of 4.0 Panaracer FBNs for the next ride (from same ebay seller) in the same conditions (two days later) and flew around the same course with much greater ease.

    Back to the Juggs. I don't think they are bad tires, they are just massive overkill for the conditions I rode them (here in northern Virginia). I'm keeping them for when I ride in much harsher conditions -- super sloppy or snow. I would think that with even lower pressure (5-6 psi), they'll ride over most anything -- though with a good bit more effort.

    Hope this helps a bit.
    _Matt
    I just wanna ride...

  83. #183
    mtbr member
    Reputation: traditiionalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    307
    Quote Originally Posted by MegaMustang View Post
    I bought a set of the 4.5 Sports (probably from same seller -- BTW, very good seller - fast shipping). However, I felt like the tires were like tank tracks. Really solid and confident grip, but took A LOT more effort to go the same speed as I did on 4.0 Vee Missions -- to be expected.

    The Juggs went on very easily and are impressive once on the wheel... especially the big wheels I am using (100mm and 80mm).

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3436.jpg 
Views:	732 
Size:	145.4 KB 
ID:	1041813

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3437.jpg 
Views:	331 
Size:	138.0 KB 
ID:	1041814

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3438.jpg 
Views:	951 
Size:	139.8 KB 
ID:	1041815

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3439.jpg 
Views:	186 
Size:	109.0 KB 
ID:	1041816

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3440.jpg 
Views:	724 
Size:	119.4 KB 
ID:	1041817

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3444.jpg 
Views:	393 
Size:	105.5 KB 
ID:	1041818

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3445.jpg 
Views:	309 
Size:	99.1 KB 
ID:	1041819

    I rode them on a cool, misty day -- mid 40s (Fahrenheit). I set them both at 7.0 psi (with the Vee Rubber tubes). Getting on the bike for the first time after installing, I noticed I had to swing my leg higher and was now an inch or so higher up (probably more BB and pedal clearance). When I rolled around the parking lot, I noticed no self steer (surprisingly). They seemed stable and quite agile for their size.

    As I first dropped in, I was impressed with the grip. Wow! However, within the first few minutes I noticed a big increase in required effort. After 30 minutes or so, I was convinced that these tires were really slow rollers and felt like they were super heavy. After a 2 hour ride, I was pretty sure they were coming off immediately.

    It's probably not a fair comparison, but I put a set of 4.0 Panaracer FBNs for the next ride (from same ebay seller) in the same conditions (two days later) and flew around the same course with much greater ease.

    Back to the Juggs. I don't think they are bad tires, they are just massive overkill for the conditions I rode them (here in northern Virginia). I'm keeping them for when I ride in much harsher conditions -- super sloppy or snow. I would think that with even lower pressure (5-6 psi), they'll ride over most anything -- though with a good bit more effort.

    Hope this helps a bit.
    _Matt
    Matt, that helps alot. I think for a winter tire that won't break the bank these are my best bet. I'm not a speed demon, not looking to break any strava times. Just looking to have fun. I'll use these for winter, early spring when it's mud and maybe fall depending on how they work out for me. I think these paired with fbn would be probably the best setup for around $200.

    Just curious though, what kind of riding do you do? Where are you located to get an idea of the trails your riding. I'm in NY, so rocks,roots,mud,logs,snow you name it we pretty much have it. I'm guessing the juggernauts are a durable tire.


    Edit:saw a 4.5 pro on ebay for $60 each are they better than the sport? Same size knobs?

  84. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    1,413
    Quote Originally Posted by traditiionalist View Post
    Edit:saw a 4.5 pro on ebay for $60 each are they better than the sport? Same size knobs?
    Same tire, but Pro will be a lighter tire since it's not a wire bead.

  85. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by DubzOxford View Post
    First impressions. The tires mounted up super easy tubeless on my 65mm Light bicycle carbon hoops. Had no leakage anywhere, which was nice for once. I took my Pugs out for the maiden voyage this morning. Dirt roads were solid and the trails were a mixture of leaves, solid dirt and a little mud from the sun drying out the wet spots. Right away I thought the Kenda's made less noise then my Husker Du on the pavement. I was stoked to think maybe they would roll better then the Du's. This was not the case at all. I was getting dropped coasting on the downhills by guys I usually are side by side with. Then when we got into the trails the bike felt very sluggish compared to my Du's. It got to a point I got off the bike to check to make sure my brakes were not applied. We continued to hit more trails and the feeling of high resistance was still there. Once we got off the trail we hit some more dirt roads. I know these roads well and I know how my bike should feel on them. Again, I continued to get dropped on the downhills and the climbs. The tires just don't roll very well. I got home and checked tire pressure. 11 in the rear and 9 in the front, Exactly what I run the Du's at. Maybe I was having an off day in the saddle, I really hope so. The Kenda seems like a great all around tire. I will need to put some more time on them before I condemn them and go back to the Du's.

    I'm very surprised to hear this. I was really looking forward to these as a fast summer tire. Strange that they're so light but roll so slowly...

    Perhaps they'll roll better once "broken in"?

  86. #186
    mtbr member
    Reputation: traditiionalist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    307
    Quote Originally Posted by ultraspontane View Post
    I'm very surprised to hear this. I was really looking forward to these as a fast summer tire. Strange that they're so light but roll so slowly...

    Perhaps they'll roll better once "broken in"?
    I'll be ordering a pair within the next few days... I'll let you know my observations. Coming from a 2.3 nevegal on a 26" tire I'm used to slow rolling tires.

  87. #187
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    24
    Superfast tyre if you take the 4.0 120tpi.

  88. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    That's not what the ride reports are saying.

  89. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    24
    Got two guys here who have them on their Inferno fatbikes, they are holding up with 29ers easily. I just was a little too late with ordering these, and they are out of stock for a while here in Europe. May be they had other series than? Because what I have seen there were hardly knobs on those tyres and asked if they had any problems to stay on the bike in muddy conditions.

  90. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    5
    Here's an interesting review from fat-bike.de The Kenda Juggernaut 4.0 Pro is the lightest FATBike tire

  91. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by matto6 View Post
    All my fat tires feel like shit on the street when run at the pressures I run them on the trail.
    Not mine.
    Both Ground Controls and Barbegazis' feel fine the the pavement at 5 PSI - no self steer, no strange behavior at all.

  92. #192
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,464
    I've had the Barbegazi's for two weeks now and have ridden them in a lot of different conditions. As much as I like them, they do have horrible self steer. I don't know how anyone could miss it.
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  93. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    ZERO self steer on my Barbis down to 5 PSI

  94. #194
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,985
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    I've had the Barbegazi's for two weeks now and have ridden them in a lot of different conditions. As much as I like them, they do have horrible self steer. I don't know how anyone could miss it.
    I think steering geometry can play into the equation.
    Latitude 61

  95. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Yep - head angle can play into it, no doubt.
    I have zero self steer on the Farley 7/Barbis.

  96. #196
    Your Best Friend
    Reputation: Silentfoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,464
    Not really. It's the tread design. It doesn't have a center line of treads and actually two parallel lines of tread just off center they conspire to fight control of the tire. I've used a bunch of different tires and I'm not shy saying something I spent a bunch of money on isn't perfect.
    I'm a mountain bike guide in southwest Utah

  97. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,134
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Not really. It's the tread design. It doesn't have a center line of treads and actually two parallel lines of tread just off center they conspire to fight control of the tire. I've used a bunch of different tires and I'm not shy saying something I spent a bunch of money on isn't perfect.
    Boom headshot! I've noticed this forum has more than it's fair share of confirmation bias.

  98. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,985
    Then there's the, "This happens to me so it must be true for everyone else in all circumstances." bias.
    Latitude 61

  99. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    357
    Can't we all just get along????

    "Buy the ticket. Take the ride." -Hunter S. Thompson
    "Life is too important to be taken seriously." -Oscar Wilde
    "Single speeds should come in cans" -Me

  100. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    1,715
    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    Not really. It's the tread design. It doesn't have a center line of treads and actually two parallel lines of tread just off center they conspire to fight control of the tire.
    I'm not going to sit here and tell you that you're not experiencing what your experiencing, but I don't think the treads are working against you in the way you describe. It doesn't work that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silentfoe View Post
    I've used a bunch of different tires and I'm not shy saying something I spent a bunch of money on isn't perfect.
    I appreciate that - we need more of that around here quite frankly.
    All I can say is that I know what self-steer is as I experienced it in an acute fashion with the 2013 Kona Wo and those V tires. The Barbagazi tires are very well behaved for me - in fact I rode out to the road this morning to test again at 5 PSI. Absolutely self-steer free.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Kenda Juggernaut...sub-800g tires???
    By OnThaCouch in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-27-2014, 09:07 PM
  2. Kenda Juggernaut tires?
    By Jisch in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-20-2014, 02:56 PM
  3. On-One Midge bars = rad. [x-post 29" juggernaut forum]
    By flexiflyer in forum Singlespeed
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 11-10-2013, 10:43 PM
  4. 26x4 v. 29x3.0?
    By green mt. boy in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 08-14-2012, 09:45 AM
  5. Replies: 34
    Last Post: 02-21-2012, 10:47 PM

Members who have read this thread: 52

Posting Permissions

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