Results 1 to 81 of 81

Thread: 928 vs 941

  1. #1
    mdc
    mdc is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    367

    928 vs 941

    Ok here's the deal. I'm planning on upgrading my wheelset this summer and REALLY like the looks of the new Ibis wheels. I typically ride 100% trail/ XC and rarely race. My local trails are a mix of techie rocks, roots and a decent amount of climbing. I'm wondering if the 41mm rims are overkill for typical trail riding. The weight is almost identical to my Arch EX setup, but I would rather not have to run monster sized tires ( I typically use 2.25 or .35) to fit the 941's correctly.

    Anywho- What do you guys think? Are the 941's overkill for all around trail riding, or would the 928's give me the stiffness, traction and weight I'm looking for.

    Cheers

  2. #2
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,975
    My thought is only go narrow if weight is important. I run the same tire size and am planning on getting 941s.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    My thought is only go narrow if weight is important. I run the same tire size and am planning on getting 941s.
    Even on the Ripley? Seems like the 941 is intended for a bit more of a burly build. The max tire that can fit in the rear triangle is 2.25 or 2.3?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    694

    928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    Even on the Ripley? Seems like the 941 is intended for a bit more of a burly build. The max tire that can fit in the rear triangle is 2.25 or 2.3?
    This is why I'm wondering if Ibis isn't working on a Ripley HD.

  5. #5
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    Even on the Ripley? Seems like the 941 is intended for a bit more of a burly build. The max tire that can fit in the rear triangle is 2.25 or 2.3?
    My Ripley is my XC bike, but I'll ride it downhill just like I do my HD, minus the bigger drops. So I want the beefier wheels. The 29 is still plenty wide.
    The wider rim is not going to turn a 2.25 tire into a 2.5. It will still be pretty much exactly the same width, but with more volume closer to the rim. That "more volume" is gained by moving the bead out wider.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    My Ripley is my XC bike, but I'll ride it downhill just like I do my HD, minus the bigger drops. So I want the beefier wheels. The 29 is still plenty wide.
    The wider rim is not going to turn a 2.25 tire into a 2.5. It will still be pretty much exactly the same width, but with more volume closer to the rim. That "more volume" is gained by moving the bead out wider.
    It's that lack of volume close to the rim that bothers me about the standard Arch option (and aluminum rims in general that a 20 mm inside diam or less. I just bought a Ripley but I'm waiting on a RS Pike and putting the 140 mm on Fleabay. I still have the option to swap to the 928s as an upgrade through the LBS but might have to think harder about this and wait for the 941s to hit the street.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    It's that lack of volume close to the rim that bothers me about the standard Arch option (and aluminum rims in general that a 20 mm inside diam or less. I just bought a Ripley but I'm waiting on a RS Pike and putting the 140 mm on Fleabay. I still have the option to swap to the 928s as an upgrade through the LBS but might have to think harder about this and wait for the 941s to hit the street.
    For my Ripley, I'm having Dave Thomas from Speed Dream wheels build up a set of the Industry 9 hubs on the new NOX AM-29 rims. The AM-29 rims aren't quite as wide as the 941 rims, but they are quite a bit wider than anything else I've run. The reasoning behind the wider rims definitely seems to make sense to me. My primary hopes/objectives with the wider rims are that the tires have less lateral rollover/squirm along with better power transfer, since I tend to run wider tires (Maxxis HRII 2.3 front or Minion DHR II 2.3 front with Ikon 2.2 or Ardent 2.2 rear).

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    241
    I'm currently running ENVE AM with CK hubs on my Ripley and I weigh 240 lbs. My girlfriend's Ripley (she's half my weight) should be finished tomorrow and she's getting the 928s. I may swap wheelsets with her (if she'll let me) and compare. The 941s sound very interesting for someone my size, especially given the price point!!! You can get two of the new Ibis carbon wheel sets for what one set of ENVE's cost!! I anticipate Ibis won't be able to make these fast enough to keep up with demand. Time will tell if the carbon layup is superclyde worthy or not.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by mdc View Post
    Ok here's the deal. I'm planning on upgrading my wheelset this summer and REALLY like the looks of the new Ibis wheels. I typically ride 100% trail/ XC and rarely race. My local trails are a mix of techie rocks, roots and a decent amount of climbing. I'm wondering if the 41mm rims are overkill for typical trail riding. The weight is almost identical to my Arch EX setup, but I would rather not have to run monster sized tires ( I typically use 2.25 or .35) to fit the 941's correctly.

    Anywho- What do you guys think? Are the 941's overkill for all around trail riding, or would the 928's give me the stiffness, traction and weight I'm looking for.

    Cheers
    I'm in the same exact boat- I ride/race XC but on some technical terrain (roots, rocks, drops). I am easy on my wheels.
    It just looks like the 941 is really more than I need- but it's possible that's just my inner weight weenie talking. OTOH, on the Ripley, tire clearance is already an issue.
    Hmmm.

  10. #10
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by RRRoubaix View Post
    I'm in the same exact boat- I ride/race XC but on some technical terrain (roots, rocks, drops). I am easy on my wheels.
    It just looks like the 941 is really more than I need- but it's possible that's just my inner weight weenie talking. OTOH, on the Ripley, tire clearance is already an issue.
    Hmmm.
    The extra volume comes in the sidewall area and where the bead is located. It's not going to turn a 2.2 into a 2.5. If the knobs of the tire you want have clearance now, they will have clearance with a wide rim too. The only things that are going to move outward are the sidewalls and beads. I think people are interpreting the purpose of the wide rims wrong, they do not make a tire bigger, they add move volume to an already pinched area.

    Here's a pic from the Ibis video showing a tire on the 941 (blue) overlaying the 929 (purple).
    Note, the TREAD is not changed, only the sidewalls have moved out a few mm creating more volume. Any change on knob profile is going to be so small that that it won't even be worth mentioning. In fact, if you look at the Derby site you will see the wider rim actually produces a NARROWER knob profile. Changed from 2.35" to 2.33".
    WIDE rims

    If you have a tire with a sidewall that is close to hitting the frame, then a wider rim might cause you problems.

    Name:  wheels.JPG
Views: 4480
Size:  15.1 KB

  11. #11
    mdc
    mdc is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mdc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    367
    After much deliberation I put my name in for a set of the 928's. As much as a like the idea of the 941's, I think they would be overkill for me. The 928's will shave about 250 grams of rotational weight out of my wheels, add stiffness and be about 3 mm wider than my current set up. I'm sure the 941's are incredible on the downhills and chunk, but I lose more time going UP than I do going down- which is why I went lighter vs. burlier....

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    The extra volume comes in the sidewall area and where the bead is located. It's not going to turn a 2.2 into a 2.5. If the knobs of the tire you want have clearance now, they will have clearance with a wide rim too. The only things that are going to move outward are the sidewalls and beads. I think people are interpreting the purpose of the wide rims wrong, they do not make a tire bigger, they add move volume to an already pinched area.

    Here's a pic from the Ibis video showing a tire on the 941 (blue) overlaying the 929 (purple).
    Note, the TREAD is not changed, only the sidewalls have moved out a few mm creating more volume. Any change on knob profile is going to be so small that that it won't even be worth mentioning. In fact, if you look at the Derby site you will see the wider rim actually produces a NARROWER knob profile. Changed from 2.35" to 2.33".
    WIDE rims

    If you have a tire with a sidewall that is close to hitting the frame, then a wider rim might cause you problems.

    Name:  wheels.JPG
Views: 4480
Size:  15.1 KB
    Wow, thanks d-bug for the picture- it really illustrates the differences.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IntenseJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    54
    FWIW they still are not in the Ibis factory yet. My dealer said maybe the end of this May at the earliest.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by IntenseJim View Post
    FWIW they still are not in the Ibis factory yet. My dealer said maybe the end of this May at the earliest.
    Is that just for the 941's?
    Or all of the Ibis wheels?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IntenseJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by RRRoubaix View Post
    Is that just for the 941's?
    Or all of the Ibis wheels?
    I only inquired about the 928 for a Ripley I am ordering on Monday; I would ass/u/me the same for the 941.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Hmmm... bummer. I am hoping to order my Rip next week sometime.
    Dunno if I could hold off for another 2-3 weeks.

    The $899 upgrade is one thing pushing me to a complete (pre-packaged) build, versus a frame-up build. (I've already got a drivetrain to go on it, and saddle, stem, handlebars...)

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IntenseJim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    54
    My LBS got a different answer today, Monday. Ibis has a few 928s in stock and I'm getting a pair on my Ripley incoming this week.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    14
    Yup started landing at dealers with complete bikes, complete ripley with 928 wheels reported in Aus here IBIS Wheelset in the House Carbon 928 - Defconcycles

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    241
    My girlfriend has about 50 miles on her 928s on her new Ripley. The medium frame, xt built kit without pedals weighed in at 26 lbs. She only weighs 125 lbs. and is new to mountain biking so it would be difficult for her to give constructive criticism regarding this wheel set with her limited experience., but she loves her new bike and has been riding it every day she can!!!

    On the other hand, I'm 240 lbs. and break a lot of stuff. I have Chris King hubs laced to ENVE AM wheels and have been very happy with my wheelset, although the new 941s do intrigue me (especially at their price point!). I'm more concerned about these unknown hubs that Ibis is using. I've been through some less than durable hubs and found Chris King to be the most durable and their excellent customer service and 5 year warranty is a plus, especially now the Chris King has the SRAM XX1 option!

    It's good to have options and chat about all these things bike related that are somewhat irrelevant when we can't be out on the trail!

  20. #20
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,975
    I ordered a set of NOX AM-29s this week. Should be delivered in 2-3 weeks.
    AM-29 Carbon Fiber Mountain Wheels | Nox Composites Carbon MTB Rims and Wheels
    Width is between the 928 and 941, but I can specify hubs (I chose I9). For $250 more than the Ibis wheels I felt that getting hubs I know to be badass was worth it.
    If I was ordering a Ripley right now I wouldn't hesitate to get the Ibis wheels.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    ...If I was ordering a Ripley right now I wouldn't hesitate to get the Ibis wheels.
    Done and done!
    I ordered my Special Blend Ripley today and upgraded to the 928 carbon wheels and the TRS+ cranks.
    I have the rest of the XTR drivetrain to swap onto it.
    I ordered a SID RCT3 last week, but Pro Bike Supply ran out. Now I gotta wait until early July...unless I find that I like the X-Fusion instead.

  22. #22
    aka dan51
    Reputation: d-bug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,975
    Quote Originally Posted by RRRoubaix View Post
    Done and done!
    I ordered my Special Blend Ripley today and upgraded to the 928 carbon wheels and the TRS+ cranks.
    I have the rest of the XTR drivetrain to swap onto it.
    I ordered a SID RCT3 last week, but Pro Bike Supply ran out. Now I gotta wait until early July...unless I find that I like the X-Fusion instead.
    Nice! Give the xfusion a shot. I'm really liking my trace.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by d-bug View Post
    Nice! Give the xfusion a shot. I'm really liking my trace.
    I'm sort of new to MTB (okay, returning to it after 20 years), so I don't really know how to set up shocks and forks. I'm guessing that I will like that the Trace doesn't have a zillion different settings.

    That said, the weight weenie in me drools over the 1588g SID RCT3 as compared to 1930g Trace... Heh!

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Anyone know if the 941's are available yet?

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: getbusyliving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    Anyone know if the 941's are available yet?
    I just ordered a new Ripley, and here is the way the 41 rims situation was described to me: the 741s (650b) are now available in limited quantities, but the 941s (29er) are not yet available at all. 941s should be available in 4ish weeks, but that is a best case scenario.

    I have a buddy who bought the 741s for his (non-Ibis) 650b, and he is beyond stoked on them, and says they're more than worth the extra couple hundred grams over narrower rims. For 29ers we're talking about not even half a pint of beer in weight over the 928 wheelset for noticeably improved traction and confidence. Worth it for me.

  26. #26
    Norðwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,598
    Anyone know if there's stores with 928s in stock? Heard there's some out there, waiting 6 weeks for my domestic dealer will probably mean I get to ride them for a month before snow drops.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Anyone get their hands on the 941s yet?

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35
    I was going to ask just that, I ordered a ripley with the 941 upgrade since them were not available my dealer gave me the bike without wheels hoping to receive them in the middle of July

    Meanwhile I have borrowed some Easton's from my mate.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jbsocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegard View Post
    Anyone know if there's stores with 928s in stock? Heard there's some out there, waiting 6 weeks for my domestic dealer will probably mean I get to ride them for a month before snow drops.
    JensonUsa has 928's and 741's:

    Ibis 928 Carbon 29" Wheelset > New Items | Jenson USA

    No 941's yet...I might get some Roval Traverse SL 29 Fatties if they are available first...

  30. #30
    Norðwegr
    Reputation: Vegard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1,598
    I bought Roam 60s which I've been very happy with, but then I went and smashed my clavicle so in hindsight I might as well had waited a couple of weeks with the purchase :P

    My reasoning for not going with something like the 941 is that it'd become a pseudo fatbike, I already have a fatbike so skinnier rim it was.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    78
    I purchased a set of Velocity Blunt 35's in the mean time while waiting for 941's. I sent the wheels back to the shop the bike felt like a slug very sluggish, and heavy feeling the Stan's which came on the bike were far better. The Blunts were 500g heavier which made a big difference in quickness off the line, climbing felt like I was dragging an anchor behind the bike couldn't keep up with the pack at all. Did find the Blunts to be very stable on the downhill, and cornering in the single track felt secure and positive loved the feel over the stock Stan's. After 150 miles I really tried to like the Blunts 35's but they were killing my old legs so off they came, and back on the Stan's what a difference the Ripley is back. I hope the 941 wheels being much lighter then the Blunts will have a livelier feel more like the Stan's but, with the secure feeling of the Blunt 35's.
    Fortes fortuna adiuvat

  32. #32
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307

    Re: 928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by Delta_kilo View Post
    I purchased a set of Velocity Blunt 35's in the mean time while waiting for 941's. I sent the wheels back to the shop the bike felt like a slug very sluggish, and heavy feeling the Stan's which came on the bike were far better. The Blunts were 500g heavier which made a big difference in quickness off the line, climbing felt like I was dragging an anchor behind the bike couldn't keep up with the pack at all. Did find the Blunts to be very stable on the downhill, and cornering in the single track felt secure and positive loved the feel over the stock Stan's. After 150 miles I really tried to like the Blunts 35's but they were killing my old legs so off they came, and back on the Stan's what a difference the Ripley is back. I hope the 941 wheels being much lighter then the Blunts will have a livelier feel more like the Stan's but, with the secure feeling of the Blunt 35's.
    The tire profile on the wide rims affects the liveliness of the the ride regardless of the rim weight.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,679
    [QUOTE=afloresd;11313795]I was going to ask just that, I ordered a ripley with the 941 upgrade since them were not available my dealer gave me the bike without wheels hoping to receive them in the middle of July

    Change of date, forget July, now Ibis says that until second week of August, hopefully ...

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    The tire profile on the wide rims affects the liveliness of the the ride regardless of the rim weight.
    Tires were 2.1
    Fortes fortuna adiuvat

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: icecreamjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,190

    928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    The tire profile on the wide rims affects the liveliness of the the ride regardless of the rim weight.
    But rim weight is going to have an effect on liveliness too. I don't know which would be a greater impact , but 500 grams per wheel is a noticeable amount.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    NEMBA Freetown VP

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by icecreamjay View Post
    But rim weight is going to have an effect on liveliness too. I don't know which would be a greater impact , but 500 grams per wheel is a noticeable amount.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Kind of what I thought too, but I'm no expert.
    Fortes fortuna adiuvat

  37. #37
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307

    Re: 928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by icecreamjay View Post
    But rim weight is going to have an effect on liveliness too. I don't know which would be a greater impact , but 500 grams per wheel is a noticeable amount.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So the Ibis rims weigh 90g each?

    Hub weight has relatively little affect on how a wheel set accelerates, brakes, and handles.
    Quote Originally Posted by Delta_kilo View Post
    Tires were 2.1
    The narrower the tire, the more they are affected. 2.25 is about as narrow as I like on a 35mm rim.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: icecreamjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,190

    928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    So the Ibis rims weigh 90g each?

    Hub weight has relatively little affect on how a wheel set accelerates, brakes, and handles.

    The narrower the tire, the more they are affected. 2.25 is about as narrow as I like on a 35mm rim.
    90 grams? No, in the text you quoted, the poster was discussing the difference between flows and blunts. He said the blunts were 500g heavier per wheel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    NEMBA Freetown VP

  39. #39
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307

    Re: 928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by icecreamjay View Post
    90 grams? No, in the text you quoted, the poster was discussing the difference between flows and blunts. He said the blunts were 500g heavier per wheel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    So the Notubes rims are 90g each?
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by icecreamjay View Post
    90 grams? No, in the text you quoted, the poster was discussing the difference between flows and blunts. He said the blunts were 500g heavier per wheel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    500g per wheel set not per wheel. I don't have the weights in front of me, but I seen to remember the Blunts were 2025g per set and the Stan's were 1775. So doing the math correctly THIS TIME! that's only 250g difference not 500g it doesn't seem much, but I notice a big difference between the two wheel sets. Maybe it was tire size that made the wheels seem sluggish? don't know. Its hard to think a wider tire with more tire contact to the ground would have a livelier feel? I'll have test that one myself.
    Fortes fortuna adiuvat

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    974
    I'll chime in, as I own a Ripley and have been running the 741s on my Nomad for the last few weeks.

    Personally, I would not get 941s for the Ripley. I think they'd be overkill, at least for me. This is not a weight issue, it's a feel issue. The fatter rims do make tires grow, about 0.2" on average in my experience. So 2.25s will measure ~2.45" on the fatter rims. They also change the shape of the tread, making it less round as the tire opens up.

    The effect of this is to improve grip, but also reduce "snap" a bit. I believe Dave Weagle posted here a while back that adding 0.1" of width to a tire has the same effect on steering response as reducing HT angle by 1 degree. I love the snappy and quick handling of the Ripley, and I think that would be negatively affected by wider rims with large tires.

    Running lower pressure on the wide rims exacerbates this effect. Rolling resistance will increase a bit depending on the tire you're using; keep in mind that the casing will need to flex more with every revolution, so casing suppleness is important. But that flex also leads to wear, so running very supple casings will eventually lead to failure and damage.

    Bottom line: I LOVE the 741s on my Nomad; the feel and traction they give is just awesome. They were perfect for the Cascadia Dirt Cup race in Pt. Angeles last weekend, where we were run down the (very dry and loose) world cup DH course. But for the Ripley, which I ride as a more XC-oriented bike, where I really enjoy the snappy handling and responsive feel, I think the 928s would be a better choice.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: icecreamjay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,190

    928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by Delta_kilo View Post
    500g per wheel set not per wheel. I don't have the weights in front of me, but I seen to remember the Blunts were 2025g per set and the Stan's were 1775. So doing the math correctly THIS TIME! that's only 250g difference not 500g it doesn't seem much, but I notice a big difference between the two wheel sets. Maybe it was tire size that made the wheels seem sluggish? don't know. Its hard to think a wider tire with more tire contact to the ground would have a livelier feel? I'll have test that one myself.
    Thanks for clarifying.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    NEMBA Freetown VP

  43. #43
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307

    Re: 928 vs 941

    Quote Originally Posted by Delta_kilo View Post
    500g per wheel set not per wheel. I don't have the weights in front of me, but I seen to remember the Blunts were 2025g per set and the Stan's were 1775. So doing the math correctly THIS TIME! that's only 250g difference not 500g it doesn't seem much, but I notice a big difference between the two wheel sets. Maybe it was tire size that made the wheels seem sluggish? don't know. Its hard to think a wider tire with more tire contact to the ground would have a livelier feel? I'll have test that one myself.
    That's better.

    Every tire width (and model) has a rim width sweetspot where it performs best. Rims can be too wide as well as too narrow.

    IME 28-30mm works well with most common MTB tire widths (Ibis offers it!)
    Wider than that and 2.1" and narrower tires start to suffer. Dead feel, hard to lean. Heavy steering. Easier to pinch flat. To get the same "cush" feel you need to drop the pressure, and you can because the tire has less squirm, which further increase the risk of flats (tubeless or not).

    Bigger tires on the wider rims maintain the intended casing shape so the tire "works" better than the spread out small tire. Remains agile. Has vertical flex. Can be leaned readily. But the big tire on the wide rim will never have the same lively feel of a narrower tire on a moderate width rim.

    Bottom line: If you are increasing your rim width you should also be using a big tire for best overall performance.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Well, it's quite obvious Shiggy is not employed on the IBIS dime. Thanks for the presumably objective comments based on your experience with rim width. Certainly food for thought for someone buying a Ripley and considering the wheel upgrade, given the limited tire size that can fit in the rear triangle. As I am.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by rockman View Post
    Well, it's quite obvious Shiggy is not employed on the IBIS dime. Thanks for the presumably objective comments based on your experience with rim width. Certainly food for thought for someone buying a Ripley and considering the wheel upgrade, given the limited tire size that can fit in the rear triangle. As I am.
    I have american classic wide lightning rims with specialized fast trak 2.2 sworks tires and could not be happier. I run 18psi front and 20 rear. Upgraded from Stans arch ex, same tires moved to new rims. So much better performance. The rims are 32mm so I'd agree with the 928s. They were not in stock when I had to upgrade due to damage.

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    974
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy View Post
    Every tire width (and model) has a rim width sweetspot where it performs best. Rims can be too wide as well as too narrow.
    Definitely concur. Messing around with various tires from my parts box on the 741s, I think the key tire features that work well with wide rims are 1) Fairly round tread pattern when viewed in cross-section, and 2) Wide tread pattern relative to casing width (i.e. tread pattern that extends down onto the shoulder of the tire.)

    Also, 2.25-2.4 is a nice EFFECTIVE width. But wide rims add ~0.2" compared to skinny rims. So for me, 2.4"+ tires on wide rims just make the bike handle like a pig.

    Tires I've tried an liked: Maxxis DHF, DHR II, and Ardent in 2.3" size, Hans Dampf in 2.25" size. (Maxxis tires are pretty undersized, so the 2.3s are actually <2.2" on normal rims, but grow to respectable size on wides.)

    Tires I've tried and not liked: Maxxis High Roller II, Trail Kings (both have square/narrow tread profiles), Hans Dampf 2.35 (effective 2.5+ on wide rims.)

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    Talked to Todd at Ibis. ETA is now mid-Aug to October for 941s depending on where you are in the Q.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Geeze6700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    103
    4 weeks ago I got a pair of Derby 26" HD wheels for my 2012 HD. At Ray's suggestion I switched over my exisiting 2.4 NoNi tires. The bottom line, a little more work going up, less wandering front tire while going up, a minor loss of that quick snappy feel, and lot more fun going down with much more traction and a smoother ride over rocks. I was running 24psi with carbon Havens and now run 17psi. I am thinking of trying a set of 2.25 RaRa for comparison. Ray had this insight: "I've found that smaller tires, even with smaller knobs, perform better with Derby Rims than bigger volume tires on narrow rims."

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    801
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Tires I've tried and not liked: Maxxis High Roller II, Trail Kings (both have square/narrow tread profiles), Hans Dampf 2.35 (effective 2.5+ on wide rims.)
    That's too bad because the TK 2.2 (HD) and 2.4 (Glory DH) are my current favorite tubeless low pressure setup (Flow and Flow EX respectively)

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    I'm still waiting on the 941s but since this is a thread intended to help folks make a choice between the two rim widths I thought I would summarize what I have read so far. Other than opinions, there's not much out there in terms of real reviews:

    1. Are 941s overkill? Depends on your riding. In my case, I have a 5" travel bike for the more burly stuff.
    2. The 250 g difference in rotational weight is considerable. But a tire can easily vary this much.
    3. The weight is at least partially offset by having a wider tire with more tire contact to the ground. Lower pressure and less rolling resistance. Theory or fact?
    4. The widest tire that will fit is 2.25 and some 2.3s. I'm not sure I believe the hype yet regarding how much better the performance of a 2.25 tire is on a wide rim. Need more reviews.
    5. Tire choice is also limited by the need for a round profile or tread pattern (relative to casing width). A tire that I like, the Conti TK, has a square/narrow tread profile but the DHF and DHR should work fine.
    6. If you are increasing your rim width you should also be using a big tire for best overall performance. Fact? And perhaps negated by the idea that Ibis may offer a newer and wider rear triangle in the future. Not sure where I heard this but seems like a Ripley HD would be a no-brainer.

    The main thing that I noticed about the bike (unlike other 29rs) when I demo'd it was the snappy handling and responsive feel. I'd hate to lose that feeling because, as implied by Shiggy, that mounting a narrow tire on a wide rim makes for an un-responsive, sluggish and stagnant ride. Not sure I buy this unless it's a 2.0 or 2.1.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332

    928 vs 941

    Another data point...
    Minion DHF 2.3's on 34mm internal Derby rims grip and corner on rails, but do feel slightly less eager to turn in than slightly larger Nevegal 2.35's on Flow rims that they replaced. I adjusted easily to the different, not better or worse, handling feel....speed and confidence increased thanks to higher volume, lower pressure, better tire stability. Woohoo
    Goma 2.4 on the Derby rim is f'n massive....65mm casing width....but rides lighter and turns in much easier than the smaller Minion 2.3. The Goma has a very round tread shape, and its handling could be characterized as more lively/less stable than the smaller Minion.
    My main point is that there's too much going on with tire designs/materials to make a blanket statement that rim width X only works with tire width Y, or a wider tire will always behave blahblah compared to a narrower tire. Are there useful rules of thumb? Absolutely. Shiggy and others are hitting on some of them. But with the variety of tire designs and wide breadth of rider perception and preference, there will be almost as many exceptions to a rule as followers.
    The 4 or 5 tires I've tried on the wide rims had widths of 53 - 61 mm when they were on 28mm Flows. They've all improved tremendously IMO on the wider rims, they're just all a little different.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    974
    Interesting and well said. As I said in an earlier post, I think casing construction and flexibility are going to be pretty important for feel. Running low pressure means lots of casing flex. Maxxis Exo casings seem relatively stiff, compared to other puncture-resistant offerings like Schwalbe Snakeskin or Conti Protection.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    34
    Just throwing my $.02 in on this based on my experience going from Stan's Arch rims to my new NOX AM-29 (29mm internal width) rims on my Ripley. Going from the aluminum Arch wheels to the carbon NOX wide rims, I immediately noticed a massive difference in both lateral and vertical stiffness. The vertical stiffness translated to feeling a lot more of the trail (kind of felt like I lost a bit of initial plushness). I ended up adjusting suspension by a click or two and also just got accustomed to the new feel of the rid.

    The lateral stiffness translated into a much more immediate and direct steering response. For me, the stiffness of the carbon wheels almost made the steering more twitchy because it was so immediate and direct. For me, I would definitely say that I didn't lose any responsiveness with the wide carbon rims, in fact it's been the opposite for me.

    Here are the variables in my case though:

    Fork: Pike 140 (so it's more slack than the 120 setup)
    Tires on Arch rims: Maxxis High Roller 2 2.3 (front), Maxxis Ikon 2.2 (rear)
    Tires on NOX AM-29 rims: Maxxis DHRII 2.3 (front), Maxxis Ardent 2.2 (rear)

    I'm still playing around with tire pressure on the new NOX wide rims, but I've mostly been running in the 19-22 psi range on the wide rims. With the Arch rims I wouldn't run anything below 26.

    FWIW, I really like the more supported sidewall feel of the wide rims now and have a lot more confidence that the tires aren't going to roll over on me mid-corner.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Interesting and well said. As I said in an earlier post, I think casing construction and flexibility are going to be pretty important for feel. Running low pressure means lots of casing flex. Maxxis Exo casings seem relatively stiff, compared to other puncture-resistant offerings like Schwalbe Snakeskin or Conti Protection.
    Agreed. The Geax Goma casings are similarly stiff. I'm pretty impressed with those tires overall, but they have a lot more nimble/darty/lively/sketchy (choose your adjective) feel on turn-in than the Minion, and they lean a lot farther before getting on the rail, with a more drifty feel.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    187
    The only problem with the 941 is ........... not available yet .Each time the scheduled date approaches, Ibis will increase another month lol


    From the original announcement of the wheels on the Ibis website,
    "We anticipate that these wheels will be available in the aftermarket in June."

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35
    Not to customers nor the aftermarket, my dealer just told me to wait until the end of the month, I was one of the first to order a ripley with this wheels. This is the third change of date. I hope Ibis will somehow reward our patience.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jbsocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    260
    I'm still considering buying the 941's when they finally become available...

    My LBS got a set of Traverse SL Fattie 29's (35 mm)...I couldn't resist and bought them.

    I didn't realize the wide rims would add that much width to the tires...

    I tried putting Minion Single Ply 2.5 DHF's both front and rear on my Enduro Comp 29 and the rear tire rubbed way too much on the drive side of the chainstay (no rubbing until I compressed the suspension).

    I should have tested it better at home, I forgot about checking the suspension since I also just put a new set of SLX brakes with Ice rotors and was breaking them in...I ended up locking out my CCDB Air CS for the entire ride and chose smoother lines (but of course it still rubbed).

    I have two DHF 2.3's (1 single and 1 dual) and compared them to the Hans Dampf 2.35 (that I previously had on the rear of my E29 on a Charger Pro 29 "Flow" rim) and I decided to try the Hans Dampf with the much larger volume on the rear...but dang it still rubbed when the suspension compresses (not near as bad as the 2.5).

    I decided to leave the Hans Dampf pacestar on the rear since it seems to be wearing down a bit and rubbing much less...the DHF 2.5 seems fine on the front.

    I'm wondering if a 2.3 DHF would fit on the rear of my E29 on 941's without rubbing...

    As far as the Fatties go, I like the engagement of the 54t rear, but I'm not crazy about the 24 spoke front wheel (seems fairly stiff), since I'm at the 240 lb weight limit.

    I like that the 941's are 32 spoke and do not have a weight limit.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dpca10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    255
    Any feedback on the ride of the roval fatties? Is the 24 spoke front worrying you durability wise? Or is it a stiffness issue.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jbsocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by Dpca10 View Post
    Any feedback on the ride of the roval fatties? Is the 24 spoke front worrying you durability wise? Or is it a stiffness issue.
    I don't have much time on them yet...so far no issues...I'd just rather have a 28 spoke straight pull front wheel since I weigh 240 lbs (the weight limit).

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    I got tired of waiting for the 941s and changed my order to 928s which I now have in hand. I'm still very intriqued by the wide rim concept but weight savings and the thought of mounting a 2.25 Schwalbe Racing Ralph (the tire that came with the build kit) to a 41 mm rim just didn't seem right
    Last edited by rockman; 09-05-2014 at 08:12 AM. Reason: removed erroneous spoke tension measurements

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    100

    New Kicks

    went with the 928. I still wanted the snappy feel of the Ripley. Currently running SWORKS Purgatory 2.3(F)(18psi)/2.2(R)(20psi). Easy to inflate with a floor pump.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 928 vs 941-928.jpg  


  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: getbusyliving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    417
    Quote Originally Posted by jbsocal View Post
    My LBS got a set of Traverse SL Fattie 29's (35 mm)...I couldn't resist and bought them.
    Same here. I got tired of waiting on the 941s that I ordered with my Ripley some months ago and bought the Roval Fatties a month ago. Definitely changes the feel of the bike from the temporary (narrower) wheels I was running on the Ripley. Instant extra traction for sure, which is welcome this time of year in Marin. The 941s are even wider than the Roval Fatties, so the improved traction will be the same or better. The downside is that the Racing Ralph 2.35 in the rear now barely fits the frame. Even rubs a tiny bit during hard cornering. Don't try anything wider.

    I just finally got delivery of my backordered 941s, and they look great. But I will likely sell them new as they are so similar to the Rovals.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35

    941s are real and they just arrived

    Hi, I just received my pair of 941s, 3 months later but finally they are here.

    Just to check out how did they look like with the tires, I mounted a new spec. ground control 2.1 that came with the bike.

    It was a bit hard to mount them, but once they did, inflating was really easy, they set up with out sealant.

    The tire just looks too skinny mounted in such a big wheel.

    Here are the first pics, I will try several tires just to make sure they fit.

    928 vs 941-img_0361.jpg928 vs 941-img_0360.jpg928 vs 941-img_0359.jpg928 vs 941-img_0362.jpg

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jbsocal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by getbusyliving View Post
    Same here. I got tired of waiting on the 941s that I ordered with my Ripley some months ago and bought the Roval Fatties a month ago. Definitely changes the feel of the bike from the temporary (narrower) wheels I was running on the Ripley. Instant extra traction for sure, which is welcome this time of year in Marin. The 941s are even wider than the Roval Fatties, so the improved traction will be the same or better. The downside is that the Racing Ralph 2.35 in the rear now barely fits the frame. Even rubs a tiny bit during hard cornering. Don't try anything wider.

    I just finally got delivery of my backordered 941s, and they look great. But I will likely sell them new as they are so similar to the Rovals.
    I just bought 941's from JensonUSA...I have not ridden them yet (bad cough), they mounted them for me on Sunday morning.

    I'm running a 2.5 DHF in front (measures 2.53 on the 941) and a 2.3 DHF in back (measures about 2.35 on the 941's).

    Just bought a Park digital caliper so I could measure the tires accurately.

    The Hans Dampf 2.35 on my Fatties measured 2.50 (I think the rubber on the tire was wearing down so the rubbing decreased). I guessed that the Hans Dampf would still have been 2.5 on the 941's...but from your post it might have been slightly wider.

    My rear Fattie somehow got scratched up (cosmetic), so I'll probably keep mine.

    I've been looking for a used carbon frame for my Fatties

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    135
    I was wondering why didn't ibis offer a 26 on their carbon hoops?

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by jbsocal View Post
    I'm still considering buying the 941's when they finally become available...

    My LBS got a set of Traverse SL Fattie 29's (35 mm)...I couldn't resist and bought them.

    I didn't realize the wide rims would add that much width to the tires...

    I tried putting Minion Single Ply 2.5 DHF's both front and rear on my Enduro Comp 29 and the rear tire rubbed way too much on the drive side of the chainstay (no rubbing until I compressed the suspension).

    I should have tested it better at home, I forgot about checking the suspension since I also just put a new set of SLX brakes with Ice rotors and was breaking them in...I ended up locking out my CCDB Air CS for the entire ride and chose smoother lines (but of course it still rubbed).

    I have two DHF 2.3's (1 single and 1 dual) and compared them to the Hans Dampf 2.35 (that I previously had on the rear of my E29 on a Charger Pro 29 "Flow" rim) and I decided to try the Hans Dampf with the much larger volume on the rear...but dang it still rubbed when the suspension compresses (not near as bad as the 2.5).

    I decided to leave the Hans Dampf pacestar on the rear since it seems to be wearing down a bit and rubbing much less...the DHF 2.5 seems fine on the front.

    I'm wondering if a 2.3 DHF would fit on the rear of my E29 on 941's without rubbing...

    As far as the Fatties go, I like the engagement of the 54t rear, but I'm not crazy about the 24 spoke front wheel (seems fairly stiff), since I'm at the 240 lb weight limit.

    I like that the 941's are 32 spoke and do not have a weight limit.
    I had the same problem on the rear of my enduro with hans dampf 2.35 rubbing the drive side chain stay. I think these frames are asymmetrical. I've had to adjust the dish by loosening one side of the spokes and tightening the other to correct it. this happened with the stock DT Swiss e440/Ground control 2.3 and also with Enve AM/ hans dampf 2.3. however mine is 2010, but its possible the rear end on the newer enduros is also asymmetrical .
    I've just ordered the ripley special blend, and plan on using light-bicycle's traverse fatty replica rims with novatec hubs, or spec aluminum fattys and upgrade later to derby rims, unless I decide on Derby rims laced up to my DTswiss hubs currently on my 26" enve's. or maybe even 941's if I can be patient enough.

    All the info on tire and rim combos from real users like you is extremely helpful.

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    5,903
    I'm really pleased with the 928s. Quality build, low key graphics and more they go where you point them. But it's not like I can run the Racing Ralph that came with my build at super low pressure like you might be able to get away with on the 941s.

    For comparison, there's about 1/4" of clearance on either side of the RR on the Ripley rear triangle.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 928 vs 941-rr_clearance.jpg  


  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35

    High roller II 2.3

    So I guess this is going to be my final build for a while

    I mounted the HR II 2.3 on the 941 and they are just perfect, I was a bit afraid about the size, but they fit well

    I noted a pair of minor dents caused by little stones that got caught in tread, so I put a smal piece of heli tape just to protect the area928 vs 941-image.jpg928 vs 941-image.jpg928 vs 941-image.jpg

    I will order the ibis decals as soon as they are available because they look too black

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    44
    Any more experience & opinions out there on the 941 on a bike like the Ripley? I'm wavering between the 928 & 941 for a new ripley. It will have a 140 fork & probably running nobby nic 2.25's possibly 2.35's. The 928 is only 1mm wider internal than a Stans Arch, so that doesn't seem like enuf to me, but the 941 is BIG.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    I think anyone buying 928's now who is NOT riding buff trails on skinny tires, or doing true XC racing, will regret not getting the wide option a year from now after perceptions catch up and the wide stuff starts looking more normal to people. The wide rims still build up into a light wheelset, and you can still run light weight tires down to about 2.1".... there's huge upside to the wide wheels, and really no downside unless you're an uber-weight weeny or you're riding long distances on smooth trails where <2.0 tires might make sense.
    To each his own...but that's my opinion after a year on 40mm carbon rims.

    Some day soon you'll think your flow wheels look cartoonishly scrawny...

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    267
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    I think anyone buying 928's now who is NOT riding buff trails on skinny tires, or doing true XC racing, will regret not getting the wide option a year from now after perceptions catch up and the wide stuff starts looking more normal to people. The wide rims still build up into a light wheelset, and you can still run light weight tires down to about 2.1".... there's huge upside to the wide wheels, and really no downside unless you're an uber-weight weeny or you're riding long distances on smooth trails where <2.0 tires might make sense.
    To each his own...but that's my opinion after a year on 40mm carbon rims.

    Some day soon you'll think your flow wheels look cartoonishly scrawny...
    +1 to this . . . after years of riding increasingly wider and wider rims, and having increasingly more confidence (crest -> arch -> flow -> I9 enduro rims) . . . I bought a set of Derby 26ers (41mm baby!) and ZOMGHOLYFINGAMAZEBALLS I love these things!

    I do think that they require a bit of experimentation until you find tires that fit right on them . . . going narrow definitely can be a problem (no luck with ground control 2.1). But I think if you put anything 2.25 or higher on there you'll be fine. Right now I ran Butcher Control 2.3 front and Purgatory 2.3 rear for Pisgah Stage Race - baller, bruiser combination there, although slow rolling in the back. In California where I live, I put a rock razor 2.35 on the rear and that REALLY picked up the bike's responsiveness to pedaling input.

    But the magic happens when you start to go downhill . . . BEASTLY cornering confidence!

    Also, for the record, built my Derbies up with I9 Torch hubs and the aluminum I9 spokes. While I would not go this route again because of the hassle of proprietary spokes, I can say that it built up to 1620g wheel set, taped and valved for tubeless. That's pretty freaking light in my book.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,173
    I recently added those Derby wide rims to my SL-R as well, and it is quite a transformation from the Arch stock rims. With a Hans Dampf on the front and a 2.25 Nobby Nic on the rear, it is like a mini fat bike. It floats pretty well over sand/silt and the cornering is quick and *very* sure footed. I liken it to the cornering capabilities changing from a horse to a mountain goat.

  73. #73
    [put something cool here]
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    177
    Quote Originally Posted by dacarbon View Post
    I do think that they require a bit of experimentation until you find tires that fit right on them . . .
    I'm not there yet, but I believe in the advantages of wide rims and hope it's a matter of time until there are more capable tires available.

    In the comment section to a recent mtbr First Look Review on the new Industry Nine PillarCarbon Wheels someone mentions the Ibis wide rims. Industry Nine then extensively replies (which is great), and their first and main comment is, that current tires are too narrow for wide rims. Quite lame imho, because there are so many standards that have been adapted by other manufacturers: bar diameter to grips and stems, head tube to forks and of course wheel size etc etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by Industry Nine
    Optimized inner rim width – With class leading Inner width to weight ratios already in place for our Torch series Aluminum rims, Industry Nine is no stranger to the recent push for wider inner width (IW) rims. So if wide is good, wider is better right? Based on our testing however, we found that there are optimal inner widths for each category of bike and tire:
    - Current Mtb. tire technology is based on established rim profiles. Tire designers create tread profiles with a specific orientation on the tire casing to function optimally on a given rim inner width. If the IW of a given rim is too far outside of this range the tread pattern (particularly the shoulder blocks) can no longer function properly.
    Based on our testing and feedback from tire manufacturers, we came to a consensus on ideal rim widths for given tire categories. XC and intermediate Trail tires (usually 1.9-2.25” widths) are designed to function best on 18-25mm IW rims. Aggressive Trail and Enduro tires (usually 2.2-2.4mm widths) are optimized for 21-29mm IW rims, and DH/Park tires (usually 2.3-2.7” widths) are optimized for 25-31mm IW rims. “Plus” size and Fat Bike tires form their own categories and are designed specifically for much wider rims, with 40+mm inner widths on “plus” size rims, and 60-90+ mm inner widths for fatbike rims depending on tire widths.
    - As many riders have experienced, rims on the narrow end of the IW scale offer poor tire support and tires easily fold over and lose traction under hard cornering, so in comparison narrow “old school” rims, a wider inner width offers a lot of advantages vs. traditional narrow IW rims.
    - Rims with exceptionally wide inner widths (for a given category) paired with a tire designed for much narrower rims, cause the cornering blocks on many tires to become so “square” that they no longer contact the trail surface in their the intended shear plane - causing a dramatic reduction in traction at the cornering limit or on of camber objects or sections of trail.
    - Rim and Tire Sidewall impact protection – with wider inner widths comes wider rim profiles overall. So for example a 35mm IW rim is generally going to have a 40+ mm outer width. On technical rocky trails a wider rim is much more susceptible to sidewall impact damage as the tire does not shield the rim from loose rocks, lateral impacts etc. Additionally the cornering tread blocks no longer shield the tire sidewalls from rocks leaving the tire much more susceptible abrasion and damage due to rock impacts.
    - Weight – all things being equal, a wider rim is going to be heavier. More surface area requires more carbon, which can completely offset the weight benefit of carbon rims.
    Taking this into account we designed the Pillar carbon series rims with inner widths which are in line or slightly wider than our current aluminum rim widths (depending on the model). The rims feature a hookless bead wall, which optimize the inner rim width of each model to be on the wide end of the spectrum for the intended tire and usage category. As tire design evolves there is no doubt that their will continue to be opportunities for wider rim technologies (after all no one wants to ride a 4.8” fatbike tire on a 19mm IW rim). However, we feel the PillarCarbon rims offer the prefect balance of IW, lateral stiffness, strength, and weight to accommodate today's XC, Trail, and Enduro Tires.
    From First Look: Industry Nine PillarCarbon Wheels - Mtbr.com

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    267
    Yea - I think as rims become wider and people see/feel the performance benefits, the rest of the industry will catch up quick. I was usually running 2.25 or wider tires anyway, so it is no big deal for me to continue to run those on my derbies. Only rarely would I ever go down to a 2.1, and only on the rear. I like my rubber :-)

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    801
    Quote Originally Posted by ibismojo09 View Post
    I was wondering why didn't ibis offer a 26 on their carbon hoops?
    probably because all the new bikes are 27/29 only (other than DH bikes and those are moving to 27 quickly) and I think Jeff from Ibis mentioned, when I saw him at the super Enduro race at Demo last weekend, that something only 2% of the HDR were sold as 26" now even though you have the option of 26 or 27. People have the option there and yet they choose 27.

    I too wish they would have a 26" carbon, but there are other cheaper options out there as well (Derby rims, light-bicycle.com, etc...) and Ibis is small so they focused on what will be around for a while.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    801
    Quote Originally Posted by brado View Post
    Any more experience & opinions out there on the 941 on a bike like the Ripley? I'm wavering between the 928 & 941 for a new ripley. It will have a 140 fork & probably running nobby nic 2.25's possibly 2.35's. The 928 is only 1mm wider internal than a Stans Arch, so that doesn't seem like enuf to me, but the 941 is BIG.
    you can also go in between with 35mm like those $600/pair beadless carbon 29er wheelset 35mm wide tubeless compatible hand-built mtb 29er wheels Light-Bicycle

    Note: I'm not vouching for them as I don't currently use them...

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Kerberos View Post
    I'm not there yet, but I believe in the advantages of wide rims and hope it's a matter of time until there are more capable tires available.

    In the comment section to a recent mtbr First Look Review on the new Industry Nine PillarCarbon Wheels someone mentions the Ibis wide rims. Industry Nine then extensively replies (which is great), and their first and main comment is, that current tires are too narrow for wide rims. Quite lame imho, because there are so many standards that have been adapted by other manufacturers: bar diameter to grips and stems, head tube to forks and of course wheel size etc etc.


    From First Look: Industry Nine PillarCarbon Wheels - Mtbr.com
    I do appreciate that mixing parts that are outside of the Mfr's original intended pairings MAY lead to problems. I also agree that making a huge change to rim width may make some previously "optimal" tires less than optimal, and open up the option of using other tires that weren't a good match prior.
    The problem that I have with I9's, and other's, statement about why to avoid wide rims is that it assumes that "optimal" is a fixed and measurable thing. Whether a tire is optimal is still 70% about rider preferences, IMO, just like which seat, grips, and flavor of ice cream is "best"....sure, at the extremes some things just categorically won't work well, like the silly example of fat bike tires on a 19mm IW rim. That's not at all the same thing as a 2.25 tire on a 35mm IW rim. There's a big fat middle ground of width pairings that don't create a REAL problem...just a change in performance that might appeal to some more than others.

    The half dozen tires I've tried on 34mm IW rims were all a little different than they were on 22mm IW rims, and all changed for the better, and all but maybe the 2.4 tire would fall outside of what these guys are saying is acceptable.... and I'm not drinking koolaid... I went in expecting the narrower (2.2ish) tires to not work well on the 34mm IW rims, and that just wasn't the case...they were better... for me.

    I think the real answer is that going mid width, rather than wide, is the more safe approach from a marketing standpoint. It's less risky... unless the whole bike buying public jumps onto the wide bandwagon whole hog...then the spoils will go to the guys who took more risk....like Derby... and Ibis.

    I'm sure those new I9 wheels are REALLY REALLY nice regardless, and I'd love to have a pair...but I'd like them better with a wider rim for running the fat tires I prefer on the chunky rocky trails I ride. It's nice to have all this choice!

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    124
    I run XC/trail tires on my ripley. 2.1 ground control and 2.0 fast track.
    Will those tires work on the 41 rim?
    Canondale Scalpel Team 2015
    Ibis Ripley 2014
    Kona Raijin 2014 SS

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    974
    So talking about wide rims and which tires work well with them, here's an interesting datapoint:

    A couple weeks back I did a gravity clinic with Bryn Atkinson and Jill Kintner, both WC DH racers. They're both sponsored by I9 and Maxxis. They said that on the really wide rims, they actually prefer a tire with a "corner" to the tread like the HRII and Shorty. They said that on narrower rims they like Minions, because with the more pinched in/narrow profile, the corner knobs are more exposed; basically the edging knobs are really at the "shoulder" of the tire, and are better able to bite.

    But on wider rims, they feel that Minion shoulder knobs "close up" with the rest of the tread; basically those shoulders get so round that they don't get the bite and "on rails" feeling they want in hard cornering, because the knobs are more on the bottom/tread surface than really at the corners.

    Anyway, I found that interesting; it's basically the opposite of what I've been thinking and what most folks have said, and it comes from people who are REALLY REALLY fast, and who depend on that speed to pay the bills.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    35

    "small tires wide rim"

    Hi, i think someone was curious about "small tires on wide wheels", here a couple pictures of the ground control and fast track mounted on 941

    928 vs 941-img_0362.jpg928 vs 941-img_0361.jpg928 vs 941-img_0360.jpg928 vs 941-img_0359.jpg

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1
    Any thoughts on what range width of tire you can run on the internal rim width of 22mm of the 928s?