Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    104

    Rear tire for Rohloff

    I am just putting my first Rohloff build together and am wondering about a rear tire.

    I am not a weight weenie but I'd like to keep the weight down. Also, I want to avoid changing the tire as much as possible (weird no? lol)

    I ride an hour long 15 km commute, each way, with some 1600+ feet of elevation gain. The trail has no roots but it is hardpack and loose gravel over hardpack, with about 3 km of asphalt. A couple of the longer steeper climbs require tires with good grip for babyhead rocks.

    Often when riding I'm going to work and just don't want to be changing tires with a Rohloff hub (because of the way my speedhub is attached -- but let's not get into that).

    I've tried some Specialized Fast Trac tires on another bike: very light but no good for me, way too deficient in grip, and probably not long lasting. Nobby Nics were okay but I bought the 2.4 version -- too big and heavy. Someone gave me a set of new 2.1 TT Larsens. Haven't tried them.

    Anyone have any suggestions?

    WTB? Continental? What about a Crossmark rear -- very solid and strong, without a big weight penalty? I'm not rich but I'm willing to spend for a great rear tire.

    Cheers!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    104
    Sorry, have to edit: the Larsens are 2.0 not 2.1

    Anyhow, what tires are people running on their XC or light AM Rohloff equipped bikes?

    Cheers!

  3. #3
    1*14*29*2.1 & 1*1*29*2.4
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    Larsons should be OK. I ran them ont he front for a while and there isn't much difference in width to the crossmark. I run crossmarks onthe rear pretty much exclusively. They grip well enough but people say not the best for wet or mud. I ride mostly steep loose and loose over hard here with the occasional rock feature. A good all round tyre IMO for most stuff

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    104
    Great thanks -- I might give that a try too.

    Do you think the Crossmarks are a bit tougher, a bit more robust and puncture resistant than the Larsens?

  5. #5
    1*14*29*2.1 & 1*1*29*2.4
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,258
    probably about the same I think. The crossmarks don't have a reputation for tough side walls, but probably no different to a lot of others. I think the newer they are the more resistant to tears, using sealant. If tubing them, they should be good unless you rie a lot of sharp rock. Tread puncture wise they hold up well. Larsons in my experience are a little more predictable in cornering especially when worn, but on the rear it's not an issue for me.

Similar Threads

  1. 142 Rear End Conversion for Rohloff
    By JimInSF in forum Internal Gear Hubs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-08-2011, 10:10 AM
  2. Fat Tire Rohloff
    By Berkeley Mike in forum Internal Gear Hubs
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 07-09-2010, 01:43 AM
  3. Rohloff rear hub
    By MTB_prodigy in forum Internal Gear Hubs
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 09-29-2008, 05:24 PM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-27-2005, 02:11 PM
  5. Ventana frames and rohloff rear hubs???
    By Brannigan in forum Ventana
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-06-2004, 01:55 PM

Posting Permissions

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