Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    378

    Actual experiences using Nobby Nic Tubeless Ready Tyres on Nicolai

    I've got 2.4 front and 2.2 rear Rubber Queen UST tyres on the Haven wheels at moment but was considering the Nobby Nic tyres in 2.35" which are quoted as being only 595g so would save 1 1/2lb of rotating weight off the bike. However various reviewers on here and other sites say they are delicate, now being so light I can accept some delicacy but no so much as to invalidate having a 170mm travel bike in the first place.

    Your personal experiences please particularly running them tubeless. No speculation from some quarters just facts please.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,406
    I've ridden both the 2.4 and the 2.25(dont think there's a 2.35?) with sealant. The 2.25, especially in non snakeskin guise is very fragile and suited only to xc IMO. The 2.4 is also pretty weak but I liked the grip and the volume. I once wrecked a 2.4 on it's first run with a sizeable tear to the sidewall.

    My current favourite is the 2.4 ardent. Big volume, loads of grip and is proving to be pretty durable. Not so keen on the 2.25. Especially up front.
    www.gravity-sports.co.uk

    flash bikes for flash gits

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    647
    They only do 2.25 and 2.4 nn. Currently running them on my nic. They go round, grip ok and so far don't puncture. Are expensive though the sidewalks are not the thickest hence the weight, I think the bad press came from people running them all the time in loose rock conditions, then complained that a light weight tyre was not very strong. Well idiots, there not going to be as strong as a heavy tyre!

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    378
    Guys the 2011 catalogue lists 2.35" and importer confirmed, I have a pair on back order to try, where I ride there are few rocks just gravel, loam and loads of roots.
    Ian I laughed at your last comments that was exactly why I put the question the way I did!

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    1,406
    That's the bottom line Ian. It's a light weight tyre and does what it's designed to do pretty well. Take into stuff it's not designed for and it'll ending tears/tears

    I did tear the 2.4 on a fast fire road though, when a stone flicked up and hit the sidewall.
    www.gravity-sports.co.uk

    flash bikes for flash gits

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    647
    I think you will be fine, ive run them for a couple of years, my latest set have the protection. Seem fine to me riding around Surrey hills, chicksands, and locally but then like you, no real rocks.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    Been running the 2.25 Ust Nobby Nic for the last year and have been impressed with them,Think my ones weigh 730g though.
    Would be interesting in trying the lighter version,might be ok for a front but would be suprised if it lasted long on the rear.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    378
    we will see they are not the UST version Norcosam just TL ready to keep weight down.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    If they are like Bontrager mud tubeless ready,Make sure you have a tube with you,They are made of tissue paper.

    I just looked and saw the new ones are Tubeless ready,interesting,will ask about them later.seems very light for a 2.35.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    378
    Yes does seem very light maybe they started using Maxxis' rulers that measure 1/4" less!

    I always keep a tube and proper Hutchinson tubeless tyre repair kit with me.

  11. #11
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,271
    I ran NNs for quite a while but thrres lots of Sharp rock and hard sections at my locale. I loved the feed back and progressive nature of the tyres but ad mentioned, the sidewalls were like cling film... I reckon the best Tyre out there albeit a bit heavy is the fat Albert. I love these tyres..

  12. #12
    steep fast and loose :)
    Reputation: The_Lecht_Rocks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    3,271
    Oh.. fwiw I have ardent too and they are just as fragile as the NNs.
    2.25 in each case..

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,962
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    I ran NNs for quite a while but thrres lots of Sharp rock and hard sections at my locale. I loved the feed back and progressive nature of the tyres but ad mentioned, the sidewalls were like cling film... I reckon the best Tyre out there albeit a bit heavy is the fat Albert. I love these tyres..

    My Riding mate has run fat alberts on his Spicy for a year or so now and they have been excellent,I have worn a rear Nobby Nic out and he is still using the Alberts,We have ridden about the same amount of miles.

    I have used his bike quite a few times and they feel very good,in all conditions,can get a bit interesting on wet roots,but what dosent.

    They are a fairly heavy tyre,but seem to last,and he has had no punctures.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    378
    Thanks guys, we will see....

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    313
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Lecht_Rocks
    Oh.. fwiw I have ardent too and they are just as fragile as the NNs.
    2.25 in each case..

    Which casings were you running? The LUST ones?

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,443
    In my opinion RQ's are far superior to NN's, they grip better, roll better, corner better,,,,,why change? If you want lighter why not take a look at the new pattern MK's?

  17. #17
    fnar fnar brrraaaaap
    Reputation: ilostmypassword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,171
    I think you will be disappointied coming from RQ to NN. The NN are paper thin. Maybe go UST NN?

    Also a 2.4 RQ is MASSIVE.

Posting Permissions

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