How big a tire will fit in a Ciclon frame?
I assume Big Betty 2.4's will fit, but is there really room for anything more?
from what I have seen the clearance on my Salty and Terremoto is the same, so I would expect the Ciclon's is like that...
the BB fits...I fit 2.6 Kinetics (about a "real" 2.5) and clearance was tight...definitely not to be run in mud....
the 2.4 BB is quite a high volume tire already, what do you want to run?
Last edited by crisillo; 02-15-2008 at 07:15 AM.
Not sure. Just wondering. I'll probably get BB Gooey Glueys or Nevegal Stick-E, but was thinking that the Nevegal 2,35 might leave me wanting a bit bigger volume, and wanted to find out if a bigger one (2.6) would fit.
However, that will probably be overkill.
I'll probably go with the Nevegal 2.35's for starters.
I do run a bigger tire in the front (the 2.6 Kinetics)...but the 2.35 Nev or 2.4 BB should be enough for the rear...as you said.. give it a shot
Originally Posted by Dazed
I just put some 2.5 Continental Diesels on my ciclon, and they just make the clearance.
on that point cris - isn't there really only two main Ventana rear triangles - the standard and HD versions?
Originally Posted by crisillo
I went from standard to HD on my X5 (now on the Terremoto) and I don't think there is any more tire clearance as you stated..
not sure about the Bruja rear tri, but it sure looks like the HD version on the Tmoto
Correct, the dimensions are the same. Even the Bruja's are the Same. obviously the HD version are burlier thru the use of reinforcing gussets etc..
To the O.P. Tires width is greatly affected by Rim size as well, so take that into consideration when sizing up what fits.
Example. My 2.5 Conti's are fatter when mounted on my 5.1D's than on my Mavic 521's. 58mm casing width(5.1D's) vs 53mm (521) Oddly the 5.1's are 28mm the 521's are 25 not sure why the casing is 5mm different. Measured at the same spot at the same tire pressure though (35psi).
"Before D.W., "anti-squat" was referred to as pedal feedback."
If you reread my post I stated they have the same clearance (you even quoted it )...the difference on the HD is a couple of reinforcements (by the brake mount and by the drive side of the main pivot)..the rest is the same AFAIK
Originally Posted by marcus_dukakis
cris - sorry my point was not about the tire clearance, but more the fact that the Ventana rear triangles on all the 26" FS frames (bar the Cuervo of course) are all actually one and the same, as you have just said (adding and subtracting a few gussets/reinforcements)..
I think my mind was elsewhere thinking about how there may eventually be a need to make a totally new HD rear end to let people run wide tires and still have plenty of clearance..
that said, I dont have any issues with the current HD rear as it hasn't rained in Australia to any great extent for about 8 years, so mud clearance is a non-issue. It would be interesting to hear from some of the UK bretheren about what size tires they can run and how the rear ends cope in the mud with fatties fitted.
This brings up a point of confusion for me. What is the 5.1's actual inner width? Outer width means nothing for tire width. I saw a post on the Stan's board by one of Stan's Techs that the 5.1 has an external width of 28mm but is odd in that its internal width is only 20.4mm (I think that was the figure...it was definantly less than 21). Doesn't Mavic's system mean the 521 has an internal width of 21mm? If these are both true then the profile created by the Mavic vs. the DT would be no different. What's the true scoop on the 5.1's width?
Originally Posted by Ciclistagonzo
yep, the 5.1d is 21mm...the ETRTO on it is 559 x 21..... maybe the hook shape is different (although that would be minimal I bet)
Originally Posted by titusquasi
the 521 is 559 x 21c..so..spec wise they are the same...basically the 521 is Mavic's response to the 5.1d
CEO Product Failure
FWIW, I run 2.5 WTB Weirwolves. No clearance issues, mud or dry land.