Page 1 of 26 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 1263

Thread: Race King 2.2

  1. #1
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062

    Race King 2.2

    Just received a pair of Continental Race King 2.2 from Chain Reaction today. 488 and 487gms for a 2.2" that measures an actual 54mm (2.12") wide inflated. Black Chili rubber compound and they appear to be built nice and straight and hop free. That's 50gms a tire lighter than the Nevegal 1.95's they'll replace. These are supposedly the secret weapon that Irina Kalentiyeva used at Offenburg in the rain in 2007 so I'm hoping that they work in my neck of the woods on wet roots and rocks.

    It does fill up a big percentage of a SID fork
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by rockyuphill; 05-26-2008 at 12:36 PM.

  2. #2
    Arnborg strik
    Reputation: Thomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    658

    Here is mine

    Race King Supersonic 2.2" = 494gram
    Speed King Supersonic 2.3" = 434gram
    Attached Images Attached Images

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,383
    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas
    Race King Supersonic 2.2" = 494gram
    Speed King Supersonic 2.3" = 434gram
    That is the exact combination that I am using currently on my Giant Anthem Advanced. The 2.2 Race King is really really close to the rear brake arch/seatstay support. When the tires was brand new, it definitely rubbed the arch, but now that there's some wear on the tire, it only occasionally touches when there's some mud/stones on the tire. I'm looking at getting the 2.0 for the rear to see how much clearance I gain.

    On another note, the reason I'm using the Speed King on the front is due to a failure of the Race King that was there at first. I am running then with Stan's on Olympic rims. I had a "burping" incident on a big drop, where I had too much weight/not enough pressure on/in the front tire. The fork bottomed, and the next thing to go was the tire bead. The tire still had air in it afterwards (enough to ride down the rest of the descent), but when I got to the bottom and pumped the tire back up, it had a bit of a "tweak" to it. I thought nothing of it, expecting to re-seat the bead when I got home, and have the tire running true once again.

    After re-seating the bead, the tweak was still there. "Oh well" I thought. "Live and learn". Next ride, I did it a 2nd time, and this time, the tweak was much worse. It seems that the carcass/kevlar bead was somehow damaged so that the tire no longer runs true. It's bad enough that on the road ride home from my ride, I was keeping the speed down because the tire was so badly out of true.

    As far as I can tell, the tire is toast. There is no externally visible damage other than the fact that the tire is seriously out of true. Damn it, the thing is practically brand new. Anyone else ever experience this type fo failure? Needless to say, I'm running a little more pressure in the front tire these days.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,419
    When you guys have ridden them a way, tell us how well they grip, how fast and how puncture resistant they are.

  5. #5
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by EGF168
    When you guys have ridden them a way, tell us how well they grip, how fast and how puncture resistant they are.
    i tried the 2,1" Speedkings first, then i got very light samples of the 2,3" and used them on my rigid winterbikie front and rear hoping for some added cushion. to my surprise the ride was really bad. the cushion wasn't there at all. i was hopping around like on a full rubber ball regardless of the pressures i tried. when i lowered the pression it would start feeling VERY sketchy to the point it would burp air, when riding it with higher pressure i was getting white knuckles from holding to the handlebar...when i went back to my original 1,8" (!!) Nobby Nic the ride was MUCH better. felt like adding supsension. sounds weird but the fat 2,3" Speedking was by far the worst dampening tire i ever mounted on a MTB!
    and i definitely didn't like its grip as well. cornering is bad. as is with the 2,1". they do roll decent but are a long way from real fast tires....i used them for about 50km only and they already seemed to seperate. you can see on the pic below that each centerknob seems to be halfway ripped away and the sealant would "shine" through....very strange.

    i won't recommend them at all.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by nino; 05-27-2008 at 06:55 AM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,419
    Well that isnít very encouraging, but I donít use tubeless so hopefully I would get away without some of those problems, all I really need is something for the UK mud later in the year that clears easily but doesnít have the problems for normal use that you get with specific mud tires. Iíve got it down to the Speed King protection 2.1/3 combo and Hutchinson Toroís, I guess Iíll just have to buy and try one although I donít like the look of the centre knobs in that pic.

  7. #7
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by EGF168
    Well that isnít very encouraging, but I donít use tubeless so hopefully I would get away without some of those problems, all I really need is something for the UK mud later in the year that clears easily but doesnít have the problems for normal use that you get with specific mud tires. Iíve got it down to the Speed King protection 2.1/3 combo and Hutchinson Toroís, I guess Iíll just have to buy and try one although I donít like the look of the centre knobs in that pic.
    the Speedking does VERY bad in mud! as mentioned i had it mounted on my winterbike and was very diappointed. the 1,8" Nobby Nic is what works best for me during the wet/muddy season. surprisingly good cushion ( i run it at 2,2 bars with sealant), really light (around 400g), pretty fast rolling and great grip. my favourite for the winter/mud right now. WORLDS better in the slippery stuff than the Speedkings!
    Attached Images Attached Images

  8. #8
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    The interesting thing is the difference in size between the Mountain King 2.2 and the Race King 2.2. The MK 2.2 has a 49mm carcass and a 52mm wide knob to knob width. The carcass on the Race King is huge at 54mm wide, so it could be run with a lower pressure, it'll be interesting to see how it feels on the trails. It looks like the Race King 2.2 is built on the same size carcass as the MK 2.4, the side knobs on the RK don't extend past the carcass width.

    The bouncy quality was my big complaint with the 2.3" Vertical Pro's, they ricocheted off rocks and roots like mad. I'm hoping that the Black Chili rubber helps keep these tires from being a like a basketball on trail lumps and bumps.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    might give those race kings a try, the 2.2 is wider than my 2.2 MK which is more like a 2.0 and smack bang the same weight.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bikeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    209
    Continental Race King WorldCup 2,2 LTD, cut tails ! = > 479 / 492 g. http://light-bike.com/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=3462

    Plenty of room on my Santa SL. I run them +/- 100 km only so it's little to fast to say more. Fast tire, allow low pressure (under 2 bar with tubs). Traction on sand - as long as you can ride. Very good mud cleaning. Good bump absortion. I ride in the forest only. I'll write some more few km later .

    Conti Race King Supersonic 2.0 (not mine) -> http://light-bike.com/forum/album_page.php?pic_id=3481
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    I was wrong with too low air pressure on them. Definietly more then 2,0 bar /30 psi is needed, for light rider too. I was flat with rear on XC downhill. That wasn't fault of a tire. Puncture of the tube was from rim inner site. No hole in tire after this (short carefull breaking). But the tire is thin. On rocks it will be ?? cut in same situation. The tire work great on dry, slow technical downhills in forest with roots etc.
    Last edited by Bikeon; 06-06-2008 at 05:01 PM.

  11. #11
    TEAM TOPEAK - ERGON
    Reputation: KERKOVEJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,046
    The Race Kings are thin. I run them tubeless with Stan's on the DT Swiss XR 1450 wheels. Most of the team members are running them with latex tubes. As far as traction....they are like velcro! They are pretty much my tire of choice for all racing conditions. As for day-to-day training...I suggest a little beefier tire in non-Supersonic.

    I have been testing since June of 2007
    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffkerkove/593375608/" title="DSCF0007.JPG by Jeff Kerkove, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1284/593375608_5b61481771.jpg" width="500" height="375" alt="DSCF0007.JPG" /></a>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffkerkove/593132587/" title="DSCF0006.JPG by Jeff Kerkove, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1365/593132587_f52821b010.jpg" width="375" height="500" alt="DSCF0006.JPG" /></a>

    <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffkerkove/2443420905/" title="DSCF0169 by Jeff Kerkove, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3089/2443420905_3e7cc3a2a1_b.jpg" width="768" height="1024" alt="DSCF0169" /></a>
    Last edited by KERKOVEJ; 05-28-2008 at 02:05 PM.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    You've been testing them since June 2008 That's impressive as it's only May 2008


    Nice bike, nice rider too!

  13. #13
    TEAM TOPEAK - ERGON
    Reputation: KERKOVEJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,046
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    You've been testing them since June 2008 That's impressive as it's only May 2008
    Err....since June '07

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072


    What frame is that in the pic with the blonde ?

    DT Swiss Carbon rims too

  15. #15
    TEAM TOPEAK - ERGON
    Reputation: KERKOVEJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,046
    Our team frame sponsor is Rotwild. It's a brand out of Germany.

  16. #16
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster


    What frame is that in the pic with the blonde ?

    DT Swiss Carbon rims too
    She is the current World Champ... no surprise she gets some nice kit.

  17. #17
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    Finally had weather cooperate to get some riding done on these Race Kings. They are really nice fast rolling tires at 30psi. Lots of grip on smooth rocks and smooth polished roots, work really well in the mud of varying gooiness without spinning out and without packing up, really well on loose over hardpack and feel really good on a hardtail. I was quite familiar with the way my 1.95 Nevegals felt on the hardtail and they were a good compromise between grip and rolling speed, the Race Kings feel like they roll faster and have really nice squirm-free cornering.

    I think I might swap the 2.2 Mountain Kings off of my ETSX and put some Race Kings on it, they feel much more predictable on roots and rocks and less squirmy with the more densely packed knobs. I like the big carcass for deformation grip capability over roots and rocks.

  18. #18
    FIRENZE rulez !!
    Reputation: eliflap's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    3,828
    i bought a pair of Race King WC 2,2

    never used ... so decided to sell on ebay

    468 and 460 their weight

    i agree with Nino ... NN 1,8 are wonderful

    i used with latex on my scalpel 2008 , great tyre

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    301
    Where can I order the race king in 2.2 and 2.0 in the us?

  20. #20
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    You'll need to get them from Chain Reaction Cycles in the UK, they haven't floated across the Atlantic yet. I think CRC still only has the 2.2", the 2" haven't crossed the English Channel yet.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    301
    I order them from star bikes, 2.2 and the 2.0 in supersonic. I dont know how long it will take them to get to Ca. But my Ibis Mojo SL cant wait for its new shoes. Thanks for all the help.
    Last edited by KenDobson; 08-19-2008 at 04:08 PM.

  22. #22
    Go faster!
    Reputation: sergio_pt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,075
    How can a tire with 2mm tall knobs grip like velcro?...

    Where I ride I have a lot of hardpack with sketchy sand over it, and its very difficult to have good grip when cornering or when going a little faster.
    This tire seems to be very fast rolling that’s something I like but I think I need bigger knobs in my trails.

    Anybody else tried the conti race king supersonic in 2.0?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: EGF168's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    3,419
    Quote Originally Posted by sergio_pt
    How can a tire with 2mm tall knobs grip like velcro?...
    Depends where you ride, in your case your riding in the wrong place for these tires, I have no doubt they grip like Velcro where I ride because there isnít that much loose stuff.

  24. #24
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    I'm actually surprised how well the Race Kings grip pea gravel and loose over hardpack surfaces, much better than the Mountain King on those surfaces. I think it must just be all the knob edges and the minimal squirm. They do wear fast, but so far I haven't come across a condition where they really suck (no deep gooey mud here though, it tends to be like watery oatmeal consistency not peanut butter). Wet roots and rocks are good, general dry hardpack and pavement sections are great, and dead quiet.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    301
    The question I have is do I try and run these tubless or go with a lightweight tube? How much trouble is it to get the supersonics to seal up? What is the ride quality like?

    Any help?

  26. #26
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    it takes a couple of days...

    Quote Originally Posted by KenDobson
    The question I have is do I try and run these tubless or go with a lightweight tube? How much trouble is it to get the supersonics to seal up? What is the ride quality like?

    Any help?
    i run a RaceKing 2.0" SS on the front and it took me a couple of days to get that tire completely sealed. it would mount pretty easy but lose air overnight.it took me 3 full days to get it airthight.i had it re-inflated twice per day, laying flat on it's sides so it can seal the porous sidewalls...yet it was taking 3 days to get fully sealed.

    i am really happy about it's low rolling resistance and grip as long as it is dry. i am not so happy on damp,technical trails where it definitely lacks sidegrip. i never felt this insecure with my Nokian NBX which do grip better in steep,technical terrain. as long as it is dry the RK is very good indeed though. i will mount another one on the rear soon where i still run a 08 Racing Ralph. the Racing Ralph got much better than the old version. it actually has decent grip everywhere, is lighter than the RK (my selected RR 2.1" weighs 207g, the selected RK 435g).

    as mentioned elsewhere i am currently testing some VERY light inner tubes so i will try the RK also on the rear soon.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 2times's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    334
    I tried the Speed King Super Sonics tubeless and could'nt get it to hold air; I ended up switching to light weight tubes. I'm a newbie when it comes to runnig tubeless though.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    With my Mountain King Supersonics - the first time i sealed them was a complete nightmare. Basically i couldn't really get them to seal and just had to pump them up once a week.

    With the same tyres i have re-mounted them about a week ago.I removed all the old sealant and tried again. This time they inflated fine, i layed them on there sides for about 8 hours each side and they are completely sealed i havent had to reinflate them as there still rock hard a week later


    On a side note. Whats the best option Race King 2.2 or 2.0? My Mountainkings are 2.2 but they actually measure 2.0 i understand the Race King 2.2 is actually a 2.2 etc and im happy with 2.0 tyres. Plus the 2.0 is 50 grams lighter per tyre

  29. #29
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    Has anyone tried treating the inside of the tires with sealant before trying to mount them, basically painting the inside of the tire with sealant and letting it set up and dry, and then going through the tubeless process?

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,383
    My solution to getting these things sealed which works every single time, is to do the shake/lie on their side thing for 2-3 cycles, and then just ride the damned thing. It'll hold enough air for a 1-2 hour ride, and then after the ride, the tire will be sealed for good.

    YMMV!

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Rocky,

    You can't do that as the stans solution doesn't make the sidewalls airtight unless air is trying to pass through it in which case the latex goes hard or "skins" to make the seal.

    I have thought about that very same idea though, spraying something on the inside of the tyre before mounting it to help make it airtight - like a sprayable rubber etc but ive never found anything.

  32. #32
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    I notice that some tires are already sprayed down with something like silicone lube (Nokian WXC300's for instance) to keep the inner tube from sticking to the tire. I wonder if that has an effect on getting the tire to seal as the liquid carrier in the sealant beads up on it instead of wetting the tire surface.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    It will prevent a seal - the latex wont be able to skin over a liquid covered contact surface.

  34. #34
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i run a RaceKing 2.0" SS on the front and it took me a couple of days to get that tire completely sealed. it would mount pretty easy but lose air overnight.it took me 3 full days to get it airthight.i had it re-inflated twice per day, laying flat on it's sides so it can seal the porous sidewalls...yet it was taking 3 days to get fully sealed.

    i am really happy about it's low rolling resistance and grip as long as it is dry. i am not so happy on damp,technical trails where it definitely lacks sidegrip. i never felt this insecure with my Nokian NBX which do grip better in steep,technical terrain. as long as it is dry the RK is very good indeed though. i will mount another one on the rear soon where i still run a 08 Racing Ralph. the Racing Ralph got much better than the old version. it actually has decent grip everywhere, is lighter than the RK (my selected RR 2.1" weighs 207g, the selected RK 435g).

    as mentioned elsewhere i am currently testing some VERY light inner tubes so i will try the RK also on the rear soon.
    I'm sure your 207g for the Ralph must be a typo...

    I'm curious about how big the 2.1 RR is compared to the 2.0 Race King. The 2.2 RKs that I got are huge. Probably the biggest tire I've ever had.

  35. #35
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    oops...

    Quote Originally Posted by JaLove
    I'm sure your 207g for the Ralph must be a typo...

    I'm curious about how big the 2.1 RR is compared to the 2.0 Race King. The 2.2 RKs that I got are huge. Probably the biggest tire I've ever had.
    correct: must read 407g
    Attached Images Attached Images

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Nino,

    Do you "know where to get" Conti tyres?? I want some Race Kings but i want light ones.....

  37. #37
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    no RaceKings for me !

    ok - i have done a couple of really intense and long rides and my conclusion using a Race King 2,0" SS on the front is:

    -VERY good on hardpack

    -VERY fast

    -VERY hard to get sealed "tubeless" (it took me 3 full days of constant re-inflating and changing side-to-side and shaking etcetc)

    -VERY,VERY bad in the mud or even on damp,humid trails! as soon as it gets a bit slippery or steep the RaceKing is a sure way to loose traction. i really have no confidence at all in this tire. even going straight through mudholes or slippery sections you can loose your line...i haven't experienced such with any other knobby i had on my bike before. it really behaves like a semislick at best as soon as it gets humid. definitely a no-go for me as i don't like a tire to wash out when i'm on the brakes. i might give it another shot in the rear but on the front i will not mount it again.

    next tire to test in the front is the new 08 Schwalbe Racing Ralph. i have it in the rear and it really performs very good. for sure no mud-tire as well but at least decent traction and no wash-out without warning.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    next tire to test in the front is the new 08 Schwalbe Racing Ralph. i have it in the rear and it really performs very good. for sure no mud-tire as well but at least decent traction and no wash-out without warning.
    that is the next tire i will buy as well. the new RR sure remind me of the Nokian NBX lite.

    everyone i know who runs em, loves them and seem to be a great all rounder, fast and good traction.

  39. #39
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    Rr

    Quote Originally Posted by kevbikemad
    that is the next tire i will buy as well. the new RR sure remind me of the Nokian NBX lite.

    everyone i know who runs em, loves them and seem to be a great all rounder, fast and good traction.
    i will know in about 3 hours....i just start a ride using RRs front and rear now.

  40. #40
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    Did you get a chance to try the RK 2.2 for comparison to the RK 2.0? I've had really good grip on wet roots and rocks with the RK 2.2 on both my hardtail and 4x4 bike.

  41. #41
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill
    Did you get a chance to try the RK 2.2 for comparison to the RK 2.0? I've had really good grip on wet roots and rocks with the RK 2.2 on both my hardtail and 4x4 bike.
    I was thinking the exact same thing. It seems unusual to Nino to not try a couple of different sizes. I know he's always looking for the lightest stuff, but it still seems odd. Maybe the 2.2 wasn't available to him at the time.

  42. #42
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    Rk 2.2

    okok,
    i was just trying the slimmer, lighter RKs first and at least on the front i didn't like it at all. not what i want on my bike since the slightest humid spot would make it wash out. really strange.

    i then mounted 2.1" Racing Ralphs front AND rear and i was getting back the confidence i was missing with the 2.0" RK.

    next to try was a RK 2.2 in the rear. i have to say i was really impressed. still difficult to compare since we had now 4 days of terrific late-summer weather with trails in perfect grip.absolutely no mud left and just the PERFECT terrain to ride on. but i am really impressed by the 2.2 so far.

    what i really like a lot was the superb comfort! so far i didn't care about how comfy a tire rides but this one is awseome.i used it with the prototype inner tubes i already mentioned elsewhere at 2.0 bar pressure (29 psi) and the comfort and grip of this tire was unreal. i felt like riding a FS.on gravelled roads you just feel like riding on a paved road. there were sections with roots that seemd like a groomed trail...completely smoothed out. it also seems very fast. too bad there were no slippery spots anymore as i would really like to see how it performs there. i really hope it does decent. anyway- just the rear tire gave me VERY much confidence.

    BUT the tire is HUGE! as you can see in the second picture i have just a couple of millimeters left between the brakecable of my V's and the top of the knobs....so definitely no deep, sticky mud with these rubbers

    one negative note was that the huge,ballonlike size of this tire made for an even steeper headangle on my already short-legged front of the bike. with the rear sitting higher the headangle became steeper and i really could feel the added nervousness going down. the grip of the Racing Ralph on the front however was real good as well. now i already installed the RK 2.2 on the front as well. this will level my ride again and if the front adds as much smoothness as the rear does i may think about going full rigid as well () i hope to be able to do a ride soon in hopefully somewhat slippery conditions as well...it's a long time i wished for such conditions rather than the perfect weather we have now. those are really huge tires. my bike looks like Hulk Hogan

    but it still weighs a decent 7,14 kilos just as pictured. not bad considering the huge tires (468+470g) and standard Crossmax wheels.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by nino; 08-31-2008 at 09:19 AM.

  43. #43
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    I had the same sort of issues with the MK2.2 versus the MK2.4, the smaller carcass made it necessary to run lots of pressure and then the tire was sketchy. If the pressure is dropped enough to keep it grippy I could feel the rim hit objects on the trail. It would be great to see a comparison of the inflated tread pattern on the RK2.0 and RK2.2.

    The RK2.2 can be run fairly low in pressure (but not really low without pinch flatting in this Supersonic form) and that seems to help it grip rocks and roots like crazy. But definitely no gooey mud, not much clearance left on most forks and frames. It makes a high tech bike look a bit like a beach cruiser with the enormous tires. It does make a hardtail a lot more comfy to ride.

    I'm still amazed at the traction of the RK2.2 on loose over hardpack and pea gravel/sand.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by rockyuphill; 08-31-2008 at 06:48 AM.

  44. #44
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    I wonder if there are any differences in the World Cup version versus the Supersonic version, other than the word painted on the sidewall? The 2.2's I got from Chain Reaction are all the WC version.

  45. #45
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill
    I wonder if there are any differences in the World Cup version versus the Supersonic version, other than the word painted on the sidewall? The 2.2's I got from Chain Reaction are all the WC version.
    I think the World Cup version IS the Supersonic. I don't think there are 2 different models. If there are, I'd really like to know.

  46. #46
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    well...

    Quote Originally Posted by JaLove
    I think the World Cup version IS the Supersonic. I don't think there are 2 different models. If there are, I'd really like to know.
    i do believe that sponsored riders get different tires than what we buy. the rubber compound might be softer for better grip and it hasn't to last more than 1 race...

    BUT on the other hand it would be damn stupid to let the consumers know that they don't get the same tire the racers have. so i sure think those are the same tires. i don't think that Conti would put a different label on "team" tires so anyone can actually see that those are special. maybe that's an earlier version or vice-versa.

  47. #47
    Weekend Warrior
    Reputation: daleksic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,078
    I don't know if this will matter in there, but I have the SpeedKing 2.1 and the tire performed best in the manufacturers recommended 55psi, i know it seems very high but it performed very well on Hardpack surfaces. Today I ran that tire on medium-hard and medium-loose moist to wet conditions on a local trail and i had to drop the pressure drastically to make it hook up. I ran it at around 38psi which is still high compared to the old tire i rode (which was 28f/32r). But as nino said the ride comfort of the Conti Tire is way and beyond any other tire. This tire is great, it diggs deep, sheds well, doesn't bounce and absorbs pump very well, but there is something about this tire that i don't like and I can't put my finger on it.

    I think what all these tires need (RK, SK and MK), is a snakeskin thread in between the knobs.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bikeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    209

    RK 2.2 Tubeless or not?

    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill
    I've had really good grip on wet roots and rocks with the RK 2.2 on both my hardtail and 4x4 bike.
    I can't belive it . I'm running RK 2.2 WC on fullsusp. XC bike. On wet root I met soil in very fast mode! On forest tracks dowhills (not true DH but down) front tire heave tendency to sideslips. On the breaks & without! Kerkovej (sponored Ergon rider) on PM to me wrote, he's running it with stans inside at lower preassure then mine. Then it will be more grippy With tubes I can't get lower, 'cose sidewalls wrinkled dangerously (once flat). Propably good tire for speed drving (not so technical), but better tubeless. Kalentieva riched Bronze Olimpic Medal on them (after our Silver Majka , on Geax) indeed.
    =========================

    WC wersion was promo mode. Kalentieva & team made some good job (I was catch too). The NEED was marketed. Then WC reborn as SS to fit name philosophy of the Conti. So simple
    Last edited by Bikeon; 09-03-2008 at 03:52 PM.

  49. #49
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikeon
    I can't belive it . I'm running RK 2.2 WC on fullsusp. XC bike. On wet root I met soil in very fast mode! On forest tracks dowhills (not true DH but down) front tire heave tendency to sideslips. On the breaks & without! Kerkovej (sponored Ergon rider) on PM to me wrote, he's running it with stans inside at lower preassure then mine. Then it will be more grippy With tubes I can't get lower, 'cose sidewalls wrinkled dangerously (once flat). Propably good tire for speed drving (not so technical), but better tubeless. Kalentieva riched Bronze Olimpic Medal on them (after our Silver Majka , on Geax) indeed.
    I watched the race here on TV and it looked like a lot of the riders were running very low pressures in their tires. You could see when some of them were going over rocks and down those steps every lap that their tires would really compress a lot.

  50. #50
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,062
    I'm running Maxxis Flyweight tubes in the 2.2's. Running about 28-30PSI and I'm about 89kg. I've got lots of roots and rocks to try them on...
    Attached Images Attached Images

Page 1 of 26 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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