Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 1263

Thread: Race King 2.2

  1. #1
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289

    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
    1,452
    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
    15,289
    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
    2,060
    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
    2,060
    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
    2,060
    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
    15,289
    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
    15,289
    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
    324
    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
    15,289
    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
    324
    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
    15,289
    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
    324
    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
    15,289
    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
    1,452
    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
    15,289
    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
    842
    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
    15,289
    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
    15,289
    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
    15,289
    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
    15,289
    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

  51. #51
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill
    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...
    That looks pretty rough, eh? What size tubes are you running and what rims do you use?

  52. #52
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    XTR 975 wheels and the tubes are the 1.90-2.125" size.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    324
    Well I just mounted my new Race Kings on my Ibis Mojo Sl. I went with light weight conti tubes and will attempt to go tubeless after a few rides. I went with th 2.2 in front and 2.0 in back. From the looks of it I should have gone with two 2.2's. Wish it was easier to get them but I will ride it this way and make a judgement. The 2.2 looks perfect on my dually and the rear seems alittle to skinny and low sidewall.

    Will post some pics when I find my camera.

    later

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    324
    Just got back from a ride. The tires have alot of grip here in the nor cal hardpack with moon dust on top. Also seem to go though the rock gardens well. I think I will order a 2.2 for the back. I like the size of it, and the sidewall protection of the bigger tire. If I was racing x-country I would like the 2.0 for sure. They roll well. Next need to try and go tubeless with them and see what the difference is. Also mine are the supersonic model dont know if this makes a difference.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    324
    Pics of the 2.2 and 2.0

    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by KenDobson; 09-02-2008 at 07:08 PM.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,452
    Let me know who you order from and when. I may join you if they're coming from Europe, so we can share the shipping charges. I need a 2.2 Race King SS, and maybe a pair of Furious Freds.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    How big is the Race King 2.2 vs a Mountain King 2.2?

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bikeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by rockyuphill
    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...
    Hymm, I have trust You. After beautyfull foto even more .

    Yesterday I switched to my old XC set from HT Dale / Headshok (sold): Schwalbe Skinny Jimmy Fold. 1.9 & Conti Twister fold. 1.9. Wow. I just reflect HOW it was possible to run tight tires as this . My Santa SL drove like HT a bit. Some ground clearence problems. I'll run them one more time, to check tread needs for next set up. Mayby Conti SK or MK for front and SK for rear (period).

  59. #59
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    How big is the Race King 2.2 vs a Mountain King 2.2?
    The Race King 2.2 has the same carcass size as the MK 2.4, they are huge. The big difference is the side knobs on the RK don't extend past the carcass width.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Hi Rocky,

    Thanks mate. They will fit my Sid like yours but it might be too tight a fit on my rear frame - my 2.2 MK's dont have much space !

    Oh well at least the 2.0 RK are lighter!

  61. #61
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    i love the RK 2.2 !!

    ok- i mounted the RK 2.2 a couple of days ago, now front AND rear , and was really impressed to say the least. these rubbers are indeed gripping like velcro, they have superb comfort and are super fast. so far i couldn't detect any weakness in them. that was on perfectly dry trails with superb grip (dry loamy trails...you know there is no better!)

    now i already wrote above that i was curious if the tires would also grip when things get slippery....my "wish" came true as we had rain during the whole night and also all day long. so i decided this would be the perfect test since rain on such trails makes for a super-slippery mess. the very top gets soft while underneath it is still dry...so i went for a ride during lunch-time in the rain!

    i was heading for the trail i know is the most slippery around with lots of off-camber turns, logs and roots and technical switchbacks. also lot of sections where the trail would fall to one side which usually lets you slip very easily. ok - i was prepared for the worst since the RK 2.2 is HUGE in size and the knobs are pretty small and not very much confidence inspiring when you think about going for a mud-ride with them. but the tires did so well i am really amazed!! i really have a hard time believeing how well they performed since the usually super-slippery trail wasn't slippery at all. i was always expecting the tires to wash out (i'm riding those trails for 15 years year in and out so i know how they feel in every imaginable weather). the tires indeed grip like V-E-L-C-R-O. i started with low expectations...slowly realizing the tires would grip...slowly going faster yet still having that barrier because i was always expecting the bike to slide...not so. in the end i was riding the bike almost as fast as when things were dry. really, really amazing. also important it seemed not to pack up from all the loam i was riding through. i never had the knobs filled. maybe the trails still weren't deep enough but usually in these loamy conditions they would clog up fairly easily.not so today.

    i am also impressed by the low rollingresistance. usually a tire clearly lets you feel when you run over different terrain.on smooth paved roads it's fairly easy to pedal while usually in sandy sections or sections with deep gravel or sticky loam you could feel the added resistance from your tires. the 2.2 RKs seem to roll over everything with ease. so fast i was really smiling.i sometimes think i had a gear higher than usual even though the massive circumference would make for a higher gearing. for more details on fat tires offering lower rollingresistance read here:
    The official Furious Fred Thread. . .

    VERY important tough is the tire pressure. i was using those experimental inner tubes at just 2 bar front / 1.9 rear (29 / 27 psi). i would think these tires are too bulky for a "tubeless" setup. they are moving around on the rims quite a bit and i would think this might lead to a "wobbly" ride. i might get corrected but usually such huge tires when used "tubeless" on narrow xc-rims ask for a certain pressure in order not to get this wobbly feeling. anyway - i was using them with inner tubes and i think this combination is the best suspension you can get. my hardtail feels like glued to the ground. the trails get smoothed out and it really seems you're gliding effortless. After my first positive feedback my friend also installed the RK 2.2 but he wasn't as impressed. when i checked his pressure he would have 2.2 bar (32 psi). just yesterday he went riding also with 1.9 bar and now he also was all positive. so i really think these tires need LOW pressure to excel. at higher pressure setting they will behave like a full-rubber ball and get springy. but at low pressure these babies suck up everything in their way and offer an insane amount of grip.

    i also tried lower pressure settings. as low as 1.4 bar but then the tire really feels wobbly and attacking corners resulted in that wobbly feeling and when braking hard going downhills you always felt like washing out....in the end i felt best at 1.9-2 bars up front with slightly less in the rear.

    so-i still can't believe my impressions from today. i might need more rides and a direct comparison with my old favourite (Nokian NBX). but so far i am a real fan of the RK 2.2
    Last edited by nino; 09-04-2008 at 07:16 AM.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    582
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    VERY important tough is the tire pressure. i was using those experimental inner tubes at just 2 bar front / 1.9 rear (29 / 27 psi). i would think these tires are too bulky for a "tubeless" setup. they are moving around on the rims quite a bit and i would think this might lead to a "wobbly" ride. i might get corrected but usually such huge tires when used "tubeless" on narrow xc-rims ask for a certain pressure in order not to get this wobbly feeling.
    I am thinking about new tires soon.

    I use a 2.4 Mountain King tubeless and I have to ride at about 32 or 33 PSI in the rear to eliminate most of the wobble. I would think going from my FSA rims which are very narrow to something like ZTR 355s would be wide enough to get back down to 28 or 29 PSI. Also, the comparison is not perfect because the bigger tread also impacts the wobble of the MK 2.4.

    I would be interested to know what rims you are using.

  63. #63
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by elephant
    I would be interested to know what rims you are using.
    the 2.4 MK is the same size than the RK 2.2 !
    it's just the knobs that stick out on the MK.

    i use Mavic Crossmax UST wheels (you can see my bike in a recent post in this thread)

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    842
    Quote Originally Posted by nino

    VERY important tough is the tire pressure. i was using those experimental inner tubes at just 2 bar front / 1.9 rear (29 / 27 psi). i would think these tires are too bulky for a "tubeless" setup. they are moving around on the rims quite a bit and i would think this might lead to a "wobbly" ride. i might get corrected but usually such huge tires when used "tubeless" on narrow xc-rims ask for a certain pressure in order not to get this wobbly feeling. anyway - i was using them with inner tubes and i think this combination is the best suspension you can get. my hardtail feels like glued to the ground. the trails get smoothed out and it really seems you're gliding effortless. After my first positive feedback my friend also installed the RK 2.2 but he wasn't as impressed. when i checked his pressure he would have 2.2 bar (32 psi). just yesterday he went riding also with 1.9 bar and now he also was all positive. so i really think these tires need LOW pressure to excel. at higher pressure setting they will behave like a full-rubber ball and get springy. but at low pressure these babies suck up everything in their way and offer an insane amount of grip.
    maybe try them tubeless on a wider rim like the ZTR race - i can feel a huge difference in tire stability between average XC rims like crossmax sl, 717 and the ZTR RACE - the CM and 717 rims need to be 4 or 5 psi higher pressure with the same tires, you can go much lower on the RACE rims tubeless. you also get a little more volume with a wider rim.

    i need to get a set of tires!

  65. #65
    the train keeps rollin
    Reputation: snowdrifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,213
    [QUOTE=nino]QUOTE]

    Dude, how wide are your bars? on seat height, you have me beat, and I thought I ride with a lot of post out.
    beaver hunt

  66. #66
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    my bike

    [QUOTE=snowdrifter]
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    QUOTE]

    Dude, how wide are your bars? on seat height, you have me beat, and I thought I ride with a lot of post out.
    it's a Scale size M. saddle height is 5cm above the handlebar (2").nothing too exotic here.

    my handlebars measure 52cm (20.5")

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 2times's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    334

    Reliabilty, longevity

    Nino, do you have any impressions as far as longevity is concerned? I have a pair of Speed King SS 2.3's and they have not lsted long at all, I'm a little disappointed to say the least.

    Might be too early for you to tell but I thought I would ask anyway.

  68. #68
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    wear

    Quote Originally Posted by 2times
    Nino, do you have any impressions as far as longevity is concerned? I have a pair of Speed King SS 2.3's and they have not lsted long at all, I'm a little disappointed to say the least.

    Might be too early for you to tell but I thought I would ask anyway.
    no i can't tell about wear since i did only 4 rides now.
    but i can tell that the Speedkings wear ultrafast. i had a set of 2.0 and also 2.3s and both performed pretty bad. when having a closer look at my 2.3s i discovered that the knobs were HOLLOW! really, no joke! i did also just about 3-4 rides with them but there's some knobs that got ripped open and you can actually see that they are hollow inside. maybe that's the reason my 2.3 Speedkings weighed just 409g...and the carcass is so thin it actually shines through.you can also see the wet spots from the sealant coming through. but i don't care since the Speedking was really a bad performing tire all the way.

    i don't really care about wear anyway since tires are too important for me. that's the number 1 factor on the bike.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bikeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by 2times
    ...do you have any impressions as far as longevity is concerned? I have a pair of Speed King SS 2.3's and they have not lsted long at all, I'm a little disappointed to say the least. Might be too early for you to tell but I thought I would ask anyway.
    My RK 2.2 set has more then 450 km. No signs of wear right now. Any foto needed??

  70. #70
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    Not sure how indicative of wear it will be, but the little mold tits took about twice as long as I expected to wear off the middle knobs and they're still hanging in there on the side knobs.

  71. #71
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    comparison ride...

    i mentioned above that i would need a compariosn ride to get proof of my impressions yesterday. well - i did the exact same ride today using my Winterbike with Nokian NBX in the fornt and 08 Racing Ralph 2.1" in the rear. a setup i am happy with most of the time. now today the weather was fine, rain has stopped this morning and we even had the sun out but this does not affect the trails IN the forest which are completely in the shadow. so the trails were actually the same as they have been yesterday.

    wow-what a difference!

    i'll start with the most important: the ride is just slightly over 1 hour long (1:02:30 to be precise). today it took me 35 seconds longer while my average heartrate was 8 beats higher!! that's 160 average instead of 152 and this alongside a slower time.

    i had severe problems in that mentioned, super slippery downhill section where i would loose 30 seconds alone with 3 hairy moments and twice almost crashing into a tree....no honestly, that trail is indeed super slippery and that was the reason i chose it because i was really curious to see how the RaceKing 2.2 would do there. it indeed was like riding on rails when i compare to my usual combo.

    my winterbike has disc and a newer SID WC with 80mm travel compared to my Scale which comes with V's and a oooold school SID with just 63mm of travel. the fork of the Winterbike is definitely doing a better job...but i was MUCH slower there.

    on a sidenote: it was soaking wet, deep mudholes etc but i didn't have a single problem with my Vs yesterday. the discs today went completely unnoticed. for sure no worse but no better as well.

    so i will use the RK 2.2 from now on. i need more time on them and will have to adapt as they allow MUCH higher speeds in slippery conditions.

  72. #72
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    so i will use the RK 2.2 from now on. i need more time on them and will have to adapt as they allow MUCH higher speeds in slippery conditions.
    You do realize that it just means more blood and bruises when things do go horribly wrong.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    421
    What RK 2.2 are you guy's using? Suresonic? Protection? With tubes or Setup as Tubless?

  74. #74
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    supersonic with tubes

    Quote Originally Posted by scarsellone
    What RK 2.2 are you guy's using? Suresonic? Protection? With tubes or Setup as Tubless?
    i use the supersonic version (470g) with suuuperlight prototype innertubes

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    324
    Im riding the supersonic with conti light tubes, 30psi in front 2.2 and 35 psi in rear 2.0

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    932
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i mentioned above that i would need a compariosn ride to get proof of my impressions yesterday. well - i did the exact same ride today using my Winterbike with Nokian NBX in the fornt and 08 Racing Ralph 2.1" in the rear. a setup i am happy with most of the time. now today the weather was fine, rain has stopped this morning and we even had the sun out but this does not affect the trails IN the forest which are completely in the shadow. so the trails were actually the same as they have been yesterday.

    wow-what a difference!

    i'll start with the most important: the ride is just slightly over 1 hour long (1:02:30 to be precise). today it took me 35 seconds longer while my average heartrate was 8 beats higher!! that's 160 average instead of 152 and this alongside a slower time.

    i had severe problems in that mentioned, super slippery downhill section where i would loose 30 seconds alone with 3 hairy moments and twice almost crashing into a tree....no honestly, that trail is indeed super slippery and that was the reason i chose it because i was really curious to see how the RaceKing 2.2 would do there. it indeed was like riding on rails when i compare to my usual combo.

    my winterbike has disc and a newer SID WC with 80mm travel compared to my Scale which comes with V's and a oooold school SID with just 63mm of travel. the fork of the Winterbike is definitely doing a better job...but i was MUCH slower there.

    on a sidenote: it was soaking wet, deep mudholes etc but i didn't have a single problem with my Vs yesterday. the discs today went completely unnoticed. for sure no worse but no better as well.

    so i will use the RK 2.2 from now on. i need more time on them and will have to adapt as they allow MUCH higher speeds in slippery conditions.

    try the 08 ralph 2.25 fr and rr. the narrower tires are slower. also that nokian is like
    a 1.8, i tried them and they suck. i can guarantee you are faster on the 2.2 conti fr and rr
    than you would be on the 2.0 conti fr and rr. i would like to see your times and impressions
    on the 2.2 conti fr and rr vs the 2.25 ralph fr and rr.

  77. #77
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    agreed...

    Quote Originally Posted by peabody
    try the 08 ralph 2.25 fr and rr. the narrower tires are slower. also that nokian is like
    a 1.8, i tried them and they suck. i can guarantee you are faster on the 2.2 conti fr and rr
    than you would be on the 2.0 conti fr and rr. i would like to see your times and impressions
    on the 2.2 conti fr and rr vs the 2.25 ralph fr and rr.
    i already rode the RK 2.0 and didn't like it too much!

    the Conti RK 2.2 got tested by german magazines also against the new Racing Ralph 2.25 and not only is the RK faster but also slightly lighter (ca. 20g). i don't plan to test the 2.25 Schwalbes since i am really,really happy with the Contis now.

    by the way - they didn't just test the tires indoors but also on the trails where the RK was faster as well.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Here's a question...

    Has anyone got a pic of the same bike setup with RK 2.2 and MK 2.2's (at different times obviously) or maybe is running a MK front and RK rear.

    If so can you link up a pic please?

    Thanks!

  79. #79
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    Here's a question...

    Has anyone got a pic of the same bike setup with RK 2.2 and MK 2.2's (at different times obviously) or maybe is running a MK front and RK rear.

    If so can you link up a pic please?

    Thanks!
    i had the 2.2 MK this spring and it isn't anything near as huge as the RK 2.2.
    the MK 2.2 is as slim as a regular 2.0. what they measure is the outer extremes of the sideknobs which stick out on the MKs. you don't have any knobs going farther out than the carcass on the RK so the 2.2 is indeed the carcass width.it is HUGE.

    and the MK was a tire that i took aff as soon as i was back home fom Italy. no weakness at all but not shining either. but he was defintely too slow for my taste. a pretty good do-it-all tire.

  80. #80
    West Poland Reprazent
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    60
    After all the praise those RK got here I would think about trying them. One problem I see is the weight of ust version in 2.2 which seems to be 700 g. since I don't want to go back to tubes I'm puzzled... Nino: how can you ride with pressure so low and don't puncture your tubes?

  81. #81
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    They are such a large volume tire that you'd likely only have to worry about pinch flats if you're running down into the 20-25psi range for the supersonic version, or really flying on a trail with square edge rocks.

    Conti has updated the German language site and UK website with all the sizes and types, including Protection, UST and a 29" version. They'll all be Black Chili rubber too.

    * Race King Supersonic: 3 Lagen/ 180tpi/ faltbar/ Black Chili Compound
    * Race King ProTection: 3 Lagen/ 180tpi/ faltbar/ Black Chili Compound
    * Race King UST-Tubeless: 3 Lagen/ 330tpi/ faltbar/ Black Chili Compound
    * Race King Supersonic.: 3 Lagen/ 180tpi/ faltbar/ Black Chili Compound
    * Race King 29inch: 3 Lagen/ 180tpi/ faltbar/ Black Chili Compound
    .

  82. #82
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    low pressure...

    Quote Originally Posted by panplan
    After all the praise those RK got here I would think about trying them. One problem I see is the weight of ust version in 2.2 which seems to be 700 g. since I don't want to go back to tubes I'm puzzled... Nino: how can you ride with pressure so low and don't puncture your tubes?
    as mentioned by rockyuphill:
    the tires are HUGE and you will have a hard time to get a pinch flat. but i will have an even harder time since my prototype tubes are virtually un-pinchable!!

    i'd also say the only weakness is the sidewalls which could get cut by sharp stones etc...pinchflatting them seems almost impossible to me.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Nino what news of these inner tubes of yours?

    How light?

  84. #84
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    Here's a question...

    Has anyone got a pic of the same bike setup with RK 2.2 and MK 2.2's (at different times obviously) or maybe is running a MK front and RK rear.

    If so can you link up a pic please?

    Thanks!
    I don't have the same camera angle...

    MK2.2's

    etsx mk22.jpg

    RK2.2

    ETSX race king1.jpg

  85. #85
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    no news

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    Nino what news of these inner tubes of yours?

    How light?
    sorry - no news. they're still in the prototype and testing stage.

  86. #86
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    big smile!

    i just headed for that slippery trail again yesterday when i met a big group of bikers, all dressed in Swisspower Team clothes, all on Scott bikes etc....about 15 riders.they looked fast
    someone called my name and immediately realized it was Frischi calling me (Thomas Frischknecht). it turned out they went for a "sponsor"-ride with several sponsors. the full team was there with Nino Schurter (bronce medaillist at the olympics), Florian Vogel (European champion) , Frischi etcetc...since they were also heading for that same trail i joined them and we had a little chat.

    on the way down that trail Vogel went into the lead followed by Schurter and myself while the others stayed behind with some of the sponsors which had a hard time on that slippery trail...i was following those guys and was really having a smile on my face because i had absolutely no problem to go their speed. there was also a younger guy in our group (Matthias Rupp, 17th at the worlds 07 in Fort Williams) but he had a rather wild style sliding and hopping around...anyway - at the bottom those guys would all tell how slippery and wet the trail was, even Frischi said "slippery when wet" with a big smile on his face while some others arrived carrying their bikes down the trail as they weren't able to ride it...i on the other hand was riding like on rails! that RK 2.2 is definitely the BOMB. i definitely think the tire made it much easier for me in some sections i was even thinking about passing but thought it might wise for an old men to stay behind those cracks

    maybe it's just because of the tires which really makes a BIG difference, maybe it was because i was riding that trail just a couple of days before already but then those guys, all living in the area, know it in and out as well. anyway - i felt great never had "a moment" hanging in there.

    a little sidenote: at the bottom i realized Frischi was using the Ashima ultralight rotor on his rear wheel and when i asked he would just shake his head and say it was BS because it would not offer enough power...

  87. #87
    Lover, not a fighter...
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    281
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    i just headed for that slippery trail again yesterday when i met a big group of bikers, all dressed in Swisspower Team clothes, all on Scott bikes etc....about 15 riders.they looked fast
    someone called my name and immediately realized it was Frischi calling me (Thomas Frischknecht). it turned out they went for a "sponsor"-ride with several sponsors. the full team was there with Nino Schurter (bronce medaillist at the olympics), Florian Vogel (European champion) , Frischi etcetc...since they were also heading for that same trail i joined them and we had a little chat.

    on the way down that trail Vogel went into the lead followed by Schurter and myself while the others stayed behind with some of the sponsors which had a hard time on that slippery trail...i was following those guys and was really having a smile on my face because i had absolutely no problem to go their speed. there was also a younger guy in our group (Matthias Rupp, 17th at the worlds 07 in Fort Williams) but he had a rather wild style sliding and hopping around...anyway - at the bottom those guys would all tell how slippery and wet the trail was, even Frischi said "slippery when wet" with a big smile on his face while some others arrived carrying their bikes down the trail as they weren't able to ride it...i on the other hand was riding like on rails! that RK 2.2 is definitely the BOMB. i definitely think the tire made it much easier for me in some sections i was even thinking about passing but thought it might wise for an old men to stay behind those cracks

    maybe it's just because of the tires which really makes a BIG difference, maybe it was because i was riding that trail just a couple of days before already but then those guys, all living in the area, know it in and out as well. anyway - i felt great never had "a moment" hanging in there.

    a little sidenote: at the bottom i realized Frischi was using the Ashima ultralight rotor on his rear wheel and when i asked he would just shake his head and say it was BS because it would not offer enough power...

    How is the wear of the tire so far? Guess you didn't tell Frischi to try different pads, eh?

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    421

    RK Tubless?

    Has anyone tried running the RK's Tubless with Stan's? I had a set of SK 2.1 supersonic last year & tried running tubless & they just would not seal? I'm thinking of getting a set of the RK with protection & try & setup Tubless on Mavic SLR's? What do you guy's think?

  89. #89
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    pads

    Quote Originally Posted by JaLove
    How is the wear of the tire so far? Guess you didn't tell Frischi to try different pads, eh?
    they are using swissstop pads and those usually do a pretty good job...Florian Vogel is using the serrated Alligators and is completely satisfied and happy with them (160/140mm).

  90. #90
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    new Contis tubeless...

    Quote Originally Posted by scarsellone
    Has anyone tried running the RK's Tubless with Stan's? I had a set of SK 2.1 supersonic last year & tried running tubless & they just would not seal? I'm thinking of getting a set of the RK with protection & try & setup Tubless on Mavic SLR's? What do you guy's think?
    as i already wrote they would take VERY long to get sealed. it took me a full 3 days of constant re-inflating,shaking etc. until they would hold the air without going almost flat overnight. the newer Contis come with a very slippery "coating" inside the tire which seems to prevent the sealants from making good contact. it will eventually work but it takes quite long.

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Same here. My MK's didnt seal the first time too well - i had to reinflate them twice a week.

    After about 2 months i removed them, stripped the old sealant off the inside which removed the slippy surface Nino mentioned. Reinstalled them and took about 8 hours to seal - i haven't had to pump them back up once in nearly a month

  92. #92
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reformed roadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,583
    I guess that obvious solution is to remove the coating prior to attempting a Stan's conversion.
    Any suggestions on getting it off safely w/o effecting tire or sealant?

    Is the coating 1) a result of the manufacturing process, 2) a protectant (like the stuff chains come with) or 3) just something conti adds to make this a pain and make people buy their UST tires?

    My only experience w/ contis tubeless was trying to seal a flow protection...weeks later the sidewalls were still weeping...

  93. #93
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,289
    It's either a silicone mould release or a silicone coating to prevent the tube from vulcanizing itself to the inside of the tire. Nokian has been using it as well.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    I've no idea how you would get it off, it's just the inside of the tyre is slippy. You could maybe try washing the insides out with soapy water but make sure to dry them off properly.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    324
    I have my front RK 2.2 converted to tubeless and waiting on a new 2.2 to replace the 2.0 RK on the back then I will go tubeless in the rear. These tires have alot of grip, and the front is nice tubeless, took alittle work but seems worth it. Loving them.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    421
    What version of the RK's do you have? Supersonic or protection?

    On a side note, did anyone see the new Schwalbe Rocket Ron? The weights are below 400g's for a 2.1 a UST 2.1 is just above 500g's
    I was set on the RK's now I'm contemplating on which tires to try? The downfall on The Schwalbe would be the cost?
    Last edited by scarsellone; 09-11-2008 at 06:02 AM.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    842
    Quote Originally Posted by nino
    on the way down that trail Vogel went into the lead followed by Schurter and myself while the others stayed behind with some of the sponsors which had a hard time on that slippery trail...i was following those guys and was really having a smile on my face because i had absolutely no problem to go their speed. there was also a younger guy in our group (Matthias Rupp, 17th at the worlds 07 in Fort Williams) but he had a rather wild style sliding and hopping around...anyway - at the bottom those guys would all tell how slippery and wet the trail was, even Frischi said "slippery when wet" with a big smile on his face while some others arrived carrying their bikes down the trail as they weren't able to ride it...i on the other hand was riding like on rails! that RK 2.2 is definitely the BOMB. i definitely think the tire made it much easier for me in some sections i was even thinking about passing but thought it might wise for an old men to stay behind those cracks

    maybe it's just because of the tires which really makes a BIG difference, maybe it was because i was riding that trail just a couple of days before already but then those guys, all living in the area, know it in and out as well. anyway - i felt great never had "a moment" hanging in there.

    a little sidenote: at the bottom i realized Frischi was using the Ashima ultralight rotor on his rear wheel and when i asked he would just shake his head and say it was BS because it would not offer enough power...
    nice to be Swiss... man, i am lucky if i see a fat guy on a bike from Wal-Mart... never mind some of the fastest riders in the world. great story. very cool.

  98. #98
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    Rocket Rons...

    Quote Originally Posted by scarsellone
    What version of the RK's do you have? Supersonic or protection?

    On a side note, did anyone see the new Schwalbe Rocket Ron? The weights are below 400g's for a 2.1 a UST 2.1 is just above 500g's
    I was set on the RK's now I'm contemplating on which tires to try? The downfall on The Schwalbe would be the cost?
    3 downsides:
    -the given sizes don't correspond with the actual size. that's not typical Schwalbe Style but a 2.25 is rather a 2.0 etc...so you need to look at 1 size bigger than what you actually want...therefore weights go up.

    -they are VERY prone to get flats.the sidewall/carcass seems to be identical with the Furious Fred which is pretty bad in this aspect

    -they wear very fast.the rubber compound is soft and it is supposed to be a race tire.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Tiffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,072
    Nino,

    How can you say/know that if there not even out yet?

  100. #100
    banned
    Reputation: nino's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,770

    because...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiffster
    Nino,

    How can you say/know that if there not even out yet?
    because there was a test in german BIKE magazine with all details and because one of the Schwalbe test-riders is writing a lot about it in that german forum you already have posted in.

Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 5

Posting Permissions

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