Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 168 of 168
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    11,525
    Quote Originally Posted by jlbanta View Post
    I have 32mm wide rims. A wider rim would be a good option since it'd flatten out the profile as well.
    So that's 32mm between the beads? A wider rim say 40-45mm between the beads lets you run a lot lower pressure probably 12 or so for your weight. The tire, if it has a flexy 120tpi sidewall, crinkles and gives a bigger footprint with big traction in cornering and climbing. You can't get foldover. Performance becomes very dependent on the tire pressure with a pound making a difference. So you need a good gauge.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    38
    I'm having a little too much fun with this. haha I liked your photoshop edit so I played around with the isometric views. You've got a good point about the ardent-like tread after removing every other intermediate block. I wasn't a huge fan of the ardent either. The only thing the Rekon has going for it is the consistent cornering knobs.

    Also...removing both intermediate knobs looks scary with such a huge open channel. I may be headed down the Forkaster route after all.

    Anyone running 2.6 Rekon's yet?-rekon_isometric_sipe_comparison.jpg

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Well, since I had a bit of time, I decided to do some digital cutting for you and here's what it would look like if you removed those intermediate knobs on the Rekon, looks very similar to a tyre a lot of people hate, myself included.

    Now I don't know if having those HR2 type centre knobs in there which go further towards the outer knobs or the more even spacing of the centre knobs would be enough to not give it that vague feeling the Ardent has if you don't slam it over, but after my experiences with the Ardent, I surely am not willing to give it a go.

    IMHO me the Ardent never did anything good, was mediocre at best, worst Maxxis tyre I ever used, to me the Rekon is a tyre you'd pair with a DHF upfront or put on the front with an Ardent Race outback, not as a super aggressive front tyre like a DHF, it just doesn't have the stoutness in the casing or edge knobs to be that.
    There are plenty of tires without a well defined channel between the center and side knobs that most people wouldn't describe as vague, so I'm not sure the transitional knobs are to blame. One theory I've heard regarding the problem with the unpredictability of the Ardent notes that half of the side knobs are completely unsupported and look like they will fold over easily in a hard cornering situation. Perhaps they're designed that way so the inner side knobs can bend outward to line up with the outer side knobs better, but I could see how that feature might cause them to feel squirmy, vague, or unpredictable when those knobs flex.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    62
    still pondering changing out my dhf 2.6 to something with a faster roll but still bites on the switchbacks. our trails remain pretty hard packed with some loose which makes the FK appealing but I keep reading that its draggy on hp?

    I want a rekon with dhf cornering lugs

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    131
    so is the consensus for a good trail/all mountain set up a 2.6 forecaster on the front and a 2.6 rekon on the rear?

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    62
    well, i broke my radius so i have a few weeks before i can ride so i'm obsessing over a new front tire. jlbanta, any updates on your thoughts or findings?

    so i am really thinking about the FK for the front now but was hoping to get other findings on the Rekon up front in 2.6.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    38
    I've gotten another 30 miles or so on the 3C Rekon. I still haven't tried cutting any of the knobs...but its SUPER tempting. My only fear is destroying a $70 tire. I think the open channel would help when running it up as a front tire. I do have my eye on the FK, but may go back with the DHF. The cornering confidence it brings overrides the weight and rolling resistance gain.

    All in all, for faster aggressive riders, I wouldn't recommend the Rekon as a front tire. I would only run the Rekon up front if you are looking for a fast rolling setup rather than grippy fun/playful tire setup. I think it would be better paired with a ikon for a fast-ish XC setup rather than aggressive trail.

    Has anyone out there tried both the FK and Rekon as a front tire?

  8. #108
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,964
    Agree, my recommendations would be Ikon/FK rear/Rekon front for a nice XCish type combo that rolls fast but still with good grip, then if you want more aggressive, Rekon rear/DHF front, which is what I run and love.

    Quote Originally Posted by jlbanta View Post
    I've gotten another 30 miles or so on the 3C Rekon. I still haven't tried cutting any of the knobs...but its SUPER tempting. My only fear is destroying a $70 tire. I think the open channel would help when running it up as a front tire. I do have my eye on the FK, but may go back with the DHF. The cornering confidence it brings overrides the weight and rolling resistance gain.

    All in all, for faster aggressive riders, I wouldn't recommend the Rekon as a front tire. I would only run the Rekon up front if you are looking for a fast rolling setup rather than grippy fun/playful tire setup. I think it would be better paired with a ikon for a fast-ish XC setup rather than aggressive trail.

    Has anyone out there tried both the FK and Rekon as a front tire?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,043
    The dhf 2.8 is not that much more than the 2.6 in weight for a front tire. Will add more grip.

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  10. #110
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    62
    well, thanks to the great return policy of bc/ c/c i am swapping out the dhf for a fk 3c. in 4 weeks, i will try it out rekon/r fk/f

  11. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    62
    mounted up the Forekaster yesterday, measured 66mm (2.59") at 40 psi, reduced to 20 this Am with little change on Ibis 741 i35 carbons. Actual weight was 800grms. interesting tire, when compared to a NN on my friends bike with i36 rims, the forekaster is much flatter and has more pronounced side lugs. center blocks are similar, maybe a mm or 2 higher than the nn but they are similar. I am thinking they should hook up in corners very well. compared to the Rekon, again, the cornering lugs are larger and overall tread is more aggressive and taller. Since i cant ride, i only pedaled down the driveway a few times. on the paved, there is def' lower RR than the DHF (as expected). i am curious to see how these roll. Despite very dry conditions, the trails are still hardpack with a thin layer of sand with some corners having a little more and some kitty litter.

    interesting that on the packaging on the tire, Maxxis rates this tire for Loose over hard, medium, loose & wet- but not mud. 3 stars cornering and 3 stars Rolling Efficiency. this is different from the web description which only lists "Mud & Wet"

    Anyone running 2.6 Rekon's yet?-forecaster.jpgAnyone running 2.6 Rekon's yet?-forekaster-tag.jpg
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Anyone running 2.6 Rekon's yet?-forecaster.jpg  

    Last edited by RidetheBoat; 07-27-2017 at 10:12 AM.

  12. #112
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    38
    Thanks for the update RidetheBoat!! Looking forward to your comparison of the Rekon and FK. It does look quite a bit more beefy than the 2.3 that I have. I like the idea of a flatter profile to help with sidebite too.

  13. #113
    Having a nice day!
    Reputation: LoneStar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,154
    Ready to see this in 29x2.6 along with the Rekon.

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by jlbanta View Post
    Thanks for the update RidetheBoat!! Looking forward to your comparison of the Rekon and FK. It does look quite a bit more beefy than the 2.3 that I have. I like the idea of a flatter profile to help with sidebite too.
    its quite a bit beefier than the Rekon and really does resemble the NN just less bulbous and better side lugs. im on i35 rims so those rollin' on narrower rims may find them more rounded, its pretty much the same rounded/flat profile as the Rekon 2.6 at 20psi.

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    453
    I just ordered a Griffin 2.3 to try out thinking it might roll almost as fast as the Rekon but with better cornering. Anyone have experience on Griffin and Rekon to compare?

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JoePAz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,209
    Quote Originally Posted by RidetheBoat View Post
    its quite a bit beefier than the Rekon and really does resemble the NN just less bulbous and better side lugs. im on i35 rims so those rollin' on narrower rims may find them more rounded, its pretty much the same rounded/flat profile as the Rekon 2.6 at 20psi.
    Any update on the Forekaster 2.6 up front? I am looking for something with more grip that an Ikon 2.35 (which is similar to Rekon), but not as draggy as the HR2 (2.4) that I currently have.

    Starting to think the Forekaster might be just perfect.
    Joe
    '18 Specialized Epic 29", Vassago Verhauen SS 29", '13 Santa Cruz Solo 27.5", XC, AM, blah blah blah.. I just ride.

  17. #117
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    34
    ...and does anyone know why among the 3C compounds the Forecaster is only available in Maxx Speed, while Rekon is available only in Maxx Terra? Seems like many would want to run a spiky Forekaster Maxx Terra in the softer Terra compound on the front with a Rekon Maxx Speed in that harder compound on the rear, right? Or am I missing something?

  18. #118
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    197
    ^^^I agree. Why a harder longer lasting compound for the front? Maybe Maxx Speed is for the rear, but at 120 tpi not sure about that. I have a 27.5x2.6 on an i30 rim waiting for soft conditions locally. I'll give feed back after a few rides.

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    805
    I have a Rekon 2.6 I would sell for $40 plus shipping used about 4-5 times looks a little rough from sidewall rubbing on rocks but is uncut.

  20. #120
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Wines of WA View Post
    ...and does anyone know why among the 3C compounds the Forecaster is only available in Maxx Speed, while Rekon is available only in Maxx Terra? Seems like many would want to run a spiky Forekaster Maxx Terra in the softer Terra compound on the front with a Rekon Maxx Speed in that harder compound on the rear, right? Or am I missing something?
    I got a logical answer for this from Maxxis: "When balancing weight and all-around cornering performance on the Forekaster we found that the 3C MaxxSpeed offered improved tactile feedback on such tall-and-small knobs. MaxxTerra rubber works much better on the heavier tires with chunkier knobs but can lead to a squirmy feel on lightweight casings with smaller knobs."

    Makes sense to me.

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    197
    Maybe so, but in my real riding experience I did not like it on the front at all. Not here in W.Pa. on slick roots & rocks, just did not instill confidence like a DHF or even a Nic.

    Didn't want to waste money so I put it on the rear and have not ridden it yet...

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ThrottleAbuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    108
    Anyone try running these tires on a narrow width rim? Got a set of wheels with 23mm internal hoop. Wondering how the 2.6 or maybe 2.8 will work on this rim? Just cant spend the cash on wider hoops now but want the to run some wider tires.

  23. #123
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,294
    Quote Originally Posted by ThrottleAbuse View Post
    Anyone try running these tires on a narrow width rim? Got a set of wheels with 23mm internal hoop. Wondering how the 2.6 or maybe 2.8 will work on this rim? Just cant spend the cash on wider hoops now but want the to run some wider tires.
    My guess is that would be pushing it. A big bene of the 2.6 is lower pressure, but that won't work with that narrow of a rim - too squirmy.


    2.6 on i35 is great. I'm curious to know how it's working out in a i30.

  24. #124
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by ThrottleAbuse View Post
    Anyone try running these tires on a narrow width rim? Got a set of wheels with 23mm internal hoop. Wondering how the 2.6 or maybe 2.8 will work on this rim? Just cant spend the cash on wider hoops now but want the to run some wider tires.
    I'm not an expert but the Maxixs 2.6 tires are the Wide Trail design even though it's not designated on the side wall like the 2.4 and 2.5 are. Maxxis recommends i30-35 for their WT tires. So you would probably not benefit from the tire design as much on an i23 rim.

    I personally wouldn't even think about running a 2.8 on that rim. When my 6fattie was new it was spec'd with i29 rims and 3.0 tires and I hated it. I've since gone with i38 and 2.8 tires.

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ThrottleAbuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    108
    Back to the drawing board. I was hoping to run some bigger tires on it for awhile until new wheels could be purchased. Its only a 115 lb rider that isnt particularly aggressive.

  26. #126
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,964
    If it's a lighter, less aggressive rider, then I'd say you'll be fine with the 2.6" for sure and the 2.8" can also work. My main B+ wheels are i35, but I've also mounted a Trailblazer 2.8" and Nobby Nic 2.8" onto i23 rims on a lonaer bike and they work fine, but as said, you can't run as low pressures as you can with i30-35 rims.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThrottleAbuse View Post
    Anyone try running these tires on a narrow width rim? Got a set of wheels with 23mm internal hoop. Wondering how the 2.6 or maybe 2.8 will work on this rim? Just cant spend the cash on wider hoops now but want the to run some wider tires.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  27. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ThrottleAbuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If it's a lighter, less aggressive rider, then I'd say you'll be fine with the 2.6" for sure and the 2.8" can also work. My main B+ wheels are i35, but I've also mounted a Trailblazer 2.8" and Nobby Nic 2.8" onto i23 rims on a lonaer bike and they work fine, but as said, you can't run as low pressures as you can with i30-35 rims.
    Cool. Thanks for the info. What type of pressure would you recommend for a rider that size?

  28. #128
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,964
    So, had a ride last night where that bike was used, set pressure by the squeeze test, when I checked pressures today it was 16 r/14 f, rider weight of about 160-179lbs, so I'd say that or a bit higher would be a good starting point for your gal, higher for faster, harder cornering, lower for slower stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by ThrottleAbuse View Post
    Cool. Thanks for the info. What type of pressure would you recommend for a rider that size?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  29. #129
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mugtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    226
    Hi

    Some advice please. I have 2.8 High Roller 2s. They are amazing and the grip is mind-blowing but unfortunately the drag is killing me. My rides are usually 50k/100k+ usually all natural riding and usually very muddy. Iím finding with the drag Iím just not fit enough on 2.8s to ride that far. My 2.4 HR2s were fine. So Iím trying to fix this. Do you think 2.5WT HR2 will be better, grip v drag. Or Rekons/Forkaster (or another) 2.8 or 2.5/6 again grip v drag.

    Thanks very much for your help. Really greatly appreciated

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    131
    Im running a 2.6 dhf front and a 2.6 forecasters on the rear (swapped out the 2.6 rekon for winter) awesome balance of grip and resistance

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mugtree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    226
    Good to hear. Trying to workout all of my options. It was almost easier when I used 2.4 HR2s!

  32. #132
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DualRollers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    432
    I mounted a set of Rekon 2.6s on my single speed recently. Made it about half a mile into my first ride and murdered the rear tire on a rock. These tires are EXO casing but they seem to be a lot less hardy than other Maxxis tires I have mounted up. I had great luck with the Ardents and Minions.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by DualRollers View Post
    I mounted a set of Rekon 2.6s on my single speed recently. Made it about half a mile into my first ride and murdered the rear tire on a rock. These tires are EXO casing but they seem to be a lot less hardy than other Maxxis tires I have mounted up. I had great luck with the Ardents and Minions.
    i think maybe you just got unlucky, my Rekon made it thru a season on the north shore, squamish and whistler (even the bike park for a day) no problem, it will be going back on again at the end of spring.

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    711
    Running them on my Pivot LES SS and love them. Just enough cush without the bouncy feeling of the 2.8's. Pretty good combo of rolling and grip also.
    You can't buy happiness. But you can buy a bike. And that's pretty close.

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    628
    Has anyone put a Rekon 2.6 side-by-side with a Rocket Ron 2.6 and compared them? It sounds like they run a bit smaller, is that correct?

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    3
    Hi guys. Was considering running 27.5 Maxxis Rekon 2.6" on WTB STs i29 rear, but reading this thread concerned this might be too narrow a rim? Cheers.

  37. #137
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    628
    I've mounted a Rekon 2.6 on that exact rim. Perfect fit IMO. I really don't think I'd choose wider unless you don't ride aggressively at all, the profile is really nice with the tread just a mm or 2 wider than the casing.

    If you want wider, move up in rim width AND to a 2.8.

    I've even run it on a 25mm wide rim and it works well enough.

  38. #138
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    22,964
    I'm with Phreeky on this one, wouldn't be too worried about running them on an i29 rim, not going by the size of the 2.8" version. I mean, i35 would probably be quite nice, but I wouldn't be buying a new rim/wheel if I already had an i29, not for this tyre.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    372
    It will be fine, Iím a little over 100 miles on ethirteen 29mm time, runs fine donít feel any squirm, Iím 220 on a 31 lb bike at 20 psi


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the replies. Fantastic.

  41. #141
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Iím running these Rekonís front and rear on i29 Flow MK3ís on my SS HT, after starting with Ranger 3.0ís. About 100 miles thus far, and have kept dropping the PSI. Latest ride was at 12.5 front and just under 15 rear. 190-195 lbs geared up. No rim strikes, and they are comfortable riding. Seem to be a little draggy on moderate climbs on loose stuff, and take a bit more juice to get them rolling. Rear is measuring at 2.50 and the front just under 2.50.

    I like them, but as an endurance XC SS rider, they may have too much rolling resistance for me.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  42. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,734
    Quote Originally Posted by waltaz View Post
    Iím running these Rekonís front and rear on i29 Flow MK3ís on my SS HT, after starting with Ranger 3.0ís. About 100 miles thus far, and have kept dropping the PSI. Latest ride was at 12.5 front and just under 15 rear. 190-195 lbs geared up. No rim strikes, and they are comfortable riding. Seem to be a little draggy on moderate climbs on loose stuff, and take a bit more juice to get them rolling. Rear is measuring at 2.50 and the front just under 2.50.

    I like them, but as an endurance XC SS rider, they may have too much rolling resistance for me.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    How are you finding the traction compared to the Rangers?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Riding slowly since 1977.

  43. #143
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Cary View Post
    How are you finding the traction compared to the Rangers?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    At 15/17 to start, sketchy, on loose over hardpack. Have dialed it down since then, and the bite was pretty good in front at 12.5, though I'll probably go to 12. I was still breaking my rear loose on looser climbs (SS), so will probably drop the rear to 14-14.5. Definitely take some dialing in, but I am generally pleased overall (RR notwithstanding).
    Ride more; post less...

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    3
    I've been looking for the Maxxis Rekon 2.6 in the UK, and nothing under £80. Found this US supplier in eBay, selling at around £47 plus £7 shipping. Might take a couple of weeks, but cheapest I could find... https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?m...2F292331771702

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    704
    Just got mine and I did a quick check. Rekon 29er 2.6, here it is

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wbMeIGJ1Hk
    2016 Transition Smuggler
    2016 TREK Fuel EX 9

  46. #146
    AOK
    AOK is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: AOK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,986
    Quote Originally Posted by waltaz View Post

    I like them, but as an endurance XC SS rider, they may have too much rolling resistance for me.
    Hey Walt - wondering if you have tried Nobby Nics or Ardent Race tires and if you can compare the Rekon rolling resistance to these.

    I am interested in the Rekons but if they are slower rolling than Nics then I will probably wait for something else.

  47. #147
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by AOK View Post
    Hey Walt - wondering if you have tried Nobby Nics or Ardent Race tires and if you can compare the Rekon rolling resistance to these.

    I am interested in the Rekons but if they are slower rolling than Nics then I will probably wait for something else.
    I have run the Ardent Race up front, and it rolls much better than the Rekon, but I don't like the profile, so I switched to an Ikon 2.35, which is even better rolling, with a great, rounded profile. I have not tried the NN's, but have heard they are not as fast rolling. I would say the Rekon's sound kind of similar to the NN's.
    Ride more; post less...

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    62
    I currently run 2.8 Rekons front & rear on Stans Flow Mk3's. Would you guys think I would see a benefit swapping the rear out to a Rekon 2.6? Not because it's lighter, but because a 2.6 might sit better on the Flows which are i29? Wondering if the more square profile they'd have would give me a bit more grip while also maybe saving a few grams? I've actually been thinking of going 2.6 front & rear but don't want to lose any grip up front.

  49. #149
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Ewing View Post
    I currently run 2.8 Rekons front & rear on Stans Flow Mk3's. Would you guys think I would see a benefit swapping the rear out to a Rekon 2.6? Not because it's lighter, but because a 2.6 might sit better on the Flows which are i29? Wondering if the more square profile they'd have would give me a bit more grip while also maybe saving a few grams? I've actually been thinking of going 2.6 front & rear but don't want to lose any grip up front.
    On 27.5 wheels?
    Ride more; post less...

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    628
    The Flow Mk3 is definitely ideally suited to 2.6" tyres, and the Rekon will come up at about 63-64mm at riding pressures after a short stretch. I've not tried the 2.8s.

    I'd be more concerned about the impact it has on BB height.

  51. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    62
    Yes

  52. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    145
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If it's a lighter, less aggressive rider, then I'd say you'll be fine with the 2.6" for sure and the 2.8" can also work. My main B+ wheels are i35, but I've also mounted a Trailblazer 2.8" and Nobby Nic 2.8" onto i23 rims on a lonaer bike and they work fine, but as said, you can't run as low pressures as you can with i30-35 rims.
    I tried out a 2.8 Rekon and 2.8 NN on i30 carbon rims and did not like it. The casings were too bulbous at 20-22 psi and the rear NN kept washing out on me since the lug weren't hooking up well. I'm sticking with 2.5-2.6 up front and 2.5-2.3 in rear moving forward. YMMV.

  53. #153
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    I wanted to update you all on my experience with the Rekon, after my previous, initial thoughts.

    I tried Rekons front and rear, and thought they felt a bit draggy, mostly due to the rear. After running Ikons for a 24-hour race, I put a Rekon on the front, paired with an Ardent 2.4 in back, and it is a great front tire, particularly in loose or chunky stuff. I run a low PSI on the Flow (12.5), and weigh 190 geared up, and it hooks up great and instills much confidence. Seriously, I'm thrilled with it as a front tire at low PSI. Overkill for buff, loose over hardpack-type trails, but shines in the rough stuff.

    FWIW, I hate Ardents, and put that on just to use it up (I'll run an Ikon 2.35 long-term), but it's proven to be decent-rolling, durable and hooks up on climbs (loose or chunk) very well. I am surprised at this. And I run that at 18.5-19 PSI. Can seem a bit low, but it works.

    Hope this helps!


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  54. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    3
    Walt, I have had the same experience. I put my Ardent 2.4 that was on the front of my Yeti SB5 and put it on the back. It has been a pretty good back tire, surprisingly so. I did not like it on the front. And I put a Rekon 2.6 on the front. I really like it. I think it finds a great middle ground between fast rolling and traction. The Rekon seems to be pretty polarizing and it seems most riders use it on the rear. But I have been in chunky wet, east coast rocky terrain and it has performed great as a front tire.

  55. #155
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Spur11 View Post
    Walt, I have had the same experience. I put my Ardent 2.4 that was on the front of my Yeti SB5 and put it on the back. It has been a pretty good back tire, surprisingly so. I did not like it on the front. And I put a Rekon 2.6 on the front. I really like it. I think it finds a great middle ground between fast rolling and traction. The Rekon seems to be pretty polarizing and it seems most riders use it on the rear. But I have been in chunky wet, east coast rocky terrain and it has performed great as a front tire.
    I totally agree. If most are using it on the rear, or both front and rear, it's not nearly as good. Front only is by far and away the best use for it, and it works great, as we've described.
    Ride more; post less...

  56. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    628
    We all ride very different trails. If I always had a Rekon up front it would be dangerous.

    I currently have it as a rear on one of my wheelsets paired with a DHF 2.6 up front. I'd consider it up front for XC duties on my other wheelset, but I'm not prepared to buy a second (I already own too many tyres) and I'm feeling too lazy to switch it over at the moment.

  57. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    62
    Well, I'm taking the plunge. My bike came with i30 rims and 2.8 Rekons. I switched to i29 Flow Mk3 wheels and was concerned narrowing rims though I didn't think 1MM was going to be a big deal. It does kinda bothers me how bulbous the tire looks on the rim though this is basically how Scott fits my 2018 Genius (only difference is my rim is 1MM narrower).

    I've now ordered 2 Rekons in 2.6 for the front and rear. I don't think BB height will be an issue and Scott states the 2018 Genius bikes can have 27.5's in that size and same in 29ers wheels after switching the shock mount chip. I like the idea of it being a little lighter but more so I think the 2.6's would be better maximized on i29 wheels than the 2.8's without losing much grip. I'll report back if I feel a big difference after I get them mounted and ride them a few times next week.

  58. #158
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Ewing View Post
    Well, I'm taking the plunge. My bike came with i30 rims and 2.8 Rekons. I switched to i29 Flow Mk3 wheels and was concerned narrowing rims though I didn't think 1MM was going to be a big deal. It does kinda bothers me how bulbous the tire looks on the rim though this is basically how Scott fits my 2018 Genius (only difference is my rim is 1MM narrower).

    I've now ordered 2 Rekons in 2.6 for the front and rear. I don't think BB height will be an issue and Scott states the 2018 Genius bikes can have 27.5's in that size and same in 29ers wheels after switching the shock mount chip. I like the idea of it being a little lighter but more so I think the 2.6's would be better maximized on i29 wheels than the 2.8's without losing much grip. I'll report back if I feel a big difference after I get them mounted and ride them a few times next week.
    Iíll be interested to hear your feedback. Remember to try a different rear to compare and contrast.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  59. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    13
    Hi guys. I got a 2017 Tracer which unfortunately came with XC-ish i25mm rims.

    I'm thinking Rekons. Possibly 2.8 in the front and maybe 2.6 in the rear (if they'll fit). I've got Dave on notice to build me a Stans Baron (i35) for the front and either Stans Sentry (i32) or Flow (i29) in the rear.

    I'm probably 220 suited up, in New England rocky terrain.

    Intense says a 2.6 will fit in the rear of the Tracer. Not sure. If not I'll go 2.4 or 2.5. I definitely want 2.6 or 2.8 up front.

    I'm waivering on the rear rim width - I was originally thinking Flow i29 until someone warned me about flat spotting, nipple tension, etc. Dave and I are both now thinking Sentry i32 for the rear. Going to talk it over w my LBS tomorrow too.
    Thoughts? Much appreciated!

  60. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    62
    So I slapped on the 2.6" Rekons (down from the 2.8" Rekons) and here are my impressions:

    The bike totally came alive! The bike felt MUCH faster and playful. Though I could tell I lost a little of the grip I had from the 2.8's, it was more than made up by the better handling, faster speed and all around tossability the bike now has that it didn't before. I totally felt like it was a great decision. However, I completely underestimated the difference in size. The difference is HUGE.

    The BB height definitely suffered. I was getting pedal strikes where I never did before. I adjusted by keeping the pedals level instead of coasting with a crank arm down over the rooty and techy stuff but that definitely made me have to think about something that I didn't have to before. I don't want to go back to the 2.8's. I love how the bike feels now. Is there anything I can do to raise the BB? The shock chip on my Genius is already set to high and the tire pressures I set today felt great. The only thing I could think of was getting slightly shorter cranks, but that changes other things like gearing and fit and don't know if that would just make me fall down some expensive rabbit hole. Any ideas? The crank arms I have on now are 175 so would going down to 170's solve the issue without impacting bike fit/gearing too much?

  61. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,043
    Thin pedals?

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  62. #162
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    628
    If you don't ever wish for longer cranks then IMO you'll probably not notice a negative going to 170 cranks. That does help with strikes a bit, and combined with thin pedals you may find it sufficient.

    Looking at the geo charts, the bike doesn't strike me as having a particularly massive BB drop. A 20mm drop (in the high setting) is only 5mm more than my Norco Sight which is a dedicated 27.5 bike - although admittedly I did have some problems with striking the pedals. Something I have done however that you may wish to consider is changing to a longer fork. You may be able to change something in your current fork to lengthen it, with possibilities including a spacer change, a new air shaft or a whole new fork depending on the specific model.

  63. #163
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    503
    Quote Originally Posted by jlbanta View Post
    I've gotten a few rides on the 3C 2.6 Rekon up front. I'm definitely not blown away with the tire likely due to its heavily rounded profile. I cant seem to get it to have distinctive bite in the corners even down at 21 psi. At 20 psi and it was a tad bit squirmy. It does have good bite but more of a consistent drift feel which is not confidence inspiring at times
    I share the exact same feelings. I do want to try them on wider rims but for now I may go another route

  64. #164
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Arctic Pride View Post
    I share the exact same feelings. I do want to try them on wider rims but for now I may go another route
    I love em on Flow MK3 i29mm rims, and I run it at 12.5 PSI in front. Sketchy above 15 PSI. I'm 185 lbs geared up.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  65. #165
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Karlewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    61
    Wow, Waltaz!
    Thatís really low for a guy your weight. @165lbs I though I was pushing it at 14PSI on my Nobby nicks. I assume we are talking about your front tire. No squirm? You must be riding real smooth/light, cool.
    Can anyone make a rolling resistance comparison to the 2.6 Nobby nick?

  66. #166
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    503
    Quote Originally Posted by waltaz View Post
    I love em on Flow MK3 i29mm rims, and I run it at 12.5 PSI in front. Sketchy above 15 PSI. I'm 185 lbs geared up.
    I'm running 25mm id, DT reccomends no wider than 2.5. Going to give DHF2.5 and DHR 2.4 a go. Definitely not getting rid of the Rekon's, eventually will do wider rims

  67. #167
    I am Walt
    Reputation: waltaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,149
    Quote Originally Posted by Karlewski View Post
    Wow, Waltaz!
    Thatís really low for a guy your weight. @165lbs I though I was pushing it at 14PSI on my Nobby nicks. I assume we are talking about your front tire. No squirm? You must be riding real smooth/light, cool.
    Yep; itís the front tire. I understand itís low, but I measure it quite carefully, so itís accurate, and perfectly doable with those rims and the volume of the tire. No squirm. And I would not say I ride smooth and light, as I tend to be a crasher, though I try to pick good lines on my hardtail. And I just did a rugged backcountry ride on the AZ Trail that has lots of loose, sharp stuff.

    Hell, I run 11 PSI on my 3.0 WTB Rangers on Duroc 40 i36 rims...


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Ride more; post less...

  68. #168
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    38
    For those interested, I just posted my thoughts on the 2.6 60TPI dual compound Forekaster in the ďAnyone ran a Maxxis Forecaster?Ē thread. Post #460. If you have a Rekon and think its lacking grip or feels squirmy, Id highly recommend the 2.6 forekaster with the stiffer 60TPI sidewall. Its bigger cornering knobs and stiffer sidewall provide MUCH better bite. This new forecaster will be replacing the 2.5 minion DHF on my trailbike.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Rekon 29 X 2.6... is coming.
    By teamdicky in forum 29er Components
    Replies: 308
    Last Post: 03-15-2018, 04:25 PM
  2. Maxxis Rekon and ikon +
    By dRjOn in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 458
    Last Post: 10-13-2017, 09:37 AM
  3. maxxis rekon 27.5x 2.6 availability
    By ianthom in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-10-2017, 06:03 AM
  4. HD3 - Minion DHF+ & Rekon+ Tires
    By NorthSideOf50 in forum Ibis
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-04-2017, 12:31 PM
  5. Where to buy Maxxis Rekon+ tires?
    By kongg in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-30-2016, 08:02 PM

Members who have read this thread: 465

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.