Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: upstateSC-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    781

    Fire XC Pro...1.8" and 127tpi questions

    Guys,
    I'm currently running Mythos XC tires, I like the grip but would like something a littler larger.
    I'm considering the XC Pros but have a few questions. Does a Kevlar bead automatically denote 127tpi and 60tpi = wire bead? I guess that goes for all tires.

    Also, has anyone used a 1.8 Fire XC Pro? Is it a true 1.8" or will it be larger than a Mythos XC? As you probably know a 1.95" Mythos XC looks really small.

    Thanks.
    Lou.
    04 Stumpjumper FSR Pro
    Airborne Ti HT
    Trek Rigid SS - No suspension, no gears....no problem

  2. #2
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,028
    Quote Originally Posted by upstateSC-rider
    Guys,
    I'm currently running Mythos XC tires, I like the grip but would like something a littler larger.
    I'm considering the XC Pros but have a few questions. Does a Kevlar bead automatically denote 127tpi and 60tpi = wire bead? I guess that goes for all tires.
    For the Fire Pro, yes. For other brands and models, no. You are going to need to check each tire.

    Quote Originally Posted by upstateSC-rider
    Also, has anyone used a 1.8 Fire XC Pro? Is it a true 1.8" or will it be larger than a Mythos XC? As you probably know a 1.95" Mythos XC looks really small.

    Thanks.
    Lou.
    IRC's and Pana racer's sizing runs about the same. A 2.1 Fire should be slightly larger than a 1.95 Mythos. The 1.8 Fire will be much smaller.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  3. #3
    Two wheels are best
    Reputation: DM-SC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,048
    The Fire XC 1.8 is pretty small too. I ran them for a year or so...until this past winter. I don't have a 1.95 Mythos XC to compare it to...

    I have a brand new Fire XC Pro 1.8 (red sidewall) and a slightly used one (I used it on the front) if you'd like to try them out. I'm down in Columbia.
    Never be afraid to try something new.

    Remember amateurs built the Ark.
    Professionals built the Titanic.

  4. #4
    Do It Yourself
    Reputation: Homebrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,722
    Well to directly answer your question, no the kevlar does not automatically mean 127tpi. There are cheaper 60 tpi kevlar version that are made in Korea. The good ones are Japanese rubber. However, I have never seen anything but 127 tpi in the 1.8 size. The 1.8 is damn skinny though. Looks like a commuter/hybid tire. I used both the Mythos and both sizes of Fire XCs many years ago.

    Now to help you out...might I suggest some good tires instead? Your profile says you are riding an Enduro, right? A bike with 5" of travel deserves bigger tires. I'm using a Specialized Enduro 2.2 (probably stock on your bike) on the rear of my bike with no complaints. It's only a few grams heavier than the Mythos or Fires but with MUCH higher volume and MUCH better traction. Some others to consider are Continental Explorer 2.1 or Vertical 2.3 or Schwalble Jimmy 2.1 or Big Jim 2.25 or King Jim 2.35. I really like the King Jim up front.

  5. #5
    We get titles?
    Reputation: upNdown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    934

    Listen to what this guy says...

    Quote Originally Posted by Homebrew
    Well to directly answer your question, no the kevlar does not automatically mean 127tpi. There are cheaper 60 tpi kevlar version that are made in Korea. The good ones are Japanese rubber. However, I have never seen anything but 127 tpi in the 1.8 size. The 1.8 is damn skinny though. Looks like a commuter/hybid tire. I used both the Mythos and both sizes of Fire XCs many years ago.

    Now to help you out...might I suggest some good tires instead? Your profile says you are riding an Enduro, right? A bike with 5" of travel deserves bigger tires. I'm using a Specialized Enduro 2.2 (probably stock on your bike) on the rear of my bike with no complaints. It's only a few grams heavier than the Mythos or Fires but with MUCH higher volume and MUCH better traction. Some others to consider are Continental Explorer 2.1 or Vertical 2.3 or Schwalble Jimmy 2.1 or Big Jim 2.25 or King Jim 2.35. I really like the King Jim up front.
    This guy's got some good advice. Skinny tires have their place. In XC races. Otherwise, they're no fun. For a couple of years I rode the skinniest, fastest rolling, lightest tires I could find (including 1.8 Fires). I stumbled upon the Hutchinson Mosquito because of its weight, but enjoyed it because its high volume allowed me to run lower PSI's. This led to bigger, heavier tires. Now I run DH tires most of the time. They're more fun. You can find a happy medium if you don't want heavy tires, but do yourself a favor and try someting else.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: upstateSC-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    781
    Wow, I appreciate all the opinions exeryone.
    Homebrew and upndown-I'm riding an Enduro but I'm riding it like a xc bike, Push-modded Float R, short travel, 4.1" in back and 105mm up front. I get a lot of climbing practice on these trails.
    DM-SC-Thanks for the offer but I was assuming IRC 1.8's were wider than mythos. I'll probably wait for the 2.1's or look more closely at the Mosquito's.
    Shiggy-I was hoping to find some reviews on the 1.8 on your site.

    Thanks all.
    Lou.
    04 Stumpjumper FSR Pro
    Airborne Ti HT
    Trek Rigid SS - No suspension, no gears....no problem

  7. #7
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,028
    Quote Originally Posted by upstateSC-rider
    ...Shiggy-I was hoping to find some reviews on the 1.8 on your site.

    Thanks all.
    Lou.
    I do not have the 1.8 Fire XCs (yet) but the casing specs are about the same as the Fire Mud 1.8. The reviews are in the works.

    The suggestions for wider tires are good. I would suggest the Nokian NBX 2.1 or 2.3, Pana racer Cinder 2.25, Schwalbe Albert 2.25, or Ken da Blue Groove/Nevegal 2.10. All very nice tires. These are just a place to start. There are so many good tires these days.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  8. #8
    We get titles?
    Reputation: upNdown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    934

    Not shiggy's review but...

    Quote Originally Posted by upNdown
    This guy's got some good advice. Skinny tires have their place. In XC races. Otherwise, they're no fun. For a couple of years I rode the skinniest, fastest rolling, lightest tires I could find (including 1.8 Fires). I stumbled upon the Hutchinson Mosquito because of its weight, but enjoyed it because its high volume allowed me to run lower PSI's. This led to bigger, heavier tires. Now I run DH tires most of the time. They're more fun. You can find a happy medium if you don't want heavy tires, but do yourself a favor and try someting else.
    FWIW, here's my review of the panaracer fire 1.8's. They are great tires for XC racing. They roll fast. They perform reasonably well in all conditions. My problem with them was if I didn't air them up to at least 55 PSI, I got lots of pinchflats. At that pressure, they don't seem to hook up as well in corners.

    Anyway, you'll ride the tires you want. But if you haven't at least tried wider tires or higher volume tires, give them a shot sometime.

Posting Permissions

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