Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    138

    Front: 2.4 DHR II or 2.5 DHF which rolls faster

    What do you think? Iíve read very mixed opinions on what rolls better, not sure what to make of it. Iíve heard the dhr rolls really slow and zaps you uphill compared to dhf and Iíve heard some say it rolls better. Thanks for your input.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,702
    Quote Originally Posted by marc.t View Post
    What do you think? Iíve read very mixed opinions on what rolls better, not sure what to make of it. Iíve heard the dhr rolls really slow and zaps you uphill compared to dhf and Iíve heard some say it rolls better. Thanks for your input.
    Rolls slower but grips wet better and brakes better. It can corner as good if you clip the larger paddle treads.

  3. #3
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,958
    I tried a DHF 2.5 on the rear, but it sucked so much energy I replaced it with a DHR 2.4, which rolls much better. Don't have a problem with the DHF up front, but don't see why it would be different.

    Sent from my SM-G935S using Tapatalk
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  4. #4
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,198
    Neither is a particularly quick tire.

    However, on a modern trail bike when riding on the flat or climbing there is so little weight on the front wheel that the CRR for a front tire is insignificant. Now the rear tire on the other hand matters.

    If you are looking for climbing performance in a front tire, weight is more important then rolling resistance. In a rear tire the opposite is true.

    On that note, I have pulled the 2.5 DHF off the front of my bike and replaced it with a 2.3 DHF. Although the 2.5 offers superior grip, I find the 2.3 is just a better all around tire.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,448
    IF Maxxis were to make a 2.4 DHF in dual compound to go with the DHR2 dual compound... THEN you would have a fast rolling setup perfect for trail use that won't wear out in 250 miles.

    marc.t the dual compound versions are just plain harder = faster which is why many see the DHR2 as being faster and it's not because of the tread pattern. The 3C compound of the DHF is SLOW for use as a rear tire; don't go there and you will be fine. The DHR2 comes in BOTH compounds so that is where you see all the discrepancies in opinions as many don't even know to take that into account. Some of the older 26" DHF's were single compound and rolled REALLY fast! It really depends on the compound.

    Have FUN!

    G MAN
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    83
    I use a 2,5 dhf dual compound on the rear. It is ok when it comes to rolling resistance. I also have a DHRII 3c MT, it is super slow and i only consider it a front tire. If the compound is the same on both i dont expect them to have very different rolling resistance. The DHRII is possible a little faster just looking at the tread pattern, but i dont think one is much different than the other in that regard.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    882
    I just replaced my rear 3C DHR2 with a DC version and I'm not sure there's much of a difference in rolling resistance.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,058
    I find tires (like saddles) are definitely a personal preference so YMMV - and I've never tried a DHR up front - many do like it. I just went back to DHF 2.5 wt front (3c) and rear (DC)... im not racing anyone but myself - and prefer the overall grip and feel of this combo... the DC rear is not as bad as you may think and works really well. I also really like the Aggressor on the rear - but cant keep em (exo version) from being slashed by the trail sharpies where as the DHF just holds up better for me. Plus its a perfectly balanced and truly fun combo when the trails face down. If memory serves - the DHR may have felt a wee bit faster on the rear - but its probably a close call. Fastest roller was the Wtb breakout in tough/fast combo - but never liked the "feel" of the casing compared to the Aggressor (or DHR or DHF as a rear).

    I also am running the DHF WT combo on my trail killer steel hardtail. I've hit top 3 prs across the board on this 30+ lb ht both up and down. the DHF in DC is not as bad as people may think

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,216
    They both roll pretty badly.

    The 2.3 DHF rolls the best, then the DHRII 2.4, then the DHF 2.5 is the slowest.

    I don't like the DHRII as a front at all.

    Front RR is not nearly as notable as on the rear, and generally I need more traction up front. However, front RR is still quite noticeable.

  10. #10
    No Clue Crew
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    5,876
    Per the original question, Iíve run both a DHF 2.5 WT and a DHRII 2.4 WT as front tires, though I normally run them front/back.

    Personally, I can feel the difference in rear tires, but not front in regard to rolling resistance. Perhaps others are more sensitive. Thereís so little weight on the front of a modern slack tall-fork bike that, for me, makes theoretical RR a moot point.

    That said, I do like either tire as a front. For me, in a front tire I want turning traction, OK volume and a sidewall thatís not going to implode and yard sale me down the mountain. Either listed tire fits that bill.
    Just like a raindrop, I was born to fall.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,448
    ^^This.
    I guess I missed the part about FRONT only unless the OP changed the title. If you do use a DHR2 as a front then you should do the cut mod as the longer horizontal knobs can slip out easier on wet roots and rocks. After cutting tho you basically have a DHF so...

    Have FUN!

    G
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    ^^This.
    I guess I missed the part about FRONT only unless the OP changed the title. If you do use a DHR2 as a front then you should do the cut mod as the longer horizontal knobs can slip out easier on wet roots and rocks. After cutting tho you basically have a DHF so...

    Have FUN!

    G
    It brakes better, sipping is better when wet and a little less slip zone when clipped. But if these things are not needed its a PITA to remove 3mm on each side when a DHF will do just fine. I unfortunately want those qualities.

Similar Threads

  1. 2.5 Minion DHR II vs DHF as Front
    By Ufdah in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 09-01-2018, 09:44 PM
  2. Switching from Minion DHF to DHR II in the front.
    By CWWalker in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-25-2016, 03:35 PM
  3. DHR 2 vs DHF as dry weather front on a 29er
    By olibluegoat in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-29-2016, 10:45 AM
  4. Minion DHF/DHF or DHF/DHR for Downieville?
    By Taz8 in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-13-2007, 02:22 PM
  5. Which ROLLS FASTER: tubed or tubeless tires?
    By SCHUMACHER in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 03-07-2004, 03:07 PM

Members who have read this thread: 191

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.