Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    48

    How much of a benefit will I see going from 2.25 to 2.35 rear and 2.3 to 2.4 front?

    I have a 2015 Tallboy LTc. Santa Cruz says 2.35 is the largest recommended tire size for the rear and I am currently running 2.25 Maxxis Ardents. I have a Pike RC with a 2.3 High Roller II up front and it looks like I may be able to squeeze a 2.4 in there. Will I see a significant improvement over my current setup or will it be almost negigable? For the sake of argument I would be replacing them with the same tires only larger.


    Also, I currently have WTB ST i23 rims, will I need a wider rim to accommodate the wider tires?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bigjunk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    257
    Your rims will be fine.
    I personally am not on the bigger tires are better wagon. Yes, bigger, fatter tires are softer.
    Bigger, Fatter tires roll slower and are heavier as well.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    3,977
    Depends on you & your riding style.

    I'm a Clyde & like 2.35/2.4's for comfort & piece of mind on my 29er AM HT.

    On my old FS 29er, 2.3/2.35 was solid.

    If you think larger will be better, then it likely will be.

    I always run different tires/widths front to back.

    Up front I want grip & stability. Out back I like a faster rolling tire... a little drifty is ok.

    Try them out, if they don't work for you - sell em to a riding buddy.

    Sent from my kltedv using Tapatalk
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigjunk1 View Post
    Your rims will be fine.
    I personally am not on the bigger tires are better wagon. Yes, bigger, fatter tires are softer.
    Bigger, Fatter tires roll slower and are heavier as well.
    My other bike is a Stache 7 with 29+ wheels that I have been riding for a year now, the weight doesn't bother me. I am hoping to get back some of that monster truck feeling of just running over everything, but if the difference is not noticeable, I don't want to waste the money on tires.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by targnik View Post
    Depends on you & your riding style.


    If you think larger will be better, then it likely will be.
    I like to run over things. My Stache does this well. I don't expect 2.35 and 2.4 to roll over things as easily as my 3.0s but I don't know how much better they would be over my current 2.25/2.3 setup. On paper the size difference looks negligible at best.

  6. #6
    No good in rock gardens..
    Reputation: Sideknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    4,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris2183 View Post
    On paper the size difference looks negligible at best.
    I think the difference in the real world will be equally negligible.
    Less isn't MOAR

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    173
    There is a big difference between the 2.3 High Roller II and the 2.4 version. I have the 2.4 on my Pike (yes it fits with lots of room) and what you will feel is increased grip, for sure.

    The difference between the 2.25 Ardent and the 2.4 version is even greater. The 2.4 is massive compared to the 2.25, which I used for a while but didn't like. Mates of mine swear by the 2.4 version though, much cushier and forgiving, with more grip as well.

  8. #8
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,822
    If that's the case, then I say go for it, you will get that feeling you're looking for, but tyre selection is important. They don't make a 2.4" HR2, nor DHR2, next biggest in Maxxis would be either a 2.4" Ardent or 2,5" DHF. Personally, if you want to give it a go and are not too worried about rolling speed, I'd look at the On One Chunky Monkey 2.4", it is built on the same casing as the Ardent by Maxxis for On One, they are huge, they are also very sticky/grippy. If you really want to increase that monster truck feel you could go for a wider rim, but most likely will then have fitment issues.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chris2183 View Post
    My other bike is a Stache 7 with 29+ wheels that I have been riding for a year now, the weight doesn't bother me. I am hoping to get back some of that monster truck feeling of just running over everything, but if the difference is not noticeable, I don't want to waste the money on tires.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If that's the case, then I say go for it, you will get that feeling you're looking for, but tyre selection is important. They don't make a 2.4" HR2, nor DHR2, next biggest in Maxxis would be either a 2.4" Ardent or 2,5" DHF. Personally, if you want to give it a go and are not too worried about rolling speed, I'd look at the On One Chunky Monkey 2.4", it is built on the same casing as the Ardent by Maxxis for On One, they are huge, they are also very sticky/grippy. If you really want to increase that monster truck feel you could go for a wider rim, but most likely will then have fitment issues.
    Yes there is a Maxxis high roller II in 2.4"

    High Roller II | Maxxis Tires USA

    And there is also a DHR II in 2.4

    Minion DHR II | Maxxis Tires USA

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    170
    With a tall boy I'm assuming 29" wheels. No 29x2.4 HRII or DHRII. You need to move to a 2.5x29 DHF for the front If you want a larger front. I would just go 2.3x29 DHF max terra in front and Forekaster 2.35x29 in the rear. Will give you great predictable grip in front very good turning w a fast rolling but grippy reasonably lite rear. I ran the HRII in the front for about a week didn't like it switched to the DHF less front washout both 2.3x29 duals. The maxx terra were out of stock at the time

  11. #11
    Captain One Lung SuperModerator
    Reputation: JCWages's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    3,667
    Quote Originally Posted by greddyvox View Post

    The difference between the 2.25 Ardent and the 2.4 version is even greater. The 2.4 is massive compared to the 2.25, which I used for a while but didn't like. Mates of mine swear by the 2.4 version though, much cushier and forgiving, with more grip as well.
    This ^^ The 2.25 Ardent is pretty much crap compared to the 2.4 version.

    Maxxis Ardent 2.4 Review

  12. #12
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,822
    That would be applicable if he was riding either a 26" or 650B bike, unfortunately he is riding a 29er

    Quote Originally Posted by greddyvox View Post
    Yes there is a Maxxis high roller II in 2.4"
    High Roller II | Maxxis Tires USA
    And there is also a DHR II in 2.4
    Minion DHR II | Maxxis Tires USA
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  13. #13
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,333
    I must be reading things wrong as I type this, I am looking right at my maxxis DHR2 in 29x 2.4 flavor.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by greddyvox View Post
    There is a big difference between the 2.3 High Roller II and the 2.4 version. I have the 2.4 on my Pike (yes it fits with lots of room) and what you will feel is increased grip, for sure.

    The difference between the 2.25 Ardent and the 2.4 version is even greater. The 2.4 is massive compared to the 2.25, which I used for a while but didn't like. Mates of mine swear by the 2.4 version though, much cushier and forgiving, with more grip as well.
    I would only be going to a 2.35 max in the rear. I am strongly thinking of just moving my 2.3 to the rear and then I only need to buy a front tire.

    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If that's the case, then I say go for it, you will get that feeling you're looking for, but tyre selection is important. They don't make a 2.4" HR2, nor DHR2, next biggest in Maxxis would be either a 2.4" Ardent or 2,5" DHF. Personally, if you want to give it a go and are not too worried about rolling speed, I'd look at the On One Chunky Monkey 2.4", it is built on the same casing as the Ardent by Maxxis for On One, they are huge, they are also very sticky/grippy. If you really want to increase that monster truck feel you could go for a wider rim, but most likely will then have fitment issues.
    I'm not opposed to buying a different brand, I just wanted to keep it apples to apples instead of things breaking down into "Tire X at 2.25 is better than Tire Y at 2.4" arguments.

    Quote Originally Posted by HoJo View Post
    With a tall boy I'm assuming 29" wheels. No 29x2.4 HRII or DHRII. You need to move to a 2.5x29 DHF for the front If you want a larger front. I would just go 2.3x29 DHF max terra in front and Forekaster 2.35x29 in the rear. Will give you great predictable grip in front very good turning w a fast rolling but grippy reasonably lite rear. I ran the HRII in the front for about a week didn't like it switched to the DHF less front washout both 2.3x29 duals. The maxx terra were out of stock at the time
    Is there an advantage of running the larger tire in the rear over my current setup of the smaller tire being in the rear?


    Quote Originally Posted by JCWages View Post
    This ^^ The 2.25 Ardent is pretty much crap compared to the 2.4 version.

    Maxxis Ardent 2.4 Review

    Does the same hold true for the 2.35 vs 2.25?

  15. #15
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    21,822
    Yes there is, but only the DHR2, no HR2, no DHF. Not sure exactly when they introduced that (assume it's been a bit since the WTs were released sometime last year), but IIRC, the new 2.4" WT designs are measuring out narrower than the old 2.3" "normal" designs, or at least that's what I getting. Tried checking the Maxxis site for the past couple days, but I could not get to the actual individual pages, so was hoping they were updating to show the new 29x2.6" Rekons or some other updates.

    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    I must be reading things wrong as I type this, I am looking right at my maxxis DHR2 in 29x 2.4 flavor.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

Similar Threads

  1. mid-fat front rigid, what's the real benefit?
    By BmoreKen in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 12-31-2015, 08:11 AM
  2. mid-fat front rigid, what's the real benefit?
    By BmoreKen in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-27-2015, 06:44 AM
  3. Benefit of different tyre front / rear?
    By Ironbar81 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-06-2014, 03:30 AM
  4. Benefit of clownshoe on front of Pugsley?
    By fat_tires_are_fun in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-13-2013, 07:13 AM
  5. Any benefit of long cage rear derailleur?
    By ipalmer13 in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-04-2012, 01:24 PM

Members who have read this thread: 105

Posting Permissions

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