This is for 26" version, Utah, DRY trail, some rocky sections, areas of buff turns with some small loose gravel (about 1 cm or less in size).
The 26x2.2 Ikon (rear) is a good substitute for the 2.1 RaRa (rear). I wouldn't use it on the front. About the same size and grip as the 2.1 RaRa, the tread on the 2.2 Ikon is a bit narrower than it's carcass, but the carcass and tread wear on the Ikon looks like it will be significantly better than the RaRa.
The 26x2.35 Ikon is a different animal with tread wider and side knobs taller than the 2.25 RaRa. As a front tire in THESE CONDITIONS, steerage and braking is closer to the 2.4 NoNi - better than 2.25, for sure (even though 2.4 tire's tread is slightly wider, spread out and taller than the 2.35 Ikon).
Given the terrible tread life of the Schwalbe's, the Ikons would be a good alternative (cheaper, slightly heavier, easy rolling and better wear).
I'm thinking of going to the 2.35 Ikon rear and a 2.4 Ardent front as a more aggressive combo. There's no option in the review section to write up the 26x2.35 Ikon, so I haven't posted there. The carcass width for the 2.35 Ikon is 57 mm and the tread width for it is 59 mm.
Results 1 to 4 of 4
Check out the hottest mountain bike products from these brands!
See All Interbike Coverage - Click Here »