Results 1 to 63 of 63
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    221

    Maxxis Minion DHF 2.5 vs 2.6

    Anyone have any time on both of these tires? Do they handle the same?

    I've been running the DHF on 35mm inner rims for about 6 months. Been an awesome tire but now the side knobs are completely chewed up and I somehow managed to knock the casing out of true so it has a wobble. Just wondering how these 2 compare...

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    483
    2.6 is a lot lighter.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    181
    Some of the 2.6 are lighter than some of the 2.5. Others not so much.

    If you want a Minion DHF with a wide trail (WT) casing that is optimized for 35mm inner width rims, you are limited to 2.5, at least for a 27.5 wheel.

    Minion DHF | Maxxis Tires USA

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: tungsten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    483
    What are you talking about wilson?

    Bicycle, Mountain, Minion DHF¬*

  5. #5
    FM
    FM is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    9,414
    Quote Originally Posted by grizfish View Post
    If you want a Minion DHF with a wide trail (WT) casing that is optimized for 35mm inner width rims, you are limited to 2.5, at least for a 27.5 wheel.
    I'd think it's safe to assume the 2.6 is designed with wider rims in mind. That'd be an awfully big tire to run on a narrow rim. I just put one on my LB 32/38 rims and the profile looks fine.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    330
    I've tried both and the handle the same IMO. The 27.5x2.6WT are wider looking on my Ibis 741s than the 2.5WTs. 2.6 Reckons on the back and the combo has been killer so far in CA.

  7. #7
    mtbr santa cruz member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    147
    The side knobs on the 2.6 are much bigger.

  8. #8
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    524
    Supposed to have a higher volume to the 2.6vs2.5


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by Duffman1976 View Post
    Anyone have any time on both of these tires? Do they handle the same?

    I've been running the DHF on 35mm inner rims for about 6 months. Been an awesome tire but now the side knobs are completely chewed up and I somehow managed to knock the casing out of true so it has a wobble. Just wondering how these 2 compare...
    I have both the 2.5 and 2.6 DHF 3C compound tires in hand. I have not had a chance to mount up the 2.6 yet so can't comment on how they ride. Here are some of the things noted when I compared the two:

    - 2.6 is slightly wider, measures 65 mm knob to knob, 61 mm for the 2.5
    - 2.6 is 7g lighter than the 2.5, 939g vs 946g according to my kitchen scale
    - i think the lighter weight if the 2.6 is attributed to 3 things: lighter casing (120 TPI vs 60 TPI), few knobs (the spacing between knobs are noticeable larger vs. the 2.5s, and the knobs are ~1mm shorter.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    On a related note...Anyone know when the 2.6 DHR2 will be available?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by biker2591 View Post
    I have both the 2.5 and 2.6 DHF 3C compound tires in hand. I have not had a chance to mount up the 2.6 yet so can't comment on how they ride. Here are some of the things noted when I compared the two:

    - 2.6 is slightly wider, measures 65 mm knob to knob, 61 mm for the 2.5
    - 2.6 is 7g lighter than the 2.5, 939g vs 946g according to my kitchen scale
    - i think the lighter weight if the 2.6 is attributed to 3 things: lighter casing (120 TPI vs 60 TPI), few knobs (the spacing between knobs are noticeable larger vs. the 2.5s, and the knobs are ~1mm shorter.
    Good info, thanks! I ended up going with the 2.5 as the grip was outstanding until the very end when the side knobs became torn or missing. Awesome tire! Lighter weight of the 2.6 also scares me a bit.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    845
    Would you recommend 2.5/2.6 dhf on the rear or stick with the 2.3 on rear. Which one has less drag? I got minion ss o rear on my lb 33mm internal width. The side thread are also positioned on the Centre.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    Given your IW of your rims, I would definitely go with the 2.5/2.6. Think the 2.3 was designed with a narrower rim in mind.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,056
    I was running the 2.5 WT on the front - finally ruined my 2.4 wt DHR2 in the rear - Sooooo - grabbed a 2.6 DHF for the front and moved the 2.5 to the rear... i need to ride some regular rides and see if Strava tells me anything but honestly - pedal effort didn't seem harder and all my initial rides were stickier high altitude single track surfaces. Bike looks burly / enduro - seems the sidewalls are stiffer on the DHF then DHR (at least seat of pants feel) and the ride is a wee bit more harsh at same pressures - i've been airing down due to the extra volume on the rear and front and gaining some tire based compliance back in the ride... will hit apex this week and see what happens!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,157
    Kamper, you are a haus if you can pedal a DHF 2.5 on the rear. That tire has great traction but slowed me down immensely.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Kamper, you are a haus if you can pedal a DHF 2.5 on the rear. That tire has great traction but slowed me down immensely.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G891A using Tapatalk

    HA - OR Im an idiot with a foot in mouth! I immediately headed to WinterPark and Granby ranch w family for a week of vaca after mounting so all my rides were there... again - seat of pants didn't feel horrible and i had a lot of vert climbing as I rode up to get my turns down...

    real test will be on the regular weekly go to's ... ill let you know what i find/think

    the 2.5 is a bit ridden worn, and i always consider thats rubbing away some of the tacky/grippy new rubber makes em roll a bit easier - maybe that's a far to simpleton thought?

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,056
    So - after a good ride on a regular trail - i would say yes - DHF in the rear is slower than DHR and definitely aggressor - and will only remain on until the 2.5 aggressor appears.

    That said - Im not racing XC - and the DH performance of this combo is - well - the best I've ever felt - but want a couple more rides on local trails to make that statement body. I set PR's on DH segments that had me stopping to yield for uphill riders or hikers w dogs.. not long stops mind you but i know strava on my phone doesn't pause/restart accurately at all. Simply - the DH ride on this 2.6/2.5 combo is unreal. As a rear it's more supportive and able to run silly low pressures compared to the 2.4 WT - no rim strikes, burps or punctures either. On the DHR 20-22 psi min or i was fixing bent rim beads. I ran this at 17ish (15ish front on the 2.6) and never felt a ping - this on the trail that had me trash my 2.4 and cause multiple rim dents.

    For reference, my uphill times were not that far off my best times - but Ill attribute that to the competitive nature my buddy and i when we ride and push each other!

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    15
    Okay here's my conundrum... just picked up a Boost fork for my Nomad... rear tire clearance is for sure tight. Trail King 2.4's fit, but barely...

    I have Easton AR 27 rims out back... thinking of building up an AR 35 wheel for the front for a DHF. Would you go DHR 2.40WT on the back on the 27mm internal wheel? Feel like DHF 2.60 is massive in front if only running DHR 2.3 in the back... so would you then stick to DHF 2.50 WT in the front?

    Like what I did there. Ha. Nice and confusing... or I could just build an AR27 wheel with boost (can't get an AR30 rim currently )

    I do like the feel of the rollover of the Trail Kings compared to pre-WT Minions... but wouldn't mind a litlle more bite upfront. Other option is I could leave the Trail King out back but I shred the Contis, where I don't shred Maxxis tires.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    221
    Quote Originally Posted by beerfriday View Post
    Okay here's my conundrum... just picked up a Boost fork for my Nomad... rear tire clearance is for sure tight. Trail King 2.4's fit, but barely...

    I have Easton AR 27 rims out back... thinking of building up an AR 35 wheel for the front for a DHF. Would you go DHR 2.40WT on the back on the 27mm internal wheel? Feel like DHF 2.60 is massive in front if only running DHR 2.3 in the back... so would you then stick to DHF 2.50 WT in the front?

    Like what I did there. Ha. Nice and confusing... or I could just build an AR27 wheel with boost (can't get an AR30 rim currently )

    I do like the feel of the rollover of the Trail Kings compared to pre-WT Minions... but wouldn't mind a litlle more bite upfront. Other option is I could leave the Trail King out back but I shred the Contis, where I don't shred Maxxis tires.
    Is the 2.4 WT aggressor out yet? That will be an awesome read for your setup. I've been running the 2.5 DHF/2.35 aggressor combo and it grips like crazy. My aggressor is now worn to smoother than semi slick status so steep loose climbs are almost impossible but it really moves going down!

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    202
    Don't have experience on 2.6 minion, but FWIW 2.5 minion as a front tire on 29 iw roval rims is excellent! I'm running a 2.4 DHR2 WT as rear.

    Edit: knobs are wider than the sidwall/casing, and 2 weeks after mounting it is ~2.5in wide at its widest using a tape measure (I don't own a caliper). Obviously grip is amazing, but what surprised me is that it rolls faster than the 2.3 Butcher/Purgatory combo it replaced despite larger size, ~100g heavier per tire and more aggressive tread/taller knobs and the softer Maxxgrip compound. I was expecting a huge rolling resistance hit, but I'm entering every corner faster than my old tires, braking better, and cornering with less sketchiness. Skeptical of minion hype before trying, but now that I tasted the coolade I think it's pretty sweet indeed.
    Last edited by rockhammer; 07-14-2017 at 06:46 PM. Reason: Additional info

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bart.taylor.sucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by biker2591 View Post
    I have both the 2.5 and 2.6 DHF 3C compound tires in hand. I have not had a chance to mount up the 2.6 yet so can't comment on how they ride. Here are some of the things noted when I compared the two:

    - 2.6 is slightly wider, measures 65 mm knob to knob, 61 mm for the 2.5
    - 2.6 is 7g lighter than the 2.5, 939g vs 946g according to my kitchen scale
    - i think the lighter weight if the 2.6 is attributed to 3 things: lighter casing (120 TPI vs 60 TPI), few knobs (the spacing between knobs are noticeable larger vs. the 2.5s, and the knobs are ~1mm shorter.
    Any feedback on the 2.5 vs the 2.6 at this point? I'm wondering if the 2.6 might roll a little faster based on the shorter knob height/spacing.

  22. #22
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,496
    2.5 vs 2.6

    2.5 is a tougher, slower rolling tire, for relatively more aggressive riding. Think of it as a shock set at the higher end of the air spring range. I think of it as an Enduro tire. You can pedal it to the top but it won't be any fun.

    2.6 is lighter, very grippy, and rolls extremely well given how grippy it is. But it's lighter and feels like it has softer sidewalls. Like running your fork on the low end of the air spring. Feels great unless you push it super hard. It's a perfect AM tire. Fun going both up and down.

    I run a DHF 2.6 front, Forcaster dual compound 2.6 rear. For trail to AM riding they are amazing. Pushing them quite hard and they have held up very well. I like them so much I'd likely no longer buy a bike that couldn't take a 2.6" tire. Maybe would try a dhr2 in a 2.6 out back if/when available, but the current setup is really great. And I am not at all a plus tire fan. The 2.6 on a i35 rim is magic.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    170
    Currently running 2.5 WT DHF in the front and 2.4 HR2 on the back (had a 2.3 DHR2 that rolled like crazy but got knackerd pretty easy) on Mavic Crossmax XL wheels , 23mm internal. I've just purchased a new wheelset EX 1501 Spline 30 mm internal and I'm thinking to change things slightly on the rear. Bike is a YT Capra.

    What I'm thinking at ,

    Option 1 : Keep the 2.5 DHF WT on the front and go for a 2.4 DHR2 WT on the rear

    Option 2: Move my 2.5 DHF on the rear , and throw a 2.6 DHF on the front altrough I don't know how much clearence will be left on the FOX 36 (non boost) with a mud guard

    Or should I think for something else that would fit better 30mm rims ?
    "16 Cotic Bfe

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by Bogdan_mb View Post
    Option 2: Move my 2.5 DHF on the rear , and throw a 2.6 DHF on the front altrough I don't know how much clearence will be left on the FOX 36 (non boost) with a mud guard

    Or should I think for something else that would fit better 30mm rims ?
    That's what I'd do I think. I have the 2.6 up front and love it. The 2.5 is tougher and so should handle the abuse of being in the rear quite well. Also I'd be very surprised if the 2.6 didn't fit in a Fox36 just fine, even with a mud guard.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bart.taylor.sucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    2.5 vs 2.6

    2.5 is a tougher, slower rolling tire, for relatively more aggressive riding. Think of it as a shock set at the higher end of the air spring range. I think of it as an Enduro tire. You can pedal it to the top but it won't be any fun.

    2.6 is lighter, very grippy, and rolls extremely well given how grippy it is. But it's lighter and feels like it has softer sidewalls. Like running your fork on the low end of the air spring. Feels great unless you push it super hard. It's a perfect AM tire. Fun going both up and down.

    I run a DHF 2.6 front, Forcaster dual compound 2.6 rear. For trail to AM riding they are amazing. Pushing them quite hard and they have held up very well. I like them so much I'd likely no longer buy a bike that couldn't take a 2.6" tire. Maybe would try a dhr2 in a 2.6 out back if/when available, but the current setup is really great. And I am not at all a plus tire fan. The 2.6 on a i35 rim is magic.
    Great info. Thanks. Wish Maxxis would offer up that sort of insight in its tire descriptions. Been running the 2.5 but sounds like it's time to try a 2.6 now that the 2.5 is wearing out.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by beerfriday View Post
    Okay here's my conundrum... just picked up a Boost fork for my Nomad... rear tire clearance is for sure tight. Trail King 2.4's fit, but barely...
    Trail King's profile is very tall. To me it looks a bit taller than Shorty 2.5WT, so I'm sure you can fit maxxis 2.4 tires without problems.

    3mm smaller inner width than recommend isn't going to be a big problem, but be aware that you will have to lean more over to engage cornering knobs.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    13
    I just bought a 2.5 WT terra rear and a 2.6 dual compound WT for the front. Will report back on the results vs the 2.8 nobby nicks ive got now....

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Helmetless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    2.5 vs 2.6

    2.5 is a tougher, slower rolling tire, for relatively more aggressive riding. Think of it as a shock set at the higher end of the air spring range. I think of it as an Enduro tire. You can pedal it to the top but it won't be any fun.

    2.6 is lighter, very grippy, and rolls extremely well given how grippy it is. But it's lighter and feels like it has softer sidewalls. Like running your fork on the low end of the air spring. Feels great unless you push it super hard. It's a perfect AM tire. Fun going both up and down.

    I run a DHF 2.6 front, Forcaster dual compound 2.6 rear. For trail to AM riding they are amazing. Pushing them quite hard and they have held up very well. I like them so much I'd likely no longer buy a bike that couldn't take a 2.6" tire. Maybe would try a dhr2 in a 2.6 out back if/when available, but the current setup is really great. And I am not at all a plus tire fan. The 2.6 on a i35 rim is magic.
    Now THIS is a great review!

    Currently have a 30mm int. width Alex Supra 35 rims. I use a 2.6 Rekon up front (with a real profile of a 2.4 tire with taller sidewalls) and a 2.35 Ikon rear, which is ok.

    Planning on using my 2.6 on the back and add a 2.6 DHF front.

    My bike is a TransAM 29 converted to 27.5+. So far it's been great but I bought by error a boost 27.5 Pike instead of the 29/27.5+ option and now my HT angle is like 68 (a bit steep IMO), so part of my effort is to rectify this by adding a bigger tire on the front.

    Will this work?
    Transition TransAM 29 (made 27.5 "Plus")
    Cannondale F5000 Yellow :P

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmetless View Post
    Now THIS is a great review!

    Currently have a 30mm int. width Alex Supra 35 rims. I use a 2.6 Rekon up front (with a real profile of a 2.4 tire with taller sidewalls) and a 2.35 Ikon rear, which is ok.

    Planning on using my 2.6 on the back and add a 2.6 DHF front.

    My bike is a TransAM 29 converted to 27.5+. So far it's been great but I bought by error a boost 27.5 Pike instead of the 29/27.5+ option and now my HT angle is like 68 (a bit steep IMO), so part of my effort is to rectify this by adding a bigger tire on the front.

    Will this work?
    I think you're talking about a few mm if anything, which definitely is not going to fix that head angle. Why not just sell off your Pike and get the right fork?

  30. #30
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,496
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmetless View Post
    Now THIS is a great review!

    Currently have a 30mm int. width Alex Supra 35 rims. I use a 2.6 Rekon up front (with a real profile of a 2.4 tire with taller sidewalls) and a 2.35 Ikon rear, which is ok.

    Planning on using my 2.6 on the back and add a 2.6 DHF front.

    My bike is a TransAM 29 converted to 27.5+. So far it's been great but I bought by error a boost 27.5 Pike instead of the 29/27.5+ option and now my HT angle is like 68 (a bit steep IMO), so part of my effort is to rectify this by adding a bigger tire on the front.

    Will this work?
    Hey, thanks.

    What is the listed axel to crown on each fork. SRAM should have it on their website. Your thinking is correct that a larger tire up front my help, but likely only a bit.

    Also, you may be loosing ground as you are taking off the 2.35 from the back and raising it with a larger tire. Yeah the Rekon may not measure a full 2.6, but it's likely still bigger than the 2.35. And the Rekon will likely stretch with time.

    Another thing, that 2.6 DHF is likely not that much bigger than the Rekon. And, you don't want to run a DHF paired with an Ikon. Too much of a mismatch IMO.

    So, if the a2c is a lot between the 2 forks tinkering with tires is not going to fix it, and if that is truly the case, I'd sell the fork and get the correct a2c fork.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    46
    Can anybody confirm if a 2.6 WT DHF will fit on a non-boost 27.5 RS Revelation? I thought I read somewhere that a 2.6 fits no problem and a 2.8 barely fits, but looking at the fork with a tape measure I am a little concerned. Fork is a 2015.


    Tappin' via Tapatalk

  32. #32
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    7,878
    Fits on my non-boost Pike and 36 with room to spare.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    46
    Do you know if the wheel void of the lowers is the same from revelation to pike? Because with the larger stanchions of the pike, just not sure itís a confirmation of fitment.


    Tappin' via Tapatalk

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Helmetless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by slipperyb View Post
    Can anybody confirm if a 2.6 WT DHF will fit on a non-boost 27.5 RS Revelation? I thought I read somewhere that a 2.6 fits no problem and a 2.8 barely fits, but looking at the fork with a tape measure I am a little concerned. Fork is a 2015.


    Tappin' via Tapatalk
    You read it and memorized well. 2.6 Minion fits "ok" and even leave you some space as long as your Rev has the newer bridge which leaves gap for the side knobs.

    2.8 Minion just doesn't fit on some 29 Revs, because of the lacking gap required for the sides. Those tall knobs on the 2.8 are also problematic.

    BTW 2.8 Rekon fits just barely. And, 2.6 Rekon is a joke, just like a regular 2.4 Ardent but higher walled.

    Some folks with pictures describing this would be great also. I don't have mine, but seen this at my LBS.
    Transition TransAM 29 (made 27.5 "Plus")
    Cannondale F5000 Yellow :P

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    424
    anymore reviews of the 2.6 dhf? lighter and a bit bigger than my current 2.5wt is appealing...just wondering if its up to task for north shore 'enduro-ish' riding and durability compared to the 2.5.
    thanks

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    46
    Quote Originally Posted by Helmetless View Post
    You read it and memorized well. 2.6 Minion fits "ok" and even leave you some space as long as your Rev has the newer bridge which leaves gap for the side knobs.
    How would I tell if mine has the newer bridge?


    Tappin' via Tapatalk

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by murrdogg11 View Post
    anymore reviews of the 2.6 dhf? lighter and a bit bigger than my current 2.5wt is appealing...just wondering if its up to task for north shore 'enduro-ish' riding and durability compared to the 2.5.
    thanks
    Do you typically have issues with front tires?

    The 2.6 has been just fine for my area which is extremely rugged and hard on tires, but I also tend to flatten back tires and never front. The sidewalls on the 2.6's definitely seem a little thinner than my smaller Maxxis tires, but the volume probably helps prevent issues.

    If you frequently have issues with front tires, this tire might be getting a little thin for you. If not, go for it!

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    645
    I've managed to put a hole through the tread of a 2.6 DHF. It sealed up really quickly though. Schwalbe tyres on the other hand seem to just keep bubbling away.

    As for the Rekon 2.6 sizing - I can't see it being as small as an Ardent 2.4. My Rekon 2.6 measures very close to my Nobby Nic 2.6, which after a little riding ends up at 64-65mm on a 30mm rim. I've not seen 2.4 Ardents that size.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: KRob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,821
    Iím thinking about pairing the DHF 2.6 on front with Agressor 2.5WT DD on the rear.

    Two concerns: will I have any clearance problems with a 2017 27.5 MRP Stage fork. Iíve run the eThirteen TRS plus with that fork and it cleared, but it wasnít massive clearance. I always heard rocks pinging on the arch (I admit part of that was the super sticky rubber compound and big blocky knobsí tendency to pick up good size rocks and pull them through the arch) . Anyone run both these tires and can compare volume/size?

    Will the 2.5 Agressor DD casing be too heavy/overkill? I ran the 2.3 with exo casing and had several punctures in the tread on relatively tame trails. Iíve had good success with the 2.3 minion SS in DD casing, but wanted to go to a bigger volume tire.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kneesliding's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    5
    Hi,

    anyone running Procore with these?
    The light at the end of the tunnel is an oncoming train...

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    426
    has any1 noticed weaker side walls or casing with the 2.6? i would think they would have to be slightly weaker since they are a tad lighter. i dunno how a larger tire is actually lighter.

    im currently running dhf 2.5WT on my 30mm internal rim, and looking to potentially get a dhf 2.6 to replace it, but i dont want a softer, less stiff tire.
    2017 yeti sb6c turq x01 eagle

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    645
    Yeah they'll be slightly weaker, a bit more give in them but IMO very comparable to a DHF 2.3 Exo in how they ride and puncture resistance.

    As a point of comparison, I've had trouble with Schwalbe 2.6" Snakeskin tyres (Nobby Nic and Rocket Ron) and puncture resistance. Holding the 2 tyres side-by-side (unmounted), it's noticeable how much thicker and tougher feeling the casing of the Maxxis is.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,056
    I've run both the 2.5 and 2.6 as fronts. At lower pressures the 2.6 rides better and has never pinch flatted bashing into a rock - whereas at similar low pressure the 2.5 did. I suspect its the additional overall volume of the tire and maybe some sidewall construction they engineered in to the 2.6..

    they look and feel very similar - but my experience tells me the 2.6 will be a little more forgiving, squirm a little less and less susceptible to flats at lower psi

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    I'm running the 2.6 on an i30 set of rims (Roval Traverse SL's) as a front tire at about 24-25psi. We have a lot of volcanic tuff in my area (similar to slickrock). My local trails have a lot of off camber sections of tuff where you will ride straight across a slab that is sloped downwards. At some of the more severe angles the tire just can't hang on.

    It's not something I have experienced with many other tires, so i'm not sure if it's that I'm on the narrow end of rim widths (i30 vs i35), or that the 2.6 is just a little lighter casing than the 2.5's, or whether I need to change my pressure up. I'm guessing it's the casing.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by Porch View Post
    I'm running the 2.6 on an i30 set of rims (Roval Traverse SL's) as a front tire at about 24-25psi. We have a lot of volcanic tuff in my area (similar to slickrock). My local trails have a lot of off camber sections of tuff where you will ride straight across a slab that is sloped downwards. At some of the more severe angles the tire just can't hang on.

    It's not something I have experienced with many other tires, so i'm not sure if it's that I'm on the narrow end of rim widths (i30 vs i35), or that the 2.6 is just a little lighter casing than the 2.5's, or whether I need to change my pressure up. I'm guessing it's the casing.
    what's your riding weight?

    i just replaced my 2.5wt with 2.6dhf on 30mm ID rims. haven't been able to ride yet, but hopefully the 2.6's are just as good if not better than the 2.5.

    what rear tire are you running?
    2017 yeti sb6c turq x01 eagle

  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by useport80 View Post
    what's your riding weight?

    i just replaced my 2.5wt with 2.6dhf on 30mm ID rims. haven't been able to ride yet, but hopefully the 2.6's are just as good if not better than the 2.5.

    what rear tire are you running?
    I'm 185 with gear. Running a Slaughter GRID rear tire. Bike is a Canfield Balance (165mm travel).

    I might try a lower pressure to see if I can get the tire to have a larger contact patch on these off-camber sections. I probably don't need so much pressure on a long travel bike where my weight is often very far back.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    127
    What I found for me, is that the tire works really well below 20 psi. Anything higher than that, for me, made it less predictable in rooty/rocky sections

    180lbs kitted
    30mm ID rims

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by ehfour View Post
    What I found for me, is that the tire works really well below 20 psi. Anything higher than that, for me, made it less predictable in rooty/rocky sections

    180lbs kitted
    30mm ID rims
    wow below 20 psi? that's nuts. im about 185-190 kitted up with 30mm ID rims, and i've always run 22+ psi. anything lower than 22psi feels squirmy
    2017 yeti sb6c turq x01 eagle

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    624
    Anyone looking for a 2.6 DHF and/or DHR2? I've got a pair with 2 rides on them I'm just not feeling on my 28mm rims. Also got a 2.6 Rekon.

    No matter what pressure I run, I'm just not liking the squirm on the narrow rims.

    Hit me up PM.

    Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by ehfour View Post
    What I found for me, is that the tire works really well below 20 psi. Anything higher than that, for me, made it less predictable in rooty/rocky sections

    180lbs kitted
    30mm ID rims
    I had also noticed that the 2.6 was sketchy on loose-over-hard, which is an area that the DHF normally excels in.

    I tried 19psi on my ride a few days ago and it feels much better without being draggy. I'll experiment from here....thanks!

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by Porch View Post
    I had also noticed that the 2.6 was sketchy on loose-over-hard, which is an area that the DHF normally excels in.

    I tried 19psi on my ride a few days ago and it feels much better without being draggy. I'll experiment from here....thanks!
    Nice! Tire pressure is free and since I paid for the tire made sense to experiment

    Quote Originally Posted by useport80
    wow below 20 psi? that's nuts. im about 185-190 kitted up with 30mm ID rims, and i've always run 22+ psi. anything lower than 22psi feels squirmy
    For me that pressure worked well for where I ride, technical downhill (North Shore)

  52. #52
    tire to rim ratio tester
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,192
    Quote Originally Posted by Duffman1976 View Post
    Anyone have any time on both of these tires? Do they handle the same?

    I've been running the DHF on 35mm inner rims for about 6 months. Been an awesome tire but now the side knobs are completely chewed up and I somehow managed to knock the casing out of true so it has a wobble. Just wondering how these 2 compare...

    Maybe 2.5 measures 61mm wide but in theory 63.5mm wide. You have them on a 35mm rim. The side knobs are completely worn and you knocked the casing out of true.


    I'm far, far, from an expert on this stuff but this is my take:

    Your tire to rim ratio is somewhere between 1.7 to 1.8. On a real + tire maybe that's OK but on a more standard tire, and again this is highly controversial, but I think it should be closer to 2.0 to 3.0x, see link:

    https://www.bikerumor.com/2016/08/12...-best-results/

    They recommend 1.6x to 3.3x for standard tires (you are on the low ratio-end; I'm on the higher-ratio end).

    I have a 2.5 on a 23 mm rim (2.8x tire to rim ratio), and the side knobs have worn evenly with the center knobs. My casing also has a wobble but that was from day one. Mine has 1000 miles on it and I'll try 2.6 later on the same rim, and I'm sure I'll like it. And no I didn't crash once at speed in 1000 miles with the 'wrong' tire to rim ratio. With your rim size can you go up to 2.8 / 3.0 or do you need a larger fork?
    Pierced from below, souls of my treacherous past

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    95
    Hi there

    I have gone back and forth from 2,5 to 2,6 DHF tires. Here my observations:

    both mounted on 32mm ID tubeless

    2.5
    +steering more precise
    +way more cornering grip
    +cornering on anything is just precise and reliable

    -rolls slower
    -less volume means lower slow bump sensitivity
    -heavier than 2.6

    2,6
    +great small bump sensitivity
    +give more confidence in chunky stuff like babyhood
    +faster on straight lines down
    +lighter
    +better rolling
    +better climbing (better traction)
    -very unprecise steering in cornering
    -way less grip cornering - so I have lowered pressure to 1.2bars to increase grip which helped but then cornering felt like loosing the tire
    -disliked the imprecise feel and switched back to 2.5

    I have actually measured the knobbier
    2.5 has about 1mm higher sideknobs and 0.5mm higher middle knobs than 2.6 which explains weight and less grip

    I would love to have the forgiving feeling of the 2,6 with the cornering grip of the 2,5

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    19
    I have both tires and agree to all of this. It's true that the knob heights for the DHF 2.6 are ~1mm lower. Also, they are spaced further apart, so fewer knobs overall. This with the combination of a thinner casing is what results in the 2.6 being lighter than the 2.5.

    Another observation is the rubber compound on the 2.6 feels much harder than the 2.5. This is comparing 3C maxx terra on both tires. The 2.6 feels more like a DC tire as I run a DHR2 DC in the back. The fact that the rubber is not a soft could be a contributor to the lack of cornering grip.

    Quote Originally Posted by muggel View Post
    Hi there

    I have gone back and forth from 2,5 to 2,6 DHF tires. Here my observations:

    both mounted on 32mm ID tubeless

    2.5
    +steering more precise
    +way more cornering grip
    +cornering on anything is just precise and reliable

    -rolls slower
    -less volume means lower slow bump sensitivity
    -heavier than 2.6

    2,6
    +great small bump sensitivity
    +give more confidence in chunky stuff like babyhood
    +faster on straight lines down
    +lighter
    +better rolling
    +better climbing (better traction)
    -very unprecise steering in cornering
    -way less grip cornering - so I have lowered pressure to 1.2bars to increase grip which helped but then cornering felt like loosing the tire
    -disliked the imprecise feel and switched back to 2.5

    I have actually measured the knobbier
    2.5 has about 1mm higher sideknobs and 0.5mm higher middle knobs than 2.6 which explains weight and less grip

    I would love to have the forgiving feeling of the 2,6 with the cornering grip of the 2,5

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    426
    Quote Originally Posted by biker2591 View Post
    I have both tires and agree to all of this. It's true that the knob heights for the DHF 2.6 are ~1mm lower. Also, they are spaced further apart, so fewer knobs overall. This with the combination of a thinner casing is what results in the 2.6 being lighter than the 2.5.

    Another observation is the rubber compound on the 2.6 feels much harder than the 2.5. This is comparing 3C maxx terra on both tires. The 2.6 feels more like a DC tire as I run a DHR2 DC in the back. The fact that the rubber is not a soft could be a contributor to the lack of cornering grip.
    Quote Originally Posted by muggel View Post
    Hi there

    I have gone back and forth from 2,5 to 2,6 DHF tires. Here my observations:

    both mounted on 32mm ID tubeless

    2.5
    +steering more precise
    +way more cornering grip
    +cornering on anything is just precise and reliable

    -rolls slower
    -less volume means lower slow bump sensitivity
    -heavier than 2.6

    2,6
    +great small bump sensitivity
    +give more confidence in chunky stuff like babyhood
    +faster on straight lines down
    +lighter
    +better rolling
    +better climbing (better traction)
    -very unprecise steering in cornering
    -way less grip cornering - so I have lowered pressure to 1.2bars to increase grip which helped but then cornering felt like loosing the tire
    -disliked the imprecise feel and switched back to 2.5

    I have actually measured the knobbier
    2.5 has about 1mm higher sideknobs and 0.5mm higher middle knobs than 2.6 which explains weight and less grip

    I would love to have the forgiving feeling of the 2,6 with the cornering grip of the 2,5
    damn, i was really afraid of this. i haven't had much time on the dhf2.6 on the trails, but this really sux. i was hoping the 2.6 was going to corner better.
    2017 yeti sb6c turq x01 eagle

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,287
    Quote Originally Posted by useport80 View Post
    damn, i was really afraid of this. i haven't had much time on the dhf2.6 on the trails, but this really sux. i was hoping the 2.6 was going to corner better.
    Yeah, it's just terrible. You should definitely get rid of it.

    Just let me know when you're ready to dump it and i'll get you my shipping address.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    645
    I have no meaningful time on a 2.5, however a fair bit of time now on a 2.6. To me the 2.6 just feels like a scaled up DHF 2.3. With regards to some of the comparisons to a 2.5, the tyre I've compared the 2.6 to the most is a Magic Mary 2.35, so some thoughts based on that...

    -very unprecise steering in cornering
    -way less grip cornering - so I have lowered pressure to 1.2bars to increase grip which helped but then cornering felt like loosing the tire
    -disliked the imprecise feel and switched back to 2.5
    The 2.6 does have a less precise feel than a DHF 2.3 (again I can't compare to a 2.5), but IMO feels more precise than a Magic Mary 2.35. I find them all great in the dry loose stuff (slight edge to the MM), however the DHF 2.6 the best of them through chunky dry rocks. I attribute it to taller knobs folding over a bit when there is lots of traction, and the DHF 2.6 having slightly shorter knobs with plenty of width, along with more volume, really helping in those situations.

    Interestingly when a mate had a DHF 2.5 mounted whilst I had the Magic Mary 2.35, both on WTB i29 rims, they looked identical in size so I'd be really curious if anyone has run both and compared. I don't ride enough at the moment to justify buying a Magic Mary 2.6 and testing it out, but it's another option that I expect to be a serious competitor.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    322
    Which Magic mary did you run? (addix soft ss?)
    Can you rank the 3 tyres in terms of rolling resistance? (2.3, 2.6, mm)

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    645
    It was the older Trailstar. Rolling resistance (worst to best) definitely went MM 2.35, DHF 2.6, DHF 2.3 on hardpack and smoother trails. On chunky trails the larger volume starts to play a role and I think that the DHF 2.6 begins to shine.

    Personally I wouldn't choose to run any for XC, and would choose between them based on their other characteristics.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by biker2591 View Post
    I have both tires and agree to all of this. It's true that the knob heights for the DHF 2.6 are ~1mm lower. Also, they are spaced further apart, so fewer knobs overall. This with the combination of a thinner casing is what results in the 2.6 being lighter than the 2.5.

    Another observation is the rubber compound on the 2.6 feels much harder than the 2.5. This is comparing 3C maxx terra on both tires. The 2.6 feels more like a DC tire as I run a DHR2 DC in the back. The fact that the rubber is not a soft could be a contributor to the lack of cornering grip.
    Absolutely the same experience with rubber compound.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    144
    I am currently running 27.5 x 2.8 minion front and 26 x 2.8 dhrII rear on my Liteville 301. I love this set up so far, I have ran a 2.6 front minion and will be going back to that in the front then throwing on a aggressor 26 x 2.3 rear. Fork is the pike 27.5 non boost, the 2.8 has room no issues, if I throw on my fender in the front you will get some barely noticeable,rubbing. first pic is the 2.8 and last is the 2.6!Maxxis Minion DHF 2.5 vs 2.6-2.8-minion.jpgMaxxis Minion DHF 2.5 vs 2.6-301-2.8s.jpgName:  2.6 side shot.png
Views: 2795
Size:  129.4 KB

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    26
    I brought a 2.5 WT DD today and installed on i29 rim,had a 2.3 DHF on it(Kona 153 2016) the casing on the 2.3 is wider than the 2.5(56.5mm-2.5 vs 58mm-2.3) does this sound correct.
    The knobs are larger on the 2.5


    weight inc wheel,tube

    2.3: 2,225 grams (approx 15% worn)
    2.5: 2,545 grams (new)
    Wheel only: 1,165 grams

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: beer_coffee_water's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    848
    Quote Originally Posted by Shane.G.M View Post
    I brought a 2.5 WT DD today and installed on i29 rim,had a 2.3 DHF on it(Kona 153 2016) the casing on the 2.3 is wider than the 2.5(56.5mm-2.5 vs 58mm-2.3) does this sound correct.
    The knobs are larger on the 2.5


    weight inc wheel,tube

    2.3: 2,225 grams (approx 15% worn)
    2.5: 2,545 grams (new)
    Wheel only: 1,165 grams
    It'll get bigger. Every Maxxis I have run has stretched but they start out a little undersized. I have 2.5 DHF and Aggressor on i30 rims. The casings measure 61mm and knobs 64mm, 63.5mm

Similar Threads

  1. Maxxis Minion 29x3.00 Minion DHF 3C
    By bonesetter2004 in forum 26+/27.5+/29+ Plus Bikes
    Replies: 154
    Last Post: 06-30-2018, 09:41 PM
  2. Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-13-2018, 02:06 PM
  3. Maxxis, Minion DHF, 26 x 2.5, EXO single-ply reinforced sidewall
    By CrashTheDOG in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 10-11-2011, 05:12 PM
  4. Paid Spam, MAXXIS MINION 2.5 DHF EXO 60a (pair)
    By morandi in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-21-2011, 03:08 PM
  5. Paid Spam, MAXXIS MINION 2.5 DHF EXO 60a (pair)
    By morandi in forum Downhill - Freeride
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-21-2011, 09:52 AM

Members who have read this thread: 478

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.