Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    189

    Maxxis Monorail vs Crossmark advice

    I am tossing up between the Monorail and Crossmark ust tyres. My local trails are 40 tarmac (badly sufaced!) the rest is offroad with a mixture of sand, hard hard pack soil. The two typres are so similar in weight, size and use. Can anyone share some ideas? Thanks

  2. #2
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,392
    Both are good tires. Monorail's are a bit faster then Crossmarks, but have a bit less grip.

    Maybe a Monorail on the rear and a Crossmark on the front?
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  3. #3
    No good in rock gardens..
    Reputation: Sideknob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    3,786
    Monorail doesn't have the edging tread that the Crossmark has - I tried the Monorail both ends and found it let go a bit suddenly on the front, on loose surfaces. Fast rolling tyre on the back with a decent amount of climbing traction, though.

    For that reason I'd avoid the Monorail up front - and go as LMN suggested or just run a Crossmark both ends as they roll pretty easy.
    My Cannondale Lefty keeps failing....

  4. #4
    bi-winning
    Reputation: rkj__'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    11,123
    I like the Crossmark.

    I have not tried the Monorail, but I would not expect it to corner as well in sand and loose conditions.
    When under pressure, your level of performance will sink to your level of preparation.


    Shorthills Cycling Club

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pagey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    596
    I love both as a rear tyre and match them up with an Ignitor on the front
    cheers
    Pagey

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    189
    I went to my LBS and I noticed that the Crossmark is slightly bigger than the Monorail and the tread comedown further down the side wall. I went for the Crossmark both ends.Thanks guys.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    605
    Obviously a dated thread, but ...

    I recently got a new pair of UST Monorails with an older set of XMax SL's that I bought to back up the SLR's that I usually ride, and so that I'd be able to compare some new tire alternatives. I mounted them on the SL's on both ends, and so far, I really like the feel of them.

    Question: Has anyone had, or heard of any difficulties removing a Monorail UST from a rim? I put both these tires all the way on the rims with my bare hands, with the intention of freeing up a small length of bead to pour in some Stan's before inflating them. Surprise! I struggled mightily to get 2 tire levers parked on the spokes just to get an inch of bead 1/2 inch away from the rim. And yeah, the bead was centered in the rim all the way around. I shudder to think what it'd take to get one of those tires all the way off if that bead doesn't loosen up in a really big way from use.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jmblg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    61

    workout...

    i've found the UST monorails to be the most difficult tire to get on (or off) almost any rim. been using them for a while

  9. #9
    The Cheater
    Reputation: Veda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    551
    Monorails are hella slippery due to the very minimal short treads on the center... crossmarks are way grippier.
    Titux X Carbon 2010 race 9.93kg
    Titux X 2009 "Deore 2012" training 11.55kg

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    605
    To update my own experience:

    I not only mount both Monorails and Crossmarks with my bare hands, but I now know that I can very easily inflate them with a floor pump, and don't even need Stan's to seal them. That's a miracle in my book. Although I did ride a Crossmark for about 100 miles with no Stan's (and no leaks), it'd be foolhardy to ride w/o sealant in NM,because of the high incidence of punctures, so I don't.

    It seems obvious that the same thing that makes them so easy to mount is what makes them so hard to remove. The sidewalls are very sticky against the rim. It's actually very hard to break the bead on a deflated tire. On the lightly used Crossmark, it wasn't too hard to get it off with levers. On a Monorail with a few hundred miles, it was a breeze (with a lever). In each case, I had to stand on the bead to break it loose. I would consider it next to impossible to remove a brand new tire that was just mounted.

    I like both tires, but prefer the Monorails. Both are very fast. We race on a lot of steep, loose stuff in NM, and they've never let me down. They might leave something to be desired on loose corners, but the drift is very controlled. No stuttering.

    Some people have complained about these tires being "warped". It's because they never mounted them correctly. They must be inflated to the point where the thin lines on the sidewalls are even about the rim. In my experience, these tires need 50 psi to finish "popping". And I wouldn't even try to mount a ust tire w/o soaping the beads first.

  11. #11
    More Torque
    Reputation: Diesel~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Garson
    To update my own experience:

    I not only mount both Monorails and Crossmarks with my bare hands, but I now know that I can very easily inflate them with a floor pump, and don't even need Stan's to seal them. That's a miracle in my book. Although I did ride a Crossmark for about 100 miles with no Stan's (and no leaks), it'd be foolhardy to ride w/o sealant in NM,because of the high incidence of punctures, so I don't.

    It seems obvious that the same thing that makes them so easy to mount is what makes them so hard to remove. The sidewalls are very sticky against the rim. It's actually very hard to break the bead on a deflated tire. On the lightly used Crossmark, it wasn't too hard to get it off with levers. On a Monorail with a few hundred miles, it was a breeze (with a lever). In each case, I had to stand on the bead to break it loose. I would consider it next to impossible to remove a brand new tire that was just mounted.

    I like both tires, but prefer the Monorails. Both are very fast. We race on a lot of steep, loose stuff in NM, and they've never let me down. They might leave something to be desired on loose corners, but the drift is very controlled. No stuttering.

    Some people have complained about these tires being "warped". It's because they never mounted them correctly. They must be inflated to the point where the thin lines on the sidewalls are even about the rim. In my experience, these tires need 50 psi to finish "popping". And I wouldn't even try to mount a ust tire w/o soaping the beads first.
    Good info; thanks for the update.

    I'm currently on a Crossmark UST 2.25 rear, and it is working out well so far. Coming from a race king 2.2 UST, it is not quite as fast, but it grips/brakes much better, has better edge knobs, and is higher volume, which inspires more confidence in the rocky sections.

    -D

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    605
    Yeah, I had a Crossmark 2.25 on the front with a Monorail 2.1 on back, and it did indeed inspire confidence. In addition to the volume, it really seemed to roll nicely over embedded rocks. I ran one lap each, Monorail vs. Crossmark on the front, on a rocky 9-mile race course, and couldn't tell the difference, so I went with 2 Monorails to save the xtra 100 gms. Had I gone with the Crossmark, I might not have crashed on a corner 3/4 of the way thru the race, which cost me 3 places. Waaaa!!

    Also, check out the review of the Crossmark at Competitive Cyclist dot com. I followed their advice and clipped the little round knobbies off the shoulders. Not really sure what those are supposed to accomplish, unless you're racing a crit on a hard packed road.

    I also have a pair of Race Kings 2.2/2.0. No telling when I'll get around to using them, but I'll keep your impressions in mind. Trying to decide what to wear on loamy ski area courses. Mountain Kings are a fave around here for that, but I'm considering the Maxxis Ignitor.

  13. #13
    More Torque
    Reputation: Diesel~'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Garson
    Yeah, I had a Crossmark 2.25 on the front with a Monorail 2.1 on back, and it did indeed inspire confidence. In addition to the volume, it really seemed to roll nicely over embedded rocks. I ran one lap each, Monorail vs. Crossmark on the front, on a rocky 9-mile race course, and couldn't tell the difference, so I went with 2 Monorails to save the xtra 100 gms. Had I gone with the Crossmark, I might not have crashed on a corner 3/4 of the way thru the race, which cost me 3 places. Waaaa!!

    Also, check out the review of the Crossmark at Competitive Cyclist dot com. I followed their advice and clipped the little round knobbies off the shoulders. Not really sure what those are supposed to accomplish, unless you're racing a crit on a hard packed road.

    I also have a pair of Race Kings 2.2/2.0. No telling when I'll get around to using them, but I'll keep your impressions in mind. Trying to decide what to wear on loamy ski area courses. Mountain Kings are a fave around here for that, but I'm considering the Maxxis Ignitor.
    Thanks for the tip on the knob trimming.

    Stay away from the Race King as a front tire in the loam.

    I have 5 Mountain King USTs, 2 2.2s and 3 2.4s. It is a good all around tire, especially the 2.4. The 2.2 is the best mud tire I've ever used, but that's the only thing I'd use it for; the volume is very small.

    The 2.4 is versatile, rolls relatively well, and grips well. It wears somewhat quickly, due to the widely spaced knobs, especially when used on hard surfaces. The MK 2.4 F is a nice when combined with the RK 2.2 R, if you don't mind the limitations of the small knobs on the rear. MK 2.4 F+R is a good combo for loam, and Conti's UST holds air well with no sealant when combined with a UST rim. They are also relatively light for a true UST tire.

    I ultimately wanted something with a little more volume and rim protection, which led me to the Crossmark 2.25 UST, which is a larger tire than the MK 2.4 UST. Have not tried the Crossmark on the front, though.

    -D

Posting Permissions

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