Results 1 to 58 of 58
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,627

    Minion DHF front/Ikon rear, is this a stupid combo?

    I'm looking for a new rear tire. Last summer I used an Ardent 2.25 and it was good for the first couple hundred miles but then lost all braking traction. I've been using a DHR2 in the rear lately when its been a little wet out but its unnecessary when the ground firms up.

    I've tried a ton of tire combos and the DHF is my favorite up front and the DHR2 is great for fall/winter but haven't really found a rear I'm in love with for summer.

    I've tried (F/R)--

    Purgatory/Ground Control
    Purgatory/X-King
    Butcher/Purgatory
    Butcher/Ground Control
    Hans Dampf/Ardent
    HR2/Ardent
    DHF/DHR2
    DHF/Ardent
    DHF/HR2
    HR2/HR2

    and probably a bunch more that were bad enough to be taken off after the first ride.

    Is the Ikon too weenie to be paired with such an aggressive front?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    68
    Jared Graves ran that combo at EWS, Finale I think

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,137
    Idk man, I have a DHRII (f) and an Ikon (r) waiting in my parts bin for when my current Hans Dampfs need replacing. I think it'll be a good compromise.

    Note: The DHRII/Ikon combo was Graves' EWS finals combo. No excuses now, shoot.

  4. #4
    OriginalDonk
    Reputation: OriginalDonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    454
    I'm running this setup at the moment while the soils have a bit of moisture and tackiness. I'll probably throw something a bit meatier on when things get drier and blown out.

    I think it's important to note that the 2.35 Ikon is quite a bit different than the 2.2 Ikon. The sidenobs on the 2.35's are pretty substantial, not Rock Razor or Slaughter big, but bigger than I expected. The 2.2 has significantly smaller sidnobs and is more of a dedicated XC option.

    I've found that the 2.35 Ikon has some pretty significant volume, rolls quickly, and provide decent bite at lower pressures. I've been hammering on it for a while now and it's holding up pretty well.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: targnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    4,638
    Almost Autumn here and running Conti TK 2.4 up front and a Michelin Wild Grip'R 2 Advanced 2.25 out back...

    Will be entering my first race in a few weeks (non-competitive), thinking I'll move the Grip'R up front and run Maxxis Ardent Race 2.2 out back...

    Good front tyre seems easier to find than a fast rolling/grippy rear tyre... The search continues ^^

    -------------------------------------
    Opinions are like A-holes... everybody
    has one & they're usually full of...??
    "Mountain biking: the under-rated and drug-free antidepressant"

  6. #6
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    If you don't have very loose surfaces you need to be hard braking on, then yes, god combo, if you've got loose surfaces, not so much. Compared to the Ardent, the 2.35" Ikon has a shit load more grip and better braking and will even perform fairly decently if it gets wet, the Ardent for me, in both sizes was never really fantastic, even in the rear except on super tacky dirt.

    I have just put on a set of Bonti XR3 2.3" on my Phantom after running a 2.35" Ikon on the rear and 2.4" Chunky Monkey on the front and they are providing some good results, lot more grip than the guy I got them off said, at least on anything dry, not sure how they'll be in the wet compared to the HR2 or On One offerings though. Oh and sidewalls are freakin tough as nails, just like I like em - popped them off some serious coral this past weekend,so much so the guy in front heard and said that has to be a sidewall gone, but not even a mark. TLR of course.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    75
    I've been running the 2.35 Ikon in the rear with an HR2 in the front and it's been a great combo. The grip braking and on loose over hard is better than I expected. I was planning on buying an Ardent but the shop had the Ikon and in person the knobs were taller than I expected based on pics on the web so I went for it. The only time the Ikon has let me down is in true mud where the whole tire was sinking into the ground, but on firm wet dirt it does fine. I'm a fan of burly front / fast rear and have an HR2 / Michelin Wild Race'r on another bike, and I like that tire too but not as dependable as the EXO Ikon.

    To the OP, shorter knobs are going to lose braking traction faster than taller knobs. I have about 100 miles on the Ikon and no signs of wear yet. Running a relatively poorer braking rear tire will get you in the habit of using your front brake more heavily than the rear.

  8. #8
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    Actually went in the bike room earlier today and my Phantom was side of the other bike with the 2.35" Ikon on it and in studying them I found them to actually be a quite similar design, with the Bonti being like a big brother version of the 2.35" Ikon, similar to the change from the 2.25" to the 2.35" is, maybe that's why I'm liking it so much. Will grab a pic tomorrow and post it up.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  9. #9
    All bike, all the time
    Reputation: BikeIntelligencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    1,074
    Same can be said of 2.35 RaRa and you save 150-200g. Probably sacrifice a bit in durability tho.
    Quote Originally Posted by OriginalDonk View Post
    I'm running this setup at the moment while the soils have a bit of moisture and tackiness. I'll probably throw something a bit meatier on when things get drier and blown out.

    I think it's important to note that the 2.35 Ikon is quite a bit different than the 2.2 Ikon. The sidenobs on the 2.35's are pretty substantial, not Rock Razor or Slaughter big, but bigger than I expected. The 2.2 has significantly smaller sidnobs and is more of a dedicated XC option.

    I've found that the 2.35 Ikon has some pretty significant volume, rolls quickly, and provide decent bite at lower pressures. I've been hammering on it for a while now and it's holding up pretty well.
    All bike, all the time

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,448
    I ran a DHF front with a 2.35 Larsen TT rear for two years - fantastic combo. Having a lesser rear tire will force you into not dragging the rear brake and relying more on the front which is what you need to do to get faster. A lot of pro slalom racers using DHF front and Larsen or Ikon rear so not a dumb idea by any stretch of the imagination!

    Have FUN!

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

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Swissam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,128
    I have a worn out HR oops, I meant to say I have a few "new Maxxis prototype" HR's where the center knobs have been "trimmed" to make for a faster rolling tire that still has a bit of braking bite and still corners great. I don't know if Maxxis will release this tire. luckily I have one or two.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    I like the Ardent Race as a rear tire. It gives up a little bit of speed to the Ikon and has quite similar shoulder knobs as the Ikon 2.35, which dwarf the smaller Ikons. But it has better traction in my experience.

    Size is an issue, though. The Ardent Race only comes in 2.2" right now, and the Ikon 2.35 is definitely more volume and wider.

  13. #13
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by BikeIntelligencer View Post
    Same can be said of 2.35 RaRa and you save 150-200g. Probably sacrifice a bit in durability tho.
    Try it. The Ikon 2.35 has been one of my favorite rears, and for exactly ^ I've never put a Ra-Ra out back.
    So far mine's gone over 2000 miles on mixed surfaces, and is barely worn.
    Until yesterday's ride in tacky conditions on a Saguaro did I realize how much more float/speed the Ikon gives.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,982
    My friend ran a Goma front with a Ikon rear and loved it.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb

  15. #15
    OriginalDonk
    Reputation: OriginalDonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    454
    Maxxis releases two faster rolling rear tire options, the Tomahawk and the Minion Semi Slick (SS).

    I'll hammer on my Ikon 'till it's dead but will probably look toward these two options when they actually are available.

    Maxxis' New Rubber - Taipei Show 2015 - Pinkbike

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: justwan naride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    626
    Resurrecting this tread as I'm too interested in the DHF/Ikon combo. Anyone has experience with the 2.2 EXO TR Ikon? Is it close to claimed size? How does it compare to the 2.3 EXO DHF sizewise? The DHF measures around 2.2 on my rims, so better than the old 2.35 (2.1 actual) but still not up to what they claim.

    I'm on a hardtail so I appreciate some volume at the back. Looking at the 2.2 as I doubt the 2.35 will clear my chainstays. Plus it will be an odd combo if the 2.35 Ikon is bigger than the 2.3 DHF.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,627
    Quote Originally Posted by justwan naride View Post
    Resurrecting this tread as I'm too interested in the DHF/Ikon combo. Anyone has experience with the 2.2 EXO TR Ikon? Is it close to claimed size? How does it compare to the 2.3 EXO DHF sizewise? The DHF measures around 2.2 on my rims, so better than the old 2.35 (2.1 actual) but still not up to what they claim.

    I'm on a hardtail so I appreciate some volume at the back. Looking at the 2.2 as I doubt the 2.35 will clear my chainstays. Plus it will be an odd combo if the 2.35 Ikon is bigger than the 2.3 DHF.
    I abandoned the Ikon idea... Specialized Slaughter GRID for me and will probably switch to the Minion SS Exo when it comes out (next month according to the rep I talked to at Sea Otter). The Specialized "Control" sidewalls are too lightweight but the "GRID" is too heavy. Maxxis Exo falls nicely between them.

  18. #18
    LCW
    LCW is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,334
    I've run (F/R) - DHF (2.5 UST SuperTacky)/HR2 2.3 EXO DC TR with great results. Recently I picked up an extra set of wheels and some extra rubber, and will be running the following 2 combos depending on conditions:

    - DHF 2.5 UST SuperTacky / DHR II 2.3 EXO DC TR (this will be my dry/hardpack and mainly gravity setup)
    - HR2 2.3 EXO 3C TR / HR2 2.3 EXO DC TR (this will be the wet and more trail oriented setup).

    Santa Cruz Hightower LT


  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ACLakey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    541
    Quote Originally Posted by OriginalDonk View Post
    Maxxis releases two faster rolling rear tire options, the Tomahawk and the Minion Semi Slick (SS).

    I'll hammer on my Ikon 'till it's dead but will probably look toward these two options when they actually are available.

    Maxxis' New Rubber - Taipei Show 2015 - Pinkbike
    I ran a Minion DHF 2.5 and Ikon 2.35 combination last summer and will be going a similar route again(sold the Ikon to a buddy) I am holding off on purchasing a new one until the new Maxxis offerings come out. Right now I have the DHF and Ardent 2.4 combination and it isn't bad either.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,627
    Quote Originally Posted by LCW View Post
    I've run (F/R) - DHF (2.5 UST SuperTacky)/HR2 2.3 EXO DC TR with great results. Recently I picked up an extra set of wheels and some extra rubber, and will be running the following 2 combos depending on conditions:

    - DHF 2.5 UST SuperTacky / DHR II 2.3 EXO DC TR (this will be my dry/hardpack and mainly gravity setup)
    - HR2 2.3 EXO 3C TR / HR2 2.3 EXO DC TR (this will be the wet and more trail oriented setup).
    It's obviously working for you but I hated the HR2. I tried it as HR2/Ardent, HR2/HR2, and DHF/HR2.

    On the back it was probably the best braking tire I've ever used but god it was slow. On the front I felt like you had to be riding REALLY aggressively or it felt pretty vague. The only time I've EVER crashed due to washing out is with an HR2 up front.

    The DHR2 doesn't really give much up as far as braking but it rolls faster. You've tried both so obviously my results are different, just a funny observation

  21. #21
    LCW
    LCW is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,334
    Yeah strange - I find the HR2's to roll quite well. I'm running a 3C in front but dual compound in back. Haven't noticed sketchiness in cornering. Feel quite predictable. This was on rocky hardback.

    Santa Cruz Hightower LT


  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mfa81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,353
    bumping this thread... anyone using DHF / SS combo these days? thinking to start running DHF 2.5 / SS 2.3 on my sb66. have been running conti mountain kings 2.4 the last 2 seasons

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,982
    I run a DHR2 front and SS rear on my Rune. Great combo, planning on running it till the SS falls apart.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb

  24. #24
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    If you've got good trail conditions (i.e. packed and getting regular rain), then yeah the SS works better than you would think, but if your trails are super dry and blown out, loose over hardpacked (down here right now), then climbing isn't so bad, but there's pretty much no braking traction going down.

    Quote Originally Posted by mfa81 View Post
    bumping this thread... anyone using DHF / SS combo these days? thinking to start running DHF 2.5 / SS 2.3 on my sb66. have been running conti mountain kings 2.4 the last 2 seasons
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,627
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If you've got good trail conditions (i.e. packed and getting regular rain), then yeah the SS works better than you would think, but if your trails are super dry and blown out, loose over hardpacked (down here right now), then climbing isn't so bad, but there's pretty much no braking traction going down.
    What about an Ikon in hard and super dry?

    Might try dhr2/ikon next. Dhr2 front and rear is nice but I can't help think I might be better off with something lighter duty in the rear during the dry months.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mfa81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,353
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    but if your trails are super dry and blown out, loose over hardpacked (down here right now), then climbing isn't so bad, but there's pretty much no braking traction going down.
    bummer! pretty much all I have on most trails here in Idaho, I can find some trails not so dey, but really I'm mostly riding on loose over hardpacked!

    pretty set on dhf 2.5 up front, though and guessed the minion ss would be a good combo! :-(

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: F29Lefty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    If you don't have very loose surfaces you need to be hard braking on, then yes, god combo, if you've got loose surfaces, not so much. Compared to the Ardent, the 2.35" Ikon has a shit load more grip and better braking and will even perform fairly decently if it gets wet, the Ardent for me, in both sizes was never really fantastic, even in the rear except on super tacky dirt.

    XR3 is hard to beat. Fast rolling great traction. Good cornering knobs. Super tuff sidewalls. And 705 grams a tire. What's not to like? ... But yes not a mud tire. But not supposed to be.

    I have just put on a set of Bonti XR3 2.3" on my Phantom after running a 2.35" Ikon on the rear and 2.4" Chunky Monkey on the front and they are providing some good results, lot more grip than the guy I got them off said, at least on anything dry, not sure how they'll be in the wet compared to the HR2 or On One offerings though. Oh and sidewalls are freakin tough as nails, just like I like em - popped them off some serious coral this past weekend,so much so the guy in front heard and said that has to be a sidewall gone, but not even a mark. TLR of course.
    What's not to like. Fast rolling. Great traction. Tuff as nails. 705 grams. Yes I'll take two.
    -No Shortcuts

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3
    The post(s)above extremely helpful, I recently installed new DHR and DHF 2.3 29er tires on my trigger 29( I ride cross country 80%, DH 20%) and noticed a significant increase in rolling resistance, I use to run an Ikon 2.35 front and rear.

    The minions hook up like no other, I know i need to give a little to gain a little (traction), however it felt like the brakes were on compared to my Ikons.

    I just removed the DHR from the rear and replaced it with the Ikon 2.35 in hopes of curing the vast increase i felt in rolling resistance, I left the minion DHF up front.......I will keep you posted on my results

    Thanks for all of your input!

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    there are now several tires in between which didn't exist when this thread was originally created.

    the Forekaster, Tomahawk, and Aggressor are all new. and there's now a 29x2.35 Ardent Race.

    so, really, you didn't have to jump from a DHR2 all the way back to Ikon.

  30. #30
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    Absolutely agree 100%, loving my Forekaster 2.35", pairs up perfectly with the DHF 2.3" for a fast rolling combo that still offers some great grip/traction. Wonder what the 2.35" Ardent race would be like, if it would offer better grip than it's predecessor, the regular Ardent?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    there are now several tires in between which didn't exist when this thread was originally created.
    the Forekaster, Tomahawk, and Aggressor are all new. and there's now a 29x2.35 Ardent Race, so, really, you didn't have to jump from a DHR2 all the way back to Ikon.
    Last edited by LyNx; 11-29-2016 at 03:22 PM.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  31. #31
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,727
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Wonder what the 2.35" Ardent race would be like, if it would offer better grip than it's predecessor, the regular Ardent?
    For me, no.
    The Ardent Race is a smaller knobbed, race version of an Ardent.
    Less grip, faster rolling.

    Better grip than an Ikon 2.35 and better knob spacing for standing climbing.

    I like it on the rear with a 2.4 Ardent on the front.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    806
    I want an Ardent Race 2.35.. like the change to the side knobs... and the lower center tread is fine by me..

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the input, I wouldnt mind trying the ardent race 2.35 or 2.4 however cant find a place that sells them online?

    I really like how fast the Ikons roll, however as stated in a previous post-they provide horrible traction up the hills, downhill isnt so bad as long as there is no moisture in the soil.......

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    Quote Originally Posted by LAB425 View Post
    Thanks for the input, I wouldnt mind trying the ardent race 2.35 or 2.4 however cant find a place that sells them online?

    I really like how fast the Ikons roll, however as stated in a previous post-they provide horrible traction up the hills, downhill isnt so bad as long as there is no moisture in the soil.......
    I have ridden the Ardent Race 2.2 extensively, but not the 2.35 yet. It has similar climbing traction to the Ikon, so if you don't like the Ikon 2.35, the AR is not your answer. As they wear, the XC type Maxxis 3C tires expose their hard base compound, which prolongs life but they lose grip more easily. Wet or rocky conditions it is really noticeable compared to a fresh tire.

    I like the Tomahawk, having spent a lot of time on it front and rear, but I'm not on 29" so I don't know about the Forekaster. Based on what I've read here and elsewhere, and just looking at the tread, I would go with the Forekaster since you are on a 29er and have that option. You could also do Aggressor which you should expect would be more grip still.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for the input Colin,I will be ordering the tomahawk 29x2.35 to give it a try. I will keep you posted on how it works out


    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    I have ridden the Ardent Race 2.2 extensively, but not the 2.35 yet. It has similar climbing traction to the Ikon, so if you don't like the Ikon 2.35, the AR is not your answer. As they wear, the XC type Maxxis 3C tires expose their hard base compound, which prolongs life but they lose grip more easily. Wet or rocky conditions it is really noticeable compared to a fresh tire.

    I like the Tomahawk, having spent a lot of time on it front and rear, but I'm not on 29" so I don't know about the Forekaster. Based on what I've read here and elsewhere, and just looking at the tread, I would go with the Forekaster since you are on a 29er and have that option. You could also do Aggressor which you should expect would be more grip still.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,982
    I REALLY liked the Tomahawk in back with a DHR2 up front. I ran the Tomahawk till it was utterly destroyed.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    The Tomahawk is fast and has great climbing and braking traction on hardpack and rocks. The cornering is awesome until you really wear down those huge shoulder knobs.

    It is not so awesome on kitty litter, loose cover or loam. Forget about mud. It does wear fast because of the tread and the low center knob height. Actually, this review wasn't written by me, but it closely matches my experience with it. https://freehubmag.com/articles/maxx...wk-tire-review

  38. #38
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    You'd be much better off ordering the 2.35" Forekaster over the Tomahawk, if you get 350 good miles out of one I'd be surprised and if it gets sloppy, forget it, Forekaster will handle dry to wet, best new tyre from Maxxis in years, similar to when they released the new HR2 design.

    Quote Originally Posted by LAB425 View Post
    Thanks for the input Colin,I will be ordering the tomahawk 29x2.35 to give it a try. I will keep you posted on how it works out
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: GTscoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,334
    Something else to add here would be the Maxxis Griffin. A lot of EWS racers have been running the 27.5x2.4 Griffin DH-casing out back for the last few years and it's out now in lighter EXO and DoubleDown constuctions, 26, 27.5, 29x2.3". It's got taller knobs compared to the Ikon, Tomahawk, and Ardent Race but is heavily ramped for speed.
    Griffin | Maxxis Tires USA

    That being said, the DHF/Ikon setup is what I run most of the time for Southeastern US riding. It's almost a year-round setup, just gets sketchy leaf surfing this time of year.

    Disclaimer - I work for Maxxis, opinions are mine and do not represent the brand.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    ^^ actually learned something, I didn't know they had released a 26" Griffin.

    yep - I'm one of 'those guys'.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Streetdoctor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,910
    Big fan of the slaughter on the rear.
    Instagram

    Denver, CO

  42. #42
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,161
    Curious, what are your thoughts comparing the Griffin to the Forekaster? I looked at the Griffin a bit back as an alternate rear tyre for trails down here to recommend to the local guys, however just didn't seem like it would really be much different to the DHR2 DC. Right now so stoked on the Forekaster, seems about the best no compromise rear tyre out from Maxxis, dry packed, dry loose, wet, just waiting for the DD casing Actually should soon be getting another to try F&R to see how it compares to the DHF f/DHR2 r combo.

    Quote Originally Posted by GTscoob View Post
    Something else to add here would be the Maxxis Griffin. A lot of EWS racers have been running the 27.5x2.4 Griffin DH-casing out back for the last few years and it's out now in lighter EXO and DoubleDown constuctions, 26, 27.5, 29x2.3". It's got taller knobs compared to the Ikon, Tomahawk, and Ardent Race but is heavily ramped for speed.
    Griffin | Maxxis Tires USA

    That being said, the DHF/Ikon setup is what I run most of the time for Southeastern US riding. It's almost a year-round setup, just gets sketchy leaf surfing this time of year.

    Disclaimer - I work for Maxxis, opinions are mine and do not represent the brand.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    193
    Try the Maxxis Aggressor. It rolls pretty fast. Ikon is slightly faster, but the Aggressor corners/brakes better. The traction is amazing

    Maxxis Aggressor is a great rear tire.

    I Run DHF Front/Aggressor Rear on all my bikes.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBforlife View Post
    Try the Maxxis Aggressor. It rolls pretty fast. Ikon is slightly faster, but the Aggressor corners/brakes better. The traction is amazing

    Maxxis Aggressor is a great rear tire.

    I Run DHF Front/Aggressor Rear on all my bikes.
    slightly?

    the aggressor is relatively fast for an... ah, aggressive tire. the Ikon is a XC race tire.

    on the rear wheel, the difference in rolling speed is very noticeable. the aggressor does roll faster than a DHF, sure.

  45. #45
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,727
    The Agressor also weighs about 14kg more than an Ikon too.

  46. #46
    on my 3rd wind...
    Reputation: SingleTrackHound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,824
    Maxxis Forekaster rear has been a real suprise for me. I have used aggressor as well and it's my fav rear tire but I was looking for something lighter with good traction and rolling.
    sth

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MSU Alum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,160
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBforlife View Post
    Try the Maxxis Aggressor. It rolls pretty fast. Ikon is slightly faster, but the Aggressor corners/brakes better. The traction is amazing

    Maxxis Aggressor is a great rear tire.

    I Run DHF Front/Aggressor Rear on all my bikes.
    I wonder if, in the intervening 3 years since the OP posted, he has settled on something....

  48. #48
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,727
    In 3 years?
    Probably about 4 different "favorite" combo's since then.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    I wonder if, in the intervening 3 years since the OP posted, he has settled on something....

  49. #49
    tire to rim ratio tester
    Reputation: richj8990's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Posts
    1,259
    Quote Originally Posted by MSU Alum View Post
    I wonder if, in the intervening 3 years since the OP posted, he has settled on something....

    lol I have to admit a rear tire is ironically more tricky than front, it's more subtle. So none of you guys like Kenda Nevegal 2.35's? They seem to climb pretty good.
    Pierced from below, souls of my treacherous past

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,735
    Quote Originally Posted by richj8990 View Post
    lol I have to admit a rear tire is ironically more tricky than front, it's more subtle. So none of you guys like Kenda Nevegal 2.35's? They seem to climb pretty good.
    Nevegal is so 4 years ago...

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,448
    Quote Originally Posted by fsrxc View Post
    Nevegal is so 4 years ago...
    No... more like 15 years ago.

    Have FUN!

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

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,509
    Quote Originally Posted by Gman086 View Post
    No... more like 15 years ago.
    This is closer to the truth.

    The Nevegal rolls very slowly. It's a dog!

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    193
    A good rear tire depends on what terrain you ride and riding style. Here in Colorado 90 percent of the riding I do is on Granite and Decomposed Granite. That stuff butchers soft skinned tires. I even tried Schwalbes Nobbie Nick offering with the new Addix SpeedGrip and they only lasted me 2 months before the nobs started to get torn off.

    Maxxis Exo casing is hard to beat.

    On my bikes; Yeti SB6 and Foes Alpine Plus ran as a 29er, I'm running I30 width rims, 2.5 WT DHF front, 2.3 Aggressor Rear. This tire combination both 27.5 and 29er works amazing out here in Colorado.

    I must admit most riders I run across out here are running DHF/DHR setups.

    Pick you poison,

  54. #54
    Uly
    Uly is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    346
    I ran 29" DHRII 2.4WT up front with an Ikon 2.35 rear for a short while. This was a pretty good rolling combo where I could feel that the DHRII was the limiting factor for speed. My local terrain has a lot of sections that are rocky where the rocks are 1 inch sharp edged gravel in some places and fist sized sharp edged gravel in others with no go around. Where it was loose over hard pack/hard pack on the flats the Ikon did great. Loose it did ok. Steep climbs on loose over hard pack it slipped here and there. Over the rocky areas it got slashes all over the side walls and by the end of the ride was weeping all over. Switched to an Aggressor 2.3 in the rear where it faired very well over the rocky sections, but really slowed me down on the loose over hard pack/hard pack. I could really feel the dragging of the Aggressor and the extra effort it took to spin it up versus the Ikon. Tried different pressures for minimal improvement. The fact that my rims are 30 mm inner and squaring up the Aggressor could have been the problem so YMMV. On hour long rides this wasn't an issue. On 2 to 3 hour rides or longer, it was real work.

    Edit: I have to add that Im 210 lbs geared up so any long ride can be work.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Uly View Post
    I ran 29" DHRII 2.4WT up front with an Ikon 2.35 rear for a short while. This was a pretty good rolling combo where I could feel that the DHRII was the limiting factor for speed. My local terrain has a lot of sections that are rocky where the rocks are 1 inch sharp edged gravel in some places and fist sized sharp edged gravel in others with no go around. Where it was loose over hard pack/hard pack on the flats the Ikon did great. Loose it did ok. Steep climbs on loose over hard pack it slipped here and there. Over the rocky areas it got slashes all over the side walls and by the end of the ride was weeping all over. Switched to an Aggressor 2.3 in the rear where it faired very well over the rocky sections, but really slowed me down on the loose over hard pack/hard pack. I could really feel the dragging of the Aggressor and the extra effort it took to spin it up versus the Ikon. Tried different pressures for minimal improvement. The fact that my rims are 30 mm inner and squaring up the Aggressor could have been the problem so YMMV. On hour long rides this wasn't an issue. On 2 to 3 hour rides or longer, it was real work.

    Edit: I have to add that Im 210 lbs geared up so any long ride can be work.
    I too am a Clydesdale. 230lbs suited up.

    I went out to Fruita Colorado 2 weeks ago to ride the 18 Road trails. The area had sustained heavy rain and wind the day before I arrivedConditions were hard packed/ buffed. Climbing up Prime Cut and down Zippity Do Da, for example, I felt rolling resistance was pretty minimal compared to my local trails, to include the Buffalo Creek trail system near Deckers CO.

    Maxxis started making a 2.5 WT Aggressor. I'm thinking about trying it out on my Foes Alpine. 2.5 will not fit in the Yeti SB6. Yes the larger tire adds weight, but a more rounded tire may still roll faster.

    Cheers,

  56. #56
    Uly
    Uly is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    346
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBforlife View Post
    I too am a Clydesdale. 230lbs suited up.

    I went out to Fruita Colorado 2 weeks ago to ride the 18 Road trails. The area had sustained heavy rain and wind the day before I arrivedConditions were hard packed/ buffed. Climbing up Prime Cut and down Zippity Do Da, for example, I felt rolling resistance was pretty minimal compared to my local trails, to include the Buffalo Creek trail system near Deckers CO.

    Maxxis started making a 2.5 WT Aggressor. I'm thinking about trying it out on my Foes Alpine. 2.5 will not fit in the Yeti SB6. Yes the larger tire adds weight, but a more rounded tire may still roll faster.

    Cheers,
    I was thinking along the same line, but I have a SC Hightower and people who have mounted a 2.5WT Aggressor on their hightowers posted pics of the clearance and it was too close for comfort for me.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by Uly View Post
    I was thinking along the same line, but I have a SC Hightower and people who have mounted a 2.5WT Aggressor on their hightowers posted pics of the clearance and it was too close for comfort for me.
    It really does come down to clearance. My Foes Alpine can fit 2.6 Nobbie Nics and the bike still has over 10mm of clearance.

    Industry says 6mm clearance minimum. If you have 6mm of clearance you are good to go.

    Cheers

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MTBforlife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBforlife View Post
    It really does come down to clearance. My Foes Alpine can fit 2.6 Nobbie Nics and the bike still has over 10mm of clearance.

    Industry says 6mm clearance minimum. If you have 6mm of clearance you are good to go.

    Cheers
    I'm running 24 psi on my 29er

Similar Threads

  1. Minion DHR2 in the Front and DHF in the rear.....?
    By turbodog in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 03-18-2015, 05:29 AM
  2. Rear tire to go with Minion DHF front
    By dlxah in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 11-21-2014, 06:15 PM
  3. minion dhf 2.3 / weirwolf rear combo opinions?
    By akiracornell in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-13-2012, 11:06 AM
  4. Ignitor front, Ikon rear - 29er
    By manamana in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-03-2012, 06:51 PM
  5. Maxxis Ikon Front and Rear for High Cascades 100?
    By Drive01 in forum Endurance XC Racing
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-27-2011, 02:28 PM

Members who have read this thread: 225

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.