Tire Geek O_o
Reviews on the new Conti Mountain King II ??
Has anyone experience on this tire?
what about the traction,
and what about the terrains this tire is suited for?
any useful comparision with similar tires from Schwalbe, WTB, Maxxis?
Like the X king 2.4 they are a 2.3 width and 2.4 height and volume.They are a good front trail tire. Not in the AM league. I haven't got a No Ni 2.4 any more but I think they would be similar in performance. They have supprisingly good grip for their width but not in the same league as a Hans Dampf. For that matter a 2.4 Ro Ro either. They'd be more stable in hard pack than the HD and Ro Ro. I didn't think the open tread hooked up that well with tree roots even with the black chilli. I haven't tried it on the rear. I suspect they would have good traction and be a good rear tire coupled with a HD up front. The tall profile, high volume and narrow width lends to good rollover and speed on rough terrain. I think the tread edge profile would hook in early and well on the rear.
I think they wear well so they are for anyone who wants a relatively fast, grippy trail tire for firm to med conditions with lots of volume. Could be a sleeper as a good AM rear tire. A lighter and faster alternative to the Trail King 2.2[ similar size]. I must try it out one day.
They just don't have the width to push hard up front in loose conditions.
I wouldn't touch the 2.2 in 26" size. Small width and volume. Would have been some use if they were also a tall tire like the Trail king /Race King 2.2. Typical conti schizophrenic tire sizing.
Last edited by gvs_nz; 09-01-2012 at 01:15 PM.
Oh dude that looks cruel. I've just bought a pair of Mountain king II RaceSports. I really hope they won't look like that after a while! What kind of conditions do you ride in?
Originally Posted by Micka
I have ridden about 50 km on them and so far no torn knobs, ect... Infact a part from the dust they look pretty much new.
As far as the handling goes they're good on hardpack and loose over hardpack. They're not a race tyre but the rolling resistance is acceptable (for me) On tarmac they get easily into skid so brake with... caution? Haven't had the opportunity to try them out in wet conditions, but in dry they hook up to pretty much anything a part from fine gravel and deep sand.
XC/AM style, generally hardpack with a topping of small loose stuff and rocky sections for good measure.
Originally Posted by Millfox
Conti is apparently warrantying this type of damage, but it wasn't worth my $ shipping them back half-way across the world to where they came from. That's what I get for buying online.
I recall seeing a comment that the updated ones are packaged as TLR or tubeless ready and this problem with the knobs should be fixed. Millfox, lucky for you it sounds like yours are holding up well.
Hey Micka, if you get the Nobby Nics, get the Pacestar, not the Trailstar rubber, which is softer for better grip in mud but knobs rip out if ridden hard on rocks. I have the 2.35/29er and really impressed with it.
Riding in the rain today in a rain forest with lots of slippery roots and the grip was sweet. I run large volume and tubeless with very low pressures tho, 18psi front and 19 rear, for better grip in the wet, weigh 158 with camelback. You might run different pressure and not sure how it would do then. Highly recommend the Snakeskin sidewall protection too.
Mine did same thing turned white and a few knobs ripped off.Tire won't last in rocks very long either.Decent hardpack tire but 4 the price can def do a lot better.
Tire Geek O_o
Problem is my bikes can only take up to 2.3" in the rear (Giant Reigns), but the Hans Dampf although it is a great tire is too expensive.. that's why I am considering other options with good traction, relatively fast rolling, and not the dead weight feeling of a Nevegal for example.
My favorite rolling tire is the Big Betty, but at 2.4" they barely fit and that creates problems with small rocks getting trapp and badly scratching the rear triangle
cesalec: What kind of terrain you want to ride?
If I may I can suggest 2012 Michelin Wild Grip'rs. I've got a pair of 2.25F/2.1R and they're holding up quite nicely. They don't climb as well as the Mountain Kings but they're also a little bit faster. Also they're sold Tubeless Ready. I dont use them for general riding, only when I go to longer trail by car. I'm afraid I'd chew em up on tarmac in a very short time.
Tire Geek O_o
I ride a mixed terrain in a semidesertic area...
point baby goats + sandy + hardpack + loosed over hardpack + some slick rocks + thorns ( I havent been to Mohab but I would pretty much compare it to it from the pictures I´ve seen except the rocks here dont really eat your tires).
have tried the Racing Ralph and the Race King, fast rollers no doubt but poor traction around here. The Hans Dampf seems to work great but expensive so since mine is a Trailstar I am running in as a front tire. Have used Minion DHR with mixed feelings about them. As said the Big Bettys work great but they present a severe fit issue... not sure the Nobby Nics would stand in these conditions and have the same problem as all Schwalbes... they are expensive like hell.
Was tempted on getting a couple of Hans Dampfs in their Performance compound, but my concern is: they have no snake skin, and I am not sure I can run them tubeless with sealant.
Also tempted on the WTB Bronsons.
Only BB's I've used for GGC compound and man they are super slow.
Originally Posted by cesalec
You'll find the MK2 much much faster but are not much lower in height than a BB.
The 2.4 x king is a very fast tire and similar size to the the 2.4 MK2. I quite often use it in the rear when I want a fast tire. Much better traction than the Ra Ra and RK but still sketchy in technical terrain.
I've used previous generation Michelins and the 2.25's were also a 2.3 width and 2.4 volume. Fast cushy but only any good in the dry. Latest generation may be better?
What about Ardent, Advantage Ground control amongst many others besides the Euro offerings.
Last edited by gvs_nz; 09-07-2012 at 06:16 PM.
Just measured a xking 2.4 and a HD on the same rim and they are identical height. From memory the MK is very slightly taller.
BB was wide and not amazingly tall.The No Ni 2.4 was taller and a Michelin wild rock'r 2.25 was 3mm higher again.
Just measured the MK2 2.4 and it's the same height as the HD and X king.