Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Tire Geek O_o
    Reputation: cesalec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,012

    Caution;  Merge;  Workers Ahead! Schwalbe Big Betty vs Kenda Nevegal - forum, comparison, personal reviews:

    As some of you might know by now, I am a tire junkie , and a schwalbe fan, although by no means closed to other options.


    BUT the point of these thread is to compare and receive opinions of users that might have hand on experience in one or both the Big Betty and the Kenda Nevegal, and how do they compare

    This is an as much as possible specific thread about these 2 tires. Intended use AM/FR size 2.4"/2.35".

    Here you can find more info and opinions on the following:

    Schwalbe Big Betty vs Schwalbe Hans Dampf (both stellar tires.):

    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=718537


    Schwalbe Big Betty vs Conti Rubber Queen/Trail King
    http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.ph...39579#poststop

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,846
    I rode Kendas for 3 years, my experience with them left a lot of knobs on my local trails - the 2.35 Nev DTC and Stick-E would shed knobs. Sure, Kenda would warranty them, but never remedied the situation by making a tire that would hold up. Ran a 2.5 Nev up front for a while, but it was sloooow rolling, although it kept its knobs.

    I moved over to the BB 2.4 up front and have been running it ever since. I have tried various rear tires, but never put the BB out back.

    IME, the BB up front is a bit more predictable, rolls faster and grips better in loose-over dry conditions than the Nevegal. It is also a higher volume and the FR/snakeskin casing is a great option that the Nev doesn't offer without going full on dual-ply.

  3. #3
    altazo
    Guest
    Not sure about Nevegals, but I know Big Bettys are no good at all. They're poor in hardpack, loose, loose over hardpack, cornering stability, and braking. Oh, and the tread is backwards and they're heavy. The Big Betty does excel at getting threads started about it on MTBR, however.

  4. #4
    eBiker
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,055
    Quote Originally Posted by altazo View Post
    The Big Betty does excel at getting threads started about it on MTBR, however.


    My experience with the BB was the opposite. Great hook up for me. But it was a stiff casing that needed to be run at stupid low pressures for it to track the trail well.

    P

  5. #5
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,843
    Rolling Big betty > never roll
    Traction new big betty > nevegal
    traction after about 20% wear big betty < nevegal
    Longevity big betty < nevegal ( based off the big betty loosing A LOT of traction as it wears)
    Dry traction big betty > nevegal ( only when new mind you)
    Wet traction big betty < nevegal
    Sandstone/ slickrock traction and wear big betty < nevegal
    Side wall protection big betty > nevegal (by a VERY large margin)
    all around traction and performance for the average joe big betty < nevegal

    To list a few ups and downs of the tires.
    Big betty a good tire for the first month then traction drops off quickly not sure why but just does. It packs up in the wet and becomes useless. Rolls and brakes pretty well I find it much better in the rear then on the front. Smaller knobs rip off and you can see the casing. The compound freezes in the winter and becomes hard as a rock. Does have a good sidewall and does not get a bunch a pinch flats. Needs to be run at a low pressure to get traction. has a "no zone" If you run front and rear you will notice on side hills or some lean angles that you loose confidence that you have great traction. Able to use stans sealant

    Nevegal. Great All around tire for the average tire guy. Grips in wet, dry, cold you know it will work in almost everything. Good at almost all but master at nothing. Rolls like a boat anchor on the rear but has great climbing traction depends on what is important to you. Front tire is very trust worthy. Tends to be a drifty tire in loose over hard ( this can be fixed by cutting every other transition knob off) Tends to pinch flat on hardtails and in the smaller sizes for some i never had a issue. Has great traction all the way up to the point where you loose traction then it is gone. Of deeper loose stuff it tends to knife edge and give a over steer feeling when you think a tire would push and under steer. Kenda says no sealant (there working on changing that from what i hear) But i have run it and it did just fine.

    Over all I think they are two different tires for two different things. Big betty is a good dry tire that is more for the bigger all mount and freeride and some downhill (rear only) tire. While the nevegal is the jack of all trades average joe tire. Made in many sizes where you can run a 2.1 on your xc bike a 2.35 on your trail bike and a 2.5 on your DH bike so you can always know what a tire is going to do all the way acrossed the board. If i had to choose one tire to put on my bike for everything it would be the nevegal You can get two for the price of on big betty, Its works on almost everything, Can find them in any bike shop in the nation so if im on a trip and i mess one up i know i can go in and get the same tire without any guess work. Small things like that tend to lead me to a tire more then the great traction for the first month of a 70 buck tire.

  6. #6
    Propr
    Reputation: Lowball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.P View Post


    My experience with the BB was the opposite. Great hook up for me. But it was a stiff casing that needed to be run at stupid low pressures for it to track the trail well.

    P
    Same for me...I ran them at 32/35 (f/r) psi to start and then went down about 2psi to really get them working better (for me @ +200lbs). Ran the GG compound with tubes and I loved them more than the Nevs that originally came with my bike. To me the Nevs just roll so completely slow that it felt like I was stuck to the ground...but not in a good way.

    Ran them on all local Nor-Cal trails until I wore them out. Still have a brand new set ORC/GGC that I never used due to switching to a tubless setup.
    12 Bandit Two9
    10 TransAM 1x9
    08 Demo 7 II
    S-Works M2
    Tarmac SL3

  7. #7
    Tire Geek O_o
    Reputation: cesalec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,012
    Quote Originally Posted by altazo View Post
    Not sure about Nevegals, but I know Big Bettys are no good at all. They're poor in hardpack, loose, loose over hardpack, cornering stability, and braking. Oh, and the tread is backwards and they're heavy. The Big Betty does excel at getting threads started about it on MTBR, however.
    Altazo, very interesting opinion, not many people have expressed discontent with the Big Bettys. Is good to hear the goods and bads.

  8. #8
    Tire Geek O_o
    Reputation: cesalec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,012
    Very interesting way of describing things hitechredneck.

    I have my share of experiences with both tires.

    Nevegal:
    - agreed they feel like anchors in the rolling department. very slow, is like pulling dead weight up a climb.
    - Excellent grip in almost anything , they felt very good on the grip department and they also pick speed quite fast on downhills. I havent yet found a better gripping tire.
    - Except, that they felt a little scary on off camber roots and rocks and wet conditions.
    - One thing I really hated was that every single ride ended up in multiple pinch flats , this was indeed very annoying.

    To be fair I havent ridden the double ply version, mostly because if the single felt like a boat anchor stuck on a rock, I thought the double ply would be even worse.

    Big Betty:
    My experiences with Schwalbe tires have been somewhat mixed, some of them can be really scary when wet or rooty trails lay ahead. But on the big betty in specific:
    - They are heavy, but once you get rolling I havent really felt the weight, they roll pretty well.
    - They hook up very well in almost all conditions, and feel very predictable, though they dont hold the line as well as Minion. And they spit a lot. Good grip in roots, rocks, wet conditions. But they do pack a lot and become useless in loamy trails.
    - in the rear they are so far the best tires I have used, they just feel fast and offer great traction, sadly there is only one size, and the 2.4 barely fits in the rear of my bike.
    - I have never had a pinch flat with any schwalbe. Though they are very pressure sensitive, to much and they feel like cr+ap, to low and they bounce a lot, find your sweetspot (which takes several rides) and they feel great.

    The GGC did have the problem of hardening in cold weather. I am not sure about the new compounds, I still have one GGC and one TC EVO (the Trailstar is similar to the TC Evo, but apparently much better, at least it feels softer).

    If the Nevegals didnt torture the legs while climbing, and above all didnt pinch flatted as much as they did, I could say in my opinion they would be in the top 3 front tires.

    kenda needs to work a lot on the compounds and the protection. All in all both are both tires.

    Since running the Betty Ive been very happy, though for wet days a Muddy Mary goes on my front.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,846
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    Longevity big betty < nevegal You can get two for the price of on big betty, Its works on almost everything, Can find them in any bike shop in the nation so if im on a trip and i mess one up i know i can go in and get the same tire without any guess work. Small things like that tend to lead me to a tire more then the great traction for the first month of a 70 buck tire.
    I have had just the opposite experience, like I said running them up front. Running the TC BB I have had 3 of them last a year each, each time taken off and put on the PT bike up front because there is nothing functionally wrong with it (ie; no shed knobs). FWIW, now on a trailstar BB and it is even better for grip.

    I'd go thru 3/4 Nevegals up front in the same timeframe, which makes it really easy to justify the cost (to me).

    I have heard of some complain about how stiff the casing is on the BB and how some didn't like the way it seemed to rebound - but then again, I am >200 and that wasn't a problem for me!

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 93
    Last Post: 05-20-2013, 09:49 AM
  2. Replies: 81
    Last Post: 08-03-2011, 11:01 AM
  3. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-30-2011, 05:42 AM
  4. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-23-2011, 03:15 AM
  5. Kenda Nevegal vs Tioga DH Size Comparison
    By le Coq Rouge in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-16-2006, 12:36 PM

Posting Permissions

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