Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 101 to 150 of 336
  1. #101
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    hi again!

    there will be a new test in the next "bike", available at 12th august.
    i will edit more then.

  2. #102
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    good news everyone:

    many new tests will be edited!

    schwalbe rocket ron, the NEW fat albert front and rear, continental rubber queen 2.2 and 2.4, ritchey zmax premonition, speci purgatory, maxxis monorail, ritchey zmax intuition, wtb wolverine and maxxis ardent.

  3. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    i cant edit the first thread.

    cornering/ traction points are given compared to tires of the same class.
    here are the new tests:

    CC-Race:

    maxxis monorail exception 2.1
    RR: 26,3 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)
    100% cc

    ritchey zmax intuition 2.0 wcs
    RR: 38,2 watt
    flattening height: 45cm
    thorn:d
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    100% cc

    schwalbe rocket ron 2,25 (stats: 436g weight, available in 2.1" and 2.4" and 2.1"/2.25" tubeless)
    RR: 24,7 watt
    flattening height: 52,5cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction:5/6 (more= the better)
    85% cc, 15% am

    wtb wolverine 2.2
    RR: 25,9 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    95% cc, 5% am

    all mountain tires

    continental rubber queen 2.2"
    RR: 29,8 watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    85% am, 15% ed

    ritchey zmax premonition 2.25 wcs
    RR: 35,2 watt
    flattening height: 67,5cm
    thorn: f
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    100% am

    specialized purgatory 2.2 s-works 2bliss
    RR: 37,2 watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    85% am, 15% ed

    enduro tires

    continental rubber queen 2.4"
    RR: 42,7 watt
    flattening height: 75cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)
    100% ed

    maxxis ardent 2.4" 60a folding
    RR: 36,3 watt
    flattening height: 80cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    15% am, 85% ed

    schwalbe fat albert 2.4" front and rear
    RR: 29,9 watt
    flattening height: 83,75cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    45% am, 55% ed
    Last edited by henryhb; 08-12-2008 at 11:17 AM.

  4. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    569
    So which Racing Ralf is fastest?

    The Tubeless version has lower resistance, but is heavier by 130gr.

    I want to buy a set, but I am not sure which one to get, tubeless or not.

    Of course, I will run both of them tubeless with Stans juice.

  5. #105
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bholwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,247
    Henry, which Maxxis Ardent was tested? The 2.4 dual ply, wire bead 3C version, the 2.4 dual ply, wire bead 60a version, or the 2.4 folding bead single ply version? Each one will perform differently.

  6. #106
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by bholwell
    Henry, which Maxxis Ardent was tested? The 2.4 dual ply, wire bead 3C version, the 2.4 dual ply, wire bead 60a version, or the 2.4 folding bead single ply version? Each one will perform differently.
    ive edited the missing information.
    the 60a folding version has been tested.

  7. #107
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    henryhb, can you please state the casing and tread widths for both the Continental Rubber Queen 2.2 and 2.4, and the tester's impression judgement of each. Thanks.
    Last edited by Gee Up; 08-12-2008 at 12:23 PM.

  8. #108
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by Gee Up
    henryhb, can you please state the casing and tread widths for both the Continental Rubber Queen 2.2 and 2.4, and the tester's impression judgement of each. Thanks.
    2.2 rubber queen
    56,3mm/56,4mm wide, no rim mentioned.
    (translated by me, so sorry for the bad english)
    "the 2.2" RW is only slighty smaller than the 2.4" one. depending on the different rubber (other kind of black chili compound) it is remarkable faster. it is a good allround tire with reliable controll at not too muddy surfaces.a little bit heavier than the direct opposition."

    2.4" rubber queen (black chili too)
    57,8mm/58,6mm
    (translated by me, too)
    "the black chili compound enables great adhesion, especially on wet stones and roots, causes higher rolling resistance, too. super downhill performance but limited touring suitability."

  9. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,140
    Has this been added yet ?
    Great thread btw.
    http://www.bicicletta.co.za/Download...llustrated.pdf

  10. #110
    They call me Shoogs
    Reputation: TripleThreat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by ghawk
    Has this been added yet ?
    Great thread btw.
    http://www.bicicletta.co.za/Download...llustrated.pdf

    great read, thanks.

    Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy

  11. #111
    No pain no gain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    87
    Here is an additional link from a similiar German Test in 2004, with many of these tires still on the market: http://www.mckramppi.com/en/bike04re...asanalyysi.htm

  12. #112
    No pain no gain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    87
    Thanks for all your time on this thread - it's some of the best data on tires I have seen! Do you have anything on a Maxxis Advantage 2.25 or Specialized Eskar 2.3; these two tires were recently rated highly in the Mountan Bike Action September 2008 tire shoot out (why does MBA continue to rate the Nevegals so high, when they are the slowest tire on the trail for width and weight? After I chewed up 3 nev's on the rear of my Yeti 575, I put a Continental Gravity on and have never looked back... BETTER traction and far faster!).
    Cheers!

  13. #113
    she keep you buying rats
    Reputation: WeakMite's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    300
    This thread should be a sticky.... or maybe make a sticky thread with all test data members find (for hubs and tires and all wheel components).
    ;-)

  14. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,197
    How does the NN UST compare to the regular NN?
    don't sweat the petty things, and pet the sweaty things

  15. #115
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    271
    Intense system 2 bless c3 2.0? It looks like a nice fast tire

  16. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by rekibtm
    How does the NN UST compare to the regular NN?
    Heavier, slightly wider and less rolling resistance (2.25 UST Vs. 2.25).

  17. #117
    mountain biker
    Reputation: slyfink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    529
    I just replaced my rear Scwalbe Albert UST with a 2.35 Maxxis High Roller UST. Though I didn't notice the increased RR, I certainly appreciated the DRASTIC improvement in traction on the wet roots and rocks. I'm convinced I wouldn't have been able to ride at least 15%-20% of the trail had I been on my Alberts.

    Looking at the test, I'm also glad I went with the High Roller over the Nevegals too, I find they do better on wet and slick rocks and roots.

    I still have the Albert on the front, and I like it a lot there... I think Albert front and High Roller rear is a great combo for xc/am riding when the conditions are wet...
    continuous growth is the strategy of a cancer cell.

  18. #118
    They call me Shoogs
    Reputation: TripleThreat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    150
    A bump to a very informative thread

    Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy

  19. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Vespasianus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,450
    Quote Originally Posted by slyfink
    I just replaced my rear Scwalbe Albert UST with a 2.35 Maxxis High Roller UST. Though I didn't notice the increased RR, I certainly appreciated the DRASTIC improvement in traction on the wet roots and rocks. I'm convinced I wouldn't have been able to ride at least 15%-20% of the trail had I been on my Alberts.

    Looking at the test, I'm also glad I went with the High Roller over the Nevegals too, I find they do better on wet and slick rocks and roots.

    I still have the Albert on the front, and I like it a lot there... I think Albert front and High Roller rear is a great combo for xc/am riding when the conditions are wet...

    I switched from a Nevegal 2.35 (with Stans) front and a 2.35 Maxxis High Roller LUST rear tire to Continental Mountain King 2.4s (with Stans) and the difference is RR is amazing. The MK rolls so much faster it blows me away. The NEV/HR combo has much better grip, unbelievably good really, but the MK are good enough and for me, the RR makes up for it.

    But I do agree, when I tried to ride the same lines with the MK as I had with the HR, I ended up on my ass.

  20. #120
    ...
    Reputation: Porchsong's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    605

    Thanks man!

    Thanks man, great thread.

    2.4 Nobby Nics are my favorite tire ever, and I've got a tire "problem".

    Porch
    "If we were Vikings, Rocky Mountain aspen stands would be our Vahalla and its singletrack our bounty" - Mtn Flyer Mag #14

  21. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    edit: answering to the first post didnt work...

  22. #122
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,197
    make this sticky!
    don't sweat the petty things, and pet the sweaty things

  23. #123
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    it would be nice if a mod/admin could add post number 3 of page 5 to my first or second post on the first page so everybody can see all tests.
    how can i reach the mods/admins? reporting posts is only allowed for harresment.

  24. #124
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,799
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    it would be nice if a mod/admin could add post number 3 of page 5 to my first or second post on the first page so everybody can see all tests.
    how can i reach the mods/admins? reporting posts is only allowed for harresment.

    I could help out but I need the post number (top right corner of the post) since the number of posts displayed per page can be set different in the preferences


    you mean post #103???

  25. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    yes i mean post 103! can you edit it to the first page?

  26. #126
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,799
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    yes i mean post 103! can you edit it to the first page?


    I edited post #2 and added the text of post #103

  27. #127
    Tire Geek O_o
    Reputation: cesalec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by scarsellone
    Any Bontrager tires tested?
    They sok....

  28. #128
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    big thx!

  29. #129
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,799
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    big thx!

    no problem!

  30. #130
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    598
    sticky please!

  31. #131
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    thx alot for all the good feedback and for making this thread sticky. i will keep it up-to-date if there are any new tests around in the magazines.

  32. #132
    It's the axle
    Reputation: Gregg K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,654
    I will second what "Vespa" said-

    With respect to the Nevegal and Mountain King, both UST tires.

    I spent the summer on the MK 2.4. The last three days I've spent on the Nevegal 2.35.

    They aren't even close in terms of cornering. The Nevegal is like being on a rail. I simply cannot believe these tires. I'm lousy at making comparisons. I never do it. But this is astonishing. So I disagree with the test results that show these as the same.

    The Nevegal is much more difficult to get rolling. Unless I just had three bad days in a row, the Nevegal is an energy sap. I don't think it's due to it's 50+ watts as much as the added half pound per tire. That's a lot of weight to be accelerating.

    By the way, is there a link to the tests?

    And thanks for this thread. Although it is limited. But it would take a long time to do the tests in vivo.

  33. #133
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gman086's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    4,282
    Lets see some figs for the Maxxis Minion 2.35 single plys please!

    Have FUN!

    G MAN
    Last edited by Gman086; 10-27-2008 at 01:41 AM.
    "There's two shuttles, one to the top and one to the hospital" I LOVE this place!!!

  34. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    4

    Stan's Crows/Ravens

    What about Stan's tires any data on those? The RR must be really good, wonder how the traction rates?

  35. #135
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    i have a lot to do at work right now. i will search for tests in the next week.

  36. #136
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    256
    Henry,

    I know you are busy, sorry can you check the figures you have written for Small Block 8? Is the RR correct?

    Many thanks..

    kenda small block eight 2,1
    RR: 34,2 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)

    When the rolling resistance for Mountain King and Big Betty are less??

    mountain king 2.4 protection
    RR: 32,5 watt
    puncture height: 65cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)
    50% am 50% en

    big betty 2.4 triple
    RR: 32,2 watt
    flattening height: 110cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)
    (comment in the bike-test: big betty should have been rated 7/6 in traction and cornering stability)
    15% am 85% ed
    ____________________
    Ibis Tranny 2009
    Ibis Mojo 2008
    Litespeed Pisgar 2004
    Pinnarello Dogma FP2006

  37. #137
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,350
    Quote Originally Posted by GBR1
    Henry,

    I know you are busy, sorry can you check the figures you have written for Small Block 8? Is the RR correct?

    When the rolling resistance for Mountain King and Big Betty are less??
    I run both SB8 & BB tires, and can say that real world RR is pretty similar to those numbers. RR is about much more than just knob size and array. Rubber compound and casing have huge effects.

    P

  38. #138
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    256
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.P
    I run both SB8 & BB tires, and can say that real world RR is pretty similar to those numbers. RR is about much more than just knob size and array. Rubber compound and casing have huge effects.

    P
    Thanks for the quick reply. This is my personal experience as well. I am amazed at the amount of people that say SB8 have low rolling resistance, when I used them I was not that impressed with that aspect of the tire!!
    ____________________
    Ibis Tranny 2009
    Ibis Mojo 2008
    Litespeed Pisgar 2004
    Pinnarello Dogma FP2006

  39. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: groovastic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    101
    Hi!
    And what about Mountain king 2,2" Protection?
    Do you possibly have the results?
    Cheers!

  40. #140
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    247
    OK, so I'm picking up a set of Mavic 819s with DT 240s. What's the best tubeless xc tire in terms of traction, rolling resistance and thorn resistance? I guess in that order since I will load them with sealant.

  41. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    sadly, there were only one or two tests of wtb products. wtb tires arent available easy here in germany.
    i used the weirwolf 2.5" a lot and loved it.

  42. #142
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat
    Reputation: Datalogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,211
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    sadly, there were only one or two tests of wtb products. wtb tires arent available easy here in germany.
    i used the weirwolf 2.5" a lot and loved it.
    Are they a true 2.5? Do you use them front and rear?

    The trails around here are a mix of sharp rocks, roots, loose dirt/gravel, and sometimes light mud. Are you using the normal 2.5 or the LT?

    Thanks!
    Maverick Durance Ano-DUC32/C KING/XTR
    Mav ML8 Ano-DUC32/X0
    Mav ML8-DUC32/I9/XTR
    09 Spec. Demo-Totem-Ti DHX
    Norco Team DH

  43. #143
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    38

    tubes?

    Apologies if this was asked and answered earlier, but were tubes used in non-UST tires for the tests? I understand that the same tire can have substantially different rolling resistances with and without a tube (e.g. with a tubeless conversion).

  44. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Richy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    253
    I believe they are tubed unless otherwise stated.
    UK-Biking Shop now live - Also follow us on Facebook and Twitter

  45. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation: likeybikey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by Datalogger
    Are they a true 2.5? Do you use them front and rear?

    The trails around here are a mix of sharp rocks, roots, loose dirt/gravel, and sometimes light mud. Are you using the normal 2.5 or the LT?

    Thanks!
    I was extremely disappointed to purchase this tire and discover that the edges of the knobs measure close to 2.5", but the casing is nowhere near 2.5". On a 19mm wide rim the WeirWolf 26x2.5 ballooned to 52mm (about 2.1"). The casing on my Specialized The Captain 26x2.2" tire is wider than the WeirWolf's casing. It seems silly to me to measure knob width and call that the tire's width. A company could just make one tire on a 2.0" casing and trim the knobs to give a whole range of tire sizes. The wide tire in the product line would be the monstrous 4.0" wide Millipede sporting super-long feelers as cornering knobs.

  46. #146
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat
    Reputation: Datalogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,211
    Thanks, I would be mounting them on a 19mm rim (819) also. Any ride impressions? Front or rear usage?
    Maverick Durance Ano-DUC32/C KING/XTR
    Mav ML8 Ano-DUC32/X0
    Mav ML8-DUC32/I9/XTR
    09 Spec. Demo-Totem-Ti DHX
    Norco Team DH

  47. #147
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    775

    How Rolling Resistance is measured in these tests

    ok, first off, I AM NOT a science guy AT ALL. so excuse me if this is stupid.

    i just want to clarify how the Rolling Resistance tests are done for the German Bike magazine tests.

    the OP says the following;
    RR measurement:
    (bad english incoming!)
    Rolling resistance: All tires are set up with 2,5 bar. Then they are set up on the testing role without load. Then they are accelerated on 20 kilometers per hour. Now the resistance is set to zero to eliminate air resistance and bearing friction. Then the wheel gets loaded with 50kg. After a short time the tire runs again with 20km/h. The difference from unloaded and loaded run results gets the rolling resistance in watt.
    movements in the carcass play a larger role than the tread.


    Just to clarify - the watt rating is the difference between NO weight at 20 km/hr at 2.5 bar and the same, but adding 50kg load?

    If yes, here is my concern / question.

    What we see is the DIFFERENCE under load, but does that REALLY tell us which tire uses more or less watts? At least I don' t think so, because we don't know what the TOTAL watts are, we only know the DIFFERENCE between loaded and NOT loaded.

    For example, tire 1 may run at 50 watts with NO load, and 70 watts with load. So 20 watts difference. Which would seem very good.

    Tire 2 may run at 40 watts with NO load, and 65 watts with load. So 25 watts difference. Which would be rated at a higher Rolling Resistance rating using the method of BIKE. But it ACTUALLY has a lower total.

    Am I correct? Please clarify if I have misunderstood how the tests are performed.

  48. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    637
    The way I understand the test they spin the tire up to speed and then zero the wattage measurement to remove the air resistance caused by the wheel spokes and tire knobs. Then they apply 50 kg force with the tire roller and take the wattage measurement. Essentially what they are doing is isolating the rolling resistance caused by the tire casing.
    It would be interesting to see how the air resistance caused by the tire tread affects the measurement. For instance the Kenda SB8 scores worse than the Schwalbe Nobby Nic in the rolling resistance measurement. If air resistance of both tires was factored in maybe the SB8 would come out on top with it's low profile knobs.

  49. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dynamite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    5
    Hi! what's about Specy Eskar 2,3" Control? Has it been tested? Thanks for the report

  50. #150
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    156
    Lots of thorns here....I assume that a higher letter rating is more thorn proof [because handling gets worse]. So is e more thornproof than b? thnx.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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