Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 151 to 200 of 336
  1. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    @ granpa:

    a is more thornproof than b, b more than c and so on.

    no tests for the 2.2" mountain king protection.
    no test for 2.35" minions.

    i am looking forward to the next year. there should be new tests in march.

  2. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    120

    Mibro's really that fast???

    I just accidently ended up with a pair of Mibro 2.25's. I checked your German testing and they are about the lowest rolling resistance in the group. Is that for real? I mean, that is a fairly "knobby" spaced-out tread. I assume that is in the Front tire orientation, as the Rear orientation ought to have more resistance. Haven't ridden them yet, and may not; they came with an ebay wheelset that is more chewed up than I expected, and I may try to return. But was curious about the tires Does the rolling resistance test really have any validity? .

  3. #153
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,339
    Quote Originally Posted by impatient
    I just accidently ended up with a pair of Mibro 2.25's. I checked your German testing and they are about the lowest rolling resistance in the group. Is that for real? ...
    The Mibro's have lots of opportunity to roll fast. They are a very clever design. The open middle allows the carcass to flex easily there, which will lower RR. Also, the soft rubber is in the middle, and the soft rubber conforms to the terrain easier than a hard rubber, again for better RR. Then, the higher rebound, hard rubber is on the sides, and more importantly on the sides of the carcass, where you want the rubber to spring back and give energy back for lower RR.

    So, in theory, they have a lot going for them.

    P

  4. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    good news everyone:

    there will be new tests in the BIKE available from 13.1.2009. i will edit the results immediatly.

  5. #155
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat
    Reputation: Datalogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,211
    Great, thanks henryhb!
    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

  6. #156
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Holdsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    42
    Great stats very useful to me trying so hard to find the right tyre for my terrian

    Thanks

  7. #157
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    short news:

    tested tires are

    geax gato 2,1
    hutchinson cobra air light 2.25
    onza canis 2,25
    onza ibex dh 2,4
    specialized fast trak 2,0
    specialized sauserwind 2bliss 2,0
    vredestein black panther xtrac 2,0
    vredestein spotted cat 2,0

    seven spike tires have been tested, too:

    continental spike claw 240 2,1
    continental spike claw 120 2,1
    kenda klondike xt 2,1
    nokian freddies revenz 2,3
    nokian hakka wxc 2,1
    schwalbe ice spiker pro 2,1
    schwalbe marathon winter 1,75

    i will edit the full test results in the next days. too much work and a sick wife right now...

  8. #158
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat
    Reputation: Datalogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,211
    Thanks henryb! Best wishes to your wife!
    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

  9. #159
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xc-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    99
    Hi Henry,

    Hope you wife is getting better and you'll find some time to post the latest results for us ! There are some new interesting tires in this test !

    Also, when you do, do you think you could include width at casing and thread as Bike usually provides ? It's also an important information to have since we know they always test all the tires at the same pressure on the drum (on which higher pressure / bigger volume gives a "harder tire" and consequently less RR in this specific situation)...

    Thanks in advance !

    Ps : when we get this latest results, I'm thinking I could make an excell table that include all the results and post it here... so I'm really looking forward to your results ;-)))

  10. #160
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    all tires except the ibex dh are CC tires. the ibex dh is a enduro tire.

    wide xx/yy : xx is carcass, yy is lug in mm

    geax gato 2.1
    RR: 28,4 watt
    flattening height: 50cm
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    wide 47,8/50,8mm

    hutchinson cobra air light 2,25
    RR: 26,8 watt
    puncture height: 60cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)
    wide 52,7/52,3

    onza canis 2,25
    RR: 36,9 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    wide 51,6/54,3mm

    specialized fast trak lk 2,0
    RR: 26,6 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: a
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)
    wide 50,6/49,5mm

    specialized sauserwind 2bliss 2.0
    RR: 38,7 watt
    flattening height: 60cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    wide 49,4/50,9mm

    vredestein black panther xtrac 2,0
    RR: 25,6watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    wide 49,3/48,8mm

    vredestein spotted cat 2,0
    RR: 23,5watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 2/6 (more= the better)
    wide 50,7/51,0mm

    onza ibex dh 2,4
    RR: 41,8watt
    flattening height: 80cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    wide 54,7/61,6mm

  11. #161
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    38

    tubes?

    henry b - do you know if tubes are installed when non-tubeless tires are tested? How about the tubeless tires? I understand from other threads that tubes add a lot of RR. Be interesting to see how non-tubeless tires test when converted to tubeless. Thanks,

    nmcaseman

  12. #162
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,339
    Interesting that in all those tests not one Michelin tire is tested.

    Doing the 'ol knob plucker-oo test, I've found the rubber to be significantly different on the Dry2 tire, than any other tire I've owned. It's long wearing and (not) grippy on wet like a high durometer rubber, but very flexible like a lower durometer (almost elastic-like). regardless, it grips quite well, and rolls stupid fast. I would love to see how the numbers stack up.

    P

  13. #163
    Mythical Creature
    Reputation: glenzx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,843
    Well...?

    Let's see the updated excel spreadsheet!

    Here's Warp's data formatted to read in order (best RR to worst):

    LINK

    Quote Originally Posted by xc-rider
    Hi Henry,

    Hope you wife is getting better and you'll find some time to post the latest results for us ! There are some new interesting tires in this test !

    Also, when you do, do you think you could include width at casing and thread as Bike usually provides ? It's also an important information to have since we know they always test all the tires at the same pressure on the drum (on which higher pressure / bigger volume gives a "harder tire" and consequently less RR in this specific situation)...

    Thanks in advance !

    Ps : when we get this latest results, I'm thinking I could make an excell table that include all the results and post it here... so I'm really looking forward to your results ;-)))
    Last edited by glenzx; 01-28-2009 at 01:49 PM.
    follow me on Twitter!
    "It's better to regret something you HAVE done, than something you haven't..." -

  14. #164
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.P
    Interesting that in all those tests not one Michelin tire is tested.

    Doing the 'ol knob plucker-oo test, I've found the rubber to be significantly different on the Dry2 tire, than any other tire I've owned. It's long wearing and (not) grippy on wet like a high durometer rubber, but very flexible like a lower durometer (almost elastic-like). regardless, it grips quite well, and rolls stupid fast. I would love to see how the numbers stack up.

    P
    i have some results for the

    michelin mountain dry² 2,3:
    RR: 28,7 watt
    flattening height: 75cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    All Mountain tire


    Michelin Mountain X´Treme 2.2 tubeless
    RR: 29,3 watt
    flattening height: 80cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)

  15. #165
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,339
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    i have some results for the

    michelin mountain dry² 2,3:...

    Michelin Mountain X´Treme 2.2 tubeless ...
    Nice one! Thanks Henryhb!

    P

  16. #166
    Ausfahrt - gut!
    Reputation: utheissen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    79

    Links to the original test PDFs

    I downloaded PDFs of the tire tests online, looks like they don't have the latest Jan 09 version online yet though.

    Even though these are in German language, they are quite easy to understand if you followed this thread as they use many English terms...or is it because I speak German?
    Just keep in mind that they are testing the rolling resistance on a smooth surface and there might be differences to performance on real dirt surface. They mention this issue themselves actually.

    I thought they could come handy and put them online:
    Sept 08: http://globusnewmedia.com/mtb/bike_t...fen_09_08_.pdf
    April 08: http://globusnewmedia.com/mtb/bike_t...fung_04_08.pdf
    June 07: http://globusnewmedia.com/mtb/bike_t...ifen_06_07.pdf
    July 06: http://globusnewmedia.com/mtb/bike_t...ifen_07_06.pdf
    August 03: http://globusnewmedia.com/mtb/bike_t...ifen_08_03.pdf

    I currently run 2.1 UST Weirwolfs on both wheels of my Haro VL 120 and the rear one is worn down. I think I am going to switch the front to the rear and the try a Nobby Nic in 2.25 as front tire...

    As soon as I can get the latest test, I will post it as well.

    uli

  17. #167
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ozhoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    47

    Tire Data

    In an attempt to improve on the original spread sheet, I've put this one together. I added weights, and some fancy color coding. And before anyone asks about the pink color, that's just how google interpreted it. I'm sure that some tires are missing and more than likely I buggered a few up, but it's editable by everyone, so feel free to fix it.

    O

  18. #168
    Fortes Fortuna Iuvat
    Reputation: Datalogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,211
    Awesome spreadsheet man, I've bookmarked it.
    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

  19. #169
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by Gregg K

    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.
    i agree
    i have nevgals (2.35's) on my khyber and they dont roll very good at all but as you said they have fantastic grip and thats why i have them

    i think im going to put some Schwalbe Racing Ralph's on my hard tail which currently has nevagals (2.1) which should make riding 100km easier

  20. #170
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xc-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    99
    Sorry I've been long to be back here.
    I'm finally making the excell file with all the test from Bike Magazin since August 2003.

    I've included all I could which means also tires width at casing and thread. It's interesting to see the evolution over the years --> in 2003, 2.3" tires were almost DH tires, now 2.2 - 2.3 almost are our friendly XC tires ;-)))

    The file on this link includes tests up to July 2005, I'm still working on it to add the tests from 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009. Should be finished by tomorrow, I'll upload the link when updated.

    Here is for now :
    http://rapidshare.com/files/19626026...tests.xls.html

  21. #171
    Unfit Norwegian
    Reputation: Dazed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,260
    Thank you! Can't wait to see the newer results. That's where the interesting stuff is. Great work!

  22. #172
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xc-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    99
    Updated file :

    http://rapidshare.com/files/19630073...tests.xls.html

    The latest are in there... now only missing some from 2006-2007.

  23. #173
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    312

    Didn't work for me........

    Quote Originally Posted by xc-rider
    Updated file :

    http://rapidshare.com/files/19630073...tests.xls.html

    The latest are in there... now only missing some from 2006-2007.
    This is the message I got when tried to upload:

    "This file is neither allocated to a Premium Account, or a Collector's Account, and can therefore only be downloaded 10 times.

    This limit is reached.

    To download this file, the uploader either needs to transfer this file into his/her Collector's Account, or upload the file again. The file can later be moved to a Collector's Account. The uploader just needs to click the delete link of the file to get further information."

  24. #174
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xc-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    99
    Please try this link and let me know :
    http://www.megaupload.com/fr/?d=RZRIKEY4

    I still have to find a place where it can stay without any limitations of days or how many time it is downloaded...

    By the way, Henryhb if you are around, could you add the missing information for February 2009 test ??? --> Thorn resistance for Gato, Tpi count for each tire and bike magazin verdict. Thanks a lot in advance.

    I will work on the last ones missing tomorrow morning... but we are getting close to having a complete sum up of all of them (it took me hourssssss... so I hope you guys enjoy ;-))) ).

  25. #175
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,339
    Quote Originally Posted by xc-rider
    I still have to find a place where it can stay without any limitations of days or how many time it is downloaded....
    The "Upload Images" in the posts here allow you to upload .zip documents. So zip it and add to your post.

    P

  26. #176
    mtbr member
    Reputation: xc-rider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    99
    There you go, thanks for the good tip !!!
    Attached Files Attached Files

  27. #177
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ozhoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    47
    I've updated the google version using xc-riders data for the excel impaired folks out there.

    O

  28. #178
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    99
    So using the stats has anyone come up with the "best of" tires for each category?

  29. #179
    wuss
    Reputation: dropadrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    2,364
    Interesting thread. I understand they can't test traction in a lot of different scenarios, but I have to say that the readings for traction don't match up with our local conditions (where wet stone / wood traction is what counts).

    I remember when nobby nics came out and everyone was raving about them. Suddenly they where on most bikes you would see. It happened to be a rare sunny month, when things came back to normal they disapered very quickly. Those tires are almost dangerous on the wet, they lose traction far quicker then a Nokian NBX or Maxxis (with one of their softer compaunds).

    It's a pity when your local conditions are completely different from the places reviews are done at. You have to take everything with a grain of salt, and rather go with what other local people have found to work.

  30. #180
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    42
    Yeah! I learn more here. Thank you to share the imformation.

  31. #181
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    340
    Is there any information in the test on a Continental Gravity 2.3 and the Continental Vapor Pro 2.1?

    Thanks

  32. #182
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    133

    New question here. WTB Wolverine 1.95

    Has the WTB Wolverine 1.95 been tested yet?

    Thanks, MTB

  33. #183
    Underskilled
    Reputation: CaveGiant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,117
    I have 29er Nevegal front and rear, I wonder if it is worth swapping to the RR, or if this thread will make me spend a lot of money for nowt.

  34. #184
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    73
    Hi, iv got some ztr 7000 race rims, 33psi max, i was running NN 1.8 at 30 psi, then the weather changed so i put some RR 2.1 on at 30psi, iv put the NN back on now because at 30psi the 1.8 NN is much much faster and more grip even in the dry, can u confirm this on your tests, any one else found this out yet, if not try it. and let me now.

  35. #185
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    769
    Quote Originally Posted by Nath01978
    Hi, iv got some ztr 7000 race rims, 33psi max, i was running NN 1.8 at 30 psi, then the weather changed so i put some RR 2.1 on at 30psi, iv put the NN back on now because at 30psi the 1.8 NN is much much faster and more grip even in the dry, can u confirm this on your tests, any one else found this out yet, if not try it. and let me now.
    well, that is the difference between these "tests" and the real world, real trails, real riders. it might get lower results on a drum at a certain PSI, but reality is different in my books.

    i made the mistake of using these "tests" and putting some 2.25 EVO racing ralphs on my wifes bike - slow rolling. tried all sorts of different PSI, different trails, with tubes and tubeless, we both felt they were slow rolling/sluggish. she went back to nokian NBX lites and the difference is HUGE. faster and still good traction.

    so use what you like and know works. a lab is not the right place to review tires.
    Last edited by kevbikemad; 06-05-2009 at 10:55 AM.

  36. #186
    Slow Patrol
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by kevbikemad
    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.
    I'll agree with this. The difference measurement can be misleading. This is good info and probably correlates to an absolute resistance at some level but all my legs care about is full absolute resistance cranking up a hill.

  37. #187
    No pain no gain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    87

    Continental Gravity VS. Mountain King

    Two tires which appear to score the highest are the Continental Gravity and the Continental Mountain King.

    does anyone have any real world experience comparing these two tires in a 2.3 Gravity Protection and the 2.4 Mountain King protection on dry, if not rocky terrain. The Mountain kings weigh a little more but are higher volume, and the Gravity has more of a side lug for the corners.

    I have used the Gravity for 1 1/2 years and LOVE them for dry, dusty, rocky conditions. I did my own tire test including Nevegals (terribly slow), WTB Weirwolfs, Rampage (great front tire), Conti Verticals (flats easy), Maxxis Ignitor (small but good), Z max ect. and my favorite for rolling speed, puncture resistance and traction are by far the Continental Gravity but... how does the Gravity Pro compare to a 2.4 Mountain King protection ???

    I only buy protection versions for the Lava rock here in Central Oregon - excellent puncture resistance. I also run Stan's tubeless, and have run them down to 24 psi recently with NO issues on a Bontrager Duster 32 hole rim / industry 9 setup. Gravity seat awesome on this rim with no issues!

    For those that are interested, the Gravity is as tough as they come for puncture resistance unless you move up to a much heavy tire. When I did run tubes, I also never got pinch flats at 28 psi. This is really a great all mountain tire and you can get them at Cambria for around $25. - a steal for this quality of tire. But... is The MK pro better?

  38. #188
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    425

    Any idea...

    ...If the data would be relevant to 29er tires?
    "I can only assume chan slap is what happens when you get assaulted by Jackie Chan. I don't think anybody can prevent that."

  39. #189
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    4,010
    interesting.
    roccowt.
    rocnbikemeld

  40. #190
    mtbr member
    Reputation: d.n.s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    503
    thanks Henry! Donetsk and Kiev give you our respect!

  41. #191
    mtbr member
    Reputation: d.n.s's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    503
    henryhb

    can you please make a test for kenda kinetiks 2,1?

  42. #192
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    i dont make the tests. they are made by the german "bike" magazin.
    the kinetiks 2,1 havent been tested.

    good news:
    there are new downhill tires tested! i will edit the stats in the next days.

  43. #193
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    i just bought the new bike.

    new tested tires are:

    kenda excavator 2.35
    nokian nbx 2.3
    wtb dissent 2.3
    wtb prowler ss 2.3

    more in the next days

  44. #194
    Cut Casing Whisperer
    Reputation: Mr.P's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,339
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    i just bought the new bike.

    new tested tires are:

    kenda excavator 2.35
    nokian nbx 2.3
    wtb dissent 2.3
    wtb prowler ss 2.3

    more in the next days
    That should interesting, the Prowler SS's tread pattern looks a fast roller, but I'll bet it's not.

    Thank HenryHB, I look forward to the info.

    P

  45. #195
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by bhsavery
    Couple things to note about these german tests:

    2. From what it seems, the best tires in these German Tests always seem to be the german/euro tires, like schwalbe, continental, etc. Does anyone else find this suspect?
    You read my mind. I was thinking the exact same thing - German Bias?

  46. #196
    Executive User - UK
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    799
    maybe...just maybe Germans build a better tyre!?

    As with all tests, I applaud anyone trying to find a test method which can produce some objective data but actual real world testing is of course the only way to confirm without any doubt which tyre is "best".

    Im very happy to read this data - it provides a good starting point for my own subjective tests.

  47. #197
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    191
    any news on the excavator?

  48. #198
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    5,181
    Quote Originally Posted by vikingboy
    maybe...just maybe Germans build a better tyre!?

    As with all tests, I applaud anyone trying to find a test method which can produce some objective data but actual real world testing is of course the only way to confirm without any doubt which tyre is "best".

    Im very happy to read this data - it provides a good starting point for my own subjective tests.
    I must agree here as this is a good start point. I run the Spec Captain 2.0 which shows like 37 watt rolling resistance. I have tried a few others that have less, but I seeem to end up skidding a lot more.

    No tire is going to make you a good rider. It's bike skills on the down hill and the power output of the engine (you) on the uphills.
    Lead by my Lefty............... right down the trail, no brakes.

  49. #199
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,781
    Anything on the Panaracer XC Fire Pro?

  50. #200
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    the four tires were tested under enduro aspects!

    kenda excavator 2.35
    RR: 41,6
    flattening height: 70
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)

    nokian nbx 2.3
    RR: 29,1
    flattening height: 55
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)

    wtb dissent 2.3
    RR: 43,4
    flattening height: 62,5
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)

    wtb prowler ss 2.3
    RR: 41,5
    flattening height: 75
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)

Page 4 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
  •