Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 125 of 325
  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 10:17 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
    2,100
    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 11:23 AM.

  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
    149
    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
    295
    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
    1,198
    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
    269
    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
    516
    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
    149
    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
    3,283
    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
    1,198
    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
    20,761
    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?

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 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
  •