Page 1 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 326
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239

    Tire test results from german "bike" magazine

    puncture height is flattening height:
    the higher the number, the better.
    they test it with a hetchet which falls down from test to test which higher and higher height., for example test 1 40cm, test 2 45cm, test 50 et cetera. the shown value is the first height the tire flattens.
    they test also for thorn proofness with a metal thorn. i will edit that soon too. thorn test isnt available for all tires.
    class a is highest resistance, class f lowest.
    the fields of use:
    cc is cross country race
    am is all mountain
    en is enduro

    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.


    mibro 2.25
    rolling resistance: 22,3 watt
    flattening height: 50cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)

    2.35 nevegal
    RR: more than 50watt
    flattening height: 43,3cm
    cornering stability/ability: 6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)

    nobby nic 2.4 triple
    RR: 28,0 watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: a
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)
    (update bike 4/08)
    100% am

    furious fred 2.0
    RR: 19,9watt
    flattening height: 42,5cm
    thorn: e
    cornering stability/ability:2/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 2/6 (more= the better)

    racing ralph 2.25 triple 2007
    RR: 26,2 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    85% cc 15% am

    racing ralph 2.25 evo TUBELESS 2008
    RR: 19,8 watt
    flattening height: 80cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)

    smart sam 2.1
    RR: 28,9 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    100% cc

    fat albert
    RR: 34,4 watt
    flattening height: 78cm
    thorn: no information
    cornering stability/ability:6/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)

    little albert light (old test from 2004!)
    RR: 32,1 watt
    flattening height:-
    thorn: -
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)

    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

    hutchinson python ng mrc medium 2.25
    RR: 36,4watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    15% cc 85% am

    hutchinson barracuda tubeless light
    RR: 35,4watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    100% am

    hutchinson toro 2.15
    RR: 37,6watt
    flattening height: 60cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    30% cc 70% am

    hutchinson piranha mrc medium 2,3
    RR: 40,8 watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 2/6 (more= the better)
    50% cc 50% am

    larsen tt 2,3 exception
    RR: 36,6 watt
    flattening height: 85cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    50% cc 50% am

    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

    speed king 2.1 supersonic
    RR: 29,6 watt
    puncture height: 40cm
    thorn: e
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    90% cc 10% am

    speed king 2.3 supersonic
    RR: 27,9 watt
    puncture height:50cm
    thorn: e
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    10% cc 90% am

    race king 2.2
    RR: 23,9 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: f
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    85% cc 15% am

    diesel protection
    RR: 43,5 watt
    flattening height: 75cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    100% ed

    explorer 2.1 supersonic
    RR: 28,5 watt
    flattening height: 40cm
    thorn:c
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)
    100% cc

    specialized the captain 2
    RR: 39,2 watt
    flattening height: 85cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    50% cc 50% am

    specialized resolution 2.1
    RR: 38,5 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    25% cc 75% am

    nokian nbx 2.3
    RR: 26,8 watt
    flattening height: 35cm
    thorn: -
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)

    maxxis crossmark 2.1 exception
    RR: 27,4 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: b
    cornering stability/ability:3/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)
    100% cc

    maxxis high roller 2.35 tubeless
    RR: over 45 watt
    flattening height: 70cm
    thorn: a
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)
    100% ed

    maxxis ignitor exception 2.1
    RR: 34,3 watt
    flattening height: 36,7cm
    thorn: -
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 6/6 (more= the better)

    maxxis ignitor exception 2.35
    RR: 32,3 watt
    flattening height: 55cm
    thorn: -
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)

    wtb mutano raptor (tested as all-mountain. maybe because of that only 2/6 cornering points)
    RR: 30,7 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: d
    cornering stability/ability:2/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 3/6 (more= the better)

    kenda karma 2.2
    RR: 41,3 watt
    flattening height: 65cm
    thorn: e
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)
    80% am 20% ed

    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)

    IRC trailbear 2.25 (2004 tested, got the "bang for the buck" award! (costs about 10€ here in germany)
    RR: 32,5 watt
    flattening height: 41,67cm
    thorn: -
    cornering stability/ability:5/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 5/6 (more= the better)

    vredestein tiger claw 2,1
    RR: 26,2 watt
    flattening height: 67,5cm
    thorn: c
    cornering stability/ability:4/6 (more= the better)
    traction: 4/6 (more= the better)
    45% cc 55% am

    more will be edited later! tell me what you want to know!
    Last edited by henryhb; 06-22-2008 at 02:38 AM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    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

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salty 1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    249
    Thats tha most USEFUL stats I have seen on tyres...thank you!
    It explains why I like the NN so much.

    Do you have any stats on Racing Ralphs 2.1, Smart Sam, Larsen TT2.0 and Python 2.0??
    Ti Steve

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by Salty 1
    Thats tha most USEFUL stats I have seen on tyres...thank you!
    It explains why I like the NN so much.

    Do you have any stats on Racing Ralphs 2.1, Smart Sam, Larsen TT2.0 and Python 2.0??
    there arent all sizes and all tires tested. i edited some requested in the first thread!

  5. #5
    local trails rider
    Reputation: perttime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    11,897
    Mountain King?

    Big sizes, if you have.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by perttime
    Mountain King?

    Big sizes, if you have.
    added!

    found newer test results for nobby nic 2.4 triple 2008. edited.
    racing ralph 2008 evo tubeless added

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boybi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    39
    What is puncture height? What's better, higher or lower number?

  8. #8
    Nightriding rules SuperModerator
    Reputation: crisillo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    20,764
    Quote Originally Posted by boybi
    What is puncture height? What's better, higher or lower number?
    it's how high the puncturing object had to be raised to cause the tire to flat....so the higher, the better

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,927
    Very nice.
    I am interested in the methodology of obtaining the RR measurement. Any why does the Nevegal just say "over 50"? Given that those are a very popular tire, the exact data point would be very beneficial!

    I cannot wait to see the Big Betty UST/ Fat Albert/ some of the Specialized lineup included.
    Thanks again!

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    421
    It would be interesting to the results of the new Furious fred's?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    169
    And the Race Kings..

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by CharacterZero
    Any why does the Nevegal just say "over 50"?
    the measure-equipment can only measure until 50watt rolling resistance. the negeval is the tire tested with the highest rolling resistance.

    fat albert, little albert, big betty, some specialized, race king added.
    there is no test result for furios fred sry

    methodology for RR measurement added!
    Last edited by henryhb; 06-04-2008 at 07:41 AM.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    7,927
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    the measure-equipment can only measure until 50watt rolling resistance. the negeval is the tire tested with the highest rolling resistance.

    fat albert, little albert, big betty, some specialized, race king added.
    there is no test result for furios fred sry

    methodology for RR measurement added!
    Awesome! Those BB and Fat Albert results just show that I should wait for them to come out....
    Do you have results for the Specialized Eskar 2.3, or Chunder 2.2/2.4?
    What about the Maxxis Ignitor?

    Man - these stats are great!

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    148
    Excellent thread henryhb ... have you got anything for Panaracer Fire XC Pro (2.1) and the Nokian NBX 2.3?

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGiv'er
    Excellent thread henryhb ... have you got anything for Panaracer Fire XC Pro (2.1) and the Nokian NBX 2.3?
    nbx 2,3 added
    no panaracer tested.
    unlikely the fire xc pro is hard to get here in germany. i read a lot of good stuff about it!

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    902
    Are the Maxxis Crossmark or Ignitor listed? What is the name or publisher of the bike magazine?
    If you're not falling, then you're not riding fast enough!
    Ibex Asta Pro SE & Giant XTC-2

  17. #17
    mountain biker
    Reputation: slyfink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    528
    I'm a little surprised by the "traction" rating for the "Albert" line... I've found them to be a marked downgrade from my Nevegals... They corner like mad, and handle wet roots and rocks like nothing I've used before but in straight braking or straight climbing, I'm finding they slip out much quicker than my old Nevs... And I've got the pressure as low as I dare go on tubeless... I'm running the Albert UST, weigh 210lbs, and run my front tire at 28psi and the rear a 31 psi...
    continuous growth is the strategy of a cancer cell.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    Quote Originally Posted by baraant
    Are the Maxxis Crossmark or Ignitor listed? What is the name or publisher of the bike magazine?
    both added!

    the magazine is called "bike"! very creative...
    www.bike-magazin.de

  19. #19
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Ha, the Germans and their tests. Germans are obsessed with the testing performance published sort of like Consumer Reports, but they swear it's not as biased or crooked and the people doing the testing are experts.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by henryhb
    nbx 2,3 added
    no panaracer tested.
    unlikely the fire xc pro is hard to get here in germany. i read a lot of good stuff about it!
    Thank you. The flattening height of 35cm for the Nokian NBX 2.3 seems surprisingly low ... this is not a typo, is it?

  21. #21
    banned
    Reputation: Jerk_Chicken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,480
    Luckily I put on new Rampages before I moved to Germany. Great tires.

  22. #22
    Flaccid Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    8,027
    Hmmm, Any testing of the WTB line of tires yet? I'd be interested in seeing how the whole line tests out, Weirwolves2.5, mutanoraptors 2.4, velocitraptors, motoraptors, etc, plus their new stuff. I run a Mutanoraptor 2.4, on the rear sometimes and rolling resistance wise, it feels close to, maybe not quite as fast as a Fat Albert 2.35 or a Nobby Nic 2.4 in dirt single track. The Mutano feels faster on pavement and fire road while climbing though and kind of loosy goosy at the edges on singletrack in the turns, nowhere near as sticky as a Fat Albert when leaned over.

    I'd love to see the results on a spread sheet format, anyone know how to put it in on Excel? I have "read only" software in Windows Home edition.

  23. #23
    himom!
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684
    Has the Kenda Karma been tested? Thanks so much for the info.

  24. #24
    ZEN RIDER!
    Reputation: Mt.Biker E's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    720
    What about posted weights & actual weights?
    I'd figure that would play into ride characteristics & durability.
    Life in every breath

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    239
    there has only been one test for wtb tires.
    wtb mutano raptor and kenda karma added!

Page 1 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 11 ... 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
  •