Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,309

    UST rear tire search - Nevegal 2.1 vs. NBX 2.1 vs. Racing Ralph 2.1 vs. Spider 2.3

    OK, looking for some input. I had a Sturdy 2.25 on the back, and it was great, but too heavy. (930 g) Currently on a 5Spot with a WeirWolf on the front.

    I'm looking for a solid, lighter UST tire for the rear and have narrowed it down to the tires listed above. I tried Conti Vert Pro's and ripped too many sidewalls. Must be my 225 clyde weight.

    so, i have the following weights for these tires -

    Which is the best tire of the 4? I'm looking for this new UST tire to replace the Sturdy as my everyday tire.

    Racing Ralph 2.1 - 712 g
    Spider 2.3 ust - 745 g
    NBX 2.1 ust - 780 g
    Nevegal 2.1 ust - 880 g

    I'm in Central OR and riding smooth singletrack and will be venturing into the high country and some Westside riding (MRT, Alpine). Later in the summer the trails around town will have some pretty decent sand bars.

    I want something that I can rail at speed and also pound through the downhills. The Sturdy was great for that. I had 100% confidence in that tire at speed. I am also going to be trying to do more 2-3' drops.
    At 225 lbs i'm not flying up the hills, but ooftah! you can still feel that heavy Sturdy as you ascend.

    Any input would be great. Things stay pretty dry around here, so not too much mud. The Sturdy will become my more burly tire, for when i need it.

    Once I'm done with this search, hopefully I won't have to bother you guys anymore about this! Thanks in advance.
    Last edited by Tappoix; 05-10-2005 at 05:35 PM.

  2. #2
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,312
    I would stay with the Sturdys because they are, well, sturdy.

    225 pounds, drops, the local lava rock and summer sand say strong casing and higher volume.

    The RR is a racing tire. Light construction, low tread and moderate volume.
    NBX 2.1 is strong enough. Lower volume.
    Nevegal 2.10. Tough enough. Moderate volume. Probably work for you. Doubt you would notice the 50g weight difference.
    Spider 2.3. Big volume. Light casing. If you tore up the Conti do not know if these will do better.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  3. #3
    Young, Shawn Young
    Reputation: Redmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,076
    Smooth ST? Then I would go with NBX. Great rear tire as long as the trail is fairly smooth. Spiders are pretty nice and thats what Im running right now. I ride alot of sharp rock and so these wear pretty quick in my opinion. On smooth trail probably fine plus they are pretty light

    Shawn
    "Im just going to explore a little bit..."

    Dont make me be the bad guy...

    Do I need a pass to ride this trail?

  4. #4
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,309
    thanks for the advice, guys.

  5. #5
    Neg reppers r my biatches
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,260
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    I would stay with the Sturdys because they are, well, sturdy.

    225 pounds, drops, the local lava rock and summer sand say strong casing and higher volume.

    The RR is a racing tire. Light construction, low tread and moderate volume.
    NBX 2.1 is strong enough. Lower volume.
    Nevegal 2.10. Tough enough. Moderate volume. Probably work for you. Doubt you would notice the 50g weight difference.
    Spider 2.3. Big volume. Light casing. If you tore up the Conti do not know if these will do better.
    how bout the Big Jim 2.25 UST?

  6. #6
    just along for the ride
    Reputation: Brown_Teeth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,037
    At your weight the 2.1 NBX is no good, too small and XC casting, I'd go with the 2.3 instead, infact stick with any 2.3 there are several good ones around given the conditions you ride. good luck!

  7. #7
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,309
    Big Jim UST comes in at 780g.....better than the 930 of the Sturdy

    nice suggestion. does it hold up?

  8. #8
    Neg reppers r my biatches
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,260
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    Big Jim UST comes in at 780g.....better than the 930 of the Sturdy

    nice suggestion. does it hold up?
    I shall see...they will come on the bike that Larry is building for me so no experience yet.

    cheers

  9. #9
    Ouch, I am hot!
    Reputation: Dirdir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,735
    On my 5-Spot, I just switched from a 2.4 Specialized 2Bliss up front and a Sturdy 2.25 in back to a Sturdy Loco Lobo 2.3 in front and a Conti Gravity Pro 2.3 in the rear. I must say I love this set up. I really notice the difference in rolling resistance, but the tires are still big enough for my style of trail riding.
    I AM JUST A JERK

  10. #10
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,309
    that's good to know, dirdir.

    i've got the weirwolf 2.3 up front, as i expect to see a lot of sandbars on the trail this summer and they eat up sand.

    the Roll-X 2.0 is so great and light, but it's folding over on the fast turns and i don't have confidence jumping it as much as something beefier.

    the Big Jim sounds enticing. i'll check the weight on the Gravity Pro. Is that UST? damn, i should just look it up.

    thx, tribesman.

  11. #11
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189

    Ahoy!

    I'm in the same boat. I'm looking for a good / non heavy UST rear tire. I love my 2.1 UST Spider up front, but I'm trying to find something better than the Python for the rear; not that there's anything wrong with the Python.

    I have a Racing Ralph 2.25 UST on order form Phattire. By the way, you listed a 2.1 on your short list, but you should know that to get a 2.1, you should order the 2.25 because I've read they come small.

    I'm worried that I'll be disappointed for a durability stand point. I do race, but just for fun, and I'm not one to change my tires on race day. I just want a great all around tire that is light, grippy and efficient. I think I'll have to sacrifice durablity to get it though.

    You know what they need is a Nevegal UST Lite (you reading this Kenda?), because at 880 grams I'm just not having it! I guess I could try throwing on a Nevegal non-UST with sealant, but I just can't understand why the tire companies wouldn't just make these tires lighter if they could. There must me a reason, and I'd rather not find out first hand.

    Happy trails

  12. #12
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,309
    the Geax Barro Marathon sounds good....780g and TNT sidewall protection

    but there is NO information on them

  13. #13
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    the Geax Barro Marathon sounds good....780g and TNT sidewall protection

    but there is NO information on them
    The Geax TNT tires will be available in early summer.
    UST-type bead, less porous casing, requires a small amount of sealant to be used tubeless, slightly thicker casing than a standard tire.

    It is not a "sidewall protection" design. Just a lighter tubeless system.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  14. #14
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189

    Geax looks like a GO!

    Just checked out the Barro Marathon and they look to be ideal for what I need. I think I'll go with a 2.3 up front and a 2.1 in the back.

    Early summer huh? Shiggy be sure to keep us posted when these exciting new tires are available.

    Thanks

  15. #15
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,312
    No TNT Barro Marathon 2.3.
    2.1 only for now.

    http://www.geax.com/tnt
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  16. #16
    ಠ_ಠ
    Reputation: dulyebr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    3,189

    Email from US Geax distributor re: the Barro Marathon TNT

    Thank you for your interest in the Geax Barro Marathon 2.1 TNT tires. At this time we do not have them in our warehouse but we do have a shipment coming in about 8 weeks. Any of your local bikes shops that carry Geax or Vittoria tires can put a special order in for you so that you can be on of the first people to ride this awesome tire in the U.S.

    Thanks,
    Jason Croom
    BIKEMINE

Similar Threads

  1. Racing Ralph as a rear tire?
    By Burger in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-08-2005, 04:31 PM
  2. Need better tire than Nevegal 2.1 for corning in sand!
    By mike ryan in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 03-04-2005, 08:57 PM
  3. If you need to know this.
    By KevinVokeyJ24 in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-24-2004, 09:40 AM
  4. Racing Ralph as a front tire?
    By WOY in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-01-2004, 09:33 AM
  5. Blur rear tire choice thread from old boards
    By CraigH in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-03-2004, 05:16 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
  •