Results 1 to 33 of 33
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681

    Nevegal 2.1 at the front for XC racing?

    Hi Guys.

    That`s the question. I`m new to this tyre and testing it the other day I realized that it weights more than my trusty 2.1 Panaracer Fire XC pro that I used to ride at the front (with a Continental Mountain King 2.0 at the back).

    The grip is good, nevertheless I have to test it with less pressure.

    What do you recommend me guys in terms of rolling resistance vs grip in very high speed conditions.

    The rear with the Mountain King (being very skinny) rolls well and grips with no problems even on muddy surfaces...

    I was thinking of a Race King at the back and the MK at the front, but I`m unable to find it here (the MK) in a size larger than 2.0

    Thanks guys, for your feedback.

  2. #2
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    The Nevegal is probably the most secure tire I've ever ridden. It's also very heavy, especially the 29er version, with a large degree of rolling resistance. I've pushed it through marathons in jagged rock conditions before.

    Now that I've tried to improve my skills, I much prefer a Racing Ralph snakeskin or WTB Nanoraptor for dry courses that need lots of grip and high puncture resistance. Check out the Nanoraptor, it's an oldie but goodie, cheap too. A Mountain King in front would be just fine, probably overkill in the rear.

    You mention "very high speed conditions," well of course a Nevegal would be right at home in downhill events, but for XC, probably not worth the energy expenditure at a Cat 2 level or higher.

  3. #3
    CB2
    CB2 is offline
    Jam Econo
    Reputation: CB2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,214
    I've used the 29 x 2.2 as a front tire in a race before.
    Racing rigid on a rocky course it worked well.
    This year if I'm racing some place where I need a more aggressive front tire I'll probably save 50-60 grams and use an Ardent 29 x 2.25.
    For course with less "New England Charm" I use something lighter like a Crossmark, or Ignitor.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    Thanks guys for your time in answering my post. To clarify some stuff, Im running it in 26size. Im talking as TunicaTrails predicted, for elite category racing...

    The thing is that Im not that WELL descender, I do well, but sometimes I struggle on gnarly stuff and the other people in my cat just fly away...I need to that "edge" on those conditions, while at the same time Im improving more and more the downhill skills...

    I see the MK 2.0 at the front as a road tire...extremely skinny. Remember that Continental measure their tires tending to the small side.

    any more comments?

    thanks.

  5. #5
    CB2
    CB2 is offline
    Jam Econo
    Reputation: CB2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,214
    Quote Originally Posted by fran
    Thanks guys for your time in answering my post. To clarify some stuff, Im running it in 26size. Im talking as TunicaTrails predicted, for elite category racing...

    The thing is that Im not that WELL descender, I do well, but sometimes I struggle on gnarly stuff and the other people in my cat just fly away...I need to that "edge" on those conditions, while at the same time Im improving more and more the downhill skills...

    I see the MK 2.0 at the front as a road tire...extremely skinny. Remember that Continental measure their tires tending to the small side.

    any more comments?

    thanks.
    There will always be guys that just "fly away" no matter what tire you use.
    I consider descending my weakness, and as I watched gaps grow on descents I would sometimes feel I was loosing a ton of time, but 5 seconds at 20 mph is larger than at at 5 mph (distance-wise) so they really weren't putting too much time into me.

  6. #6
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    I agree that the Ardent is a good choice also, kind of like the Nevegal with a faster center. If you really want a front tire that you can throw down with, try the 2.4.

    You might also try a fork with 20mm more of travel if you can get away with less cornering ability on the trails you race. A higher stem angle is something else to experiment with.

    Oh yeah, and I cringe to mention it, but 29ers give a lot of confidence on descents. They tend to have that "just roll away from" effect.
    Last edited by TunicaTrails; 02-07-2011 at 05:30 PM.

  7. #7
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,745
    The 1.95 Nevegal is actually a pretty decent XC tire. The 2.1 is really slow but the 1.95 on wet rocks and roots works well and still rolls OK.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  8. #8
    42t
    42t is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    43
    Agree with LMN. I'm on 29 now, but for 26 I liked the Nev 1.95 on the front. Pretty good size 'feel' for the number, aggro XC tread, and not too slow.

  9. #9
    The Missing
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    379
    I found the nevegal to be the grippest tire I have run up front, however that thing rolled extremely slow by my standards on the flats.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    Thanks guys! by the comments here, Im planning to do some testing on the same surfaces and check the times with each tire (fire xc pro and nevegal).

    What about the Kenda karma for the rear ? I have seen almost no reviews about it here, its thread pattern looks exactly like a stan's crow wich seem to get very good opinions here (as a rear, hardpack tire).

    thanks!

  11. #11
    CB2
    CB2 is offline
    Jam Econo
    Reputation: CB2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,214
    I love Karmas, but they don't love me; I seem to puncture them a little too often. I have friends who swear by them though, front and rear. Amazing traction for such a minimal, fast rolling tire.

  12. #12
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    Karmas are somewhat similar to the Crow or Raven but their tread pattern is deeper and their rubber compound is less pliable. They're good mud racing tires. Excellent traction for a racing tire and perhaps what you're looking for on the rear.

  13. #13
    ups and downs
    Reputation: rockyuphill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    15,325
    The Nevegal 1.95 DTC Lite is still up in the 550-580gm weight range. The Nevegal 2.1 DTC is over 600gms. In that weight range you could go with a Conti X-King 2.4 RaceSport at 580-585gms. In Black Chili rubber it rolls extremely fast and quiet. On an XTR rim it is 56mm wide across the carcass and has taller side knobs, but would be a good match to a Race King 2.2 in the back in the dry. In muddy conditions it doesn't have the directional stability of a Mountain King 2.4 SS so that would be a better match for tread depth and grip to the MK 2.2 SS in the rear.
    I'm a member of NSMBA and IMBA Canada

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,961
    if you need confidence descending i would say try a Specialized Captain in the front. i always say they are so slow rolling, and that i wouldn't race with one, but they are amazing for traction. i had been training on a set all winter and then did a local race the other week on my normal race tires, the difference in traction caught me totally off guard a few times! took me a while to get back into the groove of pushing the limits of my traction and working that edge of drifting instead of just slamming through corners as hard as i please.
    Try to be good.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    300
    Nevegal has a super high rolling resistance, so I would not recommend it for XC racing

    Look here:

    Tire test results from german "bike" magazine

  16. #16
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    Very interesting numbers, pretty much confirms what I've experienced. Wish they'd test more tires.


    Quote Originally Posted by EthanDM
    Nevegal has a super high rolling resistance, so I would not recommend it for XC racing

    Look here:

    Tire test results from german "bike" magazine

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    2,089
    Re Captain: I've found the Captain to be less than ideal on hard pack and loose over hard. I'm convinced it's the spacing of the intermediate knobs. The large gap from one to the next gives it a vague feeling when you aren't all the way over on the cornering edge. I actually like the Fast Trak LK better. They've been OK in full on loose conditions though.

    I like the Nobby Nic in a 2.1 or 2.25 better for when I want a more aggressive 26" front tire, that is also fairly durable. Otherwise I absolutely LOVE the Rocket Ron 2.4". It's a freaking monster. The casing is huge and the knobs are about 2x the size of the 2.25" size. It's still quite light. Obviously the sidewalls are not super durable.

  18. #18
    Don't be a sheep
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,388
    Quote Originally Posted by TunicaTrails
    Karmas are somewhat similar to the Crow or Raven but their tread pattern is deeper and their rubber compound is less pliable. They're good mud racing tires. Excellent traction for a racing tire and perhaps what you're looking for on the rear.
    Actually the Crow/Raven are similar to the Karma. Stan gets his tires from Kenda and they are just Karmas (which were arounf waaayyy before stans tires) with the knobs rotated 45 degrees. Personally love the Karma as a front tire and the Klimax for the rear here in SoCal.
    "Do not touch the trim"

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Fakie1999's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    911
    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    Actually the Crow/Raven are similar to the Karma. Stan gets his tires from Kenda and they are just Karmas (which were arounf waaayyy before stans tires) with the knobs rotated 45 degrees. Personally love the Karma as a front tire and the Klimax for the rear here in SoCal.
    actually, if you look at the pictures, the karma knobs look about twice the height of stans. That checkering also goes around the whole tire on the sides of stans. I have ravens, and ran them last year. I liked the speed, just didnt like cornering of them. I switched to racing ralphs.

  20. #20
    T.W.O.
    Reputation: mimi1885's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,172
    If you like the grip of the nev but like less rolling resistance you may want to try Excavator. If you want lighter weight I like Nobby nic 2.25.

  21. #21
    likes to ride bikes
    Reputation: TunicaTrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    893
    Agreed, the Karmas are not the same as Crows/Ravens. I own them all. They are quite different tires, rubber compound actually being the most important distinction. The pattern is somewhat similar in spacing, but not design.

    Now, Notubes Raven and Crow 2.0s are almost exactly alike. A Notubes tire is a faster and more compliant tubeless racing tire than a Karma, but as I said before, I keep the Karmas around for mud.



    Quote Originally Posted by Fakie1999
    actually, if you look at the pictures, the karma knobs look about twice the height of stans. That checkering also goes around the whole tire on the sides of stans. I have ravens, and ran them last year. I liked the speed, just didnt like cornering of them. I switched to racing ralphs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivet
    Actually the Crow/Raven are similar to the Karma. Stan gets his tires from Kenda and they are just Karmas (which were arounf waaayyy before stans tires) with the knobs rotated 45 degrees. Personally love the Karma as a front tire and the Klimax for the rear here in SoCal.
    Last edited by TunicaTrails; 02-09-2011 at 09:22 AM.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    177
    I use one on the front as a mud race tire, at which point rolling resistance doesn't really matter.

  23. #23
    I love Pisgah
    Reputation: Duckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,407
    Big knobs 'pack up' in red clay in seconds, and are heeeeeeavy rollers from then on. ..at least until some speed is achieved to sling it off again. I'd rather use something that doesn't pack up mud to begin with. I've been known to run a Furious Fred up front in slick saturated red clay. Just gotta ride that sucker.

    Currently for my 2 sets of Olympics, I'm running Karmas and FFreds. Fwiw.
    "I've breathed the mtn air, man" Johnny Cash

    It's a long way to the top
    . . . if you wanna rock and roll (ac/dc)

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    Thanks a lot for all the people who gave their feedback!

    I was checking that rolling resistance test, and noticed the Michelin Country Mud (Michelin XCR mud) with extremely low RR and still a tyre than can be used at the front on hardpack, dry surfaces, what do you think?

    thanks guys!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    487
    I admit I am a tire freak. I maintain at least three sets of tires for different riding conditions, but I got to tell you that when I'm racing I will sacrifice a lot of traction in order to eliminate weight and rolling resistance.
    We all know that we spend most of our time climbing so I want to do all I can to help when I'm climbing.
    I'm heading out to pre run the Sagebrush route using an old set of Kenda Kli Max tires.
    Less than 400 grams per and very narrow. The time that might be lost going downhilll I'd bet will be more than compensated for during the climbs.
    Addicted to the dirt......with no hope for recovery.

  26. #26
    Rod
    Rod is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,025
    Like others have mentioned the 1.95 Nevegal stick e weighs 550 grams, grips like mad, rolls much faster than the 2.1 dtc. The knobs aren't as big. I like this tire for slick conditions. If you're uncomfortable descending this is your tire.
    There is not much choice between rotten apples.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    53
    Try the Kenda Dred Tread 2.1. Great volume, supple, tough for extreme xc conditions. Rolls great at low pressure. 650ish weight,not bad for such a robust tire. Not the best on hardpack but works really well on everything else. I have even cut/ramped the leading edge of the knobs for extra rolling resistance and believe it or not increased cornering traction. This tire gets even better as it gets worn in...honest!

  28. #28
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    10,680

    Chiming in late

    Quote Originally Posted by CB2
    I love Karmas, but they don't love me; I seem to puncture them a little too often. I have friends who swear by them though, front and rear. Amazing traction for such a minimal, fast rolling tire.
    1.9 or 2.2 Karmas? I'm trying to decide on wether to use these out here on the West Coast when the weather turns and the trails start to tighten up. I'm 135-138# riding a 29 HT with front suspension. Thinking I could get by with the 1.9's front and rear though they're listed as "CX" for some reason. They do seem quite abit lighter then the 2.2's. Which size did you run and what trail conditions do you think were causing puncturing?

    Thanks in advance.
    Wait whuuut, who did he tell you that!?!?....

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    I will recommend the 1,9 at the front, like the other guys said. Or if you cant find it, the 2.1. They are big volumen enough and confindence inspiring for every condition use. At the back like are a caterpilar...too much rolling resistance.

    Im running right now, 2.1 nevegal at the front with a MK 2.0 at the back...but Ill be changing soon the back for a small block or karma tyre...and a RK 2.0 just for racing purposes...obviusly that all this tyre choices are for dry-loose-sand conditions...

    I hope that helps.

  30. #30
    New MTB XC Racer
    Reputation: Rum Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    253

    Go for the Nev 2.1 DTC

    I've only been racing for about 4 years. 5'4" 135lbs(145lbs last year ) I have experience with 2 tires for racing. Nev 2.1 and Karm 2.0. Typically around the 25psi Nev /28psi Karma tubed.
    I think the weights are around 400g for my Karma and 650ish(forget) Nev 2.1

    The Nev definitely stick better than the Karma. Ironically my fastest time ever on a hilly rocky rooty Camp Fortune(Quebec) course has come on the Nevs on a dry day that I was too lazy too switch back to the Karmas. Kinda throws out the theories on rolling resistance to me haha! (note I do play with tire pressure a lot and think tire pressure is very relevant to rolling resistance and grip! Get it wrong and you can be far from a tires real performance...)

    Since you want to try pick up some time on the downhills I would run the Nev 2.1 because I think you will have WAY more confidence. IMHO this is more important Note my best time was on Nevs on a dry day even tho they are 500g heavier ! ! !

    Good luck and let us know what you choose.

    Cheers,
    Paul
    p.s. Hoping to have a light tubless setup this year running the Karmas first and if I don't like this set up will try the Nev up front, then if all else fails will run both Nevs. Will report back

  31. #31
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    10,680

    My setups

    Quote Originally Posted by Rum Runner
    I've only been racing for about 4 years. 5'4" 135lbs(145lbs last year ) I have experience with 2 tires for racing. Nev 2.1 and Karm 2.0.

    p.s. Hoping to have a light tubless setup this year running the Karmas first and if I don't like this set up will try the Nev up front, then if all else fails will run both Nevs. Will report back
    29-Slant 6/Karma rr
    26-Nev/Nano rr
    FS-Well they're WTB's so nevermind!
    Wait whuuut, who did he tell you that!?!?....

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    681
    Hi guys, thanks a lot for all your important feedback.

    Well, sticking to the Kenda brand (because some $$ facility), I left the Nevegal stick-e 2.1 on the front and installed a small block eight 1.95 on the rear.

    With the nevegal at 33psi and the small block at 30 psi aprox, the confidence going down is vert good, the knobies do not deflect or squirm in tight curves and the traction on loose gravel and hard pack with the small block eight at the back seems to be better than with some phytons 2.0.

    BTW, I will be extremely happy If I could run those Hutchinson phytons without the tire moving inside the rim, to the point that it takes with it the tube and results in a valve snap

    thanks!

  33. #33
    Rod
    Rod is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    5,025
    I'm glad to hear you're happy with your tire selection. I ride new tires any chance I get, I purchase them or try a friend's bike, and I have never found the traction that I get from the Nevegal in another tire. Since you're looking for a lot of traction I think you made the right choice.
    There is not much choice between rotten apples.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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