Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    731

    "rolling resistance". Maxxis Ardent vs Racing Ralph vs IKON

    For the longest time I've run the Ardent front, IKON (EXO) rear combo (tubeless) on all my bikes. I've NEVER had any flat issues with any Ardent, but have torn the sidewall on the IKON twice, and just last race, got a flat in the middle of the tread that Stan's wouldn't seal.

    I feel like the Ardent rolls pretty fast actually, with the two big tread blocks in the middle. I was thinking of possibly just going Ardent front and rear. Is there really that much rolling resistance between the Ardent and IKON where you would absolutely pick the IKON for a rear tire for 6 hour and 100 mile races?

    Also, how is the Racing Ralph? I've got one of those tires hanging on the wall as it came used with a wheelset I bought. I was thinking of possibly using that.

    Or should I just throw a tube in the IKON and run that for my next race. Running tubes vs tubeless for racing scares me a little bit as I lose all the "tiny flat" protection that stans offers.

    -Tom

  2. #2
    I'd rather be riding
    Reputation: zippinveedub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    638
    I'm a fan of using up what you have, give the ralph a try and see how it is. I've never ridden one so I can't comment.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    597
    iirc, Racing Ralph's are thin-skinned, to reduce weight for racing. It would take more time and effort for the sealant to seal them properly.

    So, they'll be more fragile than the IKON's

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    731
    Meh, more fragile wouldn't be what I want, as I already consider the IKON pretty fragile. Hmmmmm.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    982
    I run the Ardent 2.25 front all the time racing and trail riding. I've had good luck with the Bontrager XDX TLR and Conti Race Kings on the rear. I've seen to many punctures thru the tread on Ikons and RR to chance a lighter tire for the rear. 60-80 grams go along way in durability. I want to finish races first and worry about a little added weight second.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    731
    I'm surprised you are having good luck with the XDX that tire's sidewalls in my experience have been made out of paper mache

    I would think if I go Conti, I'd go all the way to the X-King in the back vs the Race King. Seems to be more on par with the IKON.

  7. #7
    nya
    nya is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by trhoppe View Post
    Meh, more fragile wouldn't be what I want, as I already consider the IKON pretty fragile. Hmmmmm.
    RaR evo snakeskin are not fragile at all
    XCO results, races, riders etc http://mtbcrosscountry.com

    gearing ratios calculator http://gears.mtbcrosscountry.com

  8. #8
    Drop in?... Anyone?
    Reputation: strat819's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    241
    I have run Ikons front and back w no issue. Can not speak to the Ardent. However, I loved the RaRas when I had them (rolling wise, not cornering), but ran them as a standard tire tubeless... I was always concerned with reliability with this set up (uber light, and never had an issue... but it always entered my mind). It's important to know... 2013 RaRa's are different from 2012 and other previous years. This is the third generation... and promises to have better grip while carving (we will see). In addition, the TR Ready 2.25 versions are touted as 530g each. That's light for a TR ready tires, and the 2.25 size should be a real good roller... at lower pressures... while making the tire more reliable (in theory). I just switched to the 2013 RaRas from the Ikons... On paper, they look like the perfect race tire for the Rocky Mtns. I am not at all concerned w reliability on a 2.25 TR Ready tire in the 500g range (similar to the Ikon weight... at a smaller size).

    Do not go back to tubes!!! Whatever you do!!!!!!
    Last edited by strat819; 03-26-2013 at 08:51 AM.
    "Money can't buy you happiness. But it can buy you a yacht and you can sail right up next to it!" David Lee Roth

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    646

    Re: "rolling resistance". Maxxis Ardent vs Racing Ralph vs IKON

    Quote Originally Posted by nya View Post
    RaR evo snakeskin are not fragile at all
    This is my experience as well. Snakeskin all the way.

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    982
    Quote Originally Posted by nya View Post
    RaR evo snakeskin are not fragile at all
    This entirely depends on your geographical location. In Arizona any tire sold as a light "XC Race Tire" is fragile. Most mid weight tires in the 600-700 gram range are barley usable tubeless in Arizona.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    731
    Note to self, when I do the AZTR750, use the Ardents front and rear

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: 7daysaweek's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    1,337
    Aspens are pretty fast too. I've been on Aspen front Racing Ralph rear for about a year and half now and I've flatted the Ralph once. Never had any issue with the Aspen in rocks, roots, etc. I'm running tubes though.

    The Racing Ralph has been great. If the Ikon is giving you issues it wouldn't hurt to give the Ralph a try.

  13. #13
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    17,222
    Most definitely there is a big difference in rolling resistance between the Ardent and Ikon. As to the tear, I haven't managed to tear either of my 2 Ikon TR samples from end of 2011 - EXO and normal casing - and I ride on some seriously nasty rocks. I think that could maybe super glue the hole in the tread and put a patch over it and sealant will take care of the rest. For my terrain I much prefer the Ikon over Racing Ralph, but every one has different preferences and different terrain, so you may like the RR, give it a go as you have it.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My MTB vids

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Flat Ark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,521

    "rolling resistance". Maxxis Ardent vs Racing Ralph vs IKON

    These are/were used on my rigid SS.

    I had 2 Ikon EXO's give out on me with less than 1 months use. Torn sidewall in one and a tear in the tread on the other. Had a set of Racing Ralph's as well. They rolled well but that is about the only good thing I have to say about them. I found the traction to be pretty lacking and the sidewalls too thin. Tore the sidewall on one and sold the other on eBay before it suffered the same fate. I ran an Ardent 2.4 up front most of last year and never flatted. The Ardent rolls very well IMO but its definitely no light weight for sure. I do have two tires in particular from Geax that I am pretty happy with. The Saguaro and the Mezcal. I've been running a 2.1 Mezcal TNT out back and a Saguaro 2.2 "non-TNT" on the front. The Saguaro has nearly as much volume as the Ardent but is lighter, rolls better and seems to have pretty good sidewalls. The Mezcal is a semi-slick so it is excellent rolling but I am also amazed by how much grip I get out of it. Since most of my weight is on the rear tire I opted for the TNT version of the Mezcal just to give myself a little sidewall insurance. With those 2 tires I feel like I get a good balance of weight : durability ratio.

    I have a pretty expensive stack of lightly used tires with mostly torn sidewalls sitting in my garage. I've pretty much given up on running any tire weighing much under 600g.

  15. #15
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by trhoppe View Post
    For the longest time I've run the Ardent front, IKON (EXO) rear combo (tubeless) on all my bikes. I've NEVER had any flat issues with any Ardent, but have torn the sidewall on the IKON twice, and just last race, got a flat in the middle of the tread that Stan's wouldn't seal.

    I feel like the Ardent rolls pretty fast actually, with the two big tread blocks in the middle. I was thinking of possibly just going Ardent front and rear. Is there really that much rolling resistance between the Ardent and IKON where you would absolutely pick the IKON for a rear tire for 6 hour and 100 mile races?

    Also, how is the Racing Ralph? I've got one of those tires hanging on the wall as it came used with a wheelset I bought. I was thinking of possibly using that.

    Or should I just throw a tube in the IKON and run that for my next race. Running tubes vs tubeless for racing scares me a little bit as I lose all the "tiny flat" protection that stans offers.

    -Tom
    Hopefully you have patched the interior of the Ikon that wouldn't seal so you can use it again tubeless.

    The Maxxis LUST Ardent 2.25 front and LUST Crossmark 2.1 rear is a great combo for durable racing. Yes, they are heavier, but it's going to be hard to flat them they have so much extra rubber to make them UST tires. Might be a good choice to consider for something like a 100 mile race where you don't want to flat.
    The 14 warmest years have all occurred in the 16 years since 1997.

  16. #16
    Zaf
    Zaf is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Zaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    312

    Re: "rolling resistance". Maxxis Ardent vs Racing Ralph vs IKON

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    Hopefully you have patched the interior of the Ikon that wouldn't seal so you can use it again tubeless.

    The Maxxis LUST Ardent 2.25 front and LUST Crossmark 2.1 rear is a great combo for durable racing. Yes, they are heavier, but it's going to be hard to flat them they have so much extra rubber to make them UST tires. Might be a good choice to consider for something like a 100 mile race where you don't want to flat.
    This.
    For a durable setup it's brilliant. Also, wear an Ardent down on the front, then throw it on the rear. You'll still get plenty of life or if the UST ones and with a worn tread it rolls like an Aspen.

    Sent from my GT-P7500 using Tapatalk HD
    Trek Fuel EX 9 (2012)
    Trek Superfly AL Elite (2013)

  17. #17
    MTB B'dos
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    17,222
    Good point on the LUST casing tyres Bruce, they're not anywhere near as heavy as full on UST tyres, but the casing is much more substantial than the EXO, which for me seems to have worked and lasted really well. As to the tyre combo, I know you like the Ardent for the front, but I'll throw a word of caution that this tyre has very few transition knobs, so if you don't like to lean your bike over hard in corners and engage them, you probably won't like this tyre. I've been high sided by both my Ardents run upfront when they weren't quite leaned over enough and in the dead zone and then caught back on the center tread, will NEVER run them on any bike I ride at speed on the front. Still wish they'd listen and make a 2.3 Ignitor, think this is a great all around front tyre as it stands at 2.1", but would be fantastic at 2.3-2.4".

    Quote Originally Posted by BruceBrown View Post
    Hopefully you have patched the interior of the Ikon that wouldn't seal so you can use it again tubeless.

    The Maxxis LUST Ardent 2.25 front and LUST Crossmark 2.1 rear is a great combo for durable racing. Yes, they are heavier, but it's going to be hard to flat them they have so much extra rubber to make them UST tires. Might be a good choice to consider for something like a 100 mile race where you don't want to flat.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??
    MTB Barbados
    My MTB vids

  18. #18
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Good point on the LUST casing tyres Bruce, they're not anywhere near as heavy as full on UST tyres, but the casing is much more substantial than the EXO, which for me seems to have worked and lasted really well. As to the tyre combo, I know you like the Ardent for the front, but I'll throw a word of caution that this tyre has very few transition knobs, so if you don't like to lean your bike over hard in corners and engage them, you probably won't like this tyre.
    Duly noted.

    The OP seems to like his Ardent up front, but he didn't mention what size he was using or if he was experiencing similar handling issues that you point out.

    I've not had any problems with the Ardent 2.4 up front (monster truck tire), or the 2.25 LUST version. The Lust version I am able to run at super-low psi (in the mid to upper teens) because the thick sidewalls allow one to do so without any squirm. This makes for a very secure grip that is uncanny. Ditto with the Crossmark LUST in the rear. Weight penalty aside of those LUST tires, the traction is some of the best I have ever experienced compared to all the thinner and lighter XC tires I typically run. I have not ever had the chance to run a regular Ardent 2.25 - so maybe it is as you say, a bit of a handful in the corners. Not so with the LUST version thanks to the low psi of said tire making it a different breed - or my 2.4's.

    Love the LUST combo on my RIP for sure fire grip...

    Muddy RIP

    I don't race them that often as they are a bit of overkill for the usual courses here in the Midwest. One can get away with pretty minimal tread for the most part when things are buff. Last year was not buff due to the drought, so everything was loose which had me on Nobby Nics all year.

    This year, I plan on racing the Ikon 2.35 up front, and 2.2 in the rear if weather and conditions allow. If the drought resumes (as forecast), I'll be back on the Nics.

    Who knows? Ground is still covered in snow and the 1st racing is supposed to be on April 6/7.

    Yesterday's view of North America and the white shows the portions covered in snow. It hasn't been this snow covered this late in March in the past 10 years...

    Spring2013SnowCover

    But now I'm off track. The LUST tires came to mind when the OP mentioned his 100 miler race and flatting issues. I would error on the side of tire overkill for such a race - hence the LUST recommendation.
    The 14 warmest years have all occurred in the 16 years since 1997.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    123
    /\/\/\
    I'm in chicago and we definitely don't have snow on the ground. We haven't had it for over a week now. Teh map is pretty incorrect.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    731
    Thanks for all the responses guys!

    I looked and the Racing Ralph that I have is the super cheap non sidewall protection version, so I'll save that tire to be burned up on some training rides vs using it for racing.

    As far as the LUST versions of the tires. I've never had flat issues with the Ardent, so I'd hesitate to add weight to the bike by using that casing on the front. Maybe I've gotten lucky but I'll take it for now. I don't even use the EXO version of that tire, but use the 690 gram 2.25. I might step up to the 750 gram EXO version next time I buy just for "shits and giggles" but that won't be for another 6 months, these current tires are holding up wonderfully. It's almost uncanny. I've got 1k miles on my training front and it's been through TNGA and the Huracan 300 route (good amount of pavement) and looks damn close to new.

    As far as Ardent and sizing, I run the 2.25 version on my Superfly 100 and I love the traction. I run ~26psi on the front on the Ardent and ~28psi on the IKON rear (170lbs with gear). Those intermediate knobs are there to serve as a "you are about to be on the edge" sort of warning to me, and allow me to know where I am and know that the tire will hold if I push harder. I really like that over the "hold hold hold LET GO" of other tires. Sort of like a street tire vs R comp on a race car. I like the "gradual" letting go of the Ardent. I run the 2.4 (@ ~24psi) on my fun bike and that tire has a lot bigger intermediate knobs and has less of the transition feel with just MOAR grip everywhere. I can do stupid **** with that 2.4 on the front and get away with it. On that bike, I use the 2.25 Ardent in the rear, but that is my hucking bike.

    Bruce, you mentioned patching of the IKON. Would one of those Park Tire Boots work as a good patch, or is there something else you would recommend that you'd trust for a 6 hour race?

    The Crossmark LUST seems like it might be the next tire for me to try, but DAMN is that thing heavy at 850 grams and thin at a 2.1. A friend told me to just suck it up and buy another IKON EXO as they are really the "best option" for what I want.

    And also, I don't mean to make it sound like I flat all the damn time or anything like that. In the last 2 years I've done a good amount of races and about 4000 off road miles and I've gotten I think only 4 flats (Bontrager XR-3 sidewall tear, 2 IKON sidewall tears, 1 IKON flat (at this last race))

    -Tom

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    86
    Quote Originally Posted by tednugent View Post
    iirc, Racing Ralph's are thin-skinned, to reduce weight for racing. It would take more time and effort for the sealant to seal them properly.

    So, they'll be more fragile than the IKON's
    I run a RaRa in the front and an IKON in the rear. I wouldn't necessarily say the RaRa is thinner or more fragile. They both are pretty thin and light tires.

    However, I will say that the RaRa weeps small amounts of sealant. I get tiny little wet spots on the tire when it sits, but oddly the air pressure seems to hold.

    I JUST ordered another RaRa to try out as a rear. I'm sure it'll hook better than the IKON, but suspect the IKON rolls slightly better.
    There's only one bigger sheep than manufacturer's - consumers! - AndrewTO

  22. #22
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by trhoppe View Post
    Bruce, you mentioned patching of the IKON. Would one of those Park Tire Boots work as a good patch, or is there something else you would recommend that you'd trust for a 6 hour race?

    The Crossmark LUST seems like it might be the next tire for me to try, but DAMN is that thing heavy at 850 grams and thin at a 2.1. A friend told me to just suck it up and buy another IKON EXO as they are really the "best option" for what I want.
    Tom - I've had pretty good luck just patching with tube kit (glue and patch). Just make sure to clean the surface well, skip the step of a light sanding that one would do with a tube, glue the patch on and I usually use a clamp to hold the patch in place until it dries.

    I always follow the good visual "how to" from Utah Mountain Biking.com found here, but I use a clamp to hold the patch in place for a secure bind.

    It's worked well on non-tubeless tires and tubeless ready XC tires for me. I use the NoTubes sealant and all my patches have held.

    The Crossmark 2.1 mounted on a wide rim (all my rims are 28-30mm wide) makes for a pretty decent volume rear tire. Then again, I have Aspens, Ravens, Crows, Nanos, SB8's, Maxxlites, etc....so a 2.1 Crossmark doesn't seem too small. For that matter, my Ikon 2.2's are woefully undersized since Maxxis sizes their tires based on 60psi with tubes. I'd call my Ikon 2.2's more like 2.1's.

    BB
    The 14 warmest years have all occurred in the 16 years since 1997.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    157
    Tom, try the X-King as a rear tire. Go with the 2.4 as that is about 2.2" wide. Get the Protection version and you should be good. The X-King with Black Chili compound rolls extremely well.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    679
    I just switched from the ardent 2.25 to an ikon 2.2 on the rear. I was stunned at how much faster I was. I was immediately running about 2-3 cogs higher than normal and felt like I had endless power on some very familiar climbs. I dont know if it is weight or rolling resistance, but it was huge. I have lost a bit of traction over the ardent so I have to be careful with weight shifting on loose climbs. My ardent was pretty worn down so the difference between a new ardent could be substantial. I wasnt a big fan of the ardent in front and it was just ok in the rear. I ran it at around 22psi and I weigh 165.

    i only have one ride on the ikon so it could have been one of those days where you feel like superman.

  25. #25
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by goodmojo View Post
    I just switched from the ardent 2.25 to an ikon 2.2 on the rear. I was stunned at how much faster I was. I was immediately running about 2-3 cogs higher than normal and felt like I had endless power on some very familiar climbs. I dont know if it is weight or rolling resistance, but it was huge. I have lost a bit of traction over the ardent so I have to be careful with weight shifting on loose climbs. My ardent was pretty worn down so the difference between a new ardent could be substantial. I wasnt a big fan of the ardent in front and it was just ok in the rear. I ran it at around 22psi and I weigh 165.

    i only have one ride on the ikon so it could have been one of those days where you feel like superman.
    Superman aside, what you felt is pretty normal from the standpoint of rolling resistance and weight. In fact, I think the latest excellent Maxxis XC combo that I am dubbing the best for me is the new Ikon 2.3 up front with the 2.2 Ikon in the rear. The new Ikon 2.35 is a different beast due to the taller side lugs and makes it a great front tire, but the center lugs remain the same height as the 2.2 Ikon so it rolls just as fast up there. And the "dainty" Ikon in the rear gives you the most get up and go with traction from the Maxxis line. The two minimal tread XC Maxxis tires in the rear - Aspen and Maxxlite - I find not to provide as much bite and cornering assurance as the Ikon in the rear.

    By the way, the Ikons I run are the ligher, non-extra sidewall protection versions (both in the 2.35 and 2.2). I've had good luck here in the Midwest of not tearing tires, so I go with the cheaper, lighter versions of the Ikons. Hope I didn't just jinx myself on that...
    The 14 warmest years have all occurred in the 16 years since 1997.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 29er Racing Ralph VS. Maxxis IKON
    By gregoryb02 in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 10:59 AM
  2. Maxxis Ikon EXO 29er "Long Term" Review
    By jd1072 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 388
    Last Post: 11-21-2013, 03:24 AM
  3. Replies: 60
    Last Post: 06-21-2013, 12:47 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-05-2012, 03:02 PM
  5. Maxxis Ardent v. Racing Ralph
    By ncfisherman in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-05-2012, 02:36 AM

Posting Permissions

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