Results 1 to 36 of 36

Thread: Wider Rims

  1. #1
    17j
    17j is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    211

    Wider Rims

    Assuming weight isnt an issue.... Is there any negative to wider rims?

  2. #2
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    27,990
    If you aren't running a wide enough tire (which will be heavier), it makes the rim more susceptible to strikes, rocks clipping the edges, etc. It will also screw up the tread pattern on some tires, meaning you no longer have side-knobs where they are supposed to be. It's better to figure out what size tire you want to primarily run, and go from there. It'd be better to err on too small rather than too wide, because you can always get a wider tire and the side-knobs will be in a better location than doing the opposite, going for say a 40mm rim and then using a 2.2" tire or something. The wider the rim and the higher-volume the tire that naturally goes with it, the more challenging it is to find the right PSI, it in effect makes the setup more sensitive to PSI changes, this can cause issues when people are running low PSI of the tire folding over during hard cornering/Gs. As far as the weight, I notice in corners the wheels riding up the berms towards the outside more and not turning as fast. Everything is a tradeoff.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wrjr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    64
    Depends how wide you're talking. I recently built up a Yeti ASR for my XC race bike and went with 26mm internal width rims and do not have a single complaint - been running 2.35/2.2 tires.
    I ride & race rocky/rooty trails often, and am very happy with the higher volume.

  4. #4
    17j
    17j is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    211
    I generally run 2.35 & 2.2....thinking about a 29 Internal

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    703
    I am wondering the same thing right now as I am looking at building up a new swanky pair of carbon hoops soon. My tire sizes could range from 2.0 up to 2.35 and I might even want to try some 29er plus tires at some point (2.6 min). Can one rim accommodate such a wide range of tire sizes or would it be best to build up one set for the smaller sizes up to 2.35 or so and then one set for + tires? The + tires would probably just be for fun so they are really low priority right now, but I would like to go with a rim width that gives me the most versatility in the 2.0-2.35 range.

    Further, does anyone have any good references on this subject?

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    335
    Quote Originally Posted by 17j View Post
    I generally run 2.35 & 2.2....thinking about a 29 Internal
    I'd go 29id for the front to pair with the 2.35, and a 25-26 id for the rear. With a 30mm id I couldn't find a single 2.25 that wasn't squared off, so the side knobs weren't where I wanted them.
    Le Duke has the LB asym 28id rims, maybe he can weigh in on how the profile changes on 2.25s on those. Those seem like nice rims and that could be the happy medium width.

  7. #7
    17j
    17j is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    211
    Interesting, noticed kona heihei dl comes with I29 with 2.2 rear, and have ridden it - rides well, looks normal. Decent barometer

  8. #8
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,700
    Quote Originally Posted by euro-trash View Post
    I'd go 29id for the front to pair with the 2.35, and a 25-26 id for the rear. With a 30mm id I couldn't find a single 2.25 that wasn't squared off, so the side knobs weren't where I wanted them.
    Le Duke has the LB asym 28id rims, maybe he can weigh in on how the profile changes on 2.25s on those. Those seem like nice rims and that could be the happy medium width.
    I'm on a 28mm ID front rim and a 26mm ID Nox Teocalli rear.

    At 143lbs I'm able to get away with ~19psi front, 20-21psi rear. The wide rims keep me from rolling tires at those low pressures. I've been very pleasantly surprised by how many tires work well on the front with the 28mm ID rim. Truly a game changer vs. my older ENVE XCs at 19mm.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,213
    Quote Originally Posted by 17j View Post
    Assuming weight isnt an issue.... Is there any negative to wider rims?
    Assuming weight & rolling resistance isn't an issue, is there any negative to DH tires?

  10. #10
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,914
    Rougher ride, less tire height, and greater rolling resistance. How significant those factors are is debatable.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  11. #11
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,187
    Quote Originally Posted by 17j View Post
    I generally run 2.35 & 2.2....thinking about a 29 Internal
    No way on the i29 IMO for that size tire.

    Agree with Jayem above.

    I'd like to add that the wider profile a tire takes the better traction it gets but the slower it seems to roll to me. For XC that is less than ideal.


    Keep in mind, many tires we still run were designed around rims way narrower that what we are seeing today. I just swapped out my wider rear wheel/rim to a wheel with a Flow EX rim at i25.5. Running a DHR2 2.3. The tire feels better on the that rim, or at least no worse.

    Many 2.3 to 2.5" tires were designed around rims below the i25 width.



    The push for wider rims came when tubeless decreased pinch flats and allowed us to run lower psi. We then found the under pressurized tires rolled/burped and felt squirrely on narrow rims. We went to wider rims to support our flimsy, under pressured sidewalls. I bought into this and it does work if your trails are mild or you are not really pushing your bike hard.

    Ride aggressively, fast, and push your bike hard and you will find this does not work. There is a reason pro's in XC, Enduro, or DH are not often using very wide rims.

    Wide rims are a good choice in the corret setting with the correct tires. But, its a mistake to think a 2.3" tire, designed around an i24 rim will magically perform better on a wide rim.

    Many rides seem to think that about i29 will be the new "average". Maybe, especially if the 2.6" tires take off. I'm still a fan of 2.3" tires for trail to AM riding and think anything bigger than an i26 is dead weight and can actually hinder the tire's performance and sidewall's lifespan. I like the way a tire rolls on a rim that size - they feel quick and nimble. Wider setups feels slow.

    Then again the new style for everything is slow and sluggish... Ooops, mean low and stable.

  12. #12
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    4,914
    Some the conversation I have had with Pro's recently have been about different width wheels for front and rear. Wide front rims for support and contact patch, and narrower rears for flat resistance and rolling resistance.


    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Many rides seem to think that about i29 will be the new "average". Maybe, especially if the 2.6" tires take off. I'm still a fan of 2.3" tires for trail to AM riding and think anything bigger than an i26 is dead weight and can actually hinder the tire's performance and sidewall's lifespan. I like the way a tire rolls on a rim that size - they feel quick and nimble. Wider setups feels slow.

    Then again the new style for everything is slow and sluggish... Ooops, mean low and stable.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brentos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,687
    Quote Originally Posted by LMN View Post
    Some the conversation I have had with Pro's recently have been about different width wheels for front and rear. Wide front rims for support and contact patch, and narrower rears for flat resistance and rolling resistance.
    I started doing this I think in 2011. I liked it so much that I have done it since. I like what it does for the relative tire profile front to rear and the resultant breakaway characteristics of the tires. I prefer it to staggering tire sizes, as that often results in a more squared off rear tire profile relative to the front and you end up with a lower volume tire that can't adequately prevent pinch flats.

    Current setup is ENVE M60 HV (26mm) front, paired with a M60 (23mm) or M50 (21mm) rear. Back in 2011 I paired an AM (24mm) front with XC (19mm) rear, and had my revelation. It distinctly felt like the bike was carving through turns like a ski on snow, rather than wanting to push. With two AM's the bike felt a bit more sluggish and wanted to self steer (relative to the XC rear, AM front combo).

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    714

    Wider Rims

    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I'm on a 28mm ID front rim and a 26mm ID Nox Teocalli rear.

    At 143lbs I'm able to get away with ~19psi front, 20-21psi rear. The wide rims keep me from rolling tires at those low pressures. I've been very pleasantly surprised by how many tires work well on the front with the 28mm ID rim. Truly a game changer vs. my older ENVE XCs at 19mm.
    I think there's two things to think about when it comes to how well the tires work: width and rim profile. Some of the newer rims are just much better at holding the bead on and airing up.

    My friend and I both have wheelsets with older light bicycle rims--23mm internal. He cracked one (still rideable and held air--also broke a power tap rear axle, so that thing took a freaking beating) and replaced it with a newer version that is 27mm. Boy does it air up tires easily. The old rims are a huge fight, new ones are a cakewalk. The old rims the bead falls off at 0 psi until it gets glued on by sealant. The new ones you have to push it off with significant force. He doesn't burp at all anymore and can run lower pressures. Just like you, he's loving it.

    It's the same story with my buddies Pivot Mach 6. Those al DT Swiss wheels hold beads so well. Much much better than my old xr4.2s used to. And those DT rims aren't very wide either. I think he has xm1900 spline which from google is like 19mm inner?

    Going from the 23mm to 27mm internal also made minimal difference in tire width. It's ~1mm wider now. He says he can't tell any difference riding. I can't tell any difference looking at them.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    706
    I love my 25 ID carbon on 2.35s. I really do run much lower psi vs my 23 id aluminum and do not have rim strikes at those lower PSIs.

  16. #16
    My other ride
    Reputation: Sidewalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Posts
    1,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I'm on a 28mm ID front rim and a 26mm ID Nox Teocalli rear.

    At 143lbs I'm able to get away with ~19psi front, 20-21psi rear. The wide rims keep me from rolling tires at those low pressures. I've been very pleasantly surprised by how many tires work well on the front with the 28mm ID rim. Truly a game changer vs. my older ENVE XCs at 19mm.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    I'm on 23mm wheels with a 2.35 front at 20 psi (same weight), no rolling issues.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    703
    It sounds like for sure I am going to have a different set of wheels for 29+ tires than I am for XC racing since they are just totally different rims. It sounds like the range you guys are using is about 21-29 mm and inversely correlated to the tire pressures you are using (lower pressure = wider rim).

    Since I have never really been comfortable at super low pressure I am thinking for my XC racing setup 21 rear and 24-26 front. I typically ride a RaRa F/R 2.35/2.25 combo at 24/26, maybe a tad lower if I'm feeling risky and higher if I am more concerned about finishing rather than winning. I'm 155 and mainly ride a light rigid bike.

    Does 21 rear, 24-26 front sound about right to you?

    Anyone have any good references or articles on the subject?

  18. #18
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,700
    Why are you using more pressure up front?

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    601
    Quote Originally Posted by litany View Post
    I think there's two things to think about when it comes to how well the tires work: width and rim profile. Some of the newer rims are just much better at holding the bead on and airing up.

    My friend and I both have wheelsets with older light bicycle rims--23mm internal. He cracked one (still rideable and held air--also broke a power tap rear axle, so that thing took a freaking beating) and replaced it with a newer version that is 27mm. Boy does it air up tires easily. The old rims are a huge fight, new ones are a cakewalk. The old rims the bead falls off at 0 psi until it gets glued on by sealant. The new ones you have to push it off with significant force. He doesn't burp at all anymore and can run lower pressures. Just like you, he's loving it.

    It's the same story with my buddies Pivot Mach 6. Those al DT Swiss wheels hold beads so well. Much much better than my old xr4.2s used to. And those DT rims aren't very wide either. I think he has xm1900 spline which from google is like 19mm inner?

    Going from the 23mm to 27mm internal also made minimal difference in tire width. It's ~1mm wider now. He says he can't tell any difference riding. I can't tell any difference looking at them.
    My Flow MK3's air up great with 2.35 Maxxis tires. No issues getting the bead bedded in without sealant first, and they do take some effort to pop out when changing tires. Makes me feel more secure. I am also digging the profile of the tires on these rims, no complaints, and I am unlikely to go narrower in the future, either tire or rim.

  20. #20
    jct
    jct is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    920
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Why are you using more pressure up front?

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    i think he's talking about rim inner widths...wider front, narrower rear.
    i will not yield to DH traffic.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    39
    This is almost complete hearsay but Emily Batty is often seen training and even racing on blacked out 2.35 Ikons because the new Tfek Kovee xxx wheels are wide and those tires were allegedly designed around a wider rim

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    703
    Quote Originally Posted by jct View Post
    i think he's talking about rim inner widths...wider front, narrower rear.
    That's right... sorry about the miscommunication.

    21 mm inner rear with a 2.1" tire at ~26 psi, 24-26 mm inner front with a 2.25"-2.35" tire at ~24 psi.

    But now that I'm looking at them I'm thinking maybe the flyweight 22 mm rims from LightBicycle for both front and rear: https://www.lightbicycle.com/bead-ho...ompatible.html

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,702
    I have a 2017 Hei Hei Trail (140mm front/140mm rear) that came stock with WTB i29 rims, boost SLX hubs front/rear and SLX cassette. I had them set up with a Maxxis Tomahawk 2.3 on front and Vittorria Morsa 2.3 on rear.

    I switched over to some older wheels which were Hope hubs with Boostinator adaptors (and redished) with Velocity Blunt SS (i26.5) front and Spank Oozy Trail 295 (i24.5) rear with the same tires.

    There were some other changes that included switching to lighter crankset, cassette, rear der as well.

    Immediately, I noticed the bike rolled (coasted) faster, not just a little bit faster either. I can't imagine that the drag on the SLX hubs is that much worse then these Hope hubs or the weight savings was enough to make that much difference. So I am speculating it is the inner width difference that better matched what these tires were designed around.

    I also noticed that a Maxxis 2.3 HRII did not feel good on the front on the i29 rim. That has been mentioned before that the HRII is already a square-ish tire that gets squared even more on wider rims. A Maxxis Ardent 2.2 on the rear also did not feel very good on the i29 compared to the i24.5.

    Having felt this difference in rolling resistance, I'm not sure about going back to i29 rims. There are some Bontrager Line 30 carbon rims with i29 width that I am looking at but hesitate.

    Could I have just had a bad experience using the wrong tires on these rims. Is it worth trying again with some more thought into tire selection? The decision here is going with some carbon i29 rims on purpose built boost hubs vs staying on my alloy rims and boostinator hubs.
    Last edited by ashwinearl; 10-31-2017 at 05:34 AM.

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    955
    30mm IW width rims with 2.1 tires.....no desire to go back to skinny rims.
    I run 17fr/20rr psi, no rolling or burping.

    I think the near future will see somewhere around 28-30mm and 2.2ish tires as the norm for XC.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinearl View Post
    I have a 2017 Hei Hei Trail (140mm front/140mm rear) that came stock with WTB i29 rims, boost SLX hubs front/rear and SLX cassette. I had them set up with a Maxxis Tomahawk 2.3 on front and Vittorria Morsa 2.3 on rear.

    I switched over to some older wheels which were Hope hubs with Boostinator adaptors (and redished) with Velocity Blunt SS (i26.5) front and Spank Oozy Trail 295 (i24.5) rear with the same tires.

    There were some other changes that included switching to lighter crankset, cassette, rear der as well.

    Immediately, I noticed the bike rolled (coasted) faster, not just a little bit faster either. I can't imagine that the drag on the SLX hubs is that much worse then these Hope hubs or the weight savings was enough to make that much difference. So I am speculating it is the inner width difference that better matched what these tires were designed around.

    I also noticed that a Maxxis 2.3 HRII did not feel good on the front on the i29 rim. That has been mentioned before that the HRII is already a square-ish tire that gets squared even more on wider rims. A Maxxis Ardent 2.2 on the rear also did not feel very good on the i29 compared to the i24.5.

    Having felt this difference in rolling resistance, I'm not sure about going back to i29 rims. There are some Bontrager Line 30 carbon rims with i29 width that I am looking at but hesitate.

    Could I have just had a bad experience using the wrong tires on these rims. Is it worth trying again with some more thought into tire selection? The decision here is going with some carbon i29 rims on purpose built boost hubs vs staying on my alloy rims and boostinator hubs.

    Way to much going on with your bike to explain anything that is going on. I am also not sure what you think your tires are "designed for" That's a weird combo. Maybe you just bought what was available at your store?

    It sound like this is your trail bike and maybe even leaning towards enduro?

    If you are running the DHRII front, you can pare well with an aggressor rear. or even a 2.35 Ikon if you like drift. The DHR 2.3 is not very wide. The 2.2 casing looks pretty weird on a 29mm ID. and completely squares off the tread.

    I like a lot of drift when racing down flow tracks or chunky enduro lines. My preferred is a Hans Dampf/Ikon. Both in 2.35.

    What are your goals and uses of the bike?

  26. #26
    Salty member
    Reputation: Conspearasea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    The DHR 2.3 is not very wide. The 2.2 casing looks pretty weird on a 29mm ID. and completely squares off the tread.



    ?
    Hereís a 2.3 DHR on i30 Nox rim...i went to 2.4 WT and itís definitely better but still measures short

    DHF IME comes much closer to measuring up
    Wider Rims-img_1754.jpg


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2018 Santa Cruz Bronson Carbon C-S Build NOX/Hope Hoops
    If you're not bleeding, you're not trying...

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by Conspearasea View Post
    Hereís a 2.3 DHR on i30 Nox rim...i went to 2.4 WT and itís definitely better but still measures short

    DHF IME comes much closer to measuring up



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yup, and that is at the cornering knobs. The casing is even smaller. on my trails, big casing with high TPI is my preference.


    The 2.35 IKON on the other hands is very large once broken in and aired up. Mine is 59.5mm at the casing on a 25 ID rim.

    The comment about the 2.2 I made is in regards to Maxxis' 2.2 (ikon) casing. I installed one on a flow rim and it looks quite silly.

    Also worth noting that my 2.25 aspen and 2.3 Forekaster seem to share the same casing possibly.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    404
    What's the thought on running symmetric width tires F/R, but with a lighter tread pattern out back?

  29. #29
    Salty member
    Reputation: Conspearasea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    112
    Yeah the casing is almost anemic for sure

    Wanted to share an actual picture of the discussed tire on a i30 rim for anyone who might need to see.

    Ardent Race tires on I30 had some pretty big casing volume on my xc rig. Too much sidewall exposure for my taste though


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2018 Santa Cruz Bronson Carbon C-S Build NOX/Hope Hoops
    If you're not bleeding, you're not trying...

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    706
    Quote Originally Posted by alexdi View Post
    What's the thought on running symmetric width tires F/R, but with a lighter tread pattern out back?
    That's pretty much all I run, if I understand your question. Identical width tires with a better breaking and turning front tire? FS is 2.35s and my HT is 2.25s

  31. #31
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    8,700
    Quote Originally Posted by alexdi View Post
    What's the thought on running symmetric width tires F/R, but with a lighter tread pattern out back?
    I thought that's what most people did when looking for grip and speed.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    404
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    That's pretty much all I run, if I understand your question. Identical width tires with a better breaking and turning front tire? FS is 2.35s and my HT is 2.25s
    Indeed. Some posts above describe staggered setups, both in tire size and rim width. I'm dubious that most courses would favor a 2.2 over a 2.3 or above, even in the back.

  33. #33
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post

    Many rides seem to think that about i29 will be the new "average". Maybe, especially if the 2.6" tires take off. I'm still a fan of 2.3" tires for trail to AM riding and think anything bigger than an i26 is dead weight and can actually hinder the tire's performance and sidewall's lifespan. I like the way a tire rolls on a rim that size - they feel quick and nimble. Wider setups feels slow.

    Would like to update the thoughts I put out there this summer.

    2.6" tires on my current 275 bike with i35 rims have turned out to be way better than I thought.

    This is not likely completely applicable to xc racing on a 29" wheel but I think some info may be extrapolated.

    The 2.6" tires seem to have a lighter casing and roll much better than the 2.5" WT Maxxis tires I tried. The durability is fine. Almost like getting something for nothing. They grip extremely well and roll relatively fast.


    How all this will carry over to a 29" tire is something I'm very curious to see. So much so that for next season I may build up a 29" FS frame if I can find one that handles the 2.6 x 29 tires. This past experiment with the 2.6 x 275" tires went very well. This set up works so well for so many applications I would not buy a 275 frame that could not take 2.6" tires. I can't see myself going back to skinnier tires for trail/AM riding. I'm not a plus fan either, and actually was a 2.3" tire on "narrower" rim hold-out for a long time.

    Maxxis seems to be lagging on the 29 x 2.6 front but likely because there are just not that many frames out there that can take that set up.


    Again, how much all this applies to xc riding/racing - shrug shoulders - but for trail/AM riding the sweet spot is wider than I thought. For xc I'm guessing the same. I can see something like an i30 rim with a Maxxis 2.5" tire but not using their current 2.5 WT burly, slow rolling casing, but rather the faster rolling 2.6" casing - just sized down a bit.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,702
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    Way to much going on with your bike to explain anything that is going on. I am also not sure what you think your tires are "designed for" That's a weird combo. Maybe you just bought what was available at your store?

    It sound like this is your trail bike and maybe even leaning towards enduro?

    If you are running the DHRII front, you can pare well with an aggressor rear. or even a 2.35 Ikon if you like drift. The DHR 2.3 is not very wide. The 2.2 casing looks pretty weird on a 29mm ID. and completely squares off the tread.

    I like a lot of drift when racing down flow tracks or chunky enduro lines. My preferred is a Hans Dampf/Ikon. Both in 2.35.

    What are your goals and uses of the bike?
    Hi,
    When I say "what the tires for designed for" I am referring to what internal rim width the tires were originally designed around. My guess is that like many old (pre 2017/18) tires they were designed for sub 25mm rim width.

    This bike is a fast pedaling 140mm front/140mm rear marketed as a trail bike. I'd put it in the XC on steroids category more than a full on trail bike. My goals are fast riding on primitive XC single track in Upstate NY. Lots of pedaling, grinding single track, short rough downhills, short steep climbs. I am not racing but do like to go hard and get annoyed if the tires are too draggy. A DHRII on the rear had great climbing traction but I felt elsewhere it was like Velcro and just sucked my energy away.

    The bike came stock with Maxxis Tomahawk 2.3 front and rear. I've collected some tires that include 2.3 HRII, 2.2 Ardent, 2.3 Vittoria Morsa, 2.4 Chunkey Monkey. We have lots of wet roots/rocks so tend to have a set for dry and swap out to something else for wet.

    So I was trying these different tires on the i29 rims that came on this bike.

    The difference in drag when using the same tires on the narrower vs i29 tires is what is giving me pause to build my next set in i29mm. Given other's discussion, I think a light 2.6 tire newly designed for i29 or wider rims will probably match my goals and not suffer from the drag I experienced.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,702
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Would like to update the thoughts I put out there this summer.

    2.6" tires on my current 275 bike with i35 rims have turned out to be way better than I thought.
    Which 2.6 tires have you tested?

  36. #36
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,187
    Quote Originally Posted by ashwinearl View Post
    Which 2.6 tires have you tested?


    DHF 3C front.

    Forekaster Dual compound rear.


    About 180-185 geared up. 17/20 psi.



    Grippy, durable, fast.


    Just bought another set of the same as Jenson is running a sale.

Similar Threads

  1. Going with wider rim up front but is wider on rear as important?
    By MarkyMarksXC in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-31-2015, 11:38 AM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 05-11-2013, 12:37 PM
  3. Tubeless: Wider rims are better.
    By Douger-1 in forum Arizona
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 12-15-2011, 02:23 PM
  4. Replies: 47
    Last Post: 05-04-2011, 06:49 PM
  5. Performance of Wider Rims
    By Pigtire in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-15-2011, 06:07 AM

Members who have read this thread: 94

Posting Permissions

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