Widest 29er tire out there?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 42 of 42
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    40

    Widest 29er tire out there?

    I don't know about you but I can't believe that it is almost 2011 and we don't have a larger volume tire than the WTB WW 2.55, RR 2.4 and the other 2.4s out there. Came on tire manufactures out there give us a 2.7 or 2.8 at least!

  2. #2
    TR
    TR is offline
    Angry bunny
    Reputation: TR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,948
    Get a 49mm 26er rim and run a 3.8 Surly Larry if you really need a big tyre.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    10,035
    What are you looking for, bigger XC tires or full size DH tires with the casing and construction of a DH tire as well?

    That said, IIRC the manufacturing equipment most bike tire companies have supposedly can't fit a tire mold of any bigger outside diameter than the ones currently made.

  4. #4
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    I don't know about you but I can't believe that it is almost 2011 and we don't have a larger volume tire than the WTB WW 2.55, RR 2.4 and the other 2.4s out there. Came on tire manufactures out there give us a 2.7 or 2.8 at least!
    There is no large production manufacturer that has the equipment to make a tire that large.

    Has more to do with diameter than width.
    Last edited by shiggy; 12-28-2010 at 06:20 PM.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  5. #5
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,254
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    There is no large production manufacturer that has the equipment to make a tire that large.

    Has more to do with diameter than width.
    Not to mention the fact that there are almost no production bikes and very few custom rigs that would even fit such a tire as suggested by the OP. Add to that the suspension fork brake braces which are barely clearing 2.4's on 35mm wide rims as it stands now.

    Besides, it wouldn't be a 29"er at those gigantic sizes.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    400
    For summer riding my Ardent 2.4 on my SS plenty wide enough. I do wish for a larger tire in the winter though.

    A true 2.6 or 2.7 would be ideal for a "snow bike light" for those of us that aren't ready to spring for a full on fat bike, but would like some of the benefits. Add some studs to a 2.7 and you would have a serious winter machine.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    4,667
    I thought the Dissent was the largest now, true?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by BobShort
    For summer riding my Ardent 2.4 on my SS plenty wide enough. I do wish for a larger tire in the winter though.

    A true 2.6 or 2.7 would be ideal for a "snow bike light" for those of us that aren't ready to spring for a full on fat bike, but would like some of the benefits. Add some studs to a 2.7 and you would have a serious winter machine.
    That is exactly what I am talking about. I would like a tire of that size for the back of my half fat bike. The rear triangle of my Redline d660 can easily fit a tire larger than any of the large volume 29er tires out there. I want more options people! I cannot afford a full fat bike. I would be surprised to find out that I am the only one asking for this. The demand must be out there.

  9. #9
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmucker
    I thought the Dissent was the largest now, true?
    Not in casing volume. The casing is actually smaller than others because of the tread size. The outer diameter of all the "big" tires (including the Surlys) is within a couple of mm of each other.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  10. #10
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    That is exactly what I am talking about. I would like a tire of that size for the back of my half fat bike. The rear triangle of my Redline d660 can easily fit a tire larger than any of the large volume 29er tires out there. I want more options people! I cannot afford a full fat bike. I would be surprised to find out that I am the only one asking for this. The demand must be out there.
    There may be demand, but there is not the manufacturing capibility (didn't I already say this?). The main tire factories can not make a bigger tire than we already have.

    I doubt the Redline would fit a 700x70 knobby, let alone with snow clearance. As tires get wider they also get taller and the widest point is further from the axle. So that 2.7 would not only be ~8mm wider but that width would be 6-8mm closer to the BB.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  11. #11
    Its got what plants crave
    Reputation: Jim311's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    5,934
    I don't even really see a whole lot of need for a tire much larger than some of the 2.4ish alternatives out right now. How many real freeride or downhill 29ers can even handle a tire much larger than that anyway?
    Ocala Mountain Bike Association - www.omba.org

  12. #12
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,254
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    That is exactly what I am talking about. I would like a tire of that size for the back of my half fat bike. The rear triangle of my Redline d660 can easily fit a tire larger than any of the large volume 29er tires out there. I want more options people! I cannot afford a full fat bike. I would be surprised to find out that I am the only one asking for this. The demand must be out there.
    So your Redline has 62mm of clearance at the chain stays and room for snow/mud? (That's what my Ardent/P-35 combo measures in width, by the way)

    The Ardent 2.4" on a 35mm wide rim is an awesome "snowbike-lite" tire. You also could use a 26 inch rim, (a wider one, like a trials rim, about 47mm wide), and stick on a 26"er tire that was a 3.0 or a 2.75"er and attain a "snowbike-lite" back tire set up too. Check the fat Bike forum for more on that if you are interested.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  13. #13
    Positively negative
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,284
    Quote Originally Posted by TR
    Get a 49mm 26er rim and run a 3.8 Surly Larry if you really need a big tyre.
    Sounds like you don't need a new tire or bike, just a wheel.

    Well, I guess you will need a new tire, but it will technically be a 26".



    I know it's a kona, but you get the idea.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by TR
    Get a 49mm 26er rim and run a 3.8 Surly Larry if you really need a big tyre.
    I'm currently using a KH 47mm rim paired with a WTB WW 2.55 in the back. I don't think I can use a 26er rim because the chain stay is narrower in those places. My KH rim widens the WW making it not so tall, that is why I might be able to fit a wider tire. I actually do very well in the snow with my 3/4 fat bike I was just wishing that there were rumors out there of wider tires in the near future for 29" wheels. Thank you for your input people! Case close for now.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    310
    A wide tire is more important on the front, and Dorados can handle 2.7s. I ride 2.5 front, 2.3 rear on my downhill bike. Lack of downhill rubber is a big hurdle for 29er DH acceptance.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PanFry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    753
    WTB Kodiak

    EXCUSES ARE THE NAILS IN THE COFFIN OF FAILURE.

  17. #17
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    I'm currently using a KH 47mm rim paired with a WTB WW 2.55 in the back. I don't think I can use a 26er rim because the chain stay is narrower in those places. My KH rim widens the WW making it not so tall, that is why I might be able to fit a wider tire. I actually do very well in the snow with my 3/4 fat bike I was just wishing that there were rumors out there of wider tires in the near future for 29" wheels. Thank you for your input people! Case close for now.
    A WW LT 2.55 (very low tread) is only 58mm wide on a 24mm rim and 57 on a 36mm. The casing height actualy increases slightly.

    The bigger the tire, the wider and taller it is on a wider rim, and the widest point is further from the hub.

    The Kodiak 2.5 and Dissent 2.5 widest point is 4-5 mm higher on the 36mm rim than on the 24mm. Max width is 67 and 62.5mm.

    The WW casing becomes wider than the tread on the wider rims.

    Widest point of a Nokian Gazzalodi 26x3.0 is only ~15mm closer to the hub. Note that the stays of the Kona pictured above are distinctly S-shaped
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    11
    Hey what kona frame is that if you don't mind me asking? I have a 80mm UMA wheelset I purchased lately, that won't quite fit on my Unit 29er frame.

  19. #19
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by big_papa_nuts
    Sounds like you don't need a new tire or bike, just a wheel.

    Well, I guess you will need a new tire, but it will technically be a 26".



    I know it's a kona, but you get the idea.
    It says "Unit" on the top tube.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  20. #20
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by scremf
    Hey what kona frame is that if you don't mind me asking? I have a 80mm UMA wheelset I purchased lately, that won't quite fit on my Unit 29er frame.
    It's an '09 Unit 2-9
    link
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  21. #21
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,606
    why?

  22. #22
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    I don't know about you but I can't believe that it is almost 2011 and we don't have a larger volume tire than the WTB WW 2.55, RR 2.4 and the other 2.4s out there. Came on tire manufactures out there give us a 2.7 or 2.8 at least!
    Get yourself a pair of Dissents. At least the weight of 1380g for each tire will give you a good workout. Sounds like a recipe for 20T granny ring and a 39T out back.

    Dang, I just realized that one Dissent weighs a bit more than 4 times the welter weight XC tire I am currently running.

    BB

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,501
    *memory click*
    discussion in some magazine about the virtues of 24" wheels with 3" tires in DH applications in SoCal:
    "when you put one of those gazzaloddis on a 26" rim it becomes nearly impossible to turn! that's nearly 29" diameter of rubber flying around up there!"

    figured the current large air volume on 29er wheel or on 26er wheel discussion warranted bringing it back.
    short version: if you want fat tires on a 26er frame, get 24" wheels, if you want the same size tires on a 29er frame, get 26er wheels.
    the math's right there.
    If steel is real then aluminium is supercallafragiliniun!

  24. #24
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,717
    as a tire escalationist when i was a 26er I went from the early standard of 1.9 up to the maximum of 2.7 at my most extreme. Then I went 29er and started with the 2.35 Rampage which did everything I asked of the 2.7 on a 26er, that is except having the casing that a 2.7 would have. Upgrading to the 2.5 WTB Dissents fixed that and I now have a fat tread (which is really what I wanted) and it fits my El Mariachi which is nice.

    I do entertain getting the salsa enabler Larry combo for the front but it seems more like a novelty to me to see what it is like more than anything else.

    The extra size of the 29er tire allows you to make finer adjustments to air pressure and be able to discern a difference and it allows you to run lower pressures without the dangers of pinch flatting (which is important to me in the AZ desert).
    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: springbok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    78
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    it is almost 2011 and we don't have a larger volume tire than the WTB WW 2.55
    I feel your pain. I recently switched to WW 2.55s and they're not any better than the Exiwolfs (cheaper). That .3 of an inch is a marketing joke. The exiwolfs are a solid tire. My WW 2.55s will be finding their way on ebay.

    I also don't get why Pugsley/Pugsley like fanboys seem to think the fix is get Larrys or Endos for larger tires. It's like asking someone who drives a truck to get a semi!
    A wife and a good job have ruined many a good biker.

  26. #26
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by byknuts
    *memory click*
    discussion in some magazine about the virtues of 24" wheels with 3" tires in DH applications in SoCal:
    "when you put one of those gazzaloddis on a 26" rim it becomes nearly impossible to turn! that's nearly 29" diameter of rubber flying around up there!"

    figured the current large air volume on 29er wheel or on 26er wheel discussion warranted bringing it back.
    short version: if you want fat tires on a 26er frame, get 24" wheels, if you want the same size tires on a 29er frame, get 26er wheels.
    the math's right there.
    The Gazzalodi 3.0 is 28" and a bit tall but also weighs 1800g, about 50% more than the Surly tires
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: paul29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    That is exactly what I am talking about. I would like a tire of that size for the back of my half fat bike. The rear triangle of my Redline d660 can easily fit a tire larger than any of the large volume 29er tires out there. I want more options people! I cannot afford a full fat bike. I would be surprised to find out that I am the only one asking for this. The demand must be out there.

    I agree with you completely. There is a market for the higher volume tires. Great to hear your Redline D660 frame can handle a larger tire. I notice that 29er frames are moving in the direction of larger chain and seat stay clearance. Up to 2.7 in clearance on many of them. There is a huge market in bigger tires.
    stl 29 htail: Tru 3.3 stylo 180mm. WB 135/20mm, sram X-9. Schw RR. Hayes Trail 203mm, hbars spank777

  28. #28
    poser Administrator
    Reputation: rockcrusher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    9,717
    Quote Originally Posted by Drexler
    I don't know about you but I can't believe that it is almost 2011 and we don't have a larger volume tire than the WTB WW 2.55, RR 2.4 and the other 2.4s out there. Came on tire manufactures out there give us a 2.7 or 2.8 at least!
    picture of the widest tire I have run. Dissents on Sun MTX33 29. I have maybe 2-3mm clear in there. Comparably a rampage had over a centimeter of both sides. It rubs a bit on steep steep climbs.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Widest 29er tire out there?-0225111654.jpg  

    MTBR Posting Guidelines
    calories>electrons

  29. #29
    MTB Rider
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted
    Not to mention the fact that there are almost no production bikes and very few custom rigs that would even fit such a tire as suggested by the OP. Add to that the suspension fork brake braces which are barely clearing 2.4's on 35mm wide rims as it stands now.

    Besides, it wouldn't be a 29"er at those gigantic sizes.
    Yep, with a Rhynolite Rim and Panaracer Rampages, I have to be very good with getting my wheel dish just right. I do wish that they would widen those fork braces.

    My Karate Monkey chainstays are challenged when I am really grinding up hard climbs and flexing the frame with the same setup.

  30. #30
    MTB Rider
    Reputation: willtsmith_nwi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    3,004
    Quote Originally Posted by paul29er
    I agree with you completely. There is a market for the higher volume tires. Great to hear your Redline D660 frame can handle a larger tire. I notice that 29er frames are moving in the direction of larger chain and seat stay clearance. Up to 2.7 in clearance on many of them. There is a huge market in bigger tires.
    When we get widespread 29er downhill options, we'll see bigger tires.

    I'm starting to get as curmudgeonly as those 2.1" adherents. I don't feel the need for anything wider except for riding in snow, etc... And the correct tool for that is a fatbike which is unlikely to become a 622 in the near future. Fatbikes are really just taking off with multiple frame/fork options. Though I hope some of the wider axle options will spill back over into 29ers.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: namdoogttam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    46
    Anyone aware of newer offerings with which to update this ancient thread? I'm curious about any prospects in the 'dead zone': smaller than 29x3 but larger than 29x2.4?

    I'm not sure I can fathom why someone in the business has not tried to fill this gap yet....seems like it's an unclaimed corner of the market. Maybe there are difficulties with manufacturing, but when have manufacturing difficulties stopped anyone, when there are prospects of profit? I think this is an ignored market that has a lot of potential.

    Part of the reason I ask is because the world of winter mountain biking is exploding and morphing as it expands. There are so many dedicated, groomed, trail systems that, very often, conditions don't warrant 4" tires. When the tread is hard-packed, it's would be sweet to be able to roll on something wide, that will still fit on a snappier, lightweight, XC 29er (like, maybe 2.6" or 2.8"?).

    Where are these tires? Alternatively, what are some Wiiiiide 29x2.4 out there?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: spyghost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    974
    minion dhf 2.5
    Canfield Yelli Screamy

  33. #33
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,758
    Panaracer Fat B Nimble 3.0. Closer to a 2.7.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    473
    Shorty 2.5

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: seat_boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    2,569
    Another vote for the Fat B Nimble. Even though it's labeled as a 3" tire, it only measures 2.55"/65mm on my Blunt 35 rims. Undersized, but I'm happy about that, because it fits nicely in the back of my Karate Monkey:

    http://www.bikingtoplay.blogspot.com/
    RIGID, not "ridged" or "ridgid"
    PEDAL, not "peddle." Unless you're selling stuff

  36. #36
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,596
    Really really really wish maxxis would do a 2.5 ardent race or ikon. Ardent race preferably, I like the edge knobs more on that.

  37. #37
    Ambassador of Chub
    Reputation: Smithhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    2,823
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    Really really really wish maxxis would do a 2.5 ardent race or ikon. Ardent race preferably, I like the edge knobs more on that.
    Agreed. I could at least run one of those in front.
    "The only way we can truly control the outcome of a ride is not going on it, which is a choice I'm unwilling to make." -K.B.

  38. #38
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,879
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    Really really really wish maxxis would do a 2.5 ardent race or ikon. Ardent race preferably, I like the edge knobs more on that.
    Ardemt race in even 2.4 would make me happy. The edge knobs are just better then the normal ardent since they are lined up with each other.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,880
    FBN for the front will work with a Reba or SID. Here's some pictures on different forks down toward the end of this post.
    Panaracer Fat B Nimble 29x3.0 Singletrack Forum

  40. #40
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,596
    FBN seems exceptionally light for the size. I have a feeling it will be a sealant bleeder or I'll end up slicing on open the first time I scrub a sharp rock.

  41. #41
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Smithhammer View Post
    Agreed. I could at least run one of those in front.
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    Ardemt race in even 2.4 would make me happy. The edge knobs are just better then the normal ardent since they are lined up with each other.
    Email them. I have. They said thanks for the input and nothing more.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,880
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    FBN seems exceptionally light for the size. I have a feeling it will be a sealant bleeder or I'll end up slicing on open the first time I scrub a sharp rock.
    Every tire doesn't work on all terrain. I've got lotsa rocks an' roots but the rocks are rounded. I'm giving it a shot this season.

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
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.