Bontrager 29x2.6 - XR4 vs XR5- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 66 of 66
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    80

    Bontrager 29x2.6 - XR4 vs XR5

    I've owned an XR4 29x2.4 and would like to try a 2.6 up front. I was going to get the XR4 but now I see the XR5 in a 2.6. Anyone have any experience with the XR5? Curious if the weight is close to claimed. Thanks.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sethd513's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    290
    I know you are going 29er but I just got a 27.5 set of se4 and se5. Same as xr just a touch heavier casing. I got the se5 In a 2.6 and the se4 In a 2.4. The se5 is about 1/8 inch bigger but seems to be measuring at 64mm wide not 66 on a 30.5i rim. Leading me to want a 2.6 se4 in the rear to even things out. Not sure. Defiantly heavier then the se4 much heavier but I donít have exact weights.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  3. #3
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by phrider View Post
    I've owned an XR4 29x2.4 and would like to try a 2.6 up front. I was going to get the XR4 but now I see the XR5 in a 2.6. Anyone have any experience with the XR5? Curious if the weight is close to claimed. Thanks.

    XR4 is typically a better front than XR5.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    XR4 is typically a better front than XR5.
    Thanks, I decided to pickup an XR4 2.6 today.

  5. #5
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,120
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    XR4 is typically a better front than XR5.
    Than XR5? That seems odd. XR4 over XR3, I can understand. The SE5/GE5 seems to have always gotten great reviews, only complaint was no 2.5" size. Looking at the tread design, the XR5 looks similar to a DHR2, which should be an awesome front tire.
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sethd513's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    290
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Than XR5? That seems odd. XR4 over XR3, I can understand. The SE5/GE5 seems to have always gotten great reviews, only complaint was no 2.5" size. Looking at the tread design, the XR5 looks similar to a DHR2, which should be an awesome front tire.
    Only reason Iíd throw se5 out back is if the 2.6 fit for one and I put a 2.8 se4 up front


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OwenM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,363
    Nobody's talking about the back.
    XR/SE...the higher the number, the bigger, taller and fewer the knobs, the stronger the braking, and more aggressive the cornering ability.
    One's not "better" than the other, they're just different. Take a 4, drop the transition knobs, beef up the center and side knobs, you get the 5.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenM View Post
    Nobody's talking about the back.
    XR/SE...the higher the number, the bigger, taller and fewer the knobs, the stronger the braking, and more aggressive the cornering ability.
    One's not "better" than the other, they're just different. Take a 4, drop the transition knobs, beef up the center and side knobs, you get the 5.
    Right, which is great for lift service. Going fast at high lean angles.

    For trail riding, a lot of people will miss those intermediate knobs. Which is why a previous poster said that many people prefer the XR4/SE4 to the XR5/SE5.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    Just a little FYI for those, who like me didn't know or realise, but along with the jump to a bit stouter/heavier casing going from XR to SE you also get softer rubber, so better grip, especially in the wet, something to consider depending on where you live and ride - I did not know this or that the difference was as substantial as I found out, like going from Maxxis Single compound to 3C MaxxGrip nearly.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  10. #10
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    going from XR to SE you also get softer rubber

    I can find zero evidence that this is true. 61a/50a across the board.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    On the XR/SE4 you are correct, but on the XR/SE3 there is a substantial change, 62a/60a on the XR to 61a/50a on the SE. I was given a few of the XR3s and really liked them as a fast rolling XC tyre that could still handle some good chunk, but when/if there was wet, it was super sketchy, so finding that for a small weight gain I could maybe get ride of alot of that wet weather feel, could be a potential tyre again. Side note, never felt the XR casing lacked, have pinged/popped it off our coral that it was soloud the guy at the back of the group heard it and not even a decent scratch on the casing.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    I can find zero evidence that this is true. 61a/50a across the board.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  12. #12
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    On the XR/SE4 you are correct, but on the XR/SE3 there is a substantial change, 62a/60a on the XR to 61a/50a on the SE.

    This thread is about 29 x 2.6" tires. None of the XR/SE3's come in anything larger than 2.4.

    Your observation holds true for those tires, this just isn't the place for it.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OwenM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,363
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    Right, which is great for lift service. Going fast at high lean angles.

    For trail riding, a lot of people will miss those intermediate knobs. Which is why a previous poster said that many people prefer the XR4/SE4 to the XR5/SE5.
    For sure, but the OP didn't specify the type of trails or riding, just wanted to know the difference. The XR5(ok, my 2.3" one compared to the 2.3 and 2.4" XR4) doesn't need any higher a lean angle than a XR4 for the side knobs to hook up, just digs into loose stuff better because its knobs are taller and wider. Each has its own set of compromises, and either could work better, depending on what you want from the tire. I use the XR5 up front over the XR4, which I have used up front and currently use for a rear tire, strictly because of that additional traction when cornering on loose over soft surfaces where the knobs digging deeper gives me more confidence(whether that's actually necessary where I ride is quite debatable, but the fact that it allows me, at my skill level, to ride more confidently is not).

  14. #14
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    This 2.6 at 900g for 27.5 is looking attractive, especially since Conti can't get their TK 2.6 released.

    50a on the side knobs works for me on a tire that is 2.6 or over.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,351
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenM View Post
    Nobody's talking about the back.
    XR/SE...the higher the number, the bigger, taller and fewer the knobs, the stronger the braking, and more aggressive the cornering ability.
    One's not "better" than the other, they're just different. Take a 4, drop the transition knobs, beef up the center and side knobs, you get the 5.
    They need to make a 6 the 4 with better side knobs.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    24,080
    You are right, but did not know that it only applied to the <"3" series of tyres, thought it went all the way up/through the lot, had only looked at the XR3.

    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    This thread is about 29 x 2.6" tires. None of the XR/SE3's come in anything larger than 2.4.

    Your observation holds true for those tires, this just isn't the place for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Harold
    You're doing mtbr wrong, you're supposed to get increasingly offended by the implications that you're doing ANYTHING wrong.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OwenM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,363
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    They need to make a 6 the 4 with better side knobs.
    You know you're not gonna get any argument from me there!
    Have to confess I'm still a little HD curious, but I'm happy enough with the XR4 and XR5 that I already bought spares.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,351
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenM View Post
    You know you're not gonna get any argument from me there!
    Have to confess I'm still a little HD curious, but I'm happy enough with the XR4 and XR5 that I already bought spares.
    I like the XR4 for when its dry, but we only had 2 weeks of that this whole season. Once wet or really loose it slides a bit more than I like but they're nicer to peddle than minions.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sethd513's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    290
    Today was my first ride with the se5 2.6 front and se4 2.4 rear. Iím going from front and rear se5 2.3.

    Front 2.6 se5 is a great tire. Today everything was sloppy. I was able to back off my pressure a ton and could feel the larger knobs really working for me.

    Rear se4 2.4 was not so great. Going from a 2.3se5 it was noticeably fast. Also climbing grip was just about even. The only downside is the off camber slick stuff. That tire doesnít really like it. If the 2.6 se4 is larger then the 2.4 as compared to the 2.3 and 2.6 se5, then that would be better off. My bike wonít fit that though. Not sure what rear tire will be but the 2.6 se5 up front is the bomb.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    235
    Which of these tires would be the better choice for the front on wet and very rooty trails?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,313
    About 3 years ago, my LBS loaded me up with a bunch of Bontrager tires. The SE and XR 4 are my favorites. I was told all of these tires were 120 TPI ..the SE4 were a variant that was never release ...some of them said 29 x 2.55 on the sidewall. The SE4 2.55 120 TPI are probably my all time favorite tire because of the volume, rolling restistance and incredible grip on wet limestone.

    I notice the SE4 now only come in 60 TPI. I'm looking to pick up a new tire to survive a long, remote bikepacking expedition into Mexico. Will I notice the TPI difference in an SE4 29x2.4 on the rear of my bike on dry, steep, rocky jeep road?

  22. #22
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by GlazedHam View Post
    About 3 years ago, my LBS loaded me up with a bunch of Bontrager tires. The SE and XR 4 are my favorites. I was told all of these tires were 120 TPI ..the SE4 were a variant that was never release ...some of them said 29 x 2.55 on the sidewall. The SE4 2.55 120 TPI are probably my all time favorite tire because of the volume, rolling restistance and incredible grip on wet limestone.

    I notice the SE4 now only come in 60 TPI. I'm looking to pick up a new tire to survive a long, remote bikepacking expedition into Mexico. Will I notice the TPI difference in an SE4 29x2.4 on the rear of my bike on dry, steep, rocky jeep road?

    Once you're all loaded up with overnight gear/food/etc, no, I don't think you'll be able to tell much difference in any direction.

    SE4 is smart -- much more puncture resistant casing.

  23. #23
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,342
    Looking to pick up some rolling speed and am ok with giving up some grip over a DHF/DHR set by going to a 2.4 xr4/se4. Plan on running i30mm rims.

    Thoughts?

  24. #24
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Looking to pick up some rolling speed and am ok with giving up some grip over a DHF/DHR set by going to a 2.4 xr4/se4. Plan on running i30mm rims.

    Thoughts?

    2.4's on i30's are going to be very square. Grippy for certain but fast? I wouldn't think so.

  25. #25
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,342
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    2.4's on i30's are going to be very square. Grippy for certain but fast? I wouldn't think so.
    Hmmm.

    Thanks for the feedback.

    The decision is actually between an i26 and i29. While it's probably a "hair splitting" proposition, I was thinking the i29 to retain the versatility of going to a 2.6 occasionally (maybe) while still being an ok choice with a 2.4. Lots of riders seem to be going this route without reporting too much detriment in roll, but that is just anecdotal.

  26. #26
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    The round-ish 2.4s like the Bontragers, Spec Butcher, WTB Breakout do ok on i30 rims. It's the semi-slicks that feel too square.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by mikesee View Post
    2.4's on i30's are going to be very square. Grippy for certain but fast? I wouldn't think so.
    not true; I am using a XR4 2.4 on a Bonty Line 30 Pro. Which, for whatever reason known only to Trek, is officially 29mm inner width, but I think we can say it's materially the same thing.

    at any rate, the XR4 2.4 has a very round profile on rims that width. you would have to get quite a bit wider to be square.

  28. #28
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    The XR5 is round as well. I was surprised when I opened the box because I thought they were just a DHR clone. Haven't mounted them up, yet.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dr Gigi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    354
    I've got a 2.6 xr4/xr2 combo mounted to 35mm id rims. Both tires are very rounded, and the xr2 actually looks to be wider than the xr4.

  30. #30
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,342
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    not true; I am using a XR4 2.4 on a Bonty Line 30 Pro. Which, for whatever reason known only to Trek, is officially 29mm inner width, but I think we can say it's materially the same thing.

    at any rate, the XR4 2.4 has a very round profile on rims that width. you would have to get quite a bit wider to be square.

    Good to hear. Though maybe I'm cherry picking suggestions that I'd prefer.

    I know you and Mikesee have been around awhile and even there I'm getting at least a slightly different take on the 2.4 on a wider rim.

    So, the rim I'm looking at is actually an i29. Also, Trek does spec the xr 2.4 on bikes with an i29 rim. Not saying that is the best setup for a fast roller but at least it doesn't sound like it would be bad.

    The stuff I ride is immensely rocky and chattery. And long days in the saddle can be fatiguing and not fun on those types of trails. Tuning out the chatter with a shock, even a good one, is tough. But a good, plump tire, at slightly lower pressures, on the right rim does wonders - it's rare I can dial in a tire on a narrower rim to handle such a task.

    Anyway, thanks for the advice guys.

  31. #31
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    If I were you, between my opinion and your opinion, for your needs, I'd tend to trust yours...

    I've run the XR4 and XR2 in 29 x 2.6" on an i29 rim. Felt ideal as far as tire size to rim width. I've also run those same tires on i36 rims. Felt too square. And I typically *like* square.

    Princess and the pea and all that.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OwenM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    1,363
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    at any rate, the XR4 2.4 has a very round profile on rims that width. you would have to get quite a bit wider to be square.
    That is my experience, as well.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    398
    Iíve been running XR4 2.4 on 29id rim and love it. Just picked up a 2.4 SE4 for the rear. I was under the impression that Bonti designed the 2.4 for their 30 rims. After reading this thread (and everything else about the XR/SE on the internet that I could get my hands on) it seems like both the 2.4 and 2.6 can be run successfully on 29/30 mm id rims. I interpret the differences as: run 2.4 if you want more precision and sidewall support, 2.6 for more traction (in certain situations), cushion, and rim protection. If anything after reading Mikeseeís comments Iím more inclined to try out the 2.6 on my 29mm wide rims- especially with Bontragerís 30 day return period. The tire line up is so good Iíve been juggling the different combinations in my head for the past year...

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    137
    Currently have XR4 29x2.6 front 2.4 rear mounted on i34 rims. They are not square....still very rounded. The extra volume allows lower pressure to be used, so ride and grip gets better without rim strikes becoming a problem.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    763
    Any updates for people who have run both the XR4 and XR5? I have the 2.5 Minion / 2.3 Aggressor combo right now. And looking to lighten things up a bit. I'll be putting a 2.4 XR on the rear, but debating between a 2.6 XR4 or XR5 for the front.

    The "vagueness" of the center channel on the 2.5 Minions doesn't bother me anymore - would 2.6 XR5s be a better choice / similar riding style?

  36. #36
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    The XR5 is still an XC tire. If you're using the 2.6, you'll want a >35mm inner width.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    815
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    If you're using the 2.6, you'll want a >35mm inner width.
    Trek are shipping the 2020 Fuel Ex with XR5 2.6" on their Line 30 rims which are only 29mm ID.

  38. #38
    This place needs an enema
    Reputation: mikesee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    14,693
    Quote Originally Posted by PhillipJ View Post
    Trek are shipping the 2020 Fuel Ex with XR5 2.6" on their Line 30 rims which are only 29mm ID.

    Which, for most people, is about perfect.

    35mm rims are better for 2.8's, assuming they actually measure that.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    The XR5 is still an XC tire. If you're using the 2.6, you'll want a >35mm inner width.
    I'm confused.

    The xr5 rolls relatively fast for a high grip tire. and no, it's not the enduro or gravity casing but that doesn't mean that it's an xc tire.?

    I love the xr5 and judging by my lack of cuts and punctures I think it's pretty obvious I don't need even the se5, let alone the g5. I know some folks ride volcanic rock or chipped granite and they shred tires... But again, xc tire??

    Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Posts
    399
    Yeah XC tyre is a bit of a stretch. It's lighter and faster than an DHF of the same size, has nice rollover and is pretty grippy. The channel didn't give me any issues. The 2.6" XR on 30mm rims I found difficult to get the pressure right though. It was either too low/not enough support or too hard and bouncy. I suspect the SE casing is a better choice for such a high volume tyre but I have no way of quantifying that statement without trying it.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by TimoA View Post
    Which of these tires would be the better choice for the front on wet and very rooty trails?
    I like the XR4/SE4 2.4 Team Issue combo F/R on wet limestone. The 120 TPI casing is more subtle and can find better grip with the right tire pressure. The 4's knobs are not so tall that they cause traction problems when leaned over and the reasonably tight spacing puts more of them on the rock surface than the 5s or the DHF/DHR. If you don't have to worry about sliding into sharp rock edges, then might go with the XR over the SE on the back because it is lighter. If your local soil does not have too much clay, go with a 2.6 XR4 Team Issue up front. Also consider running a few PSI lower but not so much that it's squirrelly corning hard on hardpack.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    235
    Quote Originally Posted by GlazedHam View Post
    I like the XR4/SE4 2.4 Team Issue combo F/R on wet limestone. The 120 TPI casing is more subtle and can find better grip with the right tire pressure. The 4's knobs are not so tall that they cause traction problems when leaned over and the reasonably tight spacing puts more of them on the rock surface than the 5s or the DHF/DHR. If you don't have to worry about sliding into sharp rock edges, then might go with the XR over the SE on the back because it is lighter. If your local soil does not have too much clay, go with a 2.6 XR4 Team Issue up front. Also consider running a few PSI lower but not so much that it's squirrelly corning hard on hardpack.
    Thanks, actually I went with XR4 2.6/2.4 combo and it has turned out to be fantastic on wet roots and rocks and peaty loam.

  43. #43
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    I'm confused.

    The xr5 rolls relatively fast for a high grip tire. and no, it's not the enduro or gravity casing but that doesn't mean that it's an xc tire.?
    It punctures as easily as one. I took mine off the rear because I was tired of getting sprayed with sealant. Call it a trail tire if you want but if you ride it too hard you'll be dissatisfied.

  44. #44
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by PhillipJ View Post
    Trek are shipping the 2020 Fuel Ex with XR5 2.6" on their Line 30 rims which are only 29mm ID.
    That's a mistake. The center knobs are tall. I've ridden it on 30, 34, and 38mm. 38 is perfect.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    It punctures as easily as one. I took mine off the rear because I was tired of getting sprayed with sealant. Call it a trail tire if you want but if you ride it too hard you'll be dissatisfied.
    that hasn't been my experience in Colorado, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Kansas trail riding. some of it very rocky, and including lifts at Keystone. but I believe your experience so you can use a SE5 or G5 rear, and I'll be fine with my XR5, and neither of us will be using an XC tire.

  46. #46
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Well that is odd you get so much life out of it since even on mellow trails I see sealant spots on my front from thorns or whatever. This is remarkable to me because none of the other tires I've ever used get punctured this easily. I think I got a thorn through a Morsa in 2017 but it sealed up. That's all I can remember.

    I use a Goma 2.4 on the rear. Never even seen a sealant bubble and lasts forever. It lasts so long you get tired of looking at it.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,313
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    It punctures as easily as one. I took mine off the rear because I was tired of getting sprayed with sealant. Call it a trail tire if you want but if you ride it too hard you'll be dissatisfied.
    Just curious if it was the "Team Addition?" I have only ever run the Team Additions which are 120TPI and had no issues with flats in the desert SouthWest.

  48. #48
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Yes, the Team 2.6 27.5. Weighed about 850g iirc. Please don't misunderstand me, I like it a lot on the front.

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    110
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    That's a mistake. The center knobs are tall. I've ridden it on 30, 34, and 38mm. 38 is perfect.
    Trek's 2020 Fuel EX, Remedy and Slash, have from factory the same "Line 30" rims, 29mm internal width. And have all XR4/SE4 or XR5/SE5 but always in 2.6 size.
    (only some models have 2.4 but only in the rear).

    I had XR4 in 2.4 and now 2.6 on the bontrager line 30 rims...
    The 2.6 bontrager are really 66mm wide also on 29mm wheels, and watching them, i think if a wider rim (say 35mm internal) should be better... The sidewalls are really wider than the rim... at the right front pressure, you can have some 2.6 confort, and also not a too soft and unsupported sidewall... but i must admit that it's a bit tricky to found the right pressure for every weight and riding style...and it's still a compromise... if you ride aggressive with this tires/rim combination, i think you will never have the best of both.
    For me 2.6 is more trail/confort... but....

    My question is:
    Why if almost all of us agree on the above statement(bontrager 2.6 and line 30 wheels), TREK has chosen for 2020 to upgrade, mounting 2.6 tires on the existent Line 30 wheels anyway? Even on more aggressive models like Remedy and Slash! Since they were in the process of "renewing", why they didn't do a Line 35 if the sidewall was not enough supported at lower pressures?

    Maybe are we all wrong, and in reality Bontragers 2.6 with 29mm rims are really fine?

    (sorry for my english, not my language,. hope that i exposed correctly my doubt... and also a official response by Trek will be really appreciated i think that someone from Trek use this forum)

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by zambo78 View Post
    Maybe are we all wrong, and in reality Bontragers 2.6 with 29mm rims are really fine?

    (sorry for my english, not my language,. hope that i exposed correctly my doubt... and also a official response by Trek will be really appreciated i think that someone from Trek use this forum)
    Your English is perfectly fine. There are those who speak natively who write less coherent messages on MTBR.

    Anyway, the Line 30 is indeed 29mm inner width - I have a set of Line 30 Pro that I bought aftermarket for my non-Trek bike. 2.3" Bontrager tires are plenty rounded on them, but I have seen the 2.6" as original equipment on the Line 30 wheel on new bikes... and it has a good profile.

    The 2.8 is where the Trek complete bikes step up to the Line 40 wheel. My father in law has a Powerfly LT 9.7 and it came with Line 40 (aluminum) wheels and XR 27.5x2.8 and they are huuuuuge. But they have the same rounded profile so you have to lean to corner, and the shoulder knobs do not drag excessively when riding in a straight line.

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    889
    I have no issues with Line 30 rims and XR4/5 tires in a 2.6. I like to run my pressure pretty low as well.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    110
    Sometimes i have the feeling of a little too soft and unsupported sidewall if i run lower/comfort pressures... in some turns that i know well and push in the bike aggressively, let's say that with a front 2.4 it seems it "rails" the turns better... (Placebo effect?)
    However i love the cushion effect of the xr4 2.6 in front... Maybe a bontrager 2.6 with 35/38mm rims, can have the best of both... sidewalls more supported and still using lower pressures...
    But these are only "feelings"... not really have any issues or washouts... that's why i wrote the above post...It's strange that Trek doesn't provide a Line35 wheels if this bring real advantages...

    (For lower pressures on 29" rims and the very voluminous bontrager 2.6 tires, i mean from 14psi to 17psi, measured with Topeak Gauge, that seems a little on the lowend instead other gauges..) More than 17psi in the 2.6 front and i really lost all the feeling on rocks/roots and the front becomes really unstable in my opinion.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,209
    I am having great luck with i30 rim and 29 2.6 XR4 up front. Moved down from 29 3.0 (minon, xr4, and chuppa) like this much better for the combination of traction and firmness.
    XC, Road, XXC, Endurance, Mtn, All-Mtn, Cross, Gravel, just go have fun on 2 wheels!

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    235
    Actually I am running the XR4 2.6 in the front on a i25 rim with no complaints. Funnily 2.6 has less of a round profile on that rim than the 2.4.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,813
    Quote Originally Posted by zambo78 View Post
    Sometimes i have the feeling of a little too soft and unsupported sidewall if i run lower/comfort pressures... in some turns that i know well and push in the bike aggressively, let's say that with a front 2.4 it seems it "rails" the turns better... (Placebo effect?)
    it is NOT a placebo. there are 2 reasons for this, and these are 2 of the 3 reasons you don't see huge tires on world cup DH race bikes.

    as tire volume increases, the air pressure required to support the bike and rider weight decreases, assuming the tire casing is the same. but with less air pressure, you have a tire that is less rigid, and as you get very low it resists cornering forces a lot less - you feel the tread squirm - and the tire casing itself acts like an elastomer spring. an undamped spring is the last thing you want. the more force you're applying in berms and landing jumps, the more noticeable the squirm and bouncing will be.

    it's very easy to feel this by hand on the tire, and also out for a ride. a 170 pound rider might use the following pressures for their rear tire.

    road bike 700x23 tire at 90 psi
    cross 700x40 tire at 40 psi
    'trail' tire 27.5x2.3 at 24 psi
    'plus' tire 27.5x2.6 at 18 psi
    'fat' tire 26x4.8 at 8 psi

    so no it's not your imagination. there are numerous articles on the web talking about this. the 3rd reason WC DH bikes use 2.3 - 2.6 tires in 2019 is because of rolling resistance. they don't need the traction of a 2.8 and don't want to lose the speed. who knows what may happen with tire tech in the future but this is where we are today.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    242
    I loved the SE4's so I picked up an XR5 2.4 and not a lot of love up front. I ended up putting it on the rear of my 29 plus hardtail, and it does fine there. The 2.3 SE4's is about my favorite tire, not sure I like the new tread of the 2.4's better.

  57. #57
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by zambo78 View Post

    Maybe are we all wrong, and in reality Bontragers 2.6 with 29mm rims are really fine?

    (sorry for my english, not my language,. hope that i exposed correctly my doubt... and also a official response by Trek will be really appreciated i think that someone from Trek use this forum)
    I'm only talking about the XR5. I have no opinion on other Bonty 2.6 tires. The issue is the roundness of the tread. On that narrow rim you have to lean it way over. Other people have complained of this as well in other threads. The casing support seems fine.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by kendunn View Post
    I loved the SE4's so I picked up an XR5 2.4 and not a lot of love up front. I ended up putting it on the rear of my 29 plus hardtail, and it does fine there. The 2.3 SE4's is about my favorite tire, not sure I like the new tread of the 2.4's better.
    XR5 2.4 is not a size that exists. The XR5 comes in 2.3 and 2.6.

    I have an XR4 2.4 on the rear of my FS. Straight line braking feels a little worse than a 2.3 Aggressor. I think in loose dusty / blown out the Aggressor just excels.

    I really like it on my hardtail on the front.

    I have a 2.6 XR5 on i30 rims and it's been fine. I don't have enough ride time on it to say for sure that it's fine. But I haven't noticed the rounded profile. Feels similar to the 2.5 DHF I had before, just a little more compliant.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by cassieno View Post
    XR5 2.4 is not a size that exists. The XR5 comes in 2.3 and 2.6.

    I have an XR4 2.4 on the rear of my FS. Straight line braking feels a little worse than a 2.3 Aggressor. I think in loose dusty / blown out the Aggressor just excels.

    I really like it on my hardtail on the front.

    I have a 2.6 XR5 on i30 rims and it's been fine. I don't have enough ride time on it to say for sure that it's fine. But I haven't noticed the rounded profile. Feels similar to the 2.5 DHF I had before, just a little more compliant.
    It was in the 2.6, that was a typo. My El Gordo fatbike I keep set up 29+ with the XR5 out back. I bought it to try on my Specialized Enduro and just never did like it that much. Seems like it didn't excel at anything and just added weight and rolling resistance. Tires are a funny thing, some peoples experiences are totally different than others.
    2.6 tires will be fine on a 29mm internal rim. I'm running them on 30's. People overthink the rim width way too much these days.

  60. #60
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by kendunn View Post
    2.6 tires will be fine on a 29mm internal rim. I'm running them on 30's. People overthink the rim width way too much these days.
    If you are making blanket statements like this then you are not thinking enough or just don't have enough experience to know what you don't know. Knob shape varies among tires and some are rounder, others are squarer. As tire shape makes a difference in handling that can rival major geo changes, yes it does matter.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    If you are making blanket statements like this then you are not thinking enough or just don't have enough experience to know what you don't know. Knob shape varies among tires and some are rounder, others are squarer. As tire shape makes a difference in handling that can rival major geo changes, yes it does matter.
    Considering that Trek puts the XR's 2.6 on 29 internal wheels on their top of the line Fuel EX 9.8, I think he's fine.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,092
    I ride i30 rims with 2.6 XR4/XR2 F/R and its great for me. I assume it depends on your riding style though. I don't corner particularly hard - just ride over lots of rocks and crap.

  63. #63
    mtbr member
    Reputation: k2rider1964's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    3,625
    I must ride too hard or pick the wrong lines for the Bontrager XR series tires, at least on the back, because they NEVER hold up. I recently had the XR4 on the rear of my Ripmo and not surprisingly, I had (2) flats within 3 days in Bend of all places. While you could say it was bad luck, I put a 2.5 Aggressor on the back and now have 20+ days on much rockier terrain that we rode in Bend.
    Carpe Diem!!

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    110
    I ride trail that are almost dirt, roots, and the rocks are stable and not sharp, so no problem with xr casing...some small punctures but the sealant does his job

  65. #65
    Hitching a ride
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,191
    Quote Originally Posted by kendunn View Post
    Considering that Trek puts the XR's 2.6 on 29 internal wheels on their top of the line Fuel EX 9.8, I think he's fine.
    Trek also puts re:aktiv shocks on their bikes.

  66. #66
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,918

    Bontrager 29x2.6 - XR4 vs XR5

    Quote Originally Posted by Schulze View Post
    If you are making blanket statements like this then you are not thinking enough or just don't have enough experience to know what you don't know. Knob shape varies among tires and some are rounder, others are squarer. As tire shape makes a difference in handling that can rival major geo changes, yes it does matter.
    Iím running a 2.6 XR5 on a 29ID rim on the front. No issues. Front sits a little higher. It replaced a 2.5 DHF.


    Quote Originally Posted by k2rider1964 View Post
    I must ride too hard or pick the wrong lines for the Bontrager XR series tires, at least on the back, because they NEVER hold up. I recently had the XR4 on the rear of my Ripmo and not surprisingly, I had (2) flats within 3 days in Bend of all places. While you could say it was bad luck, I put a 2.5 Aggressor on the back and now have 20+ days on much rockier terrain that we rode in Bend.
    SE4 on the rear holds up well for trail/AM. I couldnít get away with a XR4 on the rear. The 2.5 Aggressor is a fine tire but rolls a little slower and is heavier.

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Similar Threads

  1. Bontrager XR5 Team Issue
    By OwenM in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-14-2020, 05:50 PM
  2. Looking for a Bonty XR4 29x2.4 Team.
    By Throb in forum 29er Components
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-21-2017, 07:13 PM
  3. Bontrager Tires - XR4 Expert vs XR4 Team Issue
    By V8Interceptor in forum Trek
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-18-2015, 04:12 AM
  4. Bontrager XR4 Comp vs. XR4 Team Issue vs. ???
    By bluntrager in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10-01-2013, 06:02 AM
  5. DT Swiss XR4.2D vs. XR4.1D
    By emejay in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-26-2007, 09:59 PM

Members who have read this thread: 61

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 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.