Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 201 to 248 of 248
  1. #201
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rscecil007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Cary View Post
    Anyone looking for a 2.5 27.5 Aggressor?


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Does it happen to be a double down version?
    If jackasses could fly this place would be an airport.

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    4,739
    Quote Originally Posted by rscecil007 View Post
    Does it happen to be a double down version?
    Oops, forgot that, no. 145 pound rider on a trail bike.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Riding slowly since 1977.

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rscecil007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    2,761
    Quote Originally Posted by Cary View Post
    Oops, forgot that, no. 145 pound rider on a trail bike.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
    Ah ok, I was looking for a DD version. Thanks though!
    If jackasses could fly this place would be an airport.

  4. #204
    Ka-coo-ka-cha!
    Reputation: snigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    547
    oops double post in this thread on same request
    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live. ~Mark Twain, "Taming the Bicycle"

  5. #205
    Ka-coo-ka-cha!
    Reputation: snigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    547
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    No pic, but it's noticeable how much meatier the 2.5 is vs the 2.3 when held side to side.

    The biggest thing I noticed is that the tread lugs on the 2.5 are larger, but (even more important) deeper/taller than the 2.3 Aggressor.
    Hmm. I was thinking about this tire as a faster roller than the DHF 2.5WT currently on my 29er. But I am coming to terms with that tire and love the outright grip. Anybody out there with the 2.5 Aggro as a front tire and still loving it, in comparison to the DHF?
    Get a bicycle. You will not regret it, if you live. ~Mark Twain, "Taming the Bicycle"

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1,076
    Hi guys, I'm running a dhf/dhr2 combo f/r. It's a little draggy and heavy tho I ride in PNW. It's lots of dusty slick Hardpack right now. I'm wondering if moving to and aggressor out back would be an improvement (2.5) or even really going light with two 2.6 rekons front and rear.

    Seems like the aggressor might be a good thing.

    I do wonder about how much I'm really giving up in traction should I move to the Rekons and if that is even a decent option. It's light at like 760g 29er I think. I don't have lots of nasty rocks where I ride and would run the DHF combo come fall and spring and winter

  7. #207
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    585
    Quote Originally Posted by svinyard View Post
    Hi guys, I'm running a dhf/dhr2 combo f/r. It's a little draggy and heavy tho I ride in PNW. It's lots of dusty slick Hardpack right now. I'm wondering if moving to and aggressor out back would be an improvement (2.5) or even really going light with two 2.6 rekons front and rear.

    Seems like the aggressor might be a good thing.

    I do wonder about how much I'm really giving up in traction should I move to the Rekons and if that is even a decent option. It's light at like 760g 29er I think. I don't have lots of nasty rocks where I ride and would run the DHF combo come fall and spring and winter
    I don't have experience with Recons or 2.5 Aggressors but I find the DHR2 a draggy rear and prefer the DHF front and rear. I ride in primarily dry conditions.

  8. #208
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,807
    I just switched from the Aggressor 2.5 to the DHR2 2.3 3c rear and I honestly cannot tell a difference between the two in rolling if anything the DHR2 feels faster. The 2.3 aggressor wins rolling hands down, but I feel the 2.5 is average at best when it comes to rolling.

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    236
    Quote Originally Posted by svinyard View Post
    Hi guys, I'm running a dhf/dhr2 combo f/r. It's a little draggy and heavy tho I ride in PNW. It's lots of dusty slick Hardpack right now. I'm wondering if moving to and aggressor out back would be an improvement (2.5) or even really going light with two 2.6 rekons front and rear.

    Seems like the aggressor might be a good thing.

    I do wonder about how much I'm really giving up in traction should I move to the Rekons and if that is even a decent option. It's light at like 760g 29er I think. I don't have lots of nasty rocks where I ride and would run the DHF combo come fall and spring and winter
    I gave up traction for sure changing from a DHR2 to Aggressor, so I changed back.
    2018 Guerrilla Gravity Trail Pistol XXL
    2017 Rocky Mountain Element XXL
    2016 Fuse Pro XXL 29er

  10. #210
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Jeremy R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    I just switched from the Aggressor 2.5 to the DHR2 2.3 3c rear and I honestly cannot tell a difference between the two in rolling if anything the DHR2 feels faster. The 2.3 aggressor wins rolling hands down, but I feel the 2.5 is average at best when it comes to rolling.
    Yeah, I just came off having an aggressor 2.3 on rear of my bike and ran it from new to bald. It worked well for me and I liked it for sure.
    But now I have on a dhr 2 2.3 in the dual compound, and it rolls the exact same as the aggressor, but the dhr 2 brakes better and corners harder. Besides going to a bigger size, I canít really find a downside to the dhr 2 2.3


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    SEI Racing

  11. #211
    endorphin addict
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    240
    Running the 2.5 WT in back. In general I like it, but riding some hardpack berms the tire felt way squirmy at 30 psi. Disappointed for sure 😕

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by TNTall View Post
    I gave up traction for sure changing from a DHR2 to Aggressor, so I changed back.
    IMO there isn't a lot of separation between the Aggressor, DHR II, and DHF, and even less when you add in 2.3 vs 2.5.

    I think that in order of grip to rolling resistance after having ridden most of the tires: DHRII 2.4WT > DFH 2.5 WT > Aggressor 2.5 WT > DHR II 2.3 > DHF 2.3 > Aggressor 2.3

    In general I think people run the DHR II in the back because it has better braking performance than the DHF, but similar rolling resistance, mostly due to the more square center nobs, whereas the DHF's are ramped. All have similar cornering nobs that I don't think there's much difference if you're comparing 2.5 to 2.5 or 2.3 to 2.3, but when you go from 2.3 to 2.5 on all the tires, the nobs get bigger leading to more grip.

    Those 3 tires are all very similar with small nuances between them, and many are going to like them or dislike them based on personal preference. Personally I'm happy running 2.4-2.5 in any of them, and currently have a DHF 2.5 front Aggressor 2.5 rear that I'm loving. I also love the DHF 2.5 front DHR II 2.4 rear combo for the steepest trails.

    Thoughts?

  13. #213
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,722
    Quote Originally Posted by tgent13 View Post
    I think that in order of grip to rolling resistance after having ridden most of the tires: DHRII 2.4WT > DFH 2.5 WT > Aggressor 2.5 WT > DHR II 2.3 > DHF 2.3 > Aggressor 2.3
    Interesting that you rank the 2.3 DHR2 between a 2.5 Aggressor and a 2.3 DHF.

    I've often heard that a 2.5/2.3 DHF combo is great, but I would've assumed that the 2.3 DHR2 or even the 2.5 Aggressor would roll quicker than a 2.3 DHF.

    Having never ridden a DHF out back, I'm not qualified to comment... but I am allowed to ask
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  14. #214
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Interesting that you rank the 2.3 DHR2 between a 2.5 Aggressor and a 2.3 DHF.

    I've often heard that a 2.5/2.3 DHF combo is great, but I would've assumed that the 2.3 DHR2 or even the 2.5 Aggressor would roll quicker than a 2.3 DHF.

    Having never ridden a DHF out back, I'm not qualified to comment... but I am allowed to ask
    It's super hard to say, and I should qualify that my list is in terms of straight line grip. I think the DHR's center nobs are more square than the DHF's which are more ramped, and I feel like the DHR has more grip than the DHF. A lot of people will reference decreased rolling resistance when running DHF front and rear. The 2.5, 2.3 DHF front rear combo is good because the consistency with the tread pattern and then the 2.5 on front gives the front tire a bit more grip with the larger nobs/tire. I've gone directly from a 2.3 DHF to the 2.5 Aggressor in the rear, and I feel the 2.5 Aggressor has a bit more grip.

    Again, they are all very close though, so it's pretty hard to tell.

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mr. Lynch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,311
    I was running a 2.4 DHR, then a 2.6 Rekon and now a 2.5 Aggressor. The DHR was too slow and draggy on smoother terrain and the Rekon was a little lacking on aggressive terrain. The Aggressor feels like a perfect combination of the 2. It doesnt feel much if any slower than the Rekon, but climbing, braking and cornering traction are a big step up from the Rekon. Maybe not DHR type braking traction, but not far off.
    I run it paired with a DHF 2.6 and I'm loving the combo!
    14 Aurum, 17 T130, 18 NS Evo HT, 19 SJ Evo 29

  16. #216
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,384
    I feel the 2.6 rekon was noticeably easier to pedal and rolled faster than the aggressor probably due to the weight and smaller knobs. The aggressor is a good step up if you want something more burly and maybe a little better cornering.

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  17. #217
    jvo
    jvo is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    19
    If anyone interested Posted one in classified ads for cheap! Thanks

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    118
    Got a 2.5 Aggressor on the rear of my full susser, and I'm impressed by how good it is at climbing.
    It seems to climb a lot better than it brakes, it's also very dissapointing as soon as the trails turn somewhat wet, and it's been abnormally wet here so far this season :/

    Ordered some Michelin Wild Enduro tires for the current wet conditions, will try the Agressor again when (if?) it dries up here.

  19. #219
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    98
    Anyone interested in a 29x2.5 WT Aggressor/DHF 60 tpi (not DD)combo?

    I've been using this combo on my 27.5 bike and loved it so put a set on my 29 hardtail and found it to be more than I can handle in the tight stuff which is where I usually ride it.

    About 5-6 hours on them in loamy loose terrain (Santa Cruz).All the sealant has been removed so they are like new.PM me with an offer.

  20. #220
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by joecx View Post
    Anyone interested in a 29x2.5 WT Aggressor/DHF 60 tpi (not DD)combo?

    I've been using this combo on my 27.5 bike and loved it so put a set on my 29 hardtail and found it to be more than I can handle in the tight stuff which is where I usually ride it.

    About 5-6 hours on them in loamy loose terrain (Santa Cruz).All the sealant has been removed so they are like new.PM me with an offer.
    Interesting. Do the tires make the bike a little less agile in your opinion? I've got the typical DHR2 2.4 rear/DHF 2.5 front combo but have often wondered if I can get away with less and lighter tires at least for dusty summer hard pack. I'm North in Oregon, but not in the rainforest stuff. Dry now.

  21. #221
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    69
    Iím running the 2.5 Aggressor on the rear after busting my 2.6 Nobby Nic after just a few rides. I way prefer it to the NN - climbing traction is way better, allowing me to get out of the saddle more without spinning out. And I donít really feel more rolling resistance, whereas the NN was way slower than the Rocket Ron I previously ran. Braking traction has not been an issue.

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    98
    Quote Originally Posted by svinyard View Post
    Interesting. Do the tires make the bike a little less agile in your opinion? I've got the typical DHR2 2.4 rear/DHF 2.5 front combo but have often wondered if I can get away with less and lighter tires at least for dusty summer hard pack. I'm North in Oregon, but not in the rainforest stuff. Dry now.
    I'm sure it is the combination of the extra 110 grams and larger wheel having more giro effect as well as the longer footptint in the soft soil creating more effort to turn.

    I'm 5'8"/150# and have been running a Recon 2.6/Ardent 2.4 combo that is more agile but lacking in cornering grip at times.The DHF/Aggressor grip is addictive and great at speed but not a what I would call nimble in the tight stuff for a smaller person.

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    807
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Interesting that you rank the 2.3 DHR2 between a 2.5 Aggressor and a 2.3 DHF.

    I've often heard that a 2.5/2.3 DHF combo is great, but I would've assumed that the 2.3 DHR2 or even the 2.5 Aggressor would roll quicker than a 2.3 DHF.

    Having never ridden a DHF out back, I'm not qualified to comment... but I am allowed to ask
    I can attest to a 2.3 DHF in the back being faster than a 2.5 Aggressor.

  24. #224
    I'm with stupid
    Reputation: hitechredneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,807
    Found my new favorite combo. I am running the 2.5 Aggressor DD rear and a Assegai ( ass guy) up front. I went back to the aggressor in the rear because the DHR2 3c wore out fast in the rear. So far this combo has been better than the DHF/ Aggressor combo I ran all last summer and this spring.

  25. #225
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    21
    After having a 2.3 Aggressor fail after 3 rides on my Bronson and a 2.5WT Aggressor fail after 1 ride on my new Ripmo I'm going back to the DHR II. I'm no enduro racer but I didn't make it 30 miles on my first Aggressor or even 20 miles on my second. That tells me all I need to know. Never had a Minion fail on me. If you're an aggressive rider riding rocky terrain I'd recommended avoiding the Aggressor.

  26. #226
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,384
    Yeah. I already have 2 plugs in mine although the tread seems to last longer than other maxxis tires I've had. The rekon seem to resist punctures more, maybe the 3 psi lower pressure helps.

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  27. #227
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    155
    On what kind of incidents you have gotten the Aggressors destroyed? Has it been pinch flats or just rock penetrating the tire? Or slashed sidewall or so..?

  28. #228
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Verttii View Post
    On what kind of incidents you have gotten the Aggressors destroyed? Has it been pinch flats or just rock penetrating the tire? Or slashed sidewall or so..?
    Sorry about that, I should have given more detail. For me it was side knobs tearing deep enough to put a hole in the tire that I couldn't get to seal with plugs. I've put over 2k miles on multiple sets of the DHF/DHR's in the same conditions without that happening once so I don't think it's me necessarily. After the first one they told me that was just really bad luck and it wouldn't happen again. 19 miles later I was flatted on the side of the trail again, this time with my brand new Ripmo They seem to do fine on dirt and roots but once you get into rougher rocks like we have here in CO they don't seem to hold up. I know lots of people run them without issue and I'm not one of the top riders out here but I can usually get into the top 5% on Strava (usually under 150 of 3,000 riders) for the descents around here so I'm a decent rider.

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    2,384
    For me: a sharp rock in between center tread and another sharp rock next to side lug

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by joecx View Post
    I'm sure it is the combination of the extra 110 grams and larger wheel having more giro effect as well as the longer footptint in the soft soil creating more effort to turn.

    I'm 5'8"/150# and have been running a Recon 2.6/Ardent 2.4 combo that is more agile but lacking in cornering grip at times.The DHF/Aggressor grip is addictive and great at speed but not a what I would call nimble in the tight stuff for a smaller person.
    Joe you are running exactly what my friend is recommending to me for my Anthem 2. I'm looking to upgrade rims to I9 270's 24h 27mm wide that supposedly weight 1480 gms (can't really believe that for Aluminum rims). I'm running 2.3" 27.5" Aggressors now front and back on SoCal hardpack, no rain or moisture to slip around. I'm also 5'8"/150# with all my gear. So you don't like the recon 2.6/ardent 2.4 combo for corner? Under what conditions, hardpack/loose? I don't think the 2.5" Aggressor will fit my bike although I've measured around 3.07 between the stays (depends on where you measure).

    Oh my current Giant rims are only 23mm so probably can't run that recon/ardent combo yet. Thanks

  31. #231
    Oh, So Interesting!
    Reputation: davec113's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by hitechredneck View Post
    Found my new favorite combo. I am running the 2.5 Aggressor DD rear and a Assegai ( ass guy) up front. I went back to the aggressor in the rear because the DHR2 3c wore out fast in the rear. So far this combo has been better than the DHF/ Aggressor combo I ran all last summer and this spring.
    That's what I'm running on my '18 Slash right now... awesome tires and combined with Fox36/X2 suspension it's incredible.

    I'll probably go back to my previous MM 2.35 on the front to save 500g for some rides, but the 2.5 Aggressor DD is only 80g more than the 2.3 DD and the 2.3 wears out on me so fast I can't deal with it. I hope the 2.5 Aggressor lasts a lot longer...

  32. #232
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,753
    A few rides so far on 29ID rims. Been off the bike a lot and Iím a little under the weather. The few rides Iíve had prior to trying it, I was on my lighter shorter travel bike. First thought was the tire was ponderous. But I had a fairly worn Morza on before. Traction, lack of deflection, and damping was much better than the 2.3 and the Morza. Long fire road climbs will probably become longer. I would not run this tire if I lived elsewhere, but in the chunk, for shorter rides I think Iíll keep it. For trips, Iíll probably run the 2:3. Itís much more rounded than the 2.3 which keeps it from being a dog. Iím able to lower pressure of course. Where the 2.3 really comes up short is accelerated side lug wear. Traction quickly falls off if itís not perpendicular. Hopefully the fast wear that occurs from local trails will be less. .


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,366
    Is the Aggressor 2.5 dual a comparable replacement on the front of an enduro bike for a DHF2.5 3c?

    I adore my tire set up (F DHF 2.5 3c & R Aggressor 2.5 Dual) but would like to piece together something that rolls a bit better with little loss in overall traction.

    Was thinking Aggressor 2.5 up front & Morsa on the rear?

    Thoughts?

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,991
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Is the Aggressor 2.5 dual a comparable replacement on the front of an enduro bike for a DHF2.5 3c?

    I adore my tire set up (F DHF 2.5 3c & R Aggressor 2.5 Dual) but would like to piece together something that rolls a bit better with little loss in overall traction.

    Was thinking Aggressor 2.5 up front & Morsa on the rear?

    Thoughts?
    2 of us switched to the Griffin in back this summer in search of some more speed. Worked well with minimal drawbacks, the largest being wear. Its 2.3 only and I think DH and Exo only for casings. Mines about trashed now but it lasted the majority of summer although it was kind of wet here this year.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtrider76 View Post
    2 of us switched to the Griffin in back this summer in search of some more speed. Worked well with minimal drawbacks, the largest being wear. Its 2.3 only and I think DH and Exo only for casings. Mines about trashed now but it lasted the majority of summer although it was kind of wet here this year.
    I'm definitely looking at options again. I went through a lot of tires last year and settled on this set up as the best compromise for me.

    I'm leaning towards a Onza Citius (according to them being released in a 29 soon) as a front as several have said it gives up nothing to the DHF 2.5 while being lighter and faster rolling.

    For the rear I'm thinking the new Hans Dampf SG. I spoke to Schwalbe and they told me the new soft SG has improved so much that it rolls better than the old snakeskin speed/ grip on their measurement machines. I was pretty happy with the old one myself. This would be a weight gain over an EXO casing but would provide some extra security (rarely needed in my case as the EXO works great for me).

    Kicking around combos...

  36. #236
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    1,080
    Citius for sure rolls better than a DHF and grips pretty much the same.

  37. #237
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,626
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I'm definitely looking at options again. I went through a lot of tires last year and settled on this set up as the best compromise for me.

    I'm leaning towards a Onza Citius (according to them being released in a 29 soon) as a front as several have said it gives up nothing to the DHF 2.5 while being lighter and faster rolling.

    For the rear I'm thinking the new Hans Dampf SG. I spoke to Schwalbe and they told me the new soft SG has improved so much that it rolls better than the old snakeskin speed/ grip on their measurement machines. I was pretty happy with the old one myself. This would be a weight gain over an EXO casing but would provide some extra security (rarely needed in my case as the EXO works great for me).

    Kicking around combos...

    I too am questioning what tires to run on my trail/AM rig.

    Was on the Maxxis 2.6 x 275 and wow do they roll fast, climb tech, and rock crawl well. But they don't offer enough support and control on the hard, fast downs. That was something I could sort of live with. I'd just take the speed down a notch on the faster descents. They over the past 2 weeks I tore 2 sidewalls on the rears. The riding I've been doing is pretty remote, backcountry-like, and loosing a tire there means a really long hike a bike. Fortunately I was able to patch them both up and hobble out.

    So, I've gone back to my 2.5 WT with the classic DHF/DHR2. While they are way better at the faster descents and on hard cornering, they just don't roll well on the rolling terrain. The also don't rock crawl or climb with the same grip as the 2.6. It's pretty clear the WT's casings are what makes it what it is. They are clearly a very different animal than the fast, supple, yet fragile 2.6 Maxxis casing.

    I'm in search for something maybe between the Maxxis 2.5 WT and their 2.6" tires.

    Now I'm looking at the Schwabs. Ran them often in the past but their rear pacestar durometer was worthless on anything slick and wet - like rocks and roots, which is about 50% of my trail surface. A Mary up front (which I ran in the past) might be overkill. I'm considering the new Hans in a 2.35. In the past that 2.35 seemed much bigger than even a Maxxis 2.5 WT. So, any word or advice on that would be great.

  38. #238
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,366
    The 2.6s just don't work for hard turning I have found. They are flimsy 'trail tires'.

    There are a few options but I'm sort of on a Schwalbe Hans Dampf II kick. I have an older Addix SG tire and rather liked it, just needed more speed.

    Here are a couple of ways I could go for a rear (trying to stay in that 2.35- 2.45 width range):

    1) HDII SG soft, 1150g. Great tire and they (Schwalbe) told me the new tread pattern is so much better that the SG now rolls better on the older snakeskin. However, I've never slashed an EXO casing (about 1000g for a 2.5 Aggr) so why carry all the extra weight around.

    2) HDII Snakeskin soft, 850g. Should roll darn well. In the past I have been able to make the snakeskin tires shift off the wheel and hit rim. They say that the sidewalls have a new formula that is more resistant to tears and firmer.

    3) HDII Snakeskin soft with Pepi's tire noodle, 850g + 80g = 930g. Should still roll great, should not blow off the wheel, should offer some damping and the option of lower pressure, and wheel protection. But it likely offers no additional slash protection. But maybe you can ride home on a slashed tire.

    4) HDII Performance general Addix, 970g. I honestly would have never looked at this option cause it was 'cheaper' but the Schwalbe rep told me I need to look at it. He said the sidewalls are reinforced and the compound is approximately Speed/ Grip addix. He said that's what most of the shop guys use for those exact reasons. Doesn't hurt that it's less money but this might actually be the best option for me.

    As far as a front tire, I hear great things about the Onza Citius as a DHF replacement. I've tried tons of front tires and until something can match it, while rolling better, I'm not changing. The 29 version of the Citius is coming so I was hoping to hold out for that little nugget.

    Thoughts?

  39. #239
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,626
    Cool. I'm thinking of going the HDII soft. I'm not opposed to inserts as I run them religiously on my DH rig.

    Size wise, how does that new HD 2.35 physically measure up t a Maxxis 2.5? Schwabs were huge in the past.

  40. #240
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The 2.6s just don't work for hard turning I have found. They are flimsy 'trail tires'.

    There are a few options but I'm sort of on a Schwalbe Hans Dampf II kick. I have an older Addix SG tire and rather liked it, just needed more speed.

    Here are a couple of ways I could go for a rear (trying to stay in that 2.35- 2.45 width range):

    1) HDII SG soft, 1150g. Great tire and they (Schwalbe) told me the new tread pattern is so much better that the SG now rolls better on the older snakeskin. However, I've never slashed an EXO casing (about 1000g for a 2.5 Aggr) so why carry all the extra weight around.

    2) HDII Snakeskin soft, 850g. Should roll darn well. In the past I have been able to make the snakeskin tires shift off the wheel and hit rim. They say that the sidewalls have a new formula that is more resistant to tears and firmer.

    3) HDII Snakeskin soft with Pepi's tire noodle, 850g + 80g = 930g. Should still roll great, should not blow off the wheel, should offer some damping and the option of lower pressure, and wheel protection. But it likely offers no additional slash protection. But maybe you can ride home on a slashed tire.

    4) HDII Performance general Addix, 970g. I honestly would have never looked at this option cause it was 'cheaper' but the Schwalbe rep told me I need to look at it. He said the sidewalls are reinforced and the compound is approximately Speed/ Grip addix. He said that's what most of the shop guys use for those exact reasons. Doesn't hurt that it's less money but this might actually be the best option for me.

    As far as a front tire, I hear great things about the Onza Citius as a DHF replacement. I've tried tons of front tires and until something can match it, while rolling better, I'm not changing. The 29 version of the Citius is coming so I was hoping to hold out for that little nugget.

    Thoughts?
    I went with option #3. It's probably all going to go on my new bike which means I will not be reporting back for at least 2 months.

    My reasoning was simply that I've only slashed 2 tires in 4.5 years of riding and the Pepi's tire noodle will allow me to ride the bike back to the truck even if I do slash the tire, and it's inexpensive enough (About $35 each) that if I kill it, it's no biggie. Plus I'll have rim protection (I've broken 2 cf rear rims) as a bonus at a minimum weight penalty.

    I do wish it offered a cleaner solution for the air fill valve however.

    I like the Vittoria tire liner but it's hokey that you have to 'mend' it together and the cost and weight is considerably more.

    I feel this set up with reduce my rolling resistance notably, with a minimal (or none) loss in volume or traction, with a slight loss in sidewall tear resistance but still having a get home plan.

  41. #241
    Rocks belong
    Reputation: 06HokieMTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    4,722
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I'm leaning towards a Onza Citius (according to them being released in a 29 soon) as a front as several have said it gives up nothing to the DHF 2.5 while being lighter and faster rolling.
    Where'd you see this? I'd love a Citius in 29x2.4!
    I like 'em long, low, slack and playful

  42. #242
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by 06HokieMTB View Post
    Where'd you see this? I'd love a Citius in 29x2.4!
    I haven't! It's not available and I gave up!

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  43. #243
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,118
    After running XC/TR tires (Mezcal/Ardent) for the last year or so, I decided I need something more beefy to help with rock strikes on my poor Blunt SS rims (which are not really AM wheels).

    The Ardent 2.4 I've been running is fast and predictable, but doesn't have enough casing rigidity to help with the rock strikes.

    I've ran DHF/DHR, Butcher/Slaughter, Trail King, Rocket Rons, the gamut. My newest acquisition is the Rekon 2.6 up front. Great tire.

    Since tire prices are insane, I shop from Europe. As a result, I typically order two pairs or more of tires.

    I just picked up the Aggressor 2.5WT Dual, DHRII 2.4WT Dual, Kenda Hellcat Pro 29x2.6 and Nevegal 2 Pro 29x2.6.

    Here's my plan of various combos I want to try.

    Rekon front/Aggressor rear
    Nevegal front/Rekon rear
    Nevegal Front/Aggressor rear
    Hellcat front/DHRII rear
    Hellcat front/Aggressor rear
    Hellcat and Nevegal.

    As you can see, the DHRII kinda gets left out of these combos. It's too small to run up front with most of these tires, and it's too aggressive to run with the Rekon or even Nevegal up front.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  44. #244
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    494
    Aggressor is a way more aggressive tire than the Rekon so Iím not sure why youíd want the Rekon up front. Nevegal is slow as dog ****. Iíd say go for DHF front/aggressor rear and call it good. DHF is a surprisingly fast roller for what it is.

  45. #245
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,118
    This is the Nevegal 2 Pro. As in the one just released late last year. With new compounds and tread design. Apparently a very nice tire.

    Here's a thread where a bunch of people mention the older slow rolling versions, and how much the new version is substantially quicker.

    Here's a BikeRumor article saying that Kenda nearly halved the rolling resistance of the new tire from 66 watts to 33 watts of resistance.


    Here's a rolling resistance test that compared the Hellcat (which is more aggressive than the Nevegal) and the DHF Maxxgrip 2.5. The Hellcat had rolling resistance of 50 watts, the DHF at 49 watts.

    If Kenda is claiming 33 watts for the Nevegal 2 Pro then you must be talking about the older tire.

    For the sake of this conversation, they also tested the Aggressor 275x2.3 Dual Compound at 32.7 watts. I'd imagine the 2.5" model is a bit slower rolling.
    GIS/GPS Pro using ArcFM for Utility Mapping - Always willing to connect with other MTBers in the industry.

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dr Gigi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    247
    I'm also jumping on the Hellkat/Nevegal 2 combo. The 29 x 2.4 Hellkat just arrived last night, weighs 930 on the scale, and looks exactly like the Magic Mary I already have on the front (good thing). I was pretty impressed with the Nevegal 2 tread pattern, knobs are more aggressive than I was thinking. Looks similar to the new HD if you squint. Problem was they accidentally sent me a Nevegal 2 with the EMC casing (E-bike) instead of the ATC. My initial thought was to return it thinking it's way too heavy and burly, but I threw it on the scale and it only came in at 910g. Hm, that's not bad at all considering it's got a pretty much bomb-proof sidewall. I might just run this setup as is...

  47. #247
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by PHeller View Post
    After running XC/TR tires (Mezcal/Ardent) for the last year or so, I decided I need something more beefy to help with rock strikes on my poor Blunt SS rims (which are not really AM wheels).

    The Ardent 2.4 I've been running is fast and predictable, but doesn't have enough casing rigidity to help with the rock strikes.

    I've ran DHF/DHR, Butcher/Slaughter, Trail King, Rocket Rons, the gamut. My newest acquisition is the Rekon 2.6 up front. Great tire.

    Since tire prices are insane, I shop from Europe. As a result, I typically order two pairs or more of tires.

    I just picked up the Aggressor 2.5WT Dual, DHRII 2.4WT Dual, Kenda Hellcat Pro 29x2.6 and Nevegal 2 Pro 29x2.6.

    Here's my plan of various combos I want to try.

    Rekon front/Aggressor rear
    Nevegal front/Rekon rear
    Nevegal Front/Aggressor rear
    Hellcat front/DHRII rear
    Hellcat front/Aggressor rear
    Hellcat and Nevegal.

    As you can see, the DHRII kinda gets left out of these combos. It's too small to run up front with most of these tires, and it's too aggressive to run with the Rekon or even Nevegal up front.

    DHRII 2.4WT really isnt too small for a front tire, it makes for a very good combo indeed, DHRII 2.4WT front and Aggressor 2.5" WT on rear(both dual compound). I've had that combo on my Jeffsy 29 for a while now, and it seems to work on most conditions very well, basically everything else except the slimiest roots and thickest mud these seem to work very nicely and predictably. Would be nice to try also the Aggressor both front and rear, that could be good combo too...

  48. #248
    Formerly PaintPeelinPbody
    Reputation: PHeller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,118
    My worry is that the size difference would translate to a strange feeling where the front tires hooks up at different lean than the rear, but I guess thats going to the case with any tire. More noticable would be that rear generates more grip all around and Im washing the front out, but the DHRII is substantially more nobby so that shouldnt be an issue.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. 29er Rear tire delemma/ MAXXIS AGGRESSOR 2.3 or MAXXIS DHR 2?
    By singlEspEEd247 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 08-02-2017, 08:43 PM
  2. Maxxis Aggressor
    By OriginalDonk in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-31-2016, 01:03 PM
  3. Enve M70 with Maxxis Aggressor?
    By fitnessgeek in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-27-2016, 06:34 AM
  4. Maxxis aggressor
    By socalrider77 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-11-2016, 12:13 AM
  5. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12-09-2011, 06:27 PM

Members who have read this thread: 529

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 2018 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.