New Panaracer Rampage 2.35- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 156 of 156
  1. #1
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236

    New Panaracer Rampage 2.35

    I received a set of the brand new Panaracer Rampage 26x2.35 tires a couple of weeks ago. I am very impressed!

    This is the best Panaracer I have used since the Dart 2.2 SC and one of the best tires I have ever used.

    Big, grippy, fairly light, grippy, very controllable and did I mention grippy?

    pana_ram_3_sm.jpg
    pana_ram_5_sm.jpg
    The cornering is fabulous. I have yet to find its limits and I have been trying. I have only had it slip out on a fast gravel descent and even that was easy to recover. The transition from center to edge is very smooth with no traction loss getting there. It there is any downside to that it is you do not have much feedback as to what is happening but you do not get that from a slick on pavement either.

    A 29x2.35 version is due soon, too. I can hardly wait

    Full specs are now up on my tire site.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  2. #2

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    119
    Where can you get them? I don't seem them on Panaracer's site. Do you think they will work on a smallish rim like the 4.1d?

  3. #3
    Chillin the Most
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,025
    Hey, Kenda called they want their knob pattern back. (it is quite similiar)


    On a more serious not, those look schweet. Do they actually measure 2.35?? Whats the compound their using ZDG, ZDG Ultima???

  4. #4
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Not on their site yet. The Rampage is just getting in the distribution channels.

    I have been using them on rims the same width as the 4.1 and with pressures as low as 20psi on fairly rough and fast terrain.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  5. #5
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by red5
    Hey, Kenda called they want their knob pattern back. (it is quite similiar)


    On a more serious not, those look schweet. Do they actually measure 2.35?? Whats the compound their using ZDG, ZDG Ultima???
    But it works MUCH better. More stagger of the knobs and more aggressive edge blocks.

    Size specs are on my site. Compare them with the Neve 2.35.

    Do not know which compound they used.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  6. #6
    mmm
    Reputation: timehoc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    952
    Shiggy,

    How would you compare them to Cinders? I know you've raved about them.

    Thanks,

  7. #7
    Chillin the Most
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,025
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    But it works MUCH better. More stagger of the knobs and more aggressive edge blocks.

    Size specs are on my site. Compare them with the Neve 2.35.

    Do not know which compound they used.
    Just did the comparison, sorry about the stupid question didn't think you'd have it up so fast, pretty similiar, except for the slight weight difference.

    So far, I'm impressed.

  8. #8
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by timehoc
    Shiggy,

    How would you compare them to Cinders? I know you've raved about them.

    Thanks,
    Comparable and better than the Cinder. The Cinder has a strange lag feel on turn-in entering corners. The Rampage has none. The Rampage feels more stable when really leaned over and railing a turn though I really had no complaint with the Cinder.

    The Rampage 2.35 is higher volume and lighter than the Cinder 2.25.

    The Cinder 2.25 feels a bit more firm-cushy, probably a function of the size/location of the tread blocks - tighter spacing. The Rampage is still plenty cushy, just different.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  9. #9
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by red5
    ...sorry about the stupid question didn't think you'd have it up so fast...
    I do not post "Full specs are now up on my tire site" until the specs are posted on the site.
    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 bigduddy
    Where can you get them?
    The word from Panaracer:
    Rampage will be available in August from our distributors. Shops could have them in August including mail order.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  11. #11
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by red5
    Whats the compound their using ZDG, ZDG Ultima???
    The word from Panaracer:
    The compound is a tweaked version of ZSG that's 20% more durable than the ZSG we use on Cinder and still gives a nice, plush feel of a sticky compound standard rubber tire from Maxxis or Kenda.
    We do adjust the compound depending on the use of the tire, etc.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  12. #12

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    119
    What's the rolling resistance like? I have to go over some paved roads to hit the trail....

  13. #13
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by bigduddy
    What's the rolling resistance like? I have to go over some paved roads to hit the trail....
    Reasonable. They do not feel slow. It is a full knobby. I never worry about rolling resistance of a knobby tire on pavement. Traction on dirt is more important than being a bit slower on the asphalt.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  14. #14

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    119
    I currently have Bontrager Jones XR tires on my hardtail. Its good for when I commute, but seems to really get loose on the Norcal dirt and gravel.

  15. #15
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,429
    If it weren't you Shiggy, I would doubt a lot just by looking at the tread. Those center knobs are seriously ramped, even more than a High Roller, good for rolling resistance but, don't they slip easily when climbing or is it a front specific tire?

    Also: any UST version to come?

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  16. #16
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Gerous
    If it weren't you Shiggy, I would doubt a lot just by looking at the tread. Those center knobs are seriously ramped, even more than a High Roller, good for rolling resistance but, don't they slip easily when climbing or is it a front specific tire?

    Also: any UST version to come?
    Generally I am not a fan of ramped knobs. My "grippy" description is more about the directional stability and cornering traction than the drive/braking traction.

    When run in the "front" direction the rear tire can spin out when climbing though not as badly as I expected (and this was with a singlespeed on a gravel road). I think the notches in the ramps and the short bar between the center blocks increases the grip.

    When run in the "rear" direction the drive traction is no worse than any other tire. The braking traction is slightly reduced though, once again, not as much as I expected. Worse on loose/soft surfaces than firmer and hardpack.

    Still acts like a full knobby.

    UST? Jeff, care to comment?
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  17. #17
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,429
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Generally I am not a fan of ramped knobs. My "grippy" description is more about the directional stability and cornering traction than the drive/braking traction.

    When run in the "front" direction the rear tire can spin out when climbing though not as badly as I expected (and this was with a singlespeed on a gravel road). I think the notches in the ramps and the short bar between the center blocks increases the grip.

    When run in the "rear" direction the drive traction is no worse than any other tire. The braking traction is slightly reduced though, once again, not as much as I expected. Worse on loose/soft surfaces than firmer and hardpack.

    Still acts like a full knobby.

    UST? Jeff, care to comment?
    Well, that tread, in UST form and the lower pressure I love, could grip well. As the tire compress, the intermediate knobs are not ramped and should help drive/brake traction... Damn, I hope there are no UST version for now, I haven't even used my Hutchinson Barracudas 2.3 UST yet!

    But Jeff, please tell me a UST version is in the works... I'm only using tubes in road tires now.

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grawbass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    But it works MUCH better. More stagger of the knobs and more aggressive edge blocks.

    Size specs are on my site. Compare them with the Neve 2.35.

    Do not know which compound they used.
    I like the way they look. I like a tire with a nice gap between the main and edge knobs. The edge knobs look well supported also.

    I can't wait for the 29" version. I think it'll be an unreal front tire.
    Wanted: broken Titec 2 bolt seatpost, any size

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: grawbass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    2,044
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Gerous
    Well, that tread, in UST form and the lower pressure I love, could grip well. As the tire compress, the intermediate knobs are not ramped and should help drive/brake traction... Damn, I hope there are no UST version for now, I haven't even used my Hutchinson Barracudas 2.3 UST yet!

    But Jeff, please tell me a UST version is in the works... I'm only using tubes in road tires now.
    Yes, at lower pressures the intermediate knobs definately help with drive/braking traction.

    I seem to remember reading an article by Continental years ago, that said at certain pressures, the intermediate knobs actually exerted more force on the ground than the center knobs. I found that odd but interesting.
    Wanted: broken Titec 2 bolt seatpost, any size

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,961
    ...wow, those look fantastic! I can't imagine those not being available in UST. A 2.1 or 2.2 version would be nice as well....


  21. #21

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    144

    How do they compare the the 2.25 Mibro?

    There's a slight similarity between the center knobs of the Rampge and Mibro, although there's definitely differences between the side knobs.

    How does the ride compare with the Mibro? I've liked the 2.25 version as a front tire for dry/loose/rocky conditions thus far.

    Que?

  22. #22
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Que?
    There's a slight similarity between the center knobs of the Rampge and Mibro, although there's definitely differences between the side knobs.

    How does the ride compare with the Mibro? I've liked the 2.25 version as a front tire for dry/loose/rocky conditions thus far.

    Que?
    Totally different design than the Mibro. The Mibro tread is small and delicate compared to the Rampage. The IRC does corner very well.

    Another rider using nearly new Mibro 2.1s has been on most of the same rides I used the Rampage. His tires show wear, especially the the rear. The Rampages still look nearly new.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  23. #23
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,429
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter
    ...wow, those look fantastic! I can't imagine those not being available in UST. A 2.1 or 2.2 version would be nice as well....
    But Panaracer has a very limited UST tire range... Jeff? I want a pair of the 2.35 in UST... please.

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,760
    Those look great, hoping for a light UST version...

  25. #25

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    144
    Excellent. Thanks. I've too noticed that the Mibros tend to wear quicker than I expected. I'll have to try the Rampage once my current stock of Mibros is depleted.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hammerheadbikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,753
    the old dart 2.2 SC was my front tire of choice in the early 90s
    hated the 2.1, LOVED the 2.2 SC

  27. #27
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by hammerheadbikes
    the old dart 2.2 SC was my front tire of choice in the early 90s
    hated the 2.1, LOVED the 2.2 SC
    Me, too. Not sure what it was about the 2.1 but it was just not as good.

    I scored a NOS Dart 2.2 SC a couple of months ago!
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: hammerheadbikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,753
    that's funny
    when I hear or see "NOS" I think of 12AX7 preamp tubes..
    old telefunkens, mullards, etc..

    I am a guitarist and an tube junkie

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TrekFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    751
    so what kind of weights are we talking here for these new tires?

  30. #30
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,429
    Quote Originally Posted by TrekFan
    so what kind of weights are we talking here for these new tires?
    The specs are in Shiggy's site... They are around 700grams for a 2.35 tube version.

    Shiggy: slightly off-topic but your pictures are interesting, I think it would be nice if there were pictures of the tires along with the specs on your site. It would be THE reference for real world tire specs and pictures.

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  31. #31
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    better as front or rear tire?

    UST?

    tanks...

  32. #32
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    better as front or rear tire?

    UST?

    tanks...
    Both.

    No.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    245
    FWIW, I contacted Panaracer back toward the beginning of the year as I was searching for a larger UST tire asking if they had plans for the Fire FR in UST. I commented on how much I like the Fire XC UST and would like the same just bigger. They commented that something new was coming later in the year.

    I'm guessing that since this new tire is very similar to the Fire and they hinted that a new larger volume UST was coming, this may be it.
    Last edited by BrandonJ; 07-20-2006 at 05:48 AM.

  34. #34

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    192
    Shiggy, will they come in other widths, such as a 2.1 or 2.5 even?

  35. #35
    Expert Pushing SSer
    Reputation: Meat Foot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,503
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    The word from Panaracer:
    Rampage will be available in August from our distributors. Shops could have them in August including mail order.
    [Sniff] Thanks for getting me all excited about something to mate up with my Cinder. Look forward to it.
    Tuff Schist

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    149
    Quote Originally Posted by hammerheadbikes
    that's funny
    when I hear or see "NOS" I think of 12AX7 preamp tubes..
    old telefunkens, mullards, etc..

    I am a guitarist and an tube junkie
    Hehe that's true... a NOS Dart will run slightly cheaper than a NOS Mullard I guess... we're lucky here in the bike world! NOS tubes score insane prices... btw... NOS Sylvania 6CA7 would be tasty!

  37. #37
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    The Rampage 29x2.35 arrived today!
    Posing with the competition (in the top pic, l-r: Specialized Fast Trak 2.00, Bontrager Jones XR front 2.25, Panaracer Rampage 2.35, WTB Exiwolf 2.3, Maxxis Ignitor 2.10 - all 29")

    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    451
    Shiggy, care to share what each of those tires are? Or are we suppose test our knowledge and guess? heh.

  39. #39
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Destroy
    Shiggy, care to share what each of those tires are? Or are we suppose test our knowledge and guess? heh.
    Everybody on the 29er board knows what they are!
    Updated
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    602
    How does the new rampage compare to the Fire XC's that everyone raves about?

  41. #41
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by drumbum
    How does the new rampage compare to the Fire XC's that everyone raves about?
    I never cared much for the Fire XC so there is no comparison.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  42. #42
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    Quote Originally Posted by trialsrookie
    Hehe that's true... a NOS Dart will run slightly cheaper than a NOS Mullard I guess... we're lucky here in the bike world! NOS tubes score insane prices... btw... NOS Sylvania 6CA7 would be tasty!
    I like STR's on 12AX7's... Less headroom but more crunch. It's sweetly dirty as the volume goes up.

    Any good humbuckers nowadays? Or still are the Duncan's 59's the pickup to have?

    Sorry for the off track.

    BTW... Those Rampages look sweet... seems like the "tyre du jour"
    Check my Site

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    86

    [Deleted Post]

    Deleted Post - Redundant
    Last edited by genny1; 07-21-2006 at 02:49 PM. Reason: [Deleted Post]

  44. #44
    www.mtbnj.com
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    494
    how do these perform in muddy conditions?

  45. #45
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbkr0101
    how do these perform in muddy conditions?
    Has not been muddy so I do not know. Have had a few very short wet/muddy spots and they worked fine though they were not enough to make any judgement one way or the other.

    I likely will not use in in the mud simply because I prefer narrower tires for mud and the Panaracer TrailRaker (1.95/2.1) is one of the best mudders.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  46. #46
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Has not been muddy so I do not know. Have had a few very short wet/muddy spots and they worked fine though they were not enough to make any judgement one way or the other.

    I likely will not use in in the mud simply because I prefer narrower tires for mud and the Panaracer TrailRaker (1.95/2.1) is one of the best mudders.
    Send me a pair to Mexico City right now... we have mud to spare nowadays.
    Check my Site

  47. #47
    err, 27.5+
    Reputation: AL29er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,928
    Those are some sweet looking tires. Nice to see panaracer coming out with something in the 2.35 range. I was amped on the FR2.4 until I mounted it up and found it to be more like a FR2.6. I also like the cinder 2.2, but find that I pinch flat it. This looks like an excellent tire smack in the middle and lighter to boot. Whoo hoo

    If it rolls like the nevegal, but grips better than this will be my new favorite AM tire. Off to QBP to see about getting me some of these

  48. #48
    MTBGremmie
    Reputation: jSatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    451
    Quote Originally Posted by dscot420
    If it rolls like the nevegal, but grips better than this will be my new favorite AM tire. Off to QBP to see about getting me some of these
    From Panaracer a few weeks ago. As we are approaching Sept, don't know exact relaese date.



    Availability is September and we expect a retail of 36.99.

    Regards,

    Panaracer Technical Support
    [email protected]
    www.panaracer.com
    PH: 510-538-9099
    FX: 510-538-5899

  49. #49

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Shiggy, I have Nevegal 2.35 DTC's and one problem I've had is that at lower (but not too low) pressures, the tire deflects on hard corners, as well as upon landings. If I run the pressure just barely high enough to prevent this, I lose a significant amount of cornering traction.

    How would you compare the Rampage to the Nevegal in this respect? I'm running DT 5.1's.

  50. #50
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    Shiggy, I have Nevegal 2.35 DTC's and one problem I've had is that at lower (but not too low) pressures, the tire deflects on hard corners, as well as upon landings. If I run the pressure just barely high enough to prevent this, I lose a significant amount of cornering traction.

    How would you compare the Rampage to the Nevegal in this respect? I'm running DT 5.1's.
    I do not have problems with either tire. I have been running the Rampage as low as 22-25psi on a 22mm wide (outside) rim. I corner hard, not much of a jumper.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  51. #51
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by dscot420
    ...If it rolls like the nevegal...
    It does not, in a good way.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  52. #52
    Double-metric mtb man
    Reputation: Psycho Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    4,482
    Dang those look sweet! If they bring out a slightly narrower one (I have some clearance issues for rear tires, so a 2.1 or 2.2 would be ideal for me) I will have to bypass the Cinders and go right to the Rampages. (Panaracers have a strong following up here where I live).
    As if four times wasn't enough-> Psycho Mike's 2013 Ride to Conquer Cancer Page

    Moran? Let your opinion be free -> F88me

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrashTheDOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,513
    Shiggy you must tire of the comparison requests, but... how is the sidewall thickness compared to the Nevegal & Big Betty? I'm hoping for something closer to the Big Betty.

  54. #54
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    The Big Betty has a rubber insert in the sidewall. The Ram' and (folding) Neve' do not.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  55. #55
    Displaying UGI Symptoms
    Reputation: murphie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    184

    Run Tubeless?

    Hi Shiggy - appreciate your tire info!

    Have you tried to run the rampage tubeless? Are there any issues running these tires tubelesss? - either Stans or DT Tubeless?

    Thanks!

  56. #56
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by murphie
    Hi Shiggy - appreciate your tire info!

    Have you tried to run the rampage tubeless? Are there any issues running these tires tubelesss? - either Stans or DT Tubeless?

    Thanks!
    I will not do DIY tubeless but Panaracer endorses Stan's.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  57. #57

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    Wow, Stan's approved. Interesting.

  58. #58
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    It does not, in a good way.
    I guess this translates to less rolling resistance. Sweet.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    602
    According to Panaracer, they will now be in stores late September. I cannot wait!

  60. #60
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    I've been running the 2.1 Nev DTC in the back and the 2.1 Blue Groove Stick-E in the front. I have between 500 and 600 miles on the Nev, and have noticed a tremendous decrease in climbing and straight line braking traction. I took off the Nev and put back on a 2.00 Spec Fast Trak Pro I had laying around. HUGE increase in climbing traction. I'm wondering if the Rampage will last longer than the Nev.

    Still not on their site yet. I hope they offer it in 2.1. I only ride a Flux and don't need a 700 gram rear tire.

  61. #61
    That's ok I'll walk it...
    Reputation: Hawkens's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    240
    This thread was passed on to me and always looking for better tires. I had Single Track Cycles in North Bend ordered them in for me.

    They arrived on Saturday and I've put 14 miles on them on Sunday.

    I agree with everything being said on these tires so far. I took off a pair of Nevegals that were only a week old to give these tires a try.

    If they handle as well in wet conditions I'll be ordering another pair.

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumbum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    602
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkens
    This thread was passed on to me and always looking for better tires. I had Single Track Cycles in North Bend ordered them in for me.

    They arrived on Saturday and I've put 14 miles on them on Sunday.

    I agree with everything being said on these tires so far. I took off a pair of Nevegals that were only a week old to give these tires a try.

    If they handle as well in wet conditions I'll be ordering another pair.
    Did Single Track Cycles order them through QBP?

    Anyone else seeing these available? If so, around what price?

  63. #63
    That's ok I'll walk it...
    Reputation: Hawkens's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    240
    They ordered them through a Distributor in Washington. I paid $37 each.

  64. #64
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkens
    They ordered them through a Distributor in Washington. I paid $37 each.
    That's a decent price!
    Check my Site

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    567

    Jenson USA has them on the web site

    But they're not in stock yet. Listed as $32

    http://jensonusa.com/store/product/T...+Mtb+Tire.aspx

  66. #66
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkens
    They ordered them through a Distributor in Washington. I paid $37 each.
    Mostly likely from Seattle Bike Supply.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  67. #67
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    BTI shows them out of stock too... But then, I have no access to the "Dealer" Area.
    Check my Site

  68. #68
    Time flies...
    Reputation: xjbebop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Hawkens
    This thread was passed on to me and always looking for better tires. I had Single Track Cycles in North Bend ordered them in for me.

    They arrived on Saturday and I've put 14 miles on them on Sunday.

    I agree with everything being said on these tires so far. I took off a pair of Nevegals that were only a week old to give these tires a try.

    If they handle as well in wet conditions I'll be ordering another pair.
    How do they compare to the Kenda's, considering that they look almost identicle...???
    ...every day sends future to past...

  69. #69
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    xjbebop, say it isn't so. Please don't tell me you didn't read shiggy's comments throughout this thread. You now must sell your Turner.

  70. #70
    Time flies...
    Reputation: xjbebop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,206
    Quote Originally Posted by royta
    xjbebop, say it isn't so. Please don't tell me you didn't read shiggy's comments throughout this thread. You now must sell your Turner.
    I just saw the pictures and saw a Nevegal with dressed-up knobs....why, you looking for a deal on a Spot???
    ...every day sends future to past...

  71. #71
    That's ok I'll walk it...
    Reputation: Hawkens's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    240
    The biggest difference I noticed right away and as mentioned by the originally reviewer is Rolling Resistance. There is a day and night difference between the two, you don't feel like your pushing around a big tractor tire. I've been running Kenda's for so long I had forgotten that they had that much resistance, I just liked the fact they did so well in the winter.

    I am riding in powder conditions right now, because of lack of rain all summer and on short steep climbs these tires are hooking up well in those conditions. The Kenda's were washing out in the corners, I haven't had that issue with these yet.

    It's suppose to rain all weekend, so I'll get some riding in wet conditions with these tires soon. If they don't grip the roots well like the Kenda's do in wet conditions then I'll go back to Kenda's. If they do then this will be my all season tire.

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madgeronimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    195

    These tires too much for my Stumpy FSR?

    Hi Shiggy,

    In your opinion, would these tires be a good match for my Stumpy FSR? I do ride it All-Mountain style more than purely xc. And I'm on the East Coast here, so I'm dealing with quite a variety of terrain, from rocky babyhead territory to sandy and rooty to mud bogs after rain. Most places I ride tend to be smaller parks (compared to out West) that are pretty technical with lots of twisty turns and rolling land versus one big climb.

    Currently, I'm on the Specialized Resolutions/Adrenalines that came with my Stumpy, and they actually do pretty okay for the places I ride, with the exception of sand. But they're showing some wear, and I'm wondering whether to get the same tires or get something new. I'm shying away from the Nevegal's because of what everyone's said about rolling resistance.

    Anyway, any thoughts you may have would be appreciated.

    Best,
    G

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    Quote Originally Posted by madgeronimo
    Hi Shiggy,

    In your opinion, would these tires be a good match for my Stumpy FSR? I do ride it All-Mountain style more than purely xc. And I'm on the East Coast here, so I'm dealing with quite a variety of terrain, from rocky babyhead territory to sandy and rooty to mud bogs after rain. Most places I ride tend to be smaller parks (compared to out West) that are pretty technical with lots of twisty turns and rolling land versus one big climb.

    Currently, I'm on the Specialized Resolutions/Adrenalines that came with my Stumpy, and they actually do pretty okay for the places I ride, with the exception of sand. But they're showing some wear, and I'm wondering whether to get the same tires or get something new. I'm shying away from the Nevegal's because of what everyone's said about rolling resistance.

    Anyway, any thoughts you may have would be appreciated.

    Best,
    G
    I live in NC and have a Stumpy FSR as well. I love the Adrenaline/Resolution as a front tire. I am running a Cinder in the rear. I absolutely love this combination and although the Cinder hooks up great, the rolling resistance makes it feel quite slow. I was looking for a replacement tire and the Rampage looks perfect.

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: madgeronimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    195

    Your stumpy

    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    I live in NC and have a Stumpy FSR as well. I love the Adrenaline/Resolution as a front tire. I am running a Cinder in the rear. I absolutely love this combination and although the Cinder hooks up great, the rolling resistance makes it feel quite slow. I was looking for a replacement tire and the Rampage looks perfect.
    That would be an interesting combo of tires. But wouldn't you have a fatter rear tire than front with the Rampage 2.35 in back and the 2.0 Resolution in front? The Resolution is a pretty chubby tire, however, for its stated width.

    I'm thinking I might order me a pair and try the Rampages front and back.

    I agree with you, though, that the Resolution is a better front tire than rear. I notice a bit of drag, especially on technical climbs. The tire does stick, but it doesn't have great roll back there.

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196

    Bonking ... not feelin' well

    As there have been several people, including myself who have expressed an interest in the Panaracer Rampage in a UST version, I thought that I'd post the following information from the UK based mountain bike forum "Bike Magic". It is from their report on Eurobike.

    "The Rampage is all-new. The square blocked tyre, designed as an all-rounder for all conditions and all terrains, comes in 2.1in (with UST option) or a proper 2.35in."

    Its a bit disappointing. It seems that some manufacturers shy away from making larger UST tires. The situation is the same with the Kenda Nevegal. They also only make it in a 2.1 UST version.

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  76. #76
    It's the axle
    Reputation: Gregg K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,763
    I'll take any UST I can get.

    As much as I would like a fatty, maybe the tread pattern makes up for it. Besides, the 2.1 weight is a plus.

    I'm just dying to get my hands of some of these.

  77. #77
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronnie
    As there have been several people, including myself who have expressed an interest in the Panaracer Rampage in a UST version, I thought that I'd post the following information from the UK based mountain bike forum "Bike Magic". It is from their report on Eurobike.

    "The Rampage is all-new. The square blocked tyre, designed as an all-rounder for all conditions and all terrains, comes in 2.1in (with UST option) or a proper 2.35in."

    Its a bit disappointing. It seems that some manufacturers shy away from making larger UST tires. The situation is the same with the Kenda Nevegal. They also only make it in a 2.1 UST version.

    Ronnie.
    FYI Panaracer offers some different models in the UK that are not available in the US. A UST version of the TrailRaker has been offered in Britain for at least a year. Not offered here.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  78. #78
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronnie
    As there have been several people, including myself who have expressed an interest in the Panaracer Rampage in a UST version, I thought that I'd post the following information from the UK based mountain bike forum "Bike Magic". It is from their report on Eurobike.

    "The Rampage is all-new. The square blocked tyre, designed as an all-rounder for all conditions and all terrains, comes in 2.1in (with UST option) or a proper 2.35in."

    Its a bit disappointing. It seems that some manufacturers shy away from making larger UST tires. The situation is the same with the Kenda Nevegal. They also only make it in a 2.1 UST version.

    Ronnie.
    well then... maybe I'll just have to grab the 2.35 and run it with stans on my mav 819's.
    seriously, is the bead on the rampage strong enough to withstand this?

  79. #79
    Saving lives with knives.
    Reputation: frank daleview's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    958
    Thanks for the update Shiggs; looks like something I would throw on the front of my bike. How does it compare to a Kenda Nevegal 2.1? How much does it weigh?
    Formerly known as iceaxe

  80. #80
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    Well alright, a 2.1 non-UST will be offered. I just hope it get's offered in teh US soon. I hope it's tread life lasts longer than the 2.1 Nev non-UST. I've already lost significant climbing and braking traction in just 600 miles on mine. Maybe that's normal for the Nev, it doesn't seem like it should be though. Maybe I'm just riding more aggressively since switching from a hard tail to a squish bike.

  81. #81
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704

  82. #82
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    What does that have to do with the price of tea in China? We already knew that from the very last sentence, HERE.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    FYI Panaracer offers some different models in the UK that are not available in the US. A UST version of the TrailRaker has been offered in Britain for at least a year. Not offered here.
    Who cares, if only they made a 2.35 UST, I'd buy it online in the UK from someone like Chain Reaction Cycles.

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  84. #84
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    I wasn't responding to you. Ice axe asked how much it weighed.

  85. #85
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    panaracer 'endorses' stans FWIW. I'm gonna give the 'regular' 2.35 a go.

  86. #86
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    I wasn't responding to you. Ice axe asked how much it weighed.
    It does avoid confusion if you actually reply to the post in question
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  87. #87
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    I DID. I happened to respond using an older mac operating system which will not quote other posters...

  88. #88
    househusband
    Guest
    My pair of 26 x 2.35 Rampages arrived today, will take them out for a good ride on Sunday.

    Is it so wrong to have a rubber (tyre) fetish..? Wife seems to understand, but then she does have two horses...

  89. #89
    Single Speed Junkie
    Reputation: crux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,113

    Sir Shiggy...

    Shiggy.

    In the process of building up a new frame and know that the rampage is wider than all previous 29er tires what is the width on this one to ensure that the frame will clear.

    Any info on the new wtb 2.55 29er? Width?

  90. #90
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by crux
    Shiggy.

    In the process of building up a new frame and know that the rampage is wider than all previous 29er tires what is the width on this one to ensure that the frame will clear.

    Any info on the new wtb 2.55 29er? Width?
    Nope. I will not quote any dimensions until I personally measure the tire.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  91. #91
    over researcher
    Reputation: royta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    I DID. I happened to respond using an older mac operating system which will not quote other posters...
    I guess you could copy the text you are responding to, and then physically type in the vB code yourself. It's not that difficult. See HERE.

  92. #92
    Single Speed Junkie
    Reputation: crux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,113
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Nope. I will not quote any dimensions until I personally measure the tire.
    Thought that you had a few sets to test. Thanks for being honest I'll wait longer.

  93. #93
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by crux
    Thought that you had a few sets to test. Thanks for being honest I'll wait longer.
    WTB has not seen me as "worthy" to receive any sample tires. The ones I have measured have come through other channels.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  94. #94
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    ordered a 2.35 Rampage from Webcyclery

    went on a Mavic 3.1 UST rim with a bit of Stans and soapy water.

    we'll see how it goes today on a ride

    stoked!

  95. #95
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    ordered a 2.35 Rampage from Webcyclery

    went on a Mavic 3.1 UST rim with a bit of Stans and soapy water.

    we'll see how it goes today on a ride

    stoked!
    PLease report back, as I'm going to try the VERY same thing.

  96. #96
    It's carbon dontcha know.
    Reputation: 6thElement's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    4,283
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    ordered a 2.35 Rampage from Webcyclery

    went on a Mavic 3.1 UST rim with a bit of Stans and soapy water.

    we'll see how it goes today on a ride

    stoked!
    They only have the Panaracer Fire Cross tire listed .o?

    edit: in 29er

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    325
    The biggest difference i noticed when changing form 2.35 Nevegal on the front and single ply 2.35 Minion on the rear was the rolling resistance - or the lack of it. I pre-ordered some of these (in UK) and received them last week.

    I have only had three rides on them so far, but so far all the impressions aregood. Loads of grip on the turns and downhill and lack of rolling resistance going up. Even managed a stretch uphill in the big ring, not something I remember ever doing .
    Last edited by dreednya; 09-20-2006 at 12:58 PM.

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    To dispel rumors and also hoping to encourage them to look at a larger UST tire, I sent the following mail to Panaracer:

    "It is with much interest that I have been reading reviews about your new Rampage 2.35 tire. I would like to enquire if this tire will be available as a UST variation in a 2.35 size? It is not just the weight weenie racing types that want tubeless tires. I have been riding a competitor's 2.3 UST tire on the rocky and rooty trails of New Jersey for two and a half years and never had a flat."

    I received the following reply:

    "We will introduce a 2.1 UST Rampage at Interbike. A 2.35 is still
    being worked on."

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    555
    Quote Originally Posted by madgeronimo
    Hi Shiggy,

    In your opinion, would these tires be a good match for my Stumpy FSR? I do ride it All-Mountain style more than purely xc. And I'm on the East Coast here, so I'm dealing with quite a variety of terrain, from rocky babyhead territory to sandy and rooty to mud bogs after rain. Most places I ride tend to be smaller parks (compared to out West) that are pretty technical with lots of twisty turns and rolling land versus one big climb.

    Currently, I'm on the Specialized Resolutions/Adrenalines that came with my Stumpy, and they actually do pretty okay for the places I ride, with the exception of sand. But they're showing some wear, and I'm wondering whether to get the same tires or get something new. I'm shying away from the Nevegal's because of what everyone's said about rolling resistance.

    Anyway, any thoughts you may have would be appreciated.

    Best,
    G
    Patapsco Buddy, My favorite front tires are Adrenaline 2.0 and Mutanoraptor 2.4 for most places I ride. For baby heads in north NJ I like Adrenaline 2.2 - huge tire,a little slow rolling but you dont feel it while riding over big rocks. I prefer a light 2.0 tire for the rear like a Karma or Roll-x. A heavy, slow rolling big knob rear tire will spin out just as easy as a semi slick if you don't weight it properly or put too much air in it.

    Selecting tires is like buying a saddle. The only way to tell If you like it is to buy it and try it. Just because other people like it, does not mean that you'll like it. If Shiggy says the best tire is xxx brand and you go out and buy it and find it's a terrible, it's not his fault. After all, it is the best tire for Shiggy. So you must become a tire whore and buy and try as many tires as you can until you find what's best for you. Right Shiggy?

    Don

  100. #100
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    PLease report back, as I'm going to try the VERY same thing.
    it rolled well, maybe a bit more resistance than my old worn down Geax Barro Marathon, but the treads are new and bigger. I have it mounted backwards so the ramp on the the center knobs faced backwards, and traction was good. Much better carving traction than the worn down Barro I was running.

    I will say that pre-ride, it had lost some air since yesterdays inflation, but a few quick pumps before I left my car and it was good to go. I started with 37 psi (tire says 35-55 psi) and that seemed a bit low. Maybe a bit sluggish and during the ride it burped once, causing it to get a bit too soft and roll over in the corners. I raised the psi to around 40 and it rolled much better. I think that it will need higher psi to stay on the rim and roll correctly.

    very happy with it so far. another ride tomorrow.

  101. #101
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    it rolled well, maybe a bit more resistance than my old worn down Geax Barro Marathon, but the treads are new and bigger. I have it mounted backwards so the ramp on the the center knobs faced backwards, and traction was good. Much better carving traction than the worn down Barro I was running.

    I will say that pre-ride, it had lost some air since yesterdays inflation, but a few quick pumps before I left my car and it was good to go. I started with 37 psi (tire says 35-55 psi) and that seemed a bit low. Maybe a bit sluggish and during the ride it burped once, causing it to get a bit too soft and roll over in the corners. I raised the psi to around 40 and it rolled much better. I think that it will need higher psi to stay on the rim and roll correctly.

    very happy with it so far. another ride tomorrow.

    Thanx, your rolling these on the front or back?

  102. #102
    Feeding your addiction
    Reputation: Ventanarama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    2,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Warp
    BTI shows them out of stock too... But then, I have no access to the "Dealer" Area.
    BTI has them in now, I have some on the way from them. FYI, dealer section of their site is exactly the same except it shows pricing if you have a dealer login, so what you see accessing it as a consumer is accurate in terms of stock.

    Larry
    Mountain High Cyclery
    [email protected]
    "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity". - Dave Barry

  103. #103
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    6,207
    Still not in at Jensen. Anybody have any other leads?

  104. #104
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    I started with 37 psi (tire says 35-55 psi) and that seemed a bit low. Maybe a bit sluggish and during the ride it burped once, causing it to get a bit too soft and roll over in the corners. I raised the psi to around 40 and it rolled much better. I think that it will need higher psi to stay on the rim and roll correctly.
    I can run my UST tires at 30psi. without any problem. I've never tried them lower. Low pressure is supposed to be one of the big advantages of tubeless. Thanks for the heads up. I have always been against DIY tubeless but I was toying with the idea of trying it. At least it crossed my mind. My Mavic XM819 are basically the same rims as yours and you're telling me that the tire burps at 37psi. No thank you! Put some tubes in man!

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  105. #105
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronnie
    I can run my UST tires at 30psi. without any problem. I've never tried them lower. Low pressure is supposed to be one of the big advantages of tubeless. Thanks for the heads up. I have always been against DIY tubeless but I was toying with the idea of trying it. At least it crossed my mind. My Mavic XM819 are basically the same rims as yours and you're telling me that the tire burps at 37psi. No thank you! Put some tubes in man!

    Ronnie.
    That does seem a little high in terms of PSI... maybe you need to let the stans set in a little longer?

  106. #106
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Ventanarama
    BTI has them in now, I have some on the way from them.
    You really know how to put people into temptation, Larry!

    Quote Originally Posted by Ventanarama
    FYI, dealer section of their site is exactly the same except it shows pricing if you have a dealer login, so what you see accessing it as a consumer is accurate in terms of stock.

    Larry
    Mountain High Cyclery
    [email protected]
    Thanks for the explanation!
    Check my Site

  107. #107
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    Thanx, your rolling these on the front or back?
    running it in back

    this morning the tire seems to have lost a bit of air, i didn't put a gauge on it, but it feels softer

    will confirm when i ride this afternoon

  108. #108
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    That does seem a little high in terms of PSI... maybe you need to let the stans set in a little longer?
    Tap is not a small boy. Many riders report they need fairly high pressures with DIY tubeless to maintain sidewall stability.

    With tubes and on narrower rims I have been running the Rampage at 22-28psi with good results. This is with both the 26 and 29 inch versions (I am ~180lbs).
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  109. #109
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    6,207
    Shiggy, if you only had 1 rampage would you run it front or back?

    or, it's so good so you buy 2 rampage's?

  110. #110
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by All Mountain
    Shiggy, if you only had 1 rampage would you run it front or back?

    or, it's so good so you buy 2 rampage's?
    If you had 1, front. Recommend 2.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  111. #111
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    6,207
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    If you had 1, front. Recommend 2.
    Thanks.

  112. #112
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Tap is not a small boy.
    'tis true. I'm 230 with gear. I like to think of it as "husky".

    again, this is a Rampage 2.35 on a Mavic 819 tubeless.

    update-

    tire again lost pressure during the night.
    tire pinch flatted with 40 psi in it as I hammered through a rock garden.
    tire pinch flatted again with a tube in it (just as I said, "Hey, this tube in here doesn't feel that bad! ). probably wasn'tpump it up enough.

    still, it runs well with a tube, but I don't ahve a pressure measurement right now.

    I'd just avoid running the 2.35 tubeless, even with Stans. I probably should have gotten the 2.1. (What is the difference in true size b/t the 2.1 and the 2.35?)

    oh well. i'll just run it with tubes for now. i think i'll replace the regular tube with a light one to save weight. maybe I should just stop drinking Black Butte Porter

    (anyone know how solidly a regular Motoraptor 2.4 would sit on an tubeless 819?)

  113. #113
    It's the axle
    Reputation: Gregg K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,763
    Yikes!

    You've got 95 pounds of "huskiness" that I don't have to climb with.

    (This is the only forum I know where being 135 pounds is considered desireable.)

  114. #114
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    421

    Shiggy-Panaracer Rampage

    Is the Rampage a single or dual ply or both? What dual ply tires are good for hard pack and loose rock but are not overly heavy. Size at least a 2.3 on up. I currently have Nevs 2.35 nonust and the Goatheads are killing me with the flats constantly. Any cure? I live in Ausitn, Tx. where it is dry 75 to 85 percent of the time, yeh and HOT too. Lots of shale rock and hard pack. Lite Freeride but mostly hard trail riding type of riding I do.
    Thanks,
    M.C.tigre

  115. #115
    "El Whatever"
    Reputation: Warp's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    18,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    anyone know how solidly a regular Motoraptor 2.4 would sit on an tubeless 819?
    The Motoraptor 2.4 wire bead (cheapo, not Race version) has nice thick sidewalls and works good on a Mavic 221 I have, but with tubes. Mine measures a true 2.3" real.

    Not the best cornering tyre on front, not the best rolling on the rear.
    Check my Site

  116. #116
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Lumbee1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,908
    Tap, 40psi and you pinch flatted the Rampage? I am 210 with gear and run my Cinder between 36 and 40psi. I tried it at ~25psi once and had lots of issues but not a single pinch flat.

    My current Cinder (rear only) is showing wear but I have a brand new backup waiting to go on. If the Rampage won't work for me, what other options are out there for a rear tire?

    BTW, I have been running tubes and have to add air every 3 weeks or so. With all the problems DIY and true tubeless have, I won't be switching anytime soon.

  117. #117
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    I have had a conti vertical 2.3 UST on the rear and a Maxxis Ignitor Lust 2.35 UST on the front (mavic 819 rims) all season with no problems -- not even a flat or air loss.

    I hit a sharded piece of New England granite off cambered on my rear wheel the other day. It scraped the the down the side of the tire so badly it left a mark and shredded little pices of tire and I didn't flat or loose any air. That being said, Ive never run non UST tires on my UST rims. I was thinking of doing so with a 2.35 rampage... I wiegh significanlty less than tap at 175 lbs but he has me second guessing...

  118. #118
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    Tap, 40psi and you pinch flatted the Rampage? I am 210 with gear and run my Cinder between 36 and 40psi. I tried it at ~25psi once and had lots of issues but not a single pinch flat.

    My current Cinder (rear only) is showing wear but I have a brand new backup waiting to go on. If the Rampage won't work for me, what other options are out there for a rear tire?

    BTW, I have been running tubes and have to add air every 3 weeks or so. With all the problems DIY and true tubeless have, I won't be switching anytime soon.
    I do not think Tap has found a rear tire that really works for him. Seems to go through all of them quickly.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  119. #119
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Lumbee1
    With all the problems DIY and true tubeless have, I won't be switching anytime soon.
    I concur with Jwind. There are no problems with true UST tubeless. I've been running Continental Vertical USTs on Mavic XM819 rims since February 2004 when I got my 5.5. I have never had a flat and I weigh about 220lbs. in my shorts. I inflate to about 30psi in the front and about 33psi in the back.

    I've been thinking of getting a set of Maxxis Ignitor as I've seen a few good reviews. They look very similar to the Vertical but perhaps a bit bigger.

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  120. #120
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Nah, Ignitors are almost exactly the same in every way -- possibly a little softer compound but that about all I can surmise. I'd like to hear others experince as i too really like the Conti's. Both are qute light as well, the conti claims to be lighter but the ignitor sure seems/feels/looks lighter.

  121. #121
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Jwind
    Nah, Ignitors are almost exactly the same in every way -- possibly a little softer compound but that about all I can surmise. I'd like to hear others experince as i too really like the Conti's. Both are qute light as well, the conti claims to be lighter but the ignitor sure seems/feels/looks lighter.
    Have you only ridden them in combination? As I said I've only used the Continentals. Have you ever tried Maxxis front and back? I'd sure like to know how they compare.

    The Contis may well be lighter as they are claimed to be 2.3" and the Ignitor is supposed to be 2.35".

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  122. #122
    Toby Wong?
    Reputation: Tappoix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,307
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    I do not think Tap has found a rear tire that really works for him. Seems to go through all of them quickly.
    this is true. Geax UST seem to hold up really well.

    I should have tried the 2.1 UST Rampage. We did Flagline today and the 2.35 rocked, albeit with a tube.

    what can I say...I hammer!

  123. #123
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by Ronnie
    Have you only ridden them in combination? As I said I've only used the Continentals. Have you ever tried Maxxis front and back? I'd sure like to know how they compare.

    The Contis may well be lighter as they are claimed to be 2.3" and the Ignitor is supposed to be 2.35".

    Ronnie.
    If by combination you mean one of each then, yes, I currently have the Conti on the rear and the maxxis on the front. I might add that this is the ONLY way i've had these tires on my bike so I can't offer any contrasting opinions. I can say that a difference in size is indistinguishable with the naked eye and I haven't measure them -- i'd be very interested to see such measurements.

    I think the Maxxis may be a bit softy/stickier. I find the conti to not quite soft enough to stick to wet (smooth) rocks as well as some other tires???? I'd like to try the maxxis in the back. all in all I really like these tires, the 'spikey' tread pattern grips and corners really well here in NE.

  124. #124

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    80
    I wonder when Panaracer will make the new tire visible on their website.

  125. #125
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,222
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    If you had 1, front. Recommend 2.
    How would you compare this to a Fat Albert 2.35 as a rear tire? My Kenda BG 2.35 still has life upfront so I'm looking for something to replace my Nevegal 2.35 on the back. The Nev worked well for me but the sidewalls were a bit too weak for my taste.

    I ride an all mountain rig in the New England gnarl and I weigh 150.

  126. #126

    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    16,457
    There has been a test done with it at Interbike and was told to be "nothing special".

  127. #127
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerk_Chicken
    There has been a test done with it at Interbike and was told to be "nothing special".
    What are you talking about? Which tire was "nothing special"? Give us a reference or a link.

    Ronnie.
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  128. #128
    Spanish rider
    Reputation: Pableras's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    311
    I think that Panaracer Rampage is very similar to Kenda Nevegal, the only difference I see is the little mark on every knob an the profile; the rest is almost the same.

    Bye
    A pessimist is an experienced optimist

  129. #129
    Displaying UGI Symptoms
    Reputation: murphie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    184
    I agree it looks that way in the pics. I have never seen them in person. I am interested in trying to run them DIY Tubeless. I currently run Kenda's Tubleless even though it is a big no no. In theory the Rampage will NOT have those same "Tire Falling Apart" issues that the Kenda's reportedly have had.

  130. #130
    Incredulous bastard
    Reputation: no one in particular's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    255
    I've bought 2 pairs of Kenda Navegals this year and have quickly torn side nobs off three of those tires. I want tires to wear down after 600 miles, not fall apart after 50 miles.

    Based on the recommendation in this thread, I had a shop order a pair from BTI. Got them on Monday and have now done two 12ish mile rides on them. Typical central NY single track: some mud, lots of roots and a few rocks. I set the Rampage up just like my Kendas, with a high 48-50psi. Yeah, I hate pinch flats. And since I choose lines like I'm blind-folded, I get pinch flats when I try to run lower pressure.

    Taking that into consideration, I found the following: They spin out on muddy climbs a little more than the Kendas and they don't velcro to roots like the Kendas. But, they seem to corner a lot better. No matter how hard or how low I corner'd with them, I couldn't get them to wash out. The Kendas did have a limit, I'm not sure I'm brave enough to find the limit on the Rampages.

    I'll try running the pressure down to 42 or so and see if that's any better on the roots and muddy climbs. And so far I've only run the rear tire in the rear-forward position. That is, "Rear ------->," so tha the flat end of the middle knobs are diging into the ground and not the ramp ends. I'll try it the other way next time I pull the tire off for any reason.
    __________________

  131. #131
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by murphie
    I am interested in trying to run them DIY Tubeless. .

    An earlier poster tried them and his results were discouraging to say the least -- albeit, he is a clyde.

  132. #132
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    9,910
    Anybody with muddy condition update for the Rampage? I need a front tire to replace my WW 2.5LT.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  133. #133
    That's ok I'll walk it...
    Reputation: Hawkens's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    240
    I found in really wet conditions they did not grip well on logs and roots. They did great in dry loose stuff though.

    Put my Nevegal 2.2 back on the rear and Blue Groove 2.35 up front and that setup worked much better in the traction area on the wet stuff.

  134. #134
    mtbr member
    Reputation: woodyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,222
    Avoid them in the wet. I sold mine after 2 rides because they were so bad in the wet. They were amazing in the dry stuff but as soon as I hit anything the least bit wet I slipped out. My previous tire was a Kenda Nevegal 2.35 DTC and even when it was almost bald it was twice as sticky as the Panny.

  135. #135
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by zorg
    Anybody with muddy condition update for the Rampage? I need a front tire to replace my WW 2.5LT.
    Not great in the wet be almost anything will be better than a WW LT
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  136. #136
    Paper or plastic?
    Reputation: zorg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    9,910
    Quote Originally Posted by shiggy
    Not great in the wet be almost anything will be better than a WW LT
    No doubt! We don't have mud yet in the SF bay area. So far, I'm thinking a 2.2 Spe Resolution as a front tire for the hard tail or maybe the Enduro for this winter.
    Faster is not always better, but it's always more fun

  137. #137
    No pain no gain
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    85

    Feedback on Panaracer Rampage

    Quote Originally Posted by Tappoix
    ordered a 2.35 Rampage from Webcyclery

    went on a Mavic 3.1 UST rim with a bit of Stans and soapy water.

    we'll see how it goes today on a ride

    stoked!
    I just read all the old postings on the Panaracer Rampage. Because you mentioned "Flagline" trail in one of your post (2006), I am guessing you are from Bend (OR.). How do you like the rampage for climbing traction on rocky tearrain? I really like the Kwoll Butte ride, and want a tire with the Nevegal traction but less rolling resistance and more lifespan. Does the Rampage grip uphill, rocky climbs as well as a Nevegal?

    What other tires in a 2.1 or 2.35 do you like for Bends twisty, dry single track but which really excel on uphill, loose, rocky terrain? Have you used the Maxxis Ignitor or Continental Gravity? Thanks for your feedback!

  138. #138
    Bike Geek
    Reputation: norcalruckus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    735

    2.1 ust

    I have a 2.1 ust panaracer from the Dirt Rag booth at Sea Otter. I still have not mounted it, but I will report my ride info when I get the chance.
    RIP AL DAVIS

  139. #139
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bgfthntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    488
    Quote Originally Posted by hammerheadbikes
    that's funny
    when I hear or see "NOS" I think of 12AX7 preamp tubes..
    old telefunkens, mullards, etc..

    I am a guitarist and an tube junkie

    +1

  140. #140
    SS Pusher Man
    Reputation: mtnbikej's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    7,555
    Quote Originally Posted by bgfthntr
    +1


    WOW!!!!!!


    You resurrected a 3 year old thread for that.....thanks for the contribution.







    Been running the 29 Rampage off an on for the last 2 years....been very happy with it.
    Bicycles don’t have motors or batteries.:nono:

    Ebikes are not bicycles :nono:

  141. #141
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chas_martel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,475
    Quote Originally Posted by mtnbikej
    WOW!!!!!!


    You resurrected a 3 year old thread for that.....thanks for the contribution.
    Ain't the internet great!? Just think, this thread might be read by people after we
    are long dead and gone.
    Nobody cares...........

  142. #142
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    321
    So...I am thinking about the Rampage SC 2.3 tire for the front. How has it been going since everybody tried this tire a while ago? Still like them, still hate them, moved on?

  143. #143
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    I have them on two bikes 26 and 29. Still like em. ALl of them are near the end of thier life. Not sure where i'm going next. It may very well be the Rpages again. THis is the first of the SC compound i've heard about. Very interested in feedback.

  144. #144
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    Never liked Panaracers especially the Rampage of old, slow rolling, poor in any kind of mud and rotates on the rim under braking ripping off to many Valves unless you run them rock solid.

    Don't like there rubber, grip grip grip then totally fail and just slide out very unpredictable and the break out is very low.

    I doubt the mk2's will be any better sadly.


    didn't realise old thread, thought they looked unchanged, 29" version I tried on the front by the way, got 1 here still in the wrapper and 1 with maybe 100miles on it TOPS!!

  145. #145
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    249
    I have two rides on this Rampage. It does well in semi loose to loose soil, but it appears to shed sticky mud poorly. My only comparison to it is my stock Exiwolf 2.3. I thought with the wider knob spacing it should shed of mud better especially on the side knobs.

    On hardpack it rolls quite well. I did notice some high frequency vibrations while on the pavement. Is this something to do with the wide knob spacing?

    IMHO, I am happy with it. Especially for the sub-$30 price I paid for it. I should have listened to Shiggy and opted for a different rear tire but I'm a cheapskate and a sucker for a bargain.

  146. #146
    Braille Riding Instructor
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    1,146
    shiggy, noting that this is a four-plus-year-old thread, I was wondering if you were still as keen on the Rampage 2.35 for 26-inch wheels as you were then.

    Thanks in advance,

    HP

  147. #147
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236
    Quote Originally Posted by hdparrish
    shiggy, noting that this is a four-plus-year-old thread, I was wondering if you were still as keen on the Rampage 2.35 for 26-inch wheels as you were then.

    Thanks in advance,

    HP
    Yes, still a very good tire. Plus there is now a SC, soft compound, version in 26". It does grip better on rock and roots, but also wears quicker.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  148. #148
    mtbr member
    Reputation: clouder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    27
    being wondering what do the markings on the rampage knobs meant? are they marked for knob cutting? searched the net but couldnt get any info about it. thanks in advance..!!

  149. #149
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SideShowJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    9
    Anyone running the Rampages on a HT 29er?
    --------------------------------
    2013 DiamondBack Mason

    2011 Transition Bottlerocket
    Seattle, USA

  150. #150
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,236

    New Panaracer Rampage 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by SideShowJohn View Post
    Anyone running the Rampages on a HT 29er?
    Yes. Hardtail, rigid, fully. All good.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  151. #151
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    243
    I have Panaracer Rampage on my wheels on my 29er for third winter and love it.

  152. #152
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,572

    New Panaracer Rampage 2.35

    Quote Originally Posted by SideShowJohn View Post
    Anyone running the Rampages on a HT 29er?
    I have it on the front of one bike; but it would be very slow for the rear. I've recently tried a Geax Gato on the front too and it seems faster and bigger for about the same weight - I think I'm liking it more.

  153. #153
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thegoodword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    31
    I ran them front and rear with tubes on my fully rigid single speed 29er. I am also running them on my carbon 29'er with good success tubeless. They work well on sand.
    Quote Originally Posted by SideShowJohn View Post
    Anyone running the Rampages on a HT 29er?

  154. #154
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ronnie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,196
    Quote Originally Posted by thegoodword View Post
    I ran them front and rear with tubes on my fully rigid single speed 29er. I am also running them on my carbon 29'er with good success tubeless. They work well on sand.
    I don't at this point want to read the entire thread. I had a look at the Panaracer website and don't see any reference to whether there is a 29" "tubeless ready" version of this tire. In fact the only 29" seems to have most of the technical features omitted. I'd like to try it but there doesn't seem to be a tire that works for me. Am I missing something?
    The trouble with having an open mind is that people will insist on trying to put things in it.

  155. #155
    mtbr member
    Reputation: thegoodword's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    31
    I am running the non-tubless 29 tire as a tubeless tire. It works fine with some sealant on a Stan's rim. I do not know if Panaracer makes a UST 29 Rampage.

  156. #156
    Paste eater
    Reputation: Jwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,704
    Quote Originally Posted by thegoodword View Post
    I am running the non-tubless 29 tire as a tubeless tire. It works fine with some sealant on a Stan's rim. I do not know if Panaracer makes a UST 29 Rampage.
    2.35 rampage works great with sealant on a stans rim. I still love this tire and holds up great in Moab so that's a double bonus!

Members who have read this thread: 1

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.