Time to start thinking about trying DHR 2- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 29 of 29
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JimF777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    464

    Time to start thinking about trying DHR 2

    I've replaced my rear tire already with the same model/size as what came on the bike new (Maxxis Aggressor 29x2.5) but as the latest spare I've ordered seems to be lost in transit, I'm thinking about going with the DHR 2 when I need to swap on a new one.

    I only seem to find them in a 2.4 and 2.6 width. Is there really much of a difference in the .10" when it comes to looks, performance, etc? My brain says go with the wider of the two, but wanted other opinions.

    I'm not a good enough rider to detect little variances like degree angle changes or like, so I don't know I"ll notice width changes, so keep that in mind if you're going to respond with magazine or online bike site review quotes. Looking for more of what you, real people notice.

    Input?


    Thanks.

  2. #2
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    5,804
    DHR2 is a great tire.

    2.4 vs 2.6... i think i'd let my rims determine that. Both sizes are sufficiently large. Go 2.4 if your rims are <30mm, 2.6 if over. If they're right around 30... up to you!

    DHR2 is fairly slow rolling, but casing makes a larger difference here. The exo tires roll surprisingly quickly, but they need more tire pressure. High pressure and a thin casing = pinball effect with any tire, and it's true here. The heavier versions are quite draggy, but they track better at speed and are more durable.

    I tend towards the harder compounds for a rear tire, but i could see going soft if i didn't mind the short lifespan. Soft compounds are amazing in the wet.
    "Things that are complex are not useful, Things that are useful are simple."
    Mikhail Kalashnikov

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,997
    Go with the 2.4 if you have a full suspension bike. The only benefit of the 2.6 is a tiny bit more cushioning at lower speeds. The 2.4 has plenty of grip and more support.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    628
    I've tried 2.6s before and while they do provide exceptional grip, I find that they feel more disconnected compared to narrower tires. They lack the directness and feedback that narrower tires provide. 2.5s are the widest I will go on all of my bikes. Given the choice between 2.4 and 2.6 of the same tire, I'll choose 2.4s every time.
    I no longer like to party. But I like the idea of it.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    475
    Another thing to check, is to see if you have clearance at the rear chainstay yolk, or the seatstay bridge.

    On my Kona Process 153 29'er, I couldn't fit a 2.6in rear tire if I wanted. 2.4's will usually fit on most modern bikes, but 2.6in rear tire clearance is less common.

    Everyone else has more or less covered the other differences. The larger tire will have a bigger footprint, and will be able to run lower pressures, and therefore will mute a bit more of the chatter of the trail (especially on a hardtail). They will also float a bit better if you have trails that are sandy. They may skate a bit over mud more though, as it won't want to dig in as much as a narrower tire.

    The 2.4 will be more precise, and will likely deform less under load (all other things being equal), and will feel less "bouncy".

    I'm not a super hard rider, and I've never ridden a 2.6in on the rear. So I'd probably try it (if it fit on my bike), just to see how I like them.

    Good luck with the decision .

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    31
    I went once 2.6'' and don't want to go back: Where I ride 2.4''s lock up too easily on wet rock slab rollers and 2.6''s find much more traction on wet roots. 2.6''s feel slightly more vague and squirm a bit more than 2.4''s but nowhere near what 2.8''s do. Furthermore, under many circumstances wider tires are faster (!) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8by3v688Ze8

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JimF777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    464
    I like it, opinions on both sides of the fence. Regarding the issue of fitment, does the width increase/decrease from 2.5 to 2.6/2.4 really equate to a tenth of an inch?

    If so, there should be plenty of clearance.

    Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    31
    ^this depends totally on the manufacturer and tire: In some review (can't remember which)I read that Maxxis 2.5'' is basically equal to a 2.4'' in width. My Maxxis "2.5''' wetscreams measure 2.15" wide but this is perhaps the most extreme deviation.

    On my 25 mm rim a 2.6'' DHF measures 2.52'' and WTB 2.5''s 2.44''.

    Specialized is perhaps the most notorious, but they print actual sizes on the tire box:

    2.6'' on a 21mm rim = 2.35'', 30 mm = 2.4'', 38 mm = 2.55''.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chuch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    656
    DHR2 is also my favorite rear, but I prefer the 2.4 option. It's already a pretty slow and meaty option in its 2.4 form, so I cant even imagine needing a 2.6.

    The posts above covered nearly everything you need to evaluate.
    - do you have clearance in the triangle?
    - Are you on wide enough rims to support a 2.6?
    - does your terrain warrant something that large?
    - how do you prefer to ride?

    The only other thing I was thinking is that you didn't mention what you are pairing it up to up front. If you aren't running a 2.6 up front as well, then your answer is 2.4 IMO.
    Santa Cruz HT2

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,166
    I find the current 2.6 tires to be to bouncy due to lighter casing. And more vulnerable to cuts. Most 2.4 and 2.5 tires are heavier and meant for higher speed and protection. 2.6 would be better for hard tails and slow crawl type trails IMHO.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JimF777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by Chuch View Post
    DHR2 is also my favorite rear, but I prefer the 2.4 option. It's already a pretty slow and meaty option in its 2.4 form, so I cant even imagine needing a 2.6.

    The posts above covered nearly everything you need to evaluate.
    1 - do you have clearance in the triangle?
    2 - Are you on wide enough rims to support a 2.6?
    3 - does your terrain warrant something that large?
    4 - how do you prefer to ride?

    The only other thing I was thinking is that you didn't mention what you are pairing it up to up front. If you aren't running a 2.6 up front as well, then your answer is 2.4 IMO.
    1 - Looks to be ample
    2 - inner width is 30 mm
    3 - Don't know, never asked it :-P I like going as fast as I can hitting large, angled, N. Calif rocks that I think is going to send me OTB
    4 - Um, see #3

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,997
    Quote Originally Posted by JimF777 View Post
    I like going as fast as I can
    Definitely 2.4 then.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,232
    I like them both. Had 2.6DHF and yes they are noticeably bigger than the 2.4/2.5 I replaced them with. If you have the resources to maybe waste money on them than you should try the 2.6. They are an interesting tire.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    I find the current 2.6 tires to be to bouncy due to lighter casing. And more vulnerable to cuts. Most 2.4 and 2.5 tires are heavier and meant for higher speed and protection. 2.6 would be better for hard tails and slow crawl type trails IMHO.
    I think your analysis has a good point, my personal preferences are in the latter category, perhaps that's why I love the 2.5-2.6'' tires so much.

    However, the bouncyness is not a problem if you are running inserts anyway.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    260
    Do not over complicate it. 2.4 You get the DHR for its awesome braking. I love mine with the exception of the Maxxis Wobble & it has as many holes as swiss cheese.

    Only option to consider is exo + or DD. Do not get the Max Grip for the rear!

    I would only consider the 2.6 for the front but then again the assegai is a better front tire.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by ttchad View Post
    Do not over complicate it. 2.4 You get the DHR for its awesome braking. I love mine with the exception of the Maxxis Wobble & it has as many holes as swiss cheese.

    Only option to consider is exo + or DD. Do not get the Max Grip for the rear!

    I would only consider the 2.6 for the front but then again the assegai is a better front tire.
    Yeah what is it with that out of the mold Wobble?? Last two Assegai's I mounted up made me think my rim was bent! DHR2 is a swell rear tire in the 2.4 size.... however, be advised it's a pretty loose tire with a long, long transition to the cornering knobs, which I love when paired with super-grippy front tire like the Assegai, but it's a feature worth noting on the DHR2...maybe the looseness is offset in the 2.6, but I've never used one.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JimF777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    Definitely 2.4 then.
    Yes fast as I can, but I must keep in mind that I'm not good when it comes to "helping the rear over" rocks, so I think it takes some good hits. At 200lb, and angular rocks bigger than my teenager's head, I keep thinking the more rubber/air between the rock and rim is a good thing. Wrong thinking?

    Quote Originally Posted by Uuno1 View Post
    I think your analysis has a good point, my personal preferences are in the latter category, perhaps that's why I love the 2.5-2.6'' tires so much.

    However, the bouncyness is not a problem if you are running inserts anyway.
    And if the suspension is doing it's job, it shouldn't be bouncy, right? Is that the bouncy you're referring to?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttchad View Post
    Do not over complicate it. 2.4 You get the DHR for its awesome braking. I love mine with the exception of the Maxxis Wobble & it has as many holes as swiss cheese.

    Only option to consider is exo + or DD. Do not get the Max Grip for the rear!

    I would only consider the 2.6 for the front but then again the assegai is a better front tire.
    For now I'm set on the front situation. Twice I searched for DHR and clicked on DHF when ordering tires. :-)

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,997
    Quote Originally Posted by JimF777 View Post
    Yes fast as I can, but I must keep in mind that I'm not good when it comes to "helping the rear over" rocks, so I think it takes some good hits. At 200lb, and angular rocks bigger than my teenager's head, I keep thinking the more rubber/air between the rock and rim is a good thing. Wrong thinking?
    There's not really more rubber in the 2.6 version. 2.6 tires from most manufacturers are like a hybrid between a plus tire and a standard tire, not just in width but also how plus tires have a lighter duty construction. The 2.6 DHR2 is a lighter duty tire than the 2.4. For bashing through rock gardens you want more rubber and less air. This gives you damping, support, and puncture resistance (think DH tires).

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Chuch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    656
    I'm with Jeremy on this, I am voting on the 2.4. 2.6 in the back is just wonky and unnecessary for me and I think you'd find the same. I really don't like the back of the bike being vague or slowing me down. The 2.4 Tire is tried and true from trail riding to the guys running world cup DH.

    Just like anything else though, everyone has an opinion. You may have to experiment and try both for yourself. Good luck dude!
    Santa Cruz HT2

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by JimF777 View Post

    And if the suspension is doing it's job, it shouldn't be bouncy, right? Is that the bouncy you're referring to?
    Not really. If you put a 2.8'' or bigger tire on and inflate it more towards the upper recommended limit you will notice your wheel having a tendency to "ping" off of roots and other uneven stuff like a ping pong ball: as there is no damping the tire tries to return to its original shape as soon as the compression of to the initial impact against the obstacle stops. Some people dislike plus tires as the pressure range where this effect is not present but the tire is not totally wobbly is very narrow.

    Inserts provide damping and thus eliminate or reduce this effect (which I personally don't find to be minding me in 2.5-2.6'' tires even w/o the insert).

  21. #21
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,120
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    There's not really more rubber in the 2.6 version. 2.6 tires from most manufacturers are like a hybrid between a plus tire and a standard tire, not just in width but also how plus tires have a lighter duty construction. The 2.6 DHR2 is a lighter duty tire than the 2.4. For bashing through rock gardens you want more rubber and less air. This gives you damping, support, and puncture resistance (think DH tires).
    This ^

    Far as I can tell the 2.6 DHR is a very different tire due to what seems to be a lighter casing.

    However, when I went back to a 2.4 DHR from the 2.6 I found I lost a lot of grip on techy climbs. Those 2.6 tire, due to their lighter, supple casing just hug rocks. So, I recently tried the new EXO + in a 2.6 DHR. I think its pretty close to being the best at both worlds.

    Depends on the trails you ride to. What I ride with that tire is a constant mat of slick roots and rocks. 5 hours of that chatter and rumble can get to you after a while. I like how bigger tires soak up the chatter and how they grip on climbs.

    When I'm more concerned about blasting to the bottom of the hill as fast as I can, I'd run the 2.4/2.5 WT flavor. Really depends on what you want to do with the bike.

    On my DH rig I've run the 2.4 DHRII DH casing (with inserts) for years. Very nice.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: JimF777's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    464
    Quote Originally Posted by jeremy3220 View Post
    There's not really more rubber in the 2.6 version. 2.6 tires from most manufacturers are like a hybrid between a plus tire and a standard tire, not just in width but also how plus tires have a lighter duty construction. The 2.6 DHR2 is a lighter duty tire than the 2.4. For bashing through rock gardens you want more rubber and less air. This gives you damping, support, and puncture resistance (think DH tires).
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    This ^

    Far as I can tell the 2.6 DHR is a very different tire due to what seems to be a lighter casing.

    However, when I went back to a 2.4 DHR from the 2.6 I found I lost a lot of grip on techy climbs. Those 2.6 tire, due to their lighter, supple casing just hug rocks. So, I recently tried the new EXO + in a 2.6 DHR. I think its pretty close to being the best at both worlds.

    Depends on the trails you ride to. What I ride with that tire is a constant mat of slick roots and rocks. 5 hours of that chatter and rumble can get to you after a while. I like how bigger tires soak up the chatter and how they grip on climbs.

    When I'm more concerned about blasting to the bottom of the hill as fast as I can, I'd run the 2.4/2.5 WT flavor. Really depends on what you want to do with the bike.

    On my DH rig I've run the 2.4 DHRII DH casing (with inserts) for years. Very nice.
    Heavier duty is preferred too, since flats suck. I think the next one will be the 2.4.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Or 2.6.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Maybe one of each :-)

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    This ^

    Far as I can tell the 2.6 DHR is a very different tire due to what seems to be a lighter casing.

    However, when I went back to a 2.4 DHR from the 2.6 I found I lost a lot of grip on techy climbs. Those 2.6 tire, due to their lighter, supple casing just hug rocks. So, I recently tried the new EXO + in a 2.6 DHR. I think its pretty close to being the best at both worlds.

    Depends on the trails you ride to. What I ride with that tire is a constant mat of slick roots and rocks. 5 hours of that chatter and rumble can get to you after a while. I like how bigger tires soak up the chatter and how they grip on climbs.

    When I'm more concerned about blasting to the bottom of the hill as fast as I can, I'd run the 2.4/2.5 WT flavor. Really depends on what you want to do with the bike.

    On my DH rig I've run the 2.4 DHRII DH casing (with inserts) for years. Very nice.
    If you're not concerned with the weight, cushcore gives me much better traction without the tire rebound of plus tires (bounyness). I ride really rocky ,rooty trails and the chatter made me want to like plus tires. I think Exo+ is a win/win though I've slashed sidewalls of Exo and the Exo+ I have on the rear is holding up well.

  24. #24
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,120
    Quote Originally Posted by Cerberus75 View Post
    If you're not concerned with the weight, cushcore gives me much better traction without the tire rebound of plus tires (bounyness). I ride really rocky ,rooty trails and the chatter made me want to like plus tires. I think Exo+ is a win/win though I've slashed sidewalls of Exo and the Exo+ I have on the rear is holding up well.

    Yeah, the lighter casing 2.6 puffy tires are bouncy if you pressure them enough to prevent sidewall/snake bites.

    But I've found the EXO+ casings to be much less bouncy. They feel more damped and therefore precise riding like the 2.4/2.5 WT tires. Like a good compromise between the two.

    Inserts are a PITA to deal with. I wrestle with them on my DH rig and feel they are worth it as I ride that bike like I'm angry. On the other hand, with trail riding I take a much more nimble approach. So I don't think the hassle of inserts would be worth it there.

    And don't call 2.6" tires plus tires - its sort of insulting. I'm not that old yet.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    2,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Yeah, the lighter casing 2.6 puffy tires are bouncy if you pressure them enough to prevent sidewall/snake bites.

    But I've found the EXO+ casings to be much less bouncy. They feel more damped and therefore precise riding like the 2.4/2.5 WT tires. Like a good compromise between the two.

    Inserts are a PITA to deal with. I wrestle with them on my DH rig and feel they are worth it as I ride that bike like I'm angry. On the other hand, with trail riding I take a much more nimble approach. So I don't think the hassle of inserts would be worth it there.

    And don't call 2.6" tires plus tires - its sort of insulting. I'm not that old yet.
    LMAO! I'm getting that old. You have me wondering about the 2.6 with Exo+

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    31
    I have Rimpacts, which are half the weight of regular Cushcores and easy to install; the only PITA -phase is the first step when removing them. I think I need some kind of tool to help me get the tire bead unstuck from the rim wall.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by JimF777 View Post

    For now I'm set on the front situation. Twice I searched for DHR and clicked on DHF when ordering tires. :-)
    BTW DHF makes for an awesome back tire! Feels less drifty but does not brake as well & I usually move the front to rear as soon as the knobs start to undercut.

  28. #28
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,001
    Quote Originally Posted by ttchad View Post
    I love mine with the exception of the Maxxis Wobble.
    Jeez, I thought it was just me who got tire wobbles (was it something I did?). I didn't know it was a Maxxis trait.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    260
    Quote Originally Posted by Nat View Post
    Jeez, I thought it was just me who got tire wobbles (was it something I did?). I didn't know it was a Maxxis trait.
    I did ruin a new DHF cleaning sealent off the bead. ridden once. Its like the drawstring on a hoodie when pulled on only one side. Yes be careful! The others were from jumps.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 11:04 AM
  2. Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-22-2012, 07:27 AM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-15-2011, 02:39 PM
  4. Time to start thinking about the trainer agian...
    By skiahh in forum Riding Passion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-09-2005, 08:26 PM
  5. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-12-2004, 07:06 PM

Members who have read this thread: 160

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.