Vittoria Agarro - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 201 to 379 of 379

Thread: Vittoria Agarro

  1. #201
    g=9.764m/s2
    Reputation: Undescended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    492
    Vittoria Agarro-ee8ed098-f615-4990-b6bd-8bbb40a9a6df.jpg
    Mine is 2.5 on DT-Swiss M1900 30id wheels.
    Quote Originally Posted by Varaxis
    I just straight up say that I ride a Motobecane, a BD bike, and acknowledge I consider it to be the Harbor Freight of bikes

  2. #202
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,769
    27.5 2.35 Agarro on a i29 Synthesis rim:

    Casing measures 2.4025"
    Widest measurement from tread block to tread block is 2.1920"

    Vittoria Agarro-img_1544.jpg

    Vittoria Agarro-img_1545.jpg

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    My 2.6 was 2.36" wide on a 31mm ID rim at 20psi. I got a refund. When Vittoria fixes their sizing I'll buy one.
    I remember that.
    There are some true plus size tires that you can buy.
    Although my opinion is that true 2.6 tires totally suck, I do wish manufacturers accurately labeled tire width on a specified rim size. But then they are in the sales business.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ACLakey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    541
    I have been running a 2.6 DHRII front and 2.35 DHRII this spring. I did get a new bike this spring and for whatever reason, I am not getting along with the DHRII in the front this time around. The DHRII in the rear is very grippy, breaks well but rolls like a turd. Things are quickly drying out here and I am looking for new tires. I purchased some Dissector tires but they are taking forever to get here. After reading some posts and seeing reviews, I ordered a 2.6 Martello front and a 2.35 Agarro rear. I am very excited to give these a try, I have had great luck with Vittoria tires in the past.

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by ACLakey View Post
    I have been running a 2.6 DHRII front and 2.35 DHRII this spring. I did get a new bike this spring and for whatever reason, I am not getting along with the DHRII in the front this time around. The DHRII in the rear is very grippy, breaks well but rolls like a turd. Things are quickly drying out here and I am looking for new tires. I purchased some Dissector tires but they are taking forever to get here. After reading some posts and seeing reviews, I ordered a 2.6 Martello front and a 2.35 Agarro rear. I am very excited to give these a try, I have had great luck with Vittoria tires in the past.
    I've tried all the tires you've mentioned and far and away prefer the set up you have on order now.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    [QUOTE=Professed;14707145]
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai.

    Suns - we generally have shared experiences - especially when I owned a Foxy 29 - but for some reason the Martello - while fabulous in most dry conditions - is not working for me in very loose/rough and definitely not damp conditions.
    I sort of encountered those same shortcomings you mentioned of the Martello in very loose dry rough conditions today. Where I was riding today all the corners where I wanted to make up speed there was just a pile of loose rocks at every apex and I was having a tough time keeping momentum up.
    Wonder if the Mazza will sort of punch through that and find traction?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  7. #207
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    219
    I currently have 2.6 DHF front and 2.3 morsa rear and looking for a faster rolling front tire and maybe rear too. I ride mostly trail without much elevation so the DHF is a bit overkill here but does grip well. Is the aggaro faster rolling rear than morsa? How would a 2.6 morsa be on the front with aggaro rear?

  8. #208
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by nashwillis View Post
    I currently have 2.6 DHF front and 2.3 morsa rear and looking for a faster rolling front tire and maybe rear too. I ride mostly trail without much elevation so the DHF is a bit overkill here but does grip well. Is the aggaro faster rolling rear than morsa? How would a 2.6 morsa be on the front with aggaro rear?
    I haven't ridden the Morsa in a while (have some hanging in my garage), and though it is pretty fast-rolling, let's just say I don't think there there's a faster-rolling true trail tire than the Agarro. The traction profiles of those two tires are pretty different, though. For the techy stuff I ride, the Agarro is much better. The Morsa is not good on any wet technical terrain, and is more of a dry conditions tire, in my opinion. Not sure I'd pair the Morsa with the Agarro, for that reason. As conditions vary, you'd get vastly different grip F/R. I'd either go Agarro F/R (what I ride), or Martello F / Agarro R.

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    [QUOTE=Suns_PSD;14726313]
    Quote Originally Posted by Professed View Post

    I sort of encountered those same shortcomings you mentioned of the Martello in very loose dry rough conditions today. Where I was riding today all the corners where I wanted to make up speed there was just a pile of loose rocks at every apex and I was having a tough time keeping momentum up.
    Wonder if the Mazza will sort of punch through that and find traction?

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    I believe the answer to that question would be yes.

  10. #210
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    I got the 2.35 Martello and experienced the same issues on loose terrain. So I gave it to a friend and bought the 2.6 Martello for more spacing between the lugs, and I mounted it this morning. This was going to be part of my Agarro and Martello combo before I took the Agarro for a refund. So far, at 30 psi, it's 2.42" on a 31mm rim. I don't want to go to a wider rim because the profile looks to be on the limits of being flat.

    It appears Vittoria is going where Specialized is, if you want a certain width you'll need to upsize the tire. I'll need to get the 2.8 to get a 2.6.

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    219
    I live around Nashville and summer is pretty dry packed trails. Maybe 2.6 aggaro front and 2.3 rear aggaro would be what I am looking for. I could always put my DHF back on if I head somewhere I need more traction up front.

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by nashwillis View Post
    I live around Nashville and summer is pretty dry packed trails. Maybe 2.6 aggaro front and 2.3 rear aggaro would be what I am looking for. I could always put my DHF back on if I head somewhere I need more traction up front.
    I think that's a good approach.

  13. #213
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    The Mazza is due in the USA in Mid-June. The 29er has a 2.35 & a 2.6 size, both sizes offered in trail or Enduro casings.

    Will be ordering one up the day they are available.

  14. #214
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The Mazza is due in the USA in Mid-June. The 29er has a 2.35 & a 2.6 size, both sizes offered in trail or Enduro casings.

    Will be ordering one up the day they are available.
    Good to hear. Interested to know the weights. Some of the burlier Vittoria tires get heavy.

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    The rep was helpful but did not have the weights yet. As a front tire, I'd probably order the trail version and run a Tubolight insert.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  16. #216
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    2.35 martello front or 2.6 agarro front with 2.35 agarro rear? This is for an aggressive short travel 29er. I have another bike for the really high speed, aggressive stuff. Terrain is hardpack and loose over hard, always dry. No Martello 2.6 front as I'm trying to keep the weight reasonable for a trail bike.

  17. #217
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    2.35 martello front or 2.6 agarro front with 2.35 agarro rear? This is for an aggressive short travel 29er. I have another bike for the really high speed, aggressive stuff. Terrain is hardpack and loose over hard, always dry. No Martello 2.6 front as I'm trying to keep the weight reasonable for a trail bike.
    That's a tough one... I've run both of those combos, and I think it depends on a couple factors... Agarro 2.6 is faster rolling (even on the front, it's noticeable), and Martello has slightly more cornering bite. Also, what's your rim width? for ~25mm rims, I've found the 2.35 shape works well, and for 30mm rims, I like the 2.6 better. Also, do you want a taller front end, or not?

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    [QUOTE=Full Send;14727035]
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post

    I believe the answer to that question would be yes.
    I suspect so and look forward to trying the Mazza. That said my Martello 10 rides in or so, while still good, is showing some slight damage. Some small tears at the base of a handful of knobs and the siping is getting worn, so it might just not be at it's former glory.

  19. #219
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    Quote Originally Posted by Full Send View Post
    That's a tough one... I've run both of those combos, and I think it depends on a couple factors... Agarro 2.6 is faster rolling (even on the front, it's noticeable), and Martello has slightly more cornering bite. Also, what's your rim width? for ~25mm rims, I've found the 2.35 shape works well, and for 30mm rims, I like the 2.6 better. Also, do you want a taller front end, or not?
    27id rims; leaning towards the martello front just given my riding style

  20. #220
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    27id rims; leaning towards the martello front just given my riding style
    Sounds good - that's a solid combo.

  21. #221
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    I got a solid fifteen 2 hour rides or so out of the rear Agarro which is good for me.
    It's still working pretty well but I can definitely feel a drop off in climbing, and descending traction, cornering traction still feels reasonable by my standards, but not as good as new.



    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    This is the plasticky insert that Vittoria has placed in the sidewalls of their Enduro tires. It really firms up the sidewall and prevents pinch flats. Very clever and high tech imo.

    Ps. I won't even consider any other rear tire at this time.


    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    It's always harder to hurt a front tire and this Martello is still working very well about 8-10 trail rides in but is getting a few microtears at the base of the knobs. Traction is still like 95% so no problem.
    I've settled on a rear tire (Agarro) but the front tire is yet to be settled but narrowed down to one of these 3: 1) Tioga Edge 22 soft, 2) Martello 2.6, 3) Mazza 2.6.

    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  24. #224
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    I'm running a Martello 2.35 TNT (940g trail version) up front and the Agarro 2.6 rear. I'm 75kg on a 29" short travel FS bike. For the very technical, roots, roots, rocks and then more roots and rocks type of trails we have around here, this combo is killer. I can get up anything and get down anything. Running 23psi front and back at the moment, tubeless.

    Loving these tyres!

  25. #225
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    195
    Is the tire running narrow still an issue? I ordered 2.35" and there going on 30mm width rims. I was going to try it on my long travel 29er, still waiting on tire inserts to show up before I put new tires on. I figured I would try to kill the Maxxis Agressors while its still dry .

  26. #226
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    I don't have anything reliable to measure tyre width with, but the 2.35 on the front does look narrower than the 2.4 Conti tyre it replaced. It doesn't bother me though, the tyre works great. To be honest, if the Agarro 2.6 is a little narrower than it should be, I'm happy about that because it only just fits in my frame as it is.
    Running id30mm DT Swiss rims.

  27. #227
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Totally useless fact: lining up the 1st 'R' in Agarro with the valvestem on one side, results in the exact same R on the other side also lined up!

    Yah I know...

  28. #228
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Totally useless fact: lining up the 1st 'R' in Agarro with the valvestem on one side, results in the exact same R on the other side also lined up!

    Yah I know...
    Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!

    I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.

    The Maxxis DHR2 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 I took off the front measured 2.4 and the Rekon 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 measured 2.35. These have been on the bike for 600 or so miles. The DHR2 seems pretty good, but the Rekon is chewed up quite a bit.

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by jonmango42 View Post
    Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!

    I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.

    The Maxxis DHR2 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 I took off the front measured 2.4 and the Rekon 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 measured 2.35. These have been on the bike for 600 or so miles. The DHR2 seems pretty good, but the Rekon is chewed up quite a bit.
    Sweet - Let us know what you think.

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevin_sbay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    337
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I got a solid fifteen 2 hour rides or so out of the rear Agarro which is good for me.
    It's still working pretty well but I can definitely feel a drop off in climbing, and descending traction, cornering traction still feels reasonable by my standards, but not as good as new.



    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    Man, you must be an aggressive rider!
    Curious how would you describe your riding and terrain?

  31. #231
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by kevin_sbay View Post
    Man, you must be an aggressive rider!
    Curious how would you describe your riding and terrain?
    You know, I'm not an 'extreme' rider. I do a few jumps and 5' drops but being nearly 50 and having only begun riding about 6 years ago I don't have a lifetime of experience nor a desire to get hurt.

    That said, smooth yet fast turning is sort of my thing if I know where I'm going and as a result at times, I'm pretty hard to keep up with when I'm feeling comfortable. I don't skid at all, always use both brakes, and just try and go through the turns as smooth and fast as possible. It's not KOM type speeds, but it's like top 10% speed.

    Our terrain is very rocky, very loose, dry, with plenty of short but steep ups and downs. I try to maintain momentum through it all but I usually poop out 3/4 way through a ride and slow down quite a bit as I don't save it for later.

    I wish I was less risk averse with drops and gap jumps, but it is what it is.

  32. #232
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,441
    Have a handful of rides on the Martello 2.35 TNT (trail) on the front with the Agarro 2.35 TNT (trail) rear. Agarro I have been riding since last fall when it first came out and the Martello has maybe 100 miles on it or so. This is on my 29er GG The Smash running 160/145 travel.

    So for me in the Northern NV high desert the Agarro does great on everything other than semi-deep kitty litter. There it has a tendency to want to drift and slide, but nothing that is uncontrollable and it lets you know if it is going to.

    The martello up front is a little different and I am not sure if I am liking it as a front tire. Could just be the size may not be good as a front in my area but damn if it doesn't feel twitchy and like it wants to wander all the time. High speed cornering, if there is even a small amount of skree then it wants to drift. Haven't had a huge amount of miles on it yet so could just be it is still breaking in.

    And HOW did I miss the information on the MAZZA!!!! Definitely looks to be a redesigned Goma, which was my absolute FAVORITE tire of all time. Patiently waiting for that to come out and will likely grab one right off the bat. ESPECIALLY if it comes in a 2.4"

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    14
    First two rides felt a ton faster, and some Strava PRs indicate that I am - haha! I have a very close little XC loop down the street from me and is more or less my proving ground.

    My first 3 laps I ran them 23F/25R and they felt fast as hell but not super confident in the corners. We haven't had a good soak in a while so the track is a bit dry at the moment. Then I aired down to 17F/19R and that was way, way better! Still rolling fast and I was able to take corners with more speed, too.

    This is my 3rd pair of tires, so I'm still learning how to feel and understand what's going on. Also, these are my first 120tpi tires. 17/19 is a bit lower than I usually go and these feel much more supportive than the DHR2/Rekon I just took off.

    In fact, I think I can air down even more without riding on my carbon rims :-) At least on my home track - when I venture farther I guess I'll run more air till I can get a good feel for what the conditions and trail allow.

    Pretty happy with the purchase, and I'm looking forward to more rides!

    Quote Originally Posted by Full Send View Post

    Quote Originally Posted by jonmango42 View Post
    Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!

    I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.

    The Maxxis DHR2 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 I took off the front measured 2.4 and the Rekon 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 measured 2.35. These have been on the bike for 600 or so miles. The DHR2 seems pretty good, but the Rekon is chewed up quite a bit.


    Sweet - Let us know what you think.

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by jonmango42 View Post
    First two rides felt a ton faster, and some Strava PRs indicate that I am - haha! I have a very close little XC loop down the street from me and is more or less my proving ground.

    My first 3 laps I ran them 23F/25R and they felt fast as hell but not super confident in the corners. We haven't had a good soak in a while so the track is a bit dry at the moment. Then I aired down to 17F/19R and that was way, way better! Still rolling fast and I was able to take corners with more speed, too.

    This is my 3rd pair of tires, so I'm still learning how to feel and understand what's going on. Also, these are my first 120tpi tires. 17/19 is a bit lower than I usually go and these feel much more supportive than the DHR2/Rekon I just took off.

    In fact, I think I can air down even more without riding on my carbon rims :-) At least on my home track - when I venture farther I guess I'll run more air till I can get a good feel for what the conditions and trail allow.

    Pretty happy with the purchase, and I'm looking forward to more rides!
    I've found their construction (and the anti-pinch-flat inserts built in) allows for a plush and supportive ride, with good durability, at low pressures. I'd get a good brass gauge and keep letting 1 psi out until you feel the tires folding under load and/or whacking the rims on stuff. Lower is better, until it's not.

  35. #235
    TŠ mť ar meisce.
    Reputation: BeerCan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    672
    Put this tire on my rear today. I think this is the biggest tire that has been on there, I replace a captain. Hit the trails tomorrow, but I think this is more tire than needed around here, we'll see.
    Stan's Arch (I know ancient)
    Vittoria Agarro-mvimg_20200514_155212.jpg

    Vittoria Agarro-mvimg_20200514_123737.jpg

    Vittoria Agarro-mvimg_20200514_123816.jpg
    Get a bicycle. You will certainly not regret it, if you live. --Mark Twain

  36. #236
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Full Send View Post
    I've found their construction (and the anti-pinch-flat inserts built in) allows for a plush and supportive ride, with good durability, at low pressures. I'd get a good brass gauge and keep letting 1 psi out until you feel the tires folding under load and/or whacking the rims on stuff. Lower is better, until it's not.
    I ran them at 13F/15R (at least according to my gauge) and they were slow to roll. The ride was more plush though, so that's a bonus. I guess it's like the Cush Core marketing - squishier tires = more suspension travel

    I didn't really notice much cornering improvement - but that could be due to my needing to get better at cornering, lol. I think I'll go up till I get a good balance between rolling, handling, and bump compliance.

    I have a close by trail system I frequent that I figure I'll need to make some adjustments. The climbs and descents are much longer and the trails have far more tech elements.

    I have the super common Topeak digital gauge - I don't know if when it says 20psi, that's a true 20psi or not, but hopefully it's accurate to itself.

    Did you already recommend a brass gauge?

  37. #237
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    The more pictures I see the more I like. I like the rekon and this looks like a beefier version.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. #238
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by BeerCan View Post
    Put this tire on my rear today. I think this is the biggest tire that has been on there, I replace a captain. Hit the trails tomorrow, but I think this is more tire than needed around here, we'll see.
    Stan's Arch (I know ancient)
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	MVIMG_20200514_155212.jpg 
Views:	67 
Size:	227.9 KB 
ID:	1333055

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	MVIMG_20200514_123737.jpg 
Views:	80 
Size:	357.1 KB 
ID:	1333057

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	MVIMG_20200514_123816.jpg 
Views:	65 
Size:	321.6 KB 
ID:	1333059
    That's a 2.35?

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  39. #239
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by jonmango42 View Post
    I ran them at 13F/15R (at least according to my gauge) and they were slow to roll. The ride was more plush though, so that's a bonus. I guess it's like the Cush Core marketing - squishier tires = more suspension travel

    I didn't really notice much cornering improvement - but that could be due to my needing to get better at cornering, lol. I think I'll go up till I get a good balance between rolling, handling, and bump compliance.

    I have a close by trail system I frequent that I figure I'll need to make some adjustments. The climbs and descents are much longer and the trails have far more tech elements.

    I have the super common Topeak digital gauge - I don't know if when it says 20psi, that's a true 20psi or not, but hopefully it's accurate to itself.

    Did you already recommend a brass gauge?
    The Topeak digital is probably fine, at least in reference to itself, as you pointed out.

    Personally, I use these: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004XISIK4..._bAQVEbDJKZCQ1

    For sure, find the pressure that works for your style and terrain. For the stuff I ride, low pressure is faster, not slower, because there are bumps and stuff. For roads, lower is slower for sure.

  40. #240
    TŠ mť ar meisce.
    Reputation: BeerCan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    672
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    That's a 2.35?

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    Yes 2.35
    Get a bicycle. You will certainly not regret it, if you live. --Mark Twain

  41. #241
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    OT regarding other Vittoria tires: My wife rode her new rear Mezcal around and instantly noticed how smooth they rode. Vittoria tires are really unique in this regard.
    And I have continued to ride my 2.6 Martello on a 34mm ID front wheel and am still blown away. It's the best I've ridden by a fair bit. Fantastic traction, low RR, still maintaining traction even as it wears. I'm surprised that others don't universally reach the same conclusion.
    I'm still Mazza curious, however I could be content running Martellos as a front for several seasons as it performs so well. Won't be easy to out perform this tire.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  42. #242
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    OT regarding other Vittoria tires: My wife rode her new rear Mezcal around and instantly noticed how smooth they rode. Vittoria tires are really unique in this regard.
    And I have continued to ride my 2.6 Martello on a 34mm ID front wheel and am still blown away. It's the best I've ridden by a fair bit. Fantastic traction, low RR, still maintaining traction even as it wears. I'm surprised that others don't universally reach the same conclusion.
    I'm still Mazza curious, however I could be content running Martellos as a front for several seasons as it performs so well. Won't be easy to out perform this tire.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    A couple rides in with a Martello 2.6 front (trail version with CushCore XC) and itís quite a remarkable tire IMHO. Iím in the PNW, so lots of wet rides but actually not a lot of deep sticky mud; our trails tend to be either loamy or hard-packed with lots of roots and rock in the trail surface.

    I find that the Martello does an exceptional job of sticking to these wet surfaces; those huge, soft, siped shoulder knobs just generate a ton of traction. Couple that with the really nice smooth ride and relatively low rolling resistance and this thing is a winner. Curious to try an Agarro in back, though not sure itíll do quite as well in our wet conditions.

    @Suns, curious how the Martello takes to the wider i34 rim. I have a 2.6 on a 30mm rim and it looks good, but the tread is a bit narrower than some other tires. Seem like going much wider you might get a ďMohawkĒ effect of the casing being significantly wider than the tread.

  43. #243
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    I put a 2.6 Martello on a 30mm rim and it looked as square as I was willing to go, and also it was just 2.4. I have some 2.8 on order, hopefully they will be somewhere near 2.6.

  44. #244
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    A couple rides in with a Martello 2.6 front (trail version with CushCore XC) and itís quite a remarkable tire IMHO. Iím in the PNW, so lots of wet rides but actually not a lot of deep sticky mud; our trails tend to be either loamy or hard-packed with lots of roots and rock in the trail surface.

    I find that the Martello does an exceptional job of sticking to these wet surfaces; those huge, soft, siped shoulder knobs just generate a ton of traction. Couple that with the really nice smooth ride and relatively low rolling resistance and this thing is a winner. Curious to try an Agarro in back, though not sure itíll do quite as well in our wet conditions.
    Try it. Other than straight up mud, the Agarro loves wet and slick conditions. Very similar to the Martello in that regard.

  45. #245
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Professed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The rep was helpful but did not have the weights yet. As a front tire, I'd probably order the trail version and run a Tubolight insert.
    Ive been running the Martello 2.6 trail front at around 20 - 22 psi. I usually run an Assegai exo+ 2.5 front at 19-20 psi Have had zero issues. No rim pinging either. I canít see the need for an Enduro casing. The trail feels firm and squirm free

    Yes, I now mostly prefer the Martello as have gotten used to its lighter feel and can trust it more. Itís initial sketchy feel in the wet has gone. Either me or perhaps there is a slight film on the new rubber??

    Agarro 2.6 rear with Cushcore in trail casing. Again, no issues.

    Fast and strong combo. Am matching PBs on most DH segments
    Pivot Firebird 29 (M)
    Ibis Mojo3 (L)
    Grove R.A.D
    Lynskey R230

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    2.6 Martello on 34mm ID wheel @ 20psi.

    This is the first non-Exo+/ non--DH front that I don't need an insert in for it to handle correctly. Consider saving that weight. Vittoria Agarro-20200518_080403.jpg

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  47. #247
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    2.6 Martello on 34mm ID wheel @ 20psi.

    This is the first non-Exo+/ non--DH front that I don't need an insert in for it to handle correctly. Consider saving that weight. Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200518_080403.jpg 
Views:	46 
Size:	68.5 KB 
ID:	1333915

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Awesome. Trying to find a new rear for my Ripmo AF as the dual assegais are way too draggy. Looking for and aggressive trail tire but want something that rolls fast. Rekons donít seem like enough, and deciding between an 2.6 Aggaro and 2.5 wt Agressor. I have S35 rims and itís good to see what the 2.6 looks like on a wider rim. Might go with the aggaro...

  48. #248
    g=9.764m/s2
    Reputation: Undescended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripbro
    Awesome. Trying to find a new rear for my Ripmo AF as the dual assegais are way too draggy. Looking for and aggressive trail tire but want something that rolls fast. Rekons donít seem like enough, and deciding between an 2.6 Aggaro and 2.5 wt Agressor. I have S35 rims and itís good to see what the 2.6 looks like on a wider rim. Might go with the aggaro...
    My Rip Bro has been running 2.6 Aggaro on rear and liked so much he is now trying on his Ripley front and rear. Here is his initial review...

    https://forums.mtbr.com/ibis/ripmo-l...l#post14450811

  49. #249
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    Posts
    39
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    This is the plasticky insert that Vittoria has placed in the sidewalls of their Enduro tires. It really firms up the sidewall and prevents pinch flats. Very clever and high tech imo.

    Ps. I won't even consider any other rear tire at this time.


    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
    Suns_PSD,
    Excellent info regarding Vittoria tires. You have peaked my interest in this brand! I looked on Vittoria's site and found more information regarding their tire construction as well as the APF inserts.

    https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction

  50. #250
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by hardtail1416 View Post
    Suns_PSD,
    Excellent info regarding Vittoria tires. You have peaked my interest in this brand! I looked on Vittoria's site and found more information regarding their tire construction as well as the APF inserts.

    https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction
    I only recently discovered Vittoria tyres, but after reading a lot of reviews and forums like this one, I became interested in what they were doing. I took the plunge and fitted an Agarro on the back and a trail Martello on the front - and I couldn't be happier! Really fast rolling, grip for days and great protection. What more do you need?

  51. #251
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Stuker View Post
    I only recently discovered Vittoria tyres, but after reading a lot of reviews and forums like this one, I became interested in what they were doing. I took the plunge and fitted an Agarro on the back and a trail Martello on the front - and I couldn't be happier! Really fast rolling, grip for days and great protection. What more do you need?
    I bought every major brand and new release EXCEPT Vittoria for 3 years. They were literally the last major brand I hadn't tried. Funny thing is that occasionally other forum members had strongly recommended Vittoria tires but I always had something else to try first. They were off my radar.
    The Agarro blew me away as a perfect rear but I still wasn't convinced! Then the Martello popped up on sale on a foreign website. I read a single online review (Outdoorgear Reviews missed the mark here) and checked the weight and I prejudged it as being likely inadequate and too heavy but I bought it anyways cause I had purchased every major competitor and was still unsatisfied with their performance so committed myself to continue testing. Then the Martello too blew me away! Phenomenally fast, grippy, stable, long lasting, reliable tire.
    I'll never doubt this brand again and my desire to try the 'next new release' from other brands is greatly reduced unless the competitors make a 20% jump in performance in 1 generation.
    Bring on the Mazza!

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  52. #252
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I bought every major brand and new release EXCEPT Vittoria for 3 years. They were literally the last major brand I hadn't tried. Funny thing is that occasionally other forum members had strongly recommended Vittoria tires but I always had something else to try first. They were off my radar.
    The Agarro blew me away as a perfect rear but I still wasn't convinced! Then the Martello popped up on sale on a foreign website. I read a single online review (Outdoorgear Reviews missed the mark here) and checked the weight and I prejudged it as being likely inadequate and too heavy but I bought it anyways cause I had purchased every major competitor and was still unsatisfied with their performance so committed myself to continue testing. Then the Martello too blew me away! Phenomenally fast, grippy, stable, long lasting, reliable tire.
    I'll never doubt this brand again and my desire to try the 'next new release' from other brands is greatly reduced unless the competitors make a 20% jump in performance in 1 generation.
    Bring on the Mazza!

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesnít look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. Iím looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire

  53. #253
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripbro View Post
    Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesnít look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. Iím looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire
    I have the Agarro 2.6 on the rear but I went for the 2.35 Trail version (940g) Martello up front in order to save weight. Any reservations I had in advance about the narrower tyre up front have been forgotten. Rolling resistance is pretty close to the Agarro (which is superb) and amazing for such a chunky and grippy front tyre. My bike used to growl on tarmac, now it's almost silent.

  54. #254
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    Does anybody have a pic of Aggaro's 2.6 & 2.35 mounted side by side by chance? I realize that's a long shot but still waffling between the two.

    *It seems there's a bit of a variability in measured 2.35's in this thread that has me hesitant.
    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  55. #255
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    If you want a 2.35 then you want the 2.6 because it's about 2.4. Some people are measuring the outside of the knobs to show wider but I can't see how the outside of the knobs affects anything other than frame clearance.

  56. #256
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    Ok, cool. Thanks.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  57. #257
    mtbr member
    Reputation: socalrider77's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    434
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    If you want a 2.35 then you want the 2.6 because it's about 2.4. Some people are measuring the outside of the knobs to show wider but I can't see how the outside of the knobs affects anything other than frame clearance.
    Is this the same for a 2.6 Martello? I have 30mm ID rims but donít like the 1100ish grams for the 29x2.6 Martello


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    2014 Giant Trance 27.5 3

  58. #258
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Does anybody have a pic of Aggaro's 2.6 & 2.35 mounted side by side by chance? I realize that's a long shot but still waffling between the two.

    *It seems there's a bit of a variability in measured 2.35's in this thread that has me hesitant.
    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    My opinion is you should choose the tire size based on your rim width, tire location, and maybe terrain. If you have a 28mm ID or more narrow rim than you are stuck with the 2.35" imo. If you are over say 32mm ID then you are stuck with the 2.6". In between rim sizes are where you have some decisions to make. For a rear aggressive tire I'd run the 2.35. For a more light trail oriented soft terrain tire I'd maybe go with the 2.6". In the front, I'd always choose the 2.6 if my rim was wide enough. Also if I was riding a 27.5" bike instead of a 29er I'd just about always choose the 2.6" width.

    I also happen to think that the proper way to measure a tire is at it's widest point.

    good luck

  59. #259
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    My opinion is you should choose the tire size based on your rim width, tire location, and maybe terrain. If you have a 28mm ID or more narrow rim than you are stuck with the 2.35" imo. If you are over say 32mm ID then you are stuck with the 2.6". In between rim sizes are where you have some decisions to make. For a rear aggressive tire I'd run the 2.35. For a more light trail oriented soft terrain tire I'd maybe go with the 2.6". In the front, I'd always choose the 2.6 if my rim was wide enough. Also if I was riding a 27.5" bike instead of a 29er I'd just about always choose the 2.6" width.

    I also happen to think that the proper way to measure a tire is at it's widest point.

    good luck
    Agreed with all of this. I loved the 2.35 Agarro on my old 25mm ID rims - it rode well and I didn't really think about wanting anything wider. However, this year on my 30ID rims I'm loving the 2.6 more - the added volume is great, speed seems about the same, weight is only ~20g different, and the shape seems better on the wider rims.

  60. #260
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    182
    Very interesting. I haven't tried any Vittoria tires yet but this has peaked my interest.
    So far I gather that the Agarro is akin to a beefed up Rekon. Any input from anyone who has tried both?

  61. #261
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripbro View Post
    Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesnít look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. Iím looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire
    Not really because I've only ran them at different locations and at different sizes.
    However, unless you ride some insanely loose terrain, the Martello is purely a front tire in my eyes.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  62. #262
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by JaxMustang50 View Post
    Very interesting. I haven't tried any Vittoria tires yet but this has peaked my interest.
    So far I gather that the Agarro is akin to a beefed up Rekon. Any input from anyone who has tried both?
    The Agarro rolls like a Rekon, but has better traction than a 2.3 Aggresor and similar traction to an HD2 or the old WTB Breakout.
    So no, it's not a beefed up Rekon. In the rear it's an Enduro grade tire that just happens to roll like the Rekon.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  63. #263
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    182
    Wow. Very impressive. Any thoughts on predictability, feedback near the limit?

  64. #264
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ridetheridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The Agarro rolls like a Rekon, but has better traction than a 2.3 Aggresor and similar traction to an HD2 or the old WTB Breakout.
    So no, it's not a beefed up Rekon. In the rear it's an Enduro grade tire that just happens to roll like the Rekon.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    If it rolls as fast as a RKN but has more traction than the AGR, it's my next tire. What Vittoria tire are you pairing with it upfront and how does it compare to other Maxxis tires you've run ?


    A bit of trivia... "Vittoria" in Italian translates to "Victory".

  65. #265
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    26
    Agreed. As long as a 2.6 is wide enough ibis 35mm rims Iím ordering one (or two) for the ripmo. Did a ride last night and couldnít stop thinking about how slow the 2.5 wt assegais are to pedal.

  66. #266
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by ridetheridge View Post
    If it rolls as fast as a RKN but has more traction than the AGR, it's my next tire. What Vittoria tire are you pairing with it upfront and how does it compare to other Maxxis tires you've run ?


    A bit of trivia... "Vittoria" in Italian translates to "Victory".
    I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome.
    I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard.
    Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  67. #267
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripbro View Post
    Agreed. As long as a 2.6 is wide enough ibis 35mm rims Iím ordering one (or two) for the ripmo. Did a ride last night and couldnít stop thinking about how slow the 2.5 wt assegais are to pedal.
    I just switched from Maxxis DHR2 in front + Rekon in rear, both 29x2.4 to Agarro 2.6 and can say they roll very fast compared to what I had. Last night in the damp they were just faster and required less pedal input to maintain speed.

    And rolling speed is just *one* of the advantages I've noticed with these tires. Other advantages are listed in the thread, but these tires have really opened my eyes to how much better my bike can be with great rubber.

  68. #268
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by socalrider77 View Post
    Is this the same for a 2.6 Martello? I have 30mm ID rims but donít like the 1100ish grams for the 29x2.6 Martello


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I just sent back a recently purchased 2.6 Martello and I have some 2.8 on order. It was 2.4 as well on a 30mm rim. It was also pretty square on that rim so I didn't try to put it on a wider rim. I'm hoping the 2.8 is a 2.6.

  69. #269
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome.
    I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard.
    Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Limited time on Martello and Agarro, but so far I tend to agree. In general I think Maxxis makes tires with great tread patterns, but their rubber and casings are nothing special. Their MaxTerra rubber combo is reasonably durable but too hard to provide good grip in wet conditions, and Exo and DoubleDown are respectively lighter and heavier than is ideal for many riders. (Exo+ is barely more than Exo, not clear it adds much support or flat protection.) And they only put their stickiest rubber on DH/DD casing tires, which are super heavy.

    Seems like Vittoria is basically copying the Rekon and the DHF tread patterns with the Agarro and Mazza, but doing it with their superior rubber, subtle improvements like siping and stepped ramps, and better casings. Those things really add up IMHO. Martello/Agarro or (soon) Mazza/Martello will be great combos.

    FWIW others I think are clearly superior to anything from Maxxis for aggressive riding (biased toward wet weather grip being in the PNW) are Conti Der Baron/Der Kaiser and Michelin Wild Enduro F/R. Again that's mostly because I think both companies make much better rubber and casings than Maxxis.

  70. #270
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    ^I'd agree with that 100%. I still like the aggressor as an all-arounder rear tire but maxxis is getting left in the dust in the casing and rubber game.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  71. #271
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ridetheridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome.
    I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard.
    Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Thanks. I ran the Morsa/Mezcal combo on my short travel 29er and loved it. It was fast, long wearing and smoothed out the trail with the 120tpi. For my long travel 29er, I might replace my Dissector (which is a good tire) with the Martello and the Rekon with the Agarro. It will be a fun combo to try.

  72. #272
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    I tried the Dissector 2.6 up front right before the Martello. It was removed after 13 miles, it's not even a top 10 front tire for me as it bounced and pushed everywhere for me.
    I was pretty disappointed just a few turns in and the rest of the ride proved that it was a turd front tire, at least in the 2.6 version.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  73. #273
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    So these things run real small is what Iím gathering. I have i35 rims and Iike 2.6ís a lot but not if they are only 2.4ís. The Martello agarro combo sounds like the setup Iíve been looking for minus its size. They all really run that small?

    I have 4 pairs of tires in the garage and my favorites are HD2 F/R and rekon and assegai and Kenda HK/ nevegal2 combo rolls slightly slower than the others. All have their pluses and minuses but none do all that I want in one. I like the HD2 in the rear a lot, itís does well in the front until it gets a bit loose. My terrain is rocky hardpack with kitty litter and sand scattered in places.

  74. #274
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Limited time on Martello and Agarro, but so far I tend to agree. In general I think Maxxis makes tires with great tread patterns, but their rubber and casings are nothing special. Their MaxTerra rubber combo is reasonably durable but too hard to provide good grip in wet conditions, and Exo and DoubleDown are respectively lighter and heavier than is ideal for many riders. (Exo+ is barely more than Exo, not clear it adds much support or flat protection.) And they only put their stickiest rubber on DH/DD casing tires, which are super heavy.

    Seems like Vittoria is basically copying the Rekon and the DHF tread patterns with the Agarro and Mazza, but doing it with their superior rubber, subtle improvements like siping and stepped ramps, and better casings. Those things really add up IMHO. Martello/Agarro or (soon) Mazza/Martello will be great combos.

    FWIW others I think are clearly superior to anything from Maxxis for aggressive riding (biased toward wet weather grip being in the PNW) are Conti Der Baron/Der Kaiser and Michelin Wild Enduro F/R. Again that's mostly because I think both companies make much better rubber and casings than Maxxis.
    Having compared the Rekon and Agarro back to back and looking at them next to eachother. The Agarro is more aggressive. It rolls similar and looks similar but the knobs are less ramped and taller on the agarro.

  75. #275
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    284
    My biggest beef with Vittoria mtb tires is they are undersized and heavy. Their 2.35 are really 2.25 and weigh like a 2.4-2.5.

  76. #276
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Professed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    84
    Its all relative.

    If you want an XC (light) casing then don't consider the Agarro or Martello but perhaps the Barzo or Mezcal. They are light

    If you are comparing the Agarro Trail with a Maxxis Exo for weight then you are simply deceiving yourself. The Vittoria Trail casings are very strong - see all the comments above. They don't slash, cut or fall apart at the beads like so many other lightweight and unsuitable casings by a range of manufacturers . Maxxis a perfect example.
    Pivot Firebird 29 (M)
    Ibis Mojo3 (L)
    Grove R.A.D
    Lynskey R230

  77. #277
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    309
    So I have measured multiple Agarros and Mattellos on my two bikes


    On 25mm internal rims, the 2.35 of both measure 2.25 initially and stretch to 2.3 after a ride or two.

    On 30mm internal rims the 2.35 of each measure 2.35 initially and stretch to 2.4 after a ride or two.

    To compare that to similar sized and performance Maxxis tires, the vittorias are similar on a 30mm and smaller on a 25mm so the casing shape is definitely different. That said, the weights are comparable to 2.3 maxxis equivalents.

  78. #278
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Professed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    84
    Oh, and the only 'True to size' manufacturer that I know are MSC Tyres from Spain.

    Everyone else's casings never actually reflect the stated size. Its not just a Vittoria problem. That's why everyone is asking how big the tyres actually are. We just need to live with the bullshit until a standard is set. As if the bike industry can ever stick to one standard FFS !!
    Pivot Firebird 29 (M)
    Ibis Mojo3 (L)
    Grove R.A.D
    Lynskey R230

  79. #279
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Professed View Post
    Oh, and the only 'True to size' manufacturer that I know are MSC Tyres from Spain.

    Everyone else's casings never actually reflect the stated size. Its not just a Vittoria problem. That's why everyone is asking how big the tyres actually are. We just need to live with the bullshit until a standard is set. As if the bike industry can ever stick to one standard FFS !!
    Well my kendaís are true 2.6ís one is a 2.55 and the other is 2.6x on i35 I canít complain there. But you have a very valid point my 2.6 rekon is small and the HD2ís are borderline.

    My assegai 2.5 is just barely smaller than the 2.6 rekon.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  80. #280
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Professed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    84
    +1

    As much as I really like the Dissector as a rear tyre its only a light duty front trail tyre. I also slashed two of them on my rear (29x2.4 EXO) once without an insert ( what was I thinking !!) and once with a Nukeproof ARD insert. They are weak and fragile tyres but roll really fast in dry conditions.

    They are also small ( around 2.3 - like a DHR2 2.4 )

    As a comparison - the Agarro Trail casing 2.6 is quicker rolling, probably better grip, much better feel due to a stiffer casing. I fitted cushcore after becoming a recent fan so can't make any durability claims without an insert . I don't have to even think about line choice in rocks presently. Not a single problem, ding or dent. Annecdotal evidence (have seem my bigger mate do this ) Dissector tearing at the beads even with cushcore (in EXO) casing. Seeing 3 incidents its enough for me. Somehow others take more convincing !
    Pivot Firebird 29 (M)
    Ibis Mojo3 (L)
    Grove R.A.D
    Lynskey R230

  81. #281
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Professed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    84
    sorry - no Kenda experience other than the old small/short? block 8 ? They are not popular nor common here in OZ.
    Pivot Firebird 29 (M)
    Ibis Mojo3 (L)
    Grove R.A.D
    Lynskey R230

  82. #282
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    Quote Originally Posted by bronxbomber252 View Post
    So I have measured multiple Agarros and Mattellos on my two bikes


    On 25mm internal rims, the 2.35 of both measure 2.25 initially and stretch to 2.3 after a ride or two.

    On 30mm internal rims the 2.35 of each measure 2.35 initially and stretch to 2.4 after a ride or two.

    To compare that to similar sized and performance Maxxis tires, the vittorias are similar on a 30mm and smaller on a 25mm so the casing shape is definitely different. That said, the weights are comparable to 2.3 maxxis equivalents.
    That's good input, thanks.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  83. #283
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbrockenchain View Post
    My biggest beef with Vittoria mtb tires is they are undersized and heavy. Their 2.35 are really 2.25 and weigh like a 2.4-2.5.
    I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
    You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
    You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
    Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
    As for why manufacturers label tires this way, cause it sells. The MSC Gripper was a fantastic tire labeled a 2.3 but measured 2.45 for me on my 34mm ID wheel. They didn't sell any and they can be bought on blowout. They should have called it a 2.6, it would have improved sales 10 fold.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  84. #284
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    163
    My agarro is 65mm wide on a 34i rim, just as wide as ut should be. The martello up frint is 1mm less wide, bet wide enough
    Bird zero AM with mt7 danny mcaskill, eagle nextie and some fun bits

  85. #285
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    414
    [QUOTE=Suns_PSD;14759811]I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
    You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
    You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
    Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
    As for why manufacturers label tires this way, cause it sells. The MSC Gripper was a fantastic tire labeled a 2.3 but measured 2.45 for me on my 34mm ID wheel. They didn't sell any and they can be bought on blowout. They should have called it a 2.6, it would have improved sales 10 fold.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk[/QUOTE

    I recently purchased a 2.35 Barzo TNT to replace 2.25 Rocket Ron 2.25 on XC wheelset. The Barzo just barely bigger volume and weighed 125 grams more. And for the record over the last 3 years the only sidewalls I have sliced were on a TNT Mezcal (I try a lot of tires). And I am not a Vittoria hater as I ride them exclusively on road bike.

  86. #286
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    [QUOTE=durkind;14759925]
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
    You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
    You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
    Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
    As for why manufacturers label tires this way, cause it sells. The MSC Gripper was a fantastic tire labeled a 2.3 but measured 2.45 for me on my 34mm ID wheel. They didn't sell any and they can be bought on blowout. They should have called it a 2.6, it would have improved sales 10 fold.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk[/QUOTE

    I recently purchased a 2.35 Barzo TNT to replace 2.25 Rocket Ron 2.25 on XC wheelset. The Barzo just barely bigger volume and weighed 125 grams more. And for the record over the last 3 years the only sidewalls I have sliced were on a TNT Mezcal (I try a lot of tires). And I am not a Vittoria hater as I ride them exclusively on road bike.
    I'm not a XC guy, but my understanding is the Rocket Ron is like riding on a skating rink. Although I'm not generally concerned with XC tire performance, you commented on sizing and weight, but not actual tire performance which is all that matters. So which tire performs better? Performance is not weight and size btw.
    I'm thoroughly convinced that riders that study spec sheets over performance, should move on from Vittorias. They are not going to meet your 'spec' requirements.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  87. #287
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    Just got back from a long ride on super steep, gnarly, rocky and rooty singletrack trails. I don't care how wide it is or what it weighs, this Agarro 2.6 is the best rear tyre I've ever ridden. I honestly got up stuff I couldn't get half way up before. No matter how gnarly or steep things got, this thing just wouldn't let go.
    But the amazing thing is that I had a half hour ride on tarmac to and from the trails and the Agarro and Martello on the front just flew! How do Vittoria manage to make such grippy tyres roll so well?

    Another thing I love about the Martello on the front is the predictable and smooth transition from the centre to the side knobs. There's none of that sketchy, vague feeling as you lean the bike over that I've experienced with other chunky front tyres.

    I've put away the scales and the tape measures - now I just ride and smile!

  88. #288
    Always in the wrong gear
    Reputation: Impetus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,510
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
    You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
    You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
    Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
    It's not so much about what it is or isn't. It's about accuracy. I buy a 2.6 tire, I expect it to be at least 2.55, not 2.4. If I want a 2.4, I'll buy a 2.4
    There's a lot of data being compiled regarding the 'proper' range of tire/rim width combos. I'm relying on accurate measurements to determine the expected performance of a tire on the wheel I'm using. A guy who builds i35 wheels specifically to run 2.6 tires is going to buy the 2.6 Agarro and likely not be satisfied when it's closer to 2.45.

    Would you be satisfied if you bough a new handlebar that was labeled as a 780mm, and it actually measured 760 and the manufacturer told you "eh, it's 780 with most lock-on grips. actual measurements can vary"....?
    Shiftin' jumps and huckin' gears

  89. #289
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    I think the overarching point is size and weight are NOT definitive factors in how a tire is going to ride.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  90. #290
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    How wide is the 2.6 Agarro on a 35mm ID wheel, measured at the widest tread point?
    Cause my Martello is 2.52" on a 33-34mm ID wheel.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  91. #291
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Harryman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,783
    Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....

  92. #292
    g=9.764m/s2
    Reputation: Undescended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    492
    MEMORIALDAY25 - Vittoria.com

  93. #293
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    309
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....
    I do, I live in Tucson where there us a lot of that. Both the Martello and the Agarro do well. Feels similar to minion levels of traction with the martello, a touch less with the Agarro

  94. #294
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    163
    my agarro is 2.56" on an 34i rim. so it should be the same on an i35 rim
    Bird zero AM with mt7 danny mcaskill, eagle nextie and some fun bits

  95. #295
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....
    Personally Martellos would not be my top pick for loose or loose over hard conditions. I find that the big closely-spaced shoulder lugs on the Martellos are great at getting a lot of rubber on the ground, but don't dig in as effectively as something like an Assegai or Michelin Wild Enduro (one of the diggiest tires I've ridden.) Martellos are great for generating traction on hardpack, rocks and roots, especially in the wet. Mazza should be great for your application, I'd guess.

  96. #296
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    142
    150 miles on my Agarro 29 x 2.35 on the rear so thought I'd share my experience.
    Weight: 950g brand new
    Width on 30i wheel:
    Actual brand new at 25psi: 56mm (2.20") big knob to knob
    Actual after around 75 miles at 20psi: 59mm (2.32") big knob to knob
    Replaced a DHR II at 20psi: 62mm (2.44") big knob to big knob
    My weight ready to ride: 175lbs

    I wouldn't have thought I could even visually notice, but the tire looked comically narrow when I first mounted it. Literally laughed out loud. I was also concerned with the weight at first. 950g for a tire that looked way narrower and less chunky (and generally more "wimpy" for lack of better term) than the 2.4 DHR II it was replacing at around the same weight did not sound like it would be beneficial. I was wrong.

    The Agarro rolls fast, it's extremely noticeable compared to the DHR II (which I moved up to the front, replacing a worn Assegai). I first rode it on pavement on my way to the trailhead and didn't even remember I had changed tires. Looking back, I had set a PR on that pavement section and I was just Sunday cruising along. I sure felt fresher when I got to the trailhead than I usually was.

    I ride hard, loose over, loose, rocky, kitty litter, steep up/steep down. I found climbing traction marginally down from the DHR II, nothing I can't get back with improvements in technique. Braking was obviously down a bit more, but still I'm gaining with better technique. I'm also loving the braking with the DHR II up front. Cornering is great and I really feel like I can squash the rear out of corners after a pump. Because the rolling resistance is lower, I don't think about the weight of the tire when I grind uphill. I did not think the closely spaced knobs would be great in loose conditions, but it's been totally fine - I'm no expert but I'm guessing that's due to the steps and sipes.

    At 175lbs kitted, I use 20psi in the rear, but feel I could go lower for a bit more traction. Unfortunately I started hearing pings at 19psi, good news is there was no tire/rim damage. I'm installing cushcore lite very soon so I'll be able to try slightly lower pressures then. I had enduro races scheduled this year but they have obviously been cancelled or rescheduled for Fall so no experience there yet.

    Overall, this is my new favorite rear tire. At $55 (with coupon code) and free shipping, it was an awesome deal. I can't run much more than the width of a 2.4 DHR II in the rear, so I'm curious if the 2.6 Agarro would be a better choice next time. I was going to try a Dissector or Martello for the front next, but now that I'm Vittoria-curious, going to stick with that for awhile. Martello is unavailable in anything wider than 2.35 at the moment, so I'll wait. Or hold off until the Mazza is released.

  97. #297
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryman View Post
    Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....
    Michelin Wild Rock'R2 is what you want. Yes they're a bit on the heavy side, but the cornering grip is absurd and you'll easily hit speeds where your brain is struggling to keep up. Rolling resistance is actually a bit better than the Maxxis High Roller 2 that came with my bike, but it has so much more grip that it's not even funny. With the possible exception soft compound DH casing tires, I haven't ridden anything else that corners like a Wild Rock'R2, it's the best dry condition tire I've ever ridden.

  98. #298
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    So as a comparison my 2.6 rekon on i35 is 2.5 at the casing and 2.46 at the knobs at 23psi. 2.5 assegai at 19psi is 2.4 casing and 2.46 at knobs. While my nevegal2 was 2.56casing 2.6 knobs hellkat was 2.66 knobs. After my ride the other night I wonít be running that combo again. Thought it was great when I first got them but just not a fan for my terrain.

    Gonna order the Martello/ agarro combo this weekend with the sales. And compare to the Hans Dampf 2ís I really like and the rekon assegai combo. Really looking for something that rolls and grips in-between a Hans dampf2 and rekon for the back, and grip in-between a Hans dampf and assegai but rolls good.
    Last edited by desertwheeler; 1 Week Ago at 10:22 PM.

  99. #299
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    OT: wife had a real ride on her Mezcal rear tire today coming from an Addix Rock Razor. She apparently is as sensitive as me in some ways because she swooned over the smooth ride and extraordinarily low rolling resistance. Had no traction complaints, but she isn't real aggressive.
    What's the best front tire match for her? I always want larger and slightly more aggressive and am thinking the 2.6 Barzo.
    Ps. Vittoria and everywhere else seems to always be sold out of the 2.6 Martello.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  100. #300
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    OT: wife had a real ride on her Mezcal rear tire today coming from an Addix Rock Razor. She apparently is as sensitive as me in some ways because she swooned over the smooth ride and extraordinarily low rolling resistance. Had no traction complaints, but she isn't real aggressive.
    What's the best front tire match for her? I always want larger and slightly more aggressive and am thinking the 2.6 Barzo.
    Ps. Vittoria and everywhere else seems to always be sold out of the 2.6 Martello.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Barzo

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  101. #301
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by bogeydog View Post
    Barzo

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk
    Barzo as I said but be aware it can get a little sketchy in really dry conditions. It's the only place I think it doesn't hold up.

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  102. #302
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by bogeydog View Post
    Barzo as I said but be aware it can get a little sketchy in really dry conditions. It's the only place I think it doesn't hold up.

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk
    I did order the 2.6 Barzo. Really she doesn't ride on anything but bone dry hardpack, particularly this time of year. Maybe it's a poor choice?
    The Peyote tread pattern seemed more ideal but was what I'd consider too narrow for front tire needs with only a 2.35 available. I also seriously considered the 2.6 Morsa as a front for her.
    I know what works for me, where I ride, how I ride, in a 29er. But trying to apply that info to my wife's needs doesn't work much except that I really like Vittoria tires and intend to stick with them for most all applications.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  103. #303
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger.

    So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.

  104. #304
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger.

    So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.
    I dont know what barzo you tried, but not the 2.6
    It is wider than any maxxis 2.8 tire, it measured up to 68mm on am 34i
    Bird zero AM with mt7 danny mcaskill, eagle nextie and some fun bits

  105. #305
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger.

    So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.
    Regardless of what a tire says on it's side I want around 2.4- 2.5 real front width and 2.3- 2.4 in the rear. On a 29er, I believe this just works better.
    I'll post up what I measure but keep in mind that the 27.5 version of a tire (wife rides a 27.5") often measures a different width than the same version of the 29 version.
    Post photos of the tire damage.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  106. #306
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    Vittoria Agarro-20200524_102352.jpg

    Vittoria Agarro-20200524_102415.jpg

    You can see the degradation in the side knobs here and a few that are starting to separate. Again this is after 19 miles of riding

  107. #307
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200524_102352.jpg 
Views:	41 
Size:	278.2 KB 
ID:	1335827

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200524_102415.jpg 
Views:	43 
Size:	241.1 KB 
ID:	1335829

    You can see the degradation in the side knobs here and a few that are starting to separate. Again this is after 19 miles of riding
    Air pressure and your weight? I've seen this happen with the uber low psi group.

    Ps. Wife's 27.5 x 2.35 Mezcal on a 30mm ID wheel is 2.26" wide. Which suits me fine for that application. I expect the 2.6 Bazzo to come in around 2.4 -2.45 which would be perfect.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  108. #308
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,131
    I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.
    2020 SC CC Hightower

  109. #309
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    28 psi, 200 geared up to ride

  110. #310
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.
    Is that agarro f/r?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  111. #311
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,131
    Quote Originally Posted by desertwheeler View Post
    Is that agarro f/r?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Yes, I had a 2,35 rear 2.6 front.
    2020 SC CC Hightower

  112. #312
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    182
    The uneven wear is strange. Almost looks like the bike was leaned to the right the whole time. Even the transition blocks show it.

  113. #313
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by JaxMustang50 View Post
    The uneven wear is strange. Almost looks like the bike was leaned to the right the whole time. Even the transition blocks show it.
    Yup, looks like someone used their trail bike for a night of track racing at the velodrome! Mystery solved!

  114. #314
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    Iíve noticed some times my tires do that when new on my home trails. Only thing I could think of is my trails are off camber and it wears one side more at first until it evens out with more use?

    I wonder if itís a compound issue on that tire tho?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  115. #315
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    142
    Funny... I have the same 1-sided wear pattern on my right side 29x2.35 rear. Interesting thing is this usually happens on the left edge of the tire since I turn better (faster) left than I do right.

    However, my wear did not look like that after 19 miles, it does after 175.

  116. #316
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Maybe some rear wheels don't run perfectly straight down the trail?

    Rear tires are dead after 100 hard miles anyways so with 19 miles, it's on track.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  117. #317
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Maybe some rear wheels don't run perfectly straight down the trail?

    Rear tires are dead after 100 hard miles anyways so with 19 miles, it's on track.
    I wouldn't buy a tire if it only lasted 100 miles.

  118. #318
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,643
    If you're rippin hardpack berms you can kill a tire fast. I can literally undercut the sideknobs on a 2.35 aggressor in 2 rides.

    Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  119. #319
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    I wouldn't buy a tire if it only lasted 100 miles.
    In my case, that would leave you with no tires to buy.
    I hurt them all when riding hard around there.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  120. #320
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    In my case, that would leave you with no tires to buy.
    I hurt them all when riding hard around there.
    Dual compound maxxis last a lot longer than 100 miles. If tires only lasted 100 miles I'd be replacing them almost weekly.

  121. #321
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ridetheridge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by mlx john View Post
    I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.
    That's the combo was thinking about going to next. Did the tires just wash out ? I would imagine most tires would give out doing high speed corning on loose over hard. Grant it larger side knobs would help, but seems to me the the risk is still high. What tires are you running now ?

  122. #322
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbDork View Post
    Dual compound maxxis last a lot longer than 100 miles. If tires only lasted 100 miles I'd be replacing them almost weekly.
    Let me say this: Maxxis tires wear at about the same rate as every other tire. Vittoria wears well comparatively.
    100 miles is a bit of an exaggeration. But in 150 miles any rear tire looks pretty rough on my bike.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  123. #323
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Millennial29erGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    1,527
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Let me say this: Maxxis tires wear at about the same rate as every other tire. Vittoria wears well comparatively.
    100 miles is a bit of an exaggeration. But in 150 miles any rear tire looks pretty rough on my bike.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    The 3C maxxis is comparable to the vittoria TNT/Graphene tires. The Maxxis dual compound tires last forever but don't really grip on anything, especially in the wet
    My name is George. Iím unemployed and I live with my parents.
    2017 BMC Speedfox 25-622 ISO
    2017 Salsa Timberjack 40-584 ISO

  124. #324
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Millennial29erGuy View Post
    The 3C maxxis is comparable to the vittoria TNT/Graphene tires. The Maxxis dual compound tires last forever but don't really grip on anything, especially in the wet
    Agreed. It depends so much on where and how you ride. You can ride 100 miles on rolling trails and have your tires look almost new, or 100 miles on steep rocky trails and shred your rear tire during that time. Also, compounds that have more inherent grip wear more quickly, period. Tread patterns make some difference, of course, but I think most of the grip/wear (especially on rock faces and/or in the wet) comes from the compound.

  125. #325
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,441
    So thinking I am going to order a Martello 2.6 for the front. Having the 2.35 in the front now just seems vague in sandy corners. Feel like I am going to washout constantly if I take corners are speed and don't have myself perfectly weighted. Never felt/had that problem with the 2.4 Goma up front, but realize it is a different tread pattern. Just gotten to the point where I don't trust it up front. And this is running mid to low 20s in the front with mid to high 20s in rear (normal for me).

    Hoping that the 2.6 version will give me a bit more traction and contact patch while I wait for the MAZZA to come out. That I will purchase in the 2.6 as well as it seems most of the 2.6 tires are coming in a bit small (2.4-2.5) which will be about right for me. Then when the MAZZA gets here I will swap the martello 2.6 to the rear and have the others for my hardtail.

  126. #326
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    The Mazza is already at the warehouse in OK. They are just waiting for the public release to begin selling them.
    It won't be long now.
    Also, I can't locate a 2.6 Martello anywhere.



    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  127. #327
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The Mazza is already at the warehouse in OK. They are just waiting for the public release to begin selling them.
    It won't be long now.
    Also, I can't locate a 2.6 Martello anywhere.



    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    What size in 29 and weights?

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  128. #328
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Unfortunately, I am unable to make out the Mazza specs because that pic is just too pixelated and the original was taken down.

    But I can guess! 2.35s & 2.6s, all 8 will weigh 60-120 grams less than the equivalent Martello version just because there is less rubber knobs.

  129. #329
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    4
    The Eminent Onset has the Mazza specced as 2.4 rear and 2.6 front, in trail casing (TNT normally) along with a lot of clearer shots.

    https://eminentcycles.com/collection...31699538083895

    I'll be putting a 2.6 Mazza on the front of mine Jeffsy when they come out.

  130. #330
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    Whatís the Mazza supposed to do better than say the Mota?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  131. #331
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785
    Just got my Martello and Agarro today. The Martellos center knobs werenít as tall as I expected, but side knobs a wide, very anxious to try it out. And compare it to my Hans Dampf and assegai that I run.

    The agarro looks very similar to the rekon but it seems the knobs might be slightly tighter spaced and definitely bigger. So itís going to be compared to the Hans Dampf and rekon all tires are 2.6 minus the assegai thatís 2.5.

    Canít wait!

  132. #332
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    One thing I have noticed is that when I first fit my 2.35 Martello up front, I thought it looked pretty narrow. Now, after having ridden it for a couple of weeks, it looks like it has "spread out" noticeably.

  133. #333
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    I'll wait for the 2.8 or 3.0 Mazza so maybe it will come out 2.5".

  134. #334
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    I'll wait for the 2.8 or 3.0 Mazza so maybe it will come out 2.5".
    I installed a 27.5 x 2.6 Barzo on my wife's 30mm ID wheel and it measures 2.53". Might be one for you to consider. Of course like all tires over 2.5 it bounces like a rubber ball. Frankly I was counting on it being undersized.


    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  135. #335
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785

    Vittoria Agarro

    Just mounted both up. Aired to 35 psi to let them stretch. Right off the bat the agarro is the same size as the rekon. Casing 2.5 and knobs 2.45-2.5 depends on where you measure. Itís a much beefier rekon at first glance. I punctured my rekon exo+ twice today on rocks and the side knobs slip off rocks and are in sad shape.

    I didnít realize in the pictures the agarro has a fairly open center channel. I wonder if it would help it as a front tire in low lean angles as an extra biting edge? Just a thought. I think itís too tightly packed as a front for me tho.

    Martello is 2.5 casing and 2.49 knobs. Both on i35ís. About the same size as the assegai that came off but with higher volume. Looking at it, itís the tire I have been looking for on tread design. See how it performs.

    You can tell both have good volume they are fairly tall tires from a side profile. Super excited to try them out! Will report on size after a couple days at 35psi.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  136. #336
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I installed a 27.5 x 2.6 Barzo on my wife's 30mm ID wheel and it measures 2.53". Might be one for you to consider. Of course like all tires over 2.5 it bounces like a rubber ball. Frankly I was counting on it being undersized.


    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    I have a Barzo 2.6 but the knobs are too short for the class of tire I want. At any rate I had it down to like 12 psi and it did pretty good for what it was. I got a Tioga Glide G3 2.6, but the knobs on that were 3mm tall, a total joke. Then I got in some Bontrager XR5 2.6 and they were 2.6 so I have one on the front now. But now that the rains have come and the dirt has firmed up a bit I think I'm going to use an Edge 22 next ride.

  137. #337
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    I have a Barzo 2.6 but the knobs are too short for the class of tire I want. At any rate I had it down to like 12 psi and it did pretty good for what it was. I got a Tioga Glide G3 2.6, but the knobs on that were 3mm tall, a total joke. Then I got in some Bontrager XR5 2.6 and they were 2.6 so I have one on the front now. But now that the rains have come and the dirt has firmed up a bit I think I'm going to use an Edge 22 next ride.
    Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away.
    We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
    First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
    She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  138. #338
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
    I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.

  139. #339
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbDork View Post
    I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.
    The Agarro in 2.6 doesn't feel that way.

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  140. #340
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away.
    We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
    First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
    She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.

  141. #341
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away.
    We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
    First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
    She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    This seems a bit much honestly. Youíre saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5Ē, but now that itís stretched an extra 0.1Ē it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.

    Iíve put decent miles on a 2.6Ē Martello and itís been great. It has stretched out a bit, but remains a nice supple, damped tire.

  142. #342
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    "Damping" = energy loss. I'd want that on a downhill tire, not a trail tire.

  143. #343
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbDork View Post
    I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.
    Yep.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  144. #344
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.
    But the Agarro 2.6 is not a true 2.6 as I understand it.
    I removed an Eliminator 2.6 but in reality it only measures 2.45 and works well.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  145. #345
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    This seems a bit much honestly. Youíre saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5Ē, but now that itís stretched an extra 0.1Ē it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.

    Iíve put decent miles on a 2.6Ē Martello and itís been great. It has stretched out a bit, but remains a nice supple, damped tire.
    It was her first ride on dirt on that tire. We both rode it on pavement after I mounted the tire for like a minute just as a test ride. We both found it slow (not true on dirt apparently) and bouncy (definitely true).
    I'm not surprised that an actual 2.6 sucks. I'm surprised a Vittoria 2.6 is an actual 2.6 as all mine measure a bit narrow and with Tyler bringing up constantly the narrow 2.6 Agarro, I was hoping for closer to 2.4".

    You'd be surprised how much bigger all tires get with a little bit of extra width because the extra tire volume to get that little bit of width is huge. This tire is big, big enough to alter geo somewhat.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  146. #346
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Ok so you bought a 2.6 and it is a 2.6.

  147. #347
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Unfortunately, YES.

    Since my other Vittoria's run small I thought that would carry over to the 2.6 Barzo, but not so much.
    Anyways, on the pavement test it feels totally different with the Tubolight insert I just installed.
    Btw, sometimes breaking the bead on a Vittoria is unbelievably hard!

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  148. #348
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,483
    Quote Originally Posted by MtbDork View Post
    I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.
    That's because you're using air in them. You're supposed to run them on 50mm wide rims with 2-3 tire inserts crammed into each tire and no air. Once you get the inserts installed, you put air in the tire to set the bead, then let it all back out. If you do this it will eliminate all tire bounce.

    But seriously. Welcome to the bike industry, where we routinely create "solutions" for problems which don't exist, then invent a bunch of stuff to fix all the problems which those "solutions" cause.

  149. #349
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.
    I'm with you on this. I have ridden a bunch of 2.6 tires with excellent results once I figured out the proper pressures.

    They're not as precise as a comparable 2.4 or 2.5 but have other high notes that the others don't. Bounce has never been an issue for me however.

  150. #350
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Ha! Funny responses above.
    Took the wife to a local trail with the air pump and that 2.6 Barzo and bracketed air pressures. We found a livable air pressure spot with a large Tubolight insert (that tire is useless without an insert) installed and 13 psi (she only weighs 111#s). She really preferred it closer to 15-16psi as it bounced way less, but traction fell off. At 10-11 psi which would appear to be appropriate for her weight and general trail riding (no jumps or ledges for her) on this wide of a tire, the bouncing is out of control.
    Anyways, that tire is a very fast XC peddaler but I would have went with something smaller if doing it again.
    True 2.6 tires, particularly those with thin sidewalls have no place on a proper mountain bike unless you ride on sand or snow imo.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  151. #351
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    "Damping" = energy loss. I'd want that on a downhill tire, not a trail tire.
    Thatís pretty silly. Does damped suspension=energy loss? Tires with what we call a ďdampedĒ feel are often heavy, but thereís nothing about a non-bouncy tire that causes energy loss.

    Steve Hed, wheel guru, has funny stories about trying to get road pros to embrace wider rims and tires with lower pressures. He had all kinds of lab data showing they had lower rolling resistance and better aerodynamics, i.e. were faster. But all the pros thought the super-rough ride of tiny 21c tires @ 140PSI felt ďfastĒ.

  152. #352
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Thatís pretty silly. Does damped suspension=energy loss? .
    Yes. Damping is irreversibility and is energy loss. Wider tires is reducing the spring rate, not damping the system.

  153. #353
    Robertson
    Reputation: rpearce1475's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    952
    Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used

  154. #354
    Got rocks?
    Reputation: desertwheeler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    785

    Vittoria Agarro

    Did a short ride on fairly loose and rocky pebbly stuff. Ended up running 1-2 pounds lower front and rear than Iím used to. Nothing grips that well where I rode so I look at the slippage I had as acceptable. Rolled well on the pavement and hard pack. Sizes still ended up at 2.5 which Iím happy with. Still early but good so far.

  155. #355
    mtbr member
    Reputation: DrewBird's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    Yes. Damping is irreversibility and is energy loss. Wider tires is reducing the spring rate, not damping the system.
    Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. Itís not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.

    If what youíre saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?

  156. #356
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    12,516
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used
    Premature wear? Yikes. I just got my Ag/Martello tire set yesterday.....
    Ripley V1 XC/Gravel Adventure rig
    NORCO Fluid FS
    Salsa Timberjack

  157. #357
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. Itís not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.

    If what youíre saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?
    ^^^This. It's true that dampers produce heat by converting kinetic energy to thermal energy, but if they didn't exist, we would simply bounce up and down uncontrollably down the trail.

    The Agarro 2.6 (actually 2.5, as noted) has nailed the construction necessary to have a controlled, supported, and damped ride, in my opinion. Other 2.6 tires, especially those with thinner sidewalls / lighter weights, do tend by nature to have less damping and thus more bounce, unless tire pressures are increased, which defeats the purpose of running larger tires. I find narrower tires naturally bite better, and the only reason to ride larger tires is to air them down to increase contact patch and bump absorption, which brings us to the discussion at hand.

    I remember a few years ago when fat bikes were cool to ride on dry trails, and I finally got out on one and was astounded at how horrible it was to ride. Another case of marketing/hype going way too far.

  158. #358
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    84
    Anybody running the Agarro on 27mm ID rims? If so, 2.6 or 2.35? Any pics or actual widths installed?
    With the Agarro's running small I want to go with a 2.6 but don't know if 27mm is possibly too narrow making the tire profile too rounded? This will be on the rear wheel.

  159. #359
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Quote Originally Posted by DrewBird View Post
    Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. Itís not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.If what youíre saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?
    You are misapplying concepts. The tire is in constant compression-rebound. If that rebound is damped we call that a slow tire. It feels like pedaling through sand. What I think is going on with these larger tires is that people run them at too high of a pressure (too high spring rate) and then complain they are "bouncy". Vittoria tires are 120 tpi to intentionally reduce the hysteresis losses through casing compression. This is what gives the supple ride and good trail feel.

  160. #360
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by kartracer View Post
    Anybody running the Agarro on 27mm ID rims? If so, 2.6 or 2.35? Any pics or actual widths installed?
    With the Agarro's running small I want to go with a 2.6 but don't know if 27mm is possibly too narrow making the tire profile too rounded? This will be on the rear wheel.
    I do and you should purchase the 2.35 for a 27mm ID wheel.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  161. #361
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    Quote Originally Posted by rpearce1475 View Post
    Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used
    I suspect the knobs on the 2.6 Martello are more spread out than on the 2.35 version.
    If anyone has an as new 27.5 x 2.35 Martello I'd be a buyer.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  162. #362
    Proudly Plus-Sized
    Reputation: blaklabl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by drewbird View Post
    this seems a bit much honestly. Youíre saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5Ē, but now that itís stretched an extra 0.1Ē it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.
    poty
    MTBR: Your dad's online mountain bike forum.



  163. #363
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I do and you should purchase the 2.35 for a 27mm ID wheel.
    Thanks Suns. Do you know the measurements of the 2.35 on your 27mm ID wheel? Or have a pic of it mounted on the wheel?

  164. #364
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,393
    I just got my 29*2.35 agarro mounted up today. Right off the bat it measured 2.31" casing width on my 30mm ID rim.

    Frankly it bugs me that I have to deal with variances like this but I do appreciate the forums and knowing ahead of time that it's an undersized tire. Looking forward to some trail time!

    Edit: overnight @ 40psi and it's now a 2.36" tire. Bingo!
    Last edited by ungod; 4 Days Ago at 08:53 AM.

  165. #365
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    8
    I can't say I'm seeing any signs of premature wear as others have reported. I installed my Martello front and Agarro rear about 6 weeks ago and have clocked up around 450 km since then, hammering along a lot of seriously rocky terrain and quite a bit of tarmac between trails too. There is minimal wear showing.

    Maybe I just ride real "light"??

    For the record, I am 78kg fully kitted up and running 23psi rear / 22psi front tubeless.

  166. #366
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,393
    Had my first ride on the Agarro, and TL;DR: It's awesome. Using a 29x2.35" on a 30mm ID rim (e*thirteen LG1r Enduro). The tire measures 2.36 to the casing on my rims.

    I'm riding a v1 Ripmo that previously had a Hellkat 2.6 / Hellkat 2.4 combo on it. The 2.4 was shipped to me by accident so I decided to run it for a while, but in general I prefer a faster-rolling rear tire. The Hellkat is fast but not that fast, and I found it to be slightly oversized in the 2.4".

    First ride out today I got a KOM on the trail out my front door (up from 3rd), which I will say is a credit to several things and not just the Agarro, but I felt comfortable enough to charge right out the gate with it. The rolling speed, grip, and damping are all very good like others have said. Cornering grip is not as good as the Hellkat but I expected that and hardly noticed.

    Uphill was also very good, and I found that I could trust it to grip uphill on both loose and slickrock (we have volcanic tuff, very similar to slickrock).

    It behaves exactly like I want a rear tire to -- it rolls fast, corners well enough, grips on the ups and has decent braking for the downs. When it gets out of line it's predictable, and easy to snap back under control. Overall it is very well-round

    I would have preferred a slightly more rounded profile with the 2.35, but my rim width probably plays into it. It's been a while since I ran an Aggressor but I think it's a good comparison...the Agarro is fairly similar riding, with a slight edge up on traction, but has a much better casing. I ran a 2.3 Exo Aggressor for a while and it was constantly getting flats and felt like an undamped balloon on the back.

    I paid about $50 on ebay for it. For that price, it will be my go-to rear tire for a long time.

    Attached a photo of one of my favorite trails for reference.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Vittoria Agarro-img_20200322_120739.jpg  


  167. #367
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by ungod View Post
    Had my first ride on the Agarro, and TL;DR: It's awesome. Using a 29x2.35" on a 30mm ID rim (e*thirteen LG1r Enduro). The tire measures 2.36 to the casing on my rims.

    I'm riding a v1 Ripmo that previously had a Hellkat 2.6 / Hellkat 2.4 combo on it. The 2.4 was shipped to me by accident so I decided to run it for a while, but in general I prefer a faster-rolling rear tire. The Hellkat is fast but not that fast, and I found it to be slightly oversized in the 2.4".

    First ride out today I got a KOM on the trail out my front door (up from 3rd), which I will say is a credit to several things and not just the Agarro, but I felt comfortable enough to charge right out the gate with it. The rolling speed, grip, and damping are all very good like others have said. Cornering grip is not as good as the Hellkat but I expected that and hardly noticed.

    Uphill was also very good, and I found that I could trust it to grip uphill on both loose and slickrock (we have volcanic tuff, very similar to slickrock).

    It behaves exactly like I want a rear tire to -- it rolls fast, corners well enough, grips on the ups and has decent braking for the downs. When it gets out of line it's predictable, and easy to snap back under control. Overall it is very well-round

    I would have preferred a slightly more rounded profile with the 2.35, but my rim width probably plays into it. It's been a while since I ran an Aggressor but I think it's a good comparison...the Agarro is fairly similar riding, with a slight edge up on traction, but has a much better casing. I ran a 2.3 Exo Aggressor for a while and it was constantly getting flats and felt like an undamped balloon on the back.

    I paid about $50 on ebay for it. For that price, it will be my go-to rear tire for a long time.

    Attached a photo of one of my favorite trails for reference.
    Yeah, it's a great tire, especially in the rear. When you wear out the 2.35, try the 2.6 (as I've said before). I prefer the profile of the 2.6 on a 30mm rim. Weight difference is about 20-30g per tire, not a big deal considering the extra volume.

  168. #368
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    2,069
    I've been running the tire since release and it is at the top of my approved list. I have found recently as things dry out that isn't perfect for a front tire in loose overr hard or dusty over hard. That's tough on most tires. I want to try the Mazza out as a front tire now.

    Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk

  169. #369
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,393
    Quote Originally Posted by Full Send View Post
    Yeah, it's a great tire, especially in the rear. When you wear out the 2.35, try the 2.6 (as I've said before). I prefer the profile of the 2.6 on a 30mm rim. Weight difference is about 20-30g per tire, not a big deal considering the extra volume.
    Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.

  170. #370
    g=9.764m/s2
    Reputation: Undescended's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by ungod View Post
    Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.
    My bud has the 2.6 on the back of his Ripmo and both F/B on his Ripley and likes the overall performance...

  171. #371
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    61
    Tire measurement confuses me. With an ETRTO of 57mm is the 2.35 a 2.25 in reality? I thought the point of ETRTO was to give a precise measurement. If so, are those that are getting these tires to 2.35 on wide rims stretching them wider than they were intended to be?

  172. #372
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    309

    Vittoria Agarro

    Quote Originally Posted by La Nada View Post
    Tire measurement confuses me. With an ETRTO of 57mm is the 2.35 a 2.25 in reality? I thought the point of ETRTO was to give a precise measurement. If so, are those that are getting these tires to 2.35 on wide rims stretching them wider than they were intended to be?
    ETRTO mandates that the measurement be taken on a specific rim inner width based on how wide the tire is. In this case a 25mm internal rim. The inch measurement can be on whatever width rim they want. So, because not all tires use the same casing shape, two tires with the same ETRTO that measure the same on the ETRTO standard rim width, may measure different on a different width rim (maybe both measure 2.25 on a 25mm rim but one measures 2.3 and the other 2.35 on a 30mm rim). However, Vittoriaís trail and enduro rims are in the 30-35mm range so the 2.35 is probably measured on a 30-35mm rim

    This seems to line up with my observations on 2 bikes. When I mount these tires on a 25mm internal rim they measure right at 2.25 new and 2.30 once they stretch. When I mount them on a 30mm internal rim they measure 2.35 new and 2.40 once they stretch.

  173. #373
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    61
    Quote Originally Posted by bronxbomber252 View Post
    ETRTO mandates that the measurement be taken on a specific rim inner width based on how wide the tire is. In this case a 25mm internal rim. The inch measurement can be on whatever width rim they want. So, because not all tires use the same casing shape, two tires with the same ETRTO that measure the same on the ETRTO standard rim width, may measure different on a different width rim (maybe both measure 2.25 on a 25mm rim but one measures 2.3 and the other 2.35 on a 30mm rim). However, Vittoriaís trail and enduro rims are in the 30-35mm range so the 2.35 is probably measured on a 30-35mm rim

    This seems to line up with my observations on 2 bikes. When I mount these tires on a 25mm internal rim they measure right at 2.25 new and 2.30 once they stretch. When I mount them on a 30mm internal rim they measure 2.35 new and 2.40 once they stretch.
    Makes sense, thanks. Seems like it would be nice if they just took the extra step of saying 2.35 measured on a whatever mm rim. I have no complaints about the size of my vittoria tires. Just curious.

  174. #374
    Trail Rider
    Reputation: mlx john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,131
    Quote Originally Posted by ridetheridge View Post
    That's the combo was thinking about going to next. Did the tires just wash out ? I would imagine most tires would give out doing high speed corning on loose over hard. Grant it larger side knobs would help, but seems to me the the risk is still high. What tires are you running now ?
    They just washed out with no warning. Dumped me immediately, ouch.

    One that particularly hurt (almost hit a tree with my head) was a 2 mile rocky technical descent which I am in 6th on Strava. Got that 6th place with a Spez Eliminator front, Ground Control rear.

    I now am running Maxxis DHR2 2.5 wt front/ Aggressor 2.35 rear. Have ridden those areas again, no problem. The Maxxis tires are a bit heavier, but I'm really liking the traction aspect.

    Tires are different for everyone. The last tire I absolutely hated (though many people like it) was the Hans Dampf. Ran one on the front of a SC Tallboy LTc years ago, and couldn't get it off fast enough. Was crashing left and right on that thing.
    2020 SC CC Hightower

  175. #375
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by ungod View Post
    Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.
    No, the 2.6 is not noticeably slower. I've ridden both a ton - they are both great for their respective ideal rim widths.

  176. #376
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,802
    The 2.6 is barely heavier than the 2.35. That concerns me in a rear tire just due to durability issues.
    The 4 Agarro 2.35s I've ran are one of the few trail tires that I haven't hurt yet.
    Light is nice but it's great not having to stop to repair anything.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  177. #377
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,441
    Well shit... had something happen this weekend that I haven't had ever happen with a Vittoria tire. Had a bit of a cursed ride on Friday last week, buddy crashed and called off early, me and remaining guy start riding then he decided to peel off so I finished on my own. On the way down the trail I hit something, not sure what, but it completely blew out my rear.

    Sealant ended up EVERYWHERE but wouldn't seal the hole, right at the base of a knob. Ended up having to throw a tube in and finish the ride home.
    Last night I went to attempt to put in a plug, and no dice. Tried with 3 different plugs, but just wouldn't take. So I had to toss the tire. That was a first.

    Will be using a spare maxxis that I have laying around until I can get a MAZZA. Damn that sucked.

  178. #378
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    The 2.6 is barely heavier than the 2.35. That concerns me in a rear tire just due to durability issues.
    The 4 Agarro 2.35s I've ran are one of the few trail tires that I haven't hurt yet.
    Light is nice but it's great not having to stop to repair anything.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    I've absolutely thrashed both 2.35 and 2.6 Agarros for over a year and a half, and not had ANY issues with either beyond what can be expected. I flatted one 2.35 after many months of riding it in really rough stuff, and flatted one 2.6 after many months of the same. Otherwise I've bumped and banged them through all kinds of stuff with no problems. YMMV of course.

  179. #379
    Rider
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    377
    Patch it from the inside.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. Vittoria Agarro for 2019
    By Schulze in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-01-2018, 05:29 PM
  2. Vittoria 29er tire, PCYOTC?
    By split in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-24-2015, 10:17 AM
  3. Vittoria XG TNT 700c $32
    By Niles in forum Where are the Best Deals?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-31-2014, 06:18 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-28-2013, 10:15 AM
  5. Vittoria Cross XC Pro
    By Yuengling in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-24-2011, 07:22 PM

Members who have read this thread: 422

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.