Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype... - Page 5- Mtbr.com
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 801 to 1,000 of 1024
  1. #801
    craigsj
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    Wider tires allow lower pressures.
    No, taller tires allow lower pressures. As it turns out, wider and taller are the same thing with bicycle tires so what you say is true only by coincidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    Similar rules apply when you use a wider rim instead of a wider tire.
    This is where you get into trouble. A wider rim does not produce a taller tire so "similar rules" do not apply.

    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    The same 2.4" tire will have a wider footprint and a higher ride height when used with a wider rim.
    No, it won't. You should try measuring this.

    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    So yes, you can lower air pressure too much, but generally wider tires (or tire+rim systems) allow for the same protection at lower pressures.
    No, they don't. Wider rims allow lower pressures only when sidewall squirm is the limiting factor.

  2. #802
    craigsj
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    Now compare to a 2.4" tire to a 4.8" tire that has identical height (short and fat) and PSI.
    You don't seem to understand how bicycle tires work. Height and width are NOT independent. There is no such thing as a 4.8" tire that is the same height as a 2.4" tire, not even hypothetically.

    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    So they have identical height at zero load. But under say 100 pounds of pressure which will ride higher? The 4.8". Which will handle a higher peak load? The 4.8".
    You are wrong on both accounts. This depends on the pressures of the two tires and that's not stated.

    Quote Originally Posted by spikebike View Post
    Make sense?
    No, not remotely.

    A wider rim increases the width of the mounted casing and therefore the air volume inside the tire. Neither of these things matter one bit.
    Last edited by craigsj; 03-28-2015 at 07:56 AM.

  3. #803
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr.P View Post
    Sigh... DH rims have always been the widest rims available - for decades, until the last year or two. Why is that? According to you, just to look pretty (no benefit).

    And here come the wide/tubeless/carbon DH rims you and others can't wrap your head around:

    PIT BITS - Crankworx Rotorua - Prototype Carbon Rim - PIT BITS - Crankworx Rotorua - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB

    P
    Do you have any clue what the inner width is on that rim? By the look of it, I'm guessing <27mm.

    Meanwhile,
    7 Downhill Bike Checks - Crankworx Rotorua - Pinkbike
    and
    4 Downhill Bike Checks - Crankworx Rotorua - Pinkbike

    Everyone is pretty much still running 23mm-25mm inner width DH wheels. Including the winner and all of the serious WC contenders. The widest rim I can find in the bike checks coming in from Rotorua would probably be the Bontrager prototype wheels that the Trek team is using, which are 27mm inner width.

    And here's another real-world data point:
    Prototype Michelin Tire - PIT BITS - Crankworx Rotorua - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB

    In the entire start list for the pro enduro race, you couldn't find better DH pedigree than in Jerome Clemetz and Nico Vouilloz-- who are both running freshly minted prototype tires... on 23mm inner width rims.

  4. #804
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SDMTB'er's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,161
    Quote Originally Posted by JLF1200 View Post
    Do you have any clue what the inner width is on that rim? By the look of it, I'm guessing <27mm.

    Meanwhile,
    7 Downhill Bike Checks - Crankworx Rotorua - Pinkbike
    and
    4 Downhill Bike Checks - Crankworx Rotorua - Pinkbike

    Everyone is pretty much still running 23mm-25mm inner width DH wheels. Including the winner and all of the serious WC contenders. The widest rim I can find in the bike checks coming in from Rotorua would probably be the Bontrager prototype wheels that the Trek team is using, which are 27mm inner width.

    And here's another real-world data point:
    Prototype Michelin Tire - PIT BITS - Crankworx Rotorua - Mountain Biking Pictures - Vital MTB

    In the entire start list for the pro enduro race, you couldn't find better DH pedigree than in Jerome Clemetz and Nico Vouilloz-- who are both running freshly minted prototype tires... on 23mm inner width rims.
    There were a lot of flats in rotorua this year - wonder if there is a correlation with rim width.

  5. #805
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    Is there really anyone out there breaking out calipers and dyes to measure and compare different contact patches between various tire/rim width combinations?
    I wouldn't think so.

    Facts are antithetical to the average armchair engineer... unless they can be wildly misinterpreted for entertaining hypotheses.

  6. #806
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mazspeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,058
    I did a simple test with the tires. I have 2 pair of rims, both 27.5 with 2.4 maxxis tires. One are on the derby's, and one on a set of enduro i9's. I think the inner difference in width is about 18mm or so, the derby's being the wider rims. Pumping them up to 20lbs each I notice 2 things. 1. The derby's seem to be more progressive when you put weight on them. Which means to me, the more you push on them, the more they push back at the same lbs. Which seems to make me think that you can run lower pressures without damage since it seems like there is more air to push back. Does this make sense to anyone?
    2. when you lean on both tires, I did so with my fox fork an interesting thing happened. More tread hit the ground. The outer edges were almost flat on the ground at 20psi. The tires didn't really seem wider, ( I did not measure) but the tread did. When I put them on the enduro rim, and did the same thing, the outer tread were touching the ground, but barley. It seems as if I had a much flatter tread on the ground. Does that make any sense?
    Ok, this was something I did to see if there was any difference in tire width. This was in no way any kind of scientific test of any kind. I was just mucking about. Now how this equates to the real world on my bike when I will start riding it, who knows, but there is absolutely a tread difference on the ground with weight being applied. Hope this helps and I hope someone can explain it to me how this may be better or worse in real world riding and not in forum arguments.

  7. #807
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by mazspeed View Post
    1. The derby's seem to be more progressive when you put weight on them. Which means to me, the more you push on them, the more they push back at the same lbs. Which seems to make me think that you can run lower pressures without damage since it seems like there is more air to push back. Does this make sense to anyone?
    No.

  8. #808
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mazspeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,058
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    No.
    I guess you will to try it for yourself.

  9. #809
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by mazspeed View Post
    I did a simple test with the tires. I have 2 pair of rims, both 27.5 with 2.4 maxxis tires. One are on the derby's, and one on a set of enduro i9's. I think the inner difference in width is about 18mm or so, the derby's being the wider rims. Pumping them up to 20lbs each I notice 2 things. 1. The derby's seem to be more progressive when you put weight on them. Which means to me, the more you push on them, the more they push back at the same lbs. Which seems to make me think that you can run lower pressures without damage since it seems like there is more air to push back. Does this make sense to anyone?
    I say a 100% yes to this. This has been my experience. ESPECIALLY, if you are running the same psi as you were with the narrow rims. I'm running 10psi lower and this is still a yes for me.

  10. #810
    Save Jesus
    Reputation: beanbag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by mazspeed View Post
    I did a simple test with the tires. I have 2 pair of rims, both 27.5 with 2.4 maxxis tires. One are on the derby's, and one on a set of enduro i9's. I think the inner difference in width is about 18mm or so, the derby's being the wider rims. Pumping them up to 20lbs each I notice 2 things. 1. The derby's seem to be more progressive when you put weight on them. Which means to me, the more you push on them, the more they push back at the same lbs. Which seems to make me think that you can run lower pressures without damage since it seems like there is more air to push back. Does this make sense to anyone?
    2. when you lean on both tires, I did so with my fox fork an interesting thing happened. More tread hit the ground. The outer edges were almost flat on the ground at 20psi. The tires didn't really seem wider, ( I did not measure) but the tread did. When I put them on the enduro rim, and did the same thing, the outer tread were touching the ground, but barley. It seems as if I had a much flatter tread on the ground. Does that make any sense?
    Yes, this does make sense, see:

    Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype... - Page 22- Mtbr.com

    Comparing the same tire on a wide vs narrow rim when both have been compressed almost to the point that the rim touches the ground (pinch flat). When the rim is wider, the tire "flat spot" is wider in profile as well, since....
    Well, lemme put it this way.
    Assume that in cross section view, the total arc length of the tire is fixed from bead to bead. Then when the rim is wider, that is like "unrolling" the tire, or put another way, less arc length / sidewall is wasted from having to travel from the edge of the bulge back to the rim bead hooks. So with a wide rim, the flat spot is wider as well, and wider flat spot means bigger contact patch, means more total force pushing back against the ground.

    This view is really an oversimplification since it doesn't take into account all the weird stuff that happens because the tire casing is not stretchy, nor takes into account what happens in the other third dimension, but at least qualitatively it "makes sense".

  11. #811
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14

    Actually yes

    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    No.
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims. You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.

    WIDE rims

    from the link

    WIDE RIMS CHANGE TO TIRE SIZE:


    Going to wider rims, the tire's circumference doesn't grow taller. I've closely measured rollout curcumference which calculates to tire height, and measured knob width too. Using the same 2.3 Pacenti neo-moto tire on a 650b x 40mm Derby Rims compared to a 28mm Blunt, the tire doesn't grow taller, the tire is no higher at the center knobs, and the edge knobs are actually a very small measurement narrower, about 0.0225 inch or 0.6 mm narrower. But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs.

  12. #812
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims. You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.


    WIDE rims


    from the link


    WIDE RIMS CHANGE TO TIRE SIZE:


    Going to wider rims, the tire's circumference doesn't grow taller. I've closely measured rollout curcumference which calculates to tire height, and measured knob width too. Using the same 2.3 Pacenti neo-moto tire on a 650b x 40mm Derby Rims compared to a 28mm Blunt, the tire doesn't grow taller, the tire is no higher at the center knobs, and the edge knobs are actually a very small measurement narrower, about 0.0225 inch or 0.6 mm narrower. But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs.



    Ummm, if you'll read what you posted. Ray actually claims that the edge knobs are narrower, but stand up higher. If you read the link that you posted it says that the sidewalls are wider with a wider rim, which makes sense. No where does it say that the tire width at the tread is any wider with a wider rim. You can't stretch the tread of a tire, with a wider rim. The only thing you can do is change its profile. But, all of this has very little or nothing to do with why wide rims work better. It has everything to do with the fact that a wider rim allows the tire to better deal with the forces acting upon it, and nothing else. Some tires will gain a bit better tread profile and some tires will get a worse tread profile with wider rims.
    Last edited by Mountain Cycle Shawn; 03-29-2015 at 01:53 PM.

  13. #813
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims. You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.

    WIDE rims

    from the link

    WIDE RIMS CHANGE TO TIRE SIZE:


    Going to wider rims, the tire's circumference doesn't grow taller. I've closely measured rollout curcumference which calculates to tire height, and measured knob width too. Using the same 2.3 Pacenti neo-moto tire on a 650b x 40mm Derby Rims compared to a 28mm Blunt, the tire doesn't grow taller, the tire is no higher at the center knobs, and the edge knobs are actually a very small measurement narrower, about 0.0225 inch or 0.6 mm narrower. But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs.
    You obviously don't know who you are talking to, bub

  14. #814
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims.
    I'm ALL about the facts sir.
    I don't think tread width gets wider, or contact patch gets wider, but the contact patch thing is more complicated. max width (sidewall bulge) gets wider.

    You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.
    You obviously have poor reading comprehension skills, as your quote from Derby proves, contradicting the point you thought it made. But you also have misread my posts. I don't claim that wider rims "do nothing". I am just challenging some of the reasoning that people are using to explain the benefits they feel. And I have ridden wide rims. I was riding them in 1988!

  15. #815
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Ummm, if you'll read what you posted. Ray actually claims that the edge knobs are narrower, but stand up higher. If you read the link that you posted it says that the sidewalls are wider with a wider rim, which makes sense. No where does it say that the tire width at the tread is any wider with a wider rim. You can't stretch the tread of a tire. The only thing you can do is change its profile. But, all of this has very little or nothing to do with why wide rims work better. It has everything to do with the fact that a wider rim allows the tire to better deal with the forces acting upon it, and nothing else. Some tires will gain a bit better tread profile and some tires will get a worse tread profile with wider rims.
    I never said the sidewalls were wider in my post did I? I wasn't specific in my post to what I meant about "Wider Tires" but if you look at the link it is pretty obvious what I am talking about is it not? However he actually does say the tires are wider where it matters right here:

    "But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs."

    The profile being more "Square" is exactly what I am talking about. It makes the profile of the tire wider. The edge nobs are closer to the fork or the yoke because they are flaring out more and the measurement he does shows that the edge nobs are doing just that. The tire didn't get wider but it does widen the tread (edge nobs) which is why they are flaring up. When on the trail the edge nobs are now being utilized more and that is what he is talking about in that post.

    The measurements are right here on his page and it is pretty clear that it is wider:

    "Tire measured on 40mm wide rim, edge knobs stand up and flair very slightly less to the sides"

    Width measurement from the knobs = 2.35

    as compared to the other 28mm wide rims which are measuring at 2.33.

    So yes the tire itself isn't going to grow in size, but it does widen the profile of the tread by moving the edge nobs closer to the contact patch on the trail.

    He even says this on the same exact page, he says exactly what I just said here:

    "Cornering traction is much improved on dusty hardpack to very loose gravelly dirt or loamy covered with leaves, as a result of this combination of flatter tread cross section, stiffer edge knobs, more knobs in contact, and lower air pressure, all enabled with wide rims."

    Cornering traction is better because of increased contact on the trail from the edge nobs being utilized more.

    Maybe wider is a bad word to use but what is a better word for what is going on with the edge nobs and the "Squaring" of the tire profile? I guess the best way to put this is that the wider rims do increase the width of the contact patch (atleast according to Derby it does) by actually pushing the edge nobs closer to the contact patch of the tire.

  16. #816
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    No where does it say that the tire width at the tread is any wider with a wider rim. You can't stretch the tread of a tire. The only thing you can do is change its profile. But, all of this has very little or nothing to do with why wide rims work better. It has everything to do with the fact that a wider rim allows the tire to better deal with the forces acting upon it, and nothing else. Some tires will gain a bit better tread profile and some tires will get a worse tread profile with wider rims.
    Yes I think there is something about the way the sidewall reacts to forces that changes with the profile change. I wish I understood it, but I don't. The only article I can find on the subject is by Richard Cunningham, and it is a pretty awful explanation.

    I think the reasoning that is going around this thread, e.g. wider tire, wider contact patch, lower pressure, more volume to absorb forces, etc, are pretty much all wrong.

  17. #817
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    I never said the sidewalls were wider in my post did I? I wasn't specific in my post to what I meant about "Wider Tires" but if you look at the link it is pretty obvious what I am talking about is it not? However he actually does say the tires are wider where it matters right here:

    "But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs."

    The profile being more "Square" is exactly what I am talking about. It makes the profile of the tire wider. The edge nobs are closer to the fork or the yoke because they are flaring out more and the measurement he does shows that the edge nobs are doing just that. The tire didn't get wider but it does widen the tread (edge nobs) which is why they are flaring up. When on the trail the edge nobs are now being utilized more and that is what he is talking about in that post.

    The measurements are right here on his page and it is pretty clear that it is wider:

    "Tire measured on 40mm wide rim, edge knobs stand up and flair very slightly less to the sides"

    Width measurement from the knobs = 2.35

    as compared to the other 28mm wide rims which are measuring at 2.33.

    So yes the tire itself isn't going to grow in size, but it does widen the profile of the tread by moving the edge nobs closer to the contact patch on the trail.

    He even says this on the same exact page, he says exactly what I just said here:

    "Cornering traction is much improved on dusty hardpack to very loose gravelly dirt or loamy covered with leaves, as a result of this combination of flatter tread cross section, stiffer edge knobs, more knobs in contact, and lower air pressure, all enabled with wide rims."

    Cornering traction is better because of increased contact on the trail from the edge nobs being utilized more.

    Maybe wider is a bad word to use but what is a better word for what is going on with the edge nobs and the "Squaring" of the tire profile? I guess the best way to put this is that the wider rims do increase the width of the contact patch (atleast according to Derby it does) by actually pushing the edge nobs closer to the contact patch of the tire.
    The edge knobs STAND UP more. He's talking about height, not width. The fork crown is a three dimensional object. But, obviously they don't stand up higer than the middle of the tire. Each tire is going to be slightly different on a wider rim. If your hanging your hat on a .02" increase in tire width, then your are missing the point. Again, refer back to post # 812 as to why wider rims work better. It's not your small increase, if any, in tire width. The only reason Ray gets that much into the tire dimensions is so people won't think that they can't use these rims because they are affraid the tires won't fit in the bike.

  18. #818
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The edge knobs STAND UP more. He's talking about height, not width. The fork crown is a three dimensional object. But, obviously they don't stand up higer than the middle of the tire. Each tire is going to be slightly different on a wider rim. If your hanging your hat on a .02" increase in tire width, then your are missing the point. Again, refer back to post # 812 as to why wider rims work better. It's not your small increase, if any, in tire width. The only reason Ray gets that much into the tire dimensions is so people won't think that they can't use these rims because they are affraid the tires won't fit in the bike.
    Sorry but you are just ignoring what he says himself on his website. So I will repost his exact words:

    "Cornering traction is much improved on dusty hardpack to very loose gravelly dirt or loamy covered with leaves, as a result of this combination of flatter tread cross section, stiffer edge knobs, more knobs in contact, and lower air pressure, all enabled with wide rims."

    Flatter is a better word to use, it makes the tire flatter and thus more knobs in contact with the trail. That does make a difference hints why he has it on his site. The lower air pressure is 1 component of that also but not the only one.

  19. #819
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Another thing to consider. Wider rims don't stretch a tire. Higher psi will. Most people are running a lot lower psi with wider rims, a lot lower. Which will take away any small increase in tire width, if any, caused by a wider rim.

  20. #820
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Sorry but you are just ignoring what he says himself on his website. So I will repost his exact words:

    "Cornering traction is much improved on dusty hardpack to very loose gravelly dirt or loamy covered with leaves, as a result of this combination of flatter tread cross section, stiffer edge knobs, more knobs in contact, and lower air pressure, all enabled with wide rims."

    Flatter is a better word to use, it makes the tire flatter and thus more knobs in contact with the trail. That does make a difference hints why he has it on his site. The lower air pressure is 1 component of that also but not the only one.
    Dude, where does it say anything about tire width? Tire width doesn't make wide rims better.

  21. #821
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    If tire width was that important, then people would just be putting bigger and bigger tires on. The bigger tires caused this problem. That's what people thought would be better. That's what caused the need for wide rims. To get rid of the lightbulb shape of a narrow rim and wide tire. The idea is to get away from that and have more of a dirt bike rim/tire profile.

  22. #822
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Dude, where does it say anything about tire width? Tire width doesn't make wide rims better.
    Who said anything about tire width making rims better? Wider rims enable the bottom of your tires to have a wider contact patch. Try reading the quote again.

    "Cornering traction is much improved on dusty hardpack to very loose gravelly dirt or loamy covered with leaves, as a result of this combination of flatter tread cross section, stiffer edge knobs, more knobs in contact, and lower air pressure, all enabled with wide rims."

    And he says it again here:

    "The wider sidewall raises the edge knobs without raising the center knobs, which makes a less round or more "square" tread cross-section profile."

  23. #823
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Actually with some tires the tread flattens out and you get less tread on the ground in the corners. Some tires don't work well with a wider rim. Some tires won't even stay on these rims at all.

  24. #824
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims. You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.

    WIDE rims

    from the link

    WIDE RIMS CHANGE TO TIRE SIZE:


    Going to wider rims, the tire's circumference doesn't grow taller. I've closely measured rollout curcumference which calculates to tire height, and measured knob width too. Using the same 2.3 Pacenti neo-moto tire on a 650b x 40mm Derby Rims compared to a 28mm Blunt, the tire doesn't grow taller, the tire is no higher at the center knobs, and the edge knobs are actually a very small measurement narrower, about 0.0225 inch or 0.6 mm narrower. But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs.
    Because you keep talking tire width. What am I supposed to believe that your tire width rampage here is suppose to mean that you think it's not what makes them work better.

  25. #825
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Because you keep talking tire width. What am I supposed to believe that your tire width rampage here is suppose to mean that you think it's not what makes them work better.
    Yes because of the wider rims "The wider sidewall raises the edge knobs without raising the center knobs, which makes a less round or more "square" tread cross-section profile." -Derby

  26. #826
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    182

    Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype...

    This thread has become pretty much worthless banter. There are those with wider wheels and they know how it affects the tires. And then there are those who are cynical but have never tried them. Then there are the engineering types who have proved and disproved wide wheels with some mathematical equations. Yep this thread has run its course.

  27. #827
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J.B. Weld's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    12,466
    After 33 pages, thousands of wise words and sage advice, much careful consideration and deliberation, then weighing in all contributing factors I've concluded that for now I'm not believing the hype.

  28. #828
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Don't let facts or measurements get in the way of your thinking though. Tire width has been measured with wider rims and tire width is wider with wider rims. You can argue in speculation land all you want since you have 0 real facts in your posts it is just your opinion. You haven't tried wider rims and you haven't measured wider rims, but somehow you know that they don't do anything? LOL OK. Well other people have done the measurements and tried them.

    WIDE rims

    from the link

    WIDE RIMS CHANGE TO TIRE SIZE:


    Going to wider rims, the tire's circumference doesn't grow taller. I've closely measured rollout curcumference which calculates to tire height, and measured knob width too. Using the same 2.3 Pacenti neo-moto tire on a 650b x 40mm Derby Rims compared to a 28mm Blunt, the tire doesn't grow taller, the tire is no higher at the center knobs, and the edge knobs are actually a very small measurement narrower, about 0.0225 inch or 0.6 mm narrower. But the edge knobs do "stand up" a little higher making a more "square" tread profile, and these edge knobs do come closer to the arch of a fork or yoke of a chain-stay by about 1.5mm, so it is slightly closer clearance above the edge knobs.
    Regardless of whether it may or may not be true, are you not even slightly weary of taking your evidence from an individual that has as their product a super wide rim?

    It's liking linking to Coke for proof of the healthiness of their products

  29. #829
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    After 33 pages, thousands of wise words and sage advice, much careful consideration and deliberation, then weighing in all contributing factors I've concluded that for now I'm not believing the hype.
    It's your loss. It's not hype. They make every situation in my riding world a lot better and lighter. It's the single best thing I have done to my bike!

  30. #830
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    I take that back. It's the single best thing I've done to any bike and I've had a lot of them.

  31. #831
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by pharmaboy View Post
    Regardless of whether it may or may not be true, are you not even slightly weary of taking your evidence from an individual that has as their product a super wide rim?

    It's liking linking to Coke for proof of the healthiness of their products
    Ray is a very honest and stand up guy. He has more experience than most of us put together. What he says is true, in his experience. People just interperate what he says differently. Wide rims are here to stay. The big tire companies are already making tires for wider rims.
    Last edited by Mountain Cycle Shawn; 03-29-2015 at 04:58 PM.

  32. #832
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by pharmaboy View Post
    Regardless of whether it may or may not be true, are you not even slightly weary of taking your evidence from an individual that has as their product a super wide rim?

    It's liking linking to Coke for proof of the healthiness of their products
    I was weary yes, you are right. I did a lot of research online about wider rims and those who have tried them. There dozens of reviews online on both Derby and IBIS rims that are 40-41mm in width. What ultimately led me to believing all the hype online on forums and reviews I noticed IBIS had endorsed Derby's idea completely on their website and IBIS may not be the most respected in the industry but they are a very respectable company. They have now shifted to wide rims endorsing Derby right on their website here:

    We’re not the first people to discover the wide rim advantages. The early mountain bikers as mentioned above had it right. Back in 2011, Richard Cunningham, the Pinkbike.com tech guru wrote an article called “Wider Rims Are Better” in his Pinkbike Tech Tuesday Series. RC had it right, and we encourage you to read the article. In 2012 Richard wrote about the Syntace W35 MX 35mm wide aluminum rims, once again beating the wide rim drum.
    In 2013 the first wide carbon fiber rims came out, called Derby Rims. Derby is our good friend and in fact Ibis liked his idea so much we funded half the original tooling expense of these rims. Having access to the Derby Rims proved invaluable in testing for our own concepts and designs. Derby’s rims are made in a different factory than ours, as we will be needing a much larger quantity than his source can provide.
    For now, we will only be selling complete wheels, so if you’re looking for rims only, we heartily endorse the product that Derby is selling. If you can get them that is, Derby Rims have been regularly selling out each production run.

    http://www.ibiscycles.com/wheels/

    Also if you check their website they are selling many of their enduro/downhill style bikes with IBIS 741 wheels, which are 41mm wide. Putting their money where their mouth is to sell bikes stock with these new wheels.

  33. #833
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybike View Post
    Yes because of the wider rims "The wider sidewall raises the edge knobs without raising the center knobs, which makes a less round or more "square" tread cross-section profile." -Derby
    It is true that the unloaded profile is more square. It is also true that raising the edge knobs would widen the contact patch, ONLY IF the tire pressure was high enough to prevent the flattening of the tire completely from edge to edge under a normal riding load. The whole idea of wider rims = wider contact patch came (I think) from the road tire world where pressures are very high and there are no knobs reaching for the ground. In that world, a flatter profile does widen the contact patch.

    It is my thought that normal tire pressure in tubeless MTB tires these days, even on narrow rims, allows the tire to flatten across the total tread width, in which case a wider rim can do nothing to increase the contact patch width.

    One final thought. As mentioned before, your argument for the benefit of wide rims comes from an advertisement for wide rims. Nothing against Derby. I have read a lot of his posts on this subject. Sometimes I agree, sometimes not, but regardless, he is selling wide rims.

  34. #834
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    I just got back from a ride and I can't wipe the silly grin off my face. Lighter wheels, much more control and grip, wheels that look very cool. What more could I ask for from a set of wheels. Each ride gets better as I explore their limits. I'm pretty sure these wheels limits are much more than my limits are. And, just for the record, my WTB Mutano Raptors are only wider in the sidewall. The tread is not wider, but the edge knobs stand up about 3mm higher vertically, toward the top of the fork arch, but not out to the side.




  35. #835
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by beanbag View Post
    Yes, this does make sense, see:

    Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype... - Page 22- Mtbr.com

    Comparing the same tire on a wide vs narrow rim when both have been compressed almost to the point that the rim touches the ground (pinch flat). When the rim is wider, the tire "flat spot" is wider in profile as well, since....
    Well, lemme put it this way.
    Assume that in cross section view, the total arc length of the tire is fixed from bead to bead. Then when the rim is wider, that is like "unrolling" the tire, or put another way, less arc length / sidewall is wasted from having to travel from the edge of the bulge back to the rim bead hooks. So with a wide rim, the flat spot is wider as well, and wider flat spot means bigger contact patch, means more total force pushing back against the ground.

    This view is really an oversimplification since it doesn't take into account all the weird stuff that happens because the tire casing is not stretchy, nor takes into account what happens in the other third dimension, but at least qualitatively it "makes sense".

    I disagree with you because:

    1. The contact patch width can only be as wide as the tread width, unless you are in the very bad position of riding on your sidewalls.

    2. The most accepted theory on contact patch says that its area is proportional to the air pressure in the tire and the load on the tire. So for equal load on the tire, contact patch area is the same. Some argue it is wide and short vs narrow and long, but that is a different argument I have addressed in point 1. With that said, the force pushing back by the tire is the air pressure x the contact patch area. The only way this isn't true, is if the sidewall itself adds some structural support. I have been pondering this possibility, its usually assumed to be negligible.

  36. #836
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    It is true that the unloaded profile is more square. It is also true that raising the edge knobs would widen the contact patch, ONLY IF the tire pressure was high enough to prevent the flattening of the tire completely from edge to edge under a normal riding load. The whole idea of wider rims = wider contact patch came (I think) from the road tire world where pressures are very high and there are no knobs reaching for the ground. In that world, a flatter profile does widen the contact patch.

    It is my thought that normal tire pressure in tubeless MTB tires these days, even on narrow rims, allows the tire to flatten across the total tread width, in which case a wider rim can do nothing to increase the contact patch width.

    One final thought. As mentioned before, your argument for the benefit of wide rims comes from an advertisement for wide rims. Nothing against Derby. I have read a lot of his posts on this subject. Sometimes I agree, sometimes not, but regardless, he is selling wide rims.
    He is selling wide rims that everyone is copying and that tire companies are now making tires for. Again the real benefit of these isn't the marginally bigger contact patch, tire width, air volumn, tread profile, etc. Most of these things are erased by running much less psi., that is if these changes even exist at all. The real benefit comes from getting away from a rim/tire profile that looks like a light bulb. This causes a wide, high volumn tire to be very flexible at the rim. A wider rim causes the rim/tire junction to be many times less flexible and stronger in at least 2 dimensions. Next is the psi drop. You can drop the psi a lot and still have a rim/tire junction that is less flexible, allowing more grip and still getting more rim protection.

  37. #837
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    The only way this isn't true, is if the sidewall itself adds some structural support. I have been pondering this possibility, its usually assumed to be negligible.
    The sidewalls gain a lot of structural support with a wider rim, both laterally and vertically. And everywhere in between lateral and vertical.

  38. #838
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    He is selling wide rims that everyone is copying and that tire companies are now making tires for.
    I think you know as well as I do that people jumping on the band wagon of a new trend is not proof of anything.


    Again the real benefit of these isn't the marginally bigger contact patch, tire width, air volumn, tread profile, etc. Most of these things are erased by running much less psi., that is if these changes even exist at all.
    Probably true.

    The real benefit comes from getting away from a rim/tire profile that looks like a light bulb. This causes a wide, high volumn tire to be very flexible at the rim. A wider rim causes the rim/tire junction to be many times less flexible and stronger in at least 2 dimensions. Next is the psi drop. You can drop the psi a lot and still have a rim/tire junction that is less flexible, allowing more grip and still getting more rim protection.
    Cunningham says that they tested wide rims at low pressure and found them to burp or roll off the rim much less often. I think Cunningham has posted some "engineering" articles that are complete crap, but even if he is a crappy engineer, I don't think he's a liar, so I tend to believe his test results.

    He tried to explain the reason for those results, and IMO, he failed. But, I think it has something to do with the sidewalls better resisting lateral forces, which is pretty much what you said. As I said before, I don't have an explanation for the "why", and that's what I'm looking for.

    The whole lower pressure thing - I'm still skeptical. Even if the sidewalls have some cornering advantage with wider rims, I don't see any reason to think they offer any better rim protection from straight line strikes. (See my posts about contact patch area, tire height, and pressure.) So, the ability to corner better at lower pressure isn't much good if it increases the risk of rim strikes. And I think most tubeless riders are running pressures that are as low as practical from a rim protection standpoint.

  39. #839
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The sidewalls gain a lot of structural support with a wider rim, both laterally and vertically. And everywhere in between lateral and vertical.
    I get that that is a theory, but I haven't found any good explanation for it. Feel an unmounted tire sidewall and it is a flimsy piece of fabric that is easily squished between your fingers with barely an ounce of force. That is why it is usually assumed that your weight on the bike is supported by the air pressure in the tire, with no contribution from the side wall structure.

  40. #840
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I think you know as well as I do that people jumping on the band wagon of a new trend is not proof of anything.




    Probably true.



    Cunningham says that they tested wide rims at low pressure and found them to burp or roll off the rim much less often. I think Cunningham has posted some "engineering" articles that are complete crap, but even if he is a crappy engineer, I don't think he's a liar, so I tend to believe his test results.

    He tried to explain the reason for those results, and IMO, he failed. But, I think it has something to do with the sidewalls better resisting lateral forces, which is pretty much what you said. As I said before, I don't have an explanation for the "why", and that's what I'm looking for.

    The whole lower pressure thing - I'm still skeptical. Even if the sidewalls have some cornering advantage with wider rims, I don't see any reason to think they offer any better rim protection from straight line strikes. (See my posts about contact patch area, tire height, and pressure.) So, the ability to corner better at lower pressure isn't much good if it increases the risk of rim strikes. And I think most tubeless riders are running pressures that are as low as practical from a rim protection standpoint.
    They burp or roll off less because of the two humps on the inside of the rim that Ray designed and developed. That's one aspect that everyone is copying. They help a lot to hold the tire in against the hookless bead. The wider rim also helps, because of the decrease in the tire flex.

    The increase rim strike protection is hard to explaine, I'll try. If the sidewall up and down has less of a light bulb shape and more of a perpendicular shape to the ground, any verticle force, like running straight over a curd, going up through the tire, goes through thicker layers of sidewall. Try this: curl your index finger to a C shape and press down on the tip of that finger with your other index finger. The finger you are pushing on flexes easily at the joint. Now straighten your index finger straight up and down and press down on the tip with your other index finger. It takes many times more force to get the finger you are pushing on to flex over. The same thing happens with a sidewall that has a light bulb shape. It will flex a lot easier. Stand the sidewall up and get rid of that bulg and it won't flex as easily. The wide rim stands the sidewall up and gives it more tension and strength.

  41. #841
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I get that that is a theory, but I haven't found any good explanation for it. Feel an unmounted tire sidewall and it is a flimsy piece of fabric that is easily squished between your fingers with barely an ounce of force. That is why it is usually assumed that your weight on the bike is supported by the air pressure in the tire, with no contribution from the side wall structure.
    No, the tire sidewall gives a lot of support along with psi. That's why some people complain about tires with thin sidewalls. Remember Umma Gumma tires. Very thin sidewalls that caused a lot of problems.

  42. #842
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I get that that is a theory, but I haven't found any good explanation for it. Feel an unmounted tire sidewall and it is a flimsy piece of fabric that is easily squished between your fingers with barely an ounce of force. That is why it is usually assumed that your weight on the bike is supported by the air pressure in the tire, with no contribution from the side wall structure.
    You're kinda right in a way. Put the sidewall in a bad position, like a narrow rim does and it has little support. Put in a better position with a wide rim, it now has many times more support. It gives it so much more support that you can lower psi and still have more support. It's really amazing how little changes can have such a big impact on how something works.

  43. #843
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPunchCholla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    710
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    You're kinda right in a way. Put the sidewall in a bad position, like a narrow rim does and it has little support. Put in a better position with a wide rim, it now has many times more support. It gives it so much more support that you can lower psi and still have more support. It's really amazing how little changes can have such a big impact on how something works.
    Now don't get me wrong, I like wider rims, but this doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't the amount of support a sidewall gives be independent of the air in the tire? In other words wouldn't the amount of support provided by the sidewall be the same if the tire was at normal atmospheric pressure (0 psi on a gauge) or inflated? So if wider rims allow for more sidewall support shouldn't that increase be apparent in totally flat tires?

    When I got my new rims (granted they are only 25mm wide internal compared to my older 21mm internal) I could not tell a difference in support of inflated tires one to the next. Maybe it's there but if it is, it is so small that I think it plays an insignificant role.
    It's just a flesh wound!

  44. #844
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,882
    Maybe by visualizing the shape of the tire on two different width rims it can be easier to think about how a wider rim will allow the sidewall to help make the tire more difficult to wiggle side to side. More force would be needed the wider the tire beads were separated until you wouldn't be able to push the tire at the tread side to side at all. Whereas when the two beads are brought together and touch you can easily move it back and forth. That difference in washout threshold is significant when I'm riding.

  45. #845
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by IPunchCholla View Post
    Now don't get me wrong, I like wider rims, but this doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't the amount of support a sidewall gives be independent of the air in the tire? In other words wouldn't the amount of support provided by the sidewall be the same if the tire was at normal atmospheric pressure (0 psi on a gauge) or inflated? So if wider rims allow for more sidewall support shouldn't that increase be apparent in totally flat tires?

    When I got my new rims (granted they are only 25mm wide internal compared to my older 21mm internal) I could not tell a difference in support of inflated tires one to the next. Maybe it's there but if it is, it is so small that I think it plays an insignificant role.
    The air provides tension and support to the sidewall, it keeps it in a place so it can do its job. They depend on each other to work. I have a set of Spinergy wheels. The spokes are so flexible that you can tie them in a knot. But, build them in a wheel and tension the spokes and they are as strong as SS spokes.

    You only made a 4 change in rim width. Try making a 15 or 20mm change. And it also depends on the tire or more importantly the ratio of rim width to tire width. Remember, you're just trying to get rid of the light bulb shape.

  46. #846
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by eb1888 View Post
    Maybe by visualizing the shape of the tire on two different width rims it can be easier to think about how a wider rim will allow the sidewall to help make the tire more difficult to wiggle side to side. More force would be needed the wider the tire beads were separated until you wouldn't be able to push the tire at the tread side to side at all. Whereas when the two beads are brought together and touch you can easily move it back and forth. That difference in washout threshold is significant when I'm riding.
    OMG, someone who understands this!

  47. #847
    mtbr member
    Reputation: IPunchCholla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    710
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    The air provides tension and support to the sidewall, it keeps it in a place so it can do its job. They depend on each other to work. I have a set of Spinergy wheels. The spokes are so flexible that you can tie them in a knot. But, build them in a wheel and tension the spokes and they are as strong as SS spokes.

    You only made a 4 change in rim width. Try making a 15 or 20mm change. And it also depends on the tire or more importantly the ratio of rim width to tire width. Remember, you're just trying to get rid of the light bulb shape.
    Do you know if anybody who has actually tested this? I'm wondering because as soon as the tire has less on it the side wall will be somewhat S shaped regardless of rim width. I'm just having a hard time buying the rim strike benefits of wider rims.

    now the anti-squirm, I totally buy. Even going to 25mm internal asked me to run significantly lower pressures without squirm. Plus the testing by specialized seems to confirm this, but I haven't seen anything from anyone actually experimenting on different rims and there effect on rim strikes?

    There are plenty of people making the claim based on there experience, so clearly it is possible. I guess it just goes against my intuition and I tend to be a skeptic.
    It's just a flesh wound!

  48. #848
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by IPunchCholla View Post
    Do you know if anybody who has actually tested this? I'm wondering because as soon as the tire has less on it the side wall will be somewhat S shaped regardless of rim width. I'm just having a hard time buying the rim strike benefits of wider rims.

    now the anti-squirm, I totally buy. Even going to 25mm internal asked me to run significantly lower pressures without squirm. Plus the testing by specialized seems to confirm this, but I haven't seen anything from anyone actually experimenting on different rims and there effect on rim strikes?

    There are plenty of people making the claim based on there experience, so clearly it is possible. I guess it just goes against my intuition and I tend to be a skeptic.
    I get it, it's hard to understand and get it. But when you do its like a ligh bulb going off.

    Another way I use to get this is: draw a verticle line of force up through the tire from the ground. If you draw it at the right spot, that line of force will enter the bottom of the tire, go into the tire and exit through the sidewall of the tire because the sidwall narrows down to meet the rim. When that line of force is not within the sidewall, the sidewall can't resist it. Now draw that line on the same spot with a wider rim. That line of force now goes through more of the sidewall at a less steep angle, because the sidewall has a more straight profile and it's not shaped like a light bulb anymore.

    Here's another one for the lateral flex. I had the same tire on my Derby rim as I have on my 26mm Sinergy wheels. When you compare the two, my spinergy wheel and tire combo looks like a ligh bulb. When I look at my Derby wheel and tire setup it looks more like the profile of a car tire and wheels. When I take my hand and flex the Spinergy combo, I can flex the tire a lot. When I try the same thing with my Derby combo, the rear end of the bike flexes before the tire flexes side to side. It's many time stronger.

    Also, it seems to me, that if a tire is stronger laterally for what ever reason, it will also be stronger vertically. I don't know how to explaine that though, except to say that a tire rolled over, will have less strength in the verticle direction, for the same reason the wider rim causes more strength vertically.

  49. #849
    Save Jesus
    Reputation: beanbag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,946
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I disagree with you because:

    1. The contact patch width can only be as wide as the tread width, unless you are in the very bad position of riding on your sidewalls.

    2. The most accepted theory on contact patch says that its area is proportional to the air pressure in the tire and the load on the tire. So for equal load on the tire, contact patch area is the same. Some argue it is wide and short vs narrow and long, but that is a different argument I have addressed in point 1. With that said, the force pushing back by the tire is the air pressure x the contact patch area. The only way this isn't true, is if the sidewall itself adds some structural support. I have been pondering this possibility, its usually assumed to be negligible.
    a) That is sorta true, except that in the case of a wider rim, the outer knobs push down harder, e.g. mazspeed's example.

    b) This assumes that the pressure across the contact patch is uniform, which is only the case when the tire casing is very elastic. It's not elastic, so it's not uniform, so it invalidates your point 2. Secondly, in the case of a wider rim, irrespective of whether the tire casing is elastic or not, the wider rim allows putting down a bigger contact patch (or right before pinch flat, the side knobs push down harder) = more force.
    Last edited by beanbag; 03-30-2015 at 01:44 AM.

  50. #850
    Unpredictable
    Reputation: Ridnparadise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,108
    I have no idea what happens to the tread of a light-bulb tyre versus a D-shaped one in cornering, but I do know that rim strikes often happen after a tyre hits and displaces a rock (flips it up). If wide rims reduce this they are worth considering. Somehow the follow-on from that is whether straight edged tyres will get sidewall cuts more easily from rocks that do not displace.

  51. #851
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    315
    Whew! What a read....


    One thing I am convinced about is that I need a new wheelset and I won't say what width. The question is... should I get DT 240 hubs or Project 321? LOL !

  52. #852
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by paxfobiscum View Post
    Whew! What a read....


    One thing I am convinced about is that I need a new wheelset and I won't say what width. The question is... should I get DT 240 hubs or Project 321? LOL !
    I'd ride nothing buy Hadley hubs.

  53. #853
    mtbr member
    Reputation: johnD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by paxfobiscum View Post
    Whew! What a read....


    One thing I am convinced about is that I need a new wheelset and I won't say what width. The question is... should I get DT 240 hubs or Project 321? LOL !
    I like the dt swiss , you can rebuild one blindfolded.

  54. #854
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by J.B. Weld View Post
    After 33 pages, thousands of wise words and sage advice, much careful consideration and deliberation, then weighing in all contributing factors I've concluded that for now I'm not believing the hype.
    I agree. I'm about to rebuild a set of wheels with a modern alloy rim that's under 425g and 25mm internally. $65 each shipped. To use tubeless with a 26x2.3" tire. I'd say that's about as good of a compromise as you can get.

  55. #855
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,350
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I just got back from a ride and I can't wipe the silly grin off my face. Lighter wheels, much more control and grip, wheels that look very cool. What more could I ask for from a set of wheels. Each ride gets better as I explore their limits. I'm pretty sure these wheels limits are much more than my limits are. And, just for the record, my WTB Mutano Raptors are only wider in the sidewall. The tread is not wider, but the edge knobs stand up about 3mm higher vertically, toward the top of the fork arch, but not out to the side.



    Dude, those wheels look huge! 26? What pressures?

  56. #856
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    thankfully, Art's Cyclery has employed a mechanical engineer to settle this once and for all!

    Tech: Why wider rims will improve your ride - Mtbr.com


    So many flawed assumptions in that article. But my favorite is that since a wide rim makes a 2.25" tire better, there's no need to run a 2.4"!

  57. #857
    Unpredictable
    Reputation: Ridnparadise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,108
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    thankfully, Art's Cyclery has employed a mechanical engineer to settle this once and for all!

    Tech: Why wider rims will improve your ride - Mtbr.com


    So many flawed assumptions in that article. But my favorite is that since a wide rim makes a 2.25" tire better, there's no need to run a 2.4"!
    Not only that, but to gain a benefit in rotational mass you have to use a thinner sidewall tyre, therefore undoing the benefits of reduced lateral deflection. Wider rims climb better because you can run 3lb less pressure and therefore have a wider contact patch - sounds like a wider tyre has the same effect? None of it was convincing. Not saying that wider rims aren't better, but it reads a bit like the enthusiasm for 29 wheels over 26 after all those years of whining about lack of stiffness. At least wide rims don't come with new "standards" that require more expensive parts like hubs and axels.

  58. #858
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    thankfully, Art's Cyclery has employed a mechanical engineer to settle this once and for all!

    Tech: Why wider rims will improve your ride - Mtbr.com
    This is a really interesting figure:


    Description:
    The difference in width and how it affects this off-angle deflection is fully illustrated in the tests that Specialized conducted on their Roval Traverse Fattie wheels. Specialized switched a tire between a 22mm internal rim width and a 30mm “wide” wheel. The tire and wheel were then loaded on an angle and the deflection was measured over a range of different loads. The test bench and deflection measurements can be seen below. Results show that at 900 newtons of loading, the narrower, less supportive rim allows for 50mm of tire deflection, while the wider rim supports the tire more, only allowing for around 33mm of deflection.
    Really interesting... I'm going to think about it some more before wholesale discounting the article based on what I already thought.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    So many flawed assumptions in that article. But my favorite is that since a wide rim makes a 2.25" tire better, there's no need to run a 2.4"!
    The article didn't say that.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  59. #859
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    The article didn't say that.
    I paraphrased, but it most definitely claimed a weight savings by using a 2.25" tire on a wide rim, compared to a 2.4" on a narrower rim. It's there.

  60. #860
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    I editorialized
    FIFY
    there's a difference

    Here's what the article actually said:
    Although performance characteristics are not directly comparable with added rim width and added tire width, we can loosely compare this 26-gram increase due to rim width to the 202-gram increase in tire weight when moving from a Geax Goma 2.25 to a 2.4. The point being: It will save a lot of weight to add air volume and contact area by increasing the rim width instead of tire width.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  61. #861
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    FIFY
    there's a difference

    Here's what the article actually said:
    the whole article is an editorial!

    or did I miss the part where he did some double blind testing and found that not only were the wide rims faster, but also people subjectively preferred them?

  62. #862
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    I like how he summarizes at the end...

    Bottom line: It’s my very educated opinion that...

  63. #863
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by Trajan View Post
    Dude, those wheels look huge! 26? What pressures?
    Sorry, I didn't see this till the thread blew up today. Yes, 26" rims and that picture was taken, I believe, with 22psi. Tires are WTB Mutano Race 2.4".

  64. #864
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    This is a really interesting figure:


    Description:


    Really interesting... I'm going to think about it some more before wholesale discounting the article based on what I already thought.


    The article didn't say that.
    That piccy from specialized is what I understood to be the driving argument for less burping - the reasonable proof so to speak as I assume deflection is indeed what causes burping.

    Note the assumption of the 10% increase in volume and what that means - and also given the access to the wheels,didn't bother to actually test the volume change witha simple submersion test.

    The other simple test they could do, is the require force to cause a rim strike on a square angle at the same pressure. Jeez, I could probably devise a test to do it with 2 wheels a tyre pressure guage, a tie down strap and a luggage scale

    Why doesn't someone just do the bloody simple tests that are required rather than make all these assumptions

  65. #865
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Riding is all the testing I need. And, I still can't get the silly grin off my face. Wide rims are here to stay!

  66. #866
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I like how he summarizes at the end...



    Oh the hubris!

    Find me a man that's certain of his opinion and I give you a fool.

    One of those things, the more you actually know about a subject, the more doubt you realise there is

  67. #867
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manitou2200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,029
    ^^ You amaze me dude, really!! It's not that I don't agree with you an the quality of performance of a wider rim (and tire), I do agree! I like my wider rimmed wheels!! I've riding 26 x 30 mm ID rims since 2006 on my big bikes and I have 29 x30 ID Fatties as well as 29+ Dually rimmed wheels.

    All this banter from you on wide rims and the light bulb analogy and you're just getting into a set of wide Derby's now?

    I had to leave this thread for a few weeks because the BS was way deep, that and the snow was also deep in CA and it needed to get skied! I stopped back in here tonight for more amusement which it provided! It literally has been a broken record for months and months. There are those who believe in the wide rims and those who don't and they've gathered here to debate and battle it out.

    Not to pick on you dude but seriously 9400 post on mtbr? Do you live here? Do you ever get off of this forum and actually ride? Sorry but looking at your photos last page of your bike build I'd say probably not much (but I do like your wheels and tires!)! I don't spend much time on this forum or any for that matter because I ride and ski and paddle and climb!!! "Less typing more riding" to quote Kelly McGarry! haha. I can see why oldranger is disgusted with this thread he started, it's gone over the edge and rambling on into the grave! I say wide wheels are definitely not going away, so long live wide wheels! I'm not going to be running wide wheels on my road bike but I do like my [email protected] 100 psi which is kinda wide for road bike tire! Have fun! Over and out, I'm outta here......again!!
    Last edited by manitou2200; 04-13-2015 at 08:18 PM. Reason: grammar

  68. #868
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    Engineer? Right. Way too much marketing BS in that article.

  69. #869
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    EX471's at 25mm internal width are still very popular for WC downhill.....and win. End of story.

    2015 Specialized S-Works Demo DH Bike | UCI World Cup

  70. #870
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by manitou2200 View Post
    ^^ You amaze me dude, really!! It's not that I don't agree with you an the quality of performance of a wider rim (and tire), I do agree! I like my wider rimmed wheels!! I've riding 26 x 30 mm ID rims since 2006 on my big bikes and I have 29 x30 ID Fatties as well as 29+ Dually rimmed wheels.

    All this banter from you on wide rims and the light bulb analogy and you're just getting into a set of wide Derby's now?

    I had to leave this thread for a few weeks because the BS was way deep, that and the snow was also deep in CA and it needed to get skied! I stopped back in here tonight for more amusement which it provided! It literally has been a broken record for months and months. There are those who believe in the wide rims and those who don't and they've gathered here to debate and battle it out.

    Not to pick on you dude but seriously 9400 post on mtbr? Do you live here? Do you ever get off of this forum and actually ride? Sorry but looking at your photos last page of your bike build I'd say probably not much (but I do like your wheels and tires!)! I don't spend much time on this forum or any for that matter because I ride and ski and paddle and climb!!! "Less typing more riding" to quote Kelly McGarry! haha. I can see why oldranger is disgusted with this thread he started, it's gone over the edge and rambling on into the grave! I say wide wheels are definitely not going away, so long live wide wheels! I'm not going to be running wide wheels on my road bike but I do like my [email protected] 100 psi which is kinda wide for road bike tire! Have fun! Over and out, I'm outta here......again!!
    Wow, someone is suffering from serious panty bindage! I've been here a long time. I have a whopping 2.3 posts per day. That takes like ten minutes of my time. And, since I don't have to work much it leaves me plenty of time to ride. Especially when the trails are on my property. Have a nice day!

  71. #871
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by manitou2200 View Post
    All this banter from you on wide rims and the light bulb analogy and you're just getting into a set of wide Derby's now?
    Just so you know, and I think I posted somewhere, I've been on a set of borrowed Derbys for about three months before I bought mine. So no, I'm not, "just getting into a set of wide Derbys".

  72. #872
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by pharmaboy View Post
    Note the assumption of the 10% increase in volume and what that means - and also given the access to the wheels,didn't bother to actually test the volume change witha simple submersion test.
    I don't see anything in the article that says the 10% is an assumption. In fact it says, "almost 10%," which suggests to me that there is an actual number and that it is slightly lower than 10%.
    I agree that the article is not great, but hypocritical critiques editorializing the content and claiming it says things that it doesn't aren't any better.
    If the article is so full of holes it shouldn't have to be misquoted to make your point.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  73. #873
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739

  74. #874
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,168
    So... I've been running Arch Ex which is 21mm inner with 2.0-2.2 tires.

    I've been thinking about LB 24mm inner width rims but kinda wondering if that is not enough difference?

    With the Arch EX I've never had a burp, but squirm is an issue sometimes so it would be nice to get rid of that.

    I don't want to be heavier than Arch Ex but I do wanna be stiffer, but I'm kinda at a spot of confusion on whether the 24mm or 30mm inner width for someone that wants to run 2.2 xc tires.

    I kinda wish their 24mm rims were more 25 or 26...

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    '12 Scott Spark 29 Team
    '13 Scott Scale 970
    '11 Scott Speedster S20
    '17 Scott Speedster CX20
    12 Scott Foil Team

  75. #875
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    Wide is better, imo, and it is just my opinion. I am running 30mm Nextie carbons (25mm internal) with Bontrager XR3 2.3's at 17 and 19 psi. They work exceptionally well.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  76. #876
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    833
    I am going to take on this burning debate, and do a little experiment. I know how my Carve rides with Continental 2.4 Trail Kings on P35s. I am rebuilding my CX bike and could try those wheels. they are H Plus Son 42 deep section rims. Maybe deeper is better than wider. I can start a hipster, tight pant revolution in DH racing. Anyone want to make suggestions for test parameters?

  77. #877
    ban
    ban is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,511

  78. #878
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    quote: ''Rim width should match tire volume. If you are running a large volume tire, a 30mm internal rim width provides an optimal tire profile,'' Easton says. Not looking to run the big meat? ''For lower volume cross-country and trail tires, 24 and 27mm internal rim widths provide the ideal balance between tire shape and wheel weight.''

    so, on wide rims, it's probably an excellent idea to run monster truck tires like those 26x2.4" Mutano Race shown a few pages back...

  79. #879
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    quote: ''Rim width should match tire volume. If you are running a large volume tire, a 30mm internal rim width provides an optimal tire profile,'' Easton says. Not looking to run the big meat? ''For lower volume cross-country and trail tires, 24 and 27mm internal rim widths provide the ideal balance between tire shape and wheel weight.''

    so, on wide rims, it's probably an excellent idea to run monster truck tires like those 26x2.4" Mutano Race shown a few pages back...
    They aren't all that wide. They measure 55mm across, but weight about 590 grams per tire. About the same size as my Trail King 2.4.

  80. #880
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Just a thought:
    These companies like Easton and American Classic are suddenly explaining the "science" of wide rim benefits, but they've been making rims for decades, and wide rims have always been an option. So, are they saying they didn't know how to design rims all these years? They screwed up by not knowing these now obvious scientific facts? Or are they just jumping on a marketing opportunity?

  81. #881
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    Just a thought:
    These companies like Easton and American Classic are suddenly explaining the "science" of wide rim benefits, but they've been making rims for decades, and wide rims have always been an option. So, are they saying they didn't know how to design rims all these years? They screwed up by not knowing these now obvious scientific facts? Or are they just jumping on a marketing opportunity?
    No, carbon is now accepted as a material for rims. Rims this wide are to heavy in aluminum. It was tried, but no one wanted them. Carbon allows light wide rims.

  82. #882
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    They aren't all that wide. They measure 55mm across, but weight about 590 grams per tire. About the same size as my Trail King 2.4.
    They looked absolutely massive, unless you photoshopped that pic.

    But I think Easton's point, and one that we've heard before from other manufacturers, is that there is a relationship between rim and tire width.

  83. #883
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Rims this wide are to heavy in aluminum. It was tried, but no one wanted them.
    Surly, Sun, and Kris Holm made rims that no one wanted?

    Wonder why they're still making them.

  84. #884
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Zowie View Post
    Surly, Sun, and Kris Holm made rims that no one wanted?

    Wonder why they're still making them.
    Too heavy for the vast majority of consumers to fork out the money they were selling them for? Yes.
    Death from Below.

  85. #885
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manitou2200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,029

    Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    No, carbon is now accepted as a material for rims. Rims this wide are to heavy in aluminum. It was tried, but no one wanted them. Carbon allows light wide rims.
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    They looked absolutely massive, unless you photoshopped that pic.

    But I think Easton's point, and one that we've heard before from other manufacturers, is that there is a relationship between rim and tire width.
    Quote Originally Posted by Zowie View Post
    Surly, Sun, and Kris Holm made rims that no one wanted?

    Wonder why they're still making them.
    You guys all make valid points here but besides the carbon manufacturing advancements, the fat bike movement has also made wide rims valid. It's really just getting started with the development of wide wheels chasing tires chasing wheels.
    It should be fun!
    Function in disaster, finish in style.

  86. #886
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    Fat rims have been around for a while, they were heavy though.



    Doublewides were 33mm internal with a 900g-1000g weight in 26". Mavic has made the EX729 for many years too, 675g. 3" nokian gazzaloddi's on doublewides was pretty awesome to ride down a hill, and boat anchor heavy.

    I've seen both these rims with massive dents in them, while running two ply DH tires and thick tubes. Be careful with any of these light wide rims running wimpy tires tubeless with low pressure, any hard riding is going to result in dents. Makes excessive width sort of a moot point - you may have less tire roll, but you still need enough air pressure to prevent rim dents and sidewall cuts. If you ride agressively, the higher pressure you need to keep from bottoming out the tire is also going to keep the tire from rolling off. This is part of why you aren't seeing DH on 30mm+ internal rims.

    Only sub 500g rim I would trust for hard riding is the dt EX471, at 25mm internal. I'm putting WTB KOM i25's on my bike, but I run maxxis with higher pressures and don't ride that agressively these days.

  87. #887
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,359
    Quote Originally Posted by ban View Post
    75% of the comments are asking "why no 26?" Thankfully, there are plenty of modern semi-wide 26" rims.

  88. #888
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    I think we can all agree that bicycle tires are supported by air pressure, and that the tire carcass itself does not offer any meaningful support. Isn't that evident by handling any unmounted tire, or by observing a bicycle at rest on a flat tire? The specific pressure required is determined by the tire, certainly - but the manufacturer has thoughtfully printed this on the side of the tire.

    Consider this in contrast to run-flat car tires, which are specifically built to have a really tough sidewall and tire carcass that can support the weight of the car temporarily with low / no air pressure. You can't do that with a mountain bike tire.
    It appears that you have never met a Michelin Comp 16 DH 2.4"! No added air and very little deformation when on a 35lb bike. A truely stiff sidewall and a total gorilla wrestle to get onto a Mavic 823. One could quite safely run 18-22 psi for downhill speeds on technical and rocky course (Dragon series/ UK NPS) without dinging rims and without burping the tyre from the rim.
    The original, and still some ways unmatched, true UST DH tyre.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  89. #889
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    One could quite safely run 18-22 psi for downhill speeds on technical and rocky course (Dragon series/ UK NPS) without dinging rims and without burping the tyre from the rim.
    Not if you're as big a bad ass as oldranger claims to be.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  90. #890
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,168
    I can definitely feel the difference in sidewall between my Maxxis Minion DHF and thinner XC tires.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    '12 Scott Spark 29 Team
    '13 Scott Scale 970
    '11 Scott Speedster S20
    '17 Scott Speedster CX20
    12 Scott Foil Team

  91. #891
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Too heavy for the vast majority of consumers to fork out the money they were selling them for? Yes.
    The vast majority of people will never get a rim strung up...

  92. #892
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ColinL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,775
    Quote Originally Posted by zephxiii View Post
    I can definitely feel the difference in sidewall between my Maxxis Minion DHF and thinner XC tires.
    Yes, but with no air in it, they both will sag until they're resting on the rim. Guaranteed.

    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    It appears that you have never met a Michelin Comp 16 DH 2.4"! No added air and very little deformation when on a 35lb bike. A truely stiff sidewall and a total gorilla wrestle to get onto a Mavic 823. One could quite safely run 18-22 psi for downhill speeds on technical and rocky course (Dragon series/ UK NPS) without dinging rims and without burping the tyre from the rim.
    The original, and still some ways unmatched, true UST DH tyre.
    Ok, so we have one tire and perhaps you can find some other examples. They are rarities, exceptions to the rule, and probably not even in production today.

    But I believe somewhere in this mess of a thread, bholwell confirmed that MTB tires do not get significant support from the tire carcass itself; it's supported by air.

  93. #893
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by ColinL View Post
    Yes, but with no air in it, they both will sag until they're resting on the rim. Guaranteed.



    Ok, so we have one tire and perhaps you can find some other examples. They are rarities, exceptions to the rule, and probably not even in production today.

    But I believe somewhere in this mess of a thread, bholwell confirmed that MTB tires do not get significant support from the tire carcass itself; it's supported by air.
    I think the simple idea that weight on tire = tire pressure x contact patch area is not exactly true. The same general assumption is made for car tires and this study found very wacky behavior contrary to the assumption (including contact patch decreasing when pressure decreased in a few examples!)

    Fact or fiction? Tire contact patch size is determined mostly by weight and tire pressure. | Performance Simulations

    I'm not claiming to understand it, but just because a tire sidewall is flimsy and offers no support by itself, does not mean that it offers no support when there is pressure on it. For the same reason, I think using a tube in a tire changes the feel of its compliance even though an uninflated tube has no stiffness to explain this feeling.

    And people with wide rims claim to feel a difference, just as people running tubeless claim to feel a difference. If air pressure was the sole variable, those differences would not exist. (I admit that people feel what they want to feel many times, but there seems to be enough consensus to give some credence to the idea).

  94. #894
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I think the simple idea that weight on tire = tire pressure x contact patch area is not exactly true. The same general assumption is made for car tires and this study found very wacky behavior contrary to the assumption (including contact patch decreasing when pressure decreased in a few examples!)

    Fact or fiction? Tire contact patch size is determined mostly by weight and tire pressure. | Performance Simulations
    I think belted radials are a radically different application and there are significant limitations to that "study," which took data collected for another purpose and calculated contact patch based on a crude assumption... pretty weak basis for groundbreaking "findings" IMO.

    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    I'm not claiming to understand it, but just because a tire sidewall is flimsy and offers no support by itself, does not mean that it offers no support when there is pressure on it. For the same reason, I think using a tube in a tire changes the feel of its compliance even though an uninflated tube has no stiffness to explain this feeling.

    And people with wide rims claim to feel a difference, just as people running tubeless claim to feel a difference. If air pressure was the sole variable, those differences would not exist. (I admit that people feel what they want to feel many times, but there seems to be enough consensus to give some credence to the idea).
    Feel is meaningless when it comes to physical and mechanical properties of tires.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  95. #895
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,172
    Omg this has gotten interesting.

    Feel is meaningless when it comes to properties of tires....the design of a tire affects how the tire reacts under use, thus can feel different because it responds differently. Tread design, compound, sidewall design can all have an effect. How a mtb tire feels matters to a rider because everything about a mountain bike is about feel.

  96. #896
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,168
    Yeah I was gonna say, how it feels is everything in mountain biking lol.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    '12 Scott Spark 29 Team
    '13 Scott Scale 970
    '11 Scott Speedster S20
    '17 Scott Speedster CX20
    12 Scott Foil Team

  97. #897
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307

    Wide Rims? Don't believe the hype...

    Quote Originally Posted by zephxiii View Post
    Yeah I was gonna say, how it feels is everything in mountain biking lol.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
    I should add to what I said that feel is everything for determining what you should or want to ride. There's a breakdown between that and what people want to quibble about on the Internet, which is tying feel and preference to some quantifiable physical basis to argue about.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  98. #898
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by tigris99 View Post
    Omg this has gotten interesting.

    Feel is meaningless when it comes to properties of tires....the design of a tire affects how the tire reacts under use, thus can feel different because it responds differently. Tread design, compound, sidewall design can all have an effect. How a mtb tire feels matters to a rider because everything about a mountain bike is about feel.
    I'm thinking that melting feather was saying, if you can feel it you can measure it, if you can't measure it you don't know what you are feeling or if it's real.

    Love those pictures of the double wide - I had a pair of the rhino lite wides as well fitted with trailbear tyres from memory - there was no hype at the time that they were going to take over the world. Good rims though

  99. #899
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Mine feel bittchen!!

  100. #900
    ban
    ban is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,511
    is anyone running High Rollers II 2.4 27.5 with wide rims? how is the clearence of the chain stays? I'm running 2.3 right now but maybe I'd try a little wider tire.....

  101. #901
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,768
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    I am going to take on this burning debate, and do a little experiment. I know how my Carve rides with Continental 2.4 Trail Kings on P35s. I am rebuilding my CX bike and could try those wheels. they are H Plus Son 42 deep section rims. Maybe deeper is better than wider. I can start a hipster, tight pant revolution in DH racing. Anyone want to make suggestions for test parameters?
    I am genuinely confused as to what you are trying to say here.
    Death from Below.

  102. #902
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bholwell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,244
    Quote Originally Posted by ban View Post
    is anyone running High Rollers II 2.4 27.5 with wide rims? how is the clearence of the chain stays? I'm running 2.3 right now but maybe I'd try a little wider tire.....
    The casing width should be roughly the same, and the tread width should be a couple mm greater.
    Tire Design & Development Engineer. The opinions expressed in this forum are solely my own.

  103. #903
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I am genuinely confused as to what you are trying to say here.
    I think he went a little to tight on the pants.

  104. #904
    mtbr member
    Reputation: manitou2200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    3,029
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I think he went a little to tight on the pants.
    LOL....LMFAO! This thread needs more humor.
    Function in disaster, finish in style.

  105. #905
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I am genuinely confused as to what you are trying to say here.
    these rims with a 2.4 or even a 3.0 mounted on my Carve. I know how it handles with P35s and the TK 2.4 I just picked up one Chupacabra to try also. The tight pant reference was to the fixie style deep dish wheels.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Wide Rims?  Don't believe the hype...-0416130746b.jpg  


  106. #906
    ban
    ban is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,511
    Quote Originally Posted by bholwell View Post
    The casing width should be roughly the same, and the tread width should be a couple mm greater.
    Ok cheers for the info

  107. #907
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    I should add to what I said that feel is everything for determining what you should or want to ride. There's a breakdown between that and what people want to quibble about on the Internet, which is tying feel and preference to some quantifiable physical basis to argue about.
    definitely worth a chicken sh|t neg rep... thanks LyNx!
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  108. #908
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,882
    Here's a thread with good on trail reviews of wide rims with a wider 27+ WTB Trail Blazer. These guys are really having fun.
    http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-bikes/27...-a-946050.html

  109. #909
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,882
    More good options from Schwalbe in 27.5+ tires 2.8 and 3" wide. They recommend a minimum 40mm inside dimension wheel.
    Sea Otter 2015 | Schwalbe presents Plus-Size Rocket Ron & Nobby Nic | ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine


    Wide Rims?  Don't believe the hype...-rocket-ron.jpg

    Rocket Ron

  110. #910
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    833
    what a bunch of BS. They will work just fine on 19mm external rims. Its a conspiracy! All these new standards. This season I had to get new wheels because the fork I got had 15x100TA.

  111. #911
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    what a bunch of BS. They will work just fine on 19mm external rims. Its a conspiracy! All these new standards. This season I had to get new wheels because the fork I got had 15x100TA.
    Until they flex right off the rim.

    And, no one forced you to buy a fork that required new wheels.

  112. #912
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    833
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Until they flex right off the rim.

    And, no one forced you to buy a fork that required new wheels.
    yes they did. and don't even get me started on the tapered steerer which necessitated a new lower bearing and cup. You can't get a decent 29er fork anymore with a QR. anyway, we can all enjoy our new 15x110TA and additional rear axle standards along with wide rims.

  113. #913
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    yes they did. and don't even get me started on the tapered steerer which necessitated a new lower bearing and cup. You can't get a decent 29er fork anymore with a QR. anyway, we can all enjoy our new 15x110TA and additional rear axle standards along with wide rims.
    Makin' your ride better is what it's all about!

  114. #914
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    833
    it's this thread for the luddites??? don't believe the hype right? Just trying to fit in.

  115. #915
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    yes they did. and don't even get me started on the tapered steerer which necessitated a new lower bearing and cup. You can't get a decent 29er fork anymore with a QR. anyway, we can all enjoy our new 15x110TA and additional rear axle standards along with wide rims.

    I got a "decent fork" with qr no problem. Joys of placing my fork faith in Manitou

    Loving my 25mm id rims with 2.35/2.2 tires. I'm actually looking forward to building a b+ when I can afford to get a new bike (like my 29er is that old). Wider tires and wider rims means I can avoid buying FS longer. Like ht but body may not for too many more years.

  116. #916
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    If a 2.8 tire needs a 40mm rim, a 2.3 must need a 35mm?

  117. #917
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,172
    Quote Originally Posted by smilinsteve View Post
    If a 2.8 tire needs a 40mm rim, a 2.3 must need a 35mm?

    1/2 difference in tire, 13mm, so not sure where you came up with 35mm.

  118. #918
    mtbr member
    Reputation: smilinsteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    8,605
    Quote Originally Posted by tigris99 View Post
    1/2 difference in tire, 13mm, so not sure where you came up with 35mm.
    2.3 is 18% smaller Than 2.8. 33 is 18% less than 40. But I was estimating of the top of my head. ..

  119. #919
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    12,882
    It's not just the raw width. The tread pattern and casing profile design contribute to what the manufacturer recommends.
    These seem to be designed specifically for a 40mm inside rim to perform at their maximum according to Schwalbe.
    They do testing and development to come up with that, I'm sure.

  120. #920
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dictatorsaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,658
    I thought I'd share some information.

    My Ikon 2.2 width on 20mm rim is 53mm. The Ikon width on a 23mm rim is 56mm.

    Exactly 3mm difference which is about 5%.

    Very minor difference.

  121. #921
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    315
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    I just got back from a ride and I can't wipe the silly grin off my face. Lighter wheels, much more control and grip, wheels that look very cool. What more could I ask for from a set of wheels. Each ride gets better as I explore their limits. I'm pretty sure these wheels limits are much more than my limits are. And, just for the record, my WTB Mutano Raptors are only wider in the sidewall. The tread is not wider, but the edge knobs stand up about 3mm higher vertically, toward the top of the fork arch, but not out to the side.



    Now that is one good looking bike. Are those 27+ wheels? What are the specs? What tires are those? Sweet!
    .

  122. #922
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by paxfobiscum View Post
    Now that is one good looking bike. Are those 27+ wheels? What are the specs? What tires are those? Sweet!
    .
    Thanks! WTB Mutano Raptor Race in 26 x 2.4. Some of the best tires made, if you can ride on very light tires. But, they are getting very hard to find.

    Were you asking for bike specs?

  123. #923
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by Dictatorsaurus View Post
    I thought I'd share some information.

    My Ikon 2.2 width on 20mm rim is 53mm. The Ikon width on a 23mm rim is 56mm.

    Exactly 3mm difference which is about 5%.

    Very minor difference.
    Sidewall or tread?

  124. #924
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by slowride454 View Post
    yes they did. and don't even get me started on the tapered steerer which necessitated a new lower bearing and cup. You can't get a decent 29er fork anymore with a QR. anyway, we can all enjoy our new 15x110TA and additional rear axle standards along with wide rims.
    There has never ever been such a thing as a "decent 29er fork.....with a QR". Even when ridding with a bare minimum of kit I cannot see how adding a 5 or 6mm allen key to a patch/ tube kit makes any significant difference to a minimum load ride (cell phone, $20 note, energy bar, minitool, Co2, tube and a water bottle).

    I think that through axles are genius. And wide rims (24-29 inner) are a great addition to running tubeless (assuming 2.4" or larger tyres).
    Not sure why we cannot just have 157mm on trail bikes as well as DH bikes but perhaps the 83mm axle is not ideal for pedalling Q factor?
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  125. #925
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    320
    Going back to the original premise of this thread, what people win on varies greatly by a wide variety of factors , but the #1 factor is their talent, not their equipment. The guys on top can swap out their factory equipment with the avg. enthusiast and still leave them looking like a drunk derelict that never rode on two wheels before. They may have never even tried wide wheels, or the right wide wheels, before and just went off what they believed to be a logical assumption that wider is heavier is slower. Sometimes other factors weigh in that weren't properly accounted for. People assume their mental deduction is logical, but it doesn't always pan out that way. The only way to know for sure is to actually try it. Even then, what was true today is not necessarily true tomorrow. People often get too caught up in generalities as truth for life, place too much emphasis on pointless theoretical minutia, etc. and slowly become victims of their own closed-mindedness.

    I've seen it happen across countless activities, biking is no different in that regard.

  126. #926
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Trying something out is no way to make a judgement. That's how people come to the view that homeopathy works. If you are having a good day, you will be faster, if a bad day, then slower - if you were trying out a different brand of stem the same length, you wouldn't conclude that your new found prowess is from the change in stem, but if it's something you Believe in, you will.

    That is why your point about logic is true - people can't test in a non blinded situation and make accurate comparisons.

    On pros - in most sports, professionals are at the pointy end of product development - they test the latest and greatest and reject or use based on that. This is the reason that so many are deeply suspicious of this particular "technology", because it's coming from the product marketers first into the average Joe market and very slowly permeating into sponsored professional ranks.

  127. #927
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by TheUnknownRider View Post
    Going back to the original premise of this thread, what people win on varies greatly by a wide variety of factors , but the #1 factor is their talent, not their equipment. The guys on top can swap out their factory equipment with the avg. enthusiast and still leave them looking like a drunk derelict that never rode on two wheels before. They may have never even tried wide wheels, or the right wide wheels, before and just went off what they believed to be a logical assumption that wider is heavier is slower. Sometimes other factors weigh in that weren't properly accounted for. People assume their mental deduction is logical, but it doesn't always pan out that way. The only way to know for sure is to actually try it. Even then, what was true today is not necessarily true tomorrow. People often get too caught up in generalities as truth for life, place too much emphasis on pointless theoretical minutia, etc. and slowly become victims of their own closed-mindedness.

    I've seen it happen across countless activities, biking is no different in that regard.
    This is pure BS. Competition is so stiff, you better be at the top of your game mentally, physically and have the best equipment possible if you want to be a winner at the top.

  128. #928
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    This is pure BS. Competition is so stiff, you better be at the top of your game mentally, physically and have the best equipment possible if you want to be a winner at the top.
    well I'm sure there's no convincing someone with such an absolute viewpoint so I won't quibble past this reply, but I've been around a lot of wheeled sports in my life and there are always that rare few who have some kind of magical talent over everyone else. The best equipment doesn't always win, not that anyone with advertising potential will ever admit to such a thing. However, if you go back and reread what I wrote, my comparison is not the same as your counter-comparison. Some people have an innate gift that makes them capable of winning even when the odds are against them.

    It doesn't mean that they don't get beat. Luck plays into it as much as anything you listed above, again another point that nobody in that position ever wants to concede to. It also doesn't take away from the other points I was trying to make. Generally speaking, racing in every form is one of the most monkey-see, monkey-do games around. Just because they are all in there hanging with each other doesn't mean they aren't all overlooking something that nobody has caught onto yet. Nobody in that position *ever* wants to believe that such a thing is possible. At least not until somebody comes long and shakes the tree ...

  129. #929
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,872
    Quote Originally Posted by pharmaboy View Post
    Trying something out is no way to make a judgement. That's how people come to the view that homeopathy works. If you are having a good day, you will be faster, if a bad day, then slower - if you were trying out a different brand of stem the same length, you wouldn't conclude that your new found prowess is from the change in stem, but if it's something you Believe in, you will.

    That is why your point about logic is true - people can't test in a non blinded situation and make accurate comparisons.

    On pros - in most sports, professionals are at the pointy end of product development - they test the latest and greatest and reject or use based on that. This is the reason that so many are deeply suspicious of this particular "technology", because it's coming from the product marketers first into the average Joe market and very slowly permeating into sponsored professional ranks.
    After I spend a lot of $$ on the latest and greatest I really try to convince myself my money was well spent. Sometimes its hard to discern if the bike feels faster, smoother or whatever I dropped coin on. I will say I can tell usually after my internal super sensitivity drops. I could be riding along the same trail I have ridden 100 times and say this recent tire set does feel different. Anyways I went from 22mm ID rims to 30mm ID rims and there is a difference. Doesn't really matter, for others, how it changed for my terrain or riding style other than it works for me.

  130. #930
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    Wider rims are better. I used to race pro XC. I am a mechanical engineer by trade. Take it for what you will. It's just my opinion. I also own a fat bike with 4.6" tires on 90 mmm rims. That is fine for snow, but too wide for dirt. My Evil is running 30mm rims and 2.4 Maxxis tires. I consider it the bare minimum these days. Again, just my subjective opinion.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  131. #931
    mtbr member
    Reputation: pharmaboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    514
    Quote Originally Posted by keen View Post
    After I spend a lot of $$ on the latest and greatest I really try to convince myself my money was well spent. Sometimes its hard to discern if the bike feels faster, smoother or whatever I dropped coin on. I will say I can tell usually after my internal super sensitivity drops. I could be riding along the same trail I have ridden 100 times and say this recent tire set does feel different. Anyways I went from 22mm ID rims to 30mm ID rims and there is a difference. Doesn't really matter, for others, how it changed for my terrain or riding style other than it works for me.
    I think one thing that does make a difference for mere mortals like me, is confidence.

    No doubt, when I feel the flow, and am confident I can ride much faster, I can let the front wheel slip a little on every corner - but most of the time I let my mind think about what might happen. So if what you bought makes you feel faster, you are faster

  132. #932
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    Quote Originally Posted by pharmaboy View Post
    I think one thing that does make a difference for mere mortals like me, is confidence.
    You get a bigger contact patch. As tires improve to take advantage of the width, it'll all get even better.

    I'm on 30's now. My next wheels will be 35 or 40. You couldn't pry them out of my hands and make me ride narrow rims again.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  133. #933
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,768
    Quote Originally Posted by cycloxer13 View Post
    You get a bigger contact patch. As tires improve to take advantage of the width, it'll all get even better.

    I'm on 30's now. My next wheels will be 35 or 40. You couldn't pry them out of my hands and make me ride narrow rims again.
    You don't get a bigger contact patch unless you reduce pressure.

    Patch area is a function of weight and pressure. That's it. Shape? That's a different story.

    However, in theory, a wider rim might help with allowing slightly reduced pressures, due to additional tire support.



    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  134. #934
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dictatorsaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,658
    My Ikon 2.2 width on a 20mm rim was 53mm and on a 23mm rim 56mm. A mere 5% increase.

    I had the option of going Easton Arc27 or 30 for my AM WFO9 build. I opted for the 27 rims.

    All this "bigger and wider is better" contradicts the obsessions with going light culture from a few years back. Fat bikes, Plus bikes, wide rims are all nice to have as options. But to claim "better" is very subjective.

    I see it all the time. Fat bikes are selling like hot cakes and I see them every time I'm out. The owners love them and claim they are fun but I also see them struggle pushing and rolling all that weight around.

  135. #935
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,295
    I've only been mountain biking for about 2 years, and I've only been to a bike park once. But I do really enjoy and I do it at a fairly high level. For an amateur. At the bike park we had skinny narrow hard tires which worked great for skipping over rocks at high speed. The traction kind of sucked but it didn't really seem to matter in that application. For trail riding however the speeds are slower than there's lots more climbing and off camber obstacles, and I've had good luck with wider wheels and tires so far. I do feel that some of the widths that are being suggested are blatantly too wide, but I don't have a bunch of experience on different widths and different tires.

  136. #936
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    I'm running lower pressure. 16.5 front, 19 rear, +/- depending on the conditions
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  137. #937
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,768
    Quote Originally Posted by Dictatorsaurus View Post
    My Ikon 2.2 width on a 20mm rim was 53mm and on a 23mm rim 56mm. A mere 5% increase.

    I had the option of going Easton Arc27 or 30 for my AM WFO9 build. I opted for the 27 rims.

    All this "bigger and wider is better" contradicts the obsessions with going light culture from a few years back. Fat bikes, Plus bikes, wide rims are all nice to have as options. But to claim "better" is very subjective.

    I see it all the time. Fat bikes are selling like hot cakes and I see them every time I'm out. The owners love them and claim they are fun but I also see them struggle pushing and rolling all that weight around.
    Why not have both?

    Wide/big + light?

    My ASRc could be under 21lbs with semi-useless tires on it; it's still under 22 with true 2.35/2.2s.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  138. #938
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Dictatorsaurus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,658
    Quote Originally Posted by cycloxer13 View Post
    I'm running lower pressure. 16.5 front, 19 rear, +/- depending on the conditions
    That's very low pressure. I haven't come across anyone riding wider rims that was able to run that low without denting the rims. Good for you.

  139. #939
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    For a racing application, narrower and lighter can still be faster. It really depends on the course and conditions. For fun trail riding, I'd take a wider carbon rim over a narrower rim every day of the week.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  140. #940
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    They are carbon rims and I am running Maxxis EXO TR tires - 2.4 front & 2.25 rear. It's an incredible trail setup. My buddy running 35's can get away with even lower pressure. The highest pressure I ever run now is 18F & 20R. Also, I weigh 145#. That makes a big difference too.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  141. #941
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    7,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Dictatorsaurus View Post
    That's very low pressure. I haven't come across anyone riding wider rims that was able to run that low without denting the rims. Good for you.
    It depends on the trail. And of course, riding style. I grew up on hardtails and rigid forks so still finesse my way through rock gardens than plow over them.

    I ran 13 and 15 psi F and R, respectively on Derby rims in Oakridge last summer. Maxxis HR2 and Ardent. No issues. I weigh 210# kitted up.

    That was partly by mistake, as I hadn't checked my pressure in a couple of days so probably wouldn't go that low again. 17 and 19 psi is more the norm for me. Flagstaff and Sedona makes up 90% of the riding I do.

  142. #942
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,159
    Quote Originally Posted by cycloxer13 View Post
    Wider rims are better. I used to race pro XC. I am a mechanical engineer by trade. Take it for what you will. It's just my opinion. I also own a fat bike with 4.6" tires on 90 mmm rims. That is fine for snow, but too wide for dirt. My Evil is running 30mm rims and 2.4 Maxxis tires. I consider it the bare minimum these days. Again, just my subjective opinion.
    I'd like to hear your thoughts.

    Are your rims 30mm internal width?

    I like Maxxis tires a lot and I question if I went overboard with the Derbys at 34mm internal width, 40 external. The DHF/DHRII combo is still a favorite of mine.

  143. #943
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    I'm running 30 external with 2.4 and 2.25 Ardents. The 30 is perfect for the 2.25, though if I were to do it again I'd run a 35 with the 2.4 on the front. My friend is running 35 external with High Rollers and they blow up pretty big. I think this would be a good size for the DHF and DHR's too. On the fork it is okay, but you have to watch your frame clearance. We both run Pike's on Evil The Followings (which don't have great rear triangle clearance). I have seen guys running 40's on Pike's.

    Also, I am blown away by how much better the Maxxis EXO TR tires are compared to the whimpier XC tires. They may be heavier, but they ride so much better on real world trails. It's worth the trade-off on a trail bike imho.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  144. #944
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    This tread needs a picture!

  145. #945
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jpa102's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    117
    I'm running 32 external (29.3 internal) rims with 2.4" Ardent EXO's at 17-18 psi. Amazing improvement over the stock wheels with 2.2 x-kings. Completed the Wilderness 101 with this setup with no rim damage and I run 200# kitted out. I also have a fatbike with 4.6" tires for when its is wet and squishy, but love the 2.4's when the trails are dry.
    2014 Specialized Fatboy
    2013 Rocky Mountain Element BC Edition
    2011 Gary Fisher Utopia
    2007 Specialized Roubaix

  146. #946
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rehammer81's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    415
    I'm a big fan of Nox wheels. I'm thinking of going with their Kitsuma (36mm internal) up front and Farlow (29mm internal) in the rear. My thinking is I like a 2.4-2.5" tire up front but typically not bigger then a 2.3 out back. I think, at least currently, a lot of 2.3s get too squared off with these super wide rims greater than 30mm internal.

  147. #947
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    Quote Originally Posted by rehammer81 View Post
    a lot of 2.3s get too squared off with these super wide rims greater than 30mm internal.
    They do. My 2.25 Ardent is fine on 25 internal. My friend has the same tire on 30 internal and you can see the tread sits a little flatter. It is subtle, but if you put the two wheels side to side you can see the difference.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  148. #948
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,060
    FWIW I rode a 2.7-2.5 in front and a 2.3 in back for the profile. I always liked the way the rear felt with a kind of squared off tire and a rounded one in front.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb:skep:

  149. #949
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Hi folks. Another year in the books; two years since I started this thread on Downhill Rims so I think I'll do another drive-by on some of my favorite internet friends:

    Still no breakthrough with wide DH rims for the 2015 year. Fastest guys on the UCI WC DH circuit still running 500g rims with a 25mm inner width. I took first place in 40+ Cat 1 in our regional three race series on 2 year old DT FR600s and had tons of fun on them.

    Maybe 2016 will be the year. My opinion: save your money.

  150. #950
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    761
    Quote Originally Posted by oldranger View Post
    Hi folks. Another year in the books; two years since I started this thread on Downhill Rims so I think I'll do another drive-by on some of my favorite internet friends:

    Still no breakthrough with wide DH rims for the 2015 year. Fastest guys on the UCI WC DH circuit still running 500g rims with a 25mm inner width. I took first place in 40+ Cat 1 in our regional three race series on 2 year old DT FR600s and had tons of fun on them.

    Maybe 2016 will be the year. My opinion: save your money.
    My opinion is buy what you want and have fun.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  151. #951
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBMILES View Post
    My opinion is buy what you want and have fun.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I love wandering in to this ambush zone. You guys can't shoot straight.
    RLTW.

  152. #952
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    761
    I would never shoot at a Ranger


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  153. #953
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by MTBMILES View Post
    My opinion is buy what you want and have fun.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Hey! That's what I was going to say!
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  154. #954
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Whenever a post starts with ".... Fastest guys on the UCI WC DH circuit still running 500g rims with a 25mm inner width." after I pick myself up from laughing so hard at this "science".

    Firstly, for 99% of the lurkers on this forum the only time they hit WC speed on their bicycle is downhill on a wide, paved, empty of traffic street, certainly not on a WC standard track. Speed generates forces on tyres and rims that put those riders into a seperate set of variables to us mere mortals.
    Secondly, quite a few of those riders are on product we have not seen yet and might not ever see the inside of (despite spy shots) and teams are good at 'branding' prototypes so they look like current product and re-branding non-sponsor product to look like sponsor product.
    Thirdly, and probably most important, they have contracts and run what they are provided to a large extent so there not any element of choice.

    And "I took first place in 40+ Cat 1 in our regional three race series on 2 year old DT FR600s and had tons of fun on them." well done you and I am glad that you had fun but hardly WC level speeds so not really any support to your theory of the validity of wide rims.

    It is reasonably well established that wide rims allow tyres to run slightly lower pressures which deliver measurable traction advantages at most speeds used by mortal mountain bikers. As always one must realise that the DH market it one of the smallest and most expensive segments of the bicycle sales empire and as such one of the lowest priorities for new product in many ways.

    Most importantly is that you are having fun so do it on what ever works for you.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  155. #955
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    Whenever a post starts with ".... Fastest guys on the UCI WC DH circuit still running 500g rims with a 25mm inner width." after I pick myself up from laughing so hard at this "science".

    Firstly, for 99% of the lurkers on this forum the only time they hit WC speed on their bicycle is downhill on a wide, paved, empty of traffic street, certainly not on a WC standard track. Speed generates forces on tyres and rims that put those riders into a seperate set of variables to us mere mortals.
    Secondly, quite a few of those riders are on product we have not seen yet and might not ever see the inside of (despite spy shots) and teams are good at 'branding' prototypes so they look like current product and re-branding non-sponsor product to look like sponsor product.
    Thirdly, and probably most important, they have contracts and run what they are provided to a large extent so there not any element of choice.

    And "I took first place in 40+ Cat 1 in our regional three race series on 2 year old DT FR600s and had tons of fun on them." well done you and I am glad that you had fun but hardly WC level speeds so not really any support to your theory of the validity of wide rims.

    It is reasonably well established that wide rims allow tyres to run slightly lower pressures which deliver measurable traction advantages at most speeds used by mortal mountain bikers. As always one must realise that the DH market it one of the smallest and most expensive segments of the bicycle sales empire and as such one of the lowest priorities for new product in many ways.

    Most importantly is that you are having fun so do it on what ever works for you.
    Extremely and eloquently well said!!

  156. #956
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    wide carbon rims are the future - everything else is yesterday's technology - every single bike i own is running carbon rims now
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  157. #957
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    You know what's funny, and what makes me laugh? OK, I'll tell you anyway:

    I think it's funny how many people are still looking at this thread if the premise is so bogus. This is thread is the #3 most Replied to, and also in the Top 10 most Viewed threads on this 'Wheels & Tires' Forum. It gets a ton of traffic, and some of you (us) just can't stay away from the discussion. I started it when I had only two years of experience with DH, and it was my first thread I started on this board. I think I've started all of three threads on this whole MTBR Forum and the other two are about kids bikes.

    Andrew - welcome to the topic. Please start at the beginning of the tread and read all of it. (I bet you think that's funny too). You're a guide at Whistler and ride a bike with Enve DH wheels that have a $3,000 (USD) pricetag. Hold on, let me pick myself up - that's hilarious. I can't believe you spent that much on a set of wheels (Eh). My wheels have great hubs, but they only cost me $750 to build. You are special - I am not. You are right, Andrew - I'm slower than WC racers. I'm actually about 15%-20% off of WC DH speed when I'm on the same tracks. But I am also 20+% heavier than they are. So then, I think comparisons are probably a bit complicated either way.

    For the public: I still have not seen DH riders on the Eastern side of the US adopting wide carbon rims for Downhill use. Not the WC athletes riding here, not old guys like me, not the new riders either. And again in 2016, the major bike manufacturers are NOT spec'ing their DH bikes with carbon rims. Maybe 2016 is the year where a 2-Ply DH tire comes out that works well with wide rims. I don't know. But - if you're a regular guy like me, or a parent wondering how to outfit their kid's bike for DH racing - my recommendation still stands that your money will be better spent on gas to the mountains and lift tickets.

    There are some good aluminum wheels coming out with a 27.5mm inner width. That is greater than the 23-25mm I believe is optimal - so I'm waiting to see how that goes. Maybe I'll try some of them.

    Cheers.

  158. #958
    mtbr member
    Reputation: sherwin24's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    462
    Just ordered some wheels. 29mm internal front and 26 rear. Took my wife's advice I mentioned somewhere earlier in this thread. Bigger in front is better and a bit less girth is the rear is a nice compromise.

  159. #959
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by oldranger View Post
    You know what's funny, and what makes me laugh? OK, I'll tell you anyway:


    I think it's funny how many people are still looking at this thread if the premise is so bogus. This is thread is the #3 most Replied to, and also in the Top 10 most Viewed threads on this 'Wheels & Tires' Forum. It gets a ton of traffic, and some of you (us) just can't stay away from the discussion. I started it when I had only two years of experience with DH, and it was my first thread I started on this board. I think I've started all of three threads on this whole MTBR Forum and the other two are about kids bikes.


    Andrew - welcome to the topic. Please start at the beginning of the tread and read all of it. (I bet you think that's funny too). You're a guide at Whistler and ride a bike with Enve DH wheels that have a $3,000 (USD) pricetag. Hold on, let me pick myself up - that's hilarious. I can't believe you spent that much on a set of wheels (Eh). My wheels have great hubs, but they only cost me $750 to build. You are special - I am not. You are right, Andrew - I'm slower than WC racers. I'm actually about 15%-20% off of WC DH speed when I'm on the same tracks. But I am also 20+% heavier than they are. So then, I think comparisons are probably a bit complicated either way.


    For the public: I still have not seen DH riders on the Eastern side of the US adopting wide carbon rims for Downhill use. Not the WC athletes riding here, not old guys like me, not the new riders either. And again in 2016, the major bike manufacturers are NOT spec'ing their DH bikes with carbon rims. Maybe 2016 is the year where a 2-Ply DH tire comes out that works well with wide rims. I don't know. But - if you're a regular guy like me, or a parent wondering how to outfit their kid's bike for DH racing - my recommendation still stands that your money will be better spent on gas to the mountains and lift tickets.


    There are some good aluminum wheels coming out with a 27.5mm inner width. That is greater than the 23-25mm I believe is optimal - so I'm waiting to see how that goes. Maybe I'll try some of them.


    Cheers.




    ^ Oh, I see how it is. What we have here is a poor, older, slow, fat guy that can't afford to spend, "$3000" for a set of wheels. So, in order to justify that in his little mind, he has to belittle others who can afford wide rims and has to convince himself that wide rims are not the future. Oh, and you can build a set of the best wide set of wheels with Derby rims, Hadley hubs, DT spokes and Sapim Polyax nipples for $1400. That's a very good price for what you get, considering the cost of good mountain bike stuff these days. It's not a cheap sport. And BTW, you only have a lot of reviews and replies because 97.4768% of the people replying disagree with you. Also, the DH scene at the WC level is the smallest mountain bike demographic there is. What happens at that level and even at the slower levels means absolutely nothing to the rest of us. He average mountain biker wants stability and traction. Wide rims provide that for us.

  160. #960
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    @oldranger. I completely agree with you in fact re the value of carbon wheels. The prices are ridiculous, hand building in the US and all that not withstanding. And if you think a bike guide can afford to buy anything at full retail you have not asked your instructor what his/ her wages are. Luckily some brands are happy that guides are telling students about their products.

    My DH ENVE wheels do in fact support your position that wider is not necessarily better as they have a 23mm innner (by my verniers) and have done a fantastic job of holding my heavy ass off the ground for three years now. I can run relatively low pressures anyway as I run UST DH tyres set up tubeless and I ride with care rather than raw speed as I am too old for hospital visits and body rebuilds. I also need to ride at speeds that students can cope with whilst learning new skills and tactics so most days are at slower speeds than I would normaly choose to ride at. After seven seasons of 100+ days when I am not teaching/ guiding DH in the bike park I am riding regular trails that require pedalling and provide variety that sometimes appears to be lacking in the park.

    At 230 lbs (with my guide pack on) I am definitely much heavier than most WC riders and have no interest in their speeds (other than to admire during Crankworx). That said my heavy ass does work a bike, suspension, wheelset and tyre so it shows how strong the wheels are to stand up to 250+ days of use with only one broken spoke to show for it (stick in spoke).

    So I also have a lot different cost to use ratios for my bikes and bike equipment than most riders who are not full time guides.

    There are many great rims and wheelsets that take a rider into the 27mm realm without spending silly money. And I would recommend them to anyone who asks about a foray into the realm of the wider rim as I understand that not everyone wants, can afford, needs or will benefit from carbon rims.

    That said I have a set of Light Bicycle 35mm (30 mm inner) on Hope Pro Evo hubs which cost me about what you built your wheel set for (go that strong US dollar) and they make a noticable difference, 2-3 psi less pressure which allows more grip, over my M70/30 wheels when trail riding with the same tyres mounted.

    On the parents thing, yes I see this as a guide and whilst I empathise I would observe that as no one has ever made people marry and breed so it is like anything in life, a choice that one lives with. I chose no children (which means no school fees, no camps, no college fees and no arguments about screen time and bed times) so whilst some might think that I will be sad and lonely in my old age, I'll actually be that guy who can do what ever he wants, whenever he wants, with a smile, on his really nice mountain bike.

    On a separate note the whole carbon thing is making me pause anyway as I am starting to agree with Max Commencal and Gavin Michael Vos (Spank) that aluminium is more than enough for 95% of mountain biking applications and has the advantage of being recyclable when it wears out/ breaks.

    So I agree with quite a bit of what you say actually and apologise if it did not come across that way. But wider (27-30mm) (not stupid wide) will have benefits for the majority of normal riders who are choosing to mount 2.35" to 2.5" tyres as they can run lower pressures for more traction in most trail conditions at most trail speeds.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  161. #961
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Nice looking wheelset!! Red is not my thing but they look great. What bike are they going on?
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  162. #962
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    Nice looking wheelset!! Red is not my thing but they look great. What bike are they going on?
    Thanks! A Santa Cruz Nickel in long travel mode. 150mm up front and 145mm in the rear using a 57mm stroke shock that has the same I to I length as the original 50mm stroke shock. Weight is just under 27 pounds. The next mod will be going to a 1x11 using the e-Thirteen 9x44 cassette with an oval NW 28T ring up front. That should bring my weight to around to 26 pounds. It's a blast to ride!



  163. #963
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,060
    Odd I just laced up a pair of 25mm internal wheels after riding 30mm internal wheels for 2 years.

  164. #964
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    But wider (27-30mm) (not stupid wide) will have benefits for the majority of normal riders who are choosing to mount 2.35" to 2.5" tyres as they can run lower pressures for more traction in most trail conditions at most trail speeds.
    Andrew,
    Out of curiousity - when you're riding by yourself in the bike park on your DH bike, what tire pressure do you typically run in the rear? For simplicity, let's say you're staying in the Fitzsimmons Zone, and you've ditched some of the gear you have to lug around while guiding, and you're going out to ride hard.

    (I've looked at the details you've included. I'm a bit lighter at 190+ gear)

    Then, on the trails where you use your trail bike - what PSI do you run and what is the inner width on that Enve rim?

  165. #965
    mtbr member
    Reputation: cycloxer13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    334
    I'm 145# plus gear 150# Carbon all the way, bro.
    '15 Evil The Following
    '15 Spec Fatboy R

  166. #966
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    @ oldranger

    DH/ Bike Park, riding for myself with little/ no gear:
    Favourite trail/ combo: Angry Pirate/ Samuari Pizza Cat/ Afternoon Delight/ Lower Whistler DH/ Monkey Hands.
    Bike/ Wheels: Santacruz Bicycles V-10.5 26" running ENVE DH (23 mm inner width) on DT240S:
    Spring (dry)/ Summer: Continental Trail King Protection UST 2.4" front (26 psi) and rear (29 psi), I will up this to 28 psi front/ 31 psi rear if we are hitting mainly fast jump trails (A-Line or Dirt Merchant).
    Spring (wet) & Autumn: Continental Der Kaiser Projekt 2.4"; front 25 psi and rear 28 psi. I add 2 psi to the tyres if mainly jumping.

    Trail riding (normally roadie shirt w 1 water bottle, snacks, phone and min-tool/CO2, 1 water bottle on the bike):
    Favourite trail/s: Microclimate, Howler, High Society (Whistler) and Credit line and Rupert (Squamish).
    Bike/ wheels: SC Nomad CC 27.5 w ENVE M70/30 (25 mm inner width) on DT240S.
    Spring (dry)/ Summer: Continental Trail King Protection Apex 2.4" front (22 psi) and rear (24 psi).
    Spring (wet) & Autumn: Continental Trail King Protection Apex 2.4"; front 20 psi and rear 22 psi.

    Bikes

    I have been trying WTB Breakout TCS Tough 2.4" tyres recently; "High Grip" front and "Fast Rolling" rear at 21 psi front and 23 psi rear. They are pretty good but quite a bit heavier than the Continentals and not as fast rolling or tacky. They seem to have stupid tough side walls however so I will probably use them more in Pemberton which is a bit of a sharp rock/ side wall slash fest.

    I have been too lazy to switch these to the LB wheels to try them there (all the trails are covered in snow and I am on post ACL riding restrictions so it is all spin bike at the moment).
    Last edited by AndrewBikeGuide; 01-16-2016 at 06:22 PM.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  167. #967
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    ^ it's nice to hear someone isn't running stupid low pressures.

  168. #968
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,000
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtrider76 View Post
    Odd I just laced up a pair of 25mm internal wheels after riding 30mm internal wheels for 2 years.
    I would love to hear your reasoning. I'm waffling between 26 and 29 internal, both Nox rims.
    Whining is not a strategy.

  169. #969
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Thanks Andrew. The information you put in your response was helpful. Let's say, hypothetically you were going to build a new 2016 DH bike with 27.5 wheels. Let's also add that you can't get Enve's.

    What kind of wheelset would you choose?

  170. #970
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dirtrider76's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,060
    Quote Originally Posted by kosmo View Post
    I would love to hear your reasoning. I'm waffling between 26 and 29 internal, both Nox rims.
    Unless I ran a pretty wide tire I had lots of sidewall damage to tires even on some of the wide ones. To be honest I killed the sidewall on almost every tire I ran on them. I dug them with 2.7 wide tires on them but most people don't run a 2.7 DH casing tire anymore. Heck even the rim seemed to be beat up a bit more since its more exposed. My rear rim was trashed and my 23mm internal wheels held up good and has less tire failures on my other bike. So I split the difference and a 2.3 fills out perfect on the 25mm internal rim.


    Up until build my HT a year ago I've had 28-30mm internal rims forever. See how these work out this season. I was seriously going to run LB's 38mm carbons then decided not to and built trail295s instead. Build was the same weight and a lot cheaper.
    I like to fart when I'm in front of you on a climb:skep:

  171. #971
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    48
    I wonder why MX bikes use 110mm tires on 2.15 inch rims? With all the time and money put in testing you would think they would realize how much better traction and cornering they could get with rims almost as wide as their tires.

  172. #972
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by NWRyder View Post
    I wonder why MX bikes use 110mm tires on 2.15 inch rims? With all the time and money put in testing you would think they would realize how much better traction and cornering they could get with rims almost as wide as their tires.
    Motorcycle tires are very heavy and very strong.

  173. #973
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,768
    We really, really need to get away from making comparisons to vehicles with several orders of magnitude more power and 5-10x the weight.

    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  174. #974
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    ^^Yeah. Good point.

    I wonder why tanks use treads?
    Are we missing out?

  175. #975
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Quote Originally Posted by NWRyder View Post
    I wonder why MX bikes use 110mm tires on 2.15 inch rims? With all the time and money put in testing you would think they would realize how much better traction and cornering they could get with rims almost as wide as their tires.
    Just not even a relevant comparison, percentage of overall weight of tyres not even close, unsprung to sprung weight ratio, weight of motor bike normally as much or more than the rider rather than the other way round with mountain biking. Power to weight ratio. No pedal action so no pedalling dynamics.

    In fact that was just a thoughtless question so I am wasting my time addressing it. If you really want to know start a thread.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  176. #976
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    Just not even a relevant comparison, percentage of overall weight of tyres not even close, unsprung to sprung weight ratio, weight of motor bike normally as much or more than the rider rather than the other way round with mountain biking. Power to weight ratio. No pedal action so no pedalling dynamics.

    In fact that was just a thoughtless question so I am wasting my time addressing it. If you really want to know start a thread.
    I'm sorry, but I don't see what any of these factors have to do with the ideal ratio of rim width the tire width. What makes bikes different? I have not followed this fad, but from what I understand, people run tubless and think they should have 18psi in a single ply tire. Then the tire rolls in corners and burps easy. So they get really wide rims. Then the sidewall if vertical and the tire has less compliance, so they run 15psi. Now we need special tires to provide a proper profile on 40mm rims and sidewalls wear out before the tread. (I wish I was exaggerating but I read a few pages of this thread)

    I am just skeptical because I have been riding a long time and seen many tends come and go. I have seen the majority of forum users endorse them, even when the trend completely reverses over the years. i.e. really high bars, to really low bars.

    And I wish people would not so easily dismiss the moto wold. Suspension forks sucked for about a decade because people thought it was not a "relevant comparison" so we had all these goofy linkages and elastomers other crap when really we could have just scaled down the technology which was already there. Same with brakes.

  177. #977
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Because in my case my 2.4" mountain bike tyre is not supporting 210 kg of 60 hp dirt bike at an average speed of 50 kmph.

    It is supporting a combined 107 kg of 0.5 hp (if I am dreaming) pedal mashing mountain biker at an average speed of 20 kmph.

    And, as you mentioned, people still insist on trying to run noodly, single ply tyres on 150-160mm travel bikes rather than accepting that they have made a huge weight saving with their carbon rim build anyway and riding proper tyres like the Apex Protection case, TCS Tough case or new Double Down case. Even worse they are trying to run low pressures whilst running tubes because some other forum lurker said that the Stans leaked through his sidewalls one time!!

    I have no idea how many plies Dunlop, Bridgestone or Metzeler use in their off road dirt bike tyres but I am guessing that it is lots more than on a mountain bike tyre, then there is whole larger chunk of rubber added to that. There really are just so many different variables that the comparison in this case really is basically a waste of time. It might be an interesting engineer geek out topic over a beer at the pub sometime but that is about it.

    It is pretty simple maths for a bicycle tyre at the moment and ENVE have summed it up in their recent rim/ wheel chart. Buy the width rim that you need for 90% of your riding based on the width of tyre you think you will be running. Also if you are trying to do everything with one bike then suck it up and buy a second set of wheels.

    This is a sensible chart, apply it to any wheel, not just carbon fibre, if you run tubes add some more air or you will pinch flat (and get into 2016 and go tubeless):

    Wide Rims?  Don't believe the hype...-m-series-wheel-tyre-weight-recommendations.jpg

    Good page here: Is wider always better? - ENVE Composites

    One also has to remember that this forum has quite a few 'riders' who have a 160mm travel bike with a 65º head angle, designed to be ridden down steep trails at a stupid fast speed, but they are running 170 mm forks and 2.5" tyres on 40mm wide rims because some thread said that is what all the cool kids are running and 90% of their riding is on almost flat, buffed single track that my granny could negotiate faster in her zimmer frame and then they are complaining about scuffing rims and poor steering and high rolling resistance (there is even one comedian who is trying to tell us that a 2.5" Kenda Nevegal is a great tyre!! But if he is happy riding his franken bike with his Nevegals then good on him). Or worse they have bought 35mm rims and are still running 2.1-2.2" tyres on them but have their suspension set ot 25% sag and wonder why the tyres and rims are taking a beating (read the Nox thread).

    Wider is not automatically better but slightly wider does being noticable benefits to a lot of riders who know how to sensibly combine riding style with bike, wheel (rim width) and tyre choice.

    Well this has been fun, if it was not snowing I would go for a ride. Hopefully everyone can head out for a ride and work out whether their rims are too skinny, too wide or just right.
    Last edited by AndrewBikeGuide; 02-03-2016 at 07:53 PM.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  178. #978
    Flappity flappity flap
    Reputation: Zowie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    2,590
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrewBikeGuide View Post
    Well this has been fun, if it was not snowing I would go for a ride. Hopefully everyone can head out for a ride and work out whether their rims are too skinny, too wide or just right.
    If you had 100mm rims and 4.8 tires, you wouldn't have any problems...

    Is that hype?

  179. #979
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    @Zowie

    Hilarious

    Then I will run into that other factor of mountain bike ownership which is that my wife refuses to acknowledge the truth of the "N+1" rule.

    Funny thing is that I have been trying to justify a fat bike but can't really be bothered to make a new longer rack for the storage aspect and I know, as a serial upgrader, it will turn into another "pimp my ride" exercise for a bike that is esentially doomed to disolve due to the salt treatment on the roads in winter.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  180. #980
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    48
    Thanks AndrewBikeG. It is pouring rain where I am at which is why I am here instead of testing my brand new Continental baron 2.4 projekt wonder tire. I have noticed that this Continental, and the Super Gravity tires they replaced, basically weight what old downhill tires did, such as the Kujo. Even a modern 2.5 DH dhf is only a bit heavier and most of that is probably the steel bead. For me, a thin wall tire just never feels right cornering and blasting over rocks although I wish I could find a light tire which did. With what modern 160mm travel bikes are capable of I think we just have to live with the weight regardless of what material and width our rims are.

    I thought of motorcycle tires because everything is a compromise and I wonder what the compromises are to a wide rim? The start in a MX race is super important so I know traction is a top priority. There is not much to pinch flat a tire on a groomed track so I think they run higher pressure to reduce roll over. So the goals of traction and reducing tire roll are there. I just was thinking there must be a downside. Weight is an obvious one but I don't know what else is. Cornering, sidewall compliance, the risk of destroying a rim, etc? Maybe none of this is applicable, but that is what I was getting at. Also if pro downhillers and enduro riders have a sponsor which produces wide rims, yet they do not use them, there must be a reason as these guys do test gear to find any advantage. There reasons may not apply to us, such as enduro guys can't replace their rims and they can almost always band an aluminum one into shape, but I would be curious what their reasons are.

    I also ask because I think tubeless setups are a driver for wide rims. For me, I run more air tubeless then I do tubed to keep from burping tires. Also the burps and completely blowing off tires have made me too scared to drop the pressure much. Maybe I am a hack though. I do not have thorns where I live, and with a heavy sidewall I don't get much for pinch flats anyway, so I am currently debating whether tubeless is a benefit for me. Maybe wide rims would solve all this but I am not sure. Would a traditional width tubeless design such as a UST Maxxis 823 rim be the most secure setup, or something wide? I have some Canfield rims which they claim are tubeless compatible with tape but I guess that applies to any rim. When I deflate them the beads come loose which is not giving me a good feeling. I will test though, with a full face helmet, and see.

    Here are my skinny rims in an obsolete diameter setup tubeless and waiting for some decent weather.


  181. #981
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    481
    Nice front tyre (and a really nice bike) I have been waiting for Continental to actually release them to someone other than the mountain bike press. It is what I want to run this season on my front wheel. I will be running a Trail King 2.4" Protection on the rear though.

    Truly an interesting discussion and I see your point now but the two disciplines are mechanically so different even if some of the issues/ condierations are the same. I don't think I ever worried once about burping or pinch flatting my tyres when I had a DR250 dirt bike. I agree that tyre construction is important and Maxxis has realised this with their DD case and Schwalbe has their system with stronger sidewalls but supple tyre crown under the tread (it is a pity their sticky rubber rolls so slowly and the knobs tear off in 2-3 weeks of riding). Apex does a similar thing for Conti even though is was designed to stop snake bite punctures and side wall slashes.

    Running tubeless with more air than when running tubes is outside my experience.

    I last used a tube five years ago shortly before I went tubeless on my DH bike for guiding in the park. In about 500 days of park riding I have had exactly three flats, one due to a nail after trail crew re-newed some wood work and two failed beads on a bad batch of Trail King 2.4" x 26" UST Protection tyres (the good one that are made in Germany) which Continental warrantied. Since getting rid of tubes I have consistantly run 3-5 psi less than I used to run with tubes. I am pretty heavy and do not have the greatest proprioception in my legs so my wheels and tyres get a hard time and I guess I have burped the rear tyre 2-3 times. That said when I am riding jumps trails I tend to run higher pressures (but still not that high for my weight compared to some riders) to reduce the chance of burping in berms and deforming the tyre when pressing into the take off ramp of jumps. I guess I would rather burp a tyre and walk rather than slide out on an off camber root or dusty off camber rock and take a full body fall on the chin. Each to their own on that decision cycle.

    I don't know the tech specs on the Canfield rims but I do know that they know what they are doing as far as riding goes (they are pretty regular riders in the bike park).

    I have run the silver Deemax (24mm inner?) for two seasons with no troubles, FR600s (24.9mm) for half a season with no trouble and then ENVE DH (23 mm inner) since then.

    On the trail I have 12 year old Mavic 521 Ceramics that hold tubeless well (hooked bead design/ 21 mm inner), Sun Ringle Charger Pro 26" (23 mm inner - hooked), XTR Trail M988 26" (21mm inner hooked UST), Light Bicycle 35 (29.5mm inner hookless) and ENVE M70/30 (25mm inner hookless) and I have not had any trouble with any of the wheels tubeless (other than slowly going flat when you don't ride them for 4 months in winter).

    The Charger Pros currently have Race King 2.2" Protections at 45 psi as they are on my pumptrack bike. I don't think I would trust them so much with a 2.4" tyre mounted to them.

    I run 22-24 psi on my ENVE M70/30 with most tyres, I found that the Mountain King 2.4" was pretty pressure sensitive actually and the sidewalls puncture (rock slies) too easily so I have stopped using them (although I really like them). Would I have asked for the M70/30 HV if they were available when I got my wheels, almost certainly but I am not complaining as they are awesome wheels.

    So looking at the that list I do not own any really wide rims (30mm +). I do know that I will always chose the 25mm+ inner width wheels over anything narrower. I can definitely feel the difference in tyre stability between the 21mm ish rim and the 25mm rim and it makes a difference to my riding and my confidence. I also appreciate being able to run 2-3 psi less and the extra traction that I gain as a result. But I ride black or double black trails most days following 25 year old bike ninjas who have super riding skills so I appreciate every little extra bit of traction that I can get (within reason) so I can avoid crashing too badly.

    I think somewhere between 25mm and 30mm is the magic number for the type of tyre I use and the riding that I enjoy. I can see a place for wider rims if one is using wider tyres such as those proposed for the new plus size. I will hold off judgement until I get to try one (probably at Crankworx Whistler this year) but at the moment I cannot see a weight versus benefit positive in going bigger than 2.4" so I am happy with my wheels.
    XTR Di2 :thumbsup:
    2018 Norco Sight C9.1
    2018 Norco Range C9.1
    #weareone #stagescycling #9point8ca #rideshimano #pocsports

  182. #982
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Ok, you want us to read all that?

  183. #983
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    48
    The Canfield rims are 23mm inner. They were half priced for the 26 set so I thought I would try them.

    Universal has the new baron in stock, at least in 26.

    Just a warning, if you run a 2.4 TK I think you will end up with a much larger rear tire (if you care about that). For my baron, after a day at 50psi, the casing is only 57mm. For reference the MK on the rear is measuring 60mm. Maybe after some time they will be the same width. But I also have a TK 2.2 and I think I remember it being almost exactly the same casing width as the MK 2.4. I do not have a TK 2.4 but I think they are huge.

    The MK on the rear might be a bit lighter duty then I need but it is what I had so I will try it and not drop the psi too low. I would like the projekt casing in the MK or TK for the rear. I think they might make this now, not sure. Also I would want the harder rubber. They both say black chili but the baron feels much softer to me so I think it would drag on the back but can't say for sure.

  184. #984
    craigsj
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by NWRyder View Post
    I wonder why MX bikes use 110mm tires on 2.15 inch rims? With all the time and money put in testing you would think they would realize how much better traction and cornering they could get with rims almost as wide as their tires.
    Taking those numbers at face value, a 110mm wire tire on a 55mm IW rim would require a 310mm b2b. that would yield a b2b/IW ratio of 5.64. The casing width/IW ratio is only 2:1.

    5.64:1 IS a wide rim ratio by MTB tire standards. On a 2.4" tire that would require a 28mm IW rim, pretty much exactly what is advocated for tires of that size.

  185. #985
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,872
    Not to steer this thread too far off but mx tires are an aple to oranges comparison imo. Put a rear mx tire in your hand and you will notice it is very rigid. Take a look @ the bead it has a serious step that places the rim deep in the bead channel - protects the rim / aids in bead locking?

  186. #986
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Thanks again Andrew for what you've added to v2016 of this discussion; I appreciate your attention to detail. One interesting thing that caught my attention on the Enve pressures chart is the significant difference between the recommended psi for M70 VH and M90. For the weight group of 180-200lbs. the recommendation is 7 PSI higher for the M90 wheels. The M90 are purpose built for "downhill riders and racers", and I think it's fair to assume a dual-ply casing in the model. The M70 HV are for "All-mountain gravity aficionados that appreciate human powered ascents as a means to an end"

    Note for readers: per Enve both the M70 HV and the M90 are internal width 25mm. 2016 spec.

  187. #987
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,787
    Quote Originally Posted by oldranger View Post
    Thanks again Andrew for what you've added to v2016 of this discussion; I appreciate your attention to detail. One interesting thing that caught my attention on the Enve pressures chart is the significant difference between the recommended psi for M70 VH and M90. For the weight group of 180-200lbs. the recommendation is 7 PSI higher for the M90 wheels. The M90 are purpose built for "downhill riders and racers", and I think it's fair to assume a dual-ply casing in the model. The M70 HV are for "All-mountain gravity aficionados that appreciate human powered ascents as a means to an end"

    Note for readers: per Enve both the M70 HV and the M90 are internal width 25mm. 2016 spec.

    You need to check facts. M90's are 25mm internal, M70 HV's are 31mm internal.

    M60 HV's are 26mm internal.

    Specs per 2016 Enve HV rims.

  188. #988
    J:
    Reputation: Deerhill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    5,128

    nice riding

    @ Oldranger, congrats on the first place 40+ Cat 1
    video=youtube;][/video]...

  189. #989
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Quote Originally Posted by Rick Draper View Post
    You need to check facts. M90's are 25mm internal, M70 HV's are 31mm internal.

    M60 HV's are 26mm internal.

    Specs per 2016 Enve HV rims.
    I did check the facts on the Enve website. But I guess I didn't dig deep enough. Their page here: M Series 70 Thirty / 70 Thirty HV - ENVE Composites doesn't indicate different 'Quick Specs' based on different selections in the option field.

    Rick - Where is the information on the detailed rim specs?

  190. #990
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,787
    Flick through the photo so at the top of the m70 page and you can find a photo showing the internal widths.

    M70 is 25mm internal M70 HV is 31mm internal.

  191. #991
    beater
    Reputation: evasive's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,505
    From today's Fort William pit randoms:

    "The Syndicate's New ENVE Rims
    Greg Minaar's mechanic, Jason Marsh, mentioned at Lourdes that they had a new rim system that helps to avoid punctures. He wouldn't confirm if they are 'un-puncturable', and after all, the Titanic was meant to be unsinkable and we know what happened there... We can't tell exactly what it is but it's some kind of tough plastic cover or rim-strip on a new wider rim which measures 44mm (external) and which we can guess will provide a hookless 34mm internal dimension."
    http://www.pinkbike.com/news/randoms...-cup-2016.html

  192. #992
    mtbr member
    Reputation: oldranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    162
    Hi Folks. OP here. Two years in to this thread that is about downhill tires - the fastest Downhill (DH) riders in the world are still running aluminum rims that are less than 500 grams and have a 25mm inner width. I know that wider rims are gaining popularity in trail riding and Enduro racing. I also see some tire manufacturing making trail (not DH casing) tires and marketing them for wider rims. I also recognize the Syndicate is a well funded exception to that 'rule'. But I still think this wide rim (30+mm inner width) is all marketing hype or only relevant to trail riding at lower speeds. If you want to debate trail riding and climbing ideals - start another thread. I don't have any expertise on climbing...that is my least favorite and least practices form of riding.

    To the general drifters by: the East Coast USA Downhill scene is still dominated by aluminum rims with inner widths in the normal range of 25mm - 28mm.

    P.S.: Aaron Gwin didn't appear slow on his EX471 rims at Mountain Creek Spring Classic Pro GRT last weekend. At 25mm inner width, aluminum, these can be found for about $100. Other Pro and Cat 1 riders that want to equip themselves with products them help them go fast are also choosing aluminum rims 25mm-28mm that can be bought for less than $80 per rim.

    Cheers. Hi Mountain Cycle Shawn :-)

  193. #993
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    993
    Quote Originally Posted by oldranger View Post
    Hi Folks. OP here. Two years in to this thread that is about downhill tires - the fastest Downhill (DH) riders in the world are still running aluminum rims that are less than 500 grams and have a 25mm inner width. I know that wider rims are gaining popularity in trail riding and Enduro racing. I also see some tire manufacturing making trail (not DH casing) tires and marketing them for wider rims. I also recognize the Syndicate is a well funded exception to that 'rule'. But I still think this wide rim (30+mm inner width) is all marketing hype or only relevant to trail riding at lower speeds. If you want to debate trail riding and climbing ideals - start another thread. I don't have any expertise on climbing...that is my least favorite and least practices form of riding.

    To the general drifters by: the East Coast USA Downhill scene is still dominated by aluminum rims with inner widths in the normal range of 25mm - 28mm.

    P.S.: Aaron Gwin didn't appear slow on his EX471 rims at Mountain Creek Spring Classic Pro GRT last weekend. At 25mm inner width, aluminum, these can be found for about $100. Other Pro and Cat 1 riders that want to equip themselves with products them help them go fast are also choosing aluminum rims 25mm-28mm that can be bought for less than $80 per rim.

    Cheers. Hi Mountain Cycle Shawn :-)
    So true! If wider was faster everyone would be racing fat bikes for downhill and enduro. There is a limit for everything.

  194. #994
    RAKC
    Reputation: tigris99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,172
    There's a huge difference in what were talking about and fat bikes.

    Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk

  195. #995
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by oldranger View Post
    If you want to debate trail riding and climbing ideals - start another thread. I don't have any expertise on climbing...that is my least favorite and least practices form of riding.

    Cheers. Hi Mountain Cycle Shawn :-)
    Hey what's up bra? So, this isn't the DH forum. And, you know how threads around here evolve. Plus, DH is such a small segment of the mountain bike population, especially the racing segment which you seem to talk a lot about. I don't want to DH and I'll never have a DH bike. So, as far as I'm concerned they could roll on pizza cutters. But for the rest of us, a good set of wide rims make riding faster, easier and safer. Stability is greatly increase in all situations, including at speeds into the 50s. Climbing is also greatly improved because of the lower pressures, bigger footprint and lack of tire squirm. In fact, I never get slip from the rear tire anymore, no matter how much weight I put on the front end. If I can't make a climb, it's because I run out of gearing and leg strength. If you have a trail bike, maybe wide rims would help you want to climb more. How much time have you spent on a trail bike with some good wide carbon rims?

  196. #996
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J-Ha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    211
    Before the thread gets all passionate again, I'll do my best to keep it light with a pic of a DH bike!

    I have wide rims (Derby) on my DHR, and have ridden them for a season and a half. Having been so impressed with them, I included a set on my new Jedi's build for 2016.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Wide Rims?  Don't believe the hype...-imgp9996_web.jpg  


  197. #997
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by J-Ha View Post
    Before the thread gets all passionate again, I'll do my best to keep it light with a pic of a DH bike!

    I have wide rims (Derby) on my DHR, and have ridden them for a season and a half. Having been so impressed with them, I included a set on my new Jedi's build for 2016.
    Oh Jesus, someone's gonna get a jammed up camel toe over this. Do you realize this?

  198. #998
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jazzanova's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,274
    Quote Originally Posted by J-Ha View Post
    Before the thread gets all passionate again, I'll do my best to keep it light with a pic of a DH bike!

    I have wide rims (Derby) on my DHR, and have ridden them for a season and a half. Having been so impressed with them, I included a set on my new Jedi's build for 2016.
    Are those Derby 35id?
    How is the thread on the Magic Mary? Is it a super gravity vertstar version?

  199. #999
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Mountain Cycle Shawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    12,739
    Quote Originally Posted by tigris99 View Post
    There's a huge difference in what were talking about and fat bikes.

    Sent from my XT1565 using Tapatalk
    Huge difference!

  200. #1000
    mtbr member
    Reputation: J-Ha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Mountain Cycle Shawn View Post
    Oh Jesus, someone's gonna get a jammed up camel toe over this. Do you realize this?
    Haha! I don't fully understand your comment, but I am chuckling all the same.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. rims....how wide is too wide?
    By toddre in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-29-2014, 01:04 PM
  2. Are my tires to wide for my rims?
    By Unicornz0 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 03-01-2012, 09:07 PM
  3. Who needs wide rims?
    By shiggy in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-14-2012, 05:48 AM
  4. Wide Rims
    By Jwind in forum All Mountain
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-24-2011, 08:28 AM
  5. Any wide rims available in EU
    By simen in forum Fat bikes
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-28-2011, 01:54 PM

Members who have read this thread: 20

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.