2020 XC Race Tires - Page 2- Mtbr.com
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 201 to 386 of 386
  1. #201
    B_H
    B_H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by Carioca_XC View Post
    Yeah, Vittorias are not light at all.
    I also found these weights a bit off, though.
    They are pretty much the same weight as my 2.25" Barzo (745g) and Mezcal (735g), which are XC-Trail (reinforced sidewalls).
    Yep, they are roughly 40 to 60g more than my previous sets. And a bit undersized as well but that wasn't a surprise.

  2. #202
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    529
    Ran a Kenda Saber SCT reinforced tire yesterday on a spare wheel doing the Back 40 loop. That 600g tire lasted 11 miles before slashing a sidewall on a section I've never had issues on. Another guy with me on Rekon EXO also flatted between tread blocks. Up here in NW Arkansas I don't see sub 700g tires being a good solution for racing unless you're packing a handful of plugs and CO2's. Back to "heavy" Vittorias for me...
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  3. #203
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkpowa View Post
    Ran a Kenda Saber SCT reinforced tire yesterday on a spare wheel doing the Back 40 loop. That 600g tire lasted 11 miles before slashing a sidewall on a section I've never had issues on. Another guy with me on Rekon EXO also flatted between tread blocks. Up here in NW Arkansas I don't see sub 700g tires being a good solution for racing unless you're packing a handful of plugs and CO2's. Back to "heavy" Vittorias for me...
    You are here too? My wife and I did the back 40 Last night at 5 pm. Did we pass you?

    I'm on Rekon Race Front and Aspen rear. As I had been testing them out for our last races of the season (Steep and climby) I have two laps of the back 40 on these tires.

    I usually ride on Forekasters out here. The forekaster front is better of course and I will probably race it in the future out here with the aspen rear. I just cant push as hard into the off camber turns as I can on the Rekon race of course.

    I Have raced the loop a lot and dont really have issues flatting. Lots of people I see (and they admit) ride into the bench cut instead of on the edge and end up slicing on the chipped limestone/flintrock. The average racer also rides between rocks for a smoothger line which is a recipe for disaster.

    Its worth noting that my wife is on 610 gram Rocket Rons F/R and has raced and ridden many laps with no issue. I really believe it comes down to riding style and line choice with a dab of luck And we carry a Dynaplug Kit to plug holes.


    Regarding the Recon race 2.25 front and Aspen rear. The speed is intoxicating. Sure I give up braking ability which takes some learning when slamming into a switchback mostly. Most of my downhill times are actually faster than they were on More capable tires because I pick up a little more speed in the flats and out of turns. I'm a convert for now. The recon race on teh front can be a bit of a wild ride at times (surprise loose turns where you arent leaning) but the speed of this combo and the high volume is great for me. they each are 58mm on 24mm internal wheels. For reference, rocket rons are 56mm and Nobby nic 2.35s are 60mm on these wheels.

  4. #204
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    You are here too? My wife and I did the back 40 Last night at 5 pm. Did we pass you?
    We did the back 40 CCW starting around 5:10, finished after dark with all the flats in our group. I live off Blowing Springs but the rest of these boys came to escape the craziness in south FL to hide in the woods for a bit.

    2020 XC Race Tires-screenshot.jpg
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  5. #205
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    184
    Another B40 rider here. I have cut so many tires on B40. I admit my line choices arenít great a lot of the time.

    My experience:
    - Schwable: great if you like to hike your bike, or brag about lightweight on forums.
    - Maxxis EXO: decent but I think the EXO casing is out-gunned. Have had a lot of nasty sidewall cuts
    - Conti Protection: zero sidewall cuts but I have cut the tread area many times. Also Contiís are pain to install.
    - Vittoria: only have about 500 miles on one set but so far pretty decent with 1 sidewall and 1 tread cut on the rear which I repaired with marine adhesive.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #206
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by tgoods View Post
    Another B40 rider here. I have cut so many tires on B40. I admit my line choices arenít great a lot of the time.

    My experience:
    - Schwable: great if you like to hike your bike, or brag about lightweight on forums.
    - Maxxis EXO: decent but I think the EXO casing is out-gunned. Have had a lot of nasty sidewall cuts
    - Conti Protection: zero sidewall cuts but I have cut the tread area many times. Also Contiís are pain to install.
    - Vittoria: only have about 500 miles on one set but so far pretty decent with 1 sidewall and 1 tread cut on the rear which I repaired with marine adhesive.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    In other words, all tires suck to some extent?

  7. #207
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by B_H View Post
    Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.

    Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.
    Card board is is 22-24 grams

    My new XC Race (Tan) Casing Peyotes Weigh 652/670 gram These have a distinctly lighter Tan sidewall than last years tires

    Last Years Mezcal XC race 671 g , Barzo XC Race 684 grams , Terreno XC race 690 Grams all 29 x 2,25

    Friends XC Trail Barzo 2.25 735 Grams / Barzo 2.35 735 grams

    I weighed these all personally on the same scale

  8. #208
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by B_H View Post
    Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.

    Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.
    Card Board Packing and band weigh 22-25 grams

    Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 684g 2019
    Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.25 TNT XC Trail casing 735g 2019
    Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.35 TNT XC Trail casing 735g 2019
    Vittoria Mezcal 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 671g 2019
    Vittoria Peyote 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 653g, 670g 2020 with lighter color tan sidewaal
    Vittoria Terreno 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 690

  9. #209
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    529
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    I usually ride on Forekasters out here. The forekaster front is better of course and I will probably race it in the future out here with the aspen rear. I just cant push as hard into the off camber turns as I can on the Rekon race of course.
    I think Forekaster/Aspen makes alot of sense for racing in NWA from the Maxxis catalogue. I'm settling in on Barzo/Mezcal which is roughly similar from the Vittoria catalogue. Good sized square front knobs and fast rolling rear hooks up good on these surfaces, enough loose stuff to make a less aggressive front tire be questionable.

    And someone else said it above, but yeah, all tires suck to some degree. Gotta pick your compromise. Though they're getting alot better...
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  10. #210
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by TDLover View Post
    In other words, all tires suck to some extent?
    Yep. In short Vittoria has been the best for me so far.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #211
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkpowa View Post
    We did the back 40 CCW starting around 5:10, finished after dark with all the flats in our group. I live off Blowing Springs but the rest of these boys came to escape the craziness in south FL to hide in the woods for a bit.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	screenshot.jpg 
Views:	133 
Size:	451.7 KB 
ID:	1319653
    Ha, wife and I started our CCW lap at 5:08!

    We did not want to be finishing in the Dark, so we got in a 2:01 lap.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #212
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    144
    Finally a wider Aspen! https://www.pinkbike.com/news/maxxis...aver-2020.html

    I've played around with basically every combination of maxxis tires over the last couple years, and also the Schwalbe racing ray/ralph combo. It's honestly a never-ending quest. My experience has generally lead me to choose faster rolling but wider tires for the types of racing and riding I do- Mostly backcountry endurance races in Spain/Italy/France.

    My new bike this year came with Vittoria Barzos in 2.25...I really love them! I honestly think they are the most versatile XC/Trail tire I've used. I think a 2.35 up front would make it even better at the cost of added weight. Second would probably be an Ikon 2.35 upfront and Ardent race 2.20 in back.

    I'm going to be playing with these setups this year.

    1. 2.25 Barzos TNT casing or maybe Barzo/Payote combo.
    2. 2.4 Aspen front/ rear I don't know...I wasn't happy with braking traction of 2.25 aspens...maybe rekon or rekon race?
    3. 2.35 Specialized Fasttrack/ground control combo in control casing

  13. #213
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    319
    I think barzo runs narrow and heavy. The 2.35 barzo I purchase for front was same volume as 2.25 rocket ron and 120 grams more. Also FYI all specialized tires are 2.3 not 2.35 but I believe they run big

  14. #214
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by dfishdesign View Post
    Finally a wider Aspen! https://www.pinkbike.com/news/maxxis...aver-2020.html

    I've played around with basically every combination of maxxis tires over the last couple years, and also the Schwalbe racing ray/ralph combo. It's honestly a never-ending quest. My experience has generally lead me to choose faster rolling but wider tires for the types of racing and riding I do- Mostly backcountry endurance races in Spain/Italy/France.

    My new bike this year came with Vittoria Barzos in 2.25...I really love them! I honestly think they are the most versatile XC/Trail tire I've used. I think a 2.35 up front would make it even better at the cost of added weight. Second would probably be an Ikon 2.35 upfront and Ardent race 2.20 in back.

    I'm going to be playing with these setups this year.

    1. 2.25 Barzos TNT casing or maybe Barzo/Payote combo.
    2. 2.4 Aspen front/ rear I don't know...I wasn't happy with braking traction of 2.25 aspens...maybe rekon or rekon race?
    3. 2.35 Specialized Fasttrack/ground control combo in control casing
    Barzo Weights

    2.25 56mm on 26mm rim XC Trail 735g XC Race 684g 2019 Model year
    2.35 58mm on 26mm rim XC Trail 735g attached pictures

    I really Like the Peyote over Mezcal on Hard Pack and small lose over Hard Pack
    2020 Peyote XC Race 653g 57mm wide on 26mm rim
    2019 Peyote XC race 671g 56mm wide on 26mm rim2020 XC Race Tires-barzo-2.35-xc-trail-735g.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-barzo-2.35-xc-trail-side.jpgClick image for larger version. 

Name:	Barzo 2.35 XC Trail 735g.jpg 
Views:	51 
Size:	166.1 KB 
ID:	1323509Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Barzo 2.35 XC Trail Side.jpg 
Views:	50 
Size:	121.1 KB 
ID:	1323511

  15. #215
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbrockenchain View Post
    I think barzo runs narrow and heavy. The 2.35 barzo I purchase for front was same volume as 2.25 rocket ron and 120 grams more. Also FYI all specialized tires are 2.3 not 2.35 but I believe they run big
    It might run narrow and heavy, I haven't weighed or measure it. I can tell you It seems to roll around the same speed as Ikons or Racing ray/ralph combo.
    Rear I find it has better traction/braking than:
    Ikon 2.2/Rekon 2.25/aspen 2.25/ardent race 2.2/racing ralph 2.25.

    Out front it feels very similar to an Ikon 2.35, less volume but similar traction. yet I feel more confident/faster on the Barzos than with the Ikon 2.35, backed up on strava descents. When It gets really chunky the extra volume of the Ikon might be appreciated.

    In my eyes, having gone through almost all of the Maxxis lineup and a couple of vairents of schwalbe I do think Barzos are a super versatile tire. It would be my choice for everyday training/racing tire if I wasn't trying to push 5w/kg and win races.

  16. #216
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    512
    Maxxis is finally releasing 2.4 WT versions of the Aspen and Recon Race. Pretty excited. I didn't mesh with the 2.35 Recon Race with a 30mm ID rim. I'll give it another chance now. But I'm more excited about the WT Aspen. I have some of the new pink Pepi inserts on the way too. I'm going to be dialed but with no fitness and no races!

  17. #217
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    270
    I've been riding AR 2.35/Aspen 2.25 on 19iw for the past 2 seasons and it was great. Switched to 25mm rims same AR2.35 with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the rear. Seams to have more traction in the rear.

    I am having trouble with the AR on the front that I did not have before. It works great in everything except loose over hard. It wanders and doesn't hook up anymore. AT about 185lbs running 15psi, I'm a little reluctant to run lower pressure.

    I have another Rekon Race 2.35 that I might try again up front. Didn't really like it the last time I tried it and can't see my self liking it again in loose over hard. Same with the Ikon.

    I've used a Forekaster in the past, which seemed like a great tire in everything except hard park.

    The Rekon looks promising, but it's either 2.25 or 2.4 WT, and the WT is heavy. I may try the Rekon 2.25/aspen 2.25 until the Aspen is gone.

    I've also thought about trying another brand, specifically the Barzo. Reviews seem to compare it to the AR/Forekaster with similar grip but faster rolling. Same claimed weight as the AR (745g) as well.

    Thoughts on a fast XC tire that hooks up well in loose over hard?

  18. #218
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by Ksanman View Post
    I've been riding AR 2.35/Aspen 2.25 on 19iw for the past 2 seasons and it was great. Switched to 25mm rims same AR2.35 with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the rear. Seams to have more traction in the rear.

    I am having trouble with the AR on the front that I did not have before. It works great in everything except loose over hard. It wanders and doesn't hook up anymore. AT about 185lbs running 15psi, I'm a little reluctant to run lower pressure.

    I have another Rekon Race 2.35 that I might try again up front. Didn't really like it the last time I tried it and can't see my self liking it again in loose over hard. Same with the Ikon.

    I've used a Forekaster in the past, which seemed like a great tire in everything except hard park.

    The Rekon looks promising, but it's either 2.25 or 2.4 WT, and the WT is heavy. I may try the Rekon 2.25/aspen 2.25 until the Aspen is gone.

    I've also thought about trying another brand, specifically the Barzo. Reviews seem to compare it to the AR/Forekaster with similar grip but faster rolling. Same claimed weight as the AR (745g) as well.

    Thoughts on a fast XC tire that hooks up well in loose over hard?


    We all have our go to Brand of Tire, take a Look at Vittoria XC Race Casing 2.25 Barzo 671g or Peyote 653g and Schwalbe Rocket Ron 2.25 LiteSkin 524 G or SnakeSkin 623g

    I personally found for small size lose over hard pack I prefer the Peyote to the Barzo as the Barzo squirms more on hard pack, And for Medium Size over Loose I go with the Rocket Ron over the Barzo also, albeit I have friends that Love the Barzo.

    These are actual weights of my tires.

    And Maxxis just released there 2.4 XC WT Rekon Race and Aspen !! for 25-30mm rims

    2020 XC Race Tires-max_wtxc_spec_618108.jpg

  19. #219
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    We all have our go to Brand of Tire, take a Look at Vittoria XC Race Casing 2.25 Barzo 671g or Peyote 653g and Schwalbe Rocket Ron 2.25 LiteSkin 524 G or SnakeSkin 623g

    I personally found for small size lose over hard pack I prefer the Peyote to the Barzo as the Barzo squirms more on hard pack, And for Medium Size over Loose I go with the Rocket Ron over the Barzo also, albeit I have friends that Love the Barzo.

    These are actual weights of my tires.

    And Maxxis just released there 2.4 XC WT Rekon Race and Aspen !! for 25-30mm rims

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	max_WTXC_spec_618108.jpg 
Views:	60 
Size:	143.3 KB 
ID:	1324235
    I'm looking for 2.35 ~ 60mm to match my rear tire. Smaller up front would be weird. Looks like Vittorias run small so rules them out. I run sidewall protection. Too many sidewall tears without it.

    Also, Maxxis has only announced WT XC tires. Release date is summer 2020, so still a few months out. I doubt they will be better on loose/loose over hard. Knobs aren't big enough to dig in.

  20. #220
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by Ksanman View Post
    I'm looking for 2.35 ~ 60mm to match my rear tire. Smaller up front would be weird. Looks like Vittorias run small so rules them out. I run sidewall protection. Too many sidewall tears without it.

    Also, Maxxis has only announced WT XC tires. Release date is summer 2020, so still a few months out. I doubt they will be better on loose/loose over hard. Knobs aren't big enough to dig in.
    On pinkbike Maxxis said they have them in stock already.
    Loose over hard is too broad a category. If you have really small material, pea gravel or smaller, like decomposed granite, over hard I think smaller knobs and volume can work really well. If you have bigger rocks over the hardpack I agree you need a meatier tread.

    I think siping really helps with smaller materials, which is why the Mezcal gets more grip than you would think.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  21. #221
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by euro-trash View Post
    On pinkbike Maxxis said they have them in stock already.
    Loose over hard is too broad a category. If you have really small material, pea gravel or smaller, like decomposed granite, over hard I think smaller knobs and volume can work really well. If you have bigger rocks over the hardpack I agree you need a meatier tread.

    I think siping really helps with smaller materials, which is why the Mezcal gets more grip than you would think.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    On pinkbike, Maxxis said the 27.5x2.6 Assegai is in stock, and the wt xc tires will be available in June/July. I verified this on their webstore.

    I've been waiting for the 2.4 Aspen for a while, because I think it will be great for technical xc races and races in the summer before everything gets blown out to hell.

    Where I live is an ancient lake bed, so there is every type of loose over hard here. It's different from where I race though, where I race is usually more hard pack or loose, vs loose over hard of all varieties, loose, and rare hardpack at the higher elevations before it becomes pixie dust.

  22. #222
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by Ksanman View Post
    On pinkbike, Maxxis said the 27.5x2.6 Assegai is in stock, and the wt xc tires will be available in June/July. I verified this on their webstore.

    I've been waiting for the 2.4 Aspen for a while, because I think it will be great for technical xc races and races in the summer before everything gets blown out to hell.

    Where I live is an ancient lake bed, so there is every type of loose over hard here. It's different from where I race though, where I race is usually more hard pack or loose, vs loose over hard of all varieties, loose, and rare hardpack at the higher elevations before it becomes pixie dust.
    Barzo 29 x 2.35 ETRO 57 measured 59mm on Narrow rim of my friend I think 21mm I

    Racing Ray or Racing Ralph 29 x 2.35 ETRO 60. maybe someone else has mounted these to have actual size ??

    Are these to race on or Daily Tires ? , Where do you ride that XC races need so must tire ? I'm just in Midwest so we don't have a need for that much tire here.

  23. #223
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    Barzo 29 x 2.35 ETRO 57 measured 59mm on Narrow rim of my friend I think 21mm I

    Racing Ray or Racing Ralph 29 x 2.35 ETRO 60. maybe someone else has mounted these to have actual size ??

    Are these to race on or Daily Tires ? , Where do you ride that XC races need so must tire ? I'm just in Midwest so we don't have a need for that much tire here.
    I live in Utah. I live in the extreme North and the terrain is not like the rest of northern Utah. More rocks, more loose, less maintained, more cows.

    The AR in exo has been great for racing and riding everywhere, but has 2000+ miles on it, the center tread is basically semi slick and side knobs are tearing off. I have many podiums with that tire. It just doesn't feel the same on the wider rim I have now. Or maybe I need to run even lower pressure. IDK, I thought 15psi was pushing it at 83kg.

    Barzo seemed like a good option from Vittoria, but I've seen people measuring them around 2.2, which would be weird considering I have a 2.35 on the rear.

    Forekaster is a go to tire I've used before. Great in the early spring and fall when it's wet. Never tried it in the dry though. I'm leaning towards brand loyalty by I might try my rekon race 2.35 again since the knobs are slightly taller than my worn AR.

  24. #224
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    116
    I currently run a Rekon Race 2.35 up front and an Aspen 2.2 in the back. It's great for hardpack, but my front struggles in loose over hard. Rekon Race is not advertised as a loose over hard tire though, while the Aspen is. Is it because the knobbies on the rekon race are taller? I don't get why it's a good hardpack tire but does not excel at loose over hard, assuming small sandy pebbles? Considering running Aspen front and rear.

  25. #225
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,173
    I have found the Aspen to be overall a better front tire than the Rekon Race. On the rear they are pretty similar, I would say initial grip is better with Aspen but Aspen give up grip quicker as it wears.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  26. #226
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Currently I am running Maxxis Rekon 2.25 front and Ikon 2.2 rear on 23mm id rims. As someone new to XC I am generally confused at Maxxis' line up of tires. In this video from MaxxisTiresUSA the guy states that the Ikon has more Grip than both the Aspen and Rekon Race.

    Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?

  27. #227
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,173
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Currently I am running Maxxis Rekon 2.25 front and Ikon 2.2 rear on 23mm id rims. As someone new to XC I am generally confused at Maxxis' line up of tires. In this video from MaxxisTiresUSA the guy states that the Ikon has more Grip than both the Aspen and Rekon Race.

    Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?
    Tires tend to be pretty personal and terrain specific. I think the Ikon is a great XC front tire, other equally competent XC riders absolutely hate it. Neither of us is wrong we just like a different feel from our tires.

    For front XC tires:
    Aspen, Ikon, Rekon, Ardent Race, Forecaster. Are your typical choices, ordered from lowest grip and fastest to highest grip and slowest. But within that range there is a lot of overlap and it comes down to personal preference.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  28. #228
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by vtsteevo View Post
    I currently run a Rekon Race 2.35 up front and an Aspen 2.2 in the back. It's great for hardpack, but my front struggles in loose over hard. Rekon Race is not advertised as a loose over hard tire though, while the Aspen is. Is it because the knobbies on the rekon race are taller? I don't get why it's a good hardpack tire but does not excel at loose over hard, assuming small sandy pebbles? Considering running Aspen front and rear.
    I assume the RR is not as good over loose over hard because the knobs are closer together, so there is more contact with the ground. There is no where for those loose pebbles to go.

    I've traded between the Rekon Race 2.35, Ardent Race 2.35, and an Aspen 2.25 in front the past few months paired with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the back. Even though the Aspen is slightly worn, I prefer it in the front over the other tires. Seems to have way more grip and cornering confidence in all conditions except for mud. Although, the Aspen does better in the mud than the RR because it sheds better. I've really hated the AR this year. That's probably from riding demo bikes with DHF and Forekasters.

    Once the 2.4 Aspen becomes available, I'll probably go Aspen 2.4 front until late summer when everything is blown out and moon dust.

    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?
    Before the Rekon, the Ardent was Maxxis standard trail tire, and the Ardent Race was in between the Ardent and Ikon. AR is faster than the Ardent, Slower than the Ikon, but moer grip than the Ikon, debatable grip compared to the Ardent.

    From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.

  29. #229
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    138
    Quote Originally Posted by Ksanman View Post
    From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.
    Same, the jump from 2.25 Rekon to 2.4 Rekon is too great. Would love a lighter maxxspeed 2.35-2.4 Rekon to slot in as faster than a 2.3 DHF, but grippier than the full-on XC options.

  30. #230
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Ksanman View Post
    Before the Rekon, the Ardent was Maxxis standard trail tire, and the Ardent Race was in between the Ardent and Ikon. AR is faster than the Ardent, Slower than the Ikon, but moer grip than the Ikon, debatable grip compared to the Ardent.

    From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.
    Thank you for the explanation. IĎll skip the Ardent and will try out the faster options as I get a little more confidence in the corners and get my pressure dialed in. IĎve been running them quite low 20psi in the front 22 in the back (IĎm 180lbs). The Rekon feels like on rails on hardpack and in the forest. The Ikon in 2.2 seems quite narrow on the back but grips really well. IĎve ordered one in 2.35 for the front and an Aspen in 2.25. Will try out the Aspen on the back as itĎs only available in dualcompound. I had the Forekaster in 2.35 on the front during winter and the Rekon on the back. Didnít like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? IĎm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.

  31. #231
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Didnít like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? IĎm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.
    All of those sound reasonable to me. Some other options: Bontrager tires are made by Maxxis so look at the XR3 and XR4 in Team Issue casing. They updated the designs last year and they look really good.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  32. #232
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Interesting. I didn't know that. Had originally XR1 front/rear on my Procaliber. Didn't like those tires at all. High volume is nice. But I lost grip on hardpack and washed out hard. Didn't even have time to blink. To which tire would the XR3 and XR4 be comparable? The XR3 looks like a higher knobbed Maxxis Ikon in my opinion. Maybe more like a thighter packed forekaster? XR4 looks much burlier than any of the xc maxxis tires.

  33. #233
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    804
    One question for anyone who has experience with both Schwalbe (Rocket Ron/Racing Ray) and Maxxis (Rekon/Rekon Race). I finally convinced myself to try this so hyped Maxxis tires and after 15+ years on Schwalbe (with short excursion to Conti), I landed on Maxxis Rekon race (rear) and Rekon (front) for this year.
    As tires are different then what I'm used to, and to shorten "try and test" period, what sort of pressure are you guys running? I went for first ride with new tires yesterday, with same settings as I had previously with Schwalbe (27psi rear, 23psi front), and front felt sort of ok, while rear was running smoothly but had absolutely no grip in corners (it actually felt cool drifting on gravel , but that's not really something I'm looking for). I let some air out on middle of ride, and measured when I came back home so I did other half of the ride with something like 24psi on rear and 20psi on front and it felt much better.
    I'm 86kg (i guess 189lbs) together with bike (75kg me and 11kg bike), and tires are Rekon Race 29x2.25 TR EXO (rear), and Rekon 29.2.25 TR EXO 3C MaxxSpeed (front)
    Primoz

  34. #234
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Another XC race tire question. Does anyone have any experience with the new 2020 Continental Race King Protection as a rear tire? I know it's the fastest on the metal drum test but how does it compare to the Maxxis Aspen, Rekon Race, new Racing Ralph, or Renegade as a rear tire on the trails? A friend of mine got a new Race King Protection yesterday and he said it weighed 585 grams on the scale. He hasn't ridden it yet. That's a great weight so my only question is how does it perform when cornering or climbing compared to the other speedy XC race tires I mentioned. Thanks in advance for any replies.

  35. #235
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    512
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Interesting. I didn't know that. Had originally XR1 front/rear on my Procaliber. Didn't like those tires at all. High volume is nice. But I lost grip on hardpack and washed out hard. Didn't even have time to blink. To which tire would the XR3 and XR4 be comparable? The XR3 looks like a higher knobbed Maxxis Ikon in my opinion. Maybe more like a thighter packed forekaster? XR4 looks much burlier than any of the xc maxxis tires.
    The XR3 is between a recon and recon race but with larger side knobs. I have one but haven't thrown it on yet, so I can't tell you anything more. The middle tread is siped.

    I think siping on mountain bike tires works really well but they wear a bit faster, and once the siping is worn down the grip deteriorates rapidly. Same applies to the Aspen and Forekaster.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

  36. #236
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,173
    Quote Originally Posted by euro-trash View Post

    I think siping on mountain bike tires works really well but they wear a bit faster, and once the siping is worn down the grip deteriorates rapidly. Same applies to the Aspen and Forekaster.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Generally, I use tires with sipes in wet and cold conditions. I find that tires with big solid lugs without sipes to be really slippery on wet rocks and roots. But those same tires work really well when it is hot and dry. A perfect example of this is the Ardent Race, I find them absolutely terrifying in the wet, but in dry and loose they are a good tire.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  37. #237
    If you have to ask...
    Reputation: miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by primoz View Post
    I went for first ride with new tires yesterday, with same settings as I had previously with Schwalbe (27psi rear, 23psi front),
    Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).
    It's 7:09 California time

  38. #238
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by miles View Post
    Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).
    What id rim are you running? I'm about the same weight and wouldn't want to go lower than 22 psi in the back on my 22.5mm id rims...

  39. #239
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by primoz View Post
    I let some air out on middle of ride, and measured when I came back home so I did other half of the ride with something like 24psi on rear and 20psi on front and it felt much better.
    77kg+13kg here.
    20-22psi front and 22-24psi rear.
    Leaning to the lower end with 2.3" tyres and the higher end with 2.1's.
    i25 rims.

  40. #240
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by miles View Post
    Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).
    I'm the same weight as you and cant run near those pressures. I have and it does not end well. Maybe your Pump reads much different.

    Those PSIs result in Snake bites and triple pinch flats in the tire itself if I run them and ride down hill at the speeds I am capable of. I know because I have started rides with that PSI and ruined the tire or needed lots of Dynaplugs fairly soon into the ride.

    I can run 21/24 on Schwalbe 2.35s. Anything less is a rim strike. If I actually braked going down hill I would protect the tires, but I wouldnt be using my strengths.

    Our enduro ( i just started riding while my XC bike is broken) has 36mm ID wheels with 2.35 Magic Mary at 17 psi front which snake bit This past weekend. I needed a megaplug and a regular dynaplug at the rim to get going. I was full send into a mild rocky G-out. I've had to bump psi to 19 front with even the 36mm ID and a 160 fork.


    This is using a Topeak Smart Gauge and a Blackburn MTB pump which read identical.

  41. #241
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,173
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    I'm the same weight as you and cant run near those pressures. I have and it does not end well. Maybe your Pump reads much different.

    This is using a Topeak Smart Gauge and a Blackburn MTB pump which read identical.
    Nice that those two read equal. I have probably 1/2 a dozen high-end pressure gauges and all of them read differently and significantly differently at low pressure. One gauges 17psi is 23psi on a different one.

    I have also found that the calibration on different gauges has drifted over the years. I have one gauge that 20psi use to be unridable hard, and now 20psi is double pinch flat soft. (And no I have not gotten fatter).
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  42. #242
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rupps5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    516
    Since gauges clog up with sealant after a while, I consider them a disposable item. The Meiser 0-30psi gauges I have found to be the best quality vs cost. They also come in different psi ranges if 30 is not enough for you. I weigh 143 and run 17f/23r with either maxxis or Victoria tires.



    Evolution Training Cycles

  43. #243
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by LMN View Post
    Nice that those two read equal. I have probably 1/2 a dozen high-end pressure gauges and all of them read differently and significantly differently at low pressure. One gauges 17psi is 23psi on a different one.

    I have also found that the calibration on different gauges has drifted over the years. I have one gauge that 20psi use to be unridable hard, and now 20psi is double pinch flat soft. (And no I have not gotten fatter).
    I have found these two to be the most accurate possible (blackburn Chamber HV) and Topeak D2.


    On the other hand:
    The topeaks pumps (including Joe Blow) change over time and read "low" causing you to have to pump up to a higher number as you have stated with your older pump. They have two at my bike shop for self service and they each read differently.

    The sks air checker gets clogged QUICKLY and is a sporadic Piece of crap anyway with 1.5 psi variance when checked back-to-back against itself.

  44. #244
    If you have to ask...
    Reputation: miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    I use the Meisner gauges mentioned above. Iíve got two In the pressure range for MTB tires and they both consistently read the same, and within margin of error on the gauge on my compressor. My Silca floor pumpís gauge is comically inaccurate, but consistent to itself so I can set the needle at the correct pressure and itíll be in the ballpark.

    But yes, on my Schwalbe RR tires on Enve 525 rims I am happy at sub-20 psi.
    It's 7:09 California time

  45. #245
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    586
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    Another XC race tire question. Does anyone have any experience with the new 2020 Continental Race King Protection as a rear tire? I know it's the fastest on the metal drum test but how does it compare to the Maxxis Aspen, Rekon Race, new Racing Ralph, or Renegade as a rear tire on the trails? A friend of mine got a new Race King Protection yesterday and he said it weighed 585 grams on the scale. He hasn't ridden it yet. That's a great weight so my only question is how does it perform when cornering or climbing compared to the other speedy XC race tires I mentioned. Thanks in advance for any replies.
    I use them front/rear-they are a bit undersized to a previous gen Racing Ralph 2.25. They hook up fine for me but definitely not a trail tire, fast XC only.

  46. #246
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    804
    Quote Originally Posted by miles View Post
    Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).
    Honestly no, I'm not 100% sure, as it could be my gauge on air compressor is wrong. It might show a bit different values, but they are still somehow in range of what gauge on floor pump shows. But they are constant, even if wrong, so I can use these numbers to have same pressure every time.
    But even if they would be wrong, I doubt they would be for 50% wrong. And personally, I can't imagine running Racing Ray at 1.1bar (17psi) on front. If I go under 1.5bar (22psi) I have feeling like tire would be folding under me when going into corner.
    But it could also be that it matters what rims you are using. I have some old DT Swiss xr1501 rims, which are probably way too narrow for today's standards (I think something around 22mm inner width), so maybe that's what matters too, and maybe with wider rims it would work with so low pressure.
    Anyway... I have been playing a bit during last few days, and I'm currently on 18psi front and 22/23psi rear and it feels quite nice already
    Primoz

  47. #247
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    55
    has anyone tried the schwabe Rock Razor 2.35 on the rear for loose over hard (larger rock). txs

  48. #248
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,049
    Quote Originally Posted by trysixty View Post
    has anyone tried the schwabe Rock Razor 2.35 on the rear for loose over hard (larger rock). txs
    Yes and it's awesome and oh so fast. I ran several and really liked them. However, since I've went to a more aggressive tire.
    Have a new RR 29er on the shelf I'd sell for $55 shipped in the USA.


    Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

  49. #249
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Thank you for the explanation. IĎll skip the Ardent and will try out the faster options as I get a little more confidence in the corners and get my pressure dialed in. IĎve been running them quite low 20psi in the front 22 in the back (IĎm 180lbs). The Rekon feels like on rails on hardpack and in the forest. The Ikon in 2.2 seems quite narrow on the back but grips really well. IĎve ordered one in 2.35 for the front and an Aspen in 2.25. Will try out the Aspen on the back as itĎs only available in dualcompound. I had the Forekaster in 2.35 on the front during winter and the Rekon on the back. Didnít like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? IĎm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.
    The Forekaster is spikier and works well in mud. The Rekon has a better compound and works better on hard slick surfaces like rocks and roots. I like it as a rear, but agree it's not ideal on slimy, muddy climbs.

    The Rekon 2.6 is a great tire. I used to run an Ardent Race on the front in 2.35, but my 2.6 Rekons are all within a few grams of the 2.35 AR. With a stickier compound, tons of volume for the rough trails here in PA, and better mud performance, it's a big improvement in grip. I don't notice it being any slower, at least on the front. The center knobs are widely spaced, but extremely ramped.

  50. #250
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ucdengboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    264
    I just took receipt of a Racing Ralph 29X2.25 Rear and 29X2.35 Racing Ray Front today, both Snakeskin. I do not race, ride for fun and fitness, nothing too technical, no chair lift days ever, some gravel road/double wide, some single track, on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon 110mm F/R travel bike.

    I wanted a fast rolling tire as I mostly ride solo, never stop pedaling, put a preference on sustained uphill Strava segments, and longer loops in excess of 1 hour.

    I hope they serve me well and plan to get some use out of them this season. I should find my kitchen scale this evening to weight them prior to install if I can. Center portion of tire does feel a little thin.

  51. #251
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by ucdengboss View Post
    I just took receipt of a Racing Ralph 29X2.25 Rear and 29X2.35 Racing Ray Front today, both Snakeskin. I do not race, ride for fun and fitness, nothing too technical, no chair lift days ever, some gravel road/double wide, some single track, on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon 110mm F/R travel bike.

    I wanted a fast rolling tire as I mostly ride solo, never stop pedaling, put a preference on sustained uphill Strava segments, and longer loops in excess of 1 hour.

    I hope they serve me well and plan to get some use out of them this season. I should find my kitchen scale this evening to weight them prior to install if I can. Center portion of tire does feel a little thin.
    Let us know the weights of those tires. I'm especially interested in the weight of the 2.35 Racing Ray.

  52. #252
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    Let us know the weights of those tires. I'm especially interested in the weight of the 2.35 Racing Ray.
    I just received mine in a shipment of 15 tires that has been quarantined for months.

    2.35x29 Snakeskin Racing Ray
    701 Grams

  53. #253
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ucdengboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    264
    See photos.

    Racing Ray 29X2.35 700g

    Racing Ralph 29X2.25 654g.

    To be honest I dont even know the claimed weights.

    Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

  54. #254
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bicyclelist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    468

    2.35 Schwable Racing Ray and Racing Ralph Weights

    29 x 2.35 - Racing Ray - actual 717g - claimed - 770g
    29 x 2.35 - Racing Ralph - actual - 702g - claimed - 770g

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_20200501_105534.jpg

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_20200501_105548-2-.jpg

  55. #255
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    2.35x29 Snakeskin Racing Ray
    701 Grams
    That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.

  56. #256
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.
    i'll give you measurements once installed on Roval Control SLs. On the eyeball test, it is within 1 mm of the large volume NoNo, and the tread looks wider. NoNos measure 60.x mm.

    Surprisingly this batch of 4 2.35 NoNos range from 770g - 853g! I'll post all weights soon. The entire shipment of 15 tires were hung up for months.

    Customs also accidentally threw a random Truck offroad LED light in the box during their search. Someone is going to be pissed!

  57. #257
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    239
    Isn't anyone here which use the Pirelli Scorpion H and M lite? I use them and they are durable, light and grippy. 2.20 version weights 640 and 660gr

  58. #258
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.

  59. #259
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,615
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.
    I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.

    Personally, it looks like I'll be switching back to Vittoria again. I've been riding Ikon 2.35/Rekon 2.25 front and rear, and, well, I just can't make them work for me and my local "soil", aka decomposed granite. Had two losses of the front end on relatively benign corners lately that left me with some pretty nasty road rash and some bibs in questionable condition. The tires aren't in that bad of shape and I was running pressures that should have yielded good grip.
    Death from Below.

  60. #260
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.
    620g for mine.
    Went on my WTB Freq Team i25 rims without issues.

  61. #261
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.

    Personally, it looks like I'll be switching back to Vittoria again. I've been riding Ikon 2.35/Rekon 2.25 front and rear, and, well, I just can't make them work for me and my local "soil", aka decomposed granite. Had two losses of the front end on relatively benign corners lately that left me with some pretty nasty road rash and some bibs in questionable condition. The tires aren't in that bad of shape and I was running pressures that should have yielded good grip.
    I'll measure mine, they've never been higher that 25psi, but have been on since March 12th.
    I'll also measure the 2.35 FastTrak Grids that are on the i23 rims.

  62. #262
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    55
    Received 2x new S-Works Renegade 29x2.3 rated at 575g.

    One was 567g and the other was 620g...that's quite a difference. I had to double check that it was actually the same tire. Sent it back, awaiting replacement.

    Fairly easy to mount but the bead diameter is almost the same diameter as the rim base, so it's pretty snug. Took a few days to seal as there were some pourus sections of the sidewall.

    Measured 2.28" wide on 23mm rims after a few days of riding the one I kept, which is the same as the day I mounted them. 2020 XC Race Tires-20200429_141948.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-20200429_141931.jpg

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  63. #263
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by oliver37 View Post
    Received 2x new S-Works Renegade 29x2.3 rated at 575g.

    One was 567g and the other was 620g...that's quite a difference. I had to double check that it was actually the same tire. Sent it back, awaiting replacement.

    Fairly easy to mount but the bead diameter is almost the same diameter as the rim base, so it's pretty snug. Took a few days to seal as there were some pourus sections of the sidewall.

    Measured 2.28" wide on 23mm rims after a few days of riding the one I kept, which is the same as the day I mounted them.
    That heavy one looks to have thicker sidewalls the way the rubber band sits?

  64. #264
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
    FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
    FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"

  65. #265
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    That heavy one looks to have thicker sidewalls the way the rubber band sits?
    Yeah, it may have. The replacement S-Works Renegade just showed up and it weighed 553g at about 2.24" after mounting.

    I am replacing Maxxis Aspens, which are not what I would consider heavy tires, and this one is 100g lighter than the Aspen 29x2.25!2020 XC Race Tires-20200502_183521.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-20200502_181520.jpg

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  66. #266
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
    FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
    FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"
    Interesting that the Grid was larger. Too bad I find the Grid casing super stiff.

  67. #267
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbrockenchain View Post
    Interesting that the Grid was larger. Too bad I find the Grid casing super stiff.
    My winter tyres on the Anthem are Butcher and Purgatory Grids and they feel more compliant than those damn FastTrak Grids.

    I run 20psi front and 22psi rear on the Renegade/FastTrak Controls and 17f/19r on the FastTrak Grids and the Controls still feel more compliant.

  68. #268
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    144
    Quote Originally Posted by oliver37 View Post
    Yeah, it may have. The replacement S-Works Renegade just showed up and it weighed 553g at about 2.24" after mounting.

    I am replacing Maxxis Aspens, which are not what I would consider heavy tires, and this one is 100g lighter than the Aspen 29x2.25!Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200502_183521.jpg 
Views:	77 
Size:	86.0 KB 
ID:	1329411Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200502_181520.jpg 
Views:	72 
Size:	94.2 KB 
ID:	1329413

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    Iīd be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? Iīm thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.

  69. #269
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    I have not ridden the Renegades that I just mounted yet, but I definitely prefer Fast Traks to Aspens. The FTs are a little more supple and seem to carry more speed over bumpy terrain. Cornering grip is similar.

    The Aspens are also completely useless after about about 200 miles on dry technical standing climbs. You basically have to sit down to get as much weight as possible on the rear wheel to get any traction.

  70. #270
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by dfishdesign View Post
    Iīd be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? Iīm thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.
    Sure thing. I have only two or three rides on the front Renegade so far (rear was still Aspen), as I just mounted up the rear last night. I couldn't help but notice that the Renegade sidewalls are thin and supple and it feels like the front tire rolls over rocks better. But that could be the placebo effect.

    I like the profile of the Renegades. It's very round, so as I transition from leaning one way to leaning over the other way, there are no noticeable changes in grip or cornering attitude. Tires with sharp shoulders make me feel like I'm balancing on a knife edge when leaned over and give me the wobbles as I "climb" the edge of the tire. That is personal preference though; some people like to feel where that shoulder is and lean on it.

    I was not smart enough to take any pictures of my Aspens before I removed them, but here is my Renegade and an Aspen picture I found online. Who knows if rim sizes are the same but you can kind of see what I'm talking about.

    I'll have some real feedback over the next couple days.2020 XC Race Tires-maxxis-aspen.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-20200503_093310.jpg

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  71. #271
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.
    Just remeasured and they came in at around 2.26-2.27 (some readings were 2.26 and others were 2.27 so probably 2.265 lol).

    This is at 30psi with 25 ID rims. I plan to ride the front at 23psi and rear at 25psi.

  72. #272
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    I think the Renegade and FastTrak on the rear roll similarly, but the Renegade has better braking and hardpack climbing performance.
    Under brakes the FastTrak will drift a little more in a corner (which I like), but the Renegade drifts more than the more rubbery grip of the Ikons.
    The FastTrak definitely has better sideknobs for front use.

    The Ikons are going to replace the barely worn FastTrack Grid's on the rigid single speed as the pressures I have to go down to to get some compliance are too sketchy for cornering support.

  73. #273
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ucdengboss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    264
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.
    Measured 2.25 at 28psi. Don't know my rim width it is whatever came stock on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon.

    They have been on for 3 days with one ride yesterday for 1hr 20minutes.

    Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

  74. #274
    If you have to ask...
    Reputation: miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by JasperGr View Post
    Isn't anyone here which use the Pirelli Scorpion H and M lite? I use them and they are durable, light and grippy. 2.20 version weights 640 and 660gr

    I've been very happy with the Pirellis here in SoCal.
    It's 7:09 California time

  75. #275
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,615
    Quote Originally Posted by miles View Post
    I've been very happy with the Pirellis here in SoCal.
    Measurements?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  76. #276
    If you have to ask...
    Reputation: miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Measurements?

    Labeled 2.2. Measures 2.3Ē (68mm) on an Enve 525 at 21psi.
    It's 7:09 California time

  77. #277
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    512
    2.4 XR3 on a 30mm id.
    After 2 days it measures 2.41 at 18 psi.
    The sideknobs appear to protect the sidewalls.

    Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
    Last edited by euro-trash; 05-05-2020 at 11:05 AM.

  78. #278
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,615
    Quote Originally Posted by miles View Post
    Labeled 2.2. Measures 2.3Ē (68mm) on an Enve 525 at 21psi.
    Which tire was it, exactly? H or M?

    Sorry for all of the questions...
    Death from Below.

  79. #279
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    239
    I will measure my Pirelli tires this afternoon

  80. #280
    If you have to ask...
    Reputation: miles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Which tire was it, exactly? H or M?

    Sorry for all of the questions...

    No, I should have been more clear. I am running a pair of the Pirelli Scorpion H (for Hard terrain). Here in Southern California the ground is extremely hard.
    It's 7:09 California time

  81. #281
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    239
    I run pirelli M Lite 2.2 on the front and H Lite 2.2 on the rear. Both come in at 660. 30mm id rims gr.

  82. #282
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by dfishdesign View Post
    Iīd be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? Iīm thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.
    Just rode the Renegade for the first time as a front tire. I am honestly shocked at how much traction this tire has given the small side knobs. I would say grip was every bit as good as Aspens and near the end of my ride, I was cornering pretty aggressively with no washouts. Trail conditions were medium - soil was moist but not muddy. A couple hardpack sections. I expect that these tires will really shine in hardpack conditions which is what they are designed for. But I would not hesitation to ride them in anything but really wet to muddy conditions.

  83. #283
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    239
    Agree with that but they are not durable and losing grip very fast as they wear

  84. #284
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    75
    Anyone considering trying out the new Rene Herse Fleecer Ridge when it is available end of the month?

    https://bikepacking.com/news/rene-he...er-ridge-tire/

    I have run the 38mm version of this tire for cyclocross and it is awesome. They roll quite fast and grip amazingly. This new size should be 650-670 grams in the Endurance Plus casing which is their heaviest and most protected version. They are not cheap unfortunately but I may give them a try as Rene Herse tires typically measure a bit larger than the stated size from my experience with the Bon Jon Pass, Snoqualmie Pass, and Steilacoom variants.

  85. #285
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    55
    Quote Originally Posted by oliver37 View Post
    Sure thing. I have only two or three rides on the front Renegade so far (rear was still Aspen), as I just mounted up the rear last night. I couldn't help but notice that the Renegade sidewalls are thin and supple and it feels like the front tire rolls over rocks better. But that could be the placebo effect.

    I like the profile of the Renegades. It's very round, so as I transition from leaning one way to leaning over the other way, there are no noticeable changes in grip or cornering attitude. Tires with sharp shoulders make me feel like I'm balancing on a knife edge when leaned over and give me the wobbles as I "climb" the edge of the tire. That is personal preference though; some people like to feel where that shoulder is and lean on it.

    I was not smart enough to take any pictures of my Aspens before I removed them, but here is my Renegade and an Aspen picture I found online. Who knows if rim sizes are the same but you can kind of see what I'm talking about.

    I'll have some real feedback over the next couple days.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Maxxis-Aspen.jpg 
Views:	58 
Size:	74.9 KB 
ID:	1329559Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20200503_093310.jpg 
Views:	61 
Size:	39.6 KB 
ID:	1329563

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
    After a few more rides on dust and small rocks over hardpack, I'd be lying if I told you I can feel any major differences between the S-Works Renegades and the Aspens. If I didn't know I changed the tires, I may not have noticed.

    Circumstantially, I was able to climb an impossibly steep section yesterday that in no way did I think would work out, but the tire hooked up and I made it through. I've never climbed that section before though.

    If there is a detectable improvement, it might be a slight rolling resistance improvement on asphalt at high speeds, but there are so many variables at play I'm not sure it's really much different.

    For all intents and purposes they measure the same and feel the same to me at a savings of about 170g combined vs the Aspens.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  86. #286
    B_H
    B_H is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    57
    My Race King Bernstein & Cross King Bernstein 2.2 combo arrived few days ago. Weights were close to specs, 581 & 585 grams. Rubber compound seems to be nice and works well on dry and hardpack soil. Downside is that they're quite a bit undersized, 51mm on my 23mm id spare wheels and the air volume is also on a low side. Maybe they'll stretch a bit still but they're a bit narrow for my liking on a HT.

  87. #287
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    116
    You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!

    Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?

    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
    FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
    FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"

  88. #288
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,615
    No, S-Works are a much thinner casing with basically no additional protective layers.

    I'd say something between the Control and GRID casing is equivalent to Maxxis EXO casing.
    Death from Below.

  89. #289
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    I try to avoid the S-Works casing because it is so thin. I find the Control casing to be pretty supple - more supple than my Aspen Exo. I have ridden fast trak controls in the past, and they have been plenty durable. I did pinch flat once from running too low of pressure and hitting a serious square edge rock but that was partly my fault.

    More rides with the Renegade on the front and I continue to be impressed by the front end grip. I am not holding back at all now diving into turns because I know it will hold. Plus it's more supple that the Aspen which means it also doesn't get those little washouts that occur from the tire bouncing in bumpy corners.

  90. #290
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by vtsteevo View Post
    You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!

    Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?
    I think in general the Maxxis compound has the edge in grip over Gripton, but the Control casing is more supple (and lighter) than EXO.
    Grid is heavier duty than EXO, but I'd hesitate to run it unless it was REALLY rocky or the area was known for sidewall cuts.

    S-Works are pure race tyres with bugger all protection.

    I've never tried the Rekon Race or Aspen to see what the rolling resistance is like as the price is just too high.

    Over here a Maxxis Ikon EXO/3C/TR is about $100nz.
    Specialized Fasttrak/Renegade Control/2Bliss/Gripton is about $60nz.

  91. #291
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by vtsteevo View Post
    You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!

    Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?
    Most of my aspens are 645 with a couple around 680. It took the onslaught of riding the Back 40 for hundreds of miles, so thereís not much to convince me of going to a specialized tire even if you paid me.

    You know, my wife never once flatted a regular specialized ground control racing, but Iíve never ridden my home trails with other fellow racers on specialized casings where we werenít stopping for flats. This is all Bro Science, because there are tons of epics in our race series on Fast Tracks, and most other bikes in Cat 1 are running an Aspen these days. My buddy flatted his renegade on a pretty tame course here, but it did eventually seal.

    Have you tried the recon race 2.25 rear?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  92. #292
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    FJSnoozer are you talking about S-Works casings, Control or Grid when speaking about all these flats? I've ridden some pretty gnarly rocky Missouri trails on Fast Trak controls with no problems, except when I under pressured the tire, although I did flat an Aspen Exo on a mild Indiana trail running 25psi which is actually 1 psi above my norm so go figure.... I've also flatted on a Race King Protection. The most durable tire I have ridden is actually a Bontrager XR1 Expert, but I hated the tire overall and would trade one flat a year to avoid that tire.

  93. #293
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,088
    I ran S-works Renegades with inserts all last season, and they survived several 5-7 hour races. I was definitely very conscious of my lines with them though!

  94. #294
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    55
    Just logged a 4 hour, 6,000ft ride on the S-Worls Renegades. I probably have about 200 miles on them and they're now holding air for the whole ride (small wins).

    I've covered all of the surfaces that I ride on by now including large, sharp gravel. So far so good from a puncture perspective.

    I also like the way that they break away when losing grip, especially the front. I feel comfortable exploring the limit since the front tire will slide a little bit without washing out completely, which is enough warning for me to get my sh*t together in time. It's fun. The Aspens (and Thunder Burts before those) felt like they broke away more suddenly, and as a result I wasn't as comfortable near the limit.





    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk

  95. #295
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Nice ride!
    I agree with you on the loosing grip part. I've overcooked a few turns on my Renegades and I can feel the front end giving away a bit and then grab again. Very confident tires. I"d say I like them as a front tire better than Fast Traks. Both Fast Traks and Aspens grip really will too but they don't give as much warning when they lose grip.

  96. #296
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MXIV424's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    205
    Mitas Scylla TD 29x2.45

    Specs for measured width: 30psi on 25mm rim

    Never ran Mitas but got a batch to try out this season. I was going to try this as a front tire but since thereís nothing going on Iím gonna run it as a rear on the trail bike.

    2020 XC Race Tires-9b9bafb3-2434-461e-82b3-026dbd0fcf73.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-13e66c03-e83f-4ddd-9b0b-8c3013657bad.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-25daf1c5-6290-4c5b-9475-465bb9c7b44e.jpg

  97. #297
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652
    Here are some Schwalbe weights. Got these within the last couple of weeks. Claimed weights are from the Schwalbe main (euro/German) site.

    PS - i'm no racer lol, but I do love light tires!


    Racing Ray 29x2.35 EVO Addix SpeedGrip Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)




    Racing Ralph 29x2.35 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)




    Rocket Ron 29x2.25 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 610g)


    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  98. #298
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Posts
    41
    I've been using a set of standard Fast Trak 2.3s (60TPI and no Control casing) for the past few weeks after coming off a set of Ikon 2.2 3C/EXO (120 TPI). So far, I've been impressed with the Fast Traks for the terrain here in TX. The Fast Traks seem to roll a little faster and with the slightly larger volume, I can run a lower PSI (21/22 vs 23/24) without getting squirming. The Ikons do seem to have a little better cornering grip...at least, it's more consistent. I'm likely going to upgrade this set to a front Fast Trak Control 2.3 and a Renegade Control 2.3 in the rear. This should save me some rolling weight, offer enough sidewall protection and still be more supple than the EXO for the roots and rocks.

  99. #299
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,074
    I've been running the Rekon/Aspen EXO 2.25 Combo on my hardtail for a few weeks. I'm a big fan. The Aspen doesn't have the greatest breaking traction and you have to be cognizant of your climbing technique but it rolls really fast and corners well. I love the Rekon on the front. I've had one on there for over a year now and see no reason to try something else.

  100. #300
    mtbr member
    Reputation: craign's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by csteven71 View Post
    I've been running the Rekon/Aspen EXO 2.25 Combo on my hardtail for a few weeks. I'm a big fan. The Aspen doesn't have the greatest breaking traction and you have to be cognizant of your climbing technique but it rolls really fast and corners well. I love the Rekon on the front. I've had one on there for over a year now and see no reason to try something else.
    I'm running the same combo and have a similar impression. Super happy with it.

  101. #301
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by Fraction View Post
    I've been using a set of standard Fast Trak 2.3s (60TPI and no Control casing) for the past few weeks after coming off a set of Ikon 2.2 3C/EXO (120 TPI). So far, I've been impressed with the Fast Traks for the terrain here in TX. The Fast Traks seem to roll a little faster and with the slightly larger volume, I can run a lower PSI (21/22 vs 23/24) without getting squirming. The Ikons do seem to have a little better cornering grip...at least, it's more consistent. I'm likely going to upgrade this set to a front Fast Trak Control 2.3 and a Renegade Control 2.3 in the rear. This should save me some rolling weight, offer enough sidewall protection and still be more supple than the EXO for the roots and rocks.
    The Ikon's are draggier and grippier due to the rubber compound.
    The Renegade has a little more braking grip than the FastTrak but still rolls really well.
    The Ikon's are on my rigid single speed now and the Renegade/FastTrak combo are on the Anthem.

    I run them both at 18f/20r psi for training and racing.
    20f/22r on the Anthem if it's a really rocky trail or I feel more sidewall support might be needed.

    Control is good, Grid is too stiff.

  102. #302
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    500 miles in and the Aspen on my rear wheel is close to done. Center chevron knobs are about 1/2 the height they were when new and a couple have torn off. It rolls even faster than when new - but braking and climbing traction have become useless. With our trails transitioning from hero dirt to hardpack this time of year, these Aspens will need to be replaced.

    The front Aspen on the front is going strong after about the same amount of time. Front end grip is really good though if they do brake loose, it's pretty unforgiving.

    Overall, these were very good tires. Better than the Bontragers and Race Kings I've had and nearly as good as the Renegade I am running now.

  103. #303
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    32
    Got my new (to me) bike and I have a funny tire setup. Thought I'd crowd source some opinions on what direction I might go.

    I'm in the NW Washington, and do adventure racing, which often involves 4+ hours on the bike with a mix of gravel and singletrack. I also love to hit the trails and just ride fast. Often wet, rooty, rocky, muddy. Lots of elevation.

    My TB3 came with 29X2.3 Aggressor in the back and 2.9X2.3 DHR II in the front. Super fun going down but obviously not really the tires for me. I also was given an unused pair of 29X2.2 Ardent Races.

    I'd love to just run the Ardent Races but it sounds like they don't do great in the wet? Maybe they'd be fine for the next couple of months but then that might be it. Thinking about selling them and going for something like a Barzo or Forecaster?

    My old hardtail has 29x2.25 Ardents. It did fine but I descended super slow anyway due to geometry, crazy long stem, no dropper, etc. Now I'm descending fast with these enduro tires and I'm not sure how much is bike vs. tire.

    Anyway, I'd be curious if folks had any suggestions based on my specific situation.

  104. #304
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    You might as well throw the ARs on and see how they do. Itís not like mounting them again will hurt the resale of already used tires.

    I am liking a 2.35 Ardent Race rear and 2.6 Rekon front for wet/gnarly XC riding, or just hammering our fast trail miles solo or with other XC racers.

  105. #305
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    32
    Quote Originally Posted by Autoxfil View Post
    You might as well throw the ARs on and see how they do. Itís not like mounting them again will hurt the resale of already used tires.

    I am liking a 2.35 Ardent Race rear and 2.6 Rekon front for wet/gnarly XC riding, or just hammering our fast trail miles solo or with other XC racers.
    Sorry, I had a typo. I meant to say the ARs were unused. Fixed in my OP now.

    Appreciate your two cents though.

  106. #306
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OttaCee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    197
    With the 2020 Race season pretty much blown up for the year, spent alot of time trying out tire combos. My standard was always Forekaster front and rear Oct-April, the AR/Aspen May-September.

    Rekon (2.25)/Rekon (2.25) - Master of nothing. For every positive about this setup (good rolling, very tough casing, great on loose/hard) it has its larger set of negative (not confident in wet, grip limited unless pushed, lots of wear after only 200-300 miles)

    Rekon (2.25)/Ikon 3C (2.25) - The biggest upgrade from the above setup was the speed from the Ikon. Almost intoxicating how much faster the Ikon rolled. But once things got damp the Rekon up front needed to be replaced.

    Ardent Race (2.35)/Ikon 3C (2.25) - Damn loved everything about this setup. AR bites better the Rekon. Set many PRs in this setup, doesnt feel fast but wow its moves and provide lots of confidence at high speed.

    Ardent Race (2.35)/Aspen (2.25) - This setup pretty much tells me the AR is the right front tire. Aspen rolls a bit faster but has bit of less grip than the Ikon. Once things get wet, Aspen just doesnt cut it for me. For some reason the Aspen 2.25 measures wider than the Ikon 2.25 and the comfort is much better. Casing isnt perfect, have 2 tire cuts in the thread. Flip of the coin which of the last two I continue riding this year.

  107. #307
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by OttaCee View Post

    Ardent Race (2.35)/Aspen (2.25) - This setup pretty much tells me the AR is the right front tire. Aspen rolls a bit faster but has bit of less grip than the Ikon. Once things get wet, Aspen just doesnt cut it for me. For some reason the Aspen 2.25 measures wider than the Ikon 2.25 and the comfort is much better. Casing isnt perfect, have 2 tire cuts in the thread. Flip of the coin which of the last two I continue riding this year.
    Iíve done the same thing. Your last stop is to try the recon race 2.25. itís intoxicatingly fast and the side knobs provide more saving grace if you really lean the bike in corners. The recon race 2.25 has high volume like the Aspen. It brakes better and is better for a hard charging rider.

    Pick up a forekaster to play around with as well.


    This year I tried:
    Recon race 25 / Aspen 25 (oh so fast)
    Forekaster 35 / Recon Race 25 (my pick!) I can be fast and still have all the fun I want.

    I am still going to try out a recon race front and rear for certain races and times of the year.

    In the past I have run and raced
    Ikon 35 / Aspen 25. (Fast and volume)
    Forekaster/forekaster 35 ( HIGH grip, buzzy on pavement. Silly how well it does in wet races. Not the best for total mud fest.)
    Forekaster/ Aspen (fast and grip, aspens donít brake for shit, they skip and

    My rigid hardtail currently has:
    Forekaster 35/ ikon 35 (volume is fantastic for hardtail) though it usually has an Aspen rear.

    I found the AR to have poor transition knobs when I rode it and proceeded to clean and return it. I would much rather run an IKON 35 front, but its basically the same weight as a Forekaster which has far more grip. Iíve owned 20 of these tires and the were all 735-745g.

    forekasters 2.35 have a low volume and achieve their width with their side knobs
    Ikon 2.35 are extremely high and are 2.35 at the casing alone. They have much larger knobs than the ikon 2.25.

    My conditions are hardpack Clay and varying degrees of loose over hard rocks on rock. Lots of bare limestone. We go from slick and snotty to blown out dust bowl in a matter of days after each rain.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  108. #308
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    Iíve owned 20 of these tires and the were all 735-745g.
    I just got a wider wheelset and bought 2 Ikons in 2.35". One is 700 the other 710g. I am running the Ikon in the front with a Rekon Race in 2.35" in the back (this one is 730-740g though). I really like this combo. It's fast, high volume and the weight is pretty competitive in my mind. I haven't pushed the Ikon to it's limit but am eager to get a hang of it this season. I still got a Forekaster from this winter in the bikecave somewhere and was wondering if the AR would be something in between those two tires (Forekaster and Ikon). Can you comment on that? The only downside I see with the Ardent Race is it's damn heavy...

  109. #309
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    I just got a wider wheelset and bought 2 Ikons in 2.35". One is 700 the other 710g. I am running the Ikon in the front with a Rekon Race in 2.35" in the back (this one is 730-740g though). I really like this combo. It's fast, high volume and the weight is pretty competitive in my mind. I haven't pushed the Ikon to it's limit but am eager to get a hang of it this season. I still got a Forekaster from this winter in the bikecave somewhere and was wondering if the AR would be something in between those two tires (Forekaster and Ikon). Can you comment on that? The only downside I see with the Ardent Race is it's damn heavy...
    I have a pair of Ikon and Ardent Race here, both 29x2.35 EXO. They are 773g for the Ikon, and 813g for the Ardent Race. I have a pair of 2.6" Rekons... 814g and 835g.

    There's no clear speed/traction order with the Ikon/Ardent Race/Rekon/Forekaster because they all do different things well.

    The Forekaster is the best of the bunch in mud, by a long shot. Probably loose powdery dirt, too. It's also the slowest rolling by a lot, but if you're racing in slick conditions, I still think it's worth putting on the front for sure. It's also a killer fall leaf tire.

    The Rekon is the only one that is widely available in MaxxTerra. The Ikon has a couple big sizes, but that's it. The Rekon knobs are very fast - I'd say possibly faster than the AR, certainly not appreciably slower - and it's a much grippier compound. That makes it an awesome tire for me.

    The Ardent race is a lot like an Ikon with sharper edges. It does a little better than the Ikon in slick stuff, but it's certainly not halfway between an Ikon and Forekaster - if the Ikon is a "1" in the wet and the FK is a "5", the AR is a "2" at best. I'd give the Rekon a 3. In hardpack and loose over hard, the Ardent Race bites very well. I've done some dry races with an AR front/Ikon rear, and it rolled well and had awesome grip.

  110. #310
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    48
    So I am in dilemma between Aspen and Rekon race, next month i have 110km marathon race and i want fast rear tyre, the course is not hard 40km singletrack, 35 fireroads and 30km tarmac, hardpack and loose overhard, couple of technical sections and puddles with mud, roots and rocks also. Which tyre is better in wet spots and mud?

  111. #311
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarhead View Post
    So I am in dilemma between Aspen and Rekon race, next month i have 110km marathon race and i want fast rear tyre, the course is not hard 40km singletrack, 35 fireroads and 30km tarmac, hardpack and loose overhard, couple of technical sections and puddles with mud, roots and rocks also. Which tyre is better in wet spots and mud?
    If it's just a few spots, don't worry about it. I prefer the Aspens, but the tires perform very similar. You're fine either way.

  112. #312
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652
    Quote Originally Posted by ucdengboss View Post
    Measured 2.25 at 28psi. Don't know my rim width it is whatever came stock on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon.

    They have been on for 3 days with one ride yesterday for 1hr 20minutes.

    Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk
    29x2.35 Ray, @ 19psi on a 26mm internal rim. This is after about 3 weeks. Measurement shown is casing width.


    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  113. #313
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by B_H View Post
    Yep, they are roughly 40 to 60g more than my previous sets. And a bit undersized as well but that wasn't a surprise.
    I just mounted a set of 29x2.35Ē Barzo/Mezcal, both XC-trail casing. They feel pretty stiff, more like a 60TPI EXO than a 120 TPI EXO

    Barzo is 749g. Mezcal is 730. Both measured up at 2.23Ē on a 25mm rim. The casing is just a smidge wider than the knobs on both tires. I like big tires and Iím not impressed with the size/weight ratio, but Iíll see how they ride.

    Iím running the Barzo with a Tubilito S-Tubo spare tube for a test ride tomorrow, just to make sure itís not going to fail in five minutes if I ever need it. Itís 46g, which is half the weight of the sealant I would normally run, which is nuts!

  114. #314
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    I got a nice long ride with lots of super techy wet singletrack, a little fast stuff, plenty of dirt road and a little pavement. It was a good test ride for the Barzo/Mezcal. They had plumped up to 2.3Ē overnight.

    Thereís palpable drag on pavement. Itís not like a full trail tire, and I assume itís mostly the sharp edges of the Barzo. Thereís no ramping on the leading edges of the Barzo knobs, which is going to slow them down on pavement.

    Dirt roads felt pretty quick. Not nearly as free rolling as a Burt/Ralph combo, but tons of grip and they moved along well.

    Wet roots and rocks were great. Not quite as good as a pair of 2.6 Rekons in MaxxTerra, but very close. The siped graphene feels much more like MaxxTerra than MaxxSpeed on the slick stuff. They slide when itís really nasty, but in a fairly gummy, catchable way. The MaxxSpeed tires always feel like they shoot out instantly on me.

    The mud traction of the Mezcal is about what I expected - not great, but enough for just about any XC conditions. The Barzo was really good, kinda like a Forekaster. Itís better than a Rekon in actual mud for sure. Not unlike a Nobby Nic.

    Overall they seem like they will be an excellent winter/wet XC setup. I donít know that Iíd use them on a dry course with much pavement or smooth dirt. I have some Aspens on the slow boat that I may never get (itís been well over a month from BikeInn), but Iím hoping they will be my dry-conditions tires.

    I really love the 2.25Ē LS Ralph (old version) front and 2.1Ē SS TB rear for lots of dirt/pavement. But I donít trust the sidewalls for a rocky PA XC race. Maybe if the Aspens donít show up Iíll do a Peyote/Mezcal combo? Or Peyote/Peyote? Mezcal/Mezcal?

  115. #315
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    184
    I would enjoy hearing how the Peyote rides compared to the Barzo/Mezcal if anyone has experience?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  116. #316
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by Autoxfil View Post
    I got a nice long ride with lots of super techy wet singletrack, a little fast stuff, plenty of dirt road and a little pavement. It was a good test ride for the Barzo/Mezcal. They had plumped up to 2.3Ē overnight.

    Thereís palpable drag on pavement. Itís not like a full trail tire, and I assume itís mostly the sharp edges of the Barzo. Thereís no ramping on the leading edges of the Barzo knobs, which is going to slow them down on pavement.

    Dirt roads felt pretty quick. Not nearly as free rolling as a Burt/Ralph combo, but tons of grip and they moved along well.

    Wet roots and rocks were great. Not quite as good as a pair of 2.6 Rekons in MaxxTerra, but very close. The siped graphene feels much more like MaxxTerra than MaxxSpeed on the slick stuff. They slide when itís really nasty, but in a fairly gummy, catchable way. The MaxxSpeed tires always feel like they shoot out instantly on me.

    The mud traction of the Mezcal is about what I expected - not great, but enough for just about any XC conditions. The Barzo was really good, kinda like a Forekaster. Itís better than a Rekon in actual mud for sure. Not unlike a Nobby Nic.

    Overall they seem like they will be an excellent winter/wet XC setup. I donít know that Iíd use them on a dry course with much pavement or smooth dirt. I have some Aspens on the slow boat that I may never get (itís been well over a month from BikeInn), but Iím hoping they will be my dry-conditions tires.

    I really love the 2.25Ē LS Ralph (old version) front and 2.1Ē SS TB rear for lots of dirt/pavement. But I donít trust the sidewalls for a rocky PA XC race. Maybe if the Aspens donít show up Iíll do a Peyote/Mezcal combo? Or Peyote/Peyote? Mezcal/Mezcal?
    Thanks for sharing this. I'm not a racer but a high mileage (10,000+ annually) watt sensitive rider whose typical riding is well described by your "much pavement or smooth dirt" comment (much pavement doesn't mean road bike!). Than said have been a big fan of RaRa/RoRo tires too and currently trying a 2.35 Barzo/2.25 Peyote combo. So far my impressions pretty match yours in that the Vittoria's are a bit slower than the Schwalbe's but OK and much faster than the Ardent Race tires that came on my Pivot test mule. A couple of negatives on the Peyote are it measures out an OK 2.22in. at the carcass but only 2.12in. max tread width on what I'd consider an appropriate sized 25mm ID rim so lots of sidewall exposure and is wearing pretty fast (looks 50% gone after 400 mi.). Traction is better than I expected and as I said earlier speed is OK. I also have a Mezcal I'll be putting on when the Peyote's traction starts to fade so will report back on what I think.
    Mole

    tgoods
    I would enjoy hearing how the Peyote rides compared to the Barzo/Mezcal if anyone has experience?

  117. #317
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Was quite happy with the FastTrak/Renegade combo at a dry(ish) short track XC race on a CX track.
    Same combo this weekend, but it's going to be MUCH wetter and MUCH slipperier
    I've also upgraded to a FiT/CTD damper in the Fox fork

  118. #318
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,049
    Guys, between the 2.6 Rekon 3c & the 2.35 Barzo, which is preferable for a front trail tire on a 31mm ID front wheel?


    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  119. #319
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    TL;DNR: Barzo for softer conditions, Rekon for rockier and rootier trails. Both are very nice for what they are. But they are quite different.

    Detailed analysis:
    I have both. They are very different. Both are undersized and probably wonít quite measure up to spec on an i31. Depending on pressure and temp and the exact tire you get, about 2.3 for the Barzo or 2.5 for the Rekon.

    The Rekon is a stickier compound, but not by a ton. Itís obviously much higher volume and itís a thinner, more supple casing. Mine weigh 815-830g. Itís an incredible tire for all-conditions rough-trail mileage covering at about 16psi, where it just soaks up trail chatter. And in wet conditions on hard surfaces like rocks and roots, the big size and siped lugs works very well.

    The Barzo has very sharp-edged lugs that also provide good traction in the wet, much more so than the Rekon in soft conditions. It feels slower on pavement and I bet the smaller size and thicker casing is slower all around, but maybe not. Iím going to do a roll-down test but I bet the Ikon/Rekon and Barzo/Mezcal combos are not going to be measurably different.

    So.... if you have any concern about actual soft wet mud, the Barzo is a clear winner. If you have a lot of rocks and roots and like that high volume ride, the Rekon is excellent, but the Barzo works better on hard stuff than the Rekon does in mud.

    That said, I could see the Barzo packing up more easily than the Rekon, but we donít have much sticky mud around here.

    I have concerns that the Barzo is going to lose some of that grip as the super sharp edges wear off. The Rekon relies more on wide spacing and ramped knobs, which maintain effectiveness as it wears. This may be unfounded, but Iím mostly saving my Barzo for any wet races this summer. Iíll certainly throw them on as winter XC tires, where they will deal with slick over hard and frost heave better than the Rekon.

    For now the Rekon is my go-to everyday tire that I wouldnít hesitate to use in a long race, especially a bumpy one, where I think the volume makes a marked difference in fatigue incurred.

  120. #320
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Autoxfil View Post
    TL;DNR: Barzo for softer conditions, Rekon for rockier and rootier trails. Both are very nice for what they are. But they are quite different.

    Detailed analysis:
    I have both. They are very different. Both are undersized and probably wonít quite measure up to spec on an i31. Depending on pressure and temp and the exact tire you get, about 2.3 for the Barzo or 2.5 for the Rekon.

    The Rekon is a stickier compound, but not by a ton. Itís obviously much higher volume and itís a thinner, more supple casing. Mine weigh 815-830g. Itís an incredible tire for all-conditions rough-trail mileage covering at about 16psi, where it just soaks up trail chatter. And in wet conditions on hard surfaces like rocks and roots, the big size and siped lugs works very well.

    The Barzo has very sharp-edged lugs that also provide good traction in the wet, much more so than the Rekon in soft conditions. It feels slower on pavement and I bet the smaller size and thicker casing is slower all around, but maybe not. Iím going to do a roll-down test but I bet the Ikon/Rekon and Barzo/Mezcal combos are not going to be measurably different.

    So.... if you have any concern about actual soft wet mud, the Barzo is a clear winner. If you have a lot of rocks and roots and like that high volume ride, the Rekon is excellent, but the Barzo works better on hard stuff than the Rekon does in mud.

    That said, I could see the Barzo packing up more easily than the Rekon, but we donít have much sticky mud around here.

    I have concerns that the Barzo is going to lose some of that grip as the super sharp edges wear off. The Rekon relies more on wide spacing and ramped knobs, which maintain effectiveness as it wears. This may be unfounded, but Iím mostly saving my Barzo for any wet races this summer. Iíll certainly throw them on as winter XC tires, where they will deal with slick over hard and frost heave better than the Rekon.

    For now the Rekon is my go-to everyday tire that I wouldnít hesitate to use in a long race, especially a bumpy one, where I think the volume makes a marked difference in fatigue incurred.
    That was incredibly helpful. Rekon it is.

    Thanks so much.

  121. #321
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Freshly mounted tan sidewall Fast Trak measured 2.28 width at 35psi and weigh 650g. Will measure width again after letting it sit at 35psi for a day or two. 25ID rim.

  122. #322
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    319
    Quote Originally Posted by LCW View Post
    Here are some Schwalbe weights. Got these within the last couple of weeks. Claimed weights are from the Schwalbe main (euro/German) site.

    PS - i'm no racer lol, but I do love light tires!


    Racing Ray 29x2.35 EVO Addix SpeedGrip Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)




    Racing Ralph 29x2.35 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)




    Rocket Ron 29x2.25 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 610g)

    Just look back on this post...curious what combo you are running. I just thru on nobby nic 2.25 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 rear. Pretty decent volume...in fact near identical to 2.35 Barzo and much lighter

  123. #323
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652
    Quote Originally Posted by Unbrockenchain View Post
    Just look back on this post...curious what combo you are running. I just thru on nobby nic 2.25 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 rear. Pretty decent volume...in fact near identical to 2.35 Barzo and much lighter
    Running the Ray 2.35 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 in the back. Didn't like the Ralph rear as much - felt slower than the Ron. May try another Ron (but in SpeedGrip aka blue stripe) in front.


    Measured after a couple weeks. Width shown is casing. Mounted to Race Face Next SL rims 26mm internal width.

    Racing Ray 29x2.35 @ 19 psi

    2.29Ē / 58.2 mm




    Rocket Ron 29x2.25 @ 23 psi

    2.256Ē / 57.3 mm


    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  124. #324
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    319
    Thanks for reply. Hey is there much difference in Speed vs Speedgrip? May have to replace my rear Ron Speed with a Speedgrip. The Ron sure rolls nicely!!

  125. #325
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652
    I havenít compared them back to back on the same end of the bike.

    Speed (red) is a harder compound. More durable and faster rolling. Supposedly same grip as old pacestar but a bit faster rolling.

    SpeedGrip (blue) is softer and grippier but still rolls well. Supposedly grip of old trailstar with speed of old pacestar.

    This is according to Schwalbe. Not sure I truly believe their improvements over their old compounds although durability does seem better overall.

    The new Racing Ray is meant as a front tire and comes only in SpeedGrip blue, and new Racing Ralph meant as a rear tire only comes in Speed red.

    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  126. #326
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by LCW View Post
    Running the Ray 2.35 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 in the back. Didn't like the Ralph rear as much - felt slower than the Ron. May try another Ron (but in SpeedGrip aka blue stripe) in front.


    Measured after a couple weeks. Width shown is casing. Mounted to Race Face Next SL rims 26mm internal width.

    Racing Ray 29x2.35 @ 19 psi

    2.29Ē / 58.2 mm




    Rocket Ron 29x2.25 @ 23 psi

    2.256Ē / 57.3 mm

    Interesting looking how different the side knobs are on these two tires. Contact angle and knob shape of the Ray look good for penetrating softer terrain but do they squirm on harder surfaces?
    Mole

  127. #327
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    Interesting looking how different the side knobs are on these two tires. Contact angle and knob shape of the Ray look good for penetrating softer terrain but do they squirm on harder surfaces?
    Mole
    I havenít tried a Ron on front but the Ray at first took some getting used as it provides really quick turn in. Pretty sure the side knobs are part of the reason as you observed.

    I will be trying a Ron on the front sometime soon and will see which one I like better.

    Havenít noticed any squirming or strange handling on hardpack with the Ray.

    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  128. #328
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,652
    Just dropped off by UPS... Ron 29x2.25 SS SpeedGrip.

    Another Schwalbe below advertised! Can this be? Lol

    Claimed 610g. This one is 597.


    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  129. #329
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    Freshly mounted tan sidewall Fast Trak measured 2.28 width at 35psi and weigh 650g. Will measure width again after letting it sit at 35psi for a day or two. 25ID rim.
    Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.

  130. #330
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.
    I am not sure. But a Specialized rider care agent told me the tan sidewall 2bliss ready Fast Trak is basically identical to last year's 2Bliss ready Fast Trak, just with different color sidewalls. So I suspect that the new Fast Trak Controls are a newer version that is replacing the standard 2bliss ready.

    I do have some new Control Renegades and the compound does feel different. It's softer with almost a "wet" tacky feeling whereas the tan Fast Trak feels harder and dryer.

  131. #331
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    I am not sure. But a Specialized rider care agent told me the tan sidewall 2bliss ready Fast Trak is basically identical to last year's 2Bliss ready Fast Trak, just with different color sidewalls. So I suspect that the new Fast Trak Controls are a newer version that is replacing the standard 2bliss ready.

    I do have some new Control Renegades and the compound does feel different. It's softer with almost a "wet" tacky feeling whereas the tan Fast Trak feels harder and dryer.
    I have the newer 2.3 Fast Trak Control front and 2.3 Renegade Control rear and love them for Summer/Early Fall riding in my area. After the leaves fall, I'll need to switch out the Renegade.

  132. #332
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    I have the newer 2.3 Fast Trak Control front and 2.3 Renegade Control rear and love them for Summer/Early Fall riding in my area. After the leaves fall, I'll need to switch out the Renegade.
    I really love the Renegades. Will probably run them front and rear when the Fast Trak wears out in about a year. They are big volume too. After a few weeks, my Renegades measure out to 2.33, which is pretty nice for a 657gram tire.

  133. #333
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,813
    2020 XC Race Tires-002.jpg

    This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
    Mole

  134. #334
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Was that a rear tire? I can rarely find a rear tire that holds up well past 500-600 miles.

  135. #335
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,546
    Our last batch of RoRo 2.25s were also just under 600 grams in snakeskin which is great! She also has these paired with a RaRay 2.35 front which was 700.

    The 2.35 nobby nicks were a a mess of consistency.

    5 tires weighing between 750 and 856 grams. 3 of them were right at 800g.

    For comparison sake, our equal size Magic Marry on the enduro bike was only 896 and 905.


    Iím staying on the more consistent Maxxis, forekaster/rekon race combo. But would love to test out the new 2.4 aspen when itís available.

    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	002.jpg 
Views:	227 
Size:	263.3 KB 
ID:	1348787

    This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
    Mole
    That sure looks like a rear tire that has not been cornered hard and ridden predominantly on pavement.

    Our RORos are basically destroyed after 700 miles. 10-25% of the ride knobs are ripped off and there is no siping left on the tire. Top compound of rubber on transition and side knobs are gone. This is under a 135 pound female.

    Oldschool Racing Ralphís suck here so we donít use them, but they donít last any longer and are too flat prone. Also terrible after about 200 miles as a rear.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  136. #336
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    Was that a rear tire? I can rarely find a rear tire that holds up well past 500-600 miles.
    That was rear tire wear. Tire mileage is so rider specific but I typically get 2000+ miles from the Schwalbe's I mentioned or something like an Icon. I'm not sure how relevant this is anyway since Vittoria recently discontinued the Peyote. My first Vittoria tire in over a decade + a couple of other members showed some interest in this tire so figured it was worth posting this.
    Mole

  137. #337
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MRMOLE's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    2,813
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    That sure looks like a rear tire that has not been cornered hard and ridden predominantly on pavement.
    COVID has killed a lot of my mtb. opportunities recently so sad but true.
    Mole

  138. #338
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    960
    Quote Originally Posted by MRMOLE View Post


    This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
    Mole
    2000 miles for a new tyre is insane while still having life left!

    My schwalve tires also seem to last about 1000 miles or 1600kms at most. Damaged sidewalks or casing sometimes happen to me well within the tyre life which sucks big time.

    Personally, such a poor life on tires is my biggest peeve about mtb. My road tires probably outlast my mtb tires 8:1.

  139. #339
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Hope this doesnít turn out to be bad for Vittoria lovers!

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/vittor...roup-wise.html
    Never underestimate an old man with a mountain bike.

  140. #340
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Had a chance to compare the Fast Trak, Renegade, and Aspen as front tires in similar conditions. The Fast Trak seems to have the most absolute bite. But when it goes, it goes. I was feeling so confident on my new Fast Traks that I started attacking corners more aggressively and found the limit the hardway on a damp tight 180. No warning, I was on the ground.

    The Renegade and Aspens have similar levels of grip but damn does that Renegade give you a lot of warning when it starts to slip. It slips a little, and then grabs so you know when to back it down. I haven't had many washouts on the Aspen but part of it might be that I'm not confident enough to take risks on them. I noticed that my turning radius was a little tighter on the Fast Traks due to the extra grip.

    The Renegade is now on the rear of the bike and it is definitely better than the Aspens in every way as a rear. Cushier, doesn't break loose as much when braking, and more climbing traction. No noticeable difference in rolling resistance.

  141. #341
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    Thanks so much for the review. Were you testing the Control version of the Fast Trak and Renegade?

  142. #342
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    Thanks so much for the review. Were you testing the Control version of the Fast Trak and Renegade?
    The Renegade was the control version. The Fast Trak is just the latest tan sidewall 2bliss ready.

  143. #343
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    144
    Good feedback on the Renegade/Fastracks! I've blown through my second set of tires this season (Racing ray/ralph) and went to the LBS to pick up some Specialized tires.

    I was thinking about running the Renegade rear and Fastrack front, shop guys where insistent that that was terrible combo,renegade had more grip they said. They said I should run Renegade f/r or Renegade front and fastrack rear...

    I walked out of the shop with 2x 2.3 renegades in control casing, but I'll probably go pick up a Fast track to feel things out for myself.

  144. #344
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Either FastTrak's front and rear or Renegade rear and FastTrak front.
    Definitely Control's and not Grid's.

  145. #345
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,071
    The Fast Trak will have better cornering traction. The Renegade may possibly have better braking/climbing traction.

  146. #346
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by dfishdesign View Post
    Good feedback on the Renegade/Fastracks! I've blown through my second set of tires this season (Racing ray/ralph) and went to the LBS to pick up some Specialized tires.

    I was thinking about running the Renegade rear and Fastrack front, shop guys where insistent that that was terrible combo,renegade had more grip they said. They said I should run Renegade f/r or Renegade front and fastrack rear...

    I walked out of the shop with 2x 2.3 renegades in control casing, but I'll probably go pick up a Fast track to feel things out for myself.
    I can see why the shop guys would say that because when the Renegades breaks loose, it's so controlled. But I would say for absolute grip, the Fast Trak still has more. There is this feeling that it just latches onto the trail, whereas the Renegades on the front will break loose a bit but give you plenty of warning.

    On the rear, the Fast Traks have great straightline traction but when they do break loose, it's not as controlled as the Renegades. You can drift the Renegade all day long and feel completely in control. The Renegade is just so much better than the FT as a rear tire, I can't think of a scenario where I would run a Renegade front and a FT rear.

    BTW the Specialized factory riders usually run FT front and RG rear on dry tracks. FT/FT on mixed terrain, and RG/RG on hardpack tracks. I've never seen them run RG front/ FT rear.

  147. #347
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    Maxxis Aspens are the real deal.

    I've been testing the classic Ikon/Arden Race combo, a Ralph/Burt setup for Wilmington Whiteface, Rekons in 2.4 and 2.6, and the Mezcal/Barzo combo I gave details on upthread.

    The Aspen are super fast - not as fast as the Thunder Burt on dirt roads, of course, but still really fast - and very, very nice to ride. Absolute grip level is not that high, but it's good, and they are the most predictable XC tire I've ever used.

    In the front, braking traction is excellent. Cornering is a smooth transition with no dead spot, and while ultimate grip in good conditions (tacky dirt or loam) isn't as good as an Ikon, it's at least as predictable, I think moreso. Once things get slick and wet, it gives up the ghost sooner, but retains that predictability. That is exactly what I'm looking for in a marathon XC tire - forgiveness and fast rolling.

    In real mud, or horrible greasy, slimy roots and rocks, the Vittoria compound and siping (or a MaxxTerra Rekon) absolutely smokes the Aspen. Duh. It's a dry-conditions tire, but won't kill you if there's a little mud or slickness here and there. If it's raining during a race, or lots of rain the night before, these are coming off and I'm putting on the Barzo/Mezcal.

    As a rear, braking is great, cornering is wonderful, but climbing traction is quite limited. It's fine for what it is - again, quite a bit better than a Burt - but in loose conditions an Ikon or Ardent Race is better. I'm very happy to make this trade for the speed.

    If climbing traction is really really important to you, perhaps a Rekon Race in the rear is better - I haven't run one to try, but it seems likely.

    The 2.4 Aspen should be really, really good... I'll at least get one for the front.

  148. #348
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bluebeat007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    367
    Iím back on my trusty 2.35 Ikons front and rear in the North East on my SS hardtail. I didnít realize how worn my old tires were. The Ikons were like glue in the corners in comparison.
    CADRE RACING

    Vassago Radimus
    Kona Wozo

  149. #349
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,088
    Really appreciating these detailed comparisons and feedback

    Wish I had something to contribute but with no events on the horizon, the XC bike hasn't left the garage.

  150. #350
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,661
    When are we going to be able to buy Maxxis Aspen 2.4s or Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.35s? The first to market with wide and light semi-slicks gets my business.

    Nothing against Vittoria, other than I'm bitter at them for bringing back the skinwall.

  151. #351
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    When are we going to be able to buy Maxxis Aspen 2.4s or Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.35s? The first to market with wide and light semi-slicks gets my business.

    Nothing against Vittoria, other than I'm bitter at them for bringing back the skinwall.
    Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!

    Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.

  152. #352
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Autoxfil View Post
    Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!

    Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.

    I've not ridden an Aspen before, but I've taken 2.1 and 2.25 Thunder Burts through many races, including 100-milers. I know they're the fastest real tire on the market.

    I've also raced the rare (almost forgot it existed) non-Snakeskin, sub-700 gram Racing Ralph 29x2.4 circa 2010.

    I'm a Schwalbe fan but they need to jump on this. I'm not used to seeing Maxxis be more progressive, and possibly lighter.

  153. #353
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,074
    I recently picked up a Blur Trail and I'm running the 2.25 Rekon/Aspen setup on it. I'm really amazed at how well the rear grips. I'd like to try the 2.4 setup once they're available.

  154. #354
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by Autoxfil View Post
    Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!

    Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.
    Interesting because my 2.35Ē Barzo / mezcal measured right at 2.35Ē on a 25mm ird wheel.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  155. #355
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    358
    Can anyone who has used the Mezcal in the XC Race casing report on the ride quality/suppleness of this tire compared to other popular XC tires like the Aspen, Fast Trak, Race King, etc?

  156. #356
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by csteven71 View Post
    I recently picked up a Blur Trail and I'm running the 2.25 Rekon/Aspen setup on it. I'm really amazed at how well the rear grips. I'd like to try the 2.4 setup once they're available.
    Im always amazed at how well my Aspen grips considering how minimal the tread looks.

  157. #357
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kevbikemad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by hesitationpoint View Post
    Can anyone who has used the Mezcal in the XC Race casing report on the ride quality/suppleness of this tire compared to other popular XC tires like the Aspen, Fast Trak, Race King, etc?
    I used Mezcals most of last season. This year on Aspens. Many years ago on Race Kings. Less supple than the Aspens and RK - but a good fast high volume race tire.

    Similar to Aspens, just not quite as fast IMO. Probably a little more climbing traction though.

  158. #358
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    8
    For fast races: non-exo Aspen TR 2.25" front and 2.3" s-works renegade back - 590/560gr
    When it's wet: 2.3" conti crossking racesport front and back - 675gr
    For rocky/technical rides: 2,35" schwalbe snakeskin racing ray/racing ralph - ~700gr

    I think my first combo is as fast as race kings or thunder burts but has much more grip.
    Aspen is very good front tire, fast with predictable handling and renegades is good rear tire, climbing traction is good.

    Can't use Aspen in the rear - non-exo Maxxis have very thin sidewalls like 2 times thinner than renegade or conti RK racesport. And I don't like EXO - not secure enough but weighs more than conti protection or schwalbe snakeskin.

  159. #359
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Kirsa View Post
    For fast races: non-exo Aspen TR 2.25" front and 2.3" s-works renegade back - 590/560gr
    When it's wet: 2.3" conti crossking racesport front and back - 675gr
    For rocky/technical rides: 2,35" schwalbe snakeskin racing ray/racing ralph - ~700gr

    I think my first combo is as fast as race kings or thunder burts but has much more grip.
    Aspen is very good front tire, fast with predictable handling and renegades is good rear tire, climbing traction is good.

    Can't use Aspen in the rear - non-exo Maxxis have very thin sidewalls like 2 times thinner than renegade or conti RK racesport. And I don't like EXO - not secure enough but weighs more than conti protection or schwalbe snakeskin.
    Ew. Hard to untangle all that, but if you're looking for speed and grip, I doubt any of those concoctions would beat a Rocket Ron front/Thunder Burt rear, on the drum or a TT lap (I've tested them myself).

    You're actually going to want a narrower tire with more knobs for wet races (Rocket Ron 2.1 front/rear is the king of this). Besides more clearance for mud, it digs in better.

    You'd want a wider tire for rougher courses.

  160. #360
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by kevbikemad View Post
    I used Mezcals most of last season. This year on Aspens. Many years ago on Race Kings. Less supple than the Aspens and RK - but a good fast high volume race tire.

    Similar to Aspens, just not quite as fast IMO. Probably a little more climbing traction though.
    Thanks. And were your Mezcals the reinforced TNT casing or the lighter XC race casing?

  161. #361
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    142
    I'm suprised by people saying EXO Aspens are not secure enough, in my experience they seem pretty much most secure tyre out there, especially when comparing to Specialized or Schwalbe tyres .

    Switched from 2.25 exo aspens to 2.25 thunder burts F and R, was pretty suprised how much grip they have, even rode a XCO nats and one muddy XCM race with them, you could totally feel how they rolled fast! But then on the next XCM race happened what i scared about them from the beginning, had a rear flat on a pretty random spot, switched back to aspens now, can't really beat them, great grip, fast enough, nice volume and very secure casing.

  162. #362
    Thicc Member
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    672
    Three rides on a new G2.0 Mezcal on the rear and I'm tearing side knobs off. No skidding or anything, just normal aggressive riding.

    I saw some mention of the Terreno but no opinions. Is it as sketchy as I could expect just by looking at it? How does it compare to a Thunder Burt or Race King?

  163. #363
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Tomorrow's short track XC will be on the Anthem with 2.3" FastTrak front and Renegade rear.
    Should be good

  164. #364
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.
    Ok so after spending some time on the tan sidewall Fast Traks and reading some reviews of the new Epics, I have a sneaking suspicion that they are not the same. I just got a big cut on my tan sidewall FTs and I wasn't even riding anything particularly chunky. My Control Renegades are holding up just fine with no sign of cuts or even worn tread.

    And I have been reading reviews of the new Epic and Epic evos. It seems some models come with the tan sidewall Fast Traks and others with the Control Fast Traks. It's interesting that the reviewers complained about tire punctures and needing burlier tires on the bikes with the tan sidewall tires. One reviewer also mention that the controls were like 100 grams heavier. https://flowmountainbike.com/tests/2...-works-review/

    https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/bi...ic-pro-review/

    I can't know for sure, but I suspect the new controls have been updated with more sidewall protection and the tan sidewall tires are lighter but weaker.

  165. #365
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by spsoon View Post
    Just got some 29x2.6 XR2's. Came in at 774 and 735g. I think these are gonna be a great velcro tire
    Any feedback on the XR2ís? Iím debating the trade-off between weight and comfort between a 2.3/4 and 2.6 for the rear. My hardtail is stiff AF in back.

  166. #366
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,088
    Quote Originally Posted by GSPChilliwack View Post
    Any feedback on the XR2ís? Iím debating the trade-off between weight and comfort between a 2.3/4 and 2.6 for the rear. My hardtail is stiff AF in back.
    I will try to mount them up this week. Just haven't had any use for the XC bike this year.

  167. #367
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    30
    Fast Trak 2.3 or Aspen 2.25 for XC racing in the north east?

  168. #368
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    At this point, I'd probably recommend the Aspen because the new Control Fast Traks weigh over 700g and the tan sidewall Fast Trak is light but not durable. I still like the new Renegade Control though especially on the rear.

  169. #369
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    At this point, I'd probably recommend the Aspen because the new Control Fast Traks weigh over 700g and the tan sidewall Fast Trak is light but not durable. I still like the new Renegade Control though especially on the rear.
    I got 695g for a 2.3" FastTrak Control.
    620g for the Renegade.

  170. #370
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    I got 695g for a 2.3" FastTrak Control.
    620g for the Renegade.
    Those are pretty good weights for the Controls. My Renegade Control was around 650g. And the Fast Trak control weights being reported by some reviewers can hover above 730g.

  171. #371
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,137
    Anyone have actual widths for the 2.25" racing ralph/ray combo?

    I'm running the tan version of the 2.35" rekon race front and rear. Love the volume and performance but they are incredibly heavy with one just over 800g and one just under. They are about 75g heavier than the black version of the same tire. It's like the tan layer is added on to the black tire so not a true skinwall.

    Tried the fast traks but they profile of the tread is so rounded that it is almost impossible to engage the side knobs (27mm internal rim). Felt like I was cornering on the transition knobs at near full lean. On the plus side they are wider than stated on my rims and the stated weight it accurate.

    I am looking for a 2.3-2.4" fast rolling tire. Prefer skinwall and as close to 700g if possible. Lighter would be even better. Terrain is rolling here so braking traction is almost a non factor. Only really care about the corners. Any suggestions would be appreciated!

  172. #372
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Have you tried Aspens? Mine weighed around 650g with the exo sidewalls. More squared than the Fast Traks.

  173. #373
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,137
    I've tried the 2.25, like it as a rear for sure and have run it front and rear for short track. I like a little more cornering bite in the front and I need me some tan walls to get the look I'm going for. I ride faster if I know I look cool

  174. #374
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Quote Originally Posted by rusty904 View Post
    I ride faster if I know I look cool
    lol, well then I guess the Aspen is out. Maybe the Mezcal in XC Race casing? Tan sidewall and about 700g. I have not used it myself so maybe someone else can chime in about their performance.

    OT: Just go another Renegade Control and it weighed 658g. Remarkably consistent with my other one. Must have come from the same batch. Nordieboy's are consistently lighter than mine.

  175. #375
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    lol, well then I guess the Aspen is out. Maybe the Mezcal in XC Race casing? Tan sidewall and about 700g. I have not used it myself so maybe someone else can chime in about their performance.

    OT: Just go another Renegade Control and it weighed 658g. Remarkably consistent with my other one. Must have come from the same batch. Nordieboy's are consistently lighter than mine.
    I will probably get the mezcal in 29x2.35 once they become available. I reached out to vittoria to see when that might be. In the meantime I'll keep on those heavy ass rekons. Love em aside from the weight.

  176. #376
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Posts
    19
    Renegade Control similar to the Ikon?

  177. #377
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    239
    The new schwalbe thunder burt, racing Ralph and racing ray will come in the skin wall and below the 700gr


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  178. #378
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    3,500
    Quote Originally Posted by TylerVernon View Post
    I saw some mention of the Terreno but no opinions. Is it as sketchy as I could expect just by looking at it? How does it compare to a Thunder Burt or Race King?
    I've ridden the cyclocross version and thought it was sketchy as hell as soon as I left pavement or super hard hardpack. I'd guess that the mountain bike sizes would be similar to a Thunder Burt, but possibly even faster and more sketchy.

  179. #379
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,534
    Quote Originally Posted by AFCFORME View Post
    Renegade Control similar to the Ikon?
    Nope.
    Renegade is faster rolling and lighter.
    Ikon has grippier rubber and thicker sidewalls.

    The rockier, rootier, damper it gets the more I'd lean toward the Ikon.

    The Renegade needs something to dig into, whereas the Ikon can use the mechanical grip from the rubber compound.

    I've got Ikons front and rear on the Single Speed and Renegade rear, FastTrak front on the XC full suss.

    I'd run an Ikon on the front, but not a Renegade.

  180. #380
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    I actually don't mind the Renegade as a front tire. While it doesn't have the absolute level of grip as a Fast Trak, it's more predictable at the limit, at least on hardpack and loose over hard. I've gone down without warning three or four times on Fast Traks. They are really grippy until they are not.

  181. #381
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    571
    Those of you who have used both the Ikon and the Mezcal, which do you prefer? Pros and cons of each?

  182. #382
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by JasperGr View Post
    The new schwalbe thunder burt, racing Ralph and racing ray will come in the skin wall and below the 700gr


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

    Very nice! just found the new 29x2.35 super race versions on the Schwalbe site.

    https://schwalbe.com/en/mtb-reader/thunder-burt

    Ugh, more nasty skinwalls. I can get through this...

  183. #383
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,137
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Very nice! just found the new 29x2.35 super race versions on the Schwalbe site.

    https://schwalbe.com/en/mtb-reader/thunder-burt

    Ugh, more nasty skinwalls. I can get through this...
    Wonder when/where you can get em? I think the ray front/burt rear might be my next combo.

  184. #384
    chasing simplicity
    Reputation: MattMay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,199
    Quote Originally Posted by tick_magnet View Post
    I actually don't mind the Renegade as a front tire. While it doesn't have the absolute level of grip as a Fast Trak, it's more predictable at the limit, at least on hardpack and loose over hard. I've gone down without warning three or four times on Fast Traks. They are really grippy until they are not.
    My experience as well. I actually like them better for current Southern Cal conditions than Ralph/Ray combo. Everything is so dry and hard here these days.
    Never underestimate an old man with a mountain bike.

  185. #385
    pk1
    pk1 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by rusty904 View Post
    Wonder when/where you can get em? I think the ray front/burt rear might be my next combo.
    i think i saw somewhere they would be available in september. german sites tend to get new schwalbes first however they are struggling with shipping at the moment

    i'm pretty sure the super race are exactly the same as the old lite skin anyway and super ground is exactly the same as snakeskin - just new names to clarify casing purpose

  186. #386
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    84
    Itís disappointing to see how much heavier the new Schwalbe tires are. Will have to stock up in the current versions I think.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. 2020 Hightower 2 vs 2020 Tallboy 4
    By Doug in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 4 Weeks Ago, 10:47 AM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-06-2019, 04:28 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-20-2019, 08:05 AM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-10-2019, 09:31 AM
  5. 2020 Orbea Rallon vs 2020 Santa Cruz Hightower
    By kzlucas in forum 29er Bikes
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-11-2019, 07:31 AM

Members who have read this thread: 573

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.