2020 XC Race Tires - Page 3- Mtbr.com
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 401 to 551 of 551
  1. #401
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by tgoods View Post
    To me very similar performance as a rear tire! Ikon possibly grips on loose climbs better. As a front tire I give the nod to Mezcal because it seemed to be more planted in the loose stuff. I personally think the Mezcal has a tougher casing that is more resistance to punctures. Also note the Ikon 2.35Ē is quite a bit different from the 2.2Ē. Much more volume and bigger lugs.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Thanks, good info! I am leaning Mezcal because I am interested in a front tire.

  2. #402
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    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.
    My 2.3 Renegades on the rear now measure 2.33 inches after about 200 miles. 25ID rims and 24.5psi

  3. #403
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.

    Disappointed regarding the weights:
    Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.

    The casing is different than the old snake-skin. You can definitely feel it from the inside of the casing. Volume is huge compared to the old 2.25 snake-skin.

    Mounted them with Pepis R-Evolution inserts so I'm not able to give any reviews how the tyres will work as "normal" tubeless.

    Just wanted to let you know about the weights.
    Well, I did some testing today in very technical but familiar terrain.
    To be honest, I can't say that I noticed the heavy weight of the tyres. What I did notice how smooth and fast they rolled over the roots and rocks and the grip was unbelievable (in the rear).
    Did total of 18 miles, no long climbs just steep and technical. According to Strava some PR:s and most in the top 3 from previous runs.

    Funny also that the power output was not higher when comparing to same segment times. HR was a little lower. Of course this depends on form and outside temp.

    I had 16 psi in front and 17 in rear, this with Pepis R-Evolution S/M inserts.

    I'm not saying that the weight does not matter since it does. But in very demanding terrain and shorter distances without long climbs it is not that important compared to grip and plushness.

  4. #404
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,153
    Quote Originally Posted by euro-trash View Post
    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
    That's the first of these I've seen true to size. Mine measured at 2.24 on a 27mm ID rim at 40 PSI after three days of stretching. Wasn't super pleased with it as most other Bonty's I've tried have been nearly true to size on the same rims.

  5. #405
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    I'm currently running a 2.3 Fast Trak Control front but looking ahead I'd like something with a little more grip for fall/winter riding for east coast single track when the leaves fall. I want a tire not over 800 grams and that still rolls ok...the new Nobby Nic is heavier than I want. I'm currently considering Maxxis Forekaster 2.35, Specialized Ground Control 2.3, Vittoria Barzo 2.35, or Continental Cross King 2.3. Any thoughts or suggestions on the tires I've mentioned or other suggestions for a grippier front XC tire for fall/winter?

  6. #406
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    I like the 2.3 Ground Control Control front and rear.
    Rolls well and great climbing traction. They roll better than new Ikons, but not as well as worn Ikons.

    I'd lean toward the Cross King just for some smaller, sharper knobs that'll penetrate leaves better.

  7. #407
    LCW
    LCW is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LCW's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,662
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.

    Disappointed regarding the weights:
    Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.

    The casing is different than the old snake-skin. You can definitely feel it from the inside of the casing. Volume is huge compared to the old 2.25 snake-skin.

    Mounted them with Pepis R-Evolution inserts so I'm not able to give any reviews how the tyres will work as "normal" tubeless.

    Just wanted to let you know about the weights.
    Whoa!!! I had Ray and Ralph 2.35 Snakeskin at 655 & 710 respectively. Major let down with these new casings.

    Going to stick to 2.25 Ron Snakeskin. Picked up some extras from Jenson for $50 each while I still can.

    Santa Cruz Tallboy 4


  8. #408
    LMN
    LMN is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,331
    Quote Originally Posted by LCW View Post
    Whoa!!! I had Ray and Ralph 2.35 Snakeskin at 655 & 710 respectively. Major let down with these new casings.

    Going to stick to 2.25 Ron Snakeskin. Picked up some extras from Jenson for $50 each while I still can.
    The previous generations really suffered from punctures. Those kind of weights is about what I expect from a durable tire in that size.

    For me, at least, sufficient durability is the most important characteristic of a race tire.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  9. #409
    pk1
    pk1 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by LMN View Post
    The previous generations really suffered from punctures. Those kind of weights is about what I expect from a durable tire in that size.

    For me, at least, sufficient durability is the most important characteristic of a race tire.
    i've had good luck with snakeskin schwalbes. the liteskin were very fragile (but fast if you can keep them inflated).

    it seems like now we have super race and super ground which are each heavier than their respective liteskin and snakeskin predecessors. super race certainly sounds like its more protected than liteskin, but probably well short of snakeskin, despite being possibly similar weight to snakeskin. i'm not clear that there is any reason to expect super ground to be more protected than snakeskin - its still got snakeskin as its puncture protection layer but given that it is significantly heavier you would assume there is some additional protection from that extra material.

    the rubber compunds remain the same so grip and basic weight/protection shouldn't be different unless there is simply more rubber

    i'm happy that i just bought some snakeskins as they are a sweet spot ofr me of weight/rolling/protection. i might order some more while i can

  10. #410
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    I'd love to try some faster Maxxis stuff, but here, all we get are Ikons and the complete Enduro and DH range...

  11. #411
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Anyone try Vittoria Terrano 2.25s? They'd seem to compare to Thunder Burts.

  12. #412
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    I'd love to try some faster Maxxis stuff, but here, all we get are Ikons and the complete Enduro and DH range...
    I have Aspens on one wheelset and Renegades on the other so I often ride them back to back numerous times throughout the year. The Aspens are great tires when trail conditions are close to hero dirt or a little wet. But on blown-out, slippery hardpack, the Renegades are way more confidence inspiring. On the Aspens, I adjust my riding style to be more cautious. On the Renegades, I pretty much ride the same way as I do in other trail conditions.

  13. #413
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    416
    Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?

  14. #414
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    Quote Originally Posted by durkind View Post
    Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?
    A friend of mine has a 2.4 mounted on a 23 internal rim and it looks smaller than my 2.3 Fast Trak mounted on a 25 internal rim. So I would say it is not a true 2.4.

  15. #415
    Thicc Member
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    944
    Quote Originally Posted by aerius View Post
    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.
    lol, thanks!

  16. #416
    Thicc Member
    Reputation: TylerVernon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Posts
    944
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    Peyote is one of my Favorite Tires , It discontinued for 2021
    Seems like a victim of bad marketing. I had no idea the knobs were that aggressive. One thing I like about Maxxis is that they keep producing the same tire for decades so you can try them all. Heck, you can still get 2.1 Ignitors.

  17. #417
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    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.
    You mean old generation air checker or a gen 2?

  18. #418
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    33
    Quote Originally Posted by durkind View Post
    Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?
    I was looking into the Kenda's as I thought their race version at 2.4 looked great. Here's the thing, it measured out small and was 7xx grams. I sent them back.

  19. #419
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    56
    Guys, whats the weight of the Ardent race 29. 2,35 3c/exo/tr?

  20. #420
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    Quote Originally Posted by Skarhead View Post
    Guys, whats the weight of the Ardent race 29. 2,35 3c/exo/tr?
    According to my spreadsheet I got 720g for a 2.2".
    I'd swear it was a 2.3 though.

  21. #421
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Anyone try Vittoria Terrano 2.25s? They'd seem to compare to Thunder Burts.
    I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.

  22. #422
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    56
    2020 XC Race Tires-newmaxxxis.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-newmaxxis2.jpg

    Scott-Sram using new maxxis tire

  23. #423
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    844

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Looks like a maxxis x-king but more open. Iíd be worried about punctures with the tread being that open.

  24. #424
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    Looks like they've removed half the knobs from an Ardent Race?

  25. #425
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.
    Cool, good to hear. I know of lot of guys probably ride the same tire to race and normal trail riding. For race day only, semi-slicks are the way to go IMHO.

    Just got a pair of the Vittoria Terreno 2.25s and will give them a shot at next weekend's race. They appear to have almost zero middle tread, but the side knobs are bigger than Thunder Burts. That sounds pretty good to me, but I've liked Thunder Burts very much.

    The first semi-slick I ever saw was the WTB Vulpine.

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_0215.jpg

  26. #426
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by litany View Post
    Looks like a maxxis x-king but more open. Iíd be worried about punctures with the tread being that open.
    Sure looks like it is a mud racing tire.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  27. #427
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    Sure looks like it is a mud racing tire.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Reminds me of a Barzo.
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  28. #428
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    33
    The 29x2.4 Maxxis Aspen and Recon Races are out there for purchasing. I just put in an order on biketiresdirect for the Maxxis Aspens!!!

  29. #429
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    Quote Originally Posted by 2_whl_boost View Post
    The 29x2.4 Maxxis Aspen and Recon Races are out there for purchasing. I just put in an order on biketiresdirect for the Maxxis Aspens!!!
    I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.

  30. #430
    LMN
    LMN is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,331
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.
    I think it would be worth giving it a try. I know will be putting them on some 25mm rims when I get them.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  31. #431
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.
    Don't believe everything you read in marketing material designed to get you to buy new stuff. i25 rims are easily capable of running a 2.4 tire.

  32. #432
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Cool, good to hear. I know of lot of guys probably ride the same tire to race and normal trail riding. For race day only, semi-slicks are the way to go IMHO.

    Just got a pair of the Vittoria Terreno 2.25s and will give them a shot at next weekend's race. They appear to have almost zero middle tread, but the side knobs are bigger than Thunder Burts. That sounds pretty good to me, but I've liked Thunder Burts very much.

    The first semi-slick I ever saw was the WTB Vulpine.

    those fish scales provide a shockingly high amount of grip on hard pack dirt. i was expecting it to be a little sketchy but braking traction was very good.

  33. #433
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    Don't believe everything you read in marketing material designed to get you to buy new stuff. i25 rims are easily capable of running a 2.4 tire.
    From Maxxis's own site, the 25's are still within range:

    Aspen and Rekon Race tread patterns29x2.40WT size
    ē 30mm internal rim width recommended
    ē 25-30mm internal rim width acceptable

  34. #434
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    those fish scales provide a shockingly high amount of grip on hard pack dirt. i was expecting it to be a little sketchy but braking traction was very good.
    I just put a set of Terreno Zeros on my gravel bike and I have been pretty surprised at how loud they are when I lean them onto the fish scales. I have yet to push them through any turns but I am really looking forward to trying them out on my sandy twisty flat course when it opens back up. They're also very sticky on just the slick portion. I took it down a ~20% grade the other day braking hard and it was tough to get it to slide.

    I'm looking forward to hearing how these work out for you.

  35. #435
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmygato View Post
    I just put a set of Terreno Zeros on my gravel bike and I have been pretty surprised at how loud they are when I lean them onto the fish scales. I have yet to push them through any turns but I am really looking forward to trying them out on my sandy twisty flat course when it opens back up. They're also very sticky on just the slick portion. I took it down a ~20% grade the other day braking hard and it was tough to get it to slide.

    I'm looking forward to hearing how these work out for you.
    I've got 35c Terreno Zeros on my Boone, 38mm wide on 25mm ID rims, and I'll agree they're shockinlgy grippy. Took em on some "green" singletrack flow trails in Bentonville yesterday and no issues. I've got some Terreno Dry in 35c for the CX bike if these are too sketch and a pair of 29x2.25 Terreno skinwalls for the XC bike if I can find a short track race next season to break em out for...They're as good or better than Thunder Burts IMO.
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  36. #436
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.




    The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didnít do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know theyíre grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didnít lost traction once. Iíd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by chomxxo; 09-08-2020 at 04:55 AM.

  37. #437
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Just mounted Aspen 2.4WT on Duke 6ters wheels. They came in at 744g and 739g.
    Just by pressing on them I will start with around 14.5 - 16psi at front on 29id rim.

    I did put a R-Evolution insert in the back since the rim is only 26id at rear but let's see if I can take it out after I have found correct pressures.

    And yes, these tyres fit in the Sworks Epic EVO (-21) frame.

  38. #438
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    263
    Do you have some photos?


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  39. #439
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51

  40. #440
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    263

    2020 XC Race Tires

    That is a bad ass bike with some nice tires! Do you have some shots of the clearance?


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  41. #441
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Where are you guys buying tires for decent prices shipping to USA? I am probably going to be buying a bunch of Maxxis tires and possibly some Vittorias. Bikeinn seems to have good prices on Vittorias but not so much on Maxxis.

  42. #442
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by JasperGr View Post
    That is a bad ass bike with some nice tires! Do you have some shots of the clearance?


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
    Thanks, it's a great bike!

    I can take some pictures but I did measure the clearance and the tightest spot is on the right chainstay where the rubber guard goes around the chainstay. The gap there was +7mm to the protector. Everywhere else is more than this.

  43. #443
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33
    How much did that frame actually weight and what size is it?


    Iím sad those tires weight that much, but as long as they keep their durability I guess itís all good. glad I held off a little from pulling the trigger for now and just got the very large 2.25 for the rear with new Forekaster front (734g).



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  44. #444
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    663
    I have been very happy with R-2bike. They have great prices and even with shipping included they are generally cheaper than any US based retailer. Lead time has been an issue during the covid but pre covid I was getting my stuff in a few weeks.

  45. #445
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    Isnít shipping from R2 like 80 Euro right now?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  46. #446
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    Question, Are the knobs larger on the 2.4 Aspen or are they the same size as the knobs on the 2.25 but just spaced further apart?

  47. #447
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    663
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Isnít shipping from R2 like 80 Euro right now?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Had to check if they changed it but orders under 600 euros is 35 euros. it does not makes sense to buy one or 2 tires but if you are ordering more than a set it does.

  48. #448
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    FJSnoozer: It's a XL frame and it was 1910grams without seat collar (can't remember if I had the rear axle installed when weighted). I don't think that 740g is that much weight for such a big sidewall protected tyre.

    Stonerider: Sorry can't answer your question since these are my first Maxxis tyres. I have been running Schwalbes and before that Vittorias...

  49. #449
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    137
    nice bike! you like the 2.4 wt tyre? how is the braking and the climbing with the aspen if you can compare to a "classic" fast track 2.3.

  50. #450
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,119
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post



    The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didnít do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know theyíre grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didnít lost traction once. Iíd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    No words for that setup, just beyond belief!

  51. #451
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post



    The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didnít do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know theyíre grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didnít lost traction once. Iíd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Why is the derailleur in such strange position?


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  52. #452
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody View Post
    No words for that setup, just beyond belief!
    Kiddo, Iím 6í4Ē. Youíre keeping on talking and following me thread to thread like a real loser. Donít do that.


    The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but itís garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  53. #453
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    263
    Okay good to know, it is a shame sram doesnít want to make a 10-45 or something like that.


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk

  54. #454
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by JasperGr View Post
    Okay good to know, it is a shame sram doesnít want to make a 10-45 or something like that.


    Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk
    This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.

    As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.

  55. #455
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post

    The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but itís garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.
    Garbage how?

    I have both and I far prefer the e13. I do have it set up properly. Which involves applying pressure to the face of the aluminum plate against the hub and tightening the bolt a little above spec. Then everyone seats well and shifts lightning quick. You must also grease the contact points between the two plates. (I have to degrease every so often depending upon terrain and washes.)


    Also, your B screw looks completely wrong. There is no way it could shift properly with it that far out. It would be super slow and hunt for gears at times. Here is mine for reference in the same gear.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  56. #456
    LMN
    LMN is online now
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    6,331
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.

    As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.
    Choosing between a Shimano or SRAM cassette is a compromise between light weight and shifting quality. Doesn't matter if you are using a Shimano or SRAM derailleur, it seems the shifting quality depends on the cassette more than anything. Well mechanic competence is also a big one, these 12-speed drivetrains are much more difficult to get right than 11-speed.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  57. #457
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by LMN View Post
    Choosing between a Shimano or SRAM cassette is a compromise between light weight and shifting quality. Doesn't matter if you are using a Shimano or SRAM derailleur, it seems the shifting quality depends on the cassette more than anything. Well mechanic competence is also a big one, these 12-speed drivetrains are much more difficult to get right than 11-speed.
    Absolutely, and also the chain in Shimano case. (HG+) And if you want a perfectly silent drivetrain with the Shimano chain you also need a HG+ compatible chainring. :-)

  58. #458
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post

    The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but itís garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.
    No cassette is going to run nice with the b-tension that wrong.

  59. #459
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    Garbage how?

    I have both and I far prefer the e13. I do have it set up properly. Which involves applying pressure to the face of the aluminum plate against the hub and tightening the bolt a little above spec. Then everyone seats well and shifts lightning quick. You must also grease the contact points between the two plates. (I have to degrease every so often depending upon terrain and washes.)


    Also, your B screw looks completely wrong. There is no way it could shift properly with it that far out. It would be super slow and hunt for gears at times. Here is mine for reference in the same gear.





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by afalts View Post
    No cassette is going to run nice with the b-tension that wrong.
    Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.

    I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.

    Back to the tires: Again, good impressions of the Terreno. I took it out on some damp (not wet) trails yesterday and noticed some sliding on roots, but that's to be expected. I don't expect semi-slicks to be good in all conditions, only dry XC courses. For wet I'd stick with the Rocket Ron, but I am very eager to see a 2.35/2.4 Terreno come to market, or I'd consider going with the 2.4 Thunder Burt. Right now the Terreno tread pattern seems superior in that it's more extreme.

  60. #460
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.

    I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.
    You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it wonít shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?

    We are just trying to help you not waste money.

    AND your chain is too long... you will see this once you fix your b tension.

    I actually like the looks of your bike, this has nothing to do with aesthetics.

    Here is another shot of how AXS derailleur will sit in such a gear.

    https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/co...etrain-review/

    That type of mis-adjustment would take place if someone had an eagle cassette, swapped in e13 and didnít shorten the chain by four links, then adjusted the b screw waaay out in order to get the proper tension in the 9t.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  61. #461
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    217
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.

    I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.
    It actually doesn't matter if it's wireless for setup, b-tension is set the same for all eagle mtb derailleurs. You're likely using the gauge incorrectly (assuming chain length is correct, which it may not be)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...ture=emb_title

    Anyways, I would agree that e.13 cassettes are subpar, but not quite garbage or non-functional, they have their place

  62. #462
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    I thought this was the 2020 XC Race tire thread. Take the drivetrain stuff to the drivetrain forum.

  63. #463
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    3,306
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.

    As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.
    Sorry, I know this is OT, but what did you do about mismatch between the AXS lower jockey wheel and the HG+ chain? I get a lot of noise there (I think).
    Thx

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  64. #464
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it wonít shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?

    We are just trying to help you not waste money.

    AND your chain is too long... you will see this once you fix your b tension.

    I actually like the looks of your bike, this has nothing to do with aesthetics.

    Here is another shot of how AXS derailleur will sit in such a gear.

    https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/co...etrain-review/

    That type of mis-adjustment would take place if someone had an eagle cassette, swapped in e13 and didnít shorten the chain by four links, then adjusted the b screw waaay out in order to get the proper tension in the 9t.



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Why bother, the guy has shown he knows more than everybody else advocating for 35mm stems for XC, bald tires, improperly adjusted drivetrains, saddles adjusted at negative 20 degree angle and I think I recall some weird suspension tuning theories coming from him as well?

  65. #465
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    1,119
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Kiddo, Iím 6í4Ē. Youíre keeping on talking and following me thread to thread like a real loser. Donít do that.


    The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but itís garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Iím not following you, we just happen to have the same interests. Then you throw stuff up like this pic and my mind is blown. 2 things that are quite obvious from this pic: 1-You have no clue how a rear derailleur works, which others it seems are trying to explain to you. 2-Iíd bet a paycheck that your seat height is a good 1Ē too high. Everything about your setup screams compensation for not being able to reach the pedals under a load.

  66. #466
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it wonít shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?

    We are just trying to help you not waste money.

    AND your chain is too long... you will see this once you fix your b tension.

    I actually like the looks of your bike, this has nothing to do with aesthetics.

    Here is another shot of how AXS derailleur will sit in such a gear.

    https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/co...etrain-review/

    That type of mis-adjustment would take place if someone had an eagle cassette, swapped in e13 and didnít shorten the chain by four links, then adjusted the b screw waaay out in order to get the proper tension in the 9t.

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by MessagefromTate View Post
    Why bother, the guy has shown he knows more than everybody else advocating for 35mm stems for XC, bald tires, improperly adjusted drivetrains, saddles adjusted at negative 20 degree angle and I think I recall some weird suspension tuning theories coming from him as well?

    You guys need something else to do--like racing. I don't follow either of your posts closely enough to know your tendencies.

    FJSnoozer, I do find it funny that you are basically admitting "I'm an internet expert." I was just about to say the same thing about y'all but you beat me to it

    Trying to stay on topic, I'll address only the bald tires: there's a reason that the Aspens won out as the premier XCO race tire from Maxxis, when they weren't popular before, team studies showed they were faster, and yet semi-slicks are grippy in the corner where it's needed. Thunder Burts are pretty popular as well among pro racers. That doesn't always mean anything, but I find them to be demonstrably faster. Of course there's a penalty in grip but for a race over 90 minutes, it's worth it to me. A good foil or complement to a TB is a Rocket Ron, which is probably the grippiest race tire I've ever used.

    Neither this, nor longer top tubes and shorter stems, nor wireless electronic shifting are the lunatic fringe, in fact they're becoming the norm. Again, you all just need something better to do than covet your Klein Mantras

  67. #467
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    You guys need something else to do--like racing. I don't follow either of your posts closely enough to know your tendencies.

    FJSnoozer, I do find it funny that you are basically admitting "I'm an internet expert." I was just about to say the same thing about y'all but you beat me to it
    As a matter of fact, I raced this weekend and podiumed on an Aspen. So did two other Bikes I am responsible for. I take care of a fleet of bikes for racers and several of them have e13 and shift amazingly.

    I donít know what bad blood you have with these other guys, but I was just trying to help you. Your derailleur is set up so wrong itís visible in pictures.

    Good luck.

  68. #468
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.

    Disappointed regarding the weights:
    Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.

    The casing is different than the old snake-skin. You can definitely feel it from the inside of the casing. Volume is huge compared to the old 2.25 snake-skin.

    Mounted them with Pepis R-Evolution inserts so I'm not able to give any reviews how the tyres will work as "normal" tubeless.

    Just wanted to let you know about the weights.

    Here's my Super Ground Racing Ray / Ralph Weights

    2.35 Racing Ray 779 grams 61mm wide at 22psi

    2.35 Racing Ralph 781 grams 61 mm wide at 24psi

    Mounted on Ibis 28,6mm rims set up at 40 psi and set in sun and ridden a couple times at 22/24 psi then measure to above widths.

  69. #469
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    Here's my Super Ground Racing Ray / Ralph Weights

    2.35 Racing Ray 779 grams 61mm wide at 22psi

    2.35 Racing Ralph 781 grams 61 mm wide at 24psi

    Mounted on Ibis 28,6mm rims set up at 40 psi and set in sun and ridden a couple times at 22/24 psi then measure to above widths.
    How much do you weigh? Those pressures seem a little high for big XC tire but it depends on your weight.

  70. #470
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    How much do you weigh? Those pressures seem a little high for big XC tire but it depends on your weight.
    215# with kit

    My standard Pressure for 2.25 Schwalbe or Vittoria has been 21-22 psi front and 23.5-24.5 Rear , so I just started at 22-24 psi as a reference for the casing width measurement . I will go down, I have been running the Addix Speedgrip 2.35 (2020) evo snakeskin at 21-21.5 on the front , I was lucky and got a real light one 664g, new Super Ground have a more little substantial casing vs snakeskin.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2020 XC Race Tires-20200627_224141.jpg  


  71. #471
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756

    Rock Razor aka Thunder Burt on Steroids

    While waiting for the 2.35 Thunder Burt Super Race , I thought I would give the 2020 2.35 Rock Razor Speedgrip Snake Skin a try.

    Came in Heavy 832 grams vs 740 grams spec'd
    60mm on Ibis S28 i28.6mm rim picture @ 24psi

    Second Pic of 2.35 Rock Razor & 2.25 Thunder burt.

    Sans the Weight this is an awesome tire on the rear, I was hoping to get one closer to the spec;d weight of 740 grams

    Definitely feel the weight accelerating out of corners and on the climbs
    832g vs 610 grams for a Thunder Burt

    222 grams is right at 1/2#

    Hope the New 2.35 Super Race come in at its spec'd weight of 745 grams

    As this new 2.35 Thunder Burt @ 745g is virtually the same as the 2020 Rock Razor at 740 grams it will be awesome if the new TB has side knobs like the Rock Razor one can dream right .................
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2020 XC Race Tires-20200903_092505.jpg  

    2020 XC Race Tires-20200903_080533.jpg  


  72. #472
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Rock razor is a Magic Marry Semi Slick, so it will be nothing like that tire.

    2.35 TB likely to have the Rocket Ron side knobs, or get some updated tread from the Racing Ray horizontal side knobs.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  73. #473
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    While waiting for the 2.35 Thunder Burt Super Race , I thought I would give the 2020 2.35 Rock Razor Speedgrip Snake Skin a try.

    Came in Heavy 832 grams vs 740 grams spec'd
    60mm on Ibis S28 i28.6mm rim picture @ 24psi

    Second Pic of 2.35 Rock Razor & 2.25 Thunder burt.

    Sans the Weight this is an awesome tire on the rear, I was hoping to get one closer to the spec;d weight of 740 grams

    Definitely feel the weight accelerating out of corners and on the climbs
    832g vs 610 grams for a Thunder Burt

    222 grams is right at 1/2#

    Hope the New 2.35 Super Race come in at its spec'd weight of 745 grams

    As this new 2.35 Thunder Burt @ 745g is virtually the same as the 2020 Rock Razor at 740 grams it will be awesome if the new TB has side knobs like the Rock Razor one can dream right .................
    I've raced and tested the Rock Razor, and yes despite a compelling design, it is heavier duty than would be advantageous for XC racing, it's significantly slower. Not only the weight that you mentioned, but the center tread pattern is significantly deep.

    Now it's doing duty as a rear tire (Nobby Nic 2.6 front) on my trail bike wheels, and it does well there.

    If true that the Thunder Burt's side knobs will be bigger in the 2.35, that'd be a welcome addition.

  74. #474
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefflinde View Post
    I have been very happy with R-2bike. They have great prices and even with shipping included they are generally cheaper than any US based retailer. Lead time has been an issue during the covid but pre covid I was getting my stuff in a few weeks.
    I'm not really finding any deals there, whereas I'm seeing $36/tire for Vittorias on Bikeinn.

  75. #475
    rider
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    125
    I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
    Thanks

  76. #476
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    973
    Quote Originally Posted by madfella View Post
    I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
    Thanks
    Definitely too narrow, those work great in my experience in 19-23ID so 27 is way out of range.

  77. #477
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by madfella View Post
    I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
    Thanks
    its 1 mm per side , 0.0394 of an inch, try it so many people who are not engineers put way to much into a 1 mm of rim width.
    if its 5 mm you will run into some issue.

    Gravel crowd are running 38 and 42c tires on i25mm rims

  78. #478
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    its 1 mm per side , 0.0394 of an inch, try it so many people who are not engineers put way to much into a 1 mm of rim width.
    if its 5 mm you will run into some issue.

    Gravel crowd are running 38 and 42c tires on i25mm rims
    Just to clarify, do you believe 5 mm per side or in total is an issue?

    Thanks.

  79. #479
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Marshall View Post
    Just to clarify, do you believe 5 mm per side or in total is an issue?

    Thanks.
    Since 2019 even Specialized has made i25mm rims a standard on most Mountain bike, so the 1 mm per side was a reference based on a i25mm rim.

    the 5 mm statement was if you went to a i30mm you might see the tire getting to straight of a sidewall.

    For 15 years i21rim where used with all Mtb tires, I run Ibis S28 rim i28,6mm same design as a Stans Flow that they co designed with Ibis stan list it as 29mm if you dig deeper its the same 28.6mm internal width.

    I run Vittoria 2.25/55mm and Schwalbe 2.25/57mm on this rim.

    If you look at your tire its is a 54mm ETRTO size the american 2.1 or 2.25, 2.35 is a general number the number to use is the ETRTO number.
    Having said that a 54mm tire will be just fine on a i27mm rim.

    A lot of pro's and everyday riders run a 55/57 etrto tire on a i30mm rim.

    So YOUR 54mm Thunder Burt will not know if it has 1mm or 0.039" on each side take a Caliper and look at what 1mm is ? it's a moot point !

    Run it and be happy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2x6saXUdA9o

    https://www.notubes.com/stans-tech/wide-right

    Stan's uses a more conservative rim width chart

    Hope this helps

  80. #480
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    4

    Ikon skinwall

    I've been using maxxis ikon's for a number of years in the 3c EXO maxx speed versions with out any issues...

    They needed replacing so bought the skinwall version as i thought they looked good but they lasted a total of 4 rides before both tyres got holes / rips in them.

    I've since got a mezcal tnt g2.0 which weighs alot more - yet to see how it rides properly... i've only ridden it round the block and although it rolled well, i could feel the weight.

    So has anyone noticed that the maxxis skinwall tyres are weaker then the normal black ones...

    I tempted to get another set of ikon in normal black walls...
    Not a fan of schwalbe tyres.. they seem too floppy in the corners when run at a comfortable psi.

  81. #481
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    Quote Originally Posted by pokemonjohn View Post
    So has anyone noticed that the maxxis skinwall tyres are weaker then the normal black ones...
    The only difference is the skinwalls aren't 3C.
    They're still EXO.

  82. #482
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    The only difference is the skinwalls aren't 3C.
    They're still EXO.

    My say 3C on them
    could not upload an image so heres a link - https://1drv.ms/u/s!ApWxLFzQYaHZgP8bN8S-VGEau-OLRg

    the last cut happened just above the rim / tyre bead.. went almost through the entire side wall. Not repairable

  83. #483
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    That's interesting. My skinwall Fast Trak tire was also cut within its first few rides. And I've read a few reviews of the new Epics and Epic Evos and the reviewers also suffered cuts on their skinwalls.

  84. #484
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    4
    it sems the skinwall tyres are a weaker tyre.

    I need to somehow find out what my old tyre tpi was so i can compare it. I think my new skinwall tyres were 120tpi which is the weaker of the 2 versions (judging by the weight they were the 120tpi)

    I have since found an IKON online for sake which is a 60 tpi.

  85. #485
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    Quote Originally Posted by pokemonjohn View Post
    My say 3C on them
    could not upload an image so heres a link - https://1drv.ms/u/s!ApWxLFzQYaHZgP8bN8S-VGEau-OLRg

    the last cut happened just above the rim / tyre bead.. went almost through the entire side wall. Not repairable
    I didn't read the the specs on the Maxxis page well enough.
    2020 XC Race Tires-screenshot-2020-09-18-07.47.53.jpg
    The skinwalls should be tougher as they're 60tpi?

    I just put a set of 2.35 Ikons on to replace the 2.3 FastTrak/Renegade Control combo that was 1,000km old.
    The front FastTrak is still in mint condition, the Renegade is 3/4 shot. Stan's sealant is oozing through the sidewalls leaving a tacky, oily surface.
    No complaints from running that combo at all.

    Man the Control sidewalls are paper-thin compared to EXO.
    18f/20r psi in the Controls is nice but too much with the extra sidewall support in the EXO's.
    The Renegade had better standing climbing traction when I pulled it off then the Ikon does new.
    Hopefully that'll change when I get the pressure more dialed. Come to think of it, I've never run 2.35 Ikons on 25mm rims.
    19-23mm on the the Kona Unit was the widest before this.

    Got a backcountry marathon (2.5hr single lap) race coming up next weekend and there's basically 50min of solid climbing on shaley rock followed by a 20min descent down down "Boulder Valley".
    I was thinking the 2.35 Ikons would be better (grip, cush and protection) on the shale and rocks.
    If it was more dirt based, I'd have left the Specialized tyres on no worries.

  86. #486
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Yes skinwalls are weak. In all brands I have held and used. Teravail, specialized, maxxis. Some are exo, some are non exo 60tpi. Iím unsure about Vitoria.


    Itís important to note that maxxis makes skinwall and tanwall.


    Their Tan Wall EXO which seems to be their regular EXO casing with a layer of colored light brown rubber over them. These look amazing and I do plan to try a pair front and rear for vanity and speed.

    I know these come in 2.25 rekon Race as their only race tire. I am guessing these will tip the scales around 720. My regular weight 700.

    They also make them in a 2.4 Rekon, which I have personally weighed at 890g! No thanks.

    They make a few Minions in this tan wall as well as skinwall.

    60tpi does not make tires stronger in my experience. It allows more rubber to flow between the threads. Itís a toss up as to whether that ends up making a stronger tire. Iíve seen maxxis employees state that without their additives and carbon black that go into the regular rubber that you end up with a weaker tire. This is noticeable when you hold the tires as they are noticeably flimsy and supple. Itís not the best type of supple like a 170tpi, itís a hard tread base with a softer more squirmy sidewall. You can literally see light transmitting through the sidewall on a true skinwall.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  87. #487
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    I didn't read the the specs on the Maxxis page well enough.

    The skinwalls should be tougher as they're 60tpi?

    I just put a set of 2.35 Ikons on to replace the 2.3 FastTrak/Renegade Control combo that was 1,000km old.
    The front FastTrak is still in mint condition, the Renegade is 3/4 shot. Stan's sealant is oozing through the sidewalls leaving a tacky, oily surface.
    No complaints from running that combo at all.

    Man the Control sidewalls are paper-thin compared to EXO.
    18f/20r psi in the Controls is nice but too much with the extra sidewall support in the EXO's.
    The Renegade had better standing climbing traction when I pulled it off then the Ikon does new.
    Hopefully that'll change when I get the pressure more dialed. Come to think of it, I've never run 2.35 Ikons on 25mm rims.
    19-23mm on the the Kona Unit was the widest before this.

    Got a backcountry marathon (2.5hr single lap) race coming up next weekend and there's basically 50min of solid climbing on shaley rock followed by a 20min descent down down "Boulder Valley".
    I was thinking the 2.35 Ikons would be better (grip, cush and protection) on the shale and rocks.
    If it was more dirt based, I'd have left the Specialized tyres on no worries.
    I haven't run the Ikons but on the Exo Aspens 2.25s, I had to run it a full 2psi's higher to avoid rim strikes compared the Renegade Controls. That really left me in a catch 22 - The exo sidewalls are stiffer so you want to run less pressure, but I had to run higher pressure to avoid rim strikes. The Renegades are impressive in their ability to be both supple and not rim strike.

    The Ikon 2.35 is a bigger volume tire though, so I'd be interested in hearing your experience.

  88. #488
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    At 185-190, I run 23 on 25id rim. For a 140 pounder I would run 16-17. So you can scale in between. These are for rear psi.

    I just do not really rim strike on ikon 2.35s until things get crazy. Iíve done races in super rocky course where I have burped early and done 15 miles on 18 psi. It sure felt amazing at that pressure.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  89. #489
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    I was about 200lbs geared up when I was running 18f/20r on 2.35 Ikons on the Unit.
    Now I'm about 180 ready to roll and and even 2.25 Ikons on the Unit have to go to 17f/19r.

    I've never burped a tyre and the only rim strike I've had was on a tubed rear X-King at 16psi
    I ride light and am a wimp in the corners.

    Over here the Specialized Control tyres are about $40us and normally Maxxis are about $68us and up.
    The Ikons came up on sale for $50us so I grabbed some otherwise I would have just got a new Renegade rear.

  90. #490
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    I recently replaced my front 2.3 Fast Trak Control with the new Maxxis Aspen 2.4. So far it seems to have better cornering grip than I thought it would. I've always wondered why Nino Shurter and Kate Courtney favored the Aspen over the Ikon. They never use the Ikon.

  91. #491
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    549
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post
    Yes skinwalls are weak. In all brands I have held and used. Teravail, specialized, maxxis. Some are exo, some are non exo 60tpi. Iím unsure about Vitoria.
    Vittoria Skinwalls (XC Race casing) are somewhere between an Sworks and Control Casing. It's definitely not paper thin but you won't see me running them in NWA so they stay in the parts bin for a short track or race elsewhere. Not a huge weight savings either. Hoping for some Terreno's in XC Trail (grey sidewalls) to run similar to an Aspen use case...
    -DC, just some XC Bum from FL in NW Arkansas

  92. #492
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by pinkpowa View Post
    Vittoria Skinwalls (XC Race casing) are somewhere between an Sworks and Control Casing. It's definitely not paper thin but you won't see me running them in NWA so they stay in the parts bin for a short track or race elsewhere. Not a huge weight savings either. Hoping for some Terreno's in XC Trail (grey sidewalls) to run similar to an Aspen use case...
    I ran those skinwall teravails in NWA what finally did them in was a dry rot tear in the sidewall. Plugged it and still almost got a sub 2hr lap of b40 with about 10 stops with the frame pump.

    I felt like I was playing with fire every ride on them though.

    I meant to do a tire review of them, so here is my halfassed attempt.

    2.5s measure only 58mm and came in at 730 grams.
    2.3 measured at 54mm and were a hair under 700 grams. Both tires are well under advertised weights.

    It rolls extremely fast on hard pack and pavement. I mean this thing is whisper quiet too. It has a little more traction than a recon race and better manners than an XR3(garbage and undersized). No where near something like a nobby now or Forekaster.

    In some ways itís better and worse than an ikon 2.35 if you are used to that tire. Better side log, but worse in transition.






    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  93. #493
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Wow that is ugly. I thought I was a cheapass running a 5 year old Racing Ralph but I think you have me beat.

  94. #494
    Armature speller
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    3,617
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    I was about 200lbs geared up when I was running 18f/20r on 2.35 Ikons on the Unit.
    Now I'm about 180 ready to roll and and even 2.25 Ikons on the Unit (23mm rims) have to go to 17f/19r.
    Just tried the 2.35 Ikons at 17f/19r psi (25mm rims) and still not as much standing climbing traction or cush as the worn Renegade @20psi on the back.

  95. #495
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by NordieBoy View Post
    Just tried the 2.35 Ikons at 17f/19r psi (25mm rims) and still not as much standing climbing traction or cush as the worn Renegade @20psi on the back.
    Yeah the Renegade is an amazing rear tire. My experimentation with rear tires is over. This is the tire.

    I am still experimenting with different front tires. The Renegade is pretty good upfront too but not the standout it is in the rear.

  96. #496
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    137
    Quote Originally Posted by Stonerider View Post
    I recently replaced my front 2.3 Fast Trak Control with the new Maxxis Aspen 2.4. So far it seems to have better cornering grip than I thought it would. I've always wondered why Nino Shurter and Kate Courtney favored the Aspen over the Ikon. They never use the Ikon.
    interesting, how do you compare the climbing traction and the braking grip with the fast track?

    I'm interesting to change my fast track with the aspen or the rekon race in 2.4wt.

  97. #497
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmygato View Post
    Wow that is ugly. I thought I was a cheapass running a 5 year old Racing Ralph but I think you have me beat.
    These tires are 1 year old with about 200 miles. I can not recommend! But boy do they look good.

    Search continues for useable fashion.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  98. #498
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    1,116
    Quote Originally Posted by louit32 View Post
    interesting, how do you compare the climbing traction and the braking grip with the fast track?

    I'm interesting to change my fast track with the aspen or the rekon race in 2.4wt.
    Since I only changed the front tire I can't comment on the climbing traction of the 2.4 Aspen. Braking traction seems to be just as good as the 2.3 Fast Trak.

  99. #499
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Speaking of worn out tires...

    How long are you willing to let used tires sit on the shelf before you just throw them away? I have 3 or 4 Ikons sitting that are 3-4 years old, perfectly good when I used them, and just chilling right now on the shelf in the garage. I live in a fairly temperate climate. I'm actually considering using a couple of them again.

  100. #500
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmygato View Post
    Speaking of worn out tires...

    How long are you willing to let used tires sit on the shelf before you just throw them away? I have 3 or 4 Ikons sitting that are 3-4 years old, perfectly good when I used them, and just chilling right now on the shelf in the garage. I live in a fairly temperate climate. I'm actually considering using a couple of them again.
    Good question. I have a large collection of tires, itís getting to Imelda Marcos levels. Age of rubber doesnít matter until it starts to dry rot. In the case that you start to see that youíll find that itís hard to keep the tire sealed, even if it has little wear. These days thereís no reason to keep a stockpile of any bike parts, you can get replacements so quickly. Iím trying to ride what Iíve got before I buy new but the. 2.35 race tires are too tempting...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  101. #501
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Here is Continental's tips for storing tires. While it's for car tires, I bet many of the same principles apply for any tire.

    https://www.continental-tires.com/ca.../storing-tires

  102. #502
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,061
    Quote Originally Posted by chomxxo View Post
    Age of rubber doesnít matter until it starts to dry rot.
    Does the riding performance of the tire decrease with storage? I thought I have heard that the rubber dries out and gets less supple or something. I have never really found that to be true myself but I maybe I am just less sensitive to it.

  103. #503
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    424
    If you talk to tire experts, they will tell you that performance can degrade, especially if the tires are improperly stored (like in a garage rather than a dry, cool basement). The other thing to consider is that the manufacturers are constantly improving their compounds so having four years worth of tires stored up may prevent you from using the latest rubber tech.

  104. #504
    mtbr member
    Reputation: chomxxo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,732
    Quote Originally Posted by ohmygato View Post
    Does the riding performance of the tire decrease with storage? I thought I have heard that the rubber dries out and gets less supple or something. I have never really found that to be true myself but I maybe I am just less sensitive to it.
    Yes, that's dry rot.

    https://itstillruns.com/causes-dry-r...r-5981174.html

    Keeping tires out of UV light will help.

  105. #505
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    34
    General rule for car/truck tires is anything after 5 years from mfg date dont bother. Storage: out of the sun in a not humid or hot location where you would get lots of change in temp(heat cycling the rubber), usually in black plastic trash bag and away from any garage compressors or motors that would expose them to ozone. Bike tires after that old def would not be as dangerous as a car application but probably not perform as well as you would like.

    Used to keep car race tires stored in guest room closet in black trash bags.
    2018 Santa Cruz Blur X01 Reserve
    2015 Santa Cruz Tallboy 2 C
    2016 Look 695 Aerolite

  106. #506
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    New Mezcal G2 TNT 29x2.25. Weighs 708g and measures 2.23 upon initial installation at 40psi. Will remeasure at normal pressure after a couple weeks.

    This tire was about 10 times easier to mount than Renegade/Fast Traks even though its sidewall felt much thicker.

  107. #507
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    4
    I bought the Mezcal g2.0 tnt tyre to run on the back and although it was too much heavier than an Ikon... i could really feel the weight difference when trying to pick up speed.
    Once it was rolling it was fine.. and possibly better than the ikon...

    But i decided to go back to a black 120tpi ikon exo 3r maxx speed ( so many letters )

    This seems to suit my riding the most and for now i'm giving up experiemnting with tyres. Its coming up to winter in the UK, which means the maxxis shorty will be coming out on the bigger bike to cope with the mud

  108. #508
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by pokemonjohn View Post
    I bought the Mezcal g2.0 tnt tyre to run on the back and although it was too much heavier than an Ikon... i could really feel the weight difference when trying to pick up speed.
    Once it was rolling it was fine.. and possibly better than the ikon...

    But i decided to go back to a black 120tpi ikon exo 3r maxx speed ( so many letters )

    This seems to suit my riding the most and for now i'm giving up experiemnting with tyres. Its coming up to winter in the UK, which means the maxxis shorty will be coming out on the bigger bike to cope with the mud
    I am running the Mezcal on the front not the rear, so acceleration is less of an issue. I've learned the hard way that running light front tires and risking flats is high consequence. I've settled on the Renegade control for the rear which is reasonably light, long lasting, and grips way beyond what it should given the small knobs. Still experimenting with the front.

  109. #509
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    829
    @Primoz - once you have found the perfect pressure for your new Maxxis it would be interesting to hear your opinion of how they compare to the Schwalbes - I have been running German tires for 15 years as well. Thanks!
    flyMTBfish

  110. #510
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    817
    Quote Originally Posted by Ausable View Post
    @Primoz - once you have found the perfect pressure for your new Maxxis it would be interesting to hear your opinion of how they compare to the Schwalbes - I have been running German tires for 15 years as well. Thanks!
    @Ausable to be honest, I quite like them. I mean they are definitely different then Schwalbe. They ride different, and they feel different, so next to finding out what right pressure should be, you need to get used to how they feel too. With Schwalbe, I knew how they behave, and I knew when it's too much and will lose grip. Once I switched to Maxxis on beginning of season, I basically started from zero. First it was some experimentation to get proper pressure. My setup is now Rekon Race EXO/TR/Dual 2.25" on rear and Rekon EXO/TR/3CMaxspeed 29x2.25" on front, and I'm running 1.3bar (I guess 19psi) on front and 1.5bar (22-23psi) on rear, and I think that's about right for me (75kg+11kg bike and 21mm internal rims... obviously ancient DTSwiss XR1500).
    After few weeks I got used to this how they behave and in general, there's not much difference to Schwalbe. I still have feeling that Schwalbes (my combo was Racing Ray Speedgrip front and Racing Ralph Speed rear) work a little bit better on gravel, and quite a bit better in wet, but Rekon/Rekon race combo is not that far behind. As for rolling, I don't think there's much difference, at least the way it feels.
    But what I really like is, that I don't need to bother about stones, rocks or roots anymore. Tires are pretty much indestructible. With Schwalbe I had whole bunch of flats (and not sure if it's true or not, but I tend to believe it, that sealant doesn't really work good on Scwalbe... not Stan, not Schwalbe not Mariposa CaffeLatex), and you need to be super careful on rough terrain. With these Maxxis you just bomb down and don't worry. Maybe it's just luck, but until now I didn't have single flat, and after I got used to that, I'm riding way harder over such sections then I did ever before.
    So for next year, I'm definitely staying on Maxxis, so if you ask me, definitely worth to try.
    Primoz

  111. #511
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    829
    Interesting feedback. I am currently having a lova affair with the Race Kings but your combo is worth trying . Thanks!
    flyMTBfish

  112. #512
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    108
    I been riding thunder burt 29 x 2.25 snakeskin rear and rocket ron 2.25 liteskin front on my spark rc 900 for the past few years and really like the combo for my local trails.

    I recently started using racing ray 2.35 and racing ralph 2.35 and my 20km lap times only lost about 20 seconds and some sections I am faster, its mostly on the climbs that I lose a little bit of time. I think its worth the trade off unless you are racing because the tires have a lot of tread and it seems a lot stickier then my old setup, I don't slide on roots nearly as much.

    Might try the new super race tires once they come out, waiting for peoples opinions on them, tire being more supple would be nice

    Also I don't think tire brand plays too big of a role anymore because all of the top tire manufacturers make really good tires now.... Pauline and Henrique just won the XC races on the weekend and they are both running schwalbe racing ralph on rear and I think racing ray up front possibly racing ralph up front as well

  113. #513
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    FWIW, R2 is blowing out their Rocket Ron stock right now.

    Makes me think that they know something that the public doesn't, given that they are a massive German retailer for Schwalbe, a German tire company.

    New RoRo on the way? It hasn't been updated in a long, long time.
    Death from Below.

  114. #514
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    16
    Quote Originally Posted by jps View Post
    Racing/training in Flagstaff, AZ. Unfortunately, our series starts in Jan. in the Phoenix area, yet I am at 7,000ft dealing with snow, ice, cold, etc. Races in the desert, loose over hard/kitty litter/high speed/slower speed chunk abrasive rock. Had two races already and preparing for one this weekend in Lake Havasu on a fast, flowy, loose over hard track. Raced so far on a 2.1 Mezcal TNT rear 21#, Ikon 2.2 EXO front, 19# at about 155 #. Age group Cat 1 40-49. Tires worked very well for first two races. Switching out to a 2.25 Barzo on the front, non-TNT for this race, as it has much more fast flowy turning (Was intrigued by the 2.25 Peyote) Ran the Mezcal 2.1 TNT/Barzo 2.25 much of last year, loved it. Tough tires and the Mezcal rolls very fast and I actually like the lower volume. Barzo corners very well, and also rolls quite fast. Have trained on the 2.25 Mezcal in the rear, lots of volume, but heavy, and use 2.35 Barzo/Forekaster as well in training. Last year I switched it up a bit and used Aspen EXO 2.25 rear/2.35 Rekon EXO up front for a few races too. Hard to believe I used the Kenda Karma 2.0's, 26ers at sub 500g 15 years ago in similar conditions! A bit envious of racing in some moisture/loam, this dry kitty litter stuff can be quite un-nerving!
    i have ordered

    1* Vittoria Barzo G+ TNT 29 - 2.35
    1* Vittoria Barzo G+ TNT 29 - 2.25
    1* Vittoria Mezcal lll G+ TNT 29 - 2.10 (ordered wrong :S, 2.25 i wanted :/, now too late, they are shipped internationaly)

    Guys torn between 2.10 mezcal rear & 2.25 Barzo front vs 2.25 Barzo Rear 2.35 Barzo front combo

    29 mm rim width, it say can hold 2.00 to 2.40 tires, but ! 2.10 should be fine at rear or too narrow ? how much faster are we talking about mezcal vs barzo ?

    Are you satisfied with your 2.1 mezcal / 2.25 barzo combo ?

  115. #515
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    23
    If anyone is familiar with both Bontrager and Maxxis XC/light trail tires could you provide which Maxxis tire is the best comparison for each of the Bontrager XR1-4 tires?

    In general the Maxxis tires seem to be slightly heavier than the Bontrager tires. I assume they have better flat protection though. I have ruined a few XR tires this season and am looking to test out Maxxis.

  116. #516
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729

    2020 XC Race Tires

    Quote Originally Posted by cabanaboy View Post
    If anyone is familiar with both Bontrager and Maxxis XC/light trail tires could you provide which Maxxis tire is the best comparison for each of the Bontrager XR1-4 tires?

    In general the Maxxis tires seem to be slightly heavier than the Bontrager tires. I assume they have better flat protection though. I have ruined a few XR tires this season and am looking to test out Maxxis.
    I canít speak for xr1. For the sake of my discussion, assume all tires are EXO. Weights are what I have personally seen in the scale.

    XR2 vs Aspen
    2 is better at breaking. Both are very fast. Aspen (645-670) has better cornering grip on the shoulder. I actually ran the 2 up from with an aspen rear for a long time on my hardtail.

    Yes, aspen seems to stand up much better to pinch flats. I donít know how but I think I have never pinch flatted an aspen, though there are other maxxis I have a lot.

    Both have similar real life weights. In many cases the aspen 2.25 will be lighter than the 2.2 xr2.

    Aspen lasts longer. Xr2 wears somewhere in between a Schwalbe (least life) and a maxxis.

    When you get through the dimple in the xr2 you better replace, with an aspen, kinda the same. Watch the cornering knobs as the rubber degrades.


    Xr3.

    Pretty awful for what it is. 2.4 is extremely narrow for a 2.4. And because of that it is heavy for what it is.

    Compare this to rekon Race2.25 and alternatively IKON 2.35. Because I have risen all of these tires side by side and they are both better, but in different ways.

    Rekon race (680-705g) will be lighter semi slick. Brakes much better than aspen straight line, and has more aggressive shoulder knobs to lean into. Fast on dirt and pavement. YMMV

    ikon is Huge. (730-740g) itís not good jn wet. Boy is it good in rocky terrain. You can get away with low pressures. Great for hardtails. Doesnít feel as fast on pavement, but this is a mountain bike.

    Xr4

    Now you are in real trail tire territory. Itís hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)

    I do pinch flat forkasters in situations I wouldnít pinch flat a Nobby Nic. These are full send situations. Something about the tire, but I suspect it would be better on a 30mm rim.

    Forekasters are amazing in wet weather and with wet rocks and roots. If I had a race like this, I would at least run it up front. It might be the difference maker to win/podium. Itís also one of the best tires period in blown out loose over hard until you get to a minion or Magic Mary HR II TYPE tire. I would rather run a forekaster rear than an aggressor for cornering grip. Aggressor is a full in trail/enduro rear tire. But again, I would never race the forekaster in enduro because I do occasionally pinch flat them. But then again, I can trace all of these instances back to being maybe 1-2 psi low. I got too aggressive with my psi in really cold race starts where I knew the weather would heat up and raise psi.

    On my wheels, the rekon race is 57, forekaster is 57.5, aspen is 58mm and ikon is 60mm.

    An xr3 2.4 was barely 57




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by FJSnoozer; 1 Week Ago at 06:02 PM.

  117. #517
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Posts
    187
    XR5 is faster and grips better than xr4. Run morsa rear and xr5 front if you want a fast rolling big grip setup.

  118. #518
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756

    2021 Vittoria Tires :)

    I received my 2021 Vittoria's Today

    Spec's are on 28.6mm internal Ibis S28 rims @ 25psi

    All these tires are 29" TLR XC Race Casing Tan Side walls

    Vittoria ERTRO is 55mm for 2.25", 57mm for 2.35"& 65mm for 2.6"

    Mezcal 2.25 - 660, 681 grams 58.5mm
    Mezcal 2.35 - 679,684,688,690 grams 60.5mm just mounted today to 40 psi and reduced to 25 psi
    Barzo 2.35 - 698,709 grams
    Peyote 2.25 - 653 grams old stock tire is discontinued 57mm
    Mezcal 2.6 Trail Casing 875 grams

    2020 XC Race Tires-rm-element-vittoria.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-vittoria-box.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-mezcal-2-6.jpg

    Glad to see the Weights are lower for the 2021 and are close the published weight and consistent
    Mezcal 2.25" 690 grams 2.35" 680 grams Barzo 2.35" 690 grams Mezcal 2.6" 870 grams

    I will update when I try out a 2.35" Barzo the 2020 2.25 Barzo was smaller (55mm on i25mm rim)than the Mezcal, I'm hoping the 2.35 Barzo will have a bigger volume like the 2.35 Mezcal Added this pictures, 1 day at 40 psi then at 25 psi in these pictures ! 2020 XC Race Tires-mezcal-235-1.jpg2020 XC Race Tires-mezcal-235-2.jpg
    Last edited by Spin Cycle; 1 Week Ago at 09:17 PM.

  119. #519
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    Iíd had a bad stretch of overweight and undersized Vittorias. Bought two 2.35 Barzos that were just over 2.25 and 30-40g overweight.

    Good to see they are back on track.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  120. #520
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by dinsum View Post
    I been riding thunder burt 29 x 2.25 snakeskin rear and rocket ron 2.25 liteskin front on my spark rc 900 for the past few years and really like the combo for my local trails.

    I recently started using racing ray 2.35 and racing ralph 2.35 and my 20km lap times only lost about 20 seconds and some sections I am faster, its mostly on the climbs that I lose a little bit of time. I think its worth the trade off unless you are racing because the tires have a lot of tread and it seems a lot stickier then my old setup, I don't slide on roots nearly as much.

    Might try the new super race tires once they come out, waiting for peoples opinions on them, tire being more supple would be nice

    Also I don't think tire brand plays too big of a role anymore because all of the top tire manufacturers make really good tires now.... Pauline and Henrique just won the XC races on the weekend and they are both running schwalbe racing ralph on rear and I think racing ray up front possibly racing ralph up front as well
    Racing Ralph up Front and They are running a 2.35 Thunder Burt Proto Type also up Front there are some pictures on Pink Bike but of the sideway not the tread. I was at World Cup last Fall Snowshoe and they where running the Racing Ralph on the front . I tested in on the front and being a flatter tire it was very quick turn in and grabby, maybe on my new bike that's a little slacker headtube angle and wider bars it would be worth trying again, must roll faster than the 2020 speed grip Racing Ray, now with the Super Race out and Racing ray available in speed grip compound I thought they would be on that tire, but I did not see it in the two weeks of races on the front

  121. #521
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    Quote Originally Posted by Spin Cycle View Post
    I received my 2021 Vittoria's Today

    Spec's are on 28.6mm internal Ibis S28 rims @ 25psi

    All these tires are 29" TLR XC Race Casing Tan Side walls

    Vittoria ERTRO is 55mm for 2.25", 57mm for 2.35"& 65mm for 2.6"

    Mezcal 2.25 - 660, 681 grams 58.5mm
    Mezcal 2.35 - 679,684,688,690 grams 60.5mm just mounted today to 40 psi and reduced to 25 psi
    Barzo 2.35 - 698,709 grams
    Peyote 2.25 - 653 grams old stock tire is discontinued 57mm
    Mezcal 2.6 Trail Casing 875 grams

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	RM Element Vittoria.jpg 
Views:	36 
Size:	291.1 KB 
ID:	1371321Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Vittoria Box.jpg 
Views:	29 
Size:	152.7 KB 
ID:	1371317Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Mezcal 2 6.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	275.6 KB 
ID:	1371319

    Glad to see the Weights are lower for the 2021 and are close the published weight and consistent
    Mezcal 2.25" 690 grams 2.35" 680 grams Barzo 2.35" 690 grams Mezcal 2.6" 870 grams

    I will update when I try out a 2.35" Barzo the 2020 2.25 Barzo was smaller (55mm on i25mm rim)than the Mezcal, I'm hoping the 2.35 will have a bigger
    Out of curiosity, where did you get your Vittorias?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  122. #522
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Out of curiosity, where did you get your Vittorias?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Retail from there web site, they just got the 2.35 in stock about a week ago, it would let me add them to my cart so I ordered and in about a week they showed up

  123. #523
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Iíd had a bad stretch of overweight and undersized Vittorias. Bought two 2.35 Barzos that were just over 2.25 and 30-40g overweight.

    Good to see they are back on track.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Vittorias are correct for there ERTRO size 2.25" are 55mm and 2.35" are 57mm and that's what they are on a 25mm rim its on the tires and there web site.

    Most other companies 2.25" are 57mm ertro size Both MAxxis and Schwable list there 2.25" at 57mm ertro and 2.35" as 60mm some 2.35" Maxxis are 57mm.

    So Vittoria are not small they are the ERTRO size , if you email any tire company they will tell you the tire is sized off of ERTRO 622x55 etc


    2.25 barzo are smaller volume than a 2.25 Mezcal just like the 2.25" Schwalbe Racing Ray are smaller than 2.35 Racing Ralph

    I hope these 2.35 Barzo are bigger Volume tooo....

  124. #524
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Posts
    23
    [QUOTE=FJSnoozer;15036477]

    "Now you are in real trail tire territory. Itís hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"


    Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.

    If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.

  125. #525
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rupps5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    531
    [QUOTE=cabanaboy;15041449]
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post

    "Now you are in real trail tire territory. Itís hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"


    Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.

    If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.
    An aggressor is not that good in the wet, I would take a forecaster over it any day. in the dry the Aggressor is one of my favorite rear tires on the trail bike. I don't think there is a place for it on an xc bike though.

  126. #526
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,729
    [QUOTE=cabanaboy;15041449]
    Quote Originally Posted by FJSnoozer View Post

    "Now you are in real trail tire territory. Itís hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"


    Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.

    If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.
    I wouldnít run an aggressor at all. Itís not a good tire. I feel that people run it because they are coming from a minion DHF and looking for a faster rear.

    1. It doesnít roll fast
    2. Itís heavier than even a magic Mary! It doesnít offer near the traction of a Mary.

    I would take a forekaster any day, although in crazy mud you may want a dedicated mud tire. Itís a wet or dry/loose tire. What does this mean? It works in really loose over hard, any dirt that is hard pack or hero dirt of course, and dances itís way through wet trails. Where it is not great is deep kitty litter where you would want a more dedicated shoulder tread line. I did not have great grip on it in the looser parts of Gallop, NM and High desert trails.

    I assume we are talking about trail use and general riding? For enduro, I would probably try a 2.6 forekaster with an insert. For XC race, the forekaster is about the most agressjve thing I would run on a bike other than a Nobby Nic. This coming from a gu who use to race with a Hans Dampf up front pretty much all the way until I got to Cat 1.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  127. #527
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by cabanaboy View Post

    Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.

    If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.
    I just bought a Barzo to pair with my Forekaster 2.35 up front. Will report back on how I like it, if you're interested

  128. #528
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    35
    Here is my current winter XC tire setup. Maxxis Forekaster 2.35 f / r Vittoria Barzo 2.35. The Barzo seems pretty round even on my 28mm id rims. Mounted by hand without issues. Get to ride it this afternoon. Will post initial ride impression and maybe even swap them out to see how the Barzo performs as a front tire.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails 2020 XC Race Tires-img_2415.jpg  

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_2417.jpg  

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_2423.jpg  

    2020 XC Race Tires-img_2424.jpg  


  129. #529
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rupps5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    531
    Quote Originally Posted by HT-XC View Post
    Here is my current winter XC tire setup. Maxxis Forekaster 2.35 f / r Vittoria Barzo 2.35. The Barzo seems pretty round even on my 28mm id rims. Mounted by hand without issues. Get to ride it this afternoon. Will post initial ride impression and maybe even swap them out to see how the Barzo performs as a front tire.
    That tire combination is really good. I had a lot of fun riding it that way. Unfortunately for me the barzo is too flat prone and i just could not keep them together.

    Evolution Training Cycles

  130. #530
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    35
    What are you running now? Do you have a suggestion for another rear tire to pair with the Forekaster in the front? So far I really like the Barzo as a rear tire. Definitely more draggy than the Rekon Race it replaced but so much more grip. Nice.

  131. #531
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rupps5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    531
    I still have not found an xc rear tire that has checked all the boxes yet. Most of this year I have been on the trail bike so the xc bikes have gotten less use than normal. But my favorite xc rear tire this year has been the aspen.

  132. #532
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    137
    hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
    I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks

  133. #533
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    591
    Speaking of Rekon Race, how does it compare in size to the 2.35 Ikon? Iím assuming itís built on the (strangely) smaller Rekon 2.4 casing and not the big Ikon casing.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  134. #534
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    638
    Quote Originally Posted by louit32 View Post
    hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
    I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks
    I've not used the Rekon Race, but the 2.3 Renegade is better than the Aspen in every way as a rear tire. Better climbing, braking, and cornering traction. Breaks away with control rather than suddenly. Measures out to 2.33 at about 23.5psi on 25ID rim. Have 700 miles on it and it's still going strong. Aspen was done at a little over 500.

  135. #535
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    950
    Quote Originally Posted by louit32 View Post
    hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
    I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks
    I can't weigh in on those treads specifically, but I highly doubt that the 2.4 maxxis has any more volume than the 2.35 schwalbe, despite what the numbers say.

  136. #536
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by GT87 View Post
    I can't weigh in on those treads specifically, but I highly doubt that the 2.4 maxxis has any more volume than the 2.35 schwalbe, despite what the numbers say.
    Itís bigger, Iím quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
    I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.

    I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.

  137. #537
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Itís bigger, Iím quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
    I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.

    I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.

    Are both your racing rays 2.35"? do you happen to have the weights of both the tires for comparison?

  138. #538
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    950
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Itís bigger, Iím quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
    I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.

    I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.
    Thanks for the info. My experience with various snakeskin 2.35s is that the casing often measures close to 2.5 on i30s.

    Can you comment on how the super race casing compares to the old Ralph snakeskin?

    Any other thoughts on the racing ray tread? I'm considering getting one for the front.

  139. #539
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by GT87 View Post
    Thanks for the info. My experience with various snakeskin 2.35s is that the casing often measures close to 2.5 on i30s.

    Can you comment on how the super race casing compares to the old Ralph snakeskin?

    Any other thoughts on the racing ray tread? I'm considering getting one for the front.
    Racing Ray is a fantastic front tyre. The tread pattern has not changed from the ĒoldĒ snakeskinĒ models.

    Super Race is more supple than snakeskin. Sidewalls are probably a little thinner but it feels that there is more rubber in the tread.

    Super Ground has a more robust and the sidewall is thicker than snakeskin.

    The new series is a lot heavier overall. I believe that they use more rubber in all tyres which give them very good damping. But the weight...

    They are easier to make tubeless and they keep the pressure better than the old ones.

    Iím doing a lot of tests now between Maxxis 2.4s, Mezcal 2.35 and different Schwalbes. Unfortunately the season is ending and the climate is getting colder so testing continues in the spring..

  140. #540
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by dinsum View Post
    Are both your racing rays 2.35"? do you happen to have the weights of both the tires for comparison?
    Racing Ralph Super Race 2.35 743g
    Racing Ralph Super Ground 2.35 815g
    Racing Ray Super Ground 2.35 789g

    Aspen 2.4 744g & 739g

    Mezcal 2.35 XC/Trail 741g & 714g

    All on same scale so it gives some reference.

  141. #541
    pk1
    pk1 is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    161
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Racing Ray is a fantastic front tyre. The tread pattern has not changed from the ĒoldĒ snakeskinĒ models.

    Super Race is more supple than snakeskin. Sidewalls are probably a little thinner but it feels that there is more rubber in the tread.

    Super Ground has a more robust and the sidewall is thicker than snakeskin.

    The new series is a lot heavier overall. I believe that they use more rubber in all tyres which give them very good damping. But the weight...

    They are easier to make tubeless and they keep the pressure better than the old ones.

    Iím doing a lot of tests now between Maxxis 2.4s, Mezcal 2.35 and different Schwalbes. Unfortunately the season is ending and the climate is getting colder so testing continues in the spring..
    interesting, thanks for the info.
    i found the snakeskin to be a sweetspot in terms of weight/protection so stocked up on them. even the super race is notably heavier than the old snakeskin and while it might have as much or even more tread protection i can only imagine the sidewalls are vulnerable. super ground just seem too heavy.

    i really don't like that they made the lighterweight version narrower either - you should at least be able to rely on variants of the same make and model measuring the same!

  142. #542
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by pk1 View Post
    interesting, thanks for the info.
    i found the snakeskin to be a sweetspot in terms of weight/protection so stocked up on them. even the super race is notably heavier than the old snakeskin and while it might have as much or even more tread protection i can only imagine the sidewalls are vulnerable. super ground just seem too heavy.

    i really don't like that they made the lighterweight version narrower either - you should at least be able to rely on variants of the same make and model measuring the same!
    I was really surprised how well these new Super Ground tyres work in technichal terrain. The damping is magical and better than the snakeskin variants, my opinion.
    Itís really annoying that they are so heavy because they just feel better.

    So itís all up to what you require from the tyres and also on the terrain that you are riding.

    Iím only doing xcm so for flatter technichal courses these new ones could be better. For course with a lot of long climbing the old ones are probably better for their low weight.

    But as seen during the last World Champs all three riders from Cannondale team rode on the old tyres. Pretty strange since itís a Schwalbe sponsored team.

  143. #543
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by aland33 View Post
    Racing Ralph Super Race 2.35 743g
    Racing Ralph Super Ground 2.35 815g
    Racing Ray Super Ground 2.35 789g

    Aspen 2.4 744g & 739g

    Mezcal 2.35 XC/Trail 741g & 714g

    All on same scale so it gives some reference.

    Thanks for the info, so looks like the difference between super race and ground is about 75 grams which isn't too shabby but I agree that 815 grams for an XC tire is pushing it. Is super race more supple then super ground?

    my racing ray 2.35 tle snakeskin is 700 grams, my Racing ralph tle snakeskin is 670 grams, these weights are very respectable for a 2.35 XC tires in my opinion and I can definitely notice a difference in rolling resistance and acceleration compared to my old setup, thunder burt snakeskin 2.25 rear and rocket ron liteskin 2.25 front, but its really not a crazy difference

    That being said I prefer the ray ralph 2.35 combo because it gives that much more grip but if its not a technical xc course and its just mostly flat and smooth you will probably lose 30 seconds to a minute for every hour you ride compared to Tburt and Rocket ron

    I blast corners with much more confidence with this setup, makes me feel like i'm actually a good rider lol.. When going really fast with tburt and rocket ron things can get really sketchy sometimes, with 2.35 ray ralph things are much more in control at all times for me especially on loose over hard. I think in time I will continue to get even faster with my 2.35 setup as I keep gaining more and more trust in the grip

  144. #544
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.

    Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.
    Death from Below.

  145. #545
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    950
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.

    Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.
    They've offered that for a while now. They still had some in stock last weekend... I almost ordered one while they were having the sale. They must have sold out since then.

  146. #546
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    11,820
    Quote Originally Posted by GT87 View Post
    They've offered that for a while now. They still had some in stock last weekend... I almost ordered one while they were having the sale. They must have sold out since then.
    Interesting. I've never seen the "para" (XC casing) version of any 2.35 offered in any online store, and I had no clue that they were doing the 2.35 in the XC casing for either the Barzo or Mezcal at all.
    Death from Below.

  147. #547
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    950
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    Interesting. I've never seen the "para" (XC casing) version of any 2.35 offered in any online store, and I had no clue that they were doing the 2.35 in the XC casing for either the Barzo or Mezcal at all.
    I can't say how long it's been an option, but I remember seeing them on their site before earlier this year. I was tempted by the sale last weekend and they were in stock and i added exactly that combo to my cart... Mezcal+barzo, both 29x2.35para. Ended up deciding aganst it to be responsible and use up some tires that are sitting in my bin before I buy anymore.

  148. #548
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by Le Duke View Post
    I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.

    Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.
    Just Put a few Miles on the 2.35/57mm Barzo XC Race (tan) casing, It is nice sized but after being mounted a few days now ( was at 35psi on and off) its not as big as the Mezcal, Much better than the 2.25/55mm Barzo that was small in Volume compared to the Mezcal.

    Dimensions @ 25psi 28.6 mm rim

    2.35/57 Barzo 58-58.25mm
    2.25/55 Mezcal 58.7-59mm
    2.35/57 Mezcal 59.2-59.5mm

    I can't really tell much if any size difference between the 2.25 and 2.35 Mezcal the 2.35 is about 2mm larger in height measuring from inside of
    rin to top of tread.

    I really like the size and tried to order a couple more and they where sold out already at Vittoria, a friend of mine got one at Bike Tires Direct.

  149. #549
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    delete

  150. #550
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756
    delete

  151. #551
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    756

    2021 Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.25/57 Super Race are here :)

    Just Order a Couple of the New 2.25/57mm Super Race Thunder Burt's, I was told these would not be in North America until early December and out of no where had an email yesterday and the 2.25 are available on Schwalbe web site for sale. They are listed at 625 grams I will post actual weights and width on Friday

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. 2020 Hightower 2 vs 2020 Tallboy 4
    By Doug in forum Santa Cruz
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 07-07-2020, 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: 568

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.