# Kenda K Rad 1.95 or 2.30?



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

Hi all,

I'm gonna get a set of either the 1.95 or 2.30 K-Rads...

What sizes are u guys runnin out there and why?

I'm leaning towards the 1.95's to save a little weight. But am a little concerned if its gonna be enough for jumping, going down stairs, endos, miss timed jumps etc. I weigh about 140. The bike is a Kona Scrap.

Oh yeah and I'm planning on using Stans no tube...

Whadda u guys think? lemme know


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

fmf said:


> ....1.95's ..... going down stairs....


this one of the best recipies for destroyed rims i've ever heard....


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

.WestCoastHucker. said:


> this one of the best recipies for destroyed rims i've ever heard....


right now i go down about 2 flights of stairs about 50ft long on my commuter. XC type with 1.95 Ritchys w/ regular tubes. no prob... u think the Stans aint gon hold up?


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

fmf said:


> .... u think the Stans aint gon hold up?


 i'm not worried about your tires, with that little volume of a tire, there isn't much movement before your rims are getting hit. you are going to be denting up your rims unless you run high psi, in which case you will be fine....


----------



## HANKg (Mar 20, 2006)

I have a set of the 2.3's and they already seem real narrow, visually atleast. I don't think I'd go with the 1.95


----------



## j77 (Oct 14, 2004)

Kendas run small. Definitely go with the 2.3" if you want to thrash around without worring about your wheels. There's not much of a weight penalty over the 1.95" size, both have lightweight casings. 

Also, I dont run tubless, but I do remember seeing something on the boards here about Stans + Kenda = destroyed tires. The stans goo eats up the rubber or something. . . .


----------



## sittingduck (Apr 26, 2005)

2.3 ..............


----------



## sandyP1 (Jun 20, 2006)

definitly go with the 2.3's. and what size if your rim specified for?


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

sandyP1 said:


> definitly go with the 2.3's. and what size if your rim specified for?


not sure what size theyre speced for... theyre the stock alex DM24 rims on an 06 Kona Scrap...


----------



## .WestCoastHucker. (Jan 14, 2004)

fmf said:


> not sure what size theyre speced for... theyre the stock alex DM24 rims on an 06 Kona Scrap...


for those who don't know, the alex DM24 is almost identical to a Sun Ryno Lyte XL. i'd go with the 2.3's....


----------



## MT Road (Sep 26, 2004)

2.3 I have them and I wish they where bigger...


----------



## captain spaulding (May 7, 2006)

j77 said:


> Also, I dont run tubless, but I do remember seeing something on the boards here about Stans + Kenda = destroyed tires. The stans goo eats up the rubber or something. . . .


I believe that was with the Nevegals, which ended up being a bad batch of tires..


----------



## SOG (Jun 21, 2006)

Make sure you run the proper air pressure and you should be able to avoid denting your rims.

What tire pressure do you run now?


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

fat tires are good. 

go with 2.3


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

SOG said:


> Make sure you run the proper air pressure and you should be able to avoid denting your rims.
> 
> What tire pressure do you run now?


between 30-60 psi.


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

aggiebiker said:


> fat tires are good.
> 
> go with 2.3


you know.....

BMX tires run pretty small compared to MTB street tires.... And BMX bikes weigh about the same.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Go with 2.3. run high psi in them, over 60 if you can.


----------



## cholo (Nov 25, 2006)

1.95 back, 2.3 front for trails.


----------



## yules (Jul 7, 2006)

cholo said:


> 1.95 back, 2.3 front for trails.


K-rads aren't for trails anyway (Nevegals would be better)... But you are right in principal - a thinner rear = easier pedaling.


----------



## cholo (Nov 25, 2006)

Trail JUMPING. Sorry for the misunderstanding.


----------



## JMH (Feb 23, 2005)

I run 2.3 K-Rads tubeless on my deemax wheels with stans fluid. Yeah, the ammonia in the fluid can eventually kill tires, and some of the Kendas are particularly susceptible. But at K-Rad price, I just don't care if they crap out prematurely.

Oh, the cheap thin sidewalls with the low thread count take FOREVER to seal. Plan on having flats every morning for a while, but don't give up, they will eventually hold air. I run approximately 45-50psi.

JMH


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

JMH said:


> I run 2.3 K-Rads tubeless on my deemax wheels with stans fluid. Yeah, the ammonia in the fluid can eventually kill tires, and some of the Kendas are particularly susceptible. But at K-Rad price, I just don't care if they crap out prematurely.
> 
> Oh, the cheap thin sidewalls with the low thread count take FOREVER to seal. Plan on having flats every morning for a while, but don't give up, they will eventually hold air. I run approximately 45-50psi.
> 
> JMH


Cool! txs for the info. U have any problems losing air after a hard landing or hitting square objects.

how about wheel / rim slipping on hard braking or endos?


----------



## PCinSC (Oct 25, 2005)

fmf said:


> Oh yeah and I'm planning on using Stans no tube...
> 
> Whadda u guys think?


From the Kenda website.

ATTENTION KENDA VALUED CUSTOMERS
KENDA DOES NOT ENDORSE THE USE OF ANY FLUID BASED SEALANT PRODUCTS IN KENDA TUBE TYPE OR TUBELESS TYPE TIRES. USE OF ANY FLUID BASED PRODUCT IN KENDA TIRES WILL BE AT YOUR OWN RISK AND WILL VOID ANY WARRANTY CLAIMS.

THANK YOU!
Kenda Management

If you have any questions, please contact
us at:
Tel: (614) 866-9803 x1
Fax: (614) 866-9805
Toll Free: (866) 536-3287 x1
[email protected]​I have no experience with a Kenda/Stans combo, if others say they are using it with no problems, cool. Personally, I'd be leery of doing stair gaps on tires that may be slowly degrading. Or maybe that'll just add another element of risk.


----------



## ihatemybike (Nov 27, 2005)

I'm 6'2", 210 lbs and only use the 1.95 versions, but I run 80 psi front and 100 psi rear. Yes, they hold it. I've been running this set up since Kenda introduced them, before that I was running these pressures with 1.95 Kenda Komfort tires. I have no problems with pinch flats unless a truely nail a hard corner. Stairs are no problem.


----------



## cholo (Nov 25, 2006)

Here's a good deal:

http://www.nashbar.com/profile.cfm?...id=&pagename=Shop by Subcat: 26x1.8 to 26x2.1


----------



## chucker1221 (Feb 7, 2006)

get maxxis holy rollers i hear k rads are not that great


----------



## ihatemybike (Nov 27, 2005)

You heard wrong. The problem most people have with K-Rads is the fact that they have a slightly thiner sidewall than the Holy Rollers and thus are a little easier to pinch flat. Uping your air pressure helps. I easily get over a year of use out K-Rads.


----------



## cholo (Nov 25, 2006)

I just put a 1.95 KRAD on the back. I took off a 2.3 Kniption. I like it. The Kniption weighs846gm; the Krad weighs 588gm (I weighed them). I not really a weight weenie, but I saved over half a pound. with wheel weight, that will make a noticable difference...

The ISO size for the 1.95 Krad is 50-559; that's too narrow for the front for me. ISO 2.3 Krad is 58-559, so I run that on the front. My set-up isn't that great for street/park, I'd want wider tires to pad the rims a bit more.For trails, I like the skinny back...


----------



## fmf (Jun 30, 2006)

ihatemybike said:


> I'm 6'2", 210 lbs and only use the 1.95 versions, but I run 80 psi front and 100 psi rear. Yes, they hold it. I've been running this set up since Kenda introduced them, before that I was running these pressures with 1.95 Kenda Komfort tires. I have no problems with pinch flats unless a truely nail a hard corner. Stairs are no problem.


Hi,

Thanks for the info! What kind of riding u do?


----------



## ihatemybike (Nov 27, 2005)

I spend most of my time riding park and street, but I'll hit the DJs and goof off with trials.


----------



## iron1 (Sep 23, 2006)

go for the 2.3s...you'll have more balance


----------



## ihatemybike (Nov 27, 2005)

iron1 said:


> go for the 2.3s...you'll have more balance


Have any physics to back this claim up?


----------

