# rocket ron weight gain?



## rroadie (Aug 3, 2008)

Hello all, I had been enjoying my rocket ron 2.4f and 2.25r tires so when I saw a bunch of 2.25's at my LBS today I thought I'd grab a couple more. 
Surprisingly the EVO version had 520g listed on the box as the weight. On the scale they were 500g. My current 2.4 weighs 480g and my 2.25 440g.
Did Schwalbe change the tires or something? The 2.25 Evo are suppose to be 440g according to their site.
They were not marked as tubeless or anything so I couldn't figure what was up.


----------



## AlexRandall (Apr 2, 2009)

I've seen this on a lot of current schwalbe tyres, UST as well. The weight written on the pack has been changed as well as the 'actual' weight


----------



## CharacterZero (May 19, 2004)

*confirmed*

I emailed Schwalbe about the change in the size of the Big Betty UST - it went from 900g to 1100g.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

rroadie said:


> Hello all, I had been enjoying my rocket ron 2.4f and 2.25r tires so when I saw a bunch of 2.25's at my LBS today I thought I'd grab a couple more.
> Surprisingly the EVO version had 520g listed on the box as the weight. On the scale they were 500g. *My current 2.4 weighs 480g and my 2.25 440g.*
> Did Schwalbe change the tires or something? The 2.25 Evo are suppose to be 440g according to their site.
> They were not marked as tubeless or anything so I couldn't figure what was up.


You're LUCKY!!!

I just got f***ed by Schwalbe myself... ironic that I stumbled upon this thread. I JUST got a brand new Rocket Ron 26 x 2.25 EVO... Box SAYS 445g...

So I weigh it (as some were claiming like 430-440g... So I was awaiting to pleasantly surprised)... NOPE.... Whopping 485g!!!!!!!!! :madmax:

My new 2.25 Ron weighs MORE than your 2.4.... WTF????? :madman:










Must be an old label - because I just got back from my LBS that happened to get a couple Rons *yesterday* (1x 2.1 and 1x 2.25) - the 2.25 says 465g on the box now. The 2.1 weighed 420g, and the 2.25 weight 455g. It's too bad I didn't know they were getting some - last week they didn't have any which is why I ordered them online. Shame on me I guess.

In regards to Schwalbe - Poor quality control to say the least! :nono: If they at least had the decency to print tolerance ranges on their boxes, like Kenda does, I'd have been more understanding. But even then, considering the price they sell their tire$ for - and not really the price, but how much more they are compared to other good brands, I'd expect better of them as far as consistency.

The Ron will be getting returned. Not to mention my LBS said people kept bringing them back (not for refund, but to show the damage) - because they were tearing sidewalls. So they stopped carrying them, and bring them in on rare occasions before big races.

My LBS had a Ralph 26 x 2.25 @ 478g (claimed 520g by Schwalbe) - so I just bought it and be done with it. They only had a Speed King Supersonic 2.3 as far as Conti goes, and it just was too small to run as a front tire. I have a 2.1 Ralph in the back now, and it's smaller than that even.


----------



## yellowbook (Aug 21, 2005)

Sounds like this takes the Rocket out of Ronny!


----------



## drano72 (Nov 8, 2008)

*Ron 2.1 Fiasco*

I went thru buying 3 (yes 3) Rocket Ron 2.1 Evo's for the advertised 410g or less weight. Heard they handled great so it was an easy sell. ALL of them weighed in around 460-470g, on 2 different scales. I was pretty sure they were a mislabeled batch of 2.25's. But after numerous emails to their office in WA I gave up. The folks in WA were cool, but the info I gave them was never responded to by their German counterparts. They do handle great but I won't be buying anymore in the future, for sure.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

Get some Ralphs dude... that's what I did...

I found a Ralphs 2.25 for 478g... That speaks for itself... More durable than a Ron too (which maybe is why the weights on the Rons are up - too many failures maybe in the field?)


----------



## hypercycler (Jul 7, 2009)

I just got 2 Ron Rocket UST 2.1. One is at 604g and one at 640g. I purchased them separately.... Looking at the serial # (?) inside the tires, I think the later batch is heavier...


----------



## pxx (Mar 25, 2008)

On friday I went through two batches of 10 Ron Evos, one 2.1" and one 2.25. The lightest 2.1" was 392g, others were 410-435g. 2.25":s were from 454g to 485g.


----------



## drano72 (Nov 8, 2008)

The latest theory I know of is that the sidewalls were beefed up at some point to reduce some failures/issues they had. I don't have 2 different to compare but you may want to check yours to see if that could be the case.

Tread wise these do handle great in wet or dry. They seem to wear fast but that's typical of soft/EVO compounds. At 450g for non-UST still some of the lightest you can get that aren't made of wet toilet paper.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Guys- it's old news that Schwalbe tires vary up to 80g (!) within the same size!

I weighed shelves of those tires at our distributors warehouse and was able to pick myself the lightest back then but since then the Conti RK hit the scene and Schwalbe for me is of no interest anymore 

Anyway - if you want a light Schwalbe you HAVE TO weigh them before you buy!


----------



## drano72 (Nov 8, 2008)

Well not all of us have that kind of access prior to purchase. Thx for the feedback tho. 
I don't plan to buy any more Schwalbes after this so the Contis might fit the bill.


----------



## FueLEX8 (May 24, 2008)

my 2.1's weighted 373 and 393


----------



## Strong Ti (Jun 1, 2005)

*Mine came in at*

398 for an older one, and 425 for one I just picked up, my 2.25 came in at 465gm


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

Just a sidenote:
The Rocket Ron 2,1" is so skinny i would be scared. Even the 2,25" size looks like a thinner 2,1" at best.


----------



## hypercycler (Jul 7, 2009)

Actually I compare them side by side with my Maxxis Advantage and Rendez (both 2.1), the Rocket Ron looks the same or a very tiny bit wider... Maybe it's my illusion.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

1) RoRo 2.25 - RaRa 2.25 - NoNi 2.25

2) NoNi 2.25 vs, RoRo 2.25


----------



## Mattias_Hellöre (Oct 2, 2005)

I bought a 408gram RoRo on ebay and it showed up at right weight.
But they are skinny compared to RaceKings, really..

I think I have to get light RKs again.


----------



## nino (Jan 13, 2004)

quax said:


> 1) RoRo 2.25 - RaRa 2.25 - NoNi 2.25
> 
> 2) NoNi 2.25 vs, RoRo 2.25


Don't compare them within the Schwalbe range....face to face against the conti RK 2,2 even the 2,25" Ron looks like a skinny semislick


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

funny, I haven't actually made any statement in either direction


----------



## parkrider (Mar 7, 2008)

Both my Racing Ralph and Nobby Nic turned up around 30-40g's under advertised weight recently, however these were old stock, early 2009 ones. Seem's like Nino says its just luck of the draw (or use of a scale at your lbs)


----------



## eliflap (Dec 13, 2007)

why Schwalbe does not do their tyres at CNC machine ?


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

FYI: I just got a 2.25" Nobby Nic 2010 edition from Starbike and it came in at 540 grams! Listed at 570 on the box. Much lighter than last year's model.

Hopefully the Ron's that I am waiting on will be close to claimed, or lighter, as well.


----------



## Broccoli (Jun 11, 2008)

nino said:


> Don't compare them within the Schwalbe range....face to face against the conti RK 2,2 even the 2,25" Ron looks like a skinny semislick


Why should not he compare tires within Schwalbe range?


----------

