# Muddy Mary 2.35 versus 2.5



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

i've heard that most downhillers run the 2.35 version of this tire and that the 2.5 version is just too big.. if a tire is too big how does it affect handling? i run a allmountain bike 160/160 im going to get some muddy marys for the odd day in the bike park, so what size should i choose and why?


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

higher speeds need more traction......2.5's are not that big.....if you ride a park one or two days a year then go the 2.35 route if you are pedaling more on your local trails...but if you are riding a lot of challenging trails just go the 2.5 route


----------



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

i was also thinking bigger tire more traction, until somebody told me they were bigger than need be, the comparison is that MM 2.35 is slightly wider on paper than maxxis minion DHF 2.5, what could be the problem if a tire is too big? have you used MM 2.5`s?


----------



## Johnny No.5 (Mar 20, 2008)

I wouldn't worry about "too big" unless you're looking at 3" or some 2.75's. I run 2.75 Intense tires and on pedally trails that aren't that steep they work against me but I love 'em on the steep and rocky stuff. I agree though, if you're not doing DH exclusively then the 2.35's should've plenty. I only ride down so I like fatter rubber.


----------



## staikeinthahood (Oct 8, 2008)

A friend is running 2.35 Dirty Dans and they're wider than my 2.5 High Rollers. Narrower tires digs better down in the terrain while a wide tire just "floats" a lot more on top and distrbiutes the load over a bigger area. Wider tires is more stabile, but it's easier to get sideways and squeeze more grip out of narrower tires. Trust me, 2.35 Muddy Marys will be wide enough.


----------



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

i see.. 
planning on using them only in bikepark and steep mountains where i push the bike to the top, i also like big tires and going uphill is not important, my rims have a inner width of 23mm and outer width of 30mm, could this be to narrow for such a huge tire? the stated width of a muddy mary 2.5 is 64mm, in comparison a maxxis minion 2.5 has a stated width of 55mm, could i risk a wobbly tire in sharp turns?


----------



## Scythe (Nov 23, 2011)

I had the 2.35 then got the 2.5. I got better traction with 2.5's, didn't notice much difference in rolling resistance. Maybe better traction able to take turns faster offset the rolling resistance. I would reccomend the Trailstar compound, last longer than the Vertstar.


----------



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

staikeinthahood said:


> A friend is running 2.35 Dirty Dans and they're wider than my 2.5 High Rollers. Narrower tires digs better down in the terrain while a wide tire just "floats" a lot more on top and distrbiutes the load over a bigger area. Wider tires is more stabile, but it's easier to get sideways and squeeze more grip out of narrower tires. Trust me, 2.35 Muddy Marys will be wide enough.


what you are saying sounds logical
maybe 2.35 is the way to go


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

Djenghis said:


> what you are saying sounds logical
> maybe 2.35 is the way to go


he is saying ...not much rolling resistance difference for the 2.5....so use the 2.5


----------



## cicatrix (Nov 15, 2010)

why do you have an all mountain bike if you don't ride uphill?

Anyway, I have heard that Muddy Marys are a handful when the terrain is anything but muddy. My friend was using them this past summer and was sliding around in dry conditions.


----------



## SHIVER ME TIMBERS (Jan 12, 2004)

Djenghis said:


> i see..
> planning on using them only in bikepark and steep mountains where i push the bike to the top, i also like big tires and going uphill is not important, my rims have a inner width of 23mm and outer width of 30mm, could this be to narrow for such a huge tire? the stated width of a muddy mary 2.5 is 64mm, in comparison a maxxis minion 2.5 has a stated width of 55mm, could i risk a wobbly tire in sharp turns?


there you go....2.5's it is for your type of riding


----------



## hitechredneck (May 9, 2009)

I have both the 2.35 and the 2.5's. I get a very large amount more traction with the 2.5. They are like moto tires on the front It rails and grips. if I was going to do them on my 160 bike gor 2.35 rear and 2.5 front.


----------



## Rob-Bob (Jun 11, 2004)

Anyway, I have heard that Muddy Marys are a handful when the terrain is anything but muddy. My friend was using them this past summer and was sliding around in dry conditions.[/QUOTE]

Where I ride at is mostly hard pack and rocks and the muddy marys did not handle well in those conditions. They did excel when I rode trails with softer soil and mud.


----------



## TNC3 (May 19, 2010)

*2.35 Good!*

I used the 2.35 Muddy Mary with the "gooey gluey" softer compound for my front tire on my FR/DH bike with great results riding typical Western WA terrain. Schwalbe has a more round shaped tire compared to the Maxxis Minion. Good all-around tire choice for my trail conditions.


----------



## mtg7aa (Jul 11, 2008)

I've had both, and they are both great. For DH racing on rough courses, I think the 2.5 is better. However, for a 160/160 bike riding bike park trails, I would go for the 2.35. It's about the same size as a Maxxis Minion "2.5", grips great and is quite a bit lighter than the huge 2.5.


----------



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

first, to clarify


cicatrix said:


> why do you have an all mountain bike if you don't ride uphill?


i only have one bike but its a good one and with some heavy duty downhill tyres for days in the bikepark or steep mountains, its all i need for the moment, im from Norway and conditions here in summer are rarely completely dry, its usually at least a little bit moist or damp even in summer, spring and fall have loads of mud.

so what to do? im still trying to decide, what i can make of it so far: bigger tyres give more traction and they are more stable, smaller tyres dig better into the ground which could be an advantage in loose conditions, smaller tyres are easier to squeeze through tight corners going fast..

i never try to beat the clock, when i go to a bikepark or into the mountains its for fun and to push my limits on steep trails and drops.. this points in the direction of 2.5

that being said, last time i was in a bikepark i used trailking 2.4`s and i preferred relatively high pressure to get them more stable in turns, these tyres are smaller than MM2.5.. this points in the direction of 2.35

going schizo on this one


----------



## staikeinthahood (Oct 8, 2008)

I'm also from Norway!  I'm here with the friend of me that's running the 2.35 Schwalbes. He's using them on 31 mm wide rims and they feel good for him. He wouldn't go with wider tires though, he's trying to keep his tire pressure as low as possible without being wobbly and pinchflatting and he wouldn't consider the 2.5s as he would have to run a higher pressure to keep them from wobbling.. The sidewalls isn't as stiff as Maxxis so he runs a bit more pressure already. The 2.5" MM is as wide as 2.7" Maxxis tyres and they're huge! An advantage of the 2.5" tires would have to be that they will make the steering of the bike feel slower and more stabile for the downhills which can be a plus if the bike needs it, but if that is charactheristics you don't want or need than 2.35" is the way to go in my opinion.


----------



## Djenghis (Aug 5, 2010)

staikeinthahood said:


> I'm also from Norway!


 heisann, takk for konstruktive tilbakemeldinger:thumbsup:

Its hard to argue with good arguments like that..


----------

