# Vittoria Agarro



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)




----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Interesting, looks like a lot of the newer tires, ei assguy-eliminator. Provided the side knobs aren't super spongy like the martello it should be a great tire.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

It’s a Vittoria. 

It’ll weigh 10-15% more than it should, it’ll have a wicked casing wobble and it’ll last about 200miles before it’s chunked and worn out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Damn that’s a harsh review...I’ve run Vittoria exclusively on my HT for 3yrs without issue...d;o)

MegaStoke, that’s not showing on Vittoria.com so where’d you see that info?


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

Heist30 said:


> Damn that's a harsh review...I've run Vittoria exclusively on my HT for 3yrs without issue...d;o)
> 
> MegaStoke, that's not showing on Vittoria.com so where'd you see that info?


In the 2020 dealer catalog. They're supposed shipping this fall, so I'd expect them to publicly launch soon.

And yeah, I've never even seen any of the above issues with Vittoria tires, and I see a lot of them come through my shop. The Mezcal is our top selling tire, and deservedly so.


----------



## The Squeaky Wheel (Dec 30, 2003)

MegaStoke said:


> In the 2020 dealer catalog. They're supposed shipping this fall, so I'd expect them to publicly launch soon.


Is this the end of Morsa?


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

The Squeaky Wheel said:


> Is this the end of Morsa?


Doesn't appear so. They're in the 2020 catalog with 8 variants.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Heist30 said:


> Damn that's a harsh review...I've run Vittoria exclusively on my HT for 3yrs without issue...d;o)
> 
> MegaStoke, that's not showing on Vittoria.com so where'd you see that info?


+1 Love my Vittoria's , Fast Durable and even as a weight weenies I can live with the Weight

All XCR Race Casing 29 x 2,25 Mezcal 674 g, Terreno 648g, Barzo 684g


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Impetus said:


> It's a Vittoria.
> 
> It'll weigh 10-15% more than it should, it'll have a wicked casing wobble and it'll last about 200miles before it's chunked and worn out.


So you tried one tire and weren't happy.

I've used mostly Geax/Vittoria for the last 5 years, mainly for their durability and ride quality.

This tire was expected. But it's still not the chunky front tire they need. I'll continue to run Bontrager and Maxxis on the front for trail.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Looks like an ideal rear tire in the 2.35.

Might have to try one out.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Schulze said:


> So you tried one tire and weren't happy.
> 
> I've used mostly Geax/Vittoria for the last 5 years, mainly for their durability and ride quality.
> 
> This tire was expected. But it's still not the chunky front tire they need. I'll continue to run Bontrager and Maxxis on the front for trail.


No, actually. I've tried several. 
5-ish years ago on my "regular 29er" I tried 2 Barzo's, a Mezcal, a Saguaro and 2 Gomas. The Barzo and Mezcal wore out in weeks. The saguaro tore on like the 3rd ride. 
The Gomas were puncture resistant , but I hated the way they rode and both had a casing wobble. I seem to recall them being crazy heavy too. Like 900g for a 2.35?
I laced up plus wheels and rode those for several years. I tried 4 Bombolonis, and a Cannoli in between various Maxxis and Bontrager tires. 
2 of the 4 Bombos had casing wobbles so bad I warrantied them. Not one of them was true like the Chronicle, or any Bontrager tire (Chupa/XR4)
They also ranged in weight from 900g to 1050g. I weighed them, like every tire I buy, on a 1g digital scale. 
The Cannoli i still have actually. It's is fairly true, but is 100 miles old and the edges are feathering. It's also only 2.85 wide and weighs 1200g vs the claimed weight of 1050. My most frequent riding partner bought 2 of them and one wobbles, on is true. They weigh 1125 and 1200g each. 
I have 2 friends that ride the 2.6 Mezcal and Barzo and I tell you truthfully- one of the 2 has a flat about every other ride where we stand and watch them shove bacon or a tube in. I think he's on his 3rd tire in this year. He calls them his 'race wheels' because they aren't durable for everyday riding.

But keep jumping to conclusions anyway. It's entertaining.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I think that story is enough to make me stick with Schwalbe HD2s & Rock Razors for my rear tires.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

I have Barzos in 2.25, 2.35, and 2.6, all 4c G+. I notice that you don't list the models of these tires. The G+ ones wear like iron and you'll see other people post the same. I destroy Maxxis and Bontrager SE tires so it's not like I ride like a granny. 

The Goma 2.35 doesn't exist. There is a 2.25 and a 2.4. The 2.4 is heavy because it's close to a 2.6; it's also extremely durable and the TNT has a good ride quality. 

I can't speak to the plus tires.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

I do think Vittoria wins the award for slowest tire release. This tire was spotted in the fall of LAST year. 

Meanwhile Maxxis - Here is the Dissector, and you can buy it now in like six versions.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Impetus said:


> No, actually. I've tried several.
> 5-ish years ago on my "regular 29er" I tried 2 Barzo's, a Mezcal, a Saguaro and 2 Gomas. The Barzo and Mezcal wore out in weeks. The saguaro tore on like the 3rd ride.
> The Gomas were puncture resistant , but I hated the way they rode and both had a casing wobble. I seem to recall them being crazy heavy too. Like 900g for a 2.35?
> I laced up plus wheels and rode those for several years. I tried 4 Bombolonis, and a Cannoli in between various Maxxis and Bontrager tires.
> ...


Have you use any tires in the last 2 years ? since they opened there new plant with the 4 compound process ?

Funny most of the pro peloton rides Vittoria Corsa Tires, so they must make a quality tire.

Also could you explain how if is physically possible from an engineering stand point to wear out a tire in 2 to 3 rides ? What maybe 60 miles ? Abso lutly impossiable.

There is not that much difference in the manufacturing of Vittoria vs Maxxis vs Schwalbe.

Could you explain where and what type of riding you are doing , opposed to a general statement " Barzo and Mezcal wore out in 2 weeks ?

I Have a New 4 C Mezcal that I have used on both front and rear with ~ 150 miles on it and it still has a few production vent port nubs on it ?

Years ago I had 2 Schwalbe tire that blow off on a Tubeless setup a Rear Stan's rims ( Furious Fred and Rocket Ron) I stayed away from them for years as Schwalbe would not warranty them as they said it was the tubeless mounting process, in retrospect it was my fault as I did have difficult time getting them to seat and stretched the bead.

So in my case it was user error

Now I run Snakeskin Rocket Ron and Thunder Burt with no issue.


----------



## smoothmoose (Jun 8, 2008)

Looks like heavier version of the Rekon...


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

The casing and side lugs rubber used on the morsa is the best out there imo. Tuff, great dampening, doesn't begin to weep sealant after 3 weeks, rolls great and the side lugs take for ever to undercut while hooking up great. I know of no other tire I can say that about, definitely not maxxis. SE casing is also fantastic but everything else about their tires is mid pack at best.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Interesting review Impetus...
I am quite the opposite. Worn out everything BUT my Vittorias. Actually I have a Goma TNT 2.4 on front of my new trail bike that is 3 seasons old (at least). Reason it was put on there is because the DHF that came on the bike when I got it in April was not holding air (had to run a tube) and wobbling within a month of riding. Goma still looks good after two bikes and probably close to 2k miles on it (front tire primarily).

Other Goma on my commuter bike was a different back up that still says GEAX on it, yeah still running and been on that hardtail the entire time. Old Trail bike is running Goma/Barzo combo currently in Colorado under my BIL, Goma TNT front is 2 seasons old at least and the Barzo is about 1-2 seasons old. Still looked brand new when I gave him the bike in July this year.

Only problem I ever had with Vittoria tires was when the Mezcal III first came out in the 2.35 variant. When I got it and installed it was super undersized (barely measuring 2.2), got ahold of Vittoria and they confirmed they had a few batches that were running small, notified the factory (as I was not the first to mention) and offered to replace with whatever I wanted as they could not guarantee that sending me out another Mezcal would get me a true 2.35. 

Their customer service and products wearing like iron for the most part have earned my patronage. They may have the occasional tire that has issues but what tire company doesn't. I am on my third Maxxis tire now (2nd rear, first one that went was the DHF on front) and for the money they are nothing to write home about. Currently running an Ardent EXO 2.4 that I measured last night at 56.7mm (that's more like 2.25") where as the 3 season old Goma TNT 2.4 measured at 64.2mm (that's more like 2.5-2.6"). With regards to weight of the tires, yeah that is always something that is considered because most don't want a ton of weight on their wheels, but really are you an XC racer weight-weenie? Are you someone that notices that difference when a tire is rated at 960g and comes out to be 1000g? I can understand a couple hundred gram difference but 10-15% (in this case would be about 10-20g) is something you are not really going to notice unless, like said, you are a XC racer weight weenie. If that is the case, then yeah you should not be running something like the Goma, Martello, Mota, Morsa or the more aggressive tires.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Spin Cycle said:


> Have you use any tires in the last 2 years ? since they opened there new plant with the 4 compound process ?


Pesonally, I'll admit I have not. But I ride 2x per week with guys on the 'new' graphene tires. As mentioned above we spend lots of time standing and watching one guy in particular patch or plug. We've been friends for about 3 years, riding 1-2x per week together (group rides) and he did not have tire problems when he was riding Bontrager XR2/3 or Maxxis Rekons.



Spin Cycle said:


> Funny most of the pro peloton rides Vittoria Corsa Tires, so they must make a quality tire.


My gut says road tires and mtb tires are a little different. I dunno.



Spin Cycle said:


> Also could you explain how if is physically possible from an engineering stand point to wear out a tire in 2 to 3 rides ? What maybe 60 miles ? Abso lutly impossiable.


I never said 2-3 rides. Also, I've done single rides this week that were 40-45 miles. 3 rides could be 100 miles.
I said 'weeks'... I think the Barzo that actually lived to 'worn' was about 5 weeks old. 350 miles?
I thought the ride quality of the 29x3.0 Bomboloni was excellent, but I have strava-verified tracking that the average life of that tire is about 300 miles before the edge knobs start chunking and the center knobs are in bad shape.



Spin Cycle said:


> Could you explain where and what type of riding you are doing , opposed to a general statement " Barzo and Mezcal wore out in 2 weeks ?


Again. I never said '2' weeks. I ride general XC trails in the Phoenix Arizona area, occasionally taking my bike up to my cabin in the Eastern AZ White Mountains.



Spin Cycle said:


> I Have a New 4 C Mezcal that I have used on both front and rear with ~ 150 miles on it and it still has a few production vent port nubs on it ?


That's awesome. I truly wish my experience was similar.

I get it, my original post was pretty snarky. I didn't mean to bash Vittoria tires, I just haven't seen good things from them.

I've been really happy with a 60tpi 29x2.6 Rekon on the back and a 120tpi 29x2.6 Forekaster on the front. 200-ish miles and I'd estimate the rear is at 60% life, the front is probably 80%. Zero flats or holes in either.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The problem with taking tire advise from others is that people and terrain varies a lot. Heck even how I'm riding season to season varies a lot.

The photo below is of a WTB tough/ fast Breakout after about 6 weeks of local trail riding 2-3x per week. It took more of a hammering than most of my tires just because I enjoyed it so much (before they discontinued it). Tracton notably fell off this very day.

I personally swap out rear tires usually about every 6-8 weeks because they have torn knobs and what not.

Here is an HD2 (my all time fav rear tire currently) after about 2 months. I have others in my garage but you get the idea.


----------



## jbadger1977 (Jan 17, 2015)

Impetus said:


> No, actually. I've tried several.
> 5-ish years ago on my "regular 29er" I tried 2 Barzo's, a Mezcal, a Saguaro and 2 Gomas. The Barzo and Mezcal wore out in weeks. The saguaro tore on like the 3rd ride.
> The Gomas were puncture resistant , but I hated the way they rode and both had a casing wobble. I seem to recall them being crazy heavy too. Like 900g for a 2.35?
> I laced up plus wheels and rode those for several years. I tried 4 Bombolonis, and a Cannoli in between various Maxxis and Bontrager tires.
> ...


Seems like you and your buddies have had some bad luck. Been running newer 2.35 Mezcal Graphene 2.0 with zero problems for 500+ miles. Did a 50-miler recently with mixed terrain and had no issues at all. Great tire for pretty much anything, except mud.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

^ Shwable, same as they ever were.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Honestly they hold up better for me than most other tires. I showed that picture to shwalbe North American and they sent me a brand new one at no cost. And I haven't torn another one like that.
That tire is easily the best performing rear tire that I've tried for that application. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Now all that’s out of the way, back to the Agarro. Looks aggressive and grippy with a reasonable weight for what it is. Read in the Martello review that its designer was behind the original Minion so I’d bet the Agarro is his design as well. In last years Agarro thread someone said it looked similar to a Rekon, I’ll agree with that. Martello front/Agarro rear may be a decent combo. A year is a little long for rollout of a tire though.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Impetus said:


> That's awesome. I truly wish my experience was similar.
> 
> I get it, my original post was pretty snarky. I didn't mean to bash Vittoria tires, I just haven't seen good things from them.
> 
> I've been really happy with a 60tpi 29x2.6 Rekon on the back and a 120tpi 29x2.6 Forekaster on the front. 200-ish miles and I'd estimate the rear is at 60% life, the front is probably 80%. Zero flats or holes in either.


I don't think your original post was snarky. Experiences are on a bell curve and the most dissatisfied experiences get told on the internet. I would have preferred your complaints to be more specific. Incidentally, the guy my group waits for the most is fixing his XR2 rear tire. I don't know why he sticks with it.

I'm willing to give the Agarro a try, but not on the rear. Vittoria has too many good rear tires. I'd cut off every other transition knob and use it with a Mezcal or Morsa rear.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Here's a closeup of the knobs. They look tall.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Schulze said:


> I don't think your original post was snarky...
> 
> I'm willing to give the Agarro a try, but not on the rear. Vittoria has too many good rear tires. I'd cut off every other transition knob and use it with a Mezcal or Morsa rear.


'Snarky' - word of the day! I'll file that if you don't mind.

I'll also try Agarro on front of my HT for all-around use. Just seams most threads are so assiduous with determining the best Enduro/DH combo that there is lesser discussion on trail uses.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Impetus said:


> Pesonally, I'll admit I have not. But I ride 2x per week with guys on the 'new' graphene tires. As mentioned above we spend lots of time standing and watching one guy in particular patch or plug. We've been friends for about 3 years, riding 1-2x per week together (group rides) and he did not have tire problems when he was riding Bontrager XR2/3 or Maxxis Rekons.
> 
> My gut says road tires and mtb tires are a little different. I dunno.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the reply, Tires are very personal and I do love Schwalbe and used them for years and then I had a very bad taste for them after 2 full price retail tires where ruined, as I stated I had a lot to do with this.

All change this year with the snake skin rocket ron.

Lastly I now live in Minneapolis, smooth and flat XC riding after nearly 30 years of living in Colorado with a lot of trips to Utah,

Colorado is Totally different on tires as is Arizona as both those condition are much harder on tires than the Midwest,


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Wow... watching the video that thing looks like the bastard love child of a three-way between the Goma, Martello and Barzo. Looks like it could make an awesome front or rear. However, looking at the "positioning" I am assuming that it will be replacing the Goma. Really hope that the 2.35" version has traits like the Goma where it is much larger. But looks like my new combo for next year will be Martello front and Agarro rear, or maybe a dual Agarro setup.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Looks like casing widths are as irritating as their Barzo and Mezcal - 2.35 is a 57mm, then jumps to 2.6 at 65mm. No 60mm.


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Schulze said:


> Looks like casing widths are as irritating as their Barzo and Mezcal - 2.35 is a 57mm, then jumps to 2.6 at 65mm. No 60mm.


Yep, they need a goldilocks casing size.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Schulze said:


> Looks like casing widths are as irritating as their Barzo and Mezcal - 2.35 is a 57mm, then jumps to 2.6 at 65mm. No 60mm.





Harryman said:


> Yep, they need a goldilocks casing size.


Yup... that was where the Goma was really nice. Was supposed to be a 2.4" (~60mm) but always was way bigger. My current measures closer to 2.6" and all of the previous I had seems to be between 2.5 and 2.6".


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

Nice, my Vittoria rep wasn't kidding when they said soon.









29x2.35 ~952g









29x2.6 ~968g

I wish I didn't already have a half a dozen other tires, I wanna try these out!


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

By how much did they reduce the knob height on the 2.6?


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

As far as I can tell without actually mounting a tire up, the knob heights are the same. I’m still trying to figure out how why there isn’t more difference in weight between the 2.35 and 2.6.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Thanks. If you have a micrometer you could measure the casing thicknesses. Then you would see the difference.


----------



## PuddleDuck (Feb 14, 2004)

MegaStoke said:


> As far as I can tell without actually mounting a tire up, the knob heights are the same. I'm still trying to figure out how why there isn't more difference in weight between the 2.35 and 2.6.


hmmm, what's the bead-to-bead meaurement on the 2.35 vs the 2.6? (measure by laying the tyre flat and measuring across it's width)


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

SELL THE 2.35 TO ME AND I WILL MOUNT AND MEASURE!!!
Got so pissed at my rear ardent last night as it kept slipping on loose stuff that I rarely have problems with. Kept thinking to myself, I can't wait to be able to buy the Agarro!


----------



## hartmtb (Sep 14, 2019)

*Actual widths*

Have you mounted these yet? I'm curious of the actual width. Not loving my Schwalbe 2.6's. They are like big balloons. Hoping the Vittoria are actually smaller



MegaStoke said:


> Nice, my Vittoria rep wasn't kidding when they said soon.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Just gonna leave this here!!


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

https://www.vittoria.com/us/agarro-...Pacific Limited&dm_i=4OGV,OGRF,4Z5CO4,2W2GD,1


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Has anyone ridden this tire yet?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## blaklabl (Mar 14, 2011)

I'm really curious on the height of the tire as well as the actual width. Would consider putting it in my + HT, but don't want too much of a BB height decrease.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

bogeydog said:


> Has anyone ridden this tire yet?


As the notice shows it becomes available for sale 10/15, that would be a No...


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

952g for a 57mm 29er. Heavier than a Morsa which is wider.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Schulze said:


> 952g for a 57mm 29er. Heavier than a Morsa which is wider.


953g for an "enduro inspired performance that meets XC efficiency on your trail bike." Unsure how they can call anything XC efficiency when it weighs claimed 953g.

Vittoria's newer tires seem to be about 150gs heavier than they should be.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

cassieno said:


> 953g for an "enduro inspired performance that meets XC efficiency on your trail bike." Unsure how they can call anything XC efficiency when it weighs claimed 953g.
> 
> Vittoria's newer tires seem to be about 150gs heavier than they should be.


Efficiency is more about rolling resistance than weight, in my mind.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Any recommendations for rocky rooty that could be damp and leafy?

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## In2falling (Jan 1, 2005)

cassieno said:


> Vittoria's newer tires seem to be about 150gs heavier than they should be.


Think they should ditch the APF insert (pinch guard) in their Endruo/Trail tires, sure that is adding quite a bit of weight (100 or more grams).

If you want/need pinch flat protection then a good light weight insert would work better and provide rim protection.


----------



## In2falling (Jan 1, 2005)

Le Duke said:


> Efficiency is more about rolling resistance than weight, in my mind.


Each gram of tire (rotational) weight is like adding 2 grams of weight to your bike. So set of tires weighing 300 grams more will be like adding 1.5lbs to your bike.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

In2falling said:


> Each gram of tire (rotational) weight is like adding 2 grams of weight to your bike. So set of tires weighing 300 grams more will be like adding 1.5lbs to your bike.


I understand that.

300g of rotating weight, or 1.5lbs total, isn't much compared to the differences in rolling resistance.

I'd gladly add a pound to my bike to save 10w of rolling resistance without sacrificing cornering grip.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Lookie lookie!!!
Just came this weekend, don't ask. 29x2.35 at 939g.


----------



## mikesee (Aug 25, 2003)

In2falling said:


> Think they should ditch the APF insert (pinch guard) in their Endruo/Trail tires, sure that is adding quite a bit of weight (100 or more grams).
> 
> If you want/need pinch flat protection then a good light weight insert would work better and provide rim protection.


True, but it wouldn't change anything with sidewall cuts.

You might be some infinitesimal amount slower with this added weight. But not nearly as slow as with a cut sidewall.

Not saying you need these tires. But many do.


----------



## In2falling (Jan 1, 2005)

mikesee said:


> True, but it wouldn't change anything with sidewall cuts.
> 
> You might be some infinitesimal amount slower with this added weight. But not nearly as slow as with a cut sidewall.
> 
> Not saying you need these tires. But many do.


Looking at the APF insert, don't think it extends high enough to assist with sidewall cuts. I personally never had a sidewall cut that low. Plus the TNT casings are already fairly tough. I abuse the Mezcal on the rear (running a ARD insert) of my XC bike and have not cut a sidewall with them yet.

The Agarro looks like a slightly more aggressive Maxxis Rekon. Recently put a Rekon 2.4 on rear of my trail bike and its been a great tire so far (rolls fast and has acceptable grip). Have clearance for a small 2.6, so might try a Agarro 2.6 later down the road if they run small.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

I've been riding Vittoria tires exclusively in the rear for the last four years and never lost enough air pressure to use the apf strip. That's pretty impressive. Now these extra plus heavy versions will be even more tough! 

The 2.6 won't be small.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

gregnash said:


> Lookie lookie!!!
> Just came this weekend, don't ask. 29x2.35 at 939g.


Please report back with some comparisons to other known tires. 
For me, that's about the right weight for an aggressive rear trail tire. 
That said, I love my Rock Razors for dry rocky trails.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Suns_PSD said:


> Please report back with some comparisons to other known tires.
> For me, that's about the right weight for an aggressive rear trail tire.
> That said, I love my Rock Razors for dry rocky trails.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Will do. As soon as I get some time this week I will put it on and do some more measurements.

If anyone has something very specific they want a measurement on please let me know (please put a little detail into how you want measured). Otherwise I will provide general measurements once mounted.

This will be going on the rear of my current trail bike, which is a 2019 GET REVVED GG The Smash Size 3. Rear wheel is a DT Swiss M1900 which I believe is 29mm internal width.

Riding area/terrain: Northern NV High Desert and Lake Tahoe Loam (large variety of trail conditions in one area, so lots of loose over hard, sharp edge rocks, square edge rocks, some loose climbs, LOTS of switchbacks, some pea gravel, some granite scree. All depends on which trails).


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Ok got the tire mounted up tonight while doing other things. Mounted up in normal Vittoria fashion, super easy and aired right up. Currently sitting at 40psi to make sure everything seats for the night.

Took a few quick pics. First is with the TNT Goma 2.4 front wheel next to it. 
Next two are 57.9mm at the carcass and 57mm at the outer most knob. So looks to be a consistent size. 
Thing with Vittoria's I have found is that they will spread a bit after being ridden some so it should grow slightly.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Tread looks very promising. I hope it rolls faster and that can make up for it's weight. I have 4 coming today and will weigh for consistency. Unfortunately can't ride until next week. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## aski (Oct 12, 2006)

gregnash said:


> Ok got the tire mounted up tonight while doing other things.


You think the side knobs are big enough (stout enough) to corner reasonably hard without folding under too much?


----------



## blackflys64 (Feb 15, 2006)

Anyone mount a 29x2.6 yet? Curious if the diameter and casing width is consistent with the 29x2.6 Mezcal.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

aski said:


> You think the side knobs are big enough (stout enough) to corner reasonably hard without folding under too much?


Honestly they felt a bit like the new Martello, just ever so slightly stiffer. Remember that many of their "Trail" tires are going to have a dual compound knobs, top section is going to be a much softer durometer rubber than the lower layer. So there will be some perceived "squirm" on hardpack but from what I remember when I was running the Martello, it was not discernible on the trail and actually made from some incredible traction when leaning over in certain conditions. With light waning so quickly, I have very limited time for rides after work. Hoping to get out on it tonight for a quick run-down ride. Then possibly a ride on Sunday.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

I received 4 today. Weights were pretty close to the 940g advertised for 29x2.35. widest variance was 12g. 

I haven't installed yet. I am curious how these do in the wet and light mud snow of the transition months here. Vittoria rates as the highest for wet. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

bogeydog said:


> I received 4 today. Weights were pretty close to the 940g advertised for 29x2.35. widest variance was 12g.
> 
> I haven't installed yet. I am curious how these do in the wet and light mud snow of the transition months here. Vittoria rates as the highest for wet.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Probably be able to tell you in a few weeks here. Storms are starting to roll through and unless we get a completely cold but dry winter, rain should start falling pretty often by mid November. Tahoe loam is a bit different that lots of other places as it is more gritty due to the consistency of granite rock and shale that we have. Don't get me wrong there are some serious deep, PNW type loam trails but they are pretty few and far between.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I'll probably try these next. Love my Schwalbes but knobs tearing off can be a bit of an issue sometimes. 
Would like to know if it's a real fast roller while providing medium traction. 

On Edit: Just ordered one. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## LoneStar (Jun 17, 2004)

Man, I've been waiting for Vittoria to release something like this. I was hoping it would come in the low 800s weight wise, but it might be worth trying it. I only wish Vittoria would lose the two-tone color on the upper level tires. I like all black tires


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

LoneStar said:


> Man, I've been waiting for Vittoria to release something like this. I was hoping it would come in the low 800s weight wise, but it might be worth trying it. I only wish Vittoria would lose the two-tone color on the upper level tires. I like all black tires


The 4 I weighed come it at 940 and within 10g higher.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

bogeydog said:


> The 4 I weighed come it at 940 and within 10g higher.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Do Vittoria tires generally do particularly well resisting punctures?


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> Do Vittoria tires generally do particularly well resisting punctures?


I have run various versions of the Barzo and only had 1 flat over 3 years. It was from a rock rim strike.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I am running last years Bazro / Mezcal and rode through many brutal rock gardens, they have held up really well. Other XC racers were flatting all around, I got through fine.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Good to know. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

In all my years of riding I have pretty much always had Vittoria tires. I can only think of maybe ONCE that I had a flat with a tire. The GOMA that is pictured next to the Agarro is currently my front tire and has been on two bikes for lots of mileage. In the time that tire has been on the front I have destroyed two different EXO casing Maxxis tires. I ride plenty of chunk so not something where I am gentle on it or anything like that.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Any feedback. I won't have mine on the trail until Friday. I am most curious about rolling resistance. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## blackflys64 (Feb 15, 2006)

Mounted up a 29x2.6 last night. Weights are right around 1025.
2.55" casing, 2.5" Knobs and 29.5" Diameter on 35mm internal rims. 
These do not share the same casing size as the 2.6 Mezcal....


----------



## NH Mtbiker (Nov 6, 2004)

Ride up a few days ago on Youtube....looks good for what we have here in NE!


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Finally got a chance to get out and ride last night... Short 10 mile ride for me with about 4 miles of pavement/gravel pounding. Running tire at 26.5psi and it rolled great, did not feel like it was dragging or like rolling resistance was high or anything. This is comparing most recently against the 2.4" Exo Ardent that was on the rear. 

Traction was just as I expected it for the tread pattern, great in all situations. I am lucky that I have a large variety of terrain in a single ride.
- Loose and gravely climbs were not problem. Seated climbing vs. standing and mashing did not cause the tire to slip (the Ardent would). 
- Couple of small waterfall, rock climbs that I did posed no issue for the tire. It hooked up great and provided every bit of traction I needed.
- Downhill on fast, flowy, loose over hard yielded great traction. No slipping or vague transitions during cornering or turns.
- Downhill on chunky terrain, staircase and over bridges posed little concern.
- Downhill in loose, sandy area actually had a small, but very controlled drift. Front tire hit the transition point where it wanted to either slide or wash but luckily the rear just pushed me around without issue.

So for the first ride impressions, yeah she likes grip and will give you loads of it! Supposed to potentially get a storm this weekend so if the trails are a little damp I will try to get out and see how things hook up. These are very similar feelings to the Martello but in a somewhat lighter feeling tire, so if that is true, then this thing will not disappoint when the ground gets damp!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Thanks for that. Mine arrives tomorrow and I'm eager to try it.
The weight, size, tread design, and fast rolling compound seems ideal. Like a better compound Aggressor 2.35"-2.4".

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## oldsklrdr (May 15, 2012)

For those with experience on the Martello what would you say are pro/con in comparison. 

Ive been using Martello front and rear and have been happy with both grip and wear. 

These seem to be comparable in weight??


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

If i remember correctly when I had my Martello I believe that it was comparable in size. Slightly heavier and slightly more rolling resistance on hardpack/pavement/etc. but good for looser terrain. Never had any issues with durability or with it not hooking up or anything like that, just wanted something slightly lighter in the rear. Wish I remembered what the hell I did with it. 

I don't know if the Aggressor comparison is necessarily a good one. They have similar looking tread patterns but that is about where it ends. I had issues with the aggressor hooking up properly for me (original setup on this bike was a DHF/Aggressor) and while it wasn't bad, it was nowhere near as good as this Agarro has been. Granted I only have one ride on the new tire so that could change.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Have found as I learn to ride better, have more experience, and have tried more parts, that some bikes/ setups can work well with different tires where-as others not so much.

My Foxy 29 (long front end) really likes an aggressive front tire to stay hooked up but can essentially get great traction in the rear with any old tire you can place back there. My Foxy can climb things with a fast rolling short knob rear tire that my old Yeti 5.5 could only dream of. But then again the Yeti had a slight advantage in front end traction (highlighted when I hopped on my old bike recently). For me this is a good trade off as I can get some huge RR improvements running fast rubber in the back on the Foxy.

That said, when I finally got around to testing the Aggressor 2.3 just recently I was pleasantly surprised by it's performance and I understood why so many manufacturers spec it. For me it was a high traction and consistent rear tire but just a good bit slow rolling and also bouncy due to it's small size I guess.

Currently I've been running the Rock Razor as a rear and it only occasionally lets me down on a very steep standing climb with low traction. In other situations, the Rock Razor just kills it. Tire is fast as heck all around although a bit fragile I'm finding.

The reason I'm slapping on a new Agarro for a try is I'm hoping to gain a bit of reliability while also being in a better position to deal with inclement weather without a tire swap.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The Agarro is a fantastic tire. I'm certifiable when it comes to tires and try bunches with multiple new ones on the shelf and was able to get in a fast hard ride on the Agarro today. 
The weight, sizing (don't believe in wide rear tires personally) and thickness of the carcass is right where I want it to be, just enough to hold up most of the time without being an anchor. I could feel the additional weight when spinning it up compared to my removed Rock Razor but ya know, trade offs. I don't puncture my snakeskin carcasses real often, but enough where it's getting old. Maybe once every 10 rides. 
The Agarro has a very damped feel, which I like. It feels cushy and slow to rebound. I ran it at 24psi with a Tubolight insert which is my usual set up for a rear tire. 
In spite of the weight, it's a darn fast tire. Really noticeably fast even in the parking lot. Like shockingly fast. Most tires feel extra draggy for the first 5-7 miles and then settle in, a break in I guess. Not the Agarro! No detectable difference from the first pedal stroke to the one after 11 miles. A few times it made a whirring noise when I was really pedaling, like a windmill or something. Don't recall hearing that before.
Traction was not amazing but I consider it just right. Like straight up and down a solid '7.5' and leaned over a solid '8.25'. It resulted in balanced handling at the limit. Having too much rear traction overwhelms the front tire in my experience and makes the bike an unpleasant handful. I got some slips when doing slow steep climbs I'd say a bit less slip than a RR, and notably more than a HD2. Totally livable, I'm talking steep slippery ledges all out effort with chunk, not your everyday climb. 
It's been the second hottest summer on record in ATX so my Rock Razor had never seen a wet trail. My plan was to run the RR when bone dry and the HD2 when more moisture was on the ground and I was feeling stronger (like not 104 degrees with 80% humidity so I feel stronger) But I feel the Agarro gives me everything I need without the need to swap tires for a damp trail. Clearly the knobs will do better in loose dirt than the nearly smooth RR. I don't ride 'loamy' trails unless I go to Bentonville so don't worry about those conditions much. It's basically rock where I ride. 
It felt great overall and at this very moment if I had to pick one rear tire to run long term, this would be it. If I feel the same after several rides It'll become my standard rear tire and I'll run this one until I discover something better (always testing). I might still slap a Rock Razor on for scorching hot and dry summer rides. Of course I reserve the right to change my mind!
In the 5 years I've been riding bikes it seems tires and bikes have gotten better by leaps and bounds. Certainly much of it's me but I remember barely being able to tell a difference in tires at some points early on. No longer the case, tires are really the easiest way to get real gains in bike (equipment) performance.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

Decided to get a set for wetter fall riding. Had them for a bit over a week and it's pretty much a mega-Peyote. It's fast like the Peyote (not as fast, but fast), handles similarly, but has a lot more grip. Mud clearing on the side knobs is a bit of an issue though, it's not like my Michelin Wild AM where the side knobs are pretty much impossible to clog unless the mud is so bad that the tires won't turn. Also doesn't corner as well, especially on loose blown out dirt but it is noticeably faster rolling than the Wild AM so it's not a bad trade.

Overall it's nice but not the right tire for me, at least, not on the bike I'm using it on. If I had it on a hardtail instead of my enduro bike it would probably be ideal, but they don't make them in 26".


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Rode 29" front and rear today in mid Atlantic singletrack. Trails were slightly damp and tacky with moderate leaf fall. These trails are moderately rooty and some rock gardens. Overall tire did great. Never had a issue in the turns. Techy punchys were pretty good. Coming from a full Enduro tire slight adjustments were required but easy. Not much mud but I will see some tomorrow afternoon. 

They are really easy following and I dare say fast. I was worried about the weight, but maybe the following resistance made up for it. Time will tell as conditions change. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

I would love to see a head-to-head vs a Maxxis Rekon in 2.4 3C Maxterra - my go to summer tires for rocky rooty New England chug-chug pedaly rides (exact same stuff that DirtWireTV rode in his video). I was in love with the Rekons until the leaves fell and started to hold moisture. Swapped them out for Bontrager XR4/SE4 but am still looking back. Rosebud...


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

DucatiRider said:


> I would love to see a head-to-head vs a Maxxis Rekon in 2.4 3C Maxterra - my go to summer tires for rocky rooty New England chug-chug pedaly rides (exact same stuff that DirtWireTV rode in his video). I was in love with the Rekons until the leaves fell and started to hold moisture. Swapped them out for Bontrager XR4/SE4 but am still looking back. Rosebud...


Rode them yesterday for a second time. We had almost an inch of rain between 9pm Saturday and 12 pm Sunday. However it has been really dry beforehand. Trails were damp and leaf covered. They worked great. Shockingly so. Only a few puddles. Not full out wet or muddy. The Rekons wouldn't have done well.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

bogeydog said:


> The Rekons wouldn't have done well.


Why do you suppose that is - compound? I love the Rekons in the dry but once things are damp something changes and it goes from gripping to skating, especially once we get some leaf/pine needle cover at which point I have to be more deliberate in turns. The Agarro seems to have pretty much the same tread pattern and I can't see it doing much better in these conditions.

The 2.35 is still measuring small? 2.4 Rekon measures 2.35 almost exactly which is fine with me, but I don't want anything narrower.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

DucatiRider said:


> Why do you suppose that is - compound? I love the Rekons in the dry but once things are damp something changes and it goes from gripping to skating, especially once we get some leaf/pine needle cover at which point I have to be more deliberate in turns. The Agarro seems to have pretty much the same tread pattern and I can't see it doing much better in these conditions.
> 
> The 2.35 is still measuring small? 2.4 Rekon measures 2.35 almost exactly which is fine with me, but I don't want anything narrower.


Not sure. I tried the Rekons in various sizes and each time they failed when it got wet. The Agarro has a lot of knobs and I can see why you think it looks like the Rekon. Seems like every knob has sipping. Could be compound too. Keep in mind the Agarro is 940g and heavier than the Rekon if you are sensitive to it.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

aerius said:


> Decided to get a set for wetter fall riding. Had them for a bit over a week and it's pretty much a mega-Peyote. It's fast like the Peyote (not as fast, but fast), handles similarly, but has a lot more grip. Mud clearing on the side knobs is a bit of an issue though, it's not like my Michelin Wild AM where the side knobs are pretty much impossible to clog unless the mud is so bad that the tires won't turn. Also doesn't corner as well, especially on loose blown out dirt but it is noticeably faster rolling than the Wild AM so it's not a bad trade.
> 
> Overall it's nice but not the right tire for me, at least, not on the bike I'm using it on. If I had it on a hardtail instead of my enduro bike it would probably be ideal, but they don't make them in 26".


If those Agarro's are 29 x 2.35s PM me and let's work out a purchase or tire trade.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Got a second ride on the bike in slightly different terrain on Friday last week. For those that know, I rode Peavine Mtn. in Reno, NV. This is a very dry and exposed trail that normally is loose over hard, hardpack with some pea gravel strewn here and there. The main thing with Peavine Mtn. though is that the soil is more clay based, so when it gets wet, it becomes snotty, slimy, slippery garbage. Luckily I had none of that! LOL

The tire did exceptionally well, lots of high speed, loose corners that I would have normally slipped out on but never had any issues with traction. Even purposefully locked up the rear to skid on a couple loose corners and she still yielded better traction than I could have expected. Need more daylight to be able to get some rock scrambles and whatnot in but the tire has some serious grip from what I have experienced.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

To compare: 29x2.6 Agarro vs 29x2.5 DHF on DTSwiss M-1900 30id wheels: 

New Agarro - 988g - mounted easily, aired up and seated with track pump
Tread width: 63/2.5
Height w/rim: 79/3.15
Tread height center: 4mm
Tread height outer: 5mm

Lightly used DHF EXO TR
Tread width: 64/2.55
Height w/rim: 79/3.15
Tread height center: 4mm
Tread height outer: 6mm


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Vittoria has set the bar high with this tire! 

Two 1.5hr rides in with 29x2.6 Agarro on rear since the Thursday night Mid-Atlantic storms dumped brief heavy rain. It has given sure footed full traction in short punchy climbs up moist leaf covered root and rock, total control down fast tight and twisty singletrack with fresh thick leaf cover, cranks through soft dips and water holes without slippage providing outstanding performance in moist Fall trail conditions overall. With temps in the 40s it is still holding full 22psi without any sealant. 

For my frame of reference, I went straight from a Mezcal2.35/Gato2.2 combo when my XC bike died to a DHF2.5/DHRII2.4 combo on a FS trail bike. IMO the Agarro provides easy rolling efficiency like the Gato with the confident grippy traction and control like the DHRII. The unbelievable rolling/climbing efficiency and grip of the Agarro absolutely makes the dreaded climbs much easier! Jeffsy has a new trail shoe!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

It's the first rear tire ever that I just said 'it's perfect, would not change one thing about it'.
Today I did a lot of pedaling with other riders (transfer sections at an Enduro race) and my whole set up (me and the bike obviously) allowed me to frankly smoke the other riders on the climbs. Too bad those aren't timed!

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Babas (Mar 5, 2008)

May I ask what do you have on the front? Thanks!


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

3rd ride today. Really impressed. F
Running front and back. Leafy Rocky and rooty terrain today. Good stuff. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## xtopher whyte (Jun 25, 2017)

I was talking with someone at Vittoria about the Agarro, and he told me that it's potentially unsafe and/or won't work with hookless rims. I have Ibis 942's, which are hookless (and 35id). seems odd that they'd come out with a new tire that won't work on many rims -- and that there's no clear warning on the website. anyone know anything about this? i actually called Vittoria twice about it; same answer both times.


----------



## NH Mtbiker (Nov 6, 2004)

xtopher whyte said:


> I was talking with someone at Vittoria about the Agarro, and he told me that it's potentially unsafe and/or won't work with hookless rims. I have Ibis 942's, which are hookless (and 35id). seems odd that they'd come out with a new tire that won't work on many rims -- and that there's no clear warning on the website. anyone know anything about this? i actually called Vittoria twice about it; same answer both times.


That does seem very strange since hookless rims have been on trend now for well over 5 years. Never had a problem with them and actually prefer them for installing tires and both Ibis and ENVE agree...

Ibis' Scot Nicol agrees. "We feel that hookless is the future. Enough companies have done it successfully that others are starting to get convinced hooks are not needed for low pressure tubeless tires."

"ENVE's original rim design above used bead hooks; the company has recently moved away from them, citing higher impact strength and performance gains."

https://www.bikeradar.com/features/trail-tech-off-the-hook/


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

xtopher whyte said:


> I was talking with someone at Vittoria about the Agarro, and he told me that it's potentially unsafe and/or won't work with hookless rims. I have Ibis 942's, which are hookless (and 35id). seems odd that they'd come out with a new tire that won't work on many rims -- and that there's no clear warning on the website. anyone know anything about this? i actually called Vittoria twice about it; same answer both times.


Whoever you're talking to at Vittoria is either ignorant of what hookless rims are, or is taking an overly risk averse stance. I've setup Aggaros on multiple makes of hookless rim with absolutely zero issues. Theres no notable difference between the beads on these tires and any other tubeless Vittoria.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Trend or not, i've 5 wheel sets 3 or less years old all different makes and run Vittoria on each of them without issue. Must be the high dollar wheels y'all are referring to that grunts like moi cannot afford.

If that statement is factual, it must apply to Vittoria MTB tires in general meaning they have yet to buy into the trend. I enjoy a good bead lock as I have yet to Burp a tire!

https://www.slowtwitch.com/Products/Things_that_Roll/Hooked_and_Hookless_Rim_Tech_7386.html
"Given all of the safety concerns, why bother making a rim hookless? We borrowed this quote from the blog of Rene Herse Cycles (formerly Compass Cycles - a manufacturer of high-end tires): "The hook has a crucial function in keeping the tire on the rim. Other rim and tire makers have tested and found the same: The hook significantly increases the pressure at which the tire safely stays on the rim&#8230; Why [make hookless rims]? Mostly because the hook is difficult to make with carbon fiber: It requires a complex 3-piece mold for the rim bed.""


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Vittoria has talented engineers and manufacturing people. The sales people are morons. If you call them, don't bother. If you see them at a trade show, don't waste your time.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

xtopher whyte said:


> I was talking with someone at Vittoria about the Agarro, and he told me that it's potentially unsafe and/or won't work with hookless rims. I have Ibis 942's, which are hookless (and 35id). seems odd that they'd come out with a new tire that won't work on many rims -- and that there's no clear warning on the website. anyone know anything about this? i actually called Vittoria twice about it; same answer both times.


Can't see this as true especially for the number of hookless rims made today. If it is they are morons. I would also think that their legal department would have this posted everywhere. I have the new Agarro and have had no issues. It's a phenomenal tire. Also run Barzos for years. Never an issue.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ricanfred (Jun 4, 2015)

Gomas and Mezcals have been my preferred tires for years. Currently on Onza Ibex and feel they're decent tires, but a bit 'bouncy' if that makes sense. I may try Agarro's next. TNT and G+ have been the most solid setups i've ever experienced. I kill Maxxis EXOs....


----------



## xtopher whyte (Jun 25, 2017)

MegaStoke said:


> Whoever you're talking to at Vittoria is either ignorant of what hookless rims are, or is taking an overly risk averse stance. I've setup Aggaros on multiple makes of hookless rim with absolutely zero issues. Theres no notable difference between the beads on these tires and any other tubeless Vittoria.


Thanks. Have you used 2.6 on wider rims like the Ibis 942? These were odd conversations -- the guy talked to some manager and then confirmed that they wouldn't work on hookless rims. it makes no sense, and I've been running Marello 2.35 front and rear all summer, no problem.


----------



## xtopher whyte (Jun 25, 2017)

bogeydog said:


> Can't see this as true especially for the number of hookless rims made today. If it is they are morons. I would also think that their legal department would have this posted everywhere. I have the new Agarro and have had no issues. It's a phenomenal tire. Also run Barzos for years. Never an issue.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


Thanks. You're using the Agarro on hookless rims? It looks like a sweet tire; these 2 phone calls were bizarre.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

xtopher whyte said:


> Thanks. You're using the Agarro on hookless rims? It looks like a sweet tire; these 2 phone calls were bizarre.


I am using Agarro on the new Zipp 3zero Moto hookless rims.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

In your experience, are the casing sizes the same between models? I'm riding DHF/DHR2/Assegai in 2.5s, which run small, but the overall size is good for me. I'm wondering which would be closer, a 2.35 or 2.6? Although, for this tire, it'd be on the back, so smaller would be OK. I'm liking the idea of the Mazza for up front.


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

I don’t think they would work very well on super wide rims. 30mm seems like the max IW for the correct tire profile.


----------



## MegaStoke (Aug 27, 2018)

Definitely the 2.6. It’s a small 2.6, nowhere near as voluminous as the Mezcal.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Harryman said:


> In your experience, are the casing sizes the same between models? I'm riding DHF/DHR2/Assegai in 2.5s, which run small, but the overall size is good for me. I'm wondering which would be closer, a 2.35 or 2.6? Although, for this tire, it'd be on the back, so smaller would be OK. I'm liking the idea of the Mazza for up front.


Post #90 Con't
On 30id rim

Agarro 29x 2.6
Casing - 62/2.45

DHF 29x2.5
Casing - 61/2.4


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Wow, small casing.


----------



## Trudeez (Sep 9, 2016)

Schulze said:


> So you tried one tire and weren't happy.
> 
> I've used mostly Geax/Vittoria for the last 5 years, mainly for their durability and ride quality.
> 
> This tire was expected. But it's still not the chunky front tire they need. I'll continue to run Bontrager and Maxxis on the front for trail.


It definitely looks like theres something else in the works. A more Minion-esque style tire. Possibly called the "Mazza" We all know the minion works great so I'm not at all sad to see vittoria add one to the lineup. And, who knows, with 4C, G2.0, Progressive siping and better casings. . .dare I say a BETTER MINION!? Also, if Colin Bailey is really working with Vittoria then a Minion clone makes perfect sense.


----------



## Nevada 29er (Nov 12, 2007)

The casing measurement on the 2.6 Agarro is only 1mm wider than my 2.35 Martello. I wonder if they share the same casing? 

Any ride reports for the 2.6 as a rear tire? I want something a bit faster rolling than the Martello, but don't want to give up any volume.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

It's rare that I order the same tire twice. But I went ahead and ordered another Agarro for my next rear too. Price on ebay is very good as well, less than last time. 
This one is showing typical wear for the riding I do. 
Guessing around 80 miles but at least 1/3 of those miles are with my family meaning I'm going quite slowly. I kill tires at an alarming rate unfortunately, at least for a middle aged novice! I'd say these are wearing average to maybe slightly quicker than average. 
The performance currently is identical to when new so I'll run them till they begin to let me down.









Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Here is a first ride review from my mentor. “Agarro was nice and grippy especially over wet leaf covered rocks yet less drag than an Aggressor. Conditions were slightly slick but stopping was a little more adventurous today in rapid deceleration situations. 
I made it every rock garden except the river trail today so it was fine in the chunk. 
It's way to much weight and drag for riding at MR WC cross country trails IMHO. But it rocks as an extremely aggressive trail and enduro tire. Made my rear feel like it had extra travel, must be a compliant casing.”

Also,
Vittoria.com Promo
25% off plus Free Shipping through 12/2/19
Code: THANKFUL25


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Agree with everything your mentor said in the review above. 


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

I would add that it rolls really really well. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Compared to other hard trail/ Enduro tires, yes it rolls very well. For instance, it rolls better than an Aggressor and much better than a DHR2, with similar or better performance. 
Compared to XC tires, it rolls poorly however. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## meSSican (Aug 8, 2010)

Anyone compare the agarro to the specialized eliminator? Looking for a new rear tire for my trail bike and these two are left on my list. I ride hard pack with chunk.


----------



## In2falling (Jan 1, 2005)

meSSican said:


> Anyone compare the agarro to the specialized eliminator? Looking for a new rear tire for my trail bike and these two are left on my list. I ride hard pack with chunk.


Been on a 2.6 Eliminator up front now for 6 months, can't compare to Agarro but compared to a Aggressor 2.5 it seems to roll a bit faster and hooks up nicely in my dry AZ desert conditions.

I will be looking for new rear also here soon to replace a Rekon 2.4 and was looking at Agarro also, but their 2.6 appears to be tiny and looks like it is a fast wearing tire.

Think the new Specialized Purgatory(2020) 2.6 is the rear tire I am going to go with and try. What little reviews there are out on it, appears to be fast rolling balanced trail tire (like Agarro) and I am liking Specialized compound seems to wears nicely.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

My 29x2.35 measures exact. Been running these pretty hard for about 200 miles. Even on square edge sharp rocks, no issues or excessive wear. Roll extremely well, but wish weight was a little less. 

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Winter report... Agarro rear traction is on par with DHF front in the later day Thaw Butter. Both equally smeared through the twists and turns of the open field muck while Agarro clawed the bike up the slimy climbs...continues to impress :thumbsup:


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Still really like my Agarro although I'm struggling with climbing traction a bit lately. Could be more damp trails, or just the edges on the Agarro being rounded. It's worn very well!
Have a new one on the shelf to go on next, but I am going to use Strava to make some direct trail time comparisons to a couple of other favorites, HD2 & Rock Razor, my 2 other favorite rear tires. 
As of this moment, it's definitely my favorite rear tire overall and I've tried so many.









Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## PuddleDuck (Feb 14, 2004)

Suns_PSD said:


> Still really like my Agarro although I'm struggling with climbing traction a bit lately. Could be more damp trails, or just the edges on the Agarro being rounded. It's worn very well!
> Have a new one on the shelf to go on next, but I am going to use Strava to make some direct trail time comparisons to a couple of other favorites, HD2 & Rock Razor, my 2 other favorite rear tires.
> As of this moment, it's definitely my favorite rear tire overall and I've tried so many.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Looking forward to your Strave comparisons :thumbsup:


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Still loving the Agarro but I'm swapping it a bit early for a new one. I'm injured so taking the down time to go through the bike and fresh tires are on the menu.









Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## WoodstockMTB (Oct 5, 2010)

I've been looking for the goldilocks tire for use on my HD3 here in VT. Our dirt is soft and not very fast so a nice rolling tire is needed. We have roots and rocks too, but really a lot of dirt. I get out to fruit/Moab most every year, but I've never suffered for traction out there.

What do you think of the Agarro as a front/rear for New England style dirt? I've run through the following combos all 2.6.
DHF/Forekaster (DHF more than I need, Forekaster not bad actually and rolls well
DHF/DHR: slow as fat pigs. Way too much for trail riding
Bontrager XR4/SE4: not enough grip in corners, but roll great
Schwalbe HansDampf/NobbyNic: not bad, but the NN may be too slippery for my liking. Was thinking about another HD for the rear.

Is the Agarro grippy as a front? Will it do well in loose soil if its so grippy on rocks and dry trails?


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

The DHF is too much but the XR4 isn't enough? The XR4/SE4 is my southern New England goldilocks technical trail tire (with a Rekon out back in the summer) but speeds down here aren't what they are in VT. From pictures the Agarro looks more like a grippier (and heavier) Rekon than a front end alternative to a DHF.


----------



## joergpraefke (May 15, 2019)

I have been riding the Agarro now for 400 kilometers and i like them very much - very good rolling on asphalt, good grip in rocky conditions and even good traction in snowy conditions...


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Does anyone know why I can no longer see other users photos on Tapatalk? They are all greyed out.
Thanks. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## thx138 (Aug 5, 2013)

Suns_PSD said:


> Does anyone know why I can no longer see other users photos on Tapatalk? They are all greyed out.
> Thanks.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


My phone started doing that a few weeks ago and I fixed it by uninstalling and then installing the app again.

Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

So finally started riding more consistently seeing as mother nature has decided that she is either done with winter or has something up her sleeve. Pretty much a two wheel winter for us here in No.NV.

Anyways, I think I have found the one "*****" in the armor of the Agarro. The limited mileage I have put on it so far everything has been great; rolling resistance on the road is perfect (no more or less than any other Vittoria tire I have owned), traction has been awesome in my varied conditions, the one thing that I have found is that when the trail gets a bit mucky or overly damp the extra traction from all the knobs makes the tire VERY sluggish. This was exemplified this last weekend when Nurse_Ben and I took to our local trail to do some probing on the snow line. There were some seriously soupy sections that the tire did ok but I noticed that in those few sections where it was just wet enough to NOT be soupy or muddy, but dry enough that it wasn't packed down that the tire felt like it had a HUGE drag on it. 

So far, this is the ONLY issue I have with the tire after a few hundred miles on it. My front GOMA is finally getting to the point where the knobs are worn down enough that if I push in the sand on a corner the "vague" section has expanded quite a bit. She still has some life in her but will need replacing in the near future, soooo I am debating between a 2.6 Martello or Agarro. Decisions, Decisions.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Been riding the Agarro all over since release. It have beat it hard for sure. It flat our works in everything in the rocky and rooty east coast region. But I haven't had on loose over hard pack. It has been bullet proof too. 

In sticky mud it will get full because the knobs are close. But in wet or wet dirt that doesn't stick much, it's killer. 

Although not light, it rolls so well. 

It doesn't look like it should be so good, but so far it's really really good. 



Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Yeah would have to agree that while it doesn't seem light, it sure rolls like it. But I have found that with most of Vittoria's tires. Still enjoying it immensely in all the randomness that we have been having, finally got it to spin on a slab that was super dusty today but really was like a third rotation or less before it grabbed and I was up and over the obstacle.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Just chiming in here... another EC tech rider in love with the Agarro. I've been riding it since pre-production prototype form starting about a year and a half ago, and it's still my favorite trail tire of all time. I was riding the 2.35s on 25mm ID rims, and now running the 2.6 on 30mm ID rims. I absolutely love the 2.6 - rolls so fast, crazy good traction on the stuff I ride, from dry to wet/slimy, and only 20g heavier than the 2.35. In the front, it doesn't bite in loose stuff like a DHF, but in everything else it's just so good. I'm running it front and rear on my trail bike and totally happy with it. Another note - I run pretty low pressure and have only punctured twice in 18 months of riding these over crazy rough stuff.


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

How does the 2.6 measure in the real world?


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

Thats what i want to know too


----------



## thx138 (Aug 5, 2013)

DucatiRider said:


> How does the 2.6 measure in the real world?


On an Ibis S35 rim I get the following









Sent from my GM1915 using Tapatalk


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

Nice, that wil fit my frame perfect. The barzo2.6 is a bit wider at 2.68 on 34id rims


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

I wish the 2.4 didn't measure in so small. An actual 2.4 on an i30 is an ideal size for me.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

It's a 2.35, and it is small. But it performs so well. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

It's 57mm so that is a 2.25. Once again, Vittoria makes another excellent rear tire, mediocre front. I have a 2.6 on order for the rear.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

We’re all waitin on the Mezza to grace the front end!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Undescended said:


> We're all waitin on the Mezza to grace the front end!


I'm Mezza curious as well but the Martello as a front is phenomenal.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> I'm Mezza curious as well but the Martello as a front is phenomenal.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


Compared too?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Novaterra said:


> Compared too?


DHF, DHR2, Dissector, Shorty, MM, NN, Assagai, MSC Gripper, Eliminator, and a few others over the last couple of years.

The only other tire that is a contender for a best front is the Edge 22 which I was a tester for. Very eager to test the production soft version of the E22. It's a great tire imo.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

ok, thnx!!, i'm in the run for another set of tires for the austrian alps. think of trying the martello and aggaro combo


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I'm putting together an Agarro and Martello combo for wet weather riding, for grip on Texas limestone. But my buddies who use the Martello up front cannot keep up with me in turns. I think it's because the knobs are soft and blocky and don't bite into the ground. You can see Jeff Lenosky's video where he rides that off camber trail and everyone running Minions rides it fine but he keeps sliding out on Martellos.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai. 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

TylerVernon said:


> I'm putting together an Agarro and Martello combo for wet weather riding, for grip on Texas limestone. But my buddies who use the Martello up front cannot keep up with me in turns. I think it's because the knobs are soft and blocky and don't bite into the ground. You can see Jeff Lenosky's video where he rides that off camber trail and everyone running Minions rides it fine but he keeps sliding out on Martellos.


I am doing the same. Currently have a 2.35 coming to replace my warn Goma up front. See how things play out in our varied terrain here in Northern NV.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I'm putting together an Agarro and Martello combo for wet weather riding, for grip on Texas limestone. But my buddies who use the Martello up front cannot keep up with me in turns. I think it's because the knobs are soft and blocky and don't bite into the ground. You can see Jeff Lenosky's video where he rides that off camber trail and everyone running Minions rides it fine but he keeps sliding out on Martellos.


I sincerely hate wet weather riding so avoid it. It only happens accidentally. 
Yesterday was one of those accidents when I rode the Austin GB 2 days after rains and it was still very moist in many places, and I did it on the exact set up you just mentioned. 
Horrible. Tires front and back, but especially the rear Agarro, were like mud slicks. The rotating weight was awful, the front tire slipped on every rock, and the rear pretty much anytime I pedaled. My bike has poor clearance around the rear tire so that got clogged too. If your wet weather riding is RPR, where it's all grippy limestone, well anything grips as long as you don't carry the mud with you on to the limestone. 
At least in our mud (very sticky with rocks) I could never recommend that as a wet set up. If I ever cared to ride that crap again, I'd run a Magic Mary (narrow rim) or Shorty 2.5 (wide rim) up front and almost certainly a Dissector for the rear. It's all about tires that are known fast rollers (particularly in the rear) with large gaps between the knobs. 
Good luck.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> I sincerely hate wet weather riding so avoid it. It only happens accidentally.
> Yesterday was one of those accidents when I rode the Austin GB 2 days after rains and it was still very moist in many places, and I did it on the exact set up you just mentioned.
> Horrible. Tires front and back, but especially the rear Agarro, were like mud slicks.
> At least in our mud (very sticky with rocks) I could never recommend that as a wet set up. If I ever cared to ride that crap again, I'd run a Magic Mary (narrow rim) or Shorty 2.5 (wide rim) up front and almost certainly a Dissector for the rear. It's all about tires that are known fast rollers (particularly in the rear) with large gaps between the knobs.
> ...


Interestingly, what works well as a wet weather tire differs so much in the type of surface you're on. I find the Agarro (or Martello) to be one of the best (if not the best) for wet roots/rocks on the stuff I ride, but agreed that in mud it's terrible (not surprising given the tightly-spaced tread pattern). For wet rocks/roots, you want siping and a grippy rubber compound, combined with a construction that lets you ride low enough pressure to conform to the terrain, while for muddy stuff (which I try to avoid anyway) you want the typical mud tire (widely spaced lugs with better clearing ability). Since I rarely ride in mud, the Agarros work really well for me on both dry and wet days. YMMV obviously.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I'm mainly thinking about these misty, high humid mornings that turn the limestone into slick rock. Agree on the mud, avoid completely.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Full Send said:


> Interestingly, what works well as a wet weather tire differs so much in the type of surface you're on. I find the Agarro (or Martello) to be one of the best (if not the best) for wet roots/rocks on the stuff I ride, but agreed that in mud it's terrible (not surprising given the tightly-spaced tread pattern). For wet rocks/roots, you want siping and a grippy rubber compound, combined with a construction that lets you ride low enough pressure to conform to the terrain, while for muddy stuff (which I try to avoid anyway) you want the typical mud tire (widely spaced lugs with better clearing ability). Since I rarely ride in mud, the Agarros work really well for me on both dry and wet days. YMMV obviously.


Same here... the described situation/terrain will destroy anything that is not a heavily spaced mudd-ish tyre. So in vittoria's like the rider would have been better off with the Mota and Morsa than anything else. The Martello and Agarro are drier climate tires. Though I have found that in the high desert, the day or so after a decent rain (not sloppy trails, I avoid that) these tires hook up like a cat on carpet. Traction for DAAAYYYZZZZ. I am excited to give the Martello front, Agarro rear a try in my climate. Should be an awesome setup.

But that is one of the reasons that I LOVED the Goma so much, it was a good inbetween tyre. Something not quite a knobby as the Mota or other pure mud tires, but not as super micro/mini knobbed as something like the Barzo or Agarro.


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

Suns_PSD said:


> For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


Jumping into this thread but a little off topic, but still on Vittoria topic. Not interested in the OT Agarro as I'm looking for a rear to go along with a Morsa up front. Thinking Martello now. One of the guys at my LBS rec'd it and him being ~6'-2ish/220ish using them fr/rr on a SS without issue. Just thought they were a little small per the callout size.

Looking for suggestions here. It will be for a 140# rider on a new short travel 29r. I used to run a Morsa front Barzo in back before on my xc rigs. Was originally looking at getting one of those again, or the Mezcal, now thinking to get a little more of a robust tire in back anticipating some more aggressive xc/trail outings. The 2.35 Martello appears to be heavier then the Morsa which would be fine if it rolled fairly decent.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

JMac47 said:


> Jumping into this thread but a little off topic, but still on Vittoria topic. Not interested in the OT Agarro as I'm looking for a rear to go along with a Morsa up front. Thinking Martello now. One of the guys at my LBS rec'd it and him being ~6'-2ish/220ish using them fr/rr on a SS without issue. Just thought they were a little small per the callout size.
> 
> Looking for suggestions here. It will be for a 140# rider on a new short travel 29r. I used to run a Morsa front Barzo in back before on my xc rigs. Was originally looking at getting one of those again, or the Mezcal, now thinking to get a little more of a robust tire in back anticipating some more aggressive xc/trail outings. The 2.35 Martello appears to be heavier then the Morsa which would be fine if it rolled fairly decent.


Not sure I understand you ruling out the Agarro?

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

bogeydog said:


> Not sure I understand you ruling out the Agarro?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


This is coming from someone that's been getting away with FastTracks and Ardent Race rear tires. :0 I haven't seen an Agarro in person, it just looks more aggressive than the Martello, no? I did have a DHF/Aggressor on the bike I just sold so was thinking the Morsa/Martello would be about the same setup.

Edit: I just zoomed in on the pic with tire description stating "between the Barzo and Martello". D'oh! Maybe I should get the shop to order some in!


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

JMac47 said:


> This is coming from someone that's been getting away with FastTracks and Ardent Race rear tires. :0 I haven't seen an Agarro in person, it just looks more aggressive than the Martello, no? I did have a DHF/Aggressor on the bike I just sold so was thinking the Morsa/Martello would be about the same setup.
> 
> Edit: I just zoomed in on the pic with tire description stating "between the Barzo and Martello". D'oh! Maybe I should get the shop to order some in!


The Agarro has a lot of knobbies, but they are not as aggressive as the tires you mention. Now that could be interpreted poorly, but don't be mislead. They have a ton of design and function behind them and grip really well. BUT roll fast as hell. It's punches above what you expect, rolls faster too.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

bogeydog said:


> The Agarro has a lot of knobbies, but they are not as aggressive as the tires you mention. Now that could be interpreted poorly, but don't be mislead. They have a ton of design and function behind them and grip really well. BUT roll fast as hell. It's punches above what you expect, rolls faster too.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


Yeah, definitely try the Agarro as a robust (in terms of durability/abuse) and fast rear trail tire. Personally I would pair it with a Martello up front rather than the Morsa, simply because the Martello has similar traction characteristics (especially in wet rough terrain) to the Agarro. The Morsa is... "challenging"... over wet roots/rocks. The Morsa is a good fast-rolling DRY rear tire, but isn't as versatile in my opinion as the Agarro.


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

Full Send said:


> Yeah, definitely try the Agarro as a robust (in terms of durability/abuse) and fast rear trail tire. Personally I would pair it with a Martello up front rather than the Morsa, simply because the Martello has similar traction characteristics (especially in wet rough terrain) to the Agarro. The Morsa is... "challenging"... over wet roots/rocks. The Morsa is a good fast-rolling DRY rear tire, but isn't as versatile in my opinion as the Agarro.


Since we're entering late spring now out here in NorCal not too worried about the wetness issues with Morsa up front(that's the only place I've run it). So maybe the Martello up front, Morsa in rear, forgo the Agarro in back at this time? Really only have one new tire in budget.

Ugh, the plot thickens.....


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Can someone that has an Agarro 29x2.6 measure with diameter of tire or height above rim bead?

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

On 30mm rim at 18psi, width 2.5 and height from bead about 2.4


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

Dirtwire on youtube did a review on the 2.6 switching from the 2.3's.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

*Martelo 29x2.6 Front and Agarro 29x2.6 rear. Both Trail Casings*

Ive been testing this set up as my 'trail' wheels and concur with everyone about the Agarro. It rolls really well, bites great on the climbs but I find its braking traction on rock/loose somewhat limited (only in comparison to Maxterra DHR/DHF and E13 EN Race etc ).

Many like to compare it with an Agressor. I can only compare it to the 29x2.3 which only comes in dual compound. The Agarro is in another league in terms of grip, damping and casing feel. The Agressor is slippery and dead feeling in comparison. Slower too.

It's also far superior to a Rekon in every sense. My wife who prefers trail riding had a 2.6 Rekon as a rear tyre and I swapped it for a 2.6 Agarro. Transformed her ride. She could ride up slippery rock sections and tech with far more ease. Didnt slow her down either. Rekon's are grossly overrated.

The Martello/Agarro combo are the fastest rolling trail setup I have had. On my 'standard' roll test of a moderate decline then left turn and ramp they roll further than a Nobby Nic 2.3 / MSC Gripper combo: the fastest rolling trail setup i have used so far.

The Agarro is definitely a perfect 'Trail' tyre. 
Not a single puncture to date either but have been running a foam ARD insert in the rear.

The Martello however has been less consistent for me.
Run as a front tyre in the dry is has a nice light and smooth edge to edge feel. It steers crisply and easily. no transitions.
It rolls very well and brakes really well in the Dry.

The issue I have is that for some reason it doesn't inspire confidence when conditions get loose and damp.
When the tyre is coated with wet sand and the rocks are damp it becomes very sketchy and feels similar to a plasticky Specialised Gripton Butcher 2.3 or similar.

It seems to lack bite in soft and wet ground and that light feeling becomes a floaty spooky feeling. Its not comforting.

When compared back to back with the benchmark Assegai in challenging conditions its chalk and cheese.

The Assegai is more damped, bites harder and is the ultimate "confidence" front tyre. Sure its heavy and a ***** to pedal around all day but if your trails are damp and rough and you want to feel confident to attack you will be faster on the Assegai.

Also agree that the compounds are very durable and casings strong on both tyres.

I have yet to run an Agarro front. 
Might be the next experiment and compare it to the Martello.

Martello might go to the rear with Assegai front for the bad trails set up (cushcore rear) and its good rolling and braking traction might make that the perfect set up.

Agarro front and back for the light duty trail setup ? Seems a lot of you love it as an all rounded. Definitely worth trying.

I like to support Vittoria as their road rubber is amazing. 
Their pricing is good and Like E13, they design their MTB rubber to be durable and strong (unlike some manufacturers who keep making bullshit weak and light casings to appease weight weenies)

But like somebody said previously - when will Vittoria make a good front tyre ??

Anyone try the Mota out front ?


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

---


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai.
> 
> Suns - we generally have shared experiences - especially when I owned a Foxy 29 - but for some reason the Martello - while fabulous in most dry conditions - is not working for me in very loose/rough and definitely not damp conditions.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Professed said:


> ...But like somebody said previously - when will Vittoria make a good front tyre ??
> 
> Anyone try the Mota out front ?


 Others have said the Goma was that tire...
Can't wait to hear if the Mazza will fill the gap
...Jeff L????


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Mazza the messiah? 

I think if Vittoria tweaked their compounds a little they might nail the issues we are having. The roll speed as much as being casing dependent is also compound dependent and their speed must be a compromise to the durometer.

Are all the Graphene 2.0 compounds the same? doubt it. There must be a mix.

Perhaps if the Martello 2.6 had slightly softer compound middle knobs and more supportive outer knobs AND a bigger real casing for 2.6 it could be the new 2.5 Maxterra DHF?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Professed said:


> Suns_PSD said:
> 
> 
> > For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai.
> ...


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Did the Mazza production get delayed due to CV-19? Eager to see and possibly try it. 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

JeffLenosky said:


> So, it depends on the terrain. Dirt I'd go Mazza, and if it's mixed or mostly harder pack or rocks I'd stick with Martello


Ha, Well done Sun!!!!


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> Professed said:
> 
> 
> > I'm still in love with the Martello/ Agarro combo in spite of the Martello's 1140g actual weight. However I don't ride anything wet, and also my front Martello is a 2.6 on a 34mm ID wheel, on this combo it's phenomenal.
> ...


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

I have been running Agarro front and back since release. Recently went 2.3 to 2.6. Great for sure, but the lower pressures do slow things down a bit. Will likely leave 2m6 on front and go 2.35 on rear. 

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Professed said:


> Suns_PSD said:
> 
> 
> > Good to hear they are working so well. May we get some dry and cool days down in OZ....
> ...


----------



## johnD (Mar 31, 2010)

In regards to the Mazza release. I sent Jeff Lenosky a message on youtube and told him I just bought a set of Agarros, this is his reply.

*It was supposed to be at Sea Otter but it got pushed back. If you need anything else Vittoria put out the code LENOSKY and you can save 20 percent and free shipping until the end of the month.*


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

That code is very tempting although I don't even need any additional tires at the moment.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Considering putting together a Summer tire set up on my wife's and my own bikes because we are in the 90s with high humidity already ere in Texas. Where other locations enjoy Summer and just go to a dry tire set up, around here it's brutally hot and we move to easier more mellow trails and prioritize low rolling resistance. I'm sticking with Vittoria tires 100%. We both are on Mondraker's and these bikes with their long front centers like lots of traction up front to balance well with a lower traction rear.

My wife doesn't know any different. However my goal is always to give her as much confidence in a very fast rolling set up cause she weighs 114#s and is a novice.

I was thinking about putting us both on front Morsa 2.6s & rear Mezcal 3.35s for the summer. Well it would be my summer set up, her permanent set up. 

Thoughts on a set up like this? Especially the Morsa as a front. Thx.


----------



## Machianera (Feb 5, 2011)

Suns_PSD said:


> Considering putting together a Summer tire set up on my wife's and my own bikes because we are in the 90s with high humidity already ere in Texas. Where other locations enjoy Summer and just go to a dry tire set up, around here it's brutally hot and we move to easier more mellow trails and prioritize low rolling resistance. I'm sticking with Vittoria tires 100%. We both are on Mondraker's and these bikes with their long front centers like lots of traction up front to balance well with a lower traction rear.
> 
> My wife doesn't know any different. However my goal is always to give her as much confidence in a very fast rolling set up cause she weighs 114#s and is a novice.
> 
> ...


I have the Morsa 2.3 up front, and I would not recommend it for a novice. On the back is more neutral.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Machianera said:


> I have the Morsa 2.3 up front, and I would not recommend it for a novice. On the back is more neutral.


Thanks. She is going to get an E22 up front as it rolls great with mad traction.


----------



## rianclay (Mar 2, 2008)

My rims have an internal width of 26. Would the 2.6 be too wide and thus sloppy on this rim?


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

No, it would be a perfect 2.35in on your 26mm rim.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

rianclay said:


> My rims have an internal width of 26. Would the 2.6 be too wide and thus sloppy on this rim?


I would recommend the 2.35 Agarro on that rim width. I ran the 2.35s for a year on 25mm rims and they were great! Now I'm running 2.6s on 30mm rims.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> Thanks. She is going to get an E22 up front as it rolls great with mad traction.


I would recommend the Agarro 2.35 for the rear. The Mezcal will be too different to the E22 in terms of cornering grip. I've run the Mezcal rear with all sorts of front tires, and it gets... exciting... when paired with a really grippy front, especially for a novice. The Agarro is super fast rolling, more durable than the Mezcal, and also more predictable in cornering.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Full Send said:


> I would recommend the Agarro 2.35 for the rear. The Mezcal will be too different to the E22 in terms of cornering grip. I've run the Mezcal rear with all sorts of front tires, and it gets... exciting... when paired with a really grippy front, especially for a novice. The Agarro is super fast rolling, more durable than the Mezcal, and also more predictable in cornering.


I love the Agarro as you've probably read, but I was aiming for something a bit faster rolling for summertime easier rides (it's really hot!) particularly for my wife's bike. I've been so impressed with the Vittoria tires I've tried so far I thought the Mezcal would be a great replacement for her current Rock Razor.
Anyways, I'll put her on an E22 & an Agarro next and remove her inserts, she doesn't need them anyways. 
Thanks

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> I love the Agarro as you've probably read, but I was aiming for something a bit faster rolling for summertime easier rides (it's really hot!) particularly for my wife's bike. I've been so impressed with the Vittoria tires I've tried so far I thought the Mezcal would be a great replacement for her current Rock Razor.
> Anyways, I'll put her on an E22 & an Agarro next and remove her inserts, she doesn't need them anyways.
> Thanks
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


The Mezcal is the fastest rolling tire I've run, and it's my favorite rear XC tire, usually paired with a Barzo front (or F/R for fast XC races). My point was just that I wouldn't recommend it when paired with a really aggressive front. Just my $0.02 though - you obviously know your terrain and your wife better!


----------



## OhioPT (Jul 14, 2012)

I wouldn't pair the Mezcal either with an aggressive front tire. Maybe a Barzo rear. I'm running a 2.35 Barzo rear on my Trance 29 with a Forekaster 2.35 front, which I find to be a decent combo. Both of those tires measure closer to 2.25", FYI. I also have a Mezcal 2.35 on my SS hardtail, and it is also undersized at close to 2.25". I think the Barzo rolls extremely well for the extra grip it provides over the Mezcal. If you ride in any mud, you'll find the Mezcal packs up in a hurry, so the Barzo is way better there.

My go-to rear tire for the past 4 years was the 29x2.4 Goma. I used the folding (non TNT) version because I got them super cheap, but they worked well tubeless for a couple years before the beads got worn down to the point I had to use a tube. I found that tire offered a lot of grip and protection, had massive volume (measured up to 2.5" actual), and rolled extremely well. It looks like the Aggaro might be a great replacement for the Goma, but perhaps in the 2.6 vs 2.35 size if they are measuring up undersized like recent Vittorias.


----------



## La Nada (Mar 1, 2017)

I'm running a 2.35 Agarro up front and a 2.35 Mezcal in the rear right now. Super fast combo and adequate grip for my fast, dry trails in Southern Oregon. I'll probably try Agarro front and rear next because of how fast the Agarro seems to me.


----------



## Turd (Jul 21, 2005)

The 2.6 Mezcal has quite a bit larger knobs and more shoulder bite then the 2.35. If running 2.6 combo, I kind of think the traction gap would be less than a 2.35 combo.

I’m about to pull 2.6 Mezcal from my hardtail and put on the rear of my trail bike. Not running Agarro up front (XR5) but probably somewhat relevant to see if it can hang on the rear.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Full Send said:


> The Mezcal is the fastest rolling tire I've run, and it's my favorite rear XC tire, usually paired with a Barzo front (or F/R for fast XC races). My point was just that I wouldn't recommend it when paired with a really aggressive front. Just my $0.02 though - you obviously know your terrain and your wife better!


She is not particularly fast nor strong, so I just ordered her a Mezcal 2.35 to test as a rear. I've also noticed that lighter people don't require nearly as grippy of a tire. The tires just don't slide out nearly as much plus they can run lower air pressure.

The E22 rolls very fast and is light so I'll still mount that up front. These long center bikes really need more grip up front than in the rear imo."

OT as I know this is an Agarro thread. Just had my wife do a test spin on her new rear Mezcal. I removed a nearly new Rock Razor Addix. It wasn't a real ride but she commented (unprovoked) how incredibly smooth the new tire felt. 
Those Vittoria's roll just magical, different than every other tire out there. Not sure that actually matters when trail riding but they sure feel 'rich'.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Turd said:


> The 2.6 Mezcal has quite a bit larger knobs and more shoulder bite then the 2.35. If running 2.6 combo, I kind of think the traction gap would be less than a 2.35 combo.
> 
> I'm about to pull 2.6 Mezcal from my hardtail and put on the rear of my trail bike. Not running Agarro up front (XR5) but probably somewhat relevant to see if it can hang on the rear.


Yeah I've never had a traction issue with the Mezcal 2.6 in the rear - the larger lugs definitely have more grip than those on the 2.35. I think you'll like it.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> She is not particularly fast nor strong, so I just ordered here a Mezcal 2.35 to test as a rear. I've also noticed that lighter people don't require nearly as grippy of a tire. The tires just don't slide out nearly as much plus they can run lower air pressure.
> 
> The E22 rolls very fast and is light so I'll still mount that up front. These long center bikes really need more grip up front than in the rear imo.


Cool - hope it works out well for her!


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

I have had a few good runs on the Agarro 2.6 front and back. These measure about 62mm at the tread on a 30mm ID rim. But don't let that full you. Running 16/18 psi. I have extensive time on the 2.35 too. 

I ride east coast singletrack with varying conditions and types. Some is smooth with flow, most is rooty and rocky, and some is really strune with sharp rock gardens that never end. It's been a little rainy here too. 

The 2.6 are like velcro. They are well dampened, super strong and my God grip so well. I rode 20 miles of super rock and tech Saturday with a lot of wetness. Never slipped and climbed everything. I am talking tech where it's power down and speeds only about 4 miles an hour. Downs are about 12mph. When someone has a flat on these trails, we just laugh and says that what happens 10x a day here. Tire killers. 

Not much I can say but I like these tires and I have beat them hard. 

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

A 2.6" actually measures to 2.4" Good to know, but frustrating to play the guessing game as to whether a tire will meet size expectations. This must be what my first GF had to go through.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

DucatiRider said:


> A 2.6" actually measures to 2.4" Good to know, but frustrating to play the guessing game as to whether a tire will meet size expectations. This must be what my first GF had to go through.


I am actually ok with them measuring as they are, but I understand.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

bogeydog said:


> I have had a few good runs on the Agarro 2.6 front and back. These measure about 62mm at the tread on a 30mm ID rim. But don't let that full you. Running 16/18 psi. I have extensive time on the 2.35 too.
> 
> I ride east coast singletrack with varying conditions and types. Some is smooth with flow, most is rooty and rocky, and some is really strune with sharp rock gardens that never end. It's been a little rainy here too.
> 
> ...


Yup, they are good. That's the riding I do, and they are my favorite trail tire for sure. Glad you like them.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

About to pick one up for rear. What does the 2.35 measure? If the 2.6 measures out to 2.4, I'd be tempted to get it over the 2.35. But if the 2.35 is roughly the same size as a morsa that'd be perfect for me. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

WHALENARD said:


> About to pick one up for rear. What does the 2.35 measure? If the 2.6 measures out to 2.4, I'd be tempted to get it over the 2.35. But if the 2.35 is roughly the same size as a morsa that'd be perfect for me.
> 
> Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


The 2.35 is likely closer to 2.3 (don't have any of those mounted up at the moment). Definitely smaller than the Morsa (which runs large). Also, the 2.6 is only 20g heavier than the 2.35. Go 2.6.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Ok, cool. Thanks!

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

WHALENARD said:


> About to pick one up for rear. What does the 2.35 measure? If the 2.6 measures out to 2.4, I'd be tempted to get it over the 2.35. But if the 2.35 is roughly the same size as a morsa that'd be perfect for me.
> 
> Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


58mm

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

Hi all, new member here. Long time reader, first time poster.

After months of research (including reading the posts here), I just fitted Agarro 2.6 rear and Martello 2.35 front (went for the lighter 940g trail version) to my 29" FS trail bike. Only had time for one quick test spin on my local trail so far, but I am seriously impressed by the grip and how fast these things are. 

I'm not a gravity freak and I ride pretty "light", preferring to pick a good line rather than just barrelling through stuff. Low rolling resistance is really important to me and it seems like these things may be just what I've been looking for.

I'm hoping they hold up OK since I often have to ride quite a bit of road to get to good forest trails.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

bogeydog said:


> 58mm
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


 Thanks Bogey. I bit small then, I'll definitely go for the 2.6. Glad I asked, you guys are awesome.

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

DucatiRider said:


> A 2.6" actually measures to 2.4" Good to know, but frustrating to play the guessing game as to whether a tire will meet size expectations. This must be what my first GF had to go through.


Lol.

62mm is 2.5" in my book but also only on a 30mm ID wheel.

It's interesting that the 2.6 only weighs 20 grams more. My Agarros have been totally reliable so I'm assuming the 2.35 is thicker so I'll definitely stick with that as a rear.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> Lol.
> 
> 62mm is 2.5" in my book but also only on a 30mm ID wheel.
> 
> ...


My 2.6 was 2.36" wide on a 31mm ID rim at 20psi. I got a refund. When Vittoria fixes their sizing I'll buy one.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Mine is 2.5 on DT-Swiss M1900 30id wheels.


----------



## The Squeaky Wheel (Dec 30, 2003)

27.5 2.35 Agarro on a i29 Synthesis rim:

Casing measures 2.4025"
Widest measurement from tread block to tread block is 2.1920"


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> My 2.6 was 2.36" wide on a 31mm ID rim at 20psi. I got a refund. When Vittoria fixes their sizing I'll buy one.


I remember that. 
There are some true plus size tires that you can buy.
Although my opinion is that true 2.6 tires totally suck, I do wish manufacturers accurately labeled tire width on a specified rim size. But then they are in the sales business.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## ACLakey (Jul 7, 2012)

I have been running a 2.6 DHRII front and 2.35 DHRII this spring. I did get a new bike this spring and for whatever reason, I am not getting along with the DHRII in the front this time around. The DHRII in the rear is very grippy, breaks well but rolls like a turd. Things are quickly drying out here and I am looking for new tires. I purchased some Dissector tires but they are taking forever to get here. After reading some posts and seeing reviews, I ordered a 2.6 Martello front and a 2.35 Agarro rear. I am very excited to give these a try, I have had great luck with Vittoria tires in the past.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ACLakey said:


> I have been running a 2.6 DHRII front and 2.35 DHRII this spring. I did get a new bike this spring and for whatever reason, I am not getting along with the DHRII in the front this time around. The DHRII in the rear is very grippy, breaks well but rolls like a turd. Things are quickly drying out here and I am looking for new tires. I purchased some Dissector tires but they are taking forever to get here. After reading some posts and seeing reviews, I ordered a 2.6 Martello front and a 2.35 Agarro rear. I am very excited to give these a try, I have had great luck with Vittoria tires in the past.


I've tried all the tires you've mentioned and far and away prefer the set up you have on order now.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Professed said:


> Suns_PSD said:
> 
> 
> > For me, I find the Martello to even be more consistent in traction than the Assagai.
> ...


----------



## nashwillis (Dec 27, 2012)

I currently have 2.6 DHF front and 2.3 morsa rear and looking for a faster rolling front tire and maybe rear too. I ride mostly trail without much elevation so the DHF is a bit overkill here but does grip well. Is the aggaro faster rolling rear than morsa? How would a 2.6 morsa be on the front with aggaro rear?


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

nashwillis said:


> I currently have 2.6 DHF front and 2.3 morsa rear and looking for a faster rolling front tire and maybe rear too. I ride mostly trail without much elevation so the DHF is a bit overkill here but does grip well. Is the aggaro faster rolling rear than morsa? How would a 2.6 morsa be on the front with aggaro rear?


I haven't ridden the Morsa in a while (have some hanging in my garage), and though it is pretty fast-rolling, let's just say I don't think there there's a faster-rolling true trail tire than the Agarro. The traction profiles of those two tires are pretty different, though. For the techy stuff I ride, the Agarro is much better. The Morsa is not good on any wet technical terrain, and is more of a dry conditions tire, in my opinion. Not sure I'd pair the Morsa with the Agarro, for that reason. As conditions vary, you'd get vastly different grip F/R. I'd either go Agarro F/R (what I ride), or Martello F / Agarro R.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> Professed said:
> 
> 
> > I sort of encountered those same shortcomings you mentioned of the Martello in very loose dry rough conditions today. Where I was riding today all the corners where I wanted to make up speed there was just a pile of loose rocks at every apex and I was having a tough time keeping momentum up.
> ...


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I got the 2.35 Martello and experienced the same issues on loose terrain. So I gave it to a friend and bought the 2.6 Martello for more spacing between the lugs, and I mounted it this morning. This was going to be part of my Agarro and Martello combo before I took the Agarro for a refund. So far, at 30 psi, it's 2.42" on a 31mm rim. I don't want to go to a wider rim because the profile looks to be on the limits of being flat. 

It appears Vittoria is going where Specialized is, if you want a certain width you'll need to upsize the tire. I'll need to get the 2.8 to get a 2.6.


----------



## nashwillis (Dec 27, 2012)

I live around Nashville and summer is pretty dry packed trails. Maybe 2.6 aggaro front and 2.3 rear aggaro would be what I am looking for. I could always put my DHF back on if I head somewhere I need more traction up front.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

nashwillis said:


> I live around Nashville and summer is pretty dry packed trails. Maybe 2.6 aggaro front and 2.3 rear aggaro would be what I am looking for. I could always put my DHF back on if I head somewhere I need more traction up front.


I think that's a good approach.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The Mazza is due in the USA in Mid-June. The 29er has a 2.35 & a 2.6 size, both sizes offered in trail or Enduro casings.

Will be ordering one up the day they are available.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> The Mazza is due in the USA in Mid-June. The 29er has a 2.35 & a 2.6 size, both sizes offered in trail or Enduro casings.
> 
> Will be ordering one up the day they are available.


Good to hear. Interested to know the weights. Some of the burlier Vittoria tires get heavy.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The rep was helpful but did not have the weights yet. As a front tire, I'd probably order the trail version and run a Tubolight insert. 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

2.35 martello front or 2.6 agarro front with 2.35 agarro rear? This is for an aggressive short travel 29er. I have another bike for the really high speed, aggressive stuff. Terrain is hardpack and loose over hard, always dry. No Martello 2.6 front as I'm trying to keep the weight reasonable for a trail bike.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

rpearce1475 said:


> 2.35 martello front or 2.6 agarro front with 2.35 agarro rear? This is for an aggressive short travel 29er. I have another bike for the really high speed, aggressive stuff. Terrain is hardpack and loose over hard, always dry. No Martello 2.6 front as I'm trying to keep the weight reasonable for a trail bike.


That's a tough one... I've run both of those combos, and I think it depends on a couple factors... Agarro 2.6 is faster rolling (even on the front, it's noticeable), and Martello has slightly more cornering bite. Also, what's your rim width? for ~25mm rims, I've found the 2.35 shape works well, and for 30mm rims, I like the 2.6 better. Also, do you want a taller front end, or not?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Full Send said:


> Suns_PSD said:
> 
> 
> > I believe the answer to that question would be yes.
> ...


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

Full Send said:


> That's a tough one... I've run both of those combos, and I think it depends on a couple factors... Agarro 2.6 is faster rolling (even on the front, it's noticeable), and Martello has slightly more cornering bite. Also, what's your rim width? for ~25mm rims, I've found the 2.35 shape works well, and for 30mm rims, I like the 2.6 better. Also, do you want a taller front end, or not?


27id rims; leaning towards the martello front just given my riding style


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

rpearce1475 said:


> 27id rims; leaning towards the martello front just given my riding style


Sounds good - that's a solid combo.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I got a solid fifteen 2 hour rides or so out of the rear Agarro which is good for me. 
It's still working pretty well but I can definitely feel a drop off in climbing, and descending traction, cornering traction still feels reasonable by my standards, but not as good as new.










Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

This is the plasticky insert that Vittoria has placed in the sidewalls of their Enduro tires. It really firms up the sidewall and prevents pinch flats. Very clever and high tech imo.

Ps. I won't even consider any other rear tire at this time.









Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

It's always harder to hurt a front tire and this Martello is still working very well about 8-10 trail rides in but is getting a few microtears at the base of the knobs. Traction is still like 95% so no problem. 
I've settled on a rear tire (Agarro) but the front tire is yet to be settled but narrowed down to one of these 3: 1) Tioga Edge 22 soft, 2) Martello 2.6, 3) Mazza 2.6.









Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

I'm running a Martello 2.35 TNT (940g trail version) up front and the Agarro 2.6 rear. I'm 75kg on a 29" short travel FS bike. For the very technical, roots, roots, rocks and then more roots and rocks type of trails we have around here, this combo is killer. I can get up anything and get down anything. Running 23psi front and back at the moment, tubeless.

Loving these tyres!


----------



## TXrocks (Apr 22, 2014)

Is the tire running narrow still an issue? I ordered 2.35" and there going on 30mm width rims. I was going to try it on my long travel 29er, still waiting on tire inserts to show up before I put new tires on. I figured I would try to kill the Maxxis Agressors while its still dry .


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

I don't have anything reliable to measure tyre width with, but the 2.35 on the front does look narrower than the 2.4 Conti tyre it replaced. It doesn't bother me though, the tyre works great. To be honest, if the Agarro 2.6 is a little narrower than it should be, I'm happy about that because it only just fits in my frame as it is.
Running id30mm DT Swiss rims.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Totally useless fact: lining up the 1st 'R' in Agarro with the valvestem on one side, results in the exact same R on the other side also lined up!

Yah I know...


----------



## jonmango42 (Nov 8, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> Totally useless fact: lining up the 1st 'R' in Agarro with the valvestem on one side, results in the exact same R on the other side also lined up!
> 
> Yah I know...


Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!

I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.

The Maxxis DHR2 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 I took off the front measured 2.4 and the Rekon 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 measured 2.35. These have been on the bike for 600 or so miles. The DHR2 seems pretty good, but the Rekon is chewed up quite a bit.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

jonmango42 said:


> Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!
> 
> I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.
> 
> The Maxxis DHR2 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 I took off the front measured 2.4 and the Rekon 3C MaxTerra WT 2.4 measured 2.35. These have been on the bike for 600 or so miles. The DHR2 seems pretty good, but the Rekon is chewed up quite a bit.


Sweet - Let us know what you think.


----------



## kevin_sbay (Sep 26, 2018)

Suns_PSD said:


> I got a solid fifteen 2 hour rides or so out of the rear Agarro which is good for me.
> It's still working pretty well but I can definitely feel a drop off in climbing, and descending traction, cornering traction still feels reasonable by my standards, but not as good as new.
> 
> 
> ...


Man, you must be an aggressive rider!
Curious how would you describe your riding and terrain?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

kevin_sbay said:


> Man, you must be an aggressive rider!
> Curious how would you describe your riding and terrain?


You know, I'm not an 'extreme' rider. I do a few jumps and 5' drops but being nearly 50 and having only begun riding about 6 years ago I don't have a lifetime of experience nor a desire to get hurt.

That said, smooth yet fast turning is sort of my thing if I know where I'm going and as a result at times, I'm pretty hard to keep up with when I'm feeling comfortable. I don't skid at all, always use both brakes, and just try and go through the turns as smooth and fast as possible. It's not KOM type speeds, but it's like top 10% speed.

Our terrain is very rocky, very loose, dry, with plenty of short but steep ups and downs. I try to maintain momentum through it all but I usually poop out 3/4 way through a ride and slow down quite a bit as I don't save it for later.

I wish I was less risk averse with drops and gap jumps, but it is what it is.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Have a handful of rides on the Martello 2.35 TNT (trail) on the front with the Agarro 2.35 TNT (trail) rear. Agarro I have been riding since last fall when it first came out and the Martello has maybe 100 miles on it or so. This is on my 29er GG The Smash running 160/145 travel.

So for me in the Northern NV high desert the Agarro does great on everything other than semi-deep kitty litter. There it has a tendency to want to drift and slide, but nothing that is uncontrollable and it lets you know if it is going to. 

The martello up front is a little different and I am not sure if I am liking it as a front tire. Could just be the size may not be good as a front in my area but damn if it doesn't feel twitchy and like it wants to wander all the time. High speed cornering, if there is even a small amount of skree then it wants to drift. Haven't had a huge amount of miles on it yet so could just be it is still breaking in.

And HOW did I miss the information on the MAZZA!!!! Definitely looks to be a redesigned Goma, which was my absolute FAVORITE tire of all time. Patiently waiting for that to come out and will likely grab one right off the bat. ESPECIALLY if it comes in a 2.4"


----------



## jonmango42 (Nov 8, 2019)

First two rides felt a ton faster, and some Strava PRs indicate that I am - haha! I have a very close little XC loop down the street from me and is more or less my proving ground.

My first 3 laps I ran them 23F/25R and they felt fast as hell but not super confident in the corners. We haven't had a good soak in a while so the track is a bit dry at the moment. Then I aired down to 17F/19R and that was way, way better! Still rolling fast and I was able to take corners with more speed, too.

This is my 3rd pair of tires, so I'm still learning how to feel and understand what's going on. Also, these are my first 120tpi tires. 17/19 is a bit lower than I usually go and these feel much more supportive than the DHR2/Rekon I just took off.

In fact, I think I can air down even more without riding on my carbon rims  At least on my home track - when I venture farther I guess I'll run more air till I can get a good feel for what the conditions and trail allow.

Pretty happy with the purchase, and I'm looking forward to more rides!



Full Send said:


> Quote Originally Posted by jonmango42 View Post
> Ha ha! I put the valve in the dead center of "Agarro" when looking at the drive side, and noticed it didn't quite line up on the other side. I suppose I can change that when I add more sealant or if it really bugs me to know it can be symmetrical!
> 
> I just mounted up some new 29x2.6 and they weighed in at 969g and 945g. When mounted on the i32mm rims they are about 2.5 when first installed. I inflated them ~35psi and will let them sit overnight.
> ...


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

jonmango42 said:


> First two rides felt a ton faster, and some Strava PRs indicate that I am - haha! I have a very close little XC loop down the street from me and is more or less my proving ground.
> 
> My first 3 laps I ran them 23F/25R and they felt fast as hell but not super confident in the corners. We haven't had a good soak in a while so the track is a bit dry at the moment. Then I aired down to 17F/19R and that was way, way better! Still rolling fast and I was able to take corners with more speed, too.
> 
> ...


I've found their construction (and the anti-pinch-flat inserts built in) allows for a plush and supportive ride, with good durability, at low pressures. I'd get a good brass gauge and keep letting 1 psi out until you feel the tires folding under load and/or whacking the rims on stuff. Lower is better, until it's not.


----------



## BeerCan (Aug 29, 2006)

Put this tire on my rear today. I think this is the biggest tire that has been on there, I replace a captain. Hit the trails tomorrow, but I think this is more tire than needed around here, we'll see.
Stan's Arch (I know ancient)


----------



## jonmango42 (Nov 8, 2019)

Full Send said:


> I've found their construction (and the anti-pinch-flat inserts built in) allows for a plush and supportive ride, with good durability, at low pressures. I'd get a good brass gauge and keep letting 1 psi out until you feel the tires folding under load and/or whacking the rims on stuff. Lower is better, until it's not.


I ran them at 13F/15R (at least according to my gauge) and they were slow to roll. The ride was more plush though, so that's a bonus. I guess it's like the Cush Core marketing - squishier tires = more suspension travel 

I didn't really notice much cornering improvement - but that could be due to my needing to get better at cornering, lol. I think I'll go up till I get a good balance between rolling, handling, and bump compliance.

I have a close by trail system I frequent that I figure I'll need to make some adjustments. The climbs and descents are much longer and the trails have far more tech elements.

I have the super common Topeak digital gauge - I don't know if when it says 20psi, that's a true 20psi or not, but hopefully it's accurate to itself.

Did you already recommend a brass gauge?


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

The more pictures I see the more I like. I like the rekon and this looks like a beefier version.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

BeerCan said:


> Put this tire on my rear today. I think this is the biggest tire that has been on there, I replace a captain. Hit the trails tomorrow, but I think this is more tire than needed around here, we'll see.
> Stan's Arch (I know ancient)
> View attachment 1333055
> 
> ...


That's a 2.35?

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

jonmango42 said:


> I ran them at 13F/15R (at least according to my gauge) and they were slow to roll. The ride was more plush though, so that's a bonus. I guess it's like the Cush Core marketing - squishier tires = more suspension travel
> 
> I didn't really notice much cornering improvement - but that could be due to my needing to get better at cornering, lol. I think I'll go up till I get a good balance between rolling, handling, and bump compliance.
> 
> ...


The Topeak digital is probably fine, at least in reference to itself, as you pointed out.

Personally, I use these: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004XISIK4/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_U_bAQVEbDJKZCQ1

For sure, find the pressure that works for your style and terrain. For the stuff I ride, low pressure is faster, not slower, because there are bumps and stuff.  For roads, lower is slower for sure.


----------



## BeerCan (Aug 29, 2006)

WHALENARD said:


> That's a 2.35?
> 
> Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


Yes 2.35


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

OT regarding other Vittoria tires: My wife rode her new rear Mezcal around and instantly noticed how smooth they rode. Vittoria tires are really unique in this regard. 
And I have continued to ride my 2.6 Martello on a 34mm ID front wheel and am still blown away. It's the best I've ridden by a fair bit. Fantastic traction, low RR, still maintaining traction even as it wears. I'm surprised that others don't universally reach the same conclusion. 
I'm still Mazza curious, however I could be content running Martellos as a front for several seasons as it performs so well. Won't be easy to out perform this tire. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> OT regarding other Vittoria tires: My wife rode her new rear Mezcal around and instantly noticed how smooth they rode. Vittoria tires are really unique in this regard.
> And I have continued to ride my 2.6 Martello on a 34mm ID front wheel and am still blown away. It's the best I've ridden by a fair bit. Fantastic traction, low RR, still maintaining traction even as it wears. I'm surprised that others don't universally reach the same conclusion.
> I'm still Mazza curious, however I could be content running Martellos as a front for several seasons as it performs so well. Won't be easy to out perform this tire.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


A couple rides in with a Martello 2.6 front (trail version with CushCore XC) and it's quite a remarkable tire IMHO. I'm in the PNW, so lots of wet rides but actually not a lot of deep sticky mud; our trails tend to be either loamy or hard-packed with lots of roots and rock in the trail surface.

I find that the Martello does an exceptional job of sticking to these wet surfaces; those huge, soft, siped shoulder knobs just generate a ton of traction. Couple that with the really nice smooth ride and relatively low rolling resistance and this thing is a winner. Curious to try an Agarro in back, though not sure it'll do quite as well in our wet conditions.

@Suns, curious how the Martello takes to the wider i34 rim. I have a 2.6 on a 30mm rim and it looks good, but the tread is a bit narrower than some other tires. Seem like going much wider you might get a "Mohawk" effect of the casing being significantly wider than the tread.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I put a 2.6 Martello on a 30mm rim and it looked as square as I was willing to go, and also it was just 2.4. I have some 2.8 on order, hopefully they will be somewhere near 2.6.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

DrewBird said:


> A couple rides in with a Martello 2.6 front (trail version with CushCore XC) and it's quite a remarkable tire IMHO. I'm in the PNW, so lots of wet rides but actually not a lot of deep sticky mud; our trails tend to be either loamy or hard-packed with lots of roots and rock in the trail surface.
> 
> I find that the Martello does an exceptional job of sticking to these wet surfaces; those huge, soft, siped shoulder knobs just generate a ton of traction. Couple that with the really nice smooth ride and relatively low rolling resistance and this thing is a winner. Curious to try an Agarro in back, though not sure it'll do quite as well in our wet conditions.


Try it. Other than straight up mud, the Agarro loves wet and slick conditions. Very similar to the Martello in that regard.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> The rep was helpful but did not have the weights yet. As a front tire, I'd probably order the trail version and run a Tubolight insert.


Ive been running the Martello 2.6 trail front at around 20 - 22 psi. I usually run an Assegai exo+ 2.5 front at 19-20 psi Have had zero issues. No rim pinging either. I can't see the need for an Enduro casing. The trail feels firm and squirm free

Yes, I now mostly prefer the Martello as have gotten used to its lighter feel and can trust it more. It's initial sketchy feel in the wet has gone. Either me or perhaps there is a slight film on the new rubber??

Agarro 2.6 rear with Cushcore in trail casing. Again, no issues.

Fast and strong combo. Am matching PBs on most DH segments


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

2.6 Martello on 34mm ID wheel @ 20psi.

This is the first non-Exo+/ non--DH front that I don't need an insert in for it to handle correctly. Consider saving that weight.








Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Ripbro (May 4, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> 2.6 Martello on 34mm ID wheel @ 20psi.
> 
> This is the first non-Exo+/ non--DH front that I don't need an insert in for it to handle correctly. Consider saving that weight.
> View attachment 1333915
> ...


Awesome. Trying to find a new rear for my Ripmo AF as the dual assegais are way too draggy. Looking for and aggressive trail tire but want something that rolls fast. Rekons don't seem like enough, and deciding between an 2.6 Aggaro and 2.5 wt Agressor. I have S35 rims and it's good to see what the 2.6 looks like on a wider rim. Might go with the aggaro...


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Ripbro said:


> Awesome. Trying to find a new rear for my Ripmo AF as the dual assegais are way too draggy. Looking for and aggressive trail tire but want something that rolls fast. Rekons don't seem like enough, and deciding between an 2.6 Aggaro and 2.5 wt Agressor. I have S35 rims and it's good to see what the 2.6 looks like on a wider rim. Might go with the aggaro...


My Rip Bro has been running 2.6 Aggaro on rear and liked so much he is now trying on his Ripley front and rear. Here is his initial review...

https://forums.mtbr.com/ibis/ripmo-lighter-weight-tire-options-1118303.html#post14450811


----------



## hardtail1416 (Oct 18, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> This is the plasticky insert that Vittoria has placed in the sidewalls of their Enduro tires. It really firms up the sidewall and prevents pinch flats. Very clever and high tech imo.
> 
> Ps. I won't even consider any other rear tire at this time.
> 
> ...


Suns_PSD, 
Excellent info regarding Vittoria tires. You have peaked my interest in this brand! I looked on Vittoria's site and found more information regarding their tire construction as well as the APF inserts.

https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

hardtail1416 said:


> Suns_PSD,
> Excellent info regarding Vittoria tires. You have peaked my interest in this brand! I looked on Vittoria's site and found more information regarding their tire construction as well as the APF inserts.
> 
> https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction


I only recently discovered Vittoria tyres, but after reading a lot of reviews and forums like this one, I became interested in what they were doing. I took the plunge and fitted an Agarro on the back and a trail Martello on the front - and I couldn't be happier! Really fast rolling, grip for days and great protection. What more do you need?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Stuker said:


> I only recently discovered Vittoria tyres, but after reading a lot of reviews and forums like this one, I became interested in what they were doing. I took the plunge and fitted an Agarro on the back and a trail Martello on the front - and I couldn't be happier! Really fast rolling, grip for days and great protection. What more do you need?


I bought every major brand and new release EXCEPT Vittoria for 3 years. They were literally the last major brand I hadn't tried. Funny thing is that occasionally other forum members had strongly recommended Vittoria tires but I always had something else to try first. They were off my radar. 
The Agarro blew me away as a perfect rear but I still wasn't convinced! Then the Martello popped up on sale on a foreign website. I read a single online review (Outdoorgear Reviews missed the mark here) and checked the weight and I prejudged it as being likely inadequate and too heavy but I bought it anyways cause I had purchased every major competitor and was still unsatisfied with their performance so committed myself to continue testing. Then the Martello too blew me away! Phenomenally fast, grippy, stable, long lasting, reliable tire. 
I'll never doubt this brand again and my desire to try the 'next new release' from other brands is greatly reduced unless the competitors make a 20% jump in performance in 1 generation. 
Bring on the Mazza!

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Ripbro (May 4, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> I bought every major brand and new release EXCEPT Vittoria for 3 years. They were literally the last major brand I hadn't tried. Funny thing is that occasionally other forum members had strongly recommended Vittoria tires but I always had something else to try first. They were off my radar.
> The Agarro blew me away as a perfect rear but I still wasn't convinced! Then the Martello popped up on sale on a foreign website. I read a single online review (Outdoorgear Reviews missed the mark here) and checked the weight and I prejudged it as being likely inadequate and too heavy but I bought it anyways cause I had purchased every major competitor and was still unsatisfied with their performance so committed myself to continue testing. Then the Martello too blew me away! Phenomenally fast, grippy, stable, long lasting, reliable tire.
> I'll never doubt this brand again and my desire to try the 'next new release' from other brands is greatly reduced unless the competitors make a 20% jump in performance in 1 generation.
> Bring on the Mazza!
> ...


Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesn't look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. I'm looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

Ripbro said:


> Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesn't look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. I'm looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire


I have the Agarro 2.6 on the rear but I went for the 2.35 Trail version (940g) Martello up front in order to save weight. Any reservations I had in advance about the narrower tyre up front have been forgotten. Rolling resistance is pretty close to the Agarro (which is superb) and amazing for such a chunky and grippy front tyre. My bike used to growl on tarmac, now it's almost silent.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Does anybody have a pic of Aggaro's 2.6 & 2.35 mounted side by side by chance? I realize that's a long shot but still waffling between the two. 

*It seems there's a bit of a variability in measured 2.35's in this thread that has me hesitant. 
Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

If you want a 2.35 then you want the 2.6 because it's about 2.4. Some people are measuring the outside of the knobs to show wider but I can't see how the outside of the knobs affects anything other than frame clearance.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Ok, cool. Thanks. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

TylerVernon said:


> If you want a 2.35 then you want the 2.6 because it's about 2.4. Some people are measuring the outside of the knobs to show wider but I can't see how the outside of the knobs affects anything other than frame clearance.


Is this the same for a 2.6 Martello? I have 30mm ID rims but don't like the 1100ish grams for the 29x2.6 Martello 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

WHALENARD said:


> Does anybody have a pic of Aggaro's 2.6 & 2.35 mounted side by side by chance? I realize that's a long shot but still waffling between the two.
> 
> *It seems there's a bit of a variability in measured 2.35's in this thread that has me hesitant.
> Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


My opinion is you should choose the tire size based on your rim width, tire location, and maybe terrain. If you have a 28mm ID or more narrow rim than you are stuck with the 2.35" imo. If you are over say 32mm ID then you are stuck with the 2.6". In between rim sizes are where you have some decisions to make. For a rear aggressive tire I'd run the 2.35. For a more light trail oriented soft terrain tire I'd maybe go with the 2.6". In the front, I'd always choose the 2.6 if my rim was wide enough. Also if I was riding a 27.5" bike instead of a 29er I'd just about always choose the 2.6" width.

I also happen to think that the proper way to measure a tire is at it's widest point.

good luck


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> My opinion is you should choose the tire size based on your rim width, tire location, and maybe terrain. If you have a 28mm ID or more narrow rim than you are stuck with the 2.35" imo. If you are over say 32mm ID then you are stuck with the 2.6". In between rim sizes are where you have some decisions to make. For a rear aggressive tire I'd run the 2.35. For a more light trail oriented soft terrain tire I'd maybe go with the 2.6". In the front, I'd always choose the 2.6 if my rim was wide enough. Also if I was riding a 27.5" bike instead of a 29er I'd just about always choose the 2.6" width.
> 
> I also happen to think that the proper way to measure a tire is at it's widest point.
> 
> good luck


Agreed with all of this. I loved the 2.35 Agarro on my old 25mm ID rims - it rode well and I didn't really think about wanting anything wider. However, this year on my 30ID rims I'm loving the 2.6 more - the added volume is great, speed seems about the same, weight is only ~20g different, and the shape seems better on the wider rims.


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Very interesting. I haven't tried any Vittoria tires yet but this has peaked my interest.
So far I gather that the Agarro is akin to a beefed up Rekon. Any input from anyone who has tried both?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Ripbro said:


> Can you compare the aggaro to the martello (rolling resistance, grip, acceleration)? It doesn't look like the have the Martello in a 29x 2.6 available quite yet. I'm looking to save weight and get something fast rolling so a Martello seems like too much tire


Not really because I've only ran them at different locations and at different sizes. 
However, unless you ride some insanely loose terrain, the Martello is purely a front tire in my eyes.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

JaxMustang50 said:


> Very interesting. I haven't tried any Vittoria tires yet but this has peaked my interest.
> So far I gather that the Agarro is akin to a beefed up Rekon. Any input from anyone who has tried both?


The Agarro rolls like a Rekon, but has better traction than a 2.3 Aggresor and similar traction to an HD2 or the old WTB Breakout. 
So no, it's not a beefed up Rekon. In the rear it's an Enduro grade tire that just happens to roll like the Rekon.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Wow. Very impressive. Any thoughts on predictability, feedback near the limit?


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> The Agarro rolls like a Rekon, but has better traction than a 2.3 Aggresor and similar traction to an HD2 or the old WTB Breakout.
> So no, it's not a beefed up Rekon. In the rear it's an Enduro grade tire that just happens to roll like the Rekon.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


If it rolls as fast as a RKN but has more traction than the AGR, it's my next tire. What Vittoria tire are you pairing with it upfront and how does it compare to other Maxxis tires you've run ?

A bit of trivia... "Vittoria" in Italian translates to "Victory".


----------



## Ripbro (May 4, 2020)

Agreed. As long as a 2.6 is wide enough ibis 35mm rims I’m ordering one (or two) for the ripmo. Did a ride last night and couldn’t stop thinking about how slow the 2.5 wt assegais are to pedal.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ridetheridge said:


> If it rolls as fast as a RKN but has more traction than the AGR, it's my next tire. What Vittoria tire are you pairing with it upfront and how does it compare to other Maxxis tires you've run ?
> 
> A bit of trivia... "Vittoria" in Italian translates to "Victory".


I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome. 
I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard. 
Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## jonmango42 (Nov 8, 2019)

Ripbro said:


> Agreed. As long as a 2.6 is wide enough ibis 35mm rims I'm ordering one (or two) for the ripmo. Did a ride last night and couldn't stop thinking about how slow the 2.5 wt assegais are to pedal.


I just switched from Maxxis DHR2 in front + Rekon in rear, both 29x2.4 to Agarro 2.6 and can say they roll very fast compared to what I had. Last night in the damp they were just faster and required less pedal input to maintain speed.

And rolling speed is just *one* of the advantages I've noticed with these tires. Other advantages are listed in the thread, but these tires have really opened my eyes to how much better my bike can be with great rubber.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

socalrider77 said:


> Is this the same for a 2.6 Martello? I have 30mm ID rims but don't like the 1100ish grams for the 29x2.6 Martello
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I just sent back a recently purchased 2.6 Martello and I have some 2.8 on order. It was 2.4 as well on a 30mm rim. It was also pretty square on that rim so I didn't try to put it on a wider rim. I'm hoping the 2.8 is a 2.6.


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome.
> I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard.
> Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Limited time on Martello and Agarro, but so far I tend to agree. In general I think Maxxis makes tires with great tread patterns, but their rubber and casings are nothing special. Their MaxTerra rubber combo is reasonably durable but too hard to provide good grip in wet conditions, and Exo and DoubleDown are respectively lighter and heavier than is ideal for many riders. (Exo+ is barely more than Exo, not clear it adds much support or flat protection.) And they only put their stickiest rubber on DH/DD casing tires, which are super heavy.

Seems like Vittoria is basically copying the Rekon and the DHF tread patterns with the Agarro and Mazza, but doing it with their superior rubber, subtle improvements like siping and stepped ramps, and better casings. Those things really add up IMHO. Martello/Agarro or (soon) Mazza/Martello will be great combos.

FWIW others I think are clearly superior to anything from Maxxis for aggressive riding (biased toward wet weather grip being in the PNW) are Conti Der Baron/Der Kaiser and Michelin Wild Enduro F/R. Again that's mostly because I think both companies make much better rubber and casings than Maxxis.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

^I'd agree with that 100%. I still like the aggressor as an all-arounder rear tire but maxxis is getting left in the dust in the casing and rubber game. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> I'm running the Martello up front, and it's awesome.
> I've ran every single aggressive Maxxis made, none of them are particularly close to these Vittoria tires in any regard.
> Sincerely if you are only looking for Recon traction, you might have equivalent traction in a much faster set up using an Agarro front combined with a Mezcal rear or something along those lines.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Thanks. I ran the Morsa/Mezcal combo on my short travel 29er and loved it. It was fast, long wearing and smoothed out the trail with the 120tpi. For my long travel 29er, I might replace my Dissector (which is a good tire) with the Martello and the Rekon with the Agarro. It will be a fun combo to try.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I tried the Dissector 2.6 up front right before the Martello. It was removed after 13 miles, it's not even a top 10 front tire for me as it bounced and pushed everywhere for me. 
I was pretty disappointed just a few turns in and the rest of the ride proved that it was a turd front tire, at least in the 2.6 version.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

So these things run real small is what I’m gathering. I have i35 rims and Iike 2.6’s a lot but not if they are only 2.4’s. The Martello agarro combo sounds like the setup I’ve been looking for minus its size. They all really run that small?

I have 4 pairs of tires in the garage and my favorites are HD2 F/R and rekon and assegai and Kenda HK/ nevegal2 combo rolls slightly slower than the others. All have their pluses and minuses but none do all that I want in one. I like the HD2 in the rear a lot, it’s does well in the front until it gets a bit loose. My terrain is rocky hardpack with kitty litter and sand scattered in places.


----------



## bronxbomber252 (Mar 27, 2017)

DrewBird said:


> Limited time on Martello and Agarro, but so far I tend to agree. In general I think Maxxis makes tires with great tread patterns, but their rubber and casings are nothing special. Their MaxTerra rubber combo is reasonably durable but too hard to provide good grip in wet conditions, and Exo and DoubleDown are respectively lighter and heavier than is ideal for many riders. (Exo+ is barely more than Exo, not clear it adds much support or flat protection.) And they only put their stickiest rubber on DH/DD casing tires, which are super heavy.
> 
> Seems like Vittoria is basically copying the Rekon and the DHF tread patterns with the Agarro and Mazza, but doing it with their superior rubber, subtle improvements like siping and stepped ramps, and better casings. Those things really add up IMHO. Martello/Agarro or (soon) Mazza/Martello will be great combos.
> 
> FWIW others I think are clearly superior to anything from Maxxis for aggressive riding (biased toward wet weather grip being in the PNW) are Conti Der Baron/Der Kaiser and Michelin Wild Enduro F/R. Again that's mostly because I think both companies make much better rubber and casings than Maxxis.


Having compared the Rekon and Agarro back to back and looking at them next to eachother. The Agarro is more aggressive. It rolls similar and looks similar but the knobs are less ramped and taller on the agarro.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

My biggest beef with Vittoria mtb tires is they are undersized and heavy. Their 2.35 are really 2.25 and weigh like a 2.4-2.5.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Its all relative.

If you want an XC (light) casing then don't consider the Agarro or Martello but perhaps the Barzo or Mezcal. They are light

If you are comparing the Agarro Trail with a Maxxis Exo for weight then you are simply deceiving yourself. The Vittoria Trail casings are very strong - see all the comments above. They don't slash, cut or fall apart at the beads like so many other lightweight and unsuitable casings by a range of manufacturers . Maxxis a perfect example.


----------



## bronxbomber252 (Mar 27, 2017)

So I have measured multiple Agarros and Mattellos on my two bikes


On 25mm internal rims, the 2.35 of both measure 2.25 initially and stretch to 2.3 after a ride or two.

On 30mm internal rims the 2.35 of each measure 2.35 initially and stretch to 2.4 after a ride or two.

To compare that to similar sized and performance Maxxis tires, the vittorias are similar on a 30mm and smaller on a 25mm so the casing shape is definitely different. That said, the weights are comparable to 2.3 maxxis equivalents.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Oh, and the only 'True to size' manufacturer that I know are MSC Tyres from Spain.

Everyone else's casings never actually reflect the stated size. Its not just a Vittoria problem. That's why everyone is asking how big the tyres actually are. We just need to live with the bullshit until a standard is set. As if the bike industry can ever stick to one standard FFS !!


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Professed said:


> Oh, and the only 'True to size' manufacturer that I know are MSC Tyres from Spain.
> 
> Everyone else's casings never actually reflect the stated size. Its not just a Vittoria problem. That's why everyone is asking how big the tyres actually are. We just need to live with the bullshit until a standard is set. As if the bike industry can ever stick to one standard FFS !!


Well my kenda's are true 2.6's one is a 2.55 and the other is 2.6x on i35 I can't complain there. But you have a very valid point my 2.6 rekon is small and the HD2's are borderline.

My assegai 2.5 is just barely smaller than the 2.6 rekon.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

+1

As much as I really like the Dissector as a rear tyre its only a light duty front trail tyre. I also slashed two of them on my rear (29x2.4 EXO) once without an insert ( what was I thinking !!) and once with a Nukeproof ARD insert. They are weak and fragile tyres but roll really fast in dry conditions. 

They are also small ( around 2.3 - like a DHR2 2.4 ) 

As a comparison - the Agarro Trail casing 2.6 is quicker rolling, probably better grip, much better feel due to a stiffer casing. I fitted cushcore after becoming a recent fan so can't make any durability claims without an insert . I don't have to even think about line choice in rocks presently. Not a single problem, ding or dent. Annecdotal evidence (have seem my bigger mate do this ) Dissector tearing at the beads even with cushcore (in EXO) casing. Seeing 3 incidents its enough for me. Somehow others take more convincing !


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

sorry - no Kenda experience other than the old small/short? block 8 ? They are not popular nor common here in OZ.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

bronxbomber252 said:


> So I have measured multiple Agarros and Mattellos on my two bikes
> 
> On 25mm internal rims, the 2.35 of both measure 2.25 initially and stretch to 2.3 after a ride or two.
> 
> ...


That's good input, thanks.

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Unbrockenchain said:


> My biggest beef with Vittoria mtb tires is they are undersized and heavy. Their 2.35 are really 2.25 and weigh like a 2.4-2.5.


I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias. 
You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else. 
You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance. 
Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
As for why manufacturers label tires this way, cause it sells. The MSC Gripper was a fantastic tire labeled a 2.3 but measured 2.45 for me on my 34mm ID wheel. They didn't sell any and they can be bought on blowout. They should have called it a 2.6, it would have improved sales 10 fold.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

My agarro is 65mm wide on a 34i rim, just as wide as ut should be. The martello up frint is 1mm less wide, bet wide enough


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Suns_PSD said:


> I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
> You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
> You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
> Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.
> ...


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

durkind said:


> Suns_PSD said:
> 
> 
> > I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
> ...


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

Just got back from a long ride on super steep, gnarly, rocky and rooty singletrack trails. I don't care how wide it is or what it weighs, this Agarro 2.6 is the best rear tyre I've ever ridden. I honestly got up stuff I couldn't get half way up before. No matter how gnarly or steep things got, this thing just wouldn't let go.
But the amazing thing is that I had a half hour ride on tarmac to and from the trails and the Agarro and Martello on the front just flew! How do Vittoria manage to make such grippy tyres roll so well?

Another thing I love about the Martello on the front is the predictable and smooth transition from the centre to the side knobs. There's none of that sketchy, vague feeling as you lean the bike over that I've experienced with other chunky front tyres.

I've put away the scales and the tape measures - now I just ride and smile!


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> I used to look at the specs and think the same thing about Vittorias.
> You (and I previously) think those factors define the end performance. Yet here we are, with undersized and heavy tires that outperform everything else.
> You have to decide what's more important to you, numbers on a spec sheet, or real world performance.
> Thankfully Vittoria tires are not actually sized larger or lighter, because if they were they would not perform as they do. They would perform as their competitors do, which is less well.


It's not so much about what it is or isn't. It's about accuracy. I buy a 2.6 tire, I expect it to be at least 2.55, not 2.4. If I want a 2.4, I'll buy a 2.4
There's a lot of data being compiled regarding the 'proper' range of tire/rim width combos. I'm relying on accurate measurements to determine the expected performance of a tire on the wheel I'm using. A guy who builds i35 wheels specifically to run 2.6 tires is going to buy the 2.6 Agarro and likely not be satisfied when it's closer to 2.45.

Would you be satisfied if you bough a new handlebar that was labeled as a 780mm, and it actually measured 760 and the manufacturer told you "eh, it's 780 with most lock-on grips. actual measurements can vary"....?


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

I think the overarching point is size and weight are NOT definitive factors in how a tire is going to ride. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

How wide is the 2.6 Agarro on a 35mm ID wheel, measured at the widest tread point?
Cause my Martello is 2.52" on a 33-34mm ID wheel. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

MEMORIALDAY25 - Vittoria.com


----------



## bronxbomber252 (Mar 27, 2017)

Harryman said:


> Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....


I do, I live in Tucson where there us a lot of that. Both the Martello and the Agarro do well. Feels similar to minion levels of traction with the martello, a touch less with the Agarro


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

my agarro is 2.56" on an 34i rim. so it should be the same on an i35 rim


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

Harryman said:


> Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....


Personally Martellos would not be my top pick for loose or loose over hard conditions. I find that the big closely-spaced shoulder lugs on the Martellos are great at getting a lot of rubber on the ground, but don't dig in as effectively as something like an Assegai or Michelin Wild Enduro (one of the diggiest tires I've ridden.) Martellos are great for generating traction on hardpack, rocks and roots, especially in the wet. Mazza should be great for your application, I'd guess.


----------



## jasonp22 (Oct 5, 2016)

150 miles on my Agarro 29 x 2.35 on the rear so thought I'd share my experience.
Weight: 950g brand new
Width on 30i wheel:Actual brand new at 25psi: 56mm (2.20") big knob to knob​Actual after around 75 miles at 20psi: 59mm (2.32") big knob to knob​Replaced a DHR II at 20psi: 62mm (2.44") big knob to big knob​My weight ready to ride: 175lbs

I wouldn't have thought I could even visually notice, but the tire looked comically narrow when I first mounted it. Literally laughed out loud. I was also concerned with the weight at first. 950g for a tire that looked way narrower and less chunky (and generally more "wimpy" for lack of better term) than the 2.4 DHR II it was replacing at around the same weight did not sound like it would be beneficial. I was wrong.

The Agarro rolls fast, it's extremely noticeable compared to the DHR II (which I moved up to the front, replacing a worn Assegai). I first rode it on pavement on my way to the trailhead and didn't even remember I had changed tires. Looking back, I had set a PR on that pavement section and I was just Sunday cruising along. I sure felt fresher when I got to the trailhead than I usually was.

I ride hard, loose over, loose, rocky, kitty litter, steep up/steep down. I found climbing traction marginally down from the DHR II, nothing I can't get back with improvements in technique. Braking was obviously down a bit more, but still I'm gaining with better technique. I'm also loving the braking with the DHR II up front. Cornering is great and I really feel like I can squash the rear out of corners after a pump. Because the rolling resistance is lower, I don't think about the weight of the tire when I grind uphill. I did not think the closely spaced knobs would be great in loose conditions, but it's been totally fine - I'm no expert but I'm guessing that's due to the steps and sipes.

At 175lbs kitted, I use 20psi in the rear, but feel I could go lower for a bit more traction. Unfortunately I started hearing pings at 19psi, good news is there was no tire/rim damage. I'm installing cushcore lite very soon so I'll be able to try slightly lower pressures then. I had enduro races scheduled this year but they have obviously been cancelled or rescheduled for Fall so no experience there yet.

Overall, this is my new favorite rear tire. At $55 (with coupon code) and free shipping, it was an awesome deal. I can't run much more than the width of a 2.4 DHR II in the rear, so I'm curious if the 2.6 Agarro would be a better choice next time. I was going to try a Dissector or Martello for the front next, but now that I'm Vittoria-curious, going to stick with that for awhile. Martello is unavailable in anything wider than 2.35 at the moment, so I'll wait. Or hold off until the Mazza is released.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

Harryman said:


> Any of you guys running the Martello on loose over hard kitty litter? Which is most of what I ride. The go to here are Minions/assguys and for good reason, they flat out work. I was waiting for Mazzas for obvious reasons, however, now I'm Martello curious....


Michelin Wild Rock'R2 is what you want. Yes they're a bit on the heavy side, but the cornering grip is absurd and you'll easily hit speeds where your brain is struggling to keep up. Rolling resistance is actually a bit better than the Maxxis High Roller 2 that came with my bike, but it has so much more grip that it's not even funny. With the possible exception soft compound DH casing tires, I haven't ridden anything else that corners like a Wild Rock'R2, it's the best dry condition tire I've ever ridden.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

So as a comparison my 2.6 rekon on i35 is 2.5 at the casing and 2.46 at the knobs at 23psi. 2.5 assegai at 19psi is 2.4 casing and 2.46 at knobs. While my nevegal2 was 2.56casing 2.6 knobs hellkat was 2.66 knobs. After my ride the other night I won’t be running that combo again. Thought it was great when I first got them but just not a fan for my terrain. 

Gonna order the Martello/ agarro combo this weekend with the sales. And compare to the Hans Dampf 2’s I really like and the rekon assegai combo. Really looking for something that rolls and grips in-between a Hans dampf2 and rekon for the back, and grip in-between a Hans dampf and assegai but rolls good.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

OT: wife had a real ride on her Mezcal rear tire today coming from an Addix Rock Razor. She apparently is as sensitive as me in some ways because she swooned over the smooth ride and extraordinarily low rolling resistance. Had no traction complaints, but she isn't real aggressive. 
What's the best front tire match for her? I always want larger and slightly more aggressive and am thinking the 2.6 Barzo.
Ps. Vittoria and everywhere else seems to always be sold out of the 2.6 Martello. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> OT: wife had a real ride on her Mezcal rear tire today coming from an Addix Rock Razor. She apparently is as sensitive as me in some ways because she swooned over the smooth ride and extraordinarily low rolling resistance. Had no traction complaints, but she isn't real aggressive.
> What's the best front tire match for her? I always want larger and slightly more aggressive and am thinking the 2.6 Barzo.
> Ps. Vittoria and everywhere else seems to always be sold out of the 2.6 Martello.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Barzo

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

bogeydog said:


> Barzo
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


Barzo as I said but be aware it can get a little sketchy in really dry conditions. It's the only place I think it doesn't hold up.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

bogeydog said:


> Barzo as I said but be aware it can get a little sketchy in really dry conditions. It's the only place I think it doesn't hold up.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


I did order the 2.6 Barzo. Really she doesn't ride on anything but bone dry hardpack, particularly this time of year. Maybe it's a poor choice?
The Peyote tread pattern seemed more ideal but was what I'd consider too narrow for front tire needs with only a 2.35 available. I also seriously considered the 2.6 Morsa as a front for her.
I know what works for me, where I ride, how I ride, in a 29er. But trying to apply that info to my wife's needs doesn't work much except that I really like Vittoria tires and intend to stick with them for most all applications.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger. 

So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.


----------



## Novaterra (Jan 1, 2014)

rpearce1475 said:


> Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger.
> 
> So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.


I dont know what barzo you tried, but not the 2.6
It is wider than any maxxis 2.8 tire, it measured up to 68mm on am 34i


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

rpearce1475 said:


> Just be aware that the Barzo 2.6 is really undersized; if you're running a 2.35 Mezcal (which run big) on the rear the barzo 2.6 will be only a tiny touch bigger.
> 
> So I had my first ride on the Agarro yesterday, 2.35 rear with Martello 2.35 front. Was a 19 mile ride with around 4000 ft climbing (basically I climbed up a mountain then went back down). Was impressed with the climbing traction, rolling resistance, braking feel. Cornering was acceptable but definitely down from the Bontrager SE4 it replaced. What is not so impressive is durability. There are actually a few side knobs that are already starting to separate at the base, after just one ride.


Regardless of what a tire says on it's side I want around 2.4- 2.5 real front width and 2.3- 2.4 in the rear. On a 29er, I believe this just works better. 
I'll post up what I measure but keep in mind that the 27.5 version of a tire (wife rides a 27.5") often measures a different width than the same version of the 29 version. 
Post photos of the tire damage.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

You can see the degradation in the side knobs here and a few that are starting to separate. Again this is after 19 miles of riding


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

rpearce1475 said:


> View attachment 1335827
> 
> 
> View attachment 1335829
> ...


Air pressure and your weight? I've seen this happen with the uber low psi group.

Ps. Wife's 27.5 x 2.35 Mezcal on a 30mm ID wheel is 2.26" wide. Which suits me fine for that application. I expect the 2.6 Bazzo to come in around 2.4 -2.45 which would be perfect.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

28 psi, 200 geared up to ride


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

mlx john said:


> I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.


Is that agarro f/r?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

desertwheeler said:


> Is that agarro f/r?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, I had a 2,35 rear 2.6 front.


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

The uneven wear is strange. Almost looks like the bike was leaned to the right the whole time. Even the transition blocks show it.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

JaxMustang50 said:


> The uneven wear is strange. Almost looks like the bike was leaned to the right the whole time. Even the transition blocks show it.


Yup, looks like someone used their trail bike for a night of track racing at the velodrome! Mystery solved!


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

I’ve noticed some times my tires do that when new on my home trails. Only thing I could think of is my trails are off camber and it wears one side more at first until it evens out with more use?

I wonder if it’s a compound issue on that tire tho?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jasonp22 (Oct 5, 2016)

Funny... I have the same 1-sided wear pattern on my right side 29x2.35 rear. Interesting thing is this usually happens on the left edge of the tire since I turn better (faster) left than I do right.

However, my wear did not look like that after 19 miles, it does after 175.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Maybe some rear wheels don't run perfectly straight down the trail?

Rear tires are dead after 100 hard miles anyways so with 19 miles, it's on track. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> Maybe some rear wheels don't run perfectly straight down the trail?
> 
> Rear tires are dead after 100 hard miles anyways so with 19 miles, it's on track.


I wouldn't buy a tire if it only lasted 100 miles.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

If you're rippin hardpack berms you can kill a tire fast. I can literally undercut the sideknobs on a 2.35 aggressor in 2 rides. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I wouldn't buy a tire if it only lasted 100 miles.


In my case, that would leave you with no tires to buy. 
I hurt them all when riding hard around there.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## MtbDork (Apr 10, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> In my case, that would leave you with no tires to buy.
> I hurt them all when riding hard around there.


Dual compound maxxis last a lot longer than 100 miles. If tires only lasted 100 miles I'd be replacing them almost weekly.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

mlx john said:


> I saw the same tire wear on my 2.35 rear. after 15 miles, on the drive side as well. Was not impressed. 24 psi, 195# geared up. No wear on my front 2.6. Took those tires off after crashing twice in high speed corners, loose over hard New Mexico terrain.


That's the combo was thinking about going to next. Did the tires just wash out ? I would imagine most tires would give out doing high speed corning on loose over hard. Grant it larger side knobs would help, but seems to me the the risk is still high. What tires are you running now ?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

MtbDork said:


> Dual compound maxxis last a lot longer than 100 miles. If tires only lasted 100 miles I'd be replacing them almost weekly.


Let me say this: Maxxis tires wear at about the same rate as every other tire. Vittoria wears well comparatively. 
100 miles is a bit of an exaggeration. But in 150 miles any rear tire looks pretty rough on my bike.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Millennial29erGuy (Feb 5, 2017)

Suns_PSD said:


> Let me say this: Maxxis tires wear at about the same rate as every other tire. Vittoria wears well comparatively.
> 100 miles is a bit of an exaggeration. But in 150 miles any rear tire looks pretty rough on my bike.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


The 3C maxxis is comparable to the vittoria TNT/Graphene tires. The Maxxis dual compound tires last forever but don't really grip on anything, especially in the wet


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Millennial29erGuy said:


> The 3C maxxis is comparable to the vittoria TNT/Graphene tires. The Maxxis dual compound tires last forever but don't really grip on anything, especially in the wet


Agreed. It depends so much on where and how you ride. You can ride 100 miles on rolling trails and have your tires look almost new, or 100 miles on steep rocky trails and shred your rear tire during that time. Also, compounds that have more inherent grip wear more quickly, period. Tread patterns make some difference, of course, but I think most of the grip/wear (especially on rock faces and/or in the wet) comes from the compound.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

So thinking I am going to order a Martello 2.6 for the front. Having the 2.35 in the front now just seems vague in sandy corners. Feel like I am going to washout constantly if I take corners are speed and don't have myself perfectly weighted. Never felt/had that problem with the 2.4 Goma up front, but realize it is a different tread pattern. Just gotten to the point where I don't trust it up front. And this is running mid to low 20s in the front with mid to high 20s in rear (normal for me). 

Hoping that the 2.6 version will give me a bit more traction and contact patch while I wait for the MAZZA to come out. That I will purchase in the 2.6 as well as it seems most of the 2.6 tires are coming in a bit small (2.4-2.5) which will be about right for me. Then when the MAZZA gets here I will swap the martello 2.6 to the rear and have the others for my hardtail.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The Mazza is already at the warehouse in OK. They are just waiting for the public release to begin selling them. 
It won't be long now. 
Also, I can't locate a 2.6 Martello anywhere.










Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> The Mazza is already at the warehouse in OK. They are just waiting for the public release to begin selling them.
> It won't be long now.
> Also, I can't locate a 2.6 Martello anywhere.
> 
> ...


What size in 29 and weights?

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Unfortunately, I am unable to make out the Mazza specs because that pic is just too pixelated and the original was taken down.

But I can guess! 2.35s & 2.6s, all 8 will weigh 60-120 grams less than the equivalent Martello version just because there is less rubber knobs.


----------



## TallPaul_S (May 27, 2020)

The Eminent Onset has the Mazza specced as 2.4 rear and 2.6 front, in trail casing (TNT normally) along with a lot of clearer shots.

https://eminentcycles.com/collections/onset-mt-29/products/onset-mt-pro-29?variant=31699538083895

I'll be putting a 2.6 Mazza on the front of mine Jeffsy when they come out.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

What’s the Mazza supposed to do better than say the Mota?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Just got my Martello and Agarro today. The Martellos center knobs weren’t as tall as I expected, but side knobs a wide, very anxious to try it out. And compare it to my Hans Dampf and assegai that I run. 

The agarro looks very similar to the rekon but it seems the knobs might be slightly tighter spaced and definitely bigger. So it’s going to be compared to the Hans Dampf and rekon all tires are 2.6 minus the assegai that’s 2.5.

Can’t wait!


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

One thing I have noticed is that when I first fit my 2.35 Martello up front, I thought it looked pretty narrow. Now, after having ridden it for a couple of weeks, it looks like it has "spread out" noticeably.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I'll wait for the 2.8 or 3.0 Mazza so maybe it will come out 2.5".


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I'll wait for the 2.8 or 3.0 Mazza so maybe it will come out 2.5".


I installed a 27.5 x 2.6 Barzo on my wife's 30mm ID wheel and it measures 2.53". Might be one for you to consider. Of course like all tires over 2.5 it bounces like a rubber ball. Frankly I was counting on it being undersized.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Just mounted both up. Aired to 35 psi to let them stretch. Right off the bat the agarro is the same size as the rekon. Casing 2.5 and knobs 2.45-2.5 depends on where you measure. It’s a much beefier rekon at first glance. I punctured my rekon exo+ twice today on rocks and the side knobs slip off rocks and are in sad shape.

I didn’t realize in the pictures the agarro has a fairly open center channel. I wonder if it would help it as a front tire in low lean angles as an extra biting edge? Just a thought. I think it’s too tightly packed as a front for me tho.

Martello is 2.5 casing and 2.49 knobs. Both on i35’s. About the same size as the assegai that came off but with higher volume. Looking at it, it’s the tire I have been looking for on tread design. See how it performs.

You can tell both have good volume they are fairly tall tires from a side profile. Super excited to try them out! Will report on size after a couple days at 35psi.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> I installed a 27.5 x 2.6 Barzo on my wife's 30mm ID wheel and it measures 2.53". Might be one for you to consider. Of course like all tires over 2.5 it bounces like a rubber ball. Frankly I was counting on it being undersized.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


I have a Barzo 2.6 but the knobs are too short for the class of tire I want. At any rate I had it down to like 12 psi and it did pretty good for what it was. I got a Tioga Glide G3 2.6, but the knobs on that were 3mm tall, a total joke. Then I got in some Bontrager XR5 2.6 and they were 2.6 so I have one on the front now. But now that the rains have come and the dirt has firmed up a bit I think I'm going to use an Edge 22 next ride.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I have a Barzo 2.6 but the knobs are too short for the class of tire I want. At any rate I had it down to like 12 psi and it did pretty good for what it was. I got a Tioga Glide G3 2.6, but the knobs on that were 3mm tall, a total joke. Then I got in some Bontrager XR5 2.6 and they were 2.6 so I have one on the front now. But now that the rains have come and the dirt has firmed up a bit I think I'm going to use an Edge 22 next ride.


Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away. 
We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire. 
She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## MtbDork (Apr 10, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.


I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

MtbDork said:


> I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.


The Agarro in 2.6 doesn't feel that way.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away.
> We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
> First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
> She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.
> ...


Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

Suns_PSD said:


> Well, it's now stretched and a true 2.6 now, and like every other true 2.6 it sucks. My wife is a novice and complained instantly that it bounced like an out of control basketball. She hates it. Told me to put on the old tire right away.
> We are going to test it one more time with an insert I have lying around tomorrow to see if that helps.
> First time I haven't loved a Vittoria tire.
> She did say it was real fast on the smooth sections, like really fast.
> ...


This seems a bit much honestly. You're saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5", but now that it's stretched an extra 0.1" it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.

I've put decent miles on a 2.6" Martello and it's been great. It has stretched out a bit, but remains a nice supple, damped tire.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

"Damping" = energy loss. I'd want that on a downhill tire, not a trail tire.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

MtbDork said:


> I really wish Vittoria transitioned to true 2.25/2.4 widths and dropped the 2.6 tires. I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.


Yep.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.


But the Agarro 2.6 is not a true 2.6 as I understand it. 
I removed an Eliminator 2.6 but in reality it only measures 2.45 and works well.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

DrewBird said:


> This seems a bit much honestly. You're saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5", but now that it's stretched an extra 0.1" it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.
> 
> I've put decent miles on a 2.6" Martello and it's been great. It has stretched out a bit, but remains a nice supple, damped tire.


It was her first ride on dirt on that tire. We both rode it on pavement after I mounted the tire for like a minute just as a test ride. We both found it slow (not true on dirt apparently) and bouncy (definitely true).
I'm not surprised that an actual 2.6 sucks. I'm surprised a Vittoria 2.6 is an actual 2.6 as all mine measure a bit narrow and with Tyler bringing up constantly the narrow 2.6 Agarro, I was hoping for closer to 2.4".

You'd be surprised how much bigger all tires get with a little bit of extra width because the extra tire volume to get that little bit of width is huge. This tire is big, big enough to alter geo somewhat.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Ok so you bought a 2.6 and it is a 2.6.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Unfortunately, YES.

Since my other Vittoria's run small I thought that would carry over to the 2.6 Barzo, but not so much. 
Anyways, on the pavement test it feels totally different with the Tubolight insert I just installed. 
Btw, sometimes breaking the bead on a Vittoria is unbelievably hard!

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

MtbDork said:


> I've never ridden a 2.6 tire I've liked, they all feel like poorly damped balloons. I don't understand why they're so prevalent.


That's because you're using air in them. You're supposed to run them on 50mm wide rims with 2-3 tire inserts crammed into each tire and no air. Once you get the inserts installed, you put air in the tire to set the bead, then let it all back out. If you do this it will eliminate all tire bounce.

But seriously. Welcome to the bike industry, where we routinely create "solutions" for problems which don't exist, then invent a bunch of stuff to fix all the problems which those "solutions" cause.


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

TylerVernon said:


> Man, I don't know why you experience this. I have a bunch of 2.6 and there's no bounciness after I dial the pressure.


I'm with you on this. I have ridden a bunch of 2.6 tires with excellent results once I figured out the proper pressures.

They're not as precise as a comparable 2.4 or 2.5 but have other high notes that the others don't. Bounce has never been an issue for me however.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Ha! Funny responses above. 
Took the wife to a local trail with the air pump and that 2.6 Barzo and bracketed air pressures. We found a livable air pressure spot with a large Tubolight insert (that tire is useless without an insert) installed and 13 psi (she only weighs 111#s). She really preferred it closer to 15-16psi as it bounced way less, but traction fell off. At 10-11 psi which would appear to be appropriate for her weight and general trail riding (no jumps or ledges for her) on this wide of a tire, the bouncing is out of control. 
Anyways, that tire is a very fast XC peddaler but I would have went with something smaller if doing it again. 
True 2.6 tires, particularly those with thin sidewalls have no place on a proper mountain bike unless you ride on sand or snow imo.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

TylerVernon said:


> "Damping" = energy loss. I'd want that on a downhill tire, not a trail tire.


That's pretty silly. Does damped suspension=energy loss? Tires with what we call a "damped" feel are often heavy, but there's nothing about a non-bouncy tire that causes energy loss.

Steve Hed, wheel guru, has funny stories about trying to get road pros to embrace wider rims and tires with lower pressures. He had all kinds of lab data showing they had lower rolling resistance and better aerodynamics, i.e. were faster. But all the pros thought the super-rough ride of tiny 21c tires @ 140PSI felt "fast".


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

DrewBird said:


> That's pretty silly. Does damped suspension=energy loss? .


Yes. Damping is irreversibility and is energy loss. Wider tires is reducing the spring rate, not damping the system.


----------



## rpearce1475 (Jan 24, 2015)

Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Did a short ride on fairly loose and rocky pebbly stuff. Ended up running 1-2 pounds lower front and rear than I’m used to. Nothing grips that well where I rode so I look at the slippage I had as acceptable. Rolled well on the pavement and hard pack. Sizes still ended up at 2.5 which I’m happy with. Still early but good so far.


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

TylerVernon said:


> Yes. Damping is irreversibility and is energy loss. Wider tires is reducing the spring rate, not damping the system.


Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. It's not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.

If what you're saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

rpearce1475 said:


> Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used


Premature wear? Yikes. I just got my Ag/Martello tire set yesterday.....


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

DrewBird said:


> Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. It's not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.
> 
> If what you're saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?


^^^This. It's true that dampers produce heat by converting kinetic energy to thermal energy, but if they didn't exist, we would simply bounce up and down uncontrollably down the trail.

The Agarro 2.6 (actually 2.5, as noted) has nailed the construction necessary to have a controlled, supported, and damped ride, in my opinion. Other 2.6 tires, especially those with thinner sidewalls / lighter weights, do tend by nature to have less damping and thus more bounce, unless tire pressures are increased, which defeats the purpose of running larger tires. I find narrower tires naturally bite better, and the only reason to ride larger tires is to air them down to increase contact patch and bump absorption, which brings us to the discussion at hand.

I remember a few years ago when fat bikes were cool to ride on dry trails, and I finally got out on one and was astounded at how horrible it was to ride. Another case of marketing/hype going way too far.


----------



## kartracer (Apr 10, 2015)

Anybody running the Agarro on 27mm ID rims? If so, 2.6 or 2.35? Any pics or actual widths installed?
With the Agarro's running small I want to go with a 2.6 but don't know if 27mm is possibly too narrow making the tire profile too rounded? This will be on the rear wheel.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

DrewBird said:


> Nope. Yes, damping is energy loss in the physics sense, I.e. the damper is slowing down suspension travel. But the energy being lost is not useful to making you go down the trail faster, and is in fact detrimental to that goal. It's not energy loss in the sense of lost efficiency in turning pedal power into trail speed.If what you're saying made any sense no racing vehicle, bike or otherwise, would use any damping in their suspension. Your suspension is hot at the bottom of descent, which is energy being lost (oh no!) to heat. But would you be faster down the trail without that loss?


You are misapplying concepts. The tire is in constant compression-rebound. If that rebound is damped we call that a slow tire. It feels like pedaling through sand. What I think is going on with these larger tires is that people run them at too high of a pressure (too high spring rate) and then complain they are "bouncy". Vittoria tires are 120 tpi to intentionally reduce the hysteresis losses through casing compression. This is what gives the supple ride and good trail feel.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

kartracer said:


> Anybody running the Agarro on 27mm ID rims? If so, 2.6 or 2.35? Any pics or actual widths installed?
> With the Agarro's running small I want to go with a 2.6 but don't know if 27mm is possibly too narrow making the tire profile too rounded? This will be on the rear wheel.


I do and you should purchase the 2.35 for a 27mm ID wheel.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

rpearce1475 said:


> Had ride #2 and #3 on the Martello front, Agarro rear (both 29x2.35) this weekend. The Martello worked great on firmer stuff and berms but was...less than ideal on any sort of loose conditions. Agarro continues to having surprising amount of braking and climbing grip (combined with fast rolling) for its relatively low profile knobs. Unfortunately, the rapid wear continues with the Agarro now having several braking knobs missing chunks, a few side knobs missing chunks and all (both sides now) showing clear signs of wear. Even the front Martello has a few side knobs with chunks out of them. These are definitely in competition with Schwalbe for the fastest wearing tires I've ever used


I suspect the knobs on the 2.6 Martello are more spread out than on the 2.35 version. 
If anyone has an as new 27.5 x 2.35 Martello I'd be a buyer.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## blaklabl (Mar 14, 2011)

drewbird said:


> this seems a bit much honestly. You're saying it was great when first mounted at 2.5", but now that it's stretched an extra 0.1" it sucks? This is some next-level princess-and-the-pea sh!t.


poty


----------



## kartracer (Apr 10, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> I do and you should purchase the 2.35 for a 27mm ID wheel.


Thanks Suns. Do you know the measurements of the 2.35 on your 27mm ID wheel? Or have a pic of it mounted on the wheel?


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

I just got my 29*2.35 agarro mounted up today. Right off the bat it measured 2.31" casing width on my 30mm ID rim.

Frankly it bugs me that I have to deal with variances like this but I do appreciate the forums and knowing ahead of time that it's an undersized tire. Looking forward to some trail time!

Edit: overnight @ 40psi and it's now a 2.36" tire. Bingo!


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

I can't say I'm seeing any signs of premature wear as others have reported. I installed my Martello front and Agarro rear about 6 weeks ago and have clocked up around 450 km since then, hammering along a lot of seriously rocky terrain and quite a bit of tarmac between trails too. There is minimal wear showing. 

Maybe I just ride real "light"??

For the record, I am 78kg fully kitted up and running 23psi rear / 22psi front tubeless.


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

Had my first ride on the Agarro, and TL;DR: It's awesome. Using a 29x2.35" on a 30mm ID rim (e*thirteen LG1r Enduro). The tire measures 2.36 to the casing on my rims.

I'm riding a v1 Ripmo that previously had a Hellkat 2.6 / Hellkat 2.4 combo on it. The 2.4 was shipped to me by accident so I decided to run it for a while, but in general I prefer a faster-rolling rear tire. The Hellkat is fast but not that fast, and I found it to be slightly oversized in the 2.4".

First ride out today I got a KOM on the trail out my front door (up from 3rd), which I will say is a credit to several things and not _just_ the Agarro, but I felt comfortable enough to charge right out the gate with it. The rolling speed, grip, and damping are all very good like others have said. Cornering grip is not as good as the Hellkat but I expected that and hardly noticed.

Uphill was also very good, and I found that I could trust it to grip uphill on both loose and slickrock (we have volcanic tuff, very similar to slickrock).

It behaves exactly like I want a rear tire to -- it rolls fast, corners well enough, grips on the ups and has decent braking for the downs. When it gets out of line it's predictable, and easy to snap back under control. Overall it is very well-round

I would have preferred a slightly more rounded profile with the 2.35, but my rim width probably plays into it. It's been a while since I ran an Aggressor but I think it's a good comparison...the Agarro is fairly similar riding, with a slight edge up on traction, but has a much better casing. I ran a 2.3 Exo Aggressor for a while and it was constantly getting flats and felt like an undamped balloon on the back.

I paid about $50 on ebay for it. For that price, it will be my go-to rear tire for a long time.

Attached a photo of one of my favorite trails for reference.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

ungod said:


> Had my first ride on the Agarro, and TL;DR: It's awesome. Using a 29x2.35" on a 30mm ID rim (e*thirteen LG1r Enduro). The tire measures 2.36 to the casing on my rims.
> 
> I'm riding a v1 Ripmo that previously had a Hellkat 2.6 / Hellkat 2.4 combo on it. The 2.4 was shipped to me by accident so I decided to run it for a while, but in general I prefer a faster-rolling rear tire. The Hellkat is fast but not that fast, and I found it to be slightly oversized in the 2.4".
> 
> ...


Yeah, it's a great tire, especially in the rear. When you wear out the 2.35, try the 2.6 (as I've said before). I prefer the profile of the 2.6 on a 30mm rim. Weight difference is about 20-30g per tire, not a big deal considering the extra volume.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

I've been running the tire since release and it is at the top of my approved list. I have found recently as things dry out that isn't perfect for a front tire in loose overr hard or dusty over hard. That's tough on most tires. I want to try the Mazza out as a front tire now. 

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

Full Send said:


> Yeah, it's a great tire, especially in the rear. When you wear out the 2.35, try the 2.6 (as I've said before). I prefer the profile of the 2.6 on a 30mm rim. Weight difference is about 20-30g per tire, not a big deal considering the extra volume.


Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

ungod said:


> Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.


My bud has the 2.6 on the back of his Ripmo and both F/B on his Ripley and likes the overall performance...


----------



## La Nada (Mar 1, 2017)

Tire measurement confuses me. With an ETRTO of 57mm is the 2.35 a 2.25 in reality? I thought the point of ETRTO was to give a precise measurement. If so, are those that are getting these tires to 2.35 on wide rims stretching them wider than they were intended to be?


----------



## bronxbomber252 (Mar 27, 2017)

La Nada said:


> Tire measurement confuses me. With an ETRTO of 57mm is the 2.35 a 2.25 in reality? I thought the point of ETRTO was to give a precise measurement. If so, are those that are getting these tires to 2.35 on wide rims stretching them wider than they were intended to be?


ETRTO mandates that the measurement be taken on a specific rim inner width based on how wide the tire is. In this case a 25mm internal rim. The inch measurement can be on whatever width rim they want. So, because not all tires use the same casing shape, two tires with the same ETRTO that measure the same on the ETRTO standard rim width, may measure different on a different width rim (maybe both measure 2.25 on a 25mm rim but one measures 2.3 and the other 2.35 on a 30mm rim). However, Vittoria's trail and enduro rims are in the 30-35mm range so the 2.35 is probably measured on a 30-35mm rim

This seems to line up with my observations on 2 bikes. When I mount these tires on a 25mm internal rim they measure right at 2.25 new and 2.30 once they stretch. When I mount them on a 30mm internal rim they measure 2.35 new and 2.40 once they stretch.


----------



## La Nada (Mar 1, 2017)

bronxbomber252 said:


> ETRTO mandates that the measurement be taken on a specific rim inner width based on how wide the tire is. In this case a 25mm internal rim. The inch measurement can be on whatever width rim they want. So, because not all tires use the same casing shape, two tires with the same ETRTO that measure the same on the ETRTO standard rim width, may measure different on a different width rim (maybe both measure 2.25 on a 25mm rim but one measures 2.3 and the other 2.35 on a 30mm rim). However, Vittoria's trail and enduro rims are in the 30-35mm range so the 2.35 is probably measured on a 30-35mm rim
> 
> This seems to line up with my observations on 2 bikes. When I mount these tires on a 25mm internal rim they measure right at 2.25 new and 2.30 once they stretch. When I mount them on a 30mm internal rim they measure 2.35 new and 2.40 once they stretch.


Makes sense, thanks. Seems like it would be nice if they just took the extra step of saying 2.35 measured on a whatever mm rim. I have no complaints about the size of my vittoria tires. Just curious.


----------



## mlx john (Mar 22, 2010)

ridetheridge said:


> That's the combo was thinking about going to next. Did the tires just wash out ? I would imagine most tires would give out doing high speed corning on loose over hard. Grant it larger side knobs would help, but seems to me the the risk is still high. What tires are you running now ?


They just washed out with no warning. Dumped me immediately, ouch.

One that particularly hurt (almost hit a tree with my head) was a 2 mile rocky technical descent which I am in 6th on Strava. Got that 6th place with a Spez Eliminator front, Ground Control rear.

I now am running Maxxis DHR2 2.5 wt front/ Aggressor 2.35 rear. Have ridden those areas again, no problem. The Maxxis tires are a bit heavier, but I'm really liking the traction aspect.

Tires are different for everyone. The last tire I absolutely hated (though many people like it) was the Hans Dampf. Ran one on the front of a SC Tallboy LTc years ago, and couldn't get it off fast enough. Was crashing left and right on that thing.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

ungod said:


> Is the rolling resistance much worse on the 2.6? I'd like to try it, but the Ripmo is rated for a 2.4 in the back, and I'm about maxed out on my gearing for my local trails.


No, the 2.6 is not noticeably slower. I've ridden both a ton - they are both great for their respective ideal rim widths.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The 2.6 is barely heavier than the 2.35. That concerns me in a rear tire just due to durability issues. 
The 4 Agarro 2.35s I've ran are one of the few trail tires that I haven't hurt yet.
Light is nice but it's great not having to stop to repair anything. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Well ****... had something happen this weekend that I haven't had ever happen with a Vittoria tire. Had a bit of a cursed ride on Friday last week, buddy crashed and called off early, me and remaining guy start riding then he decided to peel off so I finished on my own. On the way down the trail I hit something, not sure what, but it completely blew out my rear. 

Sealant ended up EVERYWHERE but wouldn't seal the hole, right at the base of a knob. Ended up having to throw a tube in and finish the ride home. 
Last night I went to attempt to put in a plug, and no dice. Tried with 3 different plugs, but just wouldn't take. So I had to toss the tire. That was a first. 

Will be using a spare maxxis that I have laying around until I can get a MAZZA. Damn that sucked.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> The 2.6 is barely heavier than the 2.35. That concerns me in a rear tire just due to durability issues.
> The 4 Agarro 2.35s I've ran are one of the few trail tires that I haven't hurt yet.
> Light is nice but it's great not having to stop to repair anything.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


I've absolutely thrashed both 2.35 and 2.6 Agarros for over a year and a half, and not had ANY issues with either beyond what can be expected. I flatted one 2.35 after many months of riding it in really rough stuff, and flatted one 2.6 after many months of the same. Otherwise I've bumped and banged them through all kinds of stuff with no problems. YMMV of course.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Patch it from the inside.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

This combo might be my go to combo. Did 15 miles and 2k of climbing in the mountains on loose over hard trails and both tires gripped well. I started to get used the the Martello on the front and pushed hard in un bermed loose corners and it held well. Needs more miles but was very happy today with both tires. Agarro rolls nice and grips pretty good for me. Actually surprised how well it does at times.


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

Is it me or does it seem like the 2.6 versions of just about everything (for 29er) is out of stock/available soon for Vittoria tires.
Now after a few rides on the Ardent 2.3 rear after the Agarro dying, I can safely say I remember why it was a backup tires. How people can like these tires in my terrain (tahoe loam/high desert) is absolutely insane to me unless you are a skidiot and drift every corner on purpose simply to destroy the terrain. Moderate breaking pressure results in the tire breaking traction and starting to skid. This was something that I NEVER experienced with the Agarro.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

gregnash said:


> Is it me or does it seem like the 2.6 versions of just about everything (for 29er) is out of stock/available soon for Vittoria tires.
> Now after a few rides on the Ardent 2.3 rear after the Agarro dying, I can safely say I remember why it was a backup tires. How people can like these tires in my terrain (tahoe loam/high desert) is absolutely insane to me unless you are a skidiot and drift every corner on purpose simply to destroy the terrain. Moderate breaking pressure results in the tire breaking traction and starting to skid. This was something that I NEVER experienced with the Agarro.


BikeTiresDirect has the Agarro 2.6 in stock. Martello due 6/30
https://www.biketiresdirect.com/product/vittoria-agarro-g20-tnt-29-inch-mtb-tire?sg=500


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

gregnash said:


> Is it me or does it seem like the 2.6 versions of just about everything (for 29er) is out of stock/available soon for Vittoria tires.
> Now after a few rides on the Ardent 2.3 rear after the Agarro dying, I can safely say I remember why it was a backup tires. How people can like these tires in my terrain (tahoe loam/high desert) is absolutely insane to me unless you are a skidiot and drift every corner on purpose simply to destroy the terrain. Moderate breaking pressure results in the tire breaking traction and starting to skid. This was something that I NEVER experienced with the Agarro.


Competitive Cyclist also has the Agarro in stock:

https://www.competitivecyclist.com/vittoria-agarro-g2.0-trail-4c-tire-29in


----------



## JMac47 (Apr 23, 2004)

desertwheeler said:


> This combo might be my go to combo. Did 15 miles and 2k of climbing in the mountains on loose over hard trails and both tires gripped well. I started to get used the the Martello on the front and pushed hard in un bermed loose corners and it held well. Needs more miles but was very happy today with both tires. Agarro rolls nice and grips pretty good for me. Actually surprised how well it does at times.


👆Will be seeing how good they are this weekend. 2.3 Martello fr Agarro rr on 27mm id e13's.😎


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

How wide is the Martello 2.3? Thx.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Jc5326 (May 5, 2017)

Will the profile of an Agarro 2.35 on a 34ID rim work okay for New England coastal trail/XC?

My Ripley LS (V2) came with the Ibis 34ID rims, but Ibis was a bit ahead of themselves on the rims because the V2 can’t handle most 2.6’s (seat tube & chainstay rub). Am putting an Agarro 2.6 on the front (Replacing F/R Nobby Nic’s), but am in-between sizes for the rear and trying to avoid buying 3 tires in the blind (2x2.6 and a 2.35) to do my own size testing. If the Agarro 2.35 on 34ID rims work fine that would make life easier, and with a 2.6 out front it may even help with pedal strikes (Ripley LS has an exceptionally low BB, which makes route finding & ratcheting through the rock gardens pretty interesting...)

Thanks!


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Jc5326 said:


> Will the profile of an Agarro 2.35 on a 34ID rim work okay for New England coastal trail/XC?
> 
> My Ripley LS (V2) came with the Ibis 34ID rims, but Ibis was a bit ahead of themselves on the rims because the V2 can't handle most 2.6's (seat tube & chainstay rub). Am putting an Agarro 2.6 on the front (Replacing F/R Nobby Nic's), but am in-between sizes for the rear and trying to avoid buying 3 tires in the blind (2x2.6 and a 2.35) to do my own size testing. If the Agarro 2.35 on 34ID rims work fine that would make life easier, and with a 2.6 out front it may even help with pedal strikes (Ripley LS has an exceptionally low BB, which makes route finding & ratcheting through the rock gardens pretty interesting...)
> 
> Thanks!


I just put an Agarro 2.35 on my 30mm rims and it's puny. I wouldn't recommend a 2.35 on a 34 mm rim. I'm going to guess the 2.6 maybe looks more like 2.4 especially at lower pressures so it might fit your frame. As a side note, I don't know what conditions you ride, but I found the Agarro likes to slide side to side in loose over terrain. It's a bit unnerving, frankly. After my experience with it, there is no way I would run it upfront unless it was hardpack.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

The 2.6 measures 2.5 so it might be ok?

On another note I’m finding the limits of the agarro faster than I thought in turns for the grip it has elsewhere. It let’s go sooner than I thought it would. Seems good everywhere else tho. 

The Martello is an interesting one. In some ways it grips better than the Hans dampf2 in turns and other not. So it feels like it has better ultimate grip at times but other times maybe not as aggressive of a turn it slides. I find I have to weight the front end more than my other tires to get grip. 

The combo is fast for what it is. Did a 35 mile xc ride today and found the limits a few times in flat loose over hard turns both front and rear. Need more miles for sure to make a good judgment on them. My regular trails are very rocky that’s gonna be a good test. So far they make a great trail tires. But lack ultimate grip in some turns. Set a few PR’s which might have something to do with that too. Haha


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

desertwheeler said:


> The 2.6 measures 2.5 so it might be ok?
> 
> On another note I'm finding the limits of the agarro faster than I thought in turns for the grip it has elsewhere. It let's go sooner than I thought it would. Seems good everywhere else tho.
> 
> ...


I think your moving faster than you do on other tires and that results in more slides. That's been my experience anyways. In the terrain your discussing, similar to mine, I find them positively unbeatable. Well, the 2.6 Martello grips better than anything at any rolling resistance level and also rolls insanely well. The Agarro isn't the most traction, just easily the most traction for it's relative (edited) Rolling Resistance level.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> I think your moving faster than you do on other tires and that results in more slides. That's been my experience anyways. In the terrain your discussing, similar to mine, I find them positively unbeatable. Well, the 2.6 Martello grips better than anything at any rolling resistance level and also rolls insanely well. The Agarro isn't the most traction, just easily the most traction for it's relative grip level.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


I think tour right. I was pushing more than I thought. I'd be curious how the Martello rolls on the back. I like to swap tires finding one that jumps out at me so I have a few that I might swap around to compare. But honestly it's good so far.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Today I was following a competent rider on trails he knew and I didn't. He was on XR4's and in these flat dry turns I could lean and go notably faster than him and I could see him sliding considerably and having to brake whereas I'd just throw the bike over and roll through them. Just 1 anecdotal data point. 
Of course I slid out eventually and crashed oddly hard. Middle aged guys hurting themselves at 7 mph and what not!

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Jc5326 (May 5, 2017)

ridetheridge said:


> I just put an Agarro 2.35 on my 30mm rims and it's puny. I wouldn't recommend a 2.35 on a 34 mm rim. I'm going to guess the 2.6 maybe looks more like 2.4 especially at lower pressures so it might fit your frame. As a side note, I don't know what conditions you ride, but I found the Agarro likes to slide side to side in loose over terrain. It's a bit unnerving, frankly. After my experience with it, there is no way I would run it upfront unless it was hardpack.


Coming off Nobby Nic's, they were great straight ahead but front could be pretty greasy in the turns, although I got used to it. After three sets of NN's I liked the Schwalbe's but want to try something else. Conditions around here are tech rocky-rooty Coastal NE single track (Greater Boston area) with a few sorties up North (but not enough of those!). Am hoping the Agarro will be just a bit more grippy without compromising too much speed on XC runs.

The real solution for me is to replace the rear rim with something in low-mid 20's ID so I can run tires that fit the frame with their intended profile.


----------



## Jc5326 (May 5, 2017)

desertwheeler said:


> The 2.6 measures 2.5 so it might be ok?
> ha


From what I've read around the 'net, Agarro 2.6 measures close to true when on wide rims (like my 34's), but you could be right....in normal times I'd just order a 2.6 and test it for size on rear first before ordering the other but with all the shipping delays I was hoping to replace f & r together so I could get to enjoy those first miles on all new rubber...I know...a little neurotic but you know what I mean...and my current treads are toast.

Thanks for the replies!!


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Suns_PSD said:


> Today I was following a competent rider on trails he knew and I didn't. He was on XR4's and in these flat dry turns I could lean and go notably faster than him and I could see him sliding considerably and having to brake whereas I'd just throw the bike over and roll through them. Just 1 anecdotal data point.
> Of course I slid out eventually and crashed oddly hard. Middle aged guys hurting themselves at 7 mph and what not!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


The XR4s seem slidy on wider rims. I like them better on my i25 rims than my i30 rims. Knobs stick out better and are easier to engage with the narrower rim I think.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Jc5326 said:


> From what I've read around the 'net, Agarro 2.6 measures close to true when on wide rims (like my 34's), but you could be right....in normal times I'd just order a 2.6 and test it for size on rear first before ordering the other but with all the shipping delays I was hoping to replace f & r together so I could get to enjoy those first miles on all new rubber...I know...a little neurotic but you know what I mean...and my current treads are toast.
> 
> Thanks for the replies!!


I have 27.5 2.6's on i35's and they measured 2.5

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jc5326 (May 5, 2017)

desertwheeler said:


> I have 27.5 2.6's on i35's and they measured 2.5
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks. I just ordered two 29x2.6's and we'll see how the rear fits


----------



## sfx (Jun 22, 2019)

Just mounted up 29 x 2.6 Martello Front & Agarro Rear for summer duty.

On my 30mm internal width rim both tire casings measured up @ 2.475. ~2.5 at widest knobs, a bit over on the Martello. Just wanted to share another data point for those reading. Excited to get them on the trail!


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

So, I have a few rides on the Martello 2.6 front and Agarro 2.35 rear. 30mm rims. psi is about 15 & 18. Terrain is rocky, dry and loose (Colorado). In short, I'm disappointed in the Agarro. It slips alot climbing and descending in loose terrain. If I had to choose between the Agarro 2.35 or Rekon 2.4, I would take the Rekon by a mile. They are similar tires but it's interesting that the Rekon does much better in my terrain. In any event, not to give up on Vittoria, I decided to try the 2.6 so have one on order. I'm hoping the wider spacing and the fact it's on 30mm rims may provide a better profile and more traction. We'll see.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

ridetheridge said:


> So, I have a few rides on the Martello 2.6 front and Agarro 2.35 rear. 30mm rims. psi is about 15 & 18. Terrain is rocky, dry and loose (Colorado). In short, I'm disappointed in the Agarro. It slips alot climbing and descending in loose terrain. If I had to choose between the Agarro 2.35 or Rekon 2.4, I would take the Rekon by a mile. They are similar tires but it's interesting that the Rekon does much better in my terrain. In any event, not to give up on Vittoria, I decided to try the 2.6 so have one on order. I'm hoping the wider spacing and the fact it's on 30mm rims may provide a better profile and more traction. We'll see.


Interesting for sure - your soil/terrain is a lot different than mine, but I'd recommend you try lower pressure if you can, especially once you get the 2.6. The APF inserts allow lower pressures while retaining stability and rim protection.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

ridetheridge said:


> So, I have a few rides on the Martello 2.6 front and Agarro 2.35 rear. 30mm rims. psi is about 15 & 18. Terrain is rocky, dry and loose (Colorado). In short, I'm disappointed in the Agarro. It slips alot climbing and descending in loose terrain. If I had to choose between the Agarro 2.35 or Rekon 2.4, I would take the Rekon by a mile. They are similar tires but it's interesting that the Rekon does much better in my terrain. In any event, not to give up on Vittoria, I decided to try the 2.6 so have one on order. I'm hoping the wider spacing and the fact it's on 30mm rims may provide a better profile and more traction. We'll see.


Have you ridden a 2.3 Aggressor to compare it against?


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

cassieno said:


> Have you ridden a 2.3 Aggressor to compare it against?


Yes. My bike came with a DHF/AGR. I found the AGR to be an excellent all around rear tire in my terrain for sure. One of the best climbing tires I've ever run. It was just a bit too draggy for me on the long climbs etc.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

Agarro 2.3 on its way for the rear on 29mm Flows. Has anyone compared the Martello to the Hell Kat in 2.4 on 29mm-ish rims for the front?

I've had bad experiences with the Barzo and Morsa so hope the Agarro can change my mind.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ashwinearl said:


> Agarro 2.3 on its way for the rear on 29mm Flows. Has anyone compared the Martello to the Hell Kat in 2.4 on 29mm-ish rims for the front?
> 
> I've had bad experiences with the Barzo and Morsa so hope the Agarro can change my mind.


I was holding my 1st martello 2.6 and the Hellkat 2.4 in my hands at the same time a couple of months ago. 
The Hellkat was considerably shorter when the tread was laid out flat and measured with the ruler, meaning it's a much lower volume tire. I also felt the knob gap was really high on the Hellkat and a bit too much for my terrain. 
I ended up loving the Martello and selling off the Hellkat.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

One thing to realize is that is looks like Vittoria's mfg'ing process has changed. Years ago their tires were known for being spot on or slightly larger (e.g. all my 2.4 Goma's measured closer to 2.5" and that was across about a half dozen I had purchased over the years). Now it seems that they are at spot-on for sizing or slightly smaller.

Currently running the new 2.4 Mazza front and 2.35 Martello 29er on my The Smash, DT Swiss M1900 rims (i29) and both come out true to size. They will expand slightly overtime as they break-in, which is something that I have always found with all of their tires). For where I live (northern NV, Lake Tahoe) the Mazza/Martello combo is absolutely sick, tons of traction and grip, not a huge amount of rolling resistance and just a confidence inspiring combo for me.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

2.35 Agarro on i30 rims. 967g


----------



## MtbDork (Apr 10, 2020)

cassieno said:


> 2.35 Agarro on i30 rims. 967g


That actually looks quite a bit squarer than I'd like, how's it ride?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I am not going to ride it for at least a week - so no ride reports. It's very similar in squareness to the 2.3 Aggressor (which I liked), that I had on.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

Suns_PSD said:


> I was holding my 1st martello 2.6 and the Hellkat 2.4 in my hands at the same time a couple of months ago.
> The Hellkat was considerably shorter when the tread was laid out flat and measured with the ruler, meaning it's a much lower volume tire. I also felt the knob gap was really high on the Hellkat and a bit too much for my terrain.
> I ended up loving the Martello and selling off the Hellkat.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Do you think on a 29mm Flow that the 2.6 Martello is ok or go for the smaller Martello, 2.35? 29mm seems right in the middle these days for going to 2.6.


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

I'm wondering why some of the 2.35s measure out at 2.2 and others are 2.35 on similarly sized ID rims. Is it the luck of the draw?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ashwinearl said:


> Do you think on a 29mm Flow that the 2.6 Martello is ok or go for the smaller Martello, 2.35? 29mm seems right in the middle these days for going to 2.6.


That's a darn good question that I don't know the answer to. 
For a rear tire, I'd for certain do the 2.35.
For a front however, I don't know. I'd probably err on the side of caution and go 2.35, or buy the 2.4 Mazza up front. 
Let us know what you decide and how it works out.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

ashwinearl said:


> Do you think on a 29mm Flow that the 2.6 Martello is ok or go for the smaller Martello, 2.35? 29mm seems right in the middle these days for going to 2.6.


This 2.6 would be just fine on the 29mm rim. I mounted the 2.6 Martello and Agarro on a variety of rim widths and 30mm was about perfect imo.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

I have over a hundred miles on the combo mostly xc and rocky tech trails. So it’s a good combo. I still have some uneasiness from them though in corners. They slip in corners I don’t expect them to. It’s weird I haven’t gained full confidence on when the front will hold or slide. I think for comparisons sake I am gonna swap around some tires and see. I just can’t help but feel like to get the grip I want I’m running too low of pressure and get tire roll in certain situations too.

We shall see. I might throw my Hans Dampf2 back on the front to compare. I do know for sure they are not good for any kind of loose dirt. A loop from my house is softer and they don’t like it at all.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

Anyone interested in a 29 2.35 Agarro with about 5 rides on it ?
$29 + shipping. PM me if interested.

Sold


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

Anybody run Spesh Slaughter and can compare to Agarro rolling? 
My legs are old and draggy tires on a paved approaches crush my soul.


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

Tommybees said:


> Anybody run Spesh Slaughter and can compare to Agarro rolling?
> My legs are old and draggy tires on a paved approaches crush my soul.


I ran the Slaughter for a while on two different bikes, one a 2.6 on a 30 ID rim and one a 2.4 on a 27 ID rim.

It's a very different tire, as it's a semi-slick. The rolling resistance is better, but the braking and traction are worse. Cornering might be slightly better as it has slightly larger side knobs and they're more exposed, but the side knobs also didn't last very long on the inner edge. I would say:

Specialized Slaughter
Rolling Speed: 10
Braking: 4
Cornering: 8
Climbing traction: 5
Durability: 6

Agarro 
Rolling speed: 8
Braking: 8
Cornering: 7
Climbing traction: 8
Durability: 9

All numbers out of 10, based on my personal impressions riding aggressive tires in the SW USA.


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

Outstanding response and detail- thank you @ungod. Did you ride Grid on Control?....the Grids kind of nailed sidewall protection and support for my bike and riding style.

Spech also went Graphene and like all tires that have changed rubber, overall durability went up. I will probably still pick these up when they go on sale. 

I was looking for a tire like the Agarro for a while now, but stayed a fan of a Slaughter rear & DHF front over the last dozen tire purchases. I don't have a lot of straight line braking issues (rarely skid rear) and generally climb ok unless it is marble hell which needs more technique than tire anyway. I really hope this tire ticks all the boxes like you list. I just bought a pair and plan to use them on a new 31mm ID rear wheel that I am lacing up. Will report back shortly.


----------



## ungod (Apr 16, 2011)

Tommybees said:


> Outstanding response and detail- thank you @ungod. Did you ride Grid on Control?....the Grids kind of nailed sidewall protection and support for my bike and riding style.
> 
> Spech also went Graphene and like all tires that have changed rubber, overall durability went up. I will probably still pick these up when they go on sale.


Yep, I used the GRID casings. Good tires!

The 2.4 tire was the newest design (with the "stair stepped" cornering knobs) but the 2.6 was an older design (2018ish). The 2.4 definitely lasted longer. Sounds like it might be a good tire for you, can't hurt to give it a shot!


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

how is your air pressure on the Agarro vs other similar tires. I am on 2.35" on 29mm FLOWs with them on the rear. Last tire was WTB Trail Boss Light/High Grip 2.4. I had the Trail boss at 16psi tubeless no inserts. 

The Agarro has a very supple feel, at the same pressure it felt too low, I upped to 17psi and felt better. But sometimes maybe supple faster even though it doesn't 'feel' as fast as harder tire.

This is primitive single track East coast lots of pedaling and roots

Have you typically kept the same pressure, lower or higher when using an Agarro?


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

I had to go lower on my 2.6 the keep traction. Didn’t have the traction I wanted at the same pressures as other tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ashwinearl said:


> how is your air pressure on the Agarro vs other similar tires. I am on 2.35" on 29mm FLOWs with them on the rear. Last tire was WTB Trail Boss Light/High Grip 2.4. I had the Trail boss at 16psi tubeless no inserts.
> 
> The Agarro has a very supple feel, at the same pressure it felt too low, I upped to 17psi and felt better. But sometimes maybe supple faster even though it doesn't 'feel' as fast as harder tire.
> 
> ...


I found the lack of high frequency vibration from Vittorias can make them feel slower, all while going faster.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

ashwinearl said:


> how is your air pressure on the Agarro vs other similar tires. I am on 2.35" on 29mm FLOWs with them on the rear. Last tire was WTB Trail Boss Light/High Grip 2.4. I had the Trail boss at 16psi tubeless no inserts.
> 
> The Agarro has a very supple feel, at the same pressure it felt too low, I upped to 17psi and felt better. But sometimes maybe supple faster even though it doesn't 'feel' as fast as harder tire.
> 
> ...


What do you mean by "it felt too low"? Just curious... I've found the Agarro (and Martello) to ride really nicely at low pressures. I end up at low pressures with most every tire, but Vittorias seem to handle it better. The casing and APF inserts add stability and a damped feel (like Suns mentioned) and help prevent rim whacks.

Personally I'm at 11F/13R on 2.6 Agarros on 30mm ID rims in slow and technical rocky/rooty MA singletrack. When speeds increase, impact forces increase as well, so pressures need to increase to prevent flats.


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

This is the Agarro in a 29 x 2.6 on 35mm internal rims. (Ibis S35 on a Ripmo) I have been running 14 psi front and 15 psi rear. I really like them. They replaced a DHF front, 2.5 WT and an Aggressor rear, 2.5 WT. I feel that the Agarro has better climbing traction than the Aggressor. The DHF on the front has more bite on the loose stuff, but on everything else the Agarro is equal or better. The tires roll fast and the transition from center to side knobs is seamless.

They measure 64mm on both the wider side knobs and the casing. It took two rides for them to reach full size. Here in the rocky and rooty singletrack of MA and VT, they are great so far. No issues with traction, cornering or braking. Mounted up tubeless with no issues.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

Full Send said:


> What do you mean by "it felt too low"?


It felt like when I've had a slight slow leak in a tire and forget to check it. Then rush to the trail head and jump on and start riding. I think it is just that I am not used to it. Someone else had pointed out that the casing on this tire has a supple feel to it compared to others.

I'm going to go back down and see if I can get times vs feel to draw conclusions.


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

Man you guys get away with some low pressures. 

Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

WHALENARD said:


> Man you guys get away with some low pressures.
> 
> Sent from my moto g(6) forge using Tapatalk


Ha! I weigh 165 all kitted. If I were going to highlands for lift served, I'd add some more pressure, like 20 front and 22 rear. Totally different kind of riding. But in the slower techy stuff that we call XC in MA, compliance of the tire is huge. Flow is something you make, not necessarily something that exists. To get the flow, you need to ooze through. Obviously there is a limit, but it's not much above a rim strike. I realized the benefits of lower pressure when I got a fat bike. Totally changed my mindset regarding tire pressure and rim width. Before that, I built up a set of 27.5 carbon hoops with 32mm internal width. The lateral stability of the tires increased dramatically, even with low pressures of like 16 to 18 psi. But it was the fat bike that got me to go lower. The new tires are designed for wider rims. The stability built into the casing is noticeable. The added size of the contact patch from the lower pressure increases traction. The lower pressure allows the tire to conform to the terrain and roll through as opposed to up and over.

I hope this ramble makes sense to someone. I first read about the low pressure phenomenon on this forum many moons ago. It was translated from a German bike magazine study. The science was good. Done at a reputable university's engineering department.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

I don’t know how you could ride at high pressures. My bike won’t grip for crap with the pressure some people run. I’m 235 and run 17-19 from and 21-23 rear depending on which tire I’m running. More than that and my tires bounce off rocks and don’t grip for crap.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MtbDork (Apr 10, 2020)

desertwheeler said:


> I don't know how you could ride at high pressures. My bike won't grip for crap with the pressure some people run. I'm 235 and run 17-19 from and 21-23 rear depending on which tire I'm running. More than that and my tires bounce off rocks and don't grip for crap.


Do you run tire inserts? At those pressures I'd be dinging rims left and right, and I only weigh 170.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

MtbDork said:


> Do you run tire inserts? At those pressures I'd be dinging rims left and right, and I only weigh 170.


It's also about adjusting riding style to not smash into everything. I grew up racing cyclocross, and when you're running really low pressure on 30mm wide tires, you learn to anticipate chunky stuff and unweight the bike a bit to float over it. That said, those of us who ride low pressure in chunky tech stuff do occasionally mis-judge or not see a rock and end up whacking a rim and/or flatting a tire. It just comes with the territory.

I will say that the Anti-Pinch Flat inserts in the Agarros have surprised me with their ability to keep the tire from flatting when the inevitable rim-whack sound happens.

If I increase pressure to 20+psi like others report running, it ruins my whole feel for the trail and significantly reduces traction through rough stuff. YMMV of course.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

MtbDork said:


> Do you run tire inserts? At those pressures I'd be dinging rims left and right, and I only weigh 170.


No I don't. I have pinched a couple tires but not often enough to change anything. My home trails are sharp edge rocks large and small. Not a lot of rock gardens tho.

I took my agarro off to compare and noticed a nice slice in the cords on the side wall protection which didn't seem to hurt the tire.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

First ride on the Agarro. Climbing traction is excellent. Like surprised me it was so good. A few tricky loose over hard with roots switch backs and it just motored right up.

No issues with straight line braking. Same excellent climbing traction applies to braking.

I have to get used to how this tire corners. With a little bit of support in the corner it's great. But I am not confident with it on flat corners yet. Doesn't feel like it locks in. But it also slides really well and controlled. 

Tire pressures seem like I'll end up lower than maxxis exo casing.

Not sure how I feel about it compared to an Aggressor. It's faster and has better climbing traction, but I think I get more feedback from the Aggressor side knobs.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

cassieno said:


> First ride on the Agarro. Climbing traction is excellent. Like surprised me it was so good. A few tricky loose over hard with roots switch backs and it just motored right up.
> 
> No issues with straight line braking. Same excellent climbing traction applies to braking.
> 
> ...


Good observations... I generally agree. I have found the Aggressor to work well as a rear tire for days in the bike park, where I run so much higher pressure that things like casing feel and suppleness/behavior at low pressures don't matter. It never worked well for me as a trail riding tire though, at least on the terrain I ride. It just feels dead and not particularly impressive in any one quality. That's where the Agarro shines - it has such a great overall balance of traction, speed, and ride feel. I do agree it's drifty in loose corners, but at least it's predictable. As I've said before, if you want a "locked-in" feel on the front, use a Mazza/DHF/similar.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

I have over 1k miles on 2.6 Agarro on the rear with DHF on front. The Agarro has been awesome as a rear tire so I’ve moved that Agarro to the front and put a Agarro 2.35 rear. Here is my analogy after the first ride.

DHF - butter knife
Agarro - Henckels Twin Professional cutlery set

Un-Real!!! The grip and responsiveness of the Agarro on front is mind blowing!!! I noticed I was letting off the brake in areas where the DHF has always been vague. It has transformed the performance of the bike with agility and precision.


----------



## nashwillis (Dec 27, 2012)

Anyone run the aggaro on 25mm rims? I am wondering if they would work well with them.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm currently 145lbs at 15.5 psi on Agarro on the rear with a Flow 29mm Internal Width rim.

I've been liking this tire. At first I was too high in pressure and have slowly been bringing it back down to find the best traction.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

ashwinearl said:


> I'm currently 145lbs at 15.5 psi on Agarro on the rear with a Flow 29mm Internal Width rim.
> 
> I've been liking this tire. At first I was too high in pressure and have slowly been bringing it back down to find the best traction.


Be careful in rocky terrain with that low psi. Same weight with rear 2.6 on 30mm, Mine was likely that low from a slow leak when I landed on a sharp rock which dented the rim and pinched the bead.


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Undescended said:


> I have over 1k miles on 2.6 Agarro on the rear with DHF on front. The Agarro has been awesome as a rear tire so I've moved that Agarro to the front and put a Agarro 2.35 rear. Here is my analogy after the first ride.
> 
> DHF - butter knife
> Agarro - Henckels Twin Professional cutlery set
> ...


That's interesting after running it on the rear of mine I don't think I'd want it on the front for my trails. Doesn't seem like it would grip enough. I stopped running tires with big transition gaps because of the dhf. Love tires with transition knobs or smaller gaps on the front.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

nashwillis said:


> Anyone run the aggaro on 25mm rims? I am wondering if they would work well with them.


I ran the 2.35 Agarro for several months on 25mm ID rims - worked great! No complaints whatsoever with that setup. After swapping to 30mm rims, I now run the 2.6.


----------



## mafflin (Nov 15, 2018)

nashwillis said:


> Anyone run the aggaro on 25mm rims? I am wondering if they would work well with them.


I run Martello and Agarro 2.35 on 25mm E1700 for a month now, works great.

*Real size, however, is closer to 2.25 - 2.30.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

How does the Martello 2.35 compare as a rear tire to the Agarro 2.35?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## pcro (Sep 1, 2013)

Full Send said:


> I do agree it's drifty in loose corners, but at least it's predictable. As I've said before, if you want a "locked-in" feel on the front, use a Mazza/DHF/similar.


And what about that locked in feel on the rear to pair with a Mazza? I'm looking for medium, ramped knobs in the center channel, few transition knobs with a nice channel, and full size cornering knobs similar to DHF or similar. Agarro seems close but I want more of a transition channel. Dissector looks close but it doesn't wow me. What else is similar that's out there? I want a Vittoria-ized Dissector really.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

pcro said:


> And what about that locked in feel on the rear to pair with a Mazza? I'm looking for medium, ramped knobs in the center channel, few transition knobs with a nice channel, and full size cornering knobs similar to DHF or similar. Agarro seems close but I want more of a transition channel. Dissector looks close but it doesn't wow me. What else is similar that's out there? I want a Vittoria-ized Dissector really.


Specialized eliminator comes to mind

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pcro (Sep 1, 2013)

socalrider77 said:


> Specialized eliminator comes to mind
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I like it. Mazza/Eliminator sounds pretty great. Sorry to put this in the Agarro thread.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Use Code: JULY4TH
20% off Vittoria.com


----------



## ACLakey (Jul 7, 2012)

I put 200mi on the 2.6 Martello front and 2.35 Agarro rear on 30mm width rims this spring. They are and outstanding combination in loan, hard, soft over hard and dry condition. They roll good, corner outstanding and break well. I'm now running a 2.35 Martello rear with the same front and like the combo a little better for all around use. The Martello has a little better climbing and breaking traction in the varied terrain I ride. I'd be completely happy with either combination for a wide variety of conditions.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

How does the 2.35 Martello roll in the rear compared to the Agarro?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## ACLakey (Jul 7, 2012)

I've not noticed any less rolling resistance or pedaling effort with the Martello in the rear in most conditions. On hard pack the Agarro seems faster.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> How does the 2.35 Martello roll in the rear compared to the Agarro?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


I can tell you the Agarro is faster than the Martello for sure. Whether you notice it as a rear only depends on how you ride and what your front tire is.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Full Send said:


> I can tell you the Agarro is faster than the Martello for sure. Whether you notice it as a rear only depends on how you ride and what your front tire is.


That's what I assumed. The Agarro provides enough traction for my conditions so I'm sticking with it.
Now that I'm on the Mazza front, I was able to get the back just drifting a few times before the front which is about where I want to be.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> That's what I assumed. The Agarro provides enough traction for my conditions so I'm sticking with it.
> Now that I'm on the Mazza front, I was able to get the back just drifting a few times before the front which is about where I want to be.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Yeah the Mazza/Agarro combo is great for trail riding... for a bit more rear cornering grip in loose stuff, or for higher-speed park days, Mazza/Martello would also probably work well. I've yet to get to the bike park this year so can't comment directly on really high-speed handling of either combo.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I think moving to the 2.35 Martello in the heavy casing for park days makes sense.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm souring a little on the Agarrao. Hit some wet roots this weekend and it wasn't as confidence inspiring as I'd hoped. 

Well my curse with side wall tears and odd leaks with Vittoria tires continues with my Agarro. It has not been holding pressure consistently compared to other tires, but that isn't too big a deal. All tires are different in how much air they weep. This morning though, air dropped very fast. 

I pumped it up on the trail and it fell fast enough that there was a major leak somewhere. I found a leak at the bead. For some reason the bead wasn't sealing on the rim at a specific point. I'm going to take the tire fully off and look for a burr or something on the rim. I was able to get it to seal on the trail, though not exactly sure why.

An isolated incidence, sure. Rim vs tire not sure yet. 3rd Vittoria tire to cause me issues, yes. Morsa, Barzo,


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

One of my Easton rims came with a bum weld that caused leakage, was invisible until you run your finger over it. I filed the area smooth and fixed the issue. Is your rim the common thread with those 3 tires?


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

no, not a common rim, and the issues were all unrelated. The Barzo was on the rear on some rocky trails out west and I kept flatting requiring plugs all week. The Morsa has large open areas with no tread. I got a cut on that rubber on random rock.


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

Reporting back in...
@Ungod pretty much nailed my same experience of Agarro vs Slaughter Grid. 
I do rank Agarro cornering a little lower though. At 31mm ID rim and as others have stated, I think this tire is meant for a larger ID rim. The tire is so rounded that there is never really a point to trust for a bite. 
Previously Slaughter 2.3 on 25mm ID KOM rims pretty much always had predictable hooking up point on the edge knobs and kind of felt like being on the edges of skis. The Grid casing was a more precise tire and stayed where I expected it to be, where as the Agarro is somewhere, but not sure where. The good news is that the Agarro never changes and just more predictable at angle angle.

Then there is the larger volume @ 2.6, first time for me on this size in the rear. Hum, this will stay on for now (I bought 2x) and no regrets. They are they slower rolling, have larger rolling MOI due to extra weight and diameter and just plain harder to spin up to speed. I do miss that aspect the most. But then again, if it is harder to roll up, it is harder to slow down and could be better for slow techy stuff - right?

The Slaughter is good for me on everything in NorCal (when new) and the only time it was overwhelmed was in SoCal steep marblely gully shoots on hard-pack or the like or super leafy trails. It likes clean braking action in a straight-line then roll/lean into the side knobs. Agarro on the other hand does not seem to care what it is on and how it is leaning and preforms predictably on everything I have ridden so far. 

If I could pick a more perfect tire it might actually be a real 2.4 or 2.5" Slaughter Grid, but it would have to be cheap because as it wears it get loose fast.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I've ordered the new E-Agarro for my bike. It's the exact same tire and weight as the Agarro, except the compound rolls faster, lasts longer, and I presume has less traction. 
Maybe this will be a good fit for me, maybe not. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Interesting. Ebikes may be good for something after all.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> Interesting. Ebikes may be good for something after all.


Ha! 
No seriously, e- bikes are motorcycles. I do love motorcycles however, I just don't confuse the two.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Suns_PSD said:


> I've ordered the new E-Agarro for my bike. It's the exact same tire and weight as the Agarro, except the compound rolls faster, lasts longer, and I presume has less traction.
> Maybe this will be a good fit for me, maybe not.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


It's just their double ply, the exact same tire, same compound etc.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Anyone ridden an aggarro and a Martello in the rear that can speak to the difference in grip/rolling resistance? Going back and forth between the two. Conditions are dry, dusty, rocky loose over hard in SoCal. Worried about the aggarro not being enough 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ACLakey (Jul 7, 2012)

socalrider77 said:


> Anyone ridden an aggarro and a Martello in the rear that can speak to the difference in grip/rolling resistance? Going back and forth between the two. Conditions are dry, dusty, rocky loose over hard in SoCal. Worried about the aggarro not being enough
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I did exactly that this year. This winter I was running a DHR II front and rear. This spring I switch to a Martello front and aggarro rear for general trail use in conditions as you described. After a hundred miles with that combination I absolutely love the Martello on the front and the speed of the agarro on the rear. I had no issues with cornering grip but it did not break as well as I had hoped. I went to a 2.35 Martello on the rear running the same trails and like and worse conditions due to things getting very dry and loose here. I like the Martello better as an overall tire in the rear. What little it gives up and rolling resistance it makes up for in grip and breaking traction.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

ACLakey said:


> I did exactly that this year. This winter I was running a DHR II front and rear. This spring I switch to a Martello front and aggarro rear for general trail use in conditions as you described. After a hundred miles with that combination I absolutely love the Martello on the front and the speed of the agarro on the rear. I had no issues with cornering grip but it did not break as well as I had hoped. I went to a 2.35 Martello on the rear running the same trails and like and worse conditions due to things getting very dry and loose here. I like the Martello better as an overall tire in the rear. What little it gives up and rolling resistance it makes up for in grip and breaking traction.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


Exactly what I was looking for, thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

ACLakey said:


> I did exactly that this year. This winter I was running a DHR II front and rear. This spring I switch to a Martello front and aggarro rear for general trail use in conditions as you described. After a hundred miles with that combination I absolutely love the Martello on the front and the speed of the agarro on the rear. I had no issues with cornering grip but it did not break as well as I had hoped. I went to a 2.35 Martello on the rear running the same trails and like and worse conditions due to things getting very dry and loose here. I like the Martello better as an overall tire in the rear. What little it gives up and rolling resistance it makes up for in grip and breaking traction.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


It really depends on your conditions. For the EC tech I ride, the Agarro is perfect for the rear and the Martello is overkill (not much loose / high speed stuff here). I agree that the Martello is slower (though not nearly as slow as DHF or DHRII) but has better traction overall in loose stuff than the Agarro. If I were riding high speed loose stuff, I'd be inclined to run Mazza/Martello.


----------



## ACLakey (Jul 7, 2012)

Full Send said:


> It really depends on your conditions. For the EC tech I ride, the Agarro is perfect for the rear and the Martello is overkill (not much loose / high speed stuff here). I agree that the Martello is slower (though not nearly as slow as DHF or DHRII) but has better traction overall in loose stuff than the Agarro. If I were riding high speed loose stuff, I'd be inclined to run Mazza/Martello.


I agree with you.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Harryman said:


> It's just their double ply, the exact same tire, same compound etc.


This is what a rep at Vittoria emailed me when I asked him for the differences:
"Our new E-Agarro is the exact same casing and tread mold. The only difference is a rubber compound mix. This different durometer rubber allows for better e-bike use. It is a little harder than our std 4c"

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I mentioned I had the new E-Agarro on order. Still don't have it but it's on the way. 
However when I spoke to Vittoria they were under the impression it would have the Enduro casing which would weigh in the 1200-1300 gram range in a 29 x 2.35 and was not what I wanted. 
I pointed out to the Rep that the Vittoria website said it weighed 940g and that made him grab one to weigh. The 29 x 2.35 E-Agarro weighed 970 g with the packaging on it so I think it's safe to say weight is the same, just rubber compound is different to 'improve battery life'.
I really have this e- bike thing backwards apparently: just assumed if I ever had one I'd go with really high traction/ high rolling resistance tires because I had the benefit of the battery. 
Anyways, hoping the e-agarro keeps 98% of the traction of the Agarro while dropping rolling resistance a notable amount. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## The Squeaky Wheel (Dec 30, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> This is what a rep at Vittoria emailed me when I asked him for the differences:
> "Our new E-Agarro is the exact same casing and tread mold. The only difference is a rubber compound mix. This different durometer rubber allows for better e-bike use. It is a little harder than our std 4c"
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


If this is the case, I will cross the Vittoria tires off my list as choices for my e-bike. Only double thick casings need apply for that application.
Weight is not a priority for my e-bike.

But this would frankly surprise me, as the "e-offerings" from others such as Schwalbe and Michelin use thick double ply sidewalls


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

The Squeaky Wheel said:


> If this is the case, I will cross the Vittoria tires off my list as choices for my e-bike. Only double thick casings need apply for that application.
> Weight is not a priority for my e-bike.
> 
> But this would frankly surprise me, as the "e-offerings" from others such as Schwalbe and Michelin use thick double ply sidewalls


Whereas the Trail casing has a reinforcement insert, Enduro/eMTB is a true 2-ply casing.

"ENDURO & EMTB casing is the strongest and most resistant casing for Enduro and Trail use from Vittoria. Designed to handle the stronger impacts generated by the weight of electric mountainbikes, and to deliver high performance on the most demanding Enduro courses, ENDURO & EMTB casing use a double layer of Nylon 120 TPI (2-ply casing)."
https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction


----------



## The Squeaky Wheel (Dec 30, 2003)

Undescended said:


> Whereas the Trail casing has a reinforcement insert, Enduro/eMTB is a true 2-ply casing.
> 
> "ENDURO & EMTB casing is the strongest and most resistant casing for Enduro and Trail use from Vittoria. Designed to handle the stronger impacts generated by the weight of electric mountainbikes, and to deliver high performance on the most demanding Enduro courses, ENDURO & EMTB casing use a double layer of Nylon 120 TPI (2-ply casing)."
> https://www.vittoria.com/us/enduro-tire-construction


thanks. This makes sense to me. And would account for a 1200-1400 target weight (which is similar to the Michelin e-wild and Schwalbe eddy current e tires)

The comments above from Suns_PSD confuse me.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

The Squeaky Wheel said:


> thanks. This makes sense to me. And would account for a 1200-1400 target weight (which is similar to the Michelin e-wild and Schwalbe eddy current e tires)
> 
> The comments above from Suns_PSD confuse me.


I totally get the confusion.
I'll weigh the e-agarro when it arrives and post back.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I have a couple e-Goma and they're the same weight as the regular TNT. Harder compound; doesn't climb limestone tech as well but rolls faster.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I have a couple e-Goma and they're the same weight as the regular TNT. Harder compound; doesn't climb limestone tech as well but rolls faster.


Good to get verification.
I figured that was the trade. Eager to try it out.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I received the E-Agarro today. It only weighed 15 g more than a standard Agarro I already had on the shelf, within standard variance. 
The old fingernail durometer test shows that the E-Agarro does indeed have a harder compound, but it's still softer than other aggressive tires I have lying around. 
Frankly I think the standard Agarro just has really gummy tread which is surely fantastic for wet roots and what not but in my case the standard Agarro shreds up in 15 good rides and has more than enough traction. 
Have high hopes for even lower RR and more longevity out of the E-Agarro while not giving up much traction. 
However, I'm likely rained out this weekend and unable to give a ride report for a week or two.
Edit * rode down the street on the E-Agarro, definitely rolls a bit faster. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Been on the 2.35 Agarro a few times now (5 ish). I really like it for the areas I ride. loose over hard dusty. No real bermed corners. Generally speeds are slower (narrower trails without good sight lines). 

It's predictable and slides really controlled and when up right just grips. I could see it not working as well on higher speed bermed corners. The 2.35 on i30 rims is pretty square.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Actually did around 12 miles on the E-Agarro today. It's a bit faster and probably more durable but slipped a bit 1-2x on some damp roots. 
It's probably going to be my new fave rear as much for increased longevity as lower RR but it's not a giant difference. Maybe I'd notice it more if it was cool out and I was able to ride all out.
It's less of a difference than comparing Maxxis ' 3c vs. DC.
If you do slow trials type MTBing with wet roots and slow going, I'd stay with the standard. Or if you plan to take the same set up to the bike park or really steep terrain. 
If you need to keep your speed high and momentum up to have fun on your trails, the E-Agarro is likely a better choice. It honestly felt a lot like the Aggressor 2.3 just less pingy.
I do have a brand new 29x 2.35 Agarro in original packaging I'll sell shipped for $55 if anyone is interested. 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

I have about 450 miles (750 kilometers) on my 29 x 2.6 Agarros. I replaced a rear Aggressor 2.5 and a DHF 2.5 front. The DHF is a great tire. I only changed the front because as a rear, the Agarro was great. Better than the Agressor. Lighter, better rolling resistance, better wet grip on rocks and roots. It transitions into leans more fluidly. I can't say it is better on the front than the DHF, but it isn't worse, except on loose, dry stuff, but that's an outlier around here. I didn't want to change tires again. As easy as tubeless is, it wasn't worth changing.

The tires have held up incredibly well. I had one puncture that needed a plug to seal. I would project 1,200 miles for the rear and the front will start leaking through the sidewalls before the knobs are worn (that's my guess). But it is a great New England Trail Tire. Handles rock gardens and chunky descents with no trouble. The tires are pretty round on a 35mm internal rim. There is no transition as you lean. The tires on a wide rim allow for some pretty low pressures. The sidewall support is really good. 

Personally, I wouldn't give up the grip for the higher durometer e-Agarro, but it all depends on local conditions.


----------



## Ripbro (May 4, 2020)

Put some 2.6 agarros on my ripmo AF and got my first ride in today. I was really impressed, great traction, and felt fast. Coming off the stock Assegais they don't have the same grip, but I still felt confident on the corners. I'm was a little concerned with the width as the outer knobs are right in line with the sidewall, but checked the tires post ride and all looks good. The tire has a very round profile on my 35mm ibis s35 rims. Seems like a great tire for my local trails in the foothills of the Canadian Rockies and will likely sell the assegais or trade one off for a DHRII or DHF. It's more tire than I need and they are anchors.


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

Glad to hear others are also liking the 2.6 Agarro - it's still my favorite trail tire for what/how I ride. I agree the compound is pretty soft, and even in the front, the side knobs wear fairly quickly. But, at least for me, the traction, speed, and durability (against flats/cuts) is worth it. Great tire.


----------



## ridetheridge (Mar 7, 2009)

I have couple of tires with only a few rides if anyone is interested. Photos available. 

Comfort level and grip is outstanding on these tires, but the combo turned out to be a bit more weight than I wanted for long climbs. 


29 2.6 Agarro $39 shipped within Continental US (Sold)

29 2.6 Martello $39 shipped within Continental US (Sold)


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

*2 plugs in 2 weeks*

2 plugs in two weeks. My conclusion is the rubber where there are no knobs is too thin. I live in upstate NY primitive trails, but rootier, wetter, softer, less sharp rocks. In 6 years here, I have never needed to plug a tire on my local trails.

I did cut a Vittora Morsa in a similar location, in the rubber with no knobs, bunny hopping onto a traffic island ringed with rocks. On a trip to Deer Valley, Utah, a Barzo on the rear required several plugs.

This is the Agarro Trail Graphene 2. I am wondering if their basic trail casing isn't strong enough on the exposed rubber between the knobs.

I really do like the tread pattern for a rear tire, the durometer of the rubber for varying conditions and rooty terrain, and the suppleness of the casing, but cannot recommend it from my limited experience compared to other rear tires on my terrain.

I am a sucker though, and am waiting on a Martello 2.3 for the front.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Last week I did a 22 mile ride from home on the Mazza/ Agarro combo and averaged 8.3 mph (this is my 'it's 100 degrees/ 75% humidity ride' and the trails are considerably easier than my usual trails)
This week I did nearly the same ride on the Martello/ e-Agarro combo and even though I added a couple of miles of solid slow tech riding that I found that bumped the ride to 25 miles, I averaged 8.9 mph, which is 7% faster. 
The speed difference was really noticeable when the speeds got higher.
Traction was 99% as good. No complaints at all.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

ashwinearl said:


> 2 plugs in two weeks. My conclusion is the rubber where there are no knobs is too thin. I live in upstate NY primitive trails, but rootier, wetter, softer, less sharp rocks. In 6 years here, I have never needed to plug a tire on my local trails.
> 
> I did cut a Vittora Morsa in a similar location, in the rubber with no knobs, bunny hopping onto a traffic island ringed with rocks. On a trip to Deer Valley, Utah, a Barzo on the rear required several plugs.
> 
> ...


Interesting. I have beat mine hard since release on some of the trails notorious in my area and known as tire killers. Never even a hiccup. These trails have eaten many tires before these.

Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Full Send (Mar 25, 2020)

bogeydog said:


> Interesting. I have beat mine hard since release on some of the trails notorious in my area and known as tire killers. Never even a hiccup. These trails have eaten many tires before these.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G986U1 using Tapatalk


Yeah everyone rides differently, and terrain is obviously quite variable in different regions as well, but I've found the Agarros to be extremely resistant to damage. One thing to think about - I think the higher pressure you run, the more likely you are to get a sharp rock to actually punch directly through the tread casing. I run pretty low pressure as I've mentioned before, and the only time I flat is when I pinch the tire (between a rock and the rim). The Agarros have been really resistant to this, likely due to the closely-spaced knobs and the anti-pinch-flat insert they use near the rim area.

Ashwin, what pressure were you running? Any idea what you may have hit that was sharp and thin enough to puncture between the knobs like that?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Schulze said:


> I don't think your original post was snarky. Experiences are on a bell curve and the most dissatisfied experiences get told on the internet. I would have preferred your complaints to be more specific. Incidentally, the guy my group waits for the most is fixing his XR2 rear tire. I don't know why he sticks with it.
> 
> I'm willing to give the Agarro a try, but not on the rear. Vittoria has too many good rear tires. I'd cut off every other transition knob and use it with a Mezcal or Morsa rear.


Has anyone clipped the transition knobs to make it run better as a front tire?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

ashwinearl said:


> 2 plugs in two weeks. My conclusion is the rubber where there are no knobs is too thin. I live in upstate NY primitive trails, but rootier, wetter, softer, less sharp rocks. In 6 years here, I have never needed to plug a tire on my local trails.
> 
> I did cut a Vittora Morsa in a similar location, in the rubber with no knobs, bunny hopping onto a traffic island ringed with rocks. On a trip to Deer Valley, Utah, a Barzo on the rear required several plugs.
> 
> ...


Just bad luck. The Enduro/ trail tires from Vittoria are super robust ime.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

I am light at 138-140lbs, running tubeless on Stans FLOW, 15psi Agarro on the rear. I agree that the closely spaced knobs 'should' make it more resistant to this type of tear. The Morsa had much more empty space. 

But if you look at the pictures close, both of the tears are in the same place just inside of the bigger side lug which is an empty space.

It is hard to say what is causing it. Both tears have been on the same trail. I am thinking there is a rock section of shale that has been degrading recently, and wonder if it is getting cut there.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

So while you sit back and wonder why
I got this ****in' thorn in my side
Oh my god, it's a mirage
I'm tellin' y'all, it's (Trail) SABOTAGE


----------



## Stuker (Apr 17, 2020)

I've been hammering the crap out of my Agarro 2.6 (r) and Martello 2.35 (f) over gnarly, rocky, rooty terrain for the past few months and they hardly look worn. I've hit many a rock garden with enough speed to do tyre damage, but these tyres just shrug it off. Maybe I just ride "light", but I am seriously impressed with the Vittorias. 

For the record, I am running tubeless, 22 psi front and 23 psi rear on a short travel FS 29er.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

Stuker said:


> I've been hammering the crap out of my Agarro 2.6 (r) and Martello 2.35 (f) over gnarly, rocky, rooty terrain for the past few months and they hardly look worn. I've hit many a rock garden with enough speed to do tyre damage, but these tyres just shrug it off. Maybe I just ride "light", but I am seriously impressed with the Vittorias.
> 
> For the record, I am running tubeless, 22 psi front and 23 psi rear on a short travel FS 29er.


I agree, my only mishap was my own fault... snot sealant did not seal a small thorn hole reducing pressure then I landed the rear wheel on a pointed 6" high rock bending the rim and compromising the tire bead.


----------



## Losvar (Mar 21, 2016)

Full Send said:


> It really depends on your conditions. For the EC tech I ride, the Agarro is perfect for the rear and the Martello is overkill (not much loose / high speed stuff here). I agree that the Martello is slower (though not nearly as slow as DHF or DHRII) but has better traction overall in loose stuff than the Agarro. If I were riding high speed loose stuff, I'd be inclined to run Mazza/Martello.


Just wanted to weigh in on the Martello as a rear.
It's not exactly a tire that shines in loose stuff, but it's extremely good on hardpack at speed.
I would say it's most similar to Maxxis Aggressor or Schwalbe Hans Dampf, but with a lot better cornering.

I'll be throwing some Agarros on a friend's Fuel EX this week, and I'm quite excited to see how they perform on our local XC trails.
We have lots of rocks and roots, and from what I've seen on youtube and elsewhere, it's quite similar to a lot of US east coast riding.


----------



## Prophet Julio (May 8, 2008)

600 miles on my Agarros. They are still performing great for me in a 29 x 2.6 front and rear on my Ripmo. I have the wide carbon Ibis rims and I run 15 psi rear with 14 psi front. No burps, one puncture that I had to plug. That was about 300 miles ago. 

Very predictable tire with excellent grip on rocks and roots of New England.


----------



## TazMini (Jun 21, 2019)

Running a 2.35 Agarro on my Spot Ryve with a Maxxis Ardent Race rear. Been very happy with it as an aggressive front tire for our everything and the kitchen sink conditions.


----------



## bssndr (Oct 11, 2020)

*New Tires*

So currently I'm running a Maxxis DHRII (R) and DHF(F) on my 130mm 27.5 trailbike. They were excellent in the Alps but for the winter I'm looking to switch to a lighter trail/downcountry tire setup as I'll probably be riding in some milder terrain that's considerably muddier and not quite as rocky. Right now I'm considering a Barzo(R) and Agarro(F) or Agarro F&R. Any thoughts anyone? Also, I'm reading the listed tire widths aren't particularly accurate. I have 27 wide rims and would like tires roughly 2.35in wide at 1.6bar(24psi) front and 1.8(27psi) rear. Any advise is welcome!


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

bssndr said:


> So currently I'm running a Maxxis DHRII (R) and DHF(F) on my 130mm 27.5 trailbike. They were excellent in the Alps but for the winter I'm looking to switch to a lighter trail/downcountry tire setup as I'll probably be riding in some milder terrain that's considerably muddier and not quite as rocky. Right now I'm considering a Barzo(R) and Agarro(F) or Agarro F&R. Any thoughts anyone? Also, I'm reading the listed tire widths aren't particularly accurate. I have 27 wide rims and would like tires roughly 2.35in wide at 1.6bar(24psi) front and 1.8(27psi) rear. Any advise is welcome!


On my 29r I'm running Agarro f/r at 20psi
2.6f on 30mm - measures 2.45
2.35r on 27mm - measures 2.3


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

It’s a good tire but too many of my trails are loose and it didn’t provide the braking and traction I wanted. It also slid out in my in an area of dried grass. I did slice the sidewall but it sealed up too.

I plan to use the Martello/agarro combo for my more Xcish rides 25+ miles. It’s a great combo in more hard pack trails.


----------



## bssndr (Oct 11, 2020)

Undescended said:


> On my 29r I'm running Agarro f/r at 20psi
> 2.6f on 30mm - measures 2.45
> 2.35r on 27mm - measures 2.3


Cool thanks! How's that setup working out? Is it any good?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I am running that same set-up. Although I think I am getting a little bit more volume out of my 2.6 (closer to 2.5). I really really like.

However, the one drawback is steep and loose braking the Agarro doesn't work so well. As a tough and supportive "XC-ish" tire it works really well. Rolls well on pavement, rolls well on dirt. Grips well in most conditions. Climbing traction is crazy good.

When I feel like changing a tire again, I'll probably go back to an Aggressor on my full suspension bike. It doesn't grip as well climbing, but I think it grips better braking.


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

bssndr said:


> So currently I'm running a Maxxis DHRII (R) and DHF(F) on my 130mm 27.5 trailbike. They were excellent in the Alps but for the winter I'm looking to switch to a lighter trail/downcountry tire setup as I'll probably be riding in some milder terrain that's considerably muddier and not quite as rocky. Right now I'm considering a Barzo(R) and Agarro(F) or Agarro F&R. Any thoughts anyone? Also, I'm reading the listed tire widths aren't particularly accurate. I have 27 wide rims and would like tires roughly 2.35in wide at 1.6bar(24psi) front and 1.8(27psi) rear. Any advise is welcome!


Wow... on our terrain in the blown-out Rocky Mountain foothils, I can't imagine using a Barzo out back - much less an Agarro up front! ::jealous:: (Please note I'm not one to have opinions on that kind of terrain - just want to give you a few other data points in your consideration.)

Folks do use the Agarro up front w/ success - but I say there's a key point about the terrain you'll be on:

Personally, I used the Agarro in the rear, and it is an *amazing* tire for it's speed-vs-traction (IMHO, Vittoria tires always seem to be category-leading in this regard for their class). It stuck like glue to hardpack, rocks & even wet roots... and soooo fast. The harder the surface, the more all that Vittoria-siping tech kicks in.

But as soon as you get a little loose-over-hard (from kitty litter up to gravel) it starts to loose its magic. For me - even on the rear - it was fabulous in the spring (moist, 'perfect dirt') but once things dried out, I had to upgrade to the Martello rear. Yes, slight hit on my speed in hardpack, but on my mixed terrain was faster/safer overall - especially on steep techy climbs (amazing), plus extra confidence railing corners hard.

If your terrain has those moments of dried out loose-over-hard, I'd be concerned with Agarro up front at high speeds. (Perhaps, tho, by your description, you don't??) Just FYI to consider.

But, if Barzo not enough in rear, you may want to consider Agarro there... lots of east coast folks seem to *love* it for that, as well as rocky (like Suns_PST in TX). It's magic in Moab! So - you could try the Agarro up front, and if doesn't play well there, move it to rear. Next step up in Vittoria is the Martello which is universally loved.

As far as 'mud', note that Agarro has pretty shallow teeth and closely packed - so I can't imagine it shedding too well. I'd imagine it pretty slippery up front in those conditions.

If you do want to explore other front tire, I'll give you a strange one:

Check out the Tioga Edge 22. Honestly, I've never seen anything else like it. Because they totally remove all the center blocks, not only is their rolling-drag eliminated, but (more importantly) the tire *deformation* that is normally caused by sitting high-up on those blocks is eliminated. (Rubber deformation is a huge parasitic energy loss factor in overall tire efficiency.)

As a result, the E22 rolling resistance vs. traction is *ridiculously* low. Putting it on felt like a rocket ship, and I couldn't believe how it railed corners (better than a DHF, honestly). IMHO, it's one of the rare win/wins in tire design.

It paired magically with the Agarro on rear. Both tires responded well to changes in pressure to 'tune' them for a given ride. I could keep them 'high' (21~23psi) on XC type tracks, or drop down to low (15~17psi) for monster grip when needed - both always hold great.

The bummer w/ E22, is loose or deep. Again, once trails started drying out with more gravel/loose-over-hard, the tire lost its magic in a big way. (So, I had to upgrade to the Mazza for my terrain.)

But, on your terrain, I'm wondering if the E22 could be a perfect fit. Low RR, but with the DHF-like grip you're used to rocking.

If it's of any help, I noticed that Vittoria has a few videos which explain their tires a little more:


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

cassieno said:


> However, the one drawback is steep and loose braking the Agarro doesn't work so well. As a tough and supportive "XC-ish" tire it works really well. Rolls well on pavement, rolls well on dirt. Grips well in most conditions. Climbing traction is crazy good.
> 
> When I feel like changing a tire again, I'll probably go back to an Aggressor on my full suspension bike. It does grip as well climbing, but I think it grips better braking.


I found the same issues w/ the Agarro, so I upgraded to the Martello in rear. Was *SO* much better.

Honestly, I think the Martello is better than Agressor all around: it definitely rolls faster, hooks up just as well in the loose for cornering and climbing grip - and slightly lighter, too. But, you get all the extra goodies of Vittoria: siping (better grip on rock/hardpack), better sidewall, better damped, and the Graphene - which is decently tough and great in the wet. Give it a shot.

For my riding terrain and style, the Maxxis tires that beats out Vittoria current selections are:
(1) Dissector in rear - holds a "knife-edge" for corners and climbing better on *SOME* terrain vs. Martello. It's an occasional win for Dissector - but it does happen. However, I found for my terrain, the Martello wins more often. But, it's a close fight of trade-offs.

(2) Assagai in front - it's just such a BEAST with grip. The Vittoria Mazza is (mostly) better than the DHF in every way (except wide-angle leans). But, when you need that absolute-grip only Assagai will do. Shame it's such a boat-anchor to pedal!

Again - all those advantages to Vittoria construction/materials do add up and make a difference vs Maxxis. I'm really starting to learn to love the damped ride, siping and graphene. Guess I've drunk the kool-aid!


----------



## bssndr (Oct 11, 2020)

laserjockrock said:


> Wow... on our terrain in the blown-out Rocky Mountain foothils, I can't imagine using a Barzo out back - much less an Agarro up front! ::jealous:: (Please note I'm not one to have opinions on that kind of terrain - just want to give you a few other data points in your consideration.)
> 
> Folks do use the Agarro up front w/ success - but I say there's a key point about the terrain you'll be on:
> 
> ...


Yes, this was exactly the advice I was looking for, thank you so much!:thumbsup::thumbsup:
Like you said, we don't really get much loose over hard here, especially during winter when the ground is pretty much always either solid hard pack or muddy. The E22 seems like a terrific option as well, might give that a shot if I can get my hands on them!


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

"Watch Jeff's video on our Instagram, wait for his answer on his "favorite Vittoria tire", the name of the tire is your code for a *FREE* hat + *30% off* when you use the secret code". Expires 10/19


----------



## DucatiRider (Oct 1, 2014)

Which IG page??


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

"martello" is the code.

All the tires I want are out of stock.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

DucatiRider said:


> Which IG page??




__
http://instagr.am/p/CGXnBkJARD5/




Chuck Johnson said:


> "martello" is the code.




I guessed it right:thumbsup:


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Annoying to search Insta for it.


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

Just used coupon code okaymtb20 for 20% off today. They finally got some more tires back in stock. Not sure how long the code lasts.


----------



## Surfindabass (Nov 30, 2020)

Any durability issues for others using the Agarro. I'm at 356 miles and it's time to put a new one on soon. Running it on a 140mm FS in rocky, dry terrain. Been riding more consistenly than I ever have, does that sound low or about average wear?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Rocky dry terrain is super hard on any tire casing. One weekend of riding in Moab did more damage to my Maxxis combo than the previous 4 months of riding.


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

I have a 15mo old 29x2.6 that was on Jeffsy rear for 9 mo, front of Stache and Izzo for 6mo and still goin strong in mid-Atlantic rock and root. That includes 2.4K miles for 2020...


----------



## gregnash (Jul 17, 2010)

cassieno said:


> Rocky dry terrain is super hard on any tire casing. One weekend of riding in Moab did more damage to my Maxxis combo than the previous 4 months of riding.


Which version are you using, the Trail or the Enduro?
Mine was a catastrophic failure because I got a cut at the leading edge of a knob that would not take a bacon strip. 
However, what I have noticed is that the outer most layer (believe the 4C combo) seems to wear quickly giving the tire a look that it is wearing faster than normal. For instance, the Martello Trail that is on my rear, the sipes are gone for the most part and the edges of the knobs are pretty torn but past that the tire is still in VERY good condition. No issues with holding air. Actually I was really surprised when I last gave the bike a good washing and was inspecting the tire for any issues I found that there are multiple pin holes and punctures that have been sealed and are still running strong. For my Northern NV high desert terrain it is definitely more beneficial to run the enduro casing but the trail seems to be doing fine for now.


----------



## mtnbikej (Sep 6, 2001)

I’ve got several hundred miles on my 2.35 Trail version. 

To me it’s like a burly version of a Maxxis Ardent Race.

it was heavy at 960g.

started with it on the rear of the SS here in So. Cal......but it was too heavy for big mileage/elevation days. Swapped it over to the rear of the Hightower and have been quite pleased with it. Has handled all the different kinds of terrain I’ve put it through.

then again, I’m not generally hard on tires. I’m quite comfortable on sketchy tires(Ikon, Rekon Race).


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

gregnash said:


> Which version are you using, the Trail or the Enduro?


Oh this was with Maxxis tires 3C / DC. I don't have a bunch of time on the trail 4c vittoria tires. And sandy / dirt damp has been most of my riding lately. I am riding trail casing tires now (Agarro, Martello, Mazza)



mtnbikej said:


> I've got several hundred miles on my 2.35 Trail version.
> 
> To me it's like a burly version of a Maxxis Ardent Race.
> 
> it was heavy at 960g.


The Agarro for me is a better version of a Maxxis Rekon. Overall more predictable (but heavier by 100+ grams) and decent level grip. Really happy with it as a "heavy" trail tire for longish mtb days with mixed surfaces.


----------



## Surfindabass (Nov 30, 2020)

gregnash said:


> Which version are you using, the Trail or the Enduro?


*edit - just realized you were asking another poster

Trail. Other than wear, the tire has been great. I could probably ride it for another few rides but riding this morning I lost a bunch of air after a descent. Made it back to the car and when I got home and took it off I found a bunch of cactus spines in one area. I installed the new one I had, will see how many miles I get out of it. If this ends up being my new norm (riding more and moved from a much less rocky and dry region), I'll just have to stock up.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Surfindabass said:


> *edit - just realized you were asking another poster
> 
> Trail. Other than wear, the tire has been great. I could probably ride it for another few rides but riding this morning I lost a bunch of air after a descent. Made it back to the car and when I got home and took it off I found a bunch of cactus spines in one area. I installed the new one I had, will see how many miles I get out of it. If this ends up being my new norm (riding more and moved from a much less rocky and dry region), I'll just have to stock up.


I have heard that the E (electric) version of the tire might have harder wearing rubber and might be better for rocky / dry. Unsure if there is a trade off in grip though.


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

My 1st and 2nd 2.6 Ag's seem to be lasting longer than Minion SS's or Slaughter's, riding @ Santa Cruz, Tahoe and Sierra's, without any tire related issues. No reason for me change to something else unless I get a good deal (like 1/2 off) on the ones noted. Apparently there is an E Bike version that is tougher yet with same specs.
My rides include 20% road, with something like 50 miles/week...2-3 x tires a year I guess.

BTW - These tires are super tight bead fit on the carbon hoop that I have and found the only way remove them was to stomp on the bead with wheel sideways on the ground while resting on on a piece of wood. It sounds crazy, but nothing else would get the bead to pop over a groove that creates a small shelf towards the center of the rim. I tried many offbeat things like clamps, and whatever xyz tire like irons and more and no go. Up until this point, I nearly always could pop a tire bead off without any tools at all on many other rims and tire combos. This rim is new to me so could be rim or tire or combo, but it was surprisingly difficult. Would be curious to see if anybody else has experienced similar with Vittoria tires?


----------



## Surfindabass (Nov 30, 2020)

cassieno said:


> I have heard that the E (electric) version of the tire might have harder wearing rubber and might be better for rocky / dry. Unsure if there is a trade off in grip though.


Perhaps an ebiker has some feedback. Otheriwse not sure I'd want to take the chance.



Tommybees said:


> Would be curious to see if anybody else has experienced similar with Vittoria tires?


I didn't have that bad of an issue removing from a newer wheel build but it was pretty locked in and needed a couple levers to pop it off.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

cassieno said:


> I have heard that the E (electric) version of the tire might have harder wearing rubber and might be better for rocky / dry. Unsure if there is a trade off in grip though.


I'm an original fan of the Agarro and I did switch to the E version about six months ago. I think I'm on my third or fourth one. A typical rear tire I'll usually get about six or seven weeks out of before it really falls apart. The e-agarro I would say it's more like two and a half months The weight is the same, the traction is slightly less but I only notice it on awkward climbs and even then it's slight, the wear is a bit better, and it definitely rolls better.
To me it was the right trade-off.

Sent from my KYOCERA-E6920 using Tapatalk


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Finally got a couple of Agarros to try. 2.6 on i35 rims front and rear. I have only one ride on some xc trails with them so I'll reserve myself a bit, but I really like them so far. They seem to be everything they're billed. One notable is they had a surprising amount of grip and predictability on brown ice (leaves). I didn't expect much from them on the leaves but they seemed to punch through enough to at least be predictable. On the dirt, they grip really well, though I'll hold back on a full verdict until I get more time on them in varying conditions.
I got these to try as a Rekon replacement because I wanted more grip especially up front. Something fast rolling but still able to keep the front locked in when pushed a little. So far, I think they're doing just that. 
The profile seems about perfect and I think these would be great on an i30 as well. 
So far I'm impressed with Vittoria and my enthusiasm is running high. I'm inclined to try a Mazza up front with the Agarro rear for situations where I need a little more. Also double Mazzas or Mazza/Martello to replace my Minion set when I wear them out.

For fellow tire nerds, some data and photos to show profile on i35 compared to a Rekon 2.6 on i35:
Strangely they're slightly more rounded than the wider Rekon.
















My notes: 
Measurements are averaged off several taken at different points around the tire, rounded to nearest .005".
Lug measurements are at widest point of outer most lugs.

Vittoria Agarro 27.5x2.6 TNT
i35 rim
New:
907.8g and 906.2g
28.0" diameter
2.505" lugs 30psi
2.48" casing 30psi

After 48 hrs:
2.565" lugs 23psi
2.545" casing 23psi
2.545" lugs 18.5psi
2.525" casing 18.5psi

After 1 week and first ride:
2.54" lugs 17.5psi
2.525" casing 17.5psi
2.57" lugs 22.5psi
2.555" casing 22.5psi


----------



## bssndr (Oct 11, 2020)

I posted here a few months ago about whether to get Agarro's for some lighter hill terrain.
After receiving loads of great advise from the community I thought I'd return the favour and share some of my thoughts about the Agarro's.

Right off the bat I'll say that I love them.
I run 2.35's front and rear on 27mm rims on my 5010 V3.
They're immensely progressive in grip and really predictable, setting you up for phenomenal fast and tight cornering. There's no dead spot (like I sometimes feel there is on the Minion) and the tires just grip all the way through a corner, only breaking traction predictively and when you want them to. Before the Agarro, I had Minions on this bike, which did just fine on the burlier alpine terrain but were sometimes a bit awkward in how they gripped. They were a bit lacking in the center, only to ramp up very quickly on the side tread. This sometimes caused me to lose some confidence in the corners, and I had a hard time adjusting to it over the course of several months. The Agarro's are more suitable for the terrain I currently ride in anyways, but I also feel like the predictability area is very well covered by the Vittoria's. This really lets you play around with the bike and instills huge amounts of confidence. I've ridden these things from dry sand to snow and all the dirt in between. I can honestly say that, from the big brands I've ridden, I like these the most. I feel like they excelled in drying dirt (not really moist but not bone-dry either), but even in muddier terrain and dryer bits of the trails they did very well. Since I also like technical climbing, a few words should be added about its uphill capabilities. They're great. As a matter of fact, I have now dubbed my bike; 'the mountain-goat', something I never would have expected coming from more downcountry-style riding. Of course, line-choice is crucial in this matter but I felt they handled themselves well on slippery roots and mixed surfaces. I feel like they're pretty fast too, considering they're not exactly hard-core XC tires.
Speaking of XC tires, There are some downsides as well.
Although I'm not a real stickler for weight (so I personally don't really care about the 100 grams of additional weight over comparable Schwalbe or Maxxis tires) I can see that this may be an area that bothers some people. More importantly though, I can imagine that when I take this bike back out into the Alps or Finale Ligure, the Agarro up front may not be up to the task under hard braking on the roughest enduro trails. I haven't ridden these tires in truly rocky terrain though, so it's hard to make a judgment about that.
However, I think they can handle anything but the roughest trails. Even the steeper hills in southern Germany should be doable, though a Martello or a 2.6'' in the front might be a safer choice.
Finally, I must say that I am someone who prefers being slightly underbiked to overbiked, so I may feel more comfortable on lighter duty tires than the average rider, and I seem to have the weird preference for more twitchy/agile bikes over big, burly, long and slack setups.

So that's my two cents on the Agarro's. All in all I think they're great trail tires and especially their tight-cornering capabilities and predictability are features to love. They transformed my bike, that's for sure, and have me smiling ear to ear on every descent, and every climb, which is exactly what a trail tire should be doing.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Anyone compared a Martello F/R to an Agarro F/R set-up? For whatever reasons the Martello doesn't have it's own thread. I am curious if it's just not as well liked. It doesn't have the fancy ramping that the Mazza and Agarro do, but it at least basically meets it's stated width.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

cassieno said:


> Anyone compared a Martello F/R to an Agarro F/R set-up? For whatever reasons the Martello doesn't have it's own thread. I am curious if it's just not as well liked. It doesn't have the fancy ramping that the Mazza and Agarro do, but it at least basically meets it's stated width.


I'm running the Martello/Agarro combo on my hardtail. I like it pretty well as a front tire. It rolls pretty alright, and seems to grip the dry desert terrain well. It's wearing nicely. 
It's no Assegai, but it's a good 'trail' tire, IMO.


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

cassieno said:


> Anyone compared a Martello F/R to an Agarro F/R set-up? For whatever reasons the Martello doesn't have it's own thread. I am curious if it's just not as well liked. It doesn't have the fancy ramping that the Mazza and Agarro do, but it at least basically meets it's stated width.


I can speak to the back-half: Switched rear tire from Agarro to Martello last season as CO trails get blown-out in the dry summer. Lots of deep loose-over-hard starts to pile up, and things get sketchy around here. I _loved_ the Agarro for what it is... shockingly grippy for how fast it is. But, it couldn't hold it in the deeper stuff - nor on the really steep technical climbs.

Putting the Martello on the rear was a whole new level of traction (climbing/breaking) - but most interestingly, cornered much more solidly. It still has a 'predictable' breakaway... but it takes a lot more to break loose (vs the Agarro). Yes, Martello is definitely slower - but it's not a dealbreaker. I think I'd care more on long epics than most of my shorter trail rides, so might switch for that. Also, I'm planning a trip to Moab soon, and will likely switch to Agarro for the rear as it's _awesome_ on rock.

SUNS_PSD says that the Martello is one of his fav front tires of all time (and he's done so many). As far as I can tell, he does a lot of rocky/dry and it's awesome there and on hardback up front. (Again, for the CO Front Range, I needed deeper traction in the loose, and put Mazza up front and have been _very_ happy with it!).

Yeah - Martello really needs it's own thread!!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I have a Martello 29 x2.6 I've ridden exactly 1x that I'd sell stateside for $55 shipped.
They are very good tires that I've purchased many of, but I'm on to something else now. 
Also have a new E-Agarro 39x 2.35 still in the packaging I'd sell. These 2 tires make a great package.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> I have a Martello 29 x2.6 I've ridden exactly 1x that I'd sell stateside for $55 shipped.
> They are very good tires that I've purchased many of, but I'm on to something else now.
> Also have a new E-Agarro 39x 2.35 still in the packaging I'd sell. These 2 tires make a great package.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


First, where do I get rims for the 39 tires?

Second, what have you moved on to? How are they? Inquiring minds want to know.


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Little update: I got a slice in my rear Agarro. Strange because it was on a non-rocky Local XC trail that I’ve ridden for years without even a puncture. The only thing I could find near by in the trail was a halved walnut. The edges were sharp but I wouldn’t have expected it to slice like this. I hope this is a fluke and these don’t prove to be fragile. I read mixed reviews regarding this. I have ridden them on much tougher, faster, rocky, rooty trails without incident so it really caught me by surprise. 
It turned out to be a blessing in disguise however because it gave me a reason to try a Martello up front. 
Despite the low rolling resistance offered by the Agarro, I have learned that I prefer more grip up front with my long front center slack bike. I moved the front Agarro to the rear and mounted a Martello Up front. 
I only have about 30 miles on this setup but I can see why Suns enjoyed it so much. I don’t think I can detect the increase in rolling resistance on pedally trails. Maybe a bit in the corners but there I want grip, not efficiency. 
Overall the level of grip vs RR is exceptional and the setup feels well balanced. I can push the rear Agarro to the its limit while the front feels more precise and stays planted. In short, it lets me ride the Agarro for all it’s worth. It has made this “fast rolling” setup much more fun for my aggressive riding style. 
I’ll have to put more miles on it before a final verdict but it seems like a winning combo For its intended use so far.


----------



## ashwinearl (Jan 2, 2004)

JaxMustang50 said:


> Little update: I got a slice in my rear Agarro. Strange because it was on a non-rocky Local XC trail that I've ridden for years without even a puncture. The only thing I could find near by in the trail was a halved walnut. The edges were sharp but I wouldn't have expected it to slice like this. I hope this is a fluke and these don't prove to be fragile. I read mixed reviews regarding this. I have ridden them on much tougher, faster, rocky, rooty trails without incident so it really caught me by surprise.
> It turned out to be a blessing in disguise however because it gave me a reason to try a Martello up front.
> Despite the low rolling resistance offered by the Agarro, I have learned that I prefer more grip up front with my long front center slack bike. I moved the front Agarro to the rear and mounted a Martello Up front.
> I only have about 30 miles on this setup but I can see why Suns enjoyed it so much. I don't think I can detect the increase in rolling resistance on pedally trails. Maybe a bit in the corners but there I want grip, not efficiency.
> ...


I gave up on my Agarro for similar reasons of odd slicing (running in the rear). I experienced 3x these small slices that were pluggable. I'd never experienced this in 6 years on these trails in any other tire. I liked the tread, rolling resistance, grip, cornering in general.


----------



## Professed (Sep 25, 2007)

Another Agarro fan here.
very interested in @Suns_PSD experience with the e-Agarro as it sounds like a good rear solution for my trail/xc bike

I usually run Agarro rear but for more xc/trail rides that sometimes gets more interesting. That is sand/sandstone rock/clay mostly dry (but can get wet patches)terrain. My experience matches others- great climbing grip, precise, so so braking grip when things get a bit wilder.

I have also run it out front for some endurance xc races and its brilliant. You can relaxduring racing as the additional precision and grip over a pure xc tyre more than making up for a small rolling deficit

but

have destroyed a few Vittoria trail casings at the bead now
The failures have occurred through the apex insert and it's impossible to repair

both an Agarro casing snd a Martello casing which feel much the same ( both trail )

and my son also cut his Martello through the tread ( nob free area ) and he is only 50 kg and this is one his only punctures

I guess it could be bad luck but i still ride my other bike with Exo+ Maxxis and have never had problems ( using cushcore in all applications)

so there might be a weak spot in an otherwise excellent range of tyres

ps: my favourite set up now is mazza trail 2.4 front ( no cushcore) Agarro 2.35 - or Martello 2.35 rear - whatever is lying around - ( no cushcore) for a really lively, sharp and fast/grippy all round do everything set up


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Now that I have quite a few miles and different trails on the Martello/Agarro setup, I have no complaints. I haven't managed to slash the other Agarro so hopefully that remains and it proves to be a fluke. 
The Martello has been rock solid so far and really surprising with it's wear/durability. 

Suns, what did you end up going with and why not the Martello/Agarro combo?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I really liked the Agarro rear/ Martello front set up. Just enjoy experimenting. But I went through 6-7 Agarros and 4-5 Martellos which is the most I ever rode on any tire. 

Been experimenting with the Pirelli Scorpion R-Enduro & the Schwalbe Rock Razor Super Trail and for now, when it's dry on my rocky terrain I prefer the RR. For traveling, wet out, bike park I prefer the Scorpion.

The RR gives up some climbing traction but mostly I can make it up through the speed and momentum it provides. It damps well and is reliable too. I don't need tons of rear traction, like a 7-8 out of 10 is fine, and faster overall. 

What I found with the RR is that it's a flat tire, and the 2.6 Martello is also a flat tire. Combined the bike is sluggish and doesn't lean intuitively. At least one end has to be rounded for the bike to be nimble. 

The front tire, well I've been on front prototype tires mostly for the previous year, just occasionally sticking on a Mazza/ DHF/ Martello/ Assagai for a good control. I've went through 3 proto front tires so far, and the version that's going in to production is phenomenal. Like so damn good. Very high traction, that remains high even after the edges wear off. A light tire (like .5# lighter than the 2.6 Martello). Reliable. And the holy grail, it rolls darn fast. Not XC fast, but very nearly Dissector fast but with more traction than an Assagai (on hardback, not in loose dirt).

Wish I could tell you more. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Suns_PSD said:


> I really liked the Agarro rear/ Martello front set up. Just enjoy experimenting. But I went through 6-7 Agarros and 4-5 Martellos which is the most I ever rode on any tire.
> 
> Been experimenting with the Pirelli Scorpion R-Enduro & the Schwalbe Rock Razor Super Trail and for now. When it's dry on my rocky terrain I prefer the RR. For traveling, wet, bike park I prefer the Scorpion.
> 
> ...


Without sharing secrets, can you give us an idea when it is supposed to come to market?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

If it's anything like the Wicked Will summer 2022.
😁


----------



## desertwheeler (Sep 1, 2009)

Suns_PSD said:


> I really liked the Agarro rear/ Martello front set up. Just enjoy experimenting. But I went through 6-7 Agarros and 4-5 Martellos which is the most I ever rode on any tire.
> 
> Been experimenting with the Pirelli Scorpion R-Enduro & the Schwalbe Rock Razor Super Trail and for now. When it's dry on my rocky terrain I prefer the RR. For traveling, wet, bike park I prefer the Scorpion.
> 
> ...


I'm sure you will share when you can. I'm very curious to see it when it's ready!


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Cary said:


> Without sharing secrets, can you give us an idea when it is supposed to come to market?


This Fall, I was told.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## MtbDork (Apr 10, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> And the holy grail, it rolls darn fast. Not XC fast, but very nearly Dissector fast but with more traction than an Assagai.


I want to believe!


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Wow. Thanks for the update. Of course now I'm highly interested in the tire you speak of. Please keep us apprised as you are able.


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

Professed said:


> Another Agarro fan here.
> very interested in @Suns_PSD experience with the e-Agarro as it sounds like a good rear solution for my trail/xc bike. I usually run Agarro rear but for more xc/trail rides that sometimes gets more interesting. That is sand/sandstone rock/clay mostly dry (but can get wet patches)terrain. My experience matches others- great climbing grip, precise, so so braking grip when things get a bit wilder.


I picked up that e-Agarro from SUNS... intended for a Moab trip I never got to make.  Still, put it on the rear, and have been giving the Agarro another shot here on the CO Front Range. I'd forgotten how much fun I've had w/ the tire - so fast and shockingly grippy for what it is. Yes, the e-Agarro is a bit harder/faster than the original, not mindblowingly so. Suns may be right - it's prob 5%~10% faster, without giving up too much grip. But I can feel the slight difference in durometer - it's not quite the signature Vittoria 'octopus suction cup' stickiness.

For my riding, I'd prob stick to (sorry, pun) the original Agarro... but I think for those doing longer epics and/or bikepacking - yes, the e-Agarro could be a good hack for some terrain.



Professed said:


> ps: my favourite set up now is mazza trail 2.4 front ( no cushcore) Agarro 2.35 - or Martello 2.35 rear - whatever is lying around - ( no cushcore) for a really lively, sharp and fast/grippy all round do everything set up


And - yeah - this is probably where I'll end up again. Here in the Front Range, we get lots of deeper loose-over-hard, where the treads of the Agarro just run out of steam. It's doing well now in the spring (damp, 'perfect dirt'), but as soon as it gets dry and blown-out, the Agarro just gives out. Martello was much better in the rear for what I ride. But you can _definitely_ notice the hit in rolling performance on the flats.

And I also like that Mazza 2.4 up front... a real unique tire. It holds a lot like a DHF, without the dead zone or awful rolling resistance. It's no Assegai, so I wouldn't say a first choice for a park day. But at 2.4 it is a light, quick, nimble, and fun Trail tire for lighter duty, with that great Vittoria siping and dampening when you want it.


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

MtbDork said:


> I want to believe!


I know the tire that SUNS is talking about... I've ridden some of the earlier models. It's sounding like they fixed the major problem... so I'd say YES, you can def believe SUN. Stupidly low rolling resistance for how much grip it has.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

laserjockrock said:


> I know the tire that SUNS is talking about... I've ridden some of the earlier models. It's sounding like they fixed the major problem... so I'd say YES, you can def believe SUN. Stupidly low rolling resistance for how much grip it has.


You guys have to keep this thread updated when it comes out, sounds like the holy grail of tires

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

socalrider77 said:


> sounds like the holy grail of tires


Sounds like bullshit, haha.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Chuck Johnson said:


> Sounds like bullshit, haha.


I'll update my early statement comparing traction to the Assagai and say the proto has the same traction as an Assagai or more on hard pack, and likely a bit less on loose as the Assagai really bites in. But the proto tire rolls so much faster. 
I put a new Mazza 2.6 on just recently just cause and the traction was great, but when I swapped back to the proto the speed picked up substantially with no loss of traction. 
Unfortunately summer in Central TX is not riding season and I'm working tons so won't have much to report for the next 4 months.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Suns_PSD said:


> I'll update my early statement comparing traction to the Assagai and say the proto has the same traction as an Assagai or more on hard pack, and likely a bit less on loose as the Assagai really bites in. But the proto tire rolls so much faster.
> I put a new Mazza 2.6 on just recently just cause and the traction was great, but when I swapped back to the proto the speed picked up substantially with no loss of traction.
> Unfortunately summer in Central TX is not riding season and I'm working tons so won't have much to report for the next 4 months.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Could you at least give us a brand of proto? 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Some of you guys are real teasers!

For those who like Vittoria for front tires, I'll give you a tip: Get a Martello and cut out the center knobs. Don't touch any knobs that are off center, just the ones that sit directly in the centerline. Shazam, your Martello is now a better front tire than a Mazza.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Any pictures?


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Reminds me of the tioga edge 22


----------



## WHALENARD (Feb 21, 2010)

socalrider77 said:


> Reminds me of the tioga edge 22


Was thinking the same.


----------



## ismarhadzia (Apr 19, 2021)

Just purchased two e-Agarro's 29 2.6 on Amazon for great price of $42 but to my surprise the tires were both two big for tubeless install. They were too lose and I was able to mount them with ease using just thumbs without any resistance whatsoever. Did anyone else have this issue? Is e- version of vittoria a bit different in size then a regular one?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

What rims? Have you mounted tubeless tires on those rims before?


----------



## ismarhadzia (Apr 19, 2021)

cassieno said:


> What rims? Have you mounted tubeless tires on those rims before?


This is Schwinn Axum original 30mm internal double walled rims and yes, i have used Schwalbe G-ones on them before


----------



## Chuck Johnson (Aug 5, 2020)

Those rims aren't designed for tubeless.


----------



## akmtnrunner (Dec 12, 2020)

Reading from about page 15 onward, I am sold on putting an Agarro at least on the rear of my top fuel. But I am still undecided on 2.35 vs 2.6 on the rear (my rims are 29mm ID), and if the Agarro would be right for the front. I would like the rear to start sliding out before the front so perhaps by going 2.6 in the front and 2.35 in the rear, I could accomplish that or if there's more to be had by just going with the 2.6 on the rear too.

The Agarro does seem to be ideal as a rear tire. What would be it's counterpart for the front? Someone mentioned the Tioga E22 . . . looks interesting but it may be a bit overkill. I know the Martello may be it but it's definitely getting pretty heavy there. Would prefer to stay under 1kg for a 2.6 x 29 tire.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I have run them all. I ran the 2.35s I like them for faster mixed surface riding (including pavement) 

I like the 2.6s better for pretty much all dirt. I ran them front and rear for awhile. I decided I wanted more front end bite (mostly really steep braking) and went 2.6 Mazza. 

A 2.4 Mazza or a 2.35 Martello would pair well with a 2.35 Agarro. 

I am running 2.35 Martellos front and rear on my XCish single speed and they are great. Fast rolling on dirt (for a tire and a ton of grip. 

Using 2.6s Mazza and 2.35 Martello on my "enduro" hardtail. 

Vittoria doesn't make a good tire that's not over 1100g that pairs well with the 2.6 Agarro. 

2.4 Mazza (I prefer the shape from a brain confidence perspective of the 2.6) is pretty light and would pair well with the 2.35 Agarro. 2.35 Martello is heavier but also great.


----------



## jcmonty (Apr 11, 2015)

akmtnrunner said:


> Reading from about page 15 onward, I am sold on putting an Agarro at least on the rear of my top fuel. But I am still undecided on 2.35 vs 2.6 on the rear (my rims are 29mm ID), and if the Agarro would be right for the front. I would like the rear to start sliding out before the front so perhaps by going 2.6 in the front and 2.35 in the rear, I could accomplish that or if there's more to be had by just going with the 2.6 on the rear too.
> 
> The Agarro does seem to be ideal as a rear tire. What would be it's counterpart for the front? Someone mentioned the Tioga E22 . . . looks interesting but it may be a bit overkill. I know the Martello may be it but it's definitely getting pretty heavy there. Would prefer to stay under 1kg for a 2.6 x 29 tire.


I have the tioga e22 - probably my favorite front tire ever. Rolls fast , zero issues with durability , corners great with now transition , and brakes well. But I don't think it's an xc tire. More all mountain or enduro.

the agarro 2.6 has visibly bigger knobs than the 2.35. It's not just the casing. I have the 2.6, 2.35 combo on my hardtail which is pretty solid for loose over hard and hard pack


----------



## akmtnrunner (Dec 12, 2020)

Thanks for the info, fellas, I found a good deal on the 2.6’s so I figure I’ll go with the double as the next step.


----------



## akmtnrunner (Dec 12, 2020)

I've had a couple rides in the new Agarros and I can give a positive report. Contrasting to a 2.35 Barzo in the front and 2.25 Mezcal in the rear, the 2.6* (2.4-2.5) Agarro are better in almost every way. Traction is certainly a bit better but mostly because of the larger volume, being much smoother and faster on anything but hard surfaces. Of course, that is sort of an unfair comparison, but it's all that I can speak to. I was kind of afraid that I was giving up a lot of speed by going away from the rear mezcal but strava told me otherwise. Segment times on my pavement commute to the trails were in the same realm and significantly better on the dirt segments. These are relatively harder but still bumpy surfaces with glacial till gravel, roots, and hard packed mixed dirt/foliage. Over the roughest sections (rooty rat nests) there was no contest, they were much easier riding and faster through. Still, I was pleasantly surprised just how fast they were in the relatively smooth trail sections.

I think the only thing they give up to the smaller and lighter mezcal/barzo combo is the steering responsiveness. With the mezcal/barzo weighing in around 730g each, I would get anywhere that I looked in a hurry. With the agarros, the bike needed more input like a slacker geometry trail bike. But if I am being honest, the better stability is probably a better match for my less-than-expert skills.

Perhaps I should give the 2.6 mezcal and barzo a shot but since they're a true 2.6 or larger, they're probably a bit much for my 30mm rims.


----------



## C Dub29 (Jul 13, 2021)

wow, that was like reading a short novel, except i dont have time for reading books, just stories about mtb's and parts that take hrs and hrs!!! I too am looking at the Martello (F)/ Agaro (R) for less rolling resistance to my 2.4 DHR/2.3 Aggressor but want to keep good traction and braking as like most of us, enjoy riding up and XC, but love ripping down as fast as my 50 year old body can handle! We ride a mix of packed clay/rocks on a 900 foot "mtn" when dry and then sand/loam trails down the road after rain (more aggressive xc) I am going to order this set up tonight and report back. Want them to be great for both areas, prob little more tire than needed for the xc/trail trails and maybe wear a bit fast on the "mtn" trails, but seems like the best bet if i want to save some energy when climbing 900' and still rip around up top and then down. my other option was/is Bonti XR4/SE3, (3rd choice maybe Spec Eliminator R/Butcher F but trying to learn those tire options was tiring) but sounds like the Vittorias have better grip?? Cheers everyone and SUNS has us all like kids at Christmas time after ma/pa said we have a great gift for you this year!!! Hope its that good, but we've all heard lots of good hype before in every industry and ..... Happy Riding!!


----------



## Losvar (Mar 21, 2016)

Losvar said:


> Just wanted to weigh in on the Martello as a rear.
> It's not exactly a tire that shines in loose stuff, but it's extremely good on hardpack at speed.
> I would say it's most similar to Maxxis Aggressor or Schwalbe Hans Dampf, but with a lot better cornering.
> 
> ...


I see there's quite a few questions on Martellos in this thread, so I'll add my thoughts as well.
Martellos are quite bad when it's both loose and dry, they do well in damp but loose dirt, or dry hardpack, but when it's dry and loose, the shoulder knobs simply don't dig deep enough to hang on.
I've been running a 2.6 Martello on the rear of my enduro bike since fall last year, and for the typical conditions where I ride, it's probably the best rear tire I have ever tried for "enduro" type riding.
We have tons of rock slabs, rock gardens, roots and otherwise mostly hardpack (sand/clay mix), and it's phenomenal for these conditions, and it's so damn fast for such a burly tire, I'd say it's pretty much a better Aggressor.
If you ride mostly sandy and dry conditions, I would not recommend the Martello, but that's pretty much the only condition where I feel it's struggling.
I have never tried anything that hangs on better for off camber rock slabs and roots, Martello rear with Mazza on the front sticks like glue.

Back on topic, I'm thinking of running Agarros next year for a 150 km single stage race here, did it with Barzos this year, and they were sketchy af, I had so many close calls due to the front washing out in corners.
I'm thinking the Agarros will fit the terrain better, and provide a decent safety net for when fatigue starts to set in and line choices become less optimal.
And from what I've seen and read, the Agarros seem to work very well for technical rocky trails.
How do Agarros work in sand? Do they hold a line well? Do they have decent traction for climbs in dry sandy conditions?


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

I've had an Agarro on the back of my SS for about 400 miles now- I live in and ride in the SW US Sonoran desert (Arizona). It's great on fast, loose sandy, and has proven durable (wears well, no holes), but I will say traction on steep desert climbs is not it's forte. I have to be pretty careful to not break traction when mashing a punchy climb. It rolls better than the Martello I had on there temporarily, but the traction is not there. Ironically, my other bike, a 160/150 FS rig runs a Assegai/Aggressor combo. The Agarro doe not have the traction of an Aggressor, but rolls a wee bit better.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

On sand, the agarro performs exactly as the tread pattern would suggest.


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

Any updates on the secret new tires being talked about??
Time to replace a DHF and oh my are tires expensive. The short list for Santa Cruz area is a Mazza, new secret tire or back to DHF - what shall it be? 

BTW - end of life for me on DHF is at least 1 side knob totally torn off with all others ready to go so kinda useless for a back end swap. Am I really going to spend close to $200 dollars after taxes on F/B bike tires? Crazy expensive these days.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Tommybees said:


> Any updates on the secret new tires being talked about??
> Time to replace a DHF and oh my are tires expensive. The short list for Santa Cruz area is a Mazza, new secret tire or back to DHF - what shall it be?
> 
> BTW - end of life for me on DHF is at least 1 side knob totally torn off with all others ready to go so kinda useless for a back end swap. Am I really going to spend close to $200 dollars after taxes on F/B bike tires? Crazy expensive these days.


Buy the Tioga Edge 22 Soft.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## jcmonty (Apr 11, 2015)

Suns_PSD said:


> Buy the Tioga Edge 22 Soft.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Any details? Found it at a couple of shops but same copy in the description. Is it the softer compound throughout the tread or a softer dual setup?


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Pretty sure the soft is single compound. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> Buy the Tioga Edge 22 Soft.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


Suns - Thanks for the quick response. I looked and seems most tires are out of stock.
I am still lagging on 26mm rim and stared a long time at that bare center section. Boy, I think I have to get on a wider rim to have much luck with that T Edge.....soooo I went with the Mazza for now; I hope it does not disappoint.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

You made the right decision with your rim width. The Mazza is my #2 choice btw.

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

Tommybees said:


> Suns - Thanks for the quick response. I looked and seems most tires are out of stock.
> I am still lagging on 26mm rim and stared a long time at that bare center section. Boy, I think I have to get on a wider rim to have much luck with that T Edge.....soooo I went with the Mazza for now; I hope it does not disappoint.


Where did you find a Mazza? So far I've struck out in my search. Running 2.35 Agarro's F/R and like them except when mud is unavoidable.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I have really only found the parts I want on eBay lately. All my normal shops are OOS most of the time.


----------



## Tommybees (Dec 25, 2014)

I might have gotten lucky, but Jensen had em. I picked up a 2.6" trail variant for my front end. Luckily I dont mind about sidewall color options, so I usually pick whatever is available. 
It should go on this weekend and I will report back although new tires always feel fantastic of the top. I will say that it looks pretty good in person.

Oddly, I seem to like the flex of the Exo on my 26mm rims; never really burped or folded on the front and has done me right. I do have some pretty good dents here and there, but the KOM rims never seem to die.


----------



## kyle204 (Apr 12, 2010)

I'm currently running a 2.6 Dissector MaxTerra Exo front and 2.4 Rekon MaxTerra Exo+ on my Ibis Ripley AF with S35 wheels. This setup works well for most of the trails I ride but I noticed it really seems to drag on hardpack singletrack. I'm not sure if this is a result of me coming from a XC hardtail with more XC oriented tires but it has me looking for other tire options.

Reading thorough this thread the Agarro has really piqued my interest. I'd be looking to possibly run them front and rear in 2.6. Does anyone know if they'd role better than the above setup?


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Most likely not as much traction in loose or loam as the Dissector but possibly more traction than the Rekon. I have owned both (Rekon and Agarro) and I think they are close with slight advantage going to the Agarro depending on conditions.
I have tried a double Agarro setup on my Stylus and while it was very fast, it didn't give me enough up front for my long front center, slack geo and riding style. I didn't get around to trying it on my other bike before I slashed one and ended up getting a Martello (which is being replaced yet again with an Edge 22) to replace it as a front.
Overall it's a fantastic rear tire for me. Great traction for how fast it is. Predictable handling. Nice shape on an i35 rim.
I think on a more XC oriented bike it would be a fine setup (depending on conditions) however if you're going to run it up front, you may be better with something even faster out back. That idea has been on my mind recently for my "small" bike.


----------



## laserjockrock (Jun 22, 2015)

kyle204 said:


> I'm currently running a 2.6 Dissector MaxTerra Exo front and 2.4 Rekon MaxTerra Exo+ on my Ibis Ripley AF with S35 wheels. This setup works well for most of the trails I ride but I noticed it really seems to drag on hardpack singletrack. I'm not sure if this is a result of me coming from a XC hardtail with more XC oriented tires but it has me looking for other tire options.
> 
> Reading thorough this thread the Agarro has really piqued my interest. I'd be looking to possibly run them front and rear in 2.6. Does anyone know if they'd role better than the above setup?


I ride a Ripmo and have spent a lot of time w/ the Dissector and Rekon. My hope was that the Dissector (front) could be a "mini-DHF", as I loved the DHF control when things get sandy/loose, but hate its rolling. After ~9mos, I gave up on it&#8230; it just was too squirly/unpredictable when pushed hard and it took me down several times. Glad to have moved on as I found tires with both better rolling _and_ traction.

Up front - for what you describe, I suggest you check out the Tioga Edge 22 'dual-compound'. It's significantly faster than the Dissector, with substantially better braking and cornering grip (even more than a DHF or 2.4 Mazza. I've not dared an Agarro out front - but I honestly believe the E22 would roll faster (or at least commensurate)&#8230; with WAY better control. It really is something special (you can check some of the blogs here).

In back, I felt the Agarro was superior in every way to the Rekon - slightly faster rolling, with significantly better traction & dampening. I think much of Vittoria's special-sauce is in their compound and siping (and side-walls are pretty good, too). Because of the compound & siping, I was able to run the Agarro at higher PSI than the Rekon, which sped it up further.

In back I tried the Dissector for a while - it is pretty fast for what it does. In our conditions (rocky, dry, steep, loose), I found the Agarro and Dissector a close match for rear tire - different trade offs. In general, the Agarro rode faster _most_ of the time (70~80%?), but sometimes the harder edges of the Dissector really griped on harder rock ledges or deeper gravel - and rode the Agarro out back for over a year. (Then upgraded rear to Martello, and found that better suited for our terrain. Going to try Mazza out back soon&#8230


----------



## kyle204 (Apr 12, 2010)

JaxMustang50 said:


> Most likely not as much traction in loose or loam as the Dissector but possibly more traction than the Rekon. I have owned both (Rekon and Agarro) and I think they are close with slight advantage going to the Agarro depending on conditions.
> I have tried a double Agarro setup on my Stylus and while it was very fast, it didn't give me enough up front for my long front center, slack geo and riding style. I didn't get around to trying it on my other bike before I slashed one and ended up getting a Martello (which is being replaced yet again with an Edge 22) to replace it as a front.
> Overall it's a fantastic rear tire for me. Great traction for how fast it is. Predictable handling. Nice shape on an i35 rim.
> I think on a more XC oriented bike it would be a fine setup (depending on conditions) however if you're going to run it up front, you may be better with something even faster out back. That idea has been on my mind recently for my "small" bike.


I was actually considering looking at Agarro front and either the Mezcal or the Barzo on the rear but based on what I've read the 2.6 Mezcal and Barzo are much larger than the 2.6 Agarro and I don't really like the idea of my rear tire being wider than my front and the 2.35 isn't an option on 35mm rims.


----------



## kyle204 (Apr 12, 2010)

laserjockrock said:


> I ride a Ripmo and have spent a lot of time w/ the Dissector and Rekon. My hope was that the Dissector (front) could be a "mini-DHF", as I loved the DHF control when things get sandy/loose, but hate its rolling. After ~9mos, I gave up on it&#8230; it just was too squirly/unpredictable when pushed hard and it took me down several times. Glad to have moved on as I found tires with both better rolling _and_ traction.
> 
> Up front - for what you describe, I suggest you check out the Tioga Edge 22 'dual-compound'. It's significantly faster than the Dissector, with substantially better braking and cornering grip (even more than a DHF or 2.4 Mazza. I've not dared an Agarro out front - but I honestly believe the E22 would roll faster (or at least commensurate)&#8230; with WAY better control. It really is something special (you can check some of the blogs here).
> 
> ...


The Tioga seems to get a lot of love in this thread and others I've seen. It sounds like an amazing tire so I may have to look into it. I really prefer when my front and rear tires are the same brand but I may have to make an exception.


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

cassieno said:


> Anyone compared a Martello F/R to an Agarro F/R set-up? For whatever reasons the Martello doesn't have it's own thread. I am curious if it's just not as well liked. It doesn't have the fancy ramping that the Mazza and Agarro do, but it at least basically meets it's stated width.


comment necro:
because the Martello doesn't have it's own thread, I guess I'll pollute the Agarro discussion with questions about the martello as a rear tire.
Specifically compared to the Aggressor. is the Martello faster rolling than the Aggressor?

I'm gearing up for an enduro race in Eastern AZ (Sunrise ski resort) which has terrain a lot like AngelFire, Big Bear, or much of Colorado. Its dry, but not super chunky or rocky. Has precious little loam, or real dirt, but not exactly hardpack either.

I've been running the Assegai/Aggressor combo on my 170/150 bike, I like these for PHX and Sedona, but want something a little faster for the race.
I've already been running a Mazza on the front of my "all mountain singlespeed (140 fork, 66° HTA)" with an Agarro rear. I like the front Mazza a lot, but I worry the rear Agarro is not gonna be robust enough for the race, and the only one I have is pretty darn worn out and maybe not worth stealing off my SS.

I have Tannus Tubeless inserts in both wheels, I9 enduro (i30.5mm) rims
So, what combo should I put on for the day?

2.6 Assegai EXO (50% worn)
2.5 Agressor EXO (15% worn)
2.6 Martello TNT trail (new)
2.6 Mazza TNT trail (new-ish)
2.6 Agarro (worn >50%)


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

I prefer the sidewalls of Vittoria over Maxxis exo. I like my 2.35 Martello's a ton. They have more outright braking than the Agarro's. I would vote Martello or Mazza. If it's "steep" I don't think an Agarro has nearly the same "drop anchor" as a Martello.


----------



## kyle204 (Apr 12, 2010)

Reading through this thread it sounds like the 2.6 Mezcal wider than the 2.6 Agarro. Can anyone confirm that's the case with the 2.6 Barzo as well? How noticeable is the difference between the Agarro and Mezcal?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

My 2.35 Barzo's were tiny (2.2ish). My Mezcal's measured at 2.35.


----------



## Losvar (Mar 21, 2016)

kyle204 said:


> Reading through this thread it sounds like the 2.6 Mezcal wider than the 2.6 Agarro. Can anyone confirm that's the case with the 2.6 Barzo as well? How noticeable is the difference between the Agarro and Mezcal?


My Barzos are pretty fat, but I haven't measured them.
They are definitely fatter than 2.6 Mazzas.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

laserjockrock said:


> I ride a Ripmo and have spent a lot of time w/ the Dissector and Rekon. My hope was that the Dissector (front) could be a "mini-DHF", as I loved the DHF control when things get sandy/loose, but hate its rolling. After ~9mos, I gave up on it… it just was too squirly/unpredictable when pushed hard and it took me down several times. Glad to have moved on as I found tires with both better rolling _and_ traction.
> 
> Up front - for what you describe, I suggest you check out the Tioga Edge 22 'dual-compound'. It's significantly faster than the Dissector, with substantially better braking and cornering grip (even more than a DHF or 2.4 Mazza. I've not dared an Agarro out front - but I honestly believe the E22 would roll faster (or at least commensurate)… with WAY better control. It really is something special (you can check some of the blogs here).
> 
> ...


I would just add to this that imo the DUAL COMPOUND E22 does not offer as much outright traction as a DHF or Mazza, at least not in my terrain. I'd consider it around the Dissector region of front traction.
The E22 SOFT however is beastly on traction while still rolling pretty darn well. It also continues to grip amazingly well even while quite worn. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Impetus said:


> comment necro:
> because the Martello doesn't have it's own thread, I guess I'll pollute the Agarro discussion with questions about the martello as a rear tire.
> Specifically compared to the Aggressor. is the Martello faster rolling than the Aggressor?
> 
> ...


If those were my choices and considering the wear on the tires, I'd put the nearly new Mazza up front and if it was hardpack the aggressor 2.5 in the rear or if looser the Martello.
To be fair, I've ridden lots of Martellos as fronts but never tested one in the rear. I've ridden all the others plenty. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Impetus (Aug 10, 2014)

Suns_PSD said:


> If those were my choices and considering the wear on the tires, I'd put the nearly new Mazza up front and if it was hardpack the aggressor 2.5 in the rear or if looser the Martello.
> To be fair, I've ridden lots of Martellos as fronts but never tested one in the rear. I've ridden all the others plenty.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


It ended up snowing 3 inches two days before the race- it was slush and peanut butter mud at the top of the lift, and loam at the bottom, with dry pack in the sunniest spots. The Mazza/Martello combo worked really well.


----------



## frdfandc (Sep 5, 2007)

Is anyone using the Agarro as a front tire? Looks like it may be ok up front due to the larger side knobs. Or would the Martello be a better front? This is going on a rigid SS.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Suns_PSD said:


> If those were my choices and considering the wear on the tires, I'd put the nearly new Mazza up front and if it was hardpack the aggressor 2.5 in the rear or if looser the Martello.
> To be fair, I've ridden lots of Martellos as fronts but never tested one in the rear. I've ridden all the others plenty.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


I took my Martello off the rear since the last ride and put an Agarro on there. I was disappointed how the Martello would slip when climbing rocks, whereas the Agarro sticks impressively. With the Agarro, I made some climbs that in the past I was never successful at.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

Martello will be a better front. I rode the 2.35s and the 2.6s Agarros as F/R for awhile. It worked well and rolled well. It's XCish though, but worked fine. On my Singlespeed I went Martello / Martello because of the blown out dusty conditions and I wanted to be able to punch through it and never worry about traction / routes because of my tires.

Depending on your terrain / planned riding I would not hesitate to run Agarro / Agarro. It's great. However, I don't feel that a 2.35 Martello really gives up much in rolling speed and has a ton more traction all around.



TylerVernon said:


> I took my Martello off the rear since the last ride and put an Agarro on there. I was disappointed how the Martello would slip when climbing rocks, whereas the Agarro sticks impressively. With the Agarro, I made some climbs that in the past I was never successful at.


Seated climbs I think the Agarro sticks excellent. Like surprisingly sticky. I had slightly better luck with my Martello on standing climbs. But honestly, even a Mezcal sticks pretty well for climbing.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

frdfandc said:


> Is anyone using the Agarro as a front tire? Looks like it may be ok up front due to the larger side knobs. Or would the Martello be a better front? This is going on a rigid SS.


I've seen guys using them on xc bikes with a Barzo or Mezcal rear. They don't seem to be missing out on traction.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

TylerVernon said:


> I took my Martello off the rear since the last ride and put an Agarro on there. I was disappointed how the Martello would slip when climbing rocks, whereas the Agarro sticks impressively. With the Agarro, I made some climbs that in the past I was never successful at.


For our terrain I like the drive tire to put a lot of rubber on the ground as I think that's what works. Aggressor, Breakout, Agarro, Hans Dampf, all work really well for rear tires around here. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I ran a 2.35 Agarro I had lying around up front on my Spur 2x. It just wasn't enough for me. When the ground was hardpack it hooked up well but when it was loose it was downright scary. 


Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## JaxMustang50 (Jun 26, 2017)

Suns_PSD said:


> I would just add to this that imo the DUAL COMPOUND E22 does not offer as much outright traction as a DHF or Mazza, at least not in my terrain. I'd consider it around the Dissector region of front traction.


This is 100% accurate.


Suns_PSD said:


> The E22 SOFT however is beastly on traction while still rolling pretty darn well. It also continues to grip amazingly well even while quite worn.


Does the soft version have any differences in knob height compared to the dual? Man do I wish they made it in 27.5. I'd love to try it in place of my DHF.
Regarding the dual comp, I'm really getting on well with it combined with an Agarro rear. Those two are a nice balance between grip and rolling speed.



frdfandc said:


> Is anyone using the Agarro as a front tire? Looks like it may be ok up front due to the larger side knobs. Or would the Martello be a better front? This is going on a rigid SS.


I've used and Agarro up front (paired with an Agarro rear) and it was okay. I didn't find it dangerous but I was aware of what I had available up there. Ultimately I decided it wasn't enough front tire for the bike I was using it on. Long front center and slack needs a little more up there for my style.
I then tried a Martello which had the grip however was too square for my liking. It didn't handle easily, like I had to work too much to throw the bike over. This was a 2.6 on i35 fwiw. If you prefer a more square tire it may be a good option for you.
I then went with the Tioga Edge 22 dual comp. Awesome. I've now put a fair amount of miles on that combo now and can deem it a success. I'll have to make a post in the E22 thread to follow up also.


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> I ran a 2.35 Agarro I had lying around up front on my Spur 2x. It just wasn't enough for me. When the ground was hardpack it hooked up well but when it was loose it was downright scary.
> 
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


I found out the hard way running an Agarro on the front, I did have one on the rear as well. Rock and hardpack was good but loose was sketchy and mud or sticky dirt loads up the tread. I had a washout four weeks ago and injured my left hand/wrist. I was coming into a slightly downhill turn and hit some loose stuff then onto some hardpack and went over the bars. 55 year old parts take a while to heal. Will put the dhf back on the front when I can ride again, maybe a Mazza with the Agarro on the back.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

old_er said:


> I found out the hard way running an Agarro on the front, I did have one on the rear as well. Rock and hardpack was good but loose was sketchy and mud or sticky dirt loads up the tread. I had a washout four weeks ago and injured my left hand/wrist. I was coming into a slightly downhill turn and hit some loose stuff then onto some hardpack and went over the bars. 55 year old parts take a while to heal. Will put the dhf back on the front when I can ride again, maybe a Mazza with the Agarro on the back.


E22 soft if you have a 29er and a 30-35mm width front wheel. 

Heal up!

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

So tried a Martello 2.6 Trail on the rear after my go to 2.4 Trail Boss was worn out. I have used Vittorias in the past and liked them, the Goma was a pretty good front tire, and the Morsa a great rear. 

I don't like the Martello. Gave it 3 rides to see if I just needed to get used to it, it isn't getting better. The one good thing it has is climbing traction, but that is it. It is heavy (1200 grams), undersized (2.45" casing on an i30 rim), rolls slow, and most importantly has a really strange feel. I can't tell if it is the casing or knob flex, but when you lean into a corner, it shifts around, a lot. Ultimately it grips, but feels very spooky while doing so. Note, I am far from a super aggressive rider and don't tear knobs or undercut side knobs, so I wouldn't expect this to be an issue. Anyway, hard pass for me running the Martello on the rear. Anyone want a lightly used Martello for cheap?


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

The 2.6 really doesn't make sense to me. A 1200g has to really be something special. 

The 2.35 Martellos are great. They weigh 950 to 1000g measure tts or slightly bigger and roll well. 

I do run Tannus tubeless so I guess I make them close to a 1200g tire, but I have been very happy with them as a grippy rear. 

Ran Martello 2.35 f/r on my singlespeed through the loose summer (and never had any issues) and Mazza 2.6 F / Martello 2.35 rear on my "enduro hardtail" 

I have been very pleased.


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> E22 soft if you have a 29er and a 30-35mm width front wheel.
> 
> Heal up!
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


The E22 has an interesting tread design, it's tough to look at the lack of center blocks and think it will work well. I ride in the NY/NJ area and most people I talk to use a DHF up front, it seems to be the standard for the terrain in many areas. I should have read the warning signs when I pushed the Agarro on loose stuff prior to my crash but they rolled so nice and seemed to work well with the noted exceptions. 

I have an appointment with a hand surgeon the end of this week. I am tortured all day looking at my bike which is ten feet away from my desk. It seems to be begging me to ride.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Generally a lack of center knobs rolls and leans better whereas center knobs have theoretically better braking traction. 
I intentionally search out tires with a lack of center knobs and a riding buddy trims his right off. 
Had a closed reduction on the hand years ago, hope you don't have to go through that. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> Generally a lack of center knobs rolls and leans better whereas center knobs have theoretically better braking traction.
> I intentionally search our ties with a lack of center knobs and a riding buddy trims his right off.
> Had a closed reduction on the hand years ago, hope you don't have to go through that.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


What type of terrain are you using the E22 on? I definitely like having good braking traction with my front tire.

I had x-rays done a day after the crash and have no broken bones, there is still soft tissue damage which is taking it's sweet time to heal. The closed reduction looks to be a bit painful.


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

old_er said:


> What type of terrain are you using the E22 on? I definitely like having good braking traction with my front tire.
> 
> I had x-rays done a day after the crash and have no broken bones, there is still soft tissue damage which is taking it's sweet time to heal. The closed reduction looks to be a bit painful.


Suns_PSD , I forgot you had already mentioned the E22 earlier in the thread and I see what you are using it on. My rims are 25mm internal width.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Your hand looks... not good!


----------



## old_er (Dec 27, 2020)

Suns_PSD said:


> Your hand looks... not good!


It has deflated back to mostly normal size, that was four weeks ago


----------



## frdfandc (Sep 5, 2007)

old_er said:


> It has deflated back to mostly normal size, that was four weeks ago


I'm 45 and my last big crash a couple of years ago put me off the bike for 4 weeks. Bruised my collar bone and shoulder. As we get older, we don't bounce back as well as we used to.


----------



## dysfunction (Aug 15, 2009)

I had a slip on a switchback last month (seriously low speed too, like 3mph or walking speed). Landed on my hip, which would have been fine except that hip hit a rock. Resulting in seriously wrenching my back. 

I'm managing to ride my road bike on a trainer, and that's about it. I turned 50 this year, and everything has gone to pot (in terms of recovery/healing) since that day.. or maybe that's just my imagination.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

I want some center knobs on a rear tire since that's the drive tire, but we will see how traction is after the siping wears down. I could always get the dremel and put some new siping on.


----------



## Cary (Dec 29, 2003)

Cary said:


> So tried a Martello 2.6 Trail on the rear after my go to 2.4 Trail Boss was worn out. I have used Vittorias in the past and liked them, the Goma was a pretty good front tire, and the Morsa a great rear.
> 
> I don't like the Martello. Gave it 3 rides to see if I just needed to get used to it, it isn't getting better. The one good thing it has is climbing traction, but that is it. It is heavy (1200 grams), undersized (2.45" casing on an i30 rim), rolls slow, and most importantly has a really strange feel. I can't tell if it is the casing or knob flex, but when you lean into a corner, it shifts around, a lot. Ultimately it grips, but feels very spooky while doing so. Note, I am far from a super aggressive rider and don't tear knobs or undercut side knobs, so I wouldn't expect this to be an issue. Anyway, hard pass for me running the Martello on the rear. Anyone want a lightly used Martello for cheap?


Strange feel was not the tire. Threw a trail boss 2.6 on and the same issue, then found the axle had backed out and had play, so the wheel was shifting as leaning over.


----------



## cassieno (Apr 28, 2011)

The 2.35 Martello's are the way to go. Around 2.5 at the knobs casing is close to 2.35. Roles well, grips well. 950g to 1000gs.


----------



## piciu256 (Feb 15, 2019)

Is there any real difference between g2.0 and g+ martello? Cannot find any info on that, ordered a g+ anyway as it's cheap since discontinued, but I'm curious.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Link? iirc the 1.0 is less rolling resistance but less grippy.


----------



## piciu256 (Feb 15, 2019)

Ok, so got both the g2.0 Agarro and 1.0 Martello, first difference is that I was able to install the Agarro onto my Spank 345 rim without much trouble, while for the g1.0 Martello I had to use a tire lever, also the casing seems more pliable on the Agarro, so surely should provide better rolling resistance, might also be why it was easier to install, the side lugs on the Martello feel a lot more grippy to my finger, but it's hard to tell if it's a matter of different model or casing generation. Last but not least  the grey sidewall on the Agarro is of a lighter shade and it has a grey area down the middle of the thread, the Martello is uniformly black.
Anyway, whatever the real world difference might be, it's definitely worth saving almost half the price of the new one, more importantly- it was avaible at this moment.
My 2.6" trail Agarro measures right @2.5" or 63mm side lugs on a 30mm rim and is quite round, the 2.35 Martello comes out at just slightly over @60mm wide with 59mm side lugs and a nicely balanced profile, not too round, not too square.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I've tested and used lots of Vittoria tires and am generally a fan, but currently they are not my first choice for any application or position.
Just ordered a new E-Martello 29 x 2.35 to test on the rear of my SJ Evo and excited to test it. Hoping it provides just enough traction and durability while rolling darn fast. 
Will be report back in a few weeks. 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Suns_PSD said:


> I've tested and used lots of Vittoria tires and am generally a fan, but currently they are not my first choice for any application or position.
> Just ordered a new E-Martello 29 x 2.35 to test on the rear of my SJ Evo and excited to test it. Hoping it provides just enough traction and durability while rolling darn fast.
> Will be report back in a few weeks.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


I removed a Super Trail Rock Razor that I really liked that was still in good shape to test out the E-Martello 29 x 2.35 on the rear of my SJ Evo.
Rode at the Green Belt which was tons of fun and chunkier than ever. 
Front tire is a fresh E-22 soft. 
The E-Martello is only about 2.25" wide last I measured (before riding it). The E-Martello added to my bike being more quiet and calm. Not pingy at all. Traction was exceptional (dry hardpack with rocks everywhere). It did everything I required with ease. 
At first I was thinking it was much slower than the removed RR but as I rode it more, I'm not so certain. 
The E-Martello positively stayed in place and didn't skip around the way the RR & other tires have done, it felt almost boring in comparison. 
Still thinking the E-Martello is a solid notch slower than the RR when I went to sprint on it. But it's no dog.
Wish I had better records of my overall speed on segments by tire, but I don't 

Sent from my SM-G715A using Tapatalk


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Suns_PSD said:


> I removed a Super Trail Rock Razor that I really liked that was still in good shape to test out the E-Martello 29 x 2.35 on the rear of my SJ Evo.
> Rode at the Green Belt which was tons of fun and chunkier than ever.
> Front tire is a fresh E-22 soft.
> The E-Martello is only about 2.25" wide last I measured (before riding it). The E-Martello added to my bike being more quiet and calm. Not pingy at all. Traction was exceptional (dry hardpack with rocks everywhere). It did everything I required with ease.
> ...


How much does the e-martello weight? It’s dual ply right? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

It's heavy. 1240g as I recall. 

I left my 80 gram insert out for the first time in years in an attempt to close the weight gap. 

The RR weighs 1040 + 80 g insert for 1120 g total, so the total weight difference isn't so much.


----------



## socalrider77 (Sep 1, 2012)

Suns_PSD said:


> It's heavy. 1240g as I recall.
> 
> I left my 80 gram insert out for the first time in years in an attempt to close the weight gap.
> 
> The RR weighs 1040 + 80 g insert for 1120 g total, so the total weight difference isn't so much.


How much do you weigh? I was riding the Martello trail casing 29x2.35 and liked it but it was a bit flimsy for me. I’m tempted to try it again now that I run cushcore 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## piciu256 (Feb 15, 2019)

I ride Martello and Goma trail ~2.4 both and they are plenty stiff enough, don't fold in corners @16-20 psi, I do get rim strikes though (cut the thread once on a sharp rock, sidewall was ok so butyl insert works), while being aggressive, I weigh only 55kg  32mm internal rims.
I can imagine heavier people feeling a lack of support with this casing.
Maxxis Exo was way too flimsy even for me though, nevermind too easy to pinch flat.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

socalrider77 said:


> How much do you weigh? I was riding the Martello trail casing 29x2.35 and liked it but it was a bit flimsy for me. I’m tempted to try it again now that I run cushcore
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


184#s.

Ran it at 25 psi.

We have low traction here when leaned as it's all loose, so I wouldn't say that I load the tires hard or anything like I've experienced in Bentonville, for example, where you can push the tires hard in to a berm.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Haven't ridden my big bike nearly as much as usual since I installed the E-Martello 2.35 out back as I've really been in to my new Spur lately.

About 3-4 rides per month so this rear tire probably has 10-12 rides on it.

Might be me and my rather average fitness, might be because I've gotten so use to the fast feel of my Spur with a rear Mezcal, it's also possible that the surface graphene layer has worn away slowing the tire down.

Traction was always really good, tire felt nicely damped, but the last 2 times I rode the SJ Evo, it really felt like a slug! So I pulled the E-Martello and stuck on an old Super Trail Rock Razor and of course on the test ride down the street the bike picked up instant speed. The e-Martello has some life left in it so might get reinstalled for a bike trip or something. Would definitely run the E-Martello again as the performance was really impeccable, just searching for a bit less rolling resistance, preferably with the same traction.

I just need stronger legs, or a motor!

The tire I've been eager to test for some time is the Super Ground Wicked Will but it's yet to hit N. American distributors.


----------



## piciu256 (Feb 15, 2019)

It is an aggressive tire with reasonably spaced tall knobs, it rolls quicker than tires with knobs spaced more apart, but it's still not a quick tire by any means, however I can finally say I've tried my 2.35 trail Martello front and 2.6" (2.5" real) trail Agarro in the rear and the combo does roll really quick, much quicker than with a Goma out back, haven't noticed reduced traction yet, not ridden anything but hard pack, plus riding a hardtail till my frame gets here.
Just rolling around I don't notice much, as I don't have a speedo in front of my eyes, but I do notice that it picks up speed going down stuff I've knows for years much quicker, to the point I have to brake in spots I could just roll through before.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

That's all accurate to say.

Would like the center knobs to be closer together, maybe a hair lower, and no single center knob at all.

Really what I want is a Rock Razor with the center knobs being like 30% taller.

As choosey as I am about front traction, I just need the rear to survive and roll really fast.


----------



## piciu256 (Feb 15, 2019)

Martello 2.3 sounds like what you want 😜
I assume you need the Enduro casing, Trail rolls quite a bit faster though.


----------



## karlek10 (Jan 8, 2022)

Would you consider an *Agarro 2.35 (F) *with an Syerra 2.4 (R). I have a Syerra laying around, I don't know how to combine it. I'm on a 100/120 Element, built for both XC and trail/enduro stuff occasionally. I've got i30 mm rims. Thanks!


----------



## Undescended (Apr 16, 2018)

karlek10 said:


> Would you consider an *Agarro 2.35 (F) *with an Syerra 2.4 (R). I have a Syerra laying around, I don't know how to combine it. I'm on a 100/120 Element, built for both XC and trail/enduro stuff occasionally. I've got i30 mm rims. Thanks!


I believe using an Agarro in front is an awesome combination with the Syerra for your Element!


----------

