# 2018 XC Race Tires



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Here ya go Sidewalk.  

Having had extraordinary bad luck with Schwalbe last year, I'm on Ikon 27.5x2.35 rear and Ardent Race 27.5x2.35 for most XC or marathon. I have an Aspen I might play with for hardpack, and am open to trying out a Forekaster up front.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Starting our 2018 with a 2.35/2.25 Racing Ralph combo. Did one local XC race, the cobwebs slowed me down more than the tires (haven't touched the bike in over a month, and once a month before that). Lightest combo I have for my 12 hour race (8 mile/1100' laps) this Saturday.

Will swap on an Ardent Race 2.35/ Nobby Nic 2.25 for my next local XC race (same course as above) to see how it feels.

Then I'll test a Barzo/Mezcal setup on the same course. That will prime me for the remainder of the season which starts in March, with April being my hardest XCO format races. The winter will have my hardest XCM races (50m/10k', 62m/10k', and 24 hour). Tires for the 50 and 62 will probably be aggressive (Hans Dampf 2.35?) front for the traction on the loose tech stuff they have. Worth the weight.

I'm on 21mm wheels.

The HD served me very well in the loose stuff last year. I ran a RaRa on the longer races to save weight, but I don't think it was worth it for the lack of confidence. And of course losing the ability to carry speed through corners, requiring more pedal effort. That really hurts late in the race (especially one of the races where the last 1/4 is all singletrack in the loose).



> You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to winters.benjamin again.


----------



## free-agent (Jan 12, 2004)

Good timing as I need to find an early season combo for the super muddy races here in the Pacific NW. I'm thinking Nobby Nic/Rocket Ron (have used in the past with success) or trying the Forekaster/Ikon option (never tried).


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Starting the Endurance season with a pair of Vittorias: 2.35 Barzo & 2.35 Mezcal, TNT on both, Graphene on the Mezcal only because it's not available on the Barzo. Good in loose over hard and sand, had some good mudholes last week and they didn't pack up. Ended up 3rd and 2nd so far in AMA for the first 2 races, no complaints about the tires at all. Next 2 races are more man made trails with wood structures and berms so we'll see how it goes, but I doubt I'll be making any changes tire wise. Just wish they were under 700g.

Edit: I'm on 23mm internal width rims.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

At the moment, it's 2.2 Ikon rear and 2.25 Ardent Race front on both bikes.
If the going gets muddy, the 26'er gets a pair of 2.35 High Roller II's.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

free-agent said:


> Good timing as I need to find an early season combo for the super muddy races here in the Pacific NW. I'm thinking Nobby Nic/Rocket Ron (have used in the past with success) or trying the Forekaster/Ikon option (never tried).


 I am an Ikon Fan boy, but I'm not sure it would be the best mud tire. Perhaps others could chime in. I would be interested in a FK/FK combo or a dedicated mud tire.

We don't really ride mud here unless in a race.


----------



## free-agent (Jan 12, 2004)

FJSnoozer said:


> I am an Ikon Fan boy, but I'm not sure it would be the best mud tire. Perhaps others could chime in. I would be interested in a FK/FK combo or a dedicated mud tire.
> 
> We don't really ride mud here unless in a race.


Good catch. I was thinking Ardent and typed Ikon. Thinking FK/Ardent or FK/Fk combo.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

After totally hateing my xkings I'm back to looking for a intermediate tires. I guess I will he running older sworks fastrak and SW renegade for fast days. Looking into the forkaster aswell. For super muddy is beavers all the way but they are hardly ever needed during race season.

Like to hear more on the 2.25 non exo (the lightest option) if anyone has used them. 

Also looking for some aspens if I can find some cheap. Friends seem to love them.


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

I'm an enormous tire dork and love these threads. If I could make one request it'd be that, if possible, folks list their internal rim width when describing their experience with specific tires. Not long ago it would have been assumed everyone was on basically the same width rims in an xc forum -- maybe 19-23 at most... Now it's all over the place, and it makes a big difference. Now, nerd out!


----------



## wrjr (Jun 29, 2016)

I rode most of last season on Vittoria Mezcal front and rear (2.35) on 29" Enve M60forty HV (26mm internal). They grip & corner well for me. 
I had an ikon 2.35 front and ardent race rear prior to that, but the Ikon on 26mm internal didn't feel right to me. The ardent race felt fine and compares well to the mezcal but I felt the mezcal had more grip... that could have been just "new tire" feeling though. 

If I find it in the budget I'll put a barzo 2.35 up front before my first race in April which will likely have some mud and the mezcal's probably won't be the best tire choice there.


----------



## TTUB (Nov 9, 2010)

After not riding my 'endurance' bike since last Fall... I just pulled it out and took a ride on it over the weekend. Panaracer DriverPro. Best balance of rolling speed, traction (just enough and not too much) and durability. I've tried lot's of tires and nothing comes as close to that perfect balance as these. Better quality than Schwalbe and at half the cost.


----------



## Udyr (Jul 29, 2013)

I'll probably run Mezcal 2.35 front/rear for all my races. Really great tire that I've ridden in everything but mud and they have surprisingly good traction.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

What are the +/- or Mezcal x2 vs Barzo/Mezcal?


----------



## Udyr (Jul 29, 2013)

Sidewalk said:


> What are the +/- or Mezcal x2 vs Barzo/Mezcal?


Barzo rolls a bit slower, is a bit grippier and isn't available in G+ (yet).

If conditions are super loose, I'll consider a Barzo in the front for some extra mental reassurance but the Mezcals hook up perfectly fine. I rode a 2.2/2.1 Mezcal setup for basically a whole year at Tahoe 100, Leadville 100, Demo Flow/Braille, Santa Cruz campus trails and now down in LA (Santa Monicas and El Prieto) and I was putting down PRs on the descents with an XC bike compared to my HD3 with Derby's and Minions.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Udyr said:


> Barzo rolls a bit slower, is a bit grippier and isn't available in G+ (yet).


If the order hasn't gone though, I think I'll go Mezcal x2 2.35 then.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Udyr said:


> Barzo rolls a bit slower, is a bit grippier and isn't available in G+ (yet).
> 
> If conditions are super loose, I'll consider a Barzo in the front for some extra mental reassurance but the Mezcals hook up perfectly fine. I rode a 2.2/2.1 Mezcal setup for basically a whole year at Tahoe 100, Leadville 100, Demo Flow/Braille, Santa Cruz campus trails and now down in LA (Santa Monicas and El Prieto) and I was putting down PRs on the descents with an XC bike compared to my HD3 with Derby's and Minions.


Yup, Barzos and Mezcals are close. I liked Mezcal/Mezcal in 2.35 on my SS, now running Barzo/Mezcal 2.35 for endurance season. I like the extra grip for when I get tired and sloppy late in the day. Rolling resistance seems really similar to me for a front tire, been putting in lots of gravel training miles lately with the Barzo and its rolling well.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

I thought the Barzo/Mezcal for single track was faster, but I'll be curious to go back to Mezcal/Mezcal. 

I'm also curious about Schwalbe and addix. Racing Ralph addix. Does the 2.25 measure true to size? The Rocket Ron measured below 2.20

I'm on a 22.5 rim.


----------



## HyperSprite (Mar 14, 2014)

I love the Mezcal G+ 2.25F/2.1R combo. 
At 50 mph an hour they sound like a Tie Fighter on asphalt


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

machine4321 said:


> After totally hateing my xkings I'm back to looking for a intermediate tires. I guess I will he running older sworks fastrak and SW renegade for fast days. Looking into the forkaster aswell. For super muddy is beavers all the way but they are hardly ever needed during race season.
> 
> Like to hear more on the 2.25 non exo (the lightest option) if anyone has used them.
> 
> Also looking for some aspens if I can find some cheap. Friends seem to love them.


I used the 2.25 Forekaster as a rear tire on a 19mm internal rim for the end of the season last year. I noticed it rolled slower than the Ikon I had on there, but loads more grip in the mud. I actually felt comfortable in the mud vs the ar/ikon combo I was riding. It shed mud pretty well and the rear was pretty grippy. Definitely will run a forekaster combo during mud races next year, but will stick to ar/ar or ar/ikon for everything else.


----------



## preda_0 (Feb 18, 2012)

Barzo 2.25 F 
RaceKing Protection 2.2 R
22mm internal rims


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Currently using an Ikon EXO 2.2 R with Bontrager XR3 2.2 front. I like this setup for winter but both tires are showing their age. This spring/summer I'll be on a 2.35 Barzo F and Ikon 2.2 EXO R. I'm excited to try the Barzo, I got it for $40 online after Christmas. Running Arch EX rims (21 ID)


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

free-agent said:


> Good catch. I was thinking Ardent and typed Ikon. Thinking FK/Ardent or FK/Fk combo.


FK/AR combo is weak in the mud and wet (but only because of the AR). The AR just doesn't grip well enough, especially climbing, to keep up with the FK IMHO. I am not a strong technical rider though so ymmv.

I am running 2.35 FK front, 2.2 AR rear. On hard or dry conditions I love it. Cornering is still decent in the wet with the AR, but climbing traction isn't great. The FK is the best tire I have ridden and I wish I would have gotten one for the rear as well instead of the AR.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

2.35 barzo front and 2.2 race king protection rear.


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

khardrunner14 said:


> FK/AR combo is weak in the mud and wet (but only because of the AR). The AR just doesn't grip well enough, especially climbing, to keep up with the FK IMHO. I am not a strong technical rider though so ymmv.
> 
> I am running 2.35 FK front, 2.2 AR rear. On hard or dry conditions I love it. Cornering is still decent in the wet with the AR, but climbing traction isn't great. The FK is the best tire I have ridden and I wish I would have gotten one for the rear as well instead of the AR.


I can confirm a Forekaster in the rear makes a huge difference in the wet. Not so great on the dry of you want to win, but great in wet/mud. Traction for days!


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I've got Mezcals on the fs bike and Barzos on the hardtail at the moment. I raced the Barzos in some cx races in the fall, and I've got 2 races (mostly dry) on the Mezcals from summer/fall. I think the Barzo will be a little better in stickier mud, the more open knobs should clear better. 
First race for me is this Sunday and I'm watching the weather, it's a pretty solid course with packed small rocks and hard dirt, but it's been really wet and looks to continue, so I may go with the hardtail (easier to clean up, and I've done well with it on that course in past years) and Barzos. If it's dry at all I'll be on the Mezcals, super happy with those.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

How does the mezcal compare to a race king? Does it offer any advantage that the 150 gram difference would cover up?


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I plan on running a 2.25 Nobby Nic front and 2.25 Mezcal G+ rear on 22mm internal rims.


----------



## preda_0 (Feb 18, 2012)

party_wagon said:


> How does the mezcal compare to a race king? Does it offer any advantage that the 150 gram difference would cover up?


This is officially the fastest tyre on the market - MBR


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

The Mezcal appears to have bigger knobs, more grip in loose or a little mud is my guess.
I did some very non-scientific testing last summer, with Thunder Burts, Barzo, Mezcal, and my old set of Ground Controls, I finished about the same position with the same group of guys racing in the same park; my opinion is that the steel drum test results (as others have stated) are quite different from real world experience, and my opinion/experience is that a bigger knob is not really going to slow you down much if at all most of the time.
I have seen instances where too little knob slows you down a lot, if you're surprised by a wet/slick event; last spring my main competitor showed up with fast traks for a peanut buttery course, and that gave me some added confidence at the start, - I think he has his worst finish that day. 
If I knew it was going to be dry, I'd use something like the RaceKing or TB. For mixed wet/dry and not wanting to have to change tires a lot, I like something more suitable for wet, - probably 2/3 or our spring races are wet. I think the Mezcal will be good until things start getting sloppy and slick, but will be close-enough in 'speed' to the low knob tires.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

preda_0 said:


> This is officially the fastest tyre on the market - MBR


Thats a rediculous article, but a great way to kick off the 2018 Tire thread!

All tires are EXO or Snakeskin.

'17 Combos
2.35 Exo Ikon/Ikon or HD/Ikon 
25ID LB rims 
No flats, no Gashes, 1 washout on Grass at 21 mph, 1 burp to 18 psi rear, no DNFs.

'18 combos
2.35 FK/IKON or FK/Aspen 2.25

In testing:
2.35 NoNo/RaRa Addix speed Weight 750/680g

Show me the Volume!


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I've been pleased with the grip my Mezcals have on our Colorado "soil". Meaning, decomposed granite over less decomposed granite with solid granite here and there. Some sandstone, too. I see about 200m of brown, loam-like soil a ride.

The near-continuous center strip and seems to provide good lateral grip. 

I might try a Peyote 2.35 soon, though. They're $30 on PBK. 

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

party_wagon said:


> How does the mezcal compare to a race king? Does it offer any advantage that the 150 gram difference would cover up?


Better cornering & braking grip on everything, and better overall grip on everything except hardpack and pavement. Rolling resistance feels about the same to me, however, I'm not that good at feeling small differences in rolling speed so take that for what it's worth. I find that I can carry speed better with the Mezcal and ride closer to their traction limits since they don't lose their grip as abruptly as the Race Kings when I push them a bit too far.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Anyone have experience with 27.5 Mezcals or Barzos?


----------



## luchi87 (May 4, 2009)

Does anyone have a sense of how the Mezcal compares to the new 2.25 Aspen?


----------



## luchi87 (May 4, 2009)

which size for the Mezcals, 2.25 or 2.35?


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

winters.benjamin said:


> Anyone have experience with 27.5 Mezcals or Barzos?


The barzos are great tires in 27.5. I am running a race king over the mezcal but haven't tried a mezcal yet.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Anyone seen or used a 2018 Conti RaceKing?

The Protection version supposedly runs 605g, which is markedly lighter than the previous version. Does it have the same nice fat casing? Decent puncture protection? 

I love my Mezcals but something that does the same thing, with less weight, would be great.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

I've been a RaRa RoRo fan for some time. Simply hard to beat in terms of weight and rolling resistance. Race King never seemed any faster to me, and traction not quite as good. Been eyeballing the Mezcals after this thread. Just concerned with the extra weight. For those who have compared; do the Mezcals roll as good as the Schwalbes?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I've never noticed a difference in the way things roll with exception to my XC HT and my Enduro. But there are a ton of factors there besides just the tires.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

splitendz said:


> I've been a RaRa RoRo fan for some time. Simply hard to beat in terms of weight and rolling resistance. Race King never seemed any faster to me, and traction not quite as good. Been eyeballing the Mezcals after this thread. Just concerned with the extra weight. For those who have compared; do the Mezcals roll as good as the Schwalbes?


According to bicyclerollingresistance.com, the Mezcal G+ TNT, rolls faster than the new Addix Racing Ralphs.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> According to bicyclerollingresistance.com, the Mezcal G+ TNT, rolls faster than the new Addix Racing Ralphs.


Unfortunately, I don't race on a roller 

I don't put too much stock in those tests. Even their lowest pressure test of 25 PSI is higher than what I run in my front. I only run 25 in the rear of my HT because I take hard hits and will rim strike.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Sidewalk said:


> Unfortunately, I don't race on a roller
> 
> I don't put too much stock in those tests. Even their lowest pressure test of 25 PSI is higher than what I run in my front. I only run 25 in the rear of my HT because I take hard hits and will rim strike.


Well the bottom line is it rolls well and from all the testimonials it corners better than the Race King which is one of the fastest rolling tires (yes on rollers).


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> According to bicyclerollingresistance.com, the Mezcal G+ TNT, rolls faster than the new Addix Racing Ralphs.


I deleted my post in this thread already about the subject, but basicly that website is BS. It used to win me over

It didn't even carry over to my testing on the streets. I have tested tires at the extreme end of the spectrum from that site. My testing may not be laboratory cotrolled, but its enough to convince me to not go down a rabbit hole searching for tires that aren't technically faster on the trail. But don't take my word for it.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Wonder how fast Nino's Aspens were compared to the Race Kings.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Normal race conditions: Ardent Race 2.35 front, Ikon 2.2 rear.
Wettish: Forekaster 2.35 front/rear.
Dry hardpack: Aspen 2.25 front/rear.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

I just wanted tires with a round profile that were fast so I went with race king in the rear. The mezcal is supposed to have bigger side nobs and will grip more if you lean your bike. I ride a lot of tight twisty stuff that a round profile does well on.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

I see quite a few combos on here with R being smaller width than F. Can those of you choosing this setup talk about positives and negatives? I love having good volume in the rear (cue the snarky comments) esp for technical climbing.


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

For my older frame I cannot fit larger tires in the rear so I do what I can with what I got. I run as large as possible both front and rear. It just so happens I can run bigger in the front.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

winters.benjamin said:


> I see quite a few combos on here with R being smaller width than F. Can those of you choosing this setup talk about positives and negatives? I love having good volume in the rear (cue the snarky comments) esp for technical climbing.


My frame, 2014 Scott Scale 910, only has room for a 2.25 sized tire in the rear (although I do have a 2.3 Fast Trak on the rear right now but it probably doesn't have enough clearance in muddy conditions). When I decide to upgrade, I will get an XC frame with enough clearance for a true 2.35 tire in the rear.


----------



## pemberton325 (May 13, 2009)

I normally run rocket Ron’s front and rear. This year I bought and installed rocket Ron addix speed grip 2.25 in the front and a racing Ralph addix speed 2.25 in the rear. I like this combo and the tires work well for me. I was at the bike store today and saw a combo package of 2 Mescals and a bottle of sealant on sale for $90 so I got them to try out. I have a flat 50k race in March, I think I will install them and try them then.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

pemberton325 said:


> I normally run rocket Ron's front and rear. This year I bought and installed rocket Ron addix speed grip 2.25 in the front and a racing Ralph addix speed 2.25 in the rear. I like this combo and the tires work well for me. I was at the bike store today and saw a combo package of 2 Mescals and a bottle of sealant on sale for $90 so I got them to try out. I have a flat 50k race in March, I think I will install them and try them then.


Post a follow up after race if you would. I would like to know how they compare to the Schwalbes.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

I noticed new tall boy comes with an Aspen and adhrii. Has anyone tried dhrii as a front xc tire? Seems like it would help on rough downs.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

party_wagon said:


> I noticed new tall boy comes with an Aspen and adhrii. Has anyone tried dhrii as a front xc tire? Seems like it would help on rough downs.


Ardent Race and DHR II.

Seems like you'd hate yourself as everyone rolled away from you on everything but super high speed corners.

I know some people don't believe rolling resistance is a "thing", but I do.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Le Duke said:


> Ardent Race and DHR II.
> 
> Seems like you'd hate yourself as everyone rolled away from you on everything but super high speed corners.
> 
> I know some people don't believe rolling resistance is a "thing", but I do.


We must be looking at different model years or something. I was curious as to how much of a difference it makes. Your weight is back on climbs and forward on descents.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

party_wagon said:


> We must be looking at different model years or something. I was curious as to how much of a difference it makes. Your weight is back on climbs and forward on descents.


They don't do model years. They change their specs from time to time, but SC, like other manufacturers, doesn't have a "2018" bike. And, a DHF II/Aspen combo would be pretty bizarre. I'm fairly certain that has never been a factory option.

And, I'm not sure what you're getting at with weight distribution, but a DHF II doesn't cease being a slow tire just because you're climbing.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Looking at the Tallboy on the SC site, a lot of their builds come with DHF front/Ardent Race rear or Crossmark rear. One even shows a Crossmark front/DHF rear (must be a misprint). But still, those seem kinda mis-matched to me. Isn't that their XC bike?


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

BmanInTheD said:


> Looking at the Tallboy on the SC site, a lot of their builds come with DHF front/Ardent Race rear or Crossmark rear. One even shows a Crossmark front/DHF rear (must be a misprint). But still, those seem kinda mis-matched to me. Isn't that their XC bike?


Santa Cruz doesn't have an xc bike, not anymore anyway, the tall boy is more of an all-mountain bike, that is it can handle xc, trail and enduro. The frame is not particularly light and xc frames from santa cruz used to be crazy light back in the days.

In that sense a DHF might make more sense, but for XC using a DHF? That sounds totally wrong, either you are not riding xc courses or are simply over geared and thus leaving some big watts on the terrain.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

TDLover said:


> Santa Cruz doesn't have an xc bike, not anymore anyway, the tall boy is more of an all-mountain bike, that is it can handle xc, trail and enduro. The frame is not particularly light and xc frames from santa cruz used to be crazy light back in the days.


If you're a hardtailer there's the Highball.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Le Duke said:


> Ardent Race and DHR II.
> 
> Seems like you'd hate yourself as everyone rolled away from you on everything but super high speed corners.
> 
> I know some people don't believe rolling resistance is a "thing", but I do.


The tallboy is more of an endurance bike. 120 front and 100 rear I believe.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

party_wagon said:


> The tallboy is more of an endurance bike. 120 front and 100 rear I believe.


And?

If anything, I'd argue an endurance bike needs faster tires than an XC bike.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## pemberton325 (May 13, 2009)

splitendz said:


> Post a follow up after race if you would. I would like to know how they compare to the Schwalbes.


Sure will bud! For reference, I am running the tires on a I9 24.5 mm internal rim on a 120 front 110 rear travel 2015 Camber.

I have a race next Sunday, I wanna stay with the Scwalbe's for that. I will swap them after that race and "break" in the Mezcals.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> And, I'm not sure what you're getting at with weight distribution, but a DHF II doesn't cease being a slow tire just because you're climbing.


Actually it sort of does. Rolling resistance is highly dependent on loading force on the tire. When you are climbing, especially on steep climbs, there is minimal weight on the front tire. Not a lot of rolling resistance from it.

Still though DHR II are a slow tire. Doesn't matter how fit I am the second I put those on I feel out of shape. A DHF on the other hand rolls rolls pretty well.

I think there are better options through for aggressive XC riding. In the Maxxis line-up the Forecaster does a good job of filling that gap between an Ikon and a Minion.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Just for clarification, it’s the DHF that’s specced on this bike, not DHR II.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

LMN said:


> Actually it sort of does. Rolling resistance is highly dependent on loading force on the tire. When you are climbing, especially on steep climbs, there is minimal weight on the front tire. Not a lot of rolling resistance from it.
> 
> Still though DHR II are a slow tire. Doesn't matter how fit I am the second I put those on I feel out of shape. A DHF on the other hand rolls rolls pretty well.
> 
> I think there are better options through for aggressive XC riding. In the Maxxis line-up the Forecaster does a good job of filling that gap between an Ikon and a Minion.


I was unclear.

My point was that unless your weight distribution changes based on the tires you use (I guess it's possible, but seems unlikely), you're still dealing with more or less static percentages for a given grade. Like, Ralph/Ralph and 40/60 is NOT going to change to 50/50 or 30/70 with Minion/Ardent.

So, obviously I agree that the front wheel has less of a role in overall Crr than the rear wheel. That said, if you swap wheels for a tire with close to double the Crr (with same weight on it, same internal pressure, etc), yeah, it's going to slow you down.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

DHF is a 1300g tire. That should be enough yo say "not for XC racing".

I saw a bike with a Mezcal f/AKA r yesterday. Looked like a good combo for my area (dry SoCal desert). I raced the RaRa 2.35/2.25 combo and didn't feel they held me back in the conditions we were in. Very few loose corners, and of those the corners were VERY loose.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Sidewalk said:


> DHF is a 1300g tire. That should be enough yo say "not for XC racing".


There are other DHFs that are quite a bit lighter then that. The lightest being 925 in a 29er tire. Still, not XC weight and not an XC tread. But they are such a good tire that what once you taste their grip level it hard to take one off.

Last year in ST6 I used a DHF for one of the stages. Ironically that stage I had by best result by far. The tire had nothing to do with that, but I did gap riders I was climbing with by 10 minutes on the descent.

In your neck of woods with absolute zero grip found in your soil you might find that grip level provide a DHF might make up for the weight penalty on the climb. Still though, in your neck of the woods I would used a 2.35 Forecaster.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> So, obviously I agree that the front wheel has less of a role in overall Crr than the rear wheel. That said, if you swap wheels for a tire with close to double the Crr (with same weight on it, same internal pressure, etc), yeah, it's going to slow you down.


For sure it will slow you down. But significantly or even measurable, not in my experience.

All the testing I have done with tires has indicated that weight and pressure are the most important variables.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

LMN said:


> There are other DHFs that are quite a bit lighter then that. The lightest being 925 in a 29er tire. Still, not XC weight and not an XC tread. But they are such a good tire that what once you taste their grip level it hard to take one off.
> 
> Last year in ST6 I used a DHF for one of the stages. Ironically that stage I had by best result by far. The tire had nothing to do with that, but I did gap riders I was climbing with by 10 minutes on the descent.
> 
> In your neck of woods with absolute zero grip found in your soil you might find that grip level provide a DHF might make up for the weight penalty on the climb. Still though, in your neck of the woods I would used a 2.35 Forecaster.


When I searched Google, it took me to this page. Only option was a 1300g version.

Minion DHF | Maxxis Tires USA

But then I took a look and found this, weird.

Minion DHF | Maxxis Tires USA

I would consider a DHF at 925g if the course required something more, but I'm not sure I need more than an HD has. And my LBS is dropping Maxxis.

I'm going to try a Goma pretty soon. If it is the foldable or TNT I might try it on the front of my XC. Otherwise it's going on the Enduro. The RaRa will stay until I start hitting loose courses up in the mountains. The first half of my season is hard pack desert, not worth the weight for the occasional loose corner when most of them grip fine with the RaRa. I'm rarely loosing ground in those areas, except for people I know are just more skilled than me. One of them always runs a narrow, faster rolling tires than I'm on (you might know Derek Hermon)!


----------



## luchi87 (May 4, 2009)

The first link you put up is for the downhill casing version. Maxxis website lists their DH tires separately, as far as I can tell.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

Sidewalk said:


> I saw a bike with a Mezcal f/AKA r yesterday. Looked like a good combo for my area (dry SoCal desert). I raced the RaRa 2.35/2.25 combo and didn't feel they held me back in the conditions we were in. Very few loose corners, and of those the corners were VERY loose.


Stay away from the AKA, that tire's from the bad old days of Geax and boy does it ever suck. 
Imagine a tire with the grip of a Race King plus the rolling resistance of a Nevagal and you aren't too far off.

The Mezcal on the other hand is really nice dry condition tire.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

luchi87 said:


> The first link you put up is for the downhill casing version. Maxxis website lists their DH tires separately, as far as I can tell.


Well, that's not confusing...

Okay Maxxis, why do you have a "DH" tire that isn't a "DH" tire?



aerius said:


> Stay away from the AKA, that tire's from the bad old days of Geax and boy does it ever suck.
> Imagine a tire with the grip of a Race King plus the rolling resistance of a Nevagal and you aren't too far off.
> 
> The Mezcal on the other hand is really nice dry condition tire.


Thanks for the info. I never had a problem with the RK on the rear. Matter in fact, thought it felt better than I expected. I don't plan on trying one any time soon. I've got a collection of hand me down tires to burn through first


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Sidewalk said:


> Well, that's not confusing...
> 
> Okay Maxxis, why do you have a "DH" tire that isn't a "DH" tire?


I admit I got bamboozled too. I saw a bike show photo of prototype tires, and noticed the tread blocks looking much bigger in the proto pictures than of the actual ones. Turns out the proto pictures were of the DH version of the same model.


----------



## marvinmartian (May 14, 2009)

Though I am having a hard time convincing myself to give up the Race King's, I have been thinking about a Mezcal on the rear with either a Barzo or Peyote on the front


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

Marvin; I have run all three of those (barzo, peyote, and mezcal) up front, liked them all, I've run the barzo and mezcal in wet, but only dry with the peyote. For dry to damp I'd go with the Mezcal, if it's going to be really wet I think the Barzo will be better. 
I really liked the peyote on grass and harder dirt as a front tire, I had a great finish in a cx race with it as a front, but I think the Mezcal covers everything the Peyote does, and the Mezcal is available in their G+ compound (which I understand to be 'better'...). The more open tread of the Peyote may clear mud better than the Mezcal, but the knobs aren't very high on the Peyote so I would choose the Barzo over the Peyote for stickier mud. 
If you have very low chance of any wet conditions, you'd probably be happier with the lighter weight of you race kings. I like the Mezcals best because they seem to do dry to moderately wet very well, and we get a lot of wet around here, and the forecast changes pretty quickly too.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Sidewalk said:


> When I searched Google, it took me to this page. Only option was a 1300g version.
> 
> Minion DHF | Maxxis Tires USA
> 
> ...


At that point, go Magic Mary. I put one on the front of my Wife's XC rig when we went and played in Sedona and all over Santa fe. 
It was 905G in snakeskin compared to 810-15 for my Pacestar Hans Damps.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

LMN said:


> All the testing I have done with tires has indicated that weight and pressure are the most important variables.


Speaking of pressure, last year you mentioned measuring tire sag. Can you describe how (I'm assuming it's a 2 person job) and what % sag you found ideal for xc?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

euro-trash said:


> Speaking of pressure, last year you mentioned measuring tire sag. Can you describe how (I'm assuming it's a 2 person job) and what % sag you found ideal for xc?


I read some place years ago that optimal rolling resistance is found at 15% sag. After reading that I measured the sag for the pressure that felt "right" to me on my bike. I was bang on the 15% sag mark.

To measure sag, measure the height of the tire with just bike weight and then sit on bike and have someone measure the height of the tire.

Ideally this just a ball park measurement. Helps you find the right pressure if you have dramatically switched tire size. For example gone from a 1.9inch wide 26inch tire to a 2.6inch wide 29 tire.

Once you are in the ball park then the micro adjustments for specific trail conditions are really important.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

LMN said:


> I read some place years ago that optimal rolling resistance is found at 15% sag. After reading that I measured the sag for the pressure that felt "right" to me on my bike. I was bang on the 15% sag mark.
> 
> To measure sag, measure the height of the tire with just bike weight and then sit on bike and have someone measure the height of the tire.
> 
> ...


+1 for 15%. Front goes less if I'm expecting a lot of chatter or if I'm feeling lazy.


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

Like last season, I intend to run mainly Maxxis Ikon 2.35 and Forekaster 2.35. On 28mm internal rims. The Ikon is noticeably bigger than the Forekaster so I don't mix them up. 

I generally prefer the larger 2.35 tires for the 28mm rims, but I have some Ikon 2.2 and Ardent Race 2.2 I might try with the bigger Forekaster 2.35 up front.

Our trails (Eastern Canada) are quite rocky, so it's EXO for me most of the time. I love that construction on rough XC terrain. That said, I flatted twice with 2.35 Ikon EXOs last season. Both times while away at "big" races -- BCBR and Transylvania Epic. I have learned that despite the wider rims and bigger tires I still can't really lower air pressure much. I'm about 175lbs and was running about 24lbs in the rear tire, both times. One was a puncture straight through the tread and the other was a genuine two-holed pinch flat of the tire... I should know better, but the big tire/lower psi ride just seemed perfect...


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

PlanB said:


> Like last season, I intend to run mainly Maxxis Ikon 2.35 and Forekaster 2.35. On 28mm internal rims. The Ikon is noticeably bigger than the Forekaster so I don't mix them up.
> 
> I generally prefer the larger 2.35 tires for the 28mm rims, but I have some Ikon 2.2 and Ardent Race 2.2 I might try with the bigger Forekaster 2.35 up front.
> 
> Our trails (Eastern Canada) are quite rocky, so it's EXO for me most of the time. I love that construction on rough XC terrain. That said, I flatted twice with 2.35 Ikon EXOs last season. Both times while away at "big" races -- BCBR and Transylvania Epic. I have learned that despite the wider rims and bigger tires I still can't really lower air pressure much. I'm about 175lbs and was running about 24lbs in the rear tire, both times. One was a puncture straight through the tread and the other was a genuine two-holed pinch flat of the tire... I should know better, but the big tire/lower psi ride just seemed perfect...


Pressure and flat prevention is interesting topic.

Increasing pressure will prevent pinch flats but I find with tubeless tires pinches are rare (although becoming more common as rim widths have increased) and usually caused by a significant mistake on my part. Tread punctures on the other hand actually increase as pressure goes up. A tire that doesn't give is more likely to be punctured by a sharp object.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

LMN said:


> Pressure and flat prevention is interesting topic.
> 
> Increasing pressure will prevent pinch flats but I find with tubeless tires pinches are rare (although becoming more common as rim widths have increased) and usually caused by a significant mistake on my part. Tread punctures on the other hand actually increase as pressure goes up. A tire that doesn't give is more likely to be punctured by a sharp object.


I am finding that my vittoria tires stretch more than my continental tires do and seem to eat up trail chatter better. I think they stretch when they take a hit but the protection tires aren't stretching as much.


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

LMN said:


> Pressure and flat prevention is interesting topic.
> 
> Increasing pressure will prevent pinch flats but I find with tubeless tires pinches are rare (although becoming more common as rim widths have increased) and usually caused by a significant mistake on my part. Tread punctures on the other hand actually increase as pressure goes up. A tire that doesn't give is more likely to be punctured by a sharp object.


And, of course, it's always hard to blame one particular factor... sometimes it seems like it's just your turn, but I do wonder about my switch to wider rims. For my actual pinch flat it was completely my fault for not adding air pressure to suit the terrain. The Transylvania Epic has some really serious rock gardens! Puts even Quebec to shame. Great race. The second flat, at BCBR, I think was also a result of too low air pressure. I get what you're saying about a softer tire absorbing an collision with a sharp object, but I'm pretty sure this one was a real "rim strike" with the tire bottoming out. Hard to say -- it was kind of fluky: riding a hydrocut at high speed, through a puddle with a sharp rock hiding in it... All that technical singletrack in that race and I flatted riding through a mud puddle on a gravel doubletrack.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Only flats I have had tubeless so far have been:

-Slashed sidewall. Can't remember what tire it was, but it wasn't an ultra thin tire.
-Landing off a jump INTO a rock garden on an local enduro trail. 
-Forgetting to add sealant.

I'm on a HT and run just enough pressure in the rear to not rim strike. Ends up being about 25 PSI for me at 150 pounds. Front tire is as low as I can get before it starts to squirm, usually about 21 PSI on a 2.35 (I'm pretty aggressive).


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

If you are looking for a wicked wet conditions XC race tire I highly recommend the Forecaster. I did a big ride in Bellingham Washington yesterday in just nasty conditions deep mud, slick rocks and roots, the tires worked flawlessly. Best of all, was on the road transfer sections between trails they rolled quite well considering how knobby they are. Usually when a tire works well in those conditions I absolutely hate it on any kind of hard surface.


----------



## peabody (Apr 15, 2005)

Anyone have info on when the new S Works Fast Trak and Renegades will be out?


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

Didn’t even know they were bringing SWorks versions back!


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

LMN said:


> If you are looking for a wicked wet conditions XC race tire I highly recommend the Forecaster. I did a big ride in Bellingham Washington yesterday in just nasty conditions deep mud, slick rocks and roots, the tires worked flawlessly. Best of all, was on the road transfer sections between trails they rolled quite well considering how knobby they are. Usually when a tire works well in those conditions I absolutely hate it on any kind of hard surface.


29? F and R?


----------



## free-agent (Jan 12, 2004)

Good to hear as the conditions here are similar to Bellingham. I gotta get up there soon to ride. Some good brewpubs in town, too.


----------



## luchi87 (May 4, 2009)

I'm also quite happy with the Forecaster as a wet/winter conditions tire here in Northern California. I'm running the 2.35 width and it seems to doing a better job than my old wet/aggressive XC choice, which was the 2.3 Specialized Ground Control.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

9 pages and only one person using a Bontrager tire! 120tpi,lighter and bigger than comparable tires,bomber tubeless setup, excellent durability, $55usd retail. Get some.

Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> 9 pages and only one person using a Bontrager tire! 120tpi,lighter and bigger than comparable tires,bomber tubeless setup, excellent durability, $55usd retail. Get some.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


I just bought a pair of XR4 Team Issue 2.4 tires. I'm planning on running at least a front one for a couple of specific outings. They look promising, the reviews are great and, as you say, the price was great.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

PlanB said:


> I just bought a pair of XR4 Team Issue 2.4 tires. I'm planning on running at least a front one for a couple of specific outings. They look promising, the reviews are great and, as you say, the price was great.


Great tires, but Vittoria can be had for $32-38.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## peabody (Apr 15, 2005)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> 9 pages and only one person using a Bontrager tire! 120tpi,lighter and bigger than comparable tires,bomber tubeless setup, excellent durability, $55usd retail. Get some.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


I'd only run Bontrager stuff on a Trek....you should have known


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Glad to hear the forecaster is a good performer. In need a mud/intermediate tire for this year.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

machine4321 said:


> Glad to hear the forecaster is a good performer. In need a mud/intermediate tire for this year.


it's (IMO) pretty damn solid in loose & loose over hard too. Just wish it had a bigger casing.


----------



## c_t_smith (Oct 23, 2007)

pemberton325 said:


> I normally run rocket Ron's front and rear. This year I bought and installed rocket Ron addix speed grip 2.25 in the front and a racing Ralph addix speed 2.25 in the rear. I like this combo and the tires work well for me. I was at the bike store today and saw a combo package of 2 Mescals and a bottle of sealant on sale for $90 so I got them to try out. I have a flat 50k race in March, I think I will install them and try them then.


Did you notice any difference in grip w/ the Addix SpeedGrip compound compared to the older PaceStar compound? I've raced RoRo/RaRa (29x2.25 F/R) for the last several years but I definitely lost time in a few races last year that had a lot of loose gravel in the corners. I'm leaning towards a NoNi or Barzo up front this year (and possibly going up to 2.3") but was curious if the the new tread compound alone would make enough of a difference to stick w/ the RoRo...it's too bad they don't make it in a 2.3"


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

c_t_smith said:


> Did you notice any difference in grip w/ the Addix SpeedGrip compound compared to the older PaceStar compound? I've raced RoRo/RaRa (29x2.25 F/R) for the last several years but I definitely lost time in a few races last year that had a lot of loose gravel in the corners. I'm leaning towards a NoNi or Barzo up front this year (and possibly going up to 2.3") but was curious if the the new tread compound alone would make enough of a difference to stick w/ the RoRo...it's too bad they don't make it in a 2.3"


I've ridden the Nobby Nic in both PaceStar and SpeedGrip, for gravel or loose over hard, the difference if any is marginal. There's a corner I use for tire testing that's a mix of gravel and loose over hard, there's a downhill going into the corner so I can enter as fast as I want and lots of run out space for when the bike slides off the trail. According to my notes, the PaceStar held 49km/h before it went off the trail and the SpeedGrip was 49.4km/h, it's well within the margin of error on the tests. For reference, Race Kings managed 46.6km/h and 2.3" DHFs were 55.7km/h.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

winters.benjamin said:


> 29? F and R?


I was on 27.5, my wife was on 29. Had them on F and R in 2.2s. 20psi for me, 18psi for her. Both of us were very happy with the performance. We had grip and confidence in conditions where we shouldn't have had either.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

free-agent said:


> Good to hear as the conditions here are similar to Bellingham. I gotta get up there soon to ride. Some good brewpubs in town, too.


The riding there is really good. It rivals the big BC networks in both trail volume and quality.

Killer XC trails on Galbrith. But man that place is a maze I get so turned around in there. I need to spend a day there riding with a local, and I need to spend a day there in the dry. Today was really freaking cold wet. Nothing quite as frustrating as being lost when you are shivering.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

A couple of the guys I regularly race with are from Bellingham, I hear great things about the riding there, but it does get a lot of rain. For those of you not familiar with the area, the weather comes straight in from the Pacific Ocean through the Straights between the US and Canada and hits Bellingham, there's a mountain with a ski/snowboard resort inland a ways (Mt Baker) that always sets snowpack records, a quick search tells me they got 225" of snow in January alone. 
I just learned that I may be able to get a deal on some Maxxis through my new team, I may have to try the Forekaster, - I have had good luck with Ground Controls previous seasons, and if the Forekaster is better I should get some (and I can move the Barzos to my kids bike).


----------



## gswim18 (Jan 23, 2006)

Ardent/Ikon


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

LMN said:


> I was on 27.5, my wife was on 29. Had them on F and R in 2.2s. 20psi for me, 18psi for her. Both of us were very happy with the performance. We had grip and confidence in conditions where we shouldn't have had either.


So is Catharine making the switch to a 29er for XCO racing this year?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Stonerider said:


> So is Catharine making the switch to a 29er for XCO racing this year?


Yep.

Last year she went from riding a small to medium frame. With that change the 29ers are close enough in fit to be an option. Catharine had a bike built up to test and it fits and works for her.

Riding with her it feels like she descends just a bit quicker on the 29er. Riding behind her I feel like am under a bit more pressure. Could be just me though, I haven't spent a lot of time on an XC bike with a straight post recently.

I on the other hand will be 27.5 XC bikes for as long as I can get them. Mainly because I have around 50 brand 27.5 XC tires sitting in my basement.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

LMN said:


> Yep.


Maybe a little off-topic for this thread, but I'd be interested in how she finds technical climbing on the 29s, esp on courses she's ridden lots with 27.5 wheels. It's slow-ish speed navigation that scares me off 29s. Ok that and the fact that I'm a smaller dude and riding 29s feels like I'm sitting on top of two satellite dishes.


----------



## free-agent (Jan 12, 2004)

LMN said:


> The riding there is really good. It rivals the big BC networks in both trail volume and quality.
> 
> Killer XC trails on Galbrith. But man that place is a maze I get so turned around in there. I need to spend a day there riding with a local, and I need to spend a day there in the dry. Today was really freaking cold wet. Nothing quite as frustrating as being lost when you are shivering.


That's what I've heard. Tons of maze-like trails. We drive by it every Summer on our way to Whistler and never spend time there to ride. That's gotta change.
Cheers!


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> Maybe a little off-topic for this thread, but I'd be interested in how she finds technical climbing on the 29s, esp on courses she's ridden lots with 27.5 wheels. It's slow-ish speed navigation that scares me off 29s. Ok that and the fact that I'm a smaller dude and riding 29s feels like I'm sitting on top of two satellite dishes.


This should not be a fear of yours. I ride the slowest of the slow technical climbs. I think this will come down far more to geometry and trail than the wheelsize. (yes I know wheel size increases trail.)

Example: Ive been riding a 71 degree HA with 48mm offset for years. It took me about 3 rides to make most of the adjustment to the new bike with 52mm and 69.5. I may end up bumping her back to 70 with the Mino switch. I will re evaluate after I upgrade the hub on this back to 120 POE.

Sorry If I misunderstand your concern
This is what I consider a technical climb:


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

winters.benjamin said:


> Maybe a little off-topic for this thread, but I'd be interested in how she finds technical climbing on the 29s, esp on courses she's ridden lots with 27.5 wheels. It's slow-ish speed navigation that scares me off 29s. Ok that and the fact that I'm a smaller dude and riding 29s feels like I'm sitting on top of two satellite dishes.


The other day she was have a bit more difficulty with the technical climbs than myself. But I am typically a better technical climber then her, I can't put that to the bike.

However she has comment about struggling with rear wheel grip. I think that will go away with more time as she adjust to the bike but for her that has been the single noticeable difference between the two wheel sizes. That and the weight. There is no doubt that 29 is a heavier bike.

At only 5'5 I too have felt off on 29s but the new ones are feeling better. I have only done 10 minutes on her new bike but when I sat on it felt normal to me.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

free-agent said:


> That's what I've heard. Tons of maze-like trails. We drive by it every Summer on our way to Whistler and never spend time there to ride. That's gotta change.
> Cheers!


The flow/jump trails are really good too. The ST trails is an absolute hoot. Jumps are a bit big for me on an XC bike but on a trail bike they are spectacular.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> it's (IMO) pretty damn solid in loose & loose over hard too. Just wish it had a bigger casing.


I agree on all accounts.

I'm looking around for other options, if you have any ideas or experience of tires with similar grip on loose ground, decent weight, and nice volume I'd be interested.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## pemberton325 (May 13, 2009)

c_t_smith said:


> Did you notice any difference in grip w/ the Addix SpeedGrip compound compared to the older PaceStar compound? I've raced RoRo/RaRa (29x2.25 F/R) for the last several years but I definitely lost time in a few races last year that had a lot of loose gravel in the corners. I'm leaning towards a NoNi or Barzo up front this year (and possibly going up to 2.3") but was curious if the the new tread compound alone would make enough of a difference to stick w/ the RoRo...it's too bad they don't make it in a 2.3"


I did notice better grip on the addix tires, but not in cornering. I am not good at cornering and never took a tire to its limits.

I noticed a difference in climbing and decending on wet rock. I felt the addix compound ( I use speed grip front and speed rear) gripped way better than the pace star.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

What would be a good front tire to pair with a 2.2 IKON in the rear? I have a 2.35 IKON in front right now and it sketches me out. It seems like it wants to break unpredictably on anything but hero dirt. I like a higher volume front but could be swayed to go back to something skinnier now that I have a front boinger. I have a Crossmark II 2.25 sitting around that looks like it might fit the bill. Or how about an Ardent Race? Or maybe just back to my tried and true Racing Ralph? So far my RaRa has been the best performing front tire for my conditions but I will be trying the IKON in the rear this year for sure as I really like the way it climbs. My racing terrain is a lot of hardpack and loose over hard (mostly packed sand over hard). Pretty fast courses with a lot of high speed turns and a couple races that have marginally technical descents.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

ohmygato said:


> What would be a good front tire to pair with a 2.2 IKON in the rear? I have a 2.35 IKON in front right now and it sketches me out. It seems like it wants to break unpredictably on anything but hero dirt. I like a higher volume front but could be swayed to go back to something skinnier now that I have a front boinger. I have a Crossmark II 2.25 sitting around that looks like it might fit the bill. Or how about an Ardent Race? Or maybe just back to my tried and true Racing Ralph? So far my RaRa has been the best performing front tire for my conditions but I will be trying the IKON in the rear this year for sure as I really like the way it climbs. My racing terrain is a lot of hardpack and loose over hard (mostly packed sand over hard). Pretty fast courses with a lot of high speed turns and a couple races that have marginally technical descents.


That's interesting as for the most part I ride Ikon f/r when I don't get the opportunity to pre-ride. Maybe I'm just used to all the idiosyncrasies and can look past it. Also like the AR up front but seem to be in the minority on that. oh wells.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> Also like the AR up front but seem to be in the minority on that. oh wells.


Another vote for AR F, Ikon R. Both 2.35, 27.5. Been running that for the last few months and so far pretty satisfied.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> What would be a good front tire to pair with a 2.2 IKON in the rear? I have a 2.35 IKON in front right now and it sketches me out. It seems like it wants to break unpredictably on anything but hero dirt. I like a higher volume front but could be swayed to go back to something skinnier now that I have a front boinger. I have a Crossmark II 2.25 sitting around that looks like it might fit the bill. Or how about an Ardent Race? Or maybe just back to my tried and true Racing Ralph? So far my RaRa has been the best performing front tire for my conditions but I will be trying the IKON in the rear this year for sure as I really like the way it climbs. My racing terrain is a lot of hardpack and loose over hard (mostly packed sand over hard). Pretty fast courses with a lot of high speed turns and a couple races that have marginally technical descents.


My addix 2.35 Nobby Nicks are coming in at 750 grams. Near what the Ikon comes in at. I like how quickly it transitions to the side knobs the way it is designed. That cannot be said for the AR. I cant stand the AR and chalk up all of the praises to people that dont ride real loose over HARD. It is highly unpredictable on decomposed granite and limestone. I could see it being fine in loamy conditions or areas where the "hard" is black soil. The 2.35 Ikon front is far more progressive here than an AR. I too am used to the idiosyncrasies of the Ikon and am okay with the way it drifts.

I hate to sound like a broken record. The Forekaster 2.35 is another great option but has slightly less volume than those two tires. It does sound appropriate for your terrain. Those little knobs dig hard. I run that with teh Ikon 2.35 on my hardtail and it is a sweet combo.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

ohmygato said:


> What would be a good front tire to pair with a 2.2 IKON in the rear? I have a 2.35 IKON in front right now and it sketches me out. It seems like it wants to break unpredictably on anything but hero dirt. I like a higher volume front but could be swayed to go back to something skinnier now that I have a front boinger. I have a Crossmark II 2.25 sitting around that looks like it might fit the bill. Or how about an Ardent Race? Or maybe just back to my tried and true Racing Ralph? So far my RaRa has been the best performing front tire for my conditions but I will be trying the IKON in the rear this year for sure as I really like the way it climbs. My racing terrain is a lot of hardpack and loose over hard (mostly packed sand over hard). Pretty fast courses with a lot of high speed turns and a couple races that have marginally technical descents.


I'd check out the Mezcal. The paddle shaped knobs are great in sand, for me.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

ohmygato said:


> What would be a good front tire to pair with a 2.2 IKON in the rear? I have a 2.35 IKON in front right now and it sketches me out. It seems like it wants to break unpredictably on anything but hero dirt. I like a higher volume front but could be swayed to go back to something skinnier now that I have a front boinger. I have a Crossmark II 2.25 sitting around that looks like it might fit the bill. Or how about an Ardent Race? Or maybe just back to my tried and true Racing Ralph? So far my RaRa has been the best performing front tire for my conditions but I will be trying the IKON in the rear this year for sure as I really like the way it climbs. My racing terrain is a lot of hardpack and loose over hard (mostly packed sand over hard). Pretty fast courses with a lot of high speed turns and a couple races that have marginally technical descents.


There are some places where Ikons just don't work.

I find the Ardent Race is a great loose over hard tire as is the Forecaster you can get both in 2.35. Personally, I am not a fan of the CrossMark II


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

LMN said:


> There are some places where Ikons just don't work.
> 
> I find the Ardent Race is a great loose over hard tire as is the Forecaster you can get both in 2.35. Personally, I am not a fan of the CrossMark II


Is it just me, or is the CM II abnormally heavy for what it is?

I've never seen one on a bike in person, and it's been out for over a year now.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> Is it just me, or is the CM II abnormally heavy for what it is?
> 
> I've never seen one on a bike in person, and it's been out for over a year now.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


I think the CrossMark II is more of a budget tire. The 60 TPI tires tend to be 50-80 grams heavier then a comparable 120 TPI tire.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

LMN said:


> I think the CrossMark II is more of a budget tire. The 60 TPI tires tend to be 50-80 grams heavier then a comparable 120 TPI tire.


OEM special?

It looks like an interesting tread but there are other tires that are similar enough, cheaper and lighter.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I raced these Barzos (not G+) on a moderately muddy and rooty course on Sunday, not any real mud shown here. I really liked them, and only crashed once, that was on a slick angled root. Lots of grip, they cleaned well, and were very predictable. The guy who beat me crashed 4x, I think crashes were pretty common at this one. They seem quite fast on the hardpack too, I still think these would be a good choice for all around if mud/wet is likely.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

jimPacNW said:


> I raced these Barzos (not G+) on a moderately muddy and rooty course on Sunday, not any real mud shown here. I really liked them, and only crashed once, that was on a slick angled root. Lots of grip, they cleaned well, and were very predictable. The guy who beat me crashed 4x, I think crashes were pretty common at this one. They seem quite fast on the hardpack too, I still think these would be a good choice for all around if mud/wet is likely.


Not a tire recommendation.

But I think you should try running your fork stiffer. From that picture it looks like you are not getting a lot of support


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

-could be, thanks!, that's an old 80mm fox, but I'll check pressure/sag. I did catch all the 35-49 cat1 guys, caught the top 2 of those guys on the dh sections so it didn't hurt me too much!


----------



## intheways (Apr 19, 2004)

Udyr said:


> Barzo rolls a bit slower, is a bit grippier and isn't available in G+ (yet).
> 
> If conditions are super loose, I'll consider a Barzo in the front for some extra mental reassurance but the Mezcals hook up perfectly fine. I rode a 2.2/2.1 Mezcal setup for basically a whole year at Tahoe 100, Leadville 100, Demo Flow/Braille, Santa Cruz campus trails and now down in LA (Santa Monicas and El Prieto) and I was putting down PRs on the descents with an XC bike compared to my HD3 with Derby's and Minions.


Did you ever try the Mezcals at Downieville?


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

jimPacNW said:


> I raced these Barzos (not G+) on a moderately muddy and rooty course on Sunday, not any real mud shown here. I really liked them, and only crashed once, that was on a slick angled root. Lots of grip, they cleaned well, and were very predictable. The guy who beat me crashed 4x, I think crashes were pretty common at this one. They seem quite fast on the hardpack too, I still think these would be a good choice for all around if mud/wet is likely.


Man. You'd have better grip bombing down a wet glacier. That is some seriously slick trail right there.


----------



## Udyr (Jul 29, 2013)

intheways said:


> Did you ever try the Mezcals at Downieville?


Nope, never been to Downieville. Tahoe Trail 100 was pretty dusty this past year though and the tires hooked up just fine.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

For the race on Sat, I was going to go with Ardent Race front and Ikon rear, but it looks like it's not going to be dry...
The 90min shaley climb would be fine, but the 25min descent is baby heads embedded in clay called Boulder Valley.
High Roller 2's front and rear.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

LMN said:


> There are some places where Ikons just don't work.
> 
> I find the Ardent Race is a great loose over hard tire as is the Forecaster you can get both in 2.35. Personally, I am not a fan of the CrossMark II


I think the way I'd phrase it instead is "I am just one of those guys who doesn't know how to work the IKON." 

It sounds like Ardent Race is the next one for me to check out. And yeah I am not too excited to try the Crossmark II but I figure maybe it's worth a couple training rides to see what I think.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

Another Maxxis I don't think I see a lot of you guys running, the Aggressor: one of my riding buddies/team-mates uses those, she really likes them all around and said they were great on that muddy/rooty course. She's very fast and experienced, with a valuable opinion.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

jimPacNW said:


> Another Maxxis I don't think I see a lot of you guys running, the Aggressor: one of my riding buddies/team-mates uses those, she really likes them all around and said they were great on that muddy/rooty course. She's very fast and experienced, with a valuable opinion.


The Aggressor is more of a trail/Enduro tire. Good tire, but too heavy for XC racing.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

ohmygato said:


> I think the way I'd phrase it instead is "I am just one of those guys who doesn't know how to work the IKON."
> 
> It sounds like Ardent Race is the next one for me to check out. And yeah I am not too excited to try the Crossmark II but I figure maybe it's worth a couple training rides to see what I think.


When people say Ikon's don't work for then generally they either live on the eastern slope of the rockies in Colorado or SoCal. Whenever I ride in those places I am terrified by the complete lack of grip offered by the soil.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

LMN said:


> When people say Ikon's don't work for then generally they either live on the eastern slope of the rockies in Colorado or SoCal. Whenever I ride in those places I am terrified by the complete lack of grip offered by the soil.


Ha. "Soil".

I prefer the term "aggregate". No joke, some of the trails are entirely composed of 6mm balls of decomposed granite.

The only solution is volume and the right pressure. Tire design is almost irrelevant here. In the ~30 miles in my local trail system, there's maybe half a mile of actual brown soil. Such is life at 7,000ft in the Front Range.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Nothing wrong with SoCal dirt. We get to ride it year round!


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

^+1


----------



## pemberton325 (May 13, 2009)

So...... I decided to install the Mezcals for my ride today. First off, I usually ride Schwalbe. I had a RoRo speed grip 2.25 on the front and a rara speed 2.25 on the rear. I love the tires and they are my normal go to. I did my annual service in my bike yesterday so I thought what the hell and put on the Mezcals.

They are both 2.25 on a 24.5 internal rim. First off, I could tell they where way wider than the schwalbes. The look more like a 2.35. 

I live in Italy and we have had some bad weather lately. Most of the trails are really rocky. Lots of Little Rock’s over dirt. Normally i slip around a good amount on the schwalbes but the Mezcals felt like they had grip for days. Even on the wet rock when the schwalbes would slip and slide, I didn’t even know it was wet with the Mezcals.

On the road....forget it. I felt like I was riding my road bike. 

I am sure these tires would not be a good tire in sticky mud, but they seem to be great today in the wet and rocky.

They are my new favorite tire.....

Jimmy


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

pemberton325 said:


> So...... I decided to install the Mezcals for my ride today. First off, I usually ride Schwalbe. I had a RoRo speed grip 2.25 on the front and a rara speed 2.25 on the rear. I love the tires and they are my normal go to. I did my annual service in my bike yesterday so I thought what the hell and put on the Mezcals.
> 
> They are both 2.25 on a 24.5 internal rim. First off, I could tell they where way wider than the schwalbes. The look more like a 2.35.
> 
> ...


How much total weights did the mezcals add?


----------



## pemberton325 (May 13, 2009)

The Mezcals weighed 712 each. Map I would say close to 200grams.. I just added a little less sealant. But I could not tell any difference in weight on the bike or picking it up.


----------



## chuckc760 (Jul 15, 2015)

In socal I have been running AR 2.35 front and IKON 2.35 rear tubless with Stan's Arch (21mm internal) wheels on my Scott Scale 710. The rear axle recently broke on the Arch so I switched back to the stock Syncros wheel with a Ritchey Shield WCS 2.1 tire and tube. I am surprised how much traction that "little" tire has through the loose /rocky uphill segments. The tread is noticeably thinner than the IKON. On hardpack it might spool up a little quicker, but once you get rolling there's not that much of a difference between the two. Of course, downhill the Ikon has the advantage as far as compliance and control.

But overall I am impressed with the Ritchey tire considering how "minimal" it looks.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

I raced yesterday on my Ikon 2.35/2.2 Front/Rear and they did GREAT. I was really surprised at how good they did considering my experience with the front has been lackluster until then. I could really push the front in the sticky sand and it floated and held the line really well through the loose sand. The rear actually was skittering a bit when I really put the power down. It breaks loose nice and predictably though in hard braking. The soil on course was quite a bit different than my home turf. Yesterday was tacky packed sand and a little hardpack whereas around here it's a lot more loamy. So I am now a fan of the Ikon in the front for my racing at least.

Any suggestions on what to try next? Those Mezcals sound pretty sweet! I have a Bontrager 2 2.1 or something sitting in the basement too.


----------



## irishpitbull (Sep 29, 2011)

I tried all the above tires and I'm always disappointed when compared to the S-Works Ground Control.

2.3 weighting @ 650 grams matched with a Renegade gripton. I really tried to like the Addix SS Ron''s but the sidewalls are not very supple. 

Ikons are great but for some reason I just don't trust them on the marbley stuff.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I raced the Barzos yesterday on super nice dirt, I've got mezcals on the fs bike, but I chose the hardtail because of the climbing and relatively smooth course, -my ht has the Barzos on it. 
I talked to a couple of other c1 guys on Barzos, both were very happy. 
Lots of grip, I felt like I could push the limits in the corners and if they do slide out there's enough time to react. They felt fast too. Like I've expressed above, if you do have to be ready for anything including some mud the Barzo is a good choice.
irishpitbull; I ran control casing GC the past 2 seasons, I liked them too, it's hard to say if the vittorias are really any faster, but they certainly don't feel slower.

You can see a glimpse of the wunderdirt here


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Raced out in the desert of Lake Havasu on RaRa's (haven't gotten my Vittoria's to test yet). I was surprised how well they worked out. Everything on course was either stand the bike straight up, or lean all the way over. So I was either upright or in the knobs. 2.35/2.25. Not as much sand as I expected either.

145 pounds, 21/25 PSI HT


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Sidewalk said:


> Raced out in the desert of Lake Havasu on RaRa's (haven't gotten my Vittoria's to test yet). I was surprised how well they worked out. Everything on course was either stand the bike straight up, or lean all the way over. So I was either upright or in the knobs. 2.35/2.25. Not as much sand as I expected either.


Good trails out there? My aunt/uncle live out there and always invite us to visit them.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> Good trails out there? My aunt/uncle live out there and always invite us to visit them.
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


To be fair, I only rode the XC course on my XC HT. It wouldn't be fair to grade their trails on that narrow 10 miles of experience.

But the course itself I thought was a lot of fun. No real challenging climbs (not including the HOB which might be rideable if I wasn't doing the endurance) or descents, but enough elevation to still be work. Lots of areas to flow and carry speed. Plenty of places to pass though most of it was some form of singletrack or another. A few tech bits that had bypasses that were slower (I never took them, but you could tell they weren't the fast routes). I would definitely return to race there again.

From the looks of the area, I imagine there has to be some good stuff out there for trail riding. I am sure I could find some chunky stuff for my enduro if I looked. But I only did the 10 mile race loop.

Oh, and in your case, essentially sea level. I think the highest elevation I hit was 1000'! I would think it is a good excuse to escape your freezer and race somewhere different and warm. Average temp during the endurance race was 70.

https://www.strava.com/activities/1401395767


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

jimPacNW said:


> I raced the Barzos yesterday on super nice dirt, I've got mezcals on the fs bike, but I chose the hardtail because of the climbing and relatively smooth course, -my ht has the Barzos on it.
> I talked to a couple of other c1 guys on Barzos, both were very happy.
> Lots of grip, I felt like I could push the limits in the corners and if they do slide out there's enough time to react. They felt fast too. Like I've expressed above, if you do have to be ready for anything including some mud the Barzo is a good choice.
> irishpitbull; I ran control casing GC the past 2 seasons, I liked them too, it's hard to say if the vittorias are really any faster, but they certainly don't feel slower.
> ...


Your weight and tire psi?


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

jimPacNW said:


> I raced the Barzos yesterday on super nice dirt, I've got mezcals on the fs bike, but I chose the hardtail because of the climbing and relatively smooth course, -my ht has the Barzos on it.
> I talked to a couple of other c1 guys on Barzos, both were very happy.
> Lots of grip, I felt like I could push the limits in the corners and if they do slide out there's enough time to react. They felt fast too. Like I've expressed above, if you do have to be ready for anything including some mud the Barzo is a good choice.
> irishpitbull; I ran control casing GC the past 2 seasons, I liked them too, it's hard to say if the vittorias are really any faster, but they certainly don't feel slower.
> ...


So which is better, the Barzo or Mezcal, dammit?!?


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Do you guys throw on new tires for the new season? I have an Ikon I used last fall and a Forekaster with a ton of goat thorn holes that sealed up. I'm considering replacing the front if needed.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

170-175 at 6'3". I always seem to like higher pressures than other guys, I'm running 24 fr/rr, any less and the rear feels squirmy to me in higher speed corners. I like squishy but not squirmy. 
IMO: Mezcals if you're not going to be in any sticky or greasy mud. Barzos if you're going to be in the nasty stuff, and they are also good in less wet stuff; a good one-tire solution if you intend to race in greasy mud and don't want to change tires the night before a race based on the weather forecast.


----------



## markus_krk (Jul 27, 2013)

So how does the Mezcal compare to the Ikon?


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

markus_krk said:


> So how does the Mezcal compare to the Ikon?


Which Ikon 2.2 or 2.35? What i.d. rim? For the rear wheel:
Compared to the 2.35 the 2.25 Mezcal on a 25mm rim probably rolls slightly faster, though it's negligible. Breaking traction is much better on the Ikon, cornering is a wash to me (side knobs on the Mezcal are better, the Ikon seems more confidence inspiring), climbing traction is better on the Ikon.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

steelhmr said:


> So which is better, the Barzo or Mezcal, dammit?!?


Barzo front with Mezcal rear.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Has anyone tried an aspen/2.35 ikon combo? Seems like if the ikon is enough in the front the aspen would be enough in the rear. Where does barzo compare to nobby nic and x-king?


----------



## costaorange (Sep 16, 2014)

Ksanman said:


> Do you guys throw on new tires for the new season? I have an Ikon I used last fall and a Forekaster with a ton of goat thorn holes that sealed up. I'm considering replacing the front if needed.


I learned that one the hard way. I had a season old Icon fail in my first race last season in an area that wasn't even that concerning. I think its always a good idea to start the race season with some new rubber. We tend to pick push all our equipment a little harder during races.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Ksanman said:


> Do you guys throw on new tires for the new season? I have an Ikon I used last fall and a Forekaster with a ton of goat thorn holes that sealed up. I'm considering replacing the front if needed.


I have never really put a new tire on my XC bike ever. I have been given a couple of RaRa's that were original to another bike and I think unused (my friend doesn't like RaRa's). But otherwise, all my tires are used take-off's that friends give me. The RaRa 2.35 Evo front I have right now looks totally wet from sealant. Slowly leaks out constantly. I've got probably 300 race miles on that tire. Top of my head an 80, 60, 100, 50, and 50 mile endurance races. Plus some trail riding and XCO events. Okay, way over 300 race miles...

Racing on a budget!


----------



## joecx (Aug 17, 2013)

party_wagon said:


> Has anyone tried an aspen/2.35 ikon combo? Seems like if the ikon is enough in the front the aspen would be enough in the rear. Where does barzo compare to nobby nic and x-king?


Tried it for a few races but felt the front end pushing a bit so ended up with a Ardent Race that was a better match IMO.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I had 4 seasons on a GC front, but I mostly just use that bike for racing so not a huge amount of miles, probably about 40 races total, and the race bikes live in my cool dark basement. I thought about running that and the 1yr old GC rear again, but wanted to try something different this year. I ran the same X-king rear that came on the bike used for 3 seasons until it got a little worn looking, -that 3rd season on those tires was really a great season for me in 35-49 cat1. If you're happy with your tires, I wouldn't change them just because they're a year or two old if they're still in good shape.

Comparing the x-king (which I did like) to the barzo; the x-king leaked/wept constantly through the sidewall, the barzos (and other Vittorias) hold air for a long time, my impression is that the barzo has a little more grip in all directions and does not roll any slower.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Sidewalk said:


> I have never really put a new tire on my XC bike ever. I have been given a couple of RaRa's that were original to another bike and I think unused (my friend doesn't like RaRa's). But otherwise, all my tires are used take-off's that friends give me. The RaRa 2.35 Evo front I have right now looks totally wet from sealant. Slowly leaks out constantly. I've got probably 300 race miles on that tire. Top of my head an 80, 60, 100, 50, and 50 mile endurance races. Plus some trail riding and XCO events. Okay, way over 300 race miles...
> 
> Racing on a budget!


I think you're onto something here. When I worked at a bike shop I exclusively used tires that we had "trashed" (typically they were brand newish and the customer just didn't like them). Some of the fastest riders I know don't really worry much about tires and sometimes I have worn down leaking tires I would have replaced many miles before. I'm trying to be good this season (year?) and just run my tires until they're used up. I do think they're is something to be said for how nice a brand new set of tires feel, but it may be placebo?


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

wheelzqc said:


> Barzo front with Mezcal rear.


That was my original plan for this year. Then I started to debate myself on going double Mezcal or double Barzo? Full disclose, I've never used either yet. Still confused if Barzo is available in G+ yet?

Also debating sizes and whether or not I want a 2.25/2.1 or a 2.25/2.25 combo? After going from a 2.4 to a 2.25 Goma (Geax) on the front last year, I actually noticed a significant improvement in speed with no loss in handling. I actually think my handling got better with the smaller tire. Then I ran 1.9 Gatos (Geax) for CX, and it just seems like it is worth trying a 2.1 on the rear instead of a 2.25. My rims are 29mm ID.


----------



## teleken (Jul 22, 2005)

I'm no racer but recently swapped out a front 2.3 Ground Control (Control version) for a 2.3 Barzo TNT and wow what a difference.
I also upped my rims from 19 > 24mm internal but this tire is better in every way except weight. It rolls fast on that center "strip" and floats & grips the dry & loose Colorado Springs Death Granite and sand. The GC always had a dead zone in corners/switchbacks before the side knobs kicked in & the Barzo is very even. It reminded me of my previous favorite from 26" days the 2.3 Ignitor but the Barzo has even better grip. 

I can only imagine how great it will be once summer comes and I can ride actual soil in the mountains.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Ksanman said:


> Do you guys throw on new tires for the new season? I have an Ikon I used last fall and a Forekaster with a ton of goat thorn holes that sealed up. I'm considering replacing the front if needed.


We all spend a lot time training and a lot of money on racing. Tires are the single most important piece of equipment on our bikes. When it comes to race season I put fresh tires on my bike.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

csteven71 said:


> I do think they're is something to be said for how nice a brand new set of tires feel, but it may be placebo?


If a placebo works does it matter how? For me new rubber is the most satisfying component change by far, if money were no object I'd install new tires every few hundred miles.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I'm pretty frugal, and haven't gotten any extra special discounts on tires. When I was buying the new pair of Mezcals for $110 off ebay and feeling like I was spending a lot of money, I thought about complaining to my friends that road race cars about how much I'm spending on tires.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

You have to line up your goals and budget. I'm on a pretty restrictive budget, and feel comfortable on tires long after others. I get no piece of mind with a new tire unless I know the old was worn, I just feel I wasted money. The waste weighs heavier on my mind. I'd rather race on old tires than have new tires on my race bike as it hangs in the garage.

If new tires are an option for you, and you feel it is of benefit for you, I don't see the problem.


----------



## aohammer (Feb 2, 2006)

LMN said:


> We all spend a lot time training and a lot of money on racing. Tires are the single most important piece of equipment on our bikes. When it comes to race season I put fresh tires on my bike.


Agree here, esp since most XC races here in SoCal are on fast courses with some chunkies and singletracks thrown in. I hate flats and burps, so I prep/buy before each season, at least new sealant and valves/cores.

Been using Ikon 3c EXO both f/r on my XC hardtail on Crest rims, solid, bulletproof as far as sidewalls, but I'm going to try the Mezcal G+ TNT on my next race, has long road and dirt climb, hoping for noticeable improvement on rolling resistance. I'm installing this on the rear for now. Will report results. Thoughts on that rolling resistance bit?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

aohammer said:


> my next race, has long road and dirt climb, hoping for noticeable improvement on rolling resistance.


Harding?


----------



## Udyr (Jul 29, 2013)

aohammer said:


> I'm going to try the Mezcal G+ TNT on my next race, has long road and dirt climb, hoping for noticeable improvement on rolling resistance. I'm installing this on the rear for now. Will report results. Thoughts on that rolling resistance bit?


When I was training for Leadville, I would regularly do road rides on my hardtail with the Mezcals. I found them to roll quite fast on the road and it was pretty fun towards the top of Mt. Diablo to pass roadies. I got several "do you have a motor in that thing" comments.

In fact, I pretty much just rode my hardtail with the Mezcals on the road for everything but group rides.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

steelhmr said:


> That was my original plan for this year. Then I started to debate myself on going double Mezcal or double Barzo? Full disclose, I've never used either yet. Still confused if Barzo is available in G+ yet?
> 
> Also debating sizes and whether or not I want a 2.25/2.1 or a 2.25/2.25 combo? After going from a 2.4 to a 2.25 Goma (Geax) on the front last year, I actually noticed a significant improvement in speed with no loss in handling. I actually think my handling got better with the smaller tire. Then I ran 1.9 Gatos (Geax) for CX, and it just seems like it is worth trying a 2.1 on the rear instead of a 2.25. My rims are 29mm ID.


Barzo 29 G+ TNT available in spring.
I run Barzo front, Mezcal G+ TNT rear. Both 2.35 on HT and mid-travel FS.
Mezcal too sketchy for my peace of mind in loose over hardpack at any pressure. FWIW weigh 160-ish, tire psi about 22 front, 25 rear, not a lot of rocks in my area. Rim ID 24 and 27mm.


----------



## c_t_smith (Oct 23, 2007)

steelhmr said:


> ...Still confused if Barzo is available in G+ yet?...


It looks like it's available now: https://www.bikeparts.com/BPC408221...ng-clincher-tnt-tubeless-ready-29-x-225-black


----------



## chilla13 (Mar 27, 2017)

The best tires I‘ve ever ridden: Continental Raceking Pro Ltd. 
The updated 180tpi Raceking Racesport should feel similar. I will give them a try when the weather gets better (probably never... ).
Due to constant rain over the last three month I‘m running Forekasters right now. They are a good pick for wet XC racing though I actually find them to feel quite stiff (and I am not even running Exo versions).


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

chilla13 said:


> The best tires I've ever ridden: Continental Raceking Pro Ltd.
> The updated 180tpi Raceking Racesport should feel similar. I will give them a try when the weather gets better (probably never... ).
> Due to constant rain over the last three month I'm running Forekasters right now. They are a good pick for wet XC racing though I actually find them to feel quite stiff (and I am not even running Exo versions).


How do those set up tubeless?

Do they hold air well? Puncture protection?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

biketiresdirect also claims to have the barzo G+ 29 in 2.25 and 2.35 ($55.25), same price for 27.5x2.35. When I bought mine last summer they said that they were g+, but that didn't turn out to be the case, they were just mistaken, I still got a good deal at $40ea for the non-G+.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

That could be a misprint, the G+ is still not on the Vittoria webpage. Fingers crossed it is real.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

Vittoria USA says there are NOT any Barzo G+ in the shipping containers in route to USA at this time. 

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## chilla13 (Mar 27, 2017)

Le Duke said:


> How do those set up tubeless?
> 
> Do they hold air well? Puncture protection?
> 
> Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


I never had problems setting the Raceking up tubeless. Cleaning the tire and the rim is a must but that doesn't bother me. 
You have to check and adjust tire pressure before every ride. I am from a region with inconsistent weather (Western Germany) what makes adjusting tire pressure a daily habit. So no problems here either. 
Puncture protection is mediocre. The sidewalls are as supple as they are thin. There are no sharp rocks around here only roots and soft ground so I do not dare to give a general recommendation on this side.


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

westin said:


> Barzo 29 G+ TNT available in spring.
> I run Barzo front, Mezcal G+ TNT rear. Both 2.35 on HT and mid-travel FS.
> Mezcal too sketchy for my peace of mind in loose over hardpack at any pressure. FWIW weigh 160-ish, tire psi about 22 front, 25 rear, not a lot of rocks in my area. Rim ID 24 and 27mm.


Thanks. Yeah, my general conditions here are all singletrack through the forest. Not much in the way of loose dirt (unless it's super dry) and not much in the way of rocks either (unless you seek them out), but plenty of roots and overall climbing. First race I plan on doing in the spring *does* have a couple miles of rock gardens, so we'll see. May just start out Mezcal G+ TNT 2.25/2.1, as I'll be back to doing outdoor rides next month.


----------



## spec47 (Jul 12, 2013)

Trying to decide between Nobby Nic Evo Addix Speedgrip and Forekasters. Also open to other suggestions/combos. Live in Whistler and need a bit more tire than the typical XC terrain, but Snakeskin sidewalls seem to be enough for me.

Doing the Nimby Fifty and Spakwus again plus all the Whistler toonies if anybody is local/familiar with that kind of riding.

Would be running 2.35's on 30mm ID 29" carbon wheels. I've been using Nobby Nic Pacestars for the past couple years. Racing Ralphs aren't enough grip and sometimes I'm even running a Hans Dampf up front, but that's obviously pretty slow rolling.


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

spec47 said:


> Would be running 2.35's on 30mm ID 29" carbon wheels. I've been using Nobby Nic Pacestars for the past couple years. Racing Ralphs aren't enough grip and sometimes I'm even running a Hans Dampf up front, but that's obviously pretty slow rolling.


I set up a hans dampf 2.35 trail compound as front, RR EVO 2.25 rear, because I could't find a rocket ron which is what I was hoping for. This setup is in a full sus XC bike, xtr ust rims, went overboard I know.

To be honest, I didn't find it slow rolling, neither in dirt or pavement. Its heavy at 1000grs and that I felt, but switching from double RR to that combo was surprisingly good, good enough for me to use as my training tires (worn out RR rear, new HD front).

For races I'm just gonna throw 2 new RR EVO 2.35 I'm saving then switch back again and so on. If I can find a good rocket ron EVO 2.35 then that will probably be my front. As a benefit, for races where I switch tires I think I'm gonna feel super quick with new supple and light tires.


----------



## Dphoward (Jul 29, 2013)

@JimpacNW - call metier. They had a ton of mezcals for 40 bucks..


----------



## Dphoward (Jul 29, 2013)

has anyone tried Mitas tires?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Dphoward said:


> has anyone tried Mitas tires?


Love the E07's.
Down to about 18psi rear and 20psi front and they'll grip on anything bar clay.


----------



## Dphoward (Jul 29, 2013)

@nordieboy - were you able to get those in the states??


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

aohammer said:


> Agree here, esp since most XC races here in SoCal are on fast courses with some chunkies and singletracks thrown in. I hate flats and burps, so I prep/buy before each season, at least new sealant and valves/cores.
> 
> Been using Ikon 3c EXO both f/r on my XC hardtail on Crest rims, solid, bulletproof as far as sidewalls, but I'm going to try the Mezcal G+ TNT on my next race, has long road and dirt climb, hoping for noticeable improvement on rolling resistance. I'm installing this on the rear for now. Will report results. Thoughts on that rolling resistance bit?


Definitely interested in your comparison. I am switching from a 29x2.35 ikon to a 29x2.2 XR2 soon. Mezcal was also in the running for my rear.

All paired to the under sized carcass of the 29x2.35 forekaster. Might look at NN or barzo to replace it in the future.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Dphoward said:


> @nordieboy - were you able to get those in the states??


Nope.
They're also a little heavy duty for most MTB'ers 

The only tyres we can get locally are Maxxis, Specialized, Schwable, Hutchinson and sometimes Continental.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Barzo rear and dhr2 is a pretty sweet 27.5 training combo. It's a little heavy but gets around really well.


----------



## slacker607 (May 25, 2005)

Sidewalk said:


> Raced out in the desert of Lake Havasu on RaRa's (haven't gotten my Vittoria's to test yet). I was surprised how well they worked out. Everything on course was either stand the bike straight up, or lean all the way over. So I was either upright or in the knobs. 2.35/2.25. Not as much sand as I expected either.
> 
> 145 pounds, 21/25 PSI HT


I ran Havasu on Forekaster 2.35/RaceKing 2.2. The raceking is not the greatest for corning but I did not have any issues on the course. The only downside is finding traction on loose climbs, it was a slick for that cowbell climb around mile 8.


----------



## codytaylor (Sep 3, 2010)

I just started using 2.25 SS Thunder Burts here on 25mm inner width rims at 18 psi front, 20psi rear for a couple months and have very surprisingly been happy with them.
150lbs, 2018 Epic FS. 
I am in the south where there's not a lot of rocks, but have actually ran these tires in Arkansas in the rocks while it was wet and still felt fine on them. 
They feel really good cornering with the large side knobs and roll fast with the center being so short and tight. They are lightweight at around 500g each. 
The new Addix compound are heavier at 575g but I have not tried those yet. The older lighter tires are hard to find and also over $90 each, so I will probably be giving the new ones a try soon.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

slacker607 said:


> I ran Havasu on Forekaster 2.35/RaceKing 2.2. The raceking is not the greatest for corning but I did not have any issues on the course. The only downside is finding traction on loose climbs, it was a slick for that cowbell climb around mile 8.


Was that the super loose/super steep climb after the drop line? If so, I never even tried it. No point in spiking my heart rate during an endurance race.


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

I ran Ralphs for several years. I feel they are overrated and too expensive. The compounds dry up quick as well. Our team is newly sponsored by Trek, I have some XR2 team issues I'm going to try out.


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

Litemike said:


> I ran Ralphs for several years. I feel they are overrated and too expensive. The compounds dry up quick as well. Our team is newly sponsored by Trek, I have some XR2 team issues I'm going to try out.


Have you tested a tire that is better?

Where I live hardly anyone uses schwalbe, not sure why, but most uses maxxis. The maxxis are not particularly cheap, they are on average the most expensive brand around.

While I also think Racing ralphs are not the perfect tires it does seem to be very well rounded in terms of performance, durability, puncture protection, rolling resistance and price.

For marathon style riding, I still think the race king protection is the best tire you can get, even their performance version is pretty darn good.


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

TDLover said:


> Have you tested a tire that its better?
> 
> Where I live hardly anyone uses schwalbe, not sure why, but most uses maxxis. The maxxis are not particularly cheap, they are on average the most expensive brand around.
> 
> ...


No, they just loose grip on me, I'm going to try something different.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Litemike said:


> No, they just loose grip on me, I'm going to try something different.


All tires are some sort of compromise. RaRa's are basically just a...compromise. Not the lightest, not the heaviest. Not the best traction, not the worst. Not the fastest rolling, not the slowest. They just don't excell anywhere. They are just bland. And I think that's why I like them


----------



## savechief (Jun 8, 2004)

Anybody have feedback on Onza tires for XC?


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

I'll throw this question out here because I don't think I've seen it discussed: is anybody siping or cutting treads for XC use? 

I know this is popular in the gravity disciplines, didn't know if anyone has tried it for XC yet...


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

What type of tire is good for a flat Sandy forest floor that has seen a few days of rain? 

I am thinking something with big volume with big spikes? Looking for help from anyone with experience on this type of terrain. The course is 3.5 hours from here so I need to know what to take.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> What type of tire is good for a flat Sandy forest floor that has seen a few days of rain?
> 
> I am thinking something with big volume with big spikes? Looking for help from anyone with experience on this type of terrain. The course is 3.5 hours from here so I need to know what to take.


Flat and Sandy? Sounds like South Florida. 2.35 Mezcals hard to beat for me in those conditions.


----------



## Tyrone Shoelaces (Nov 6, 2006)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> 9 pages and only one person using a Bontrager tire! 120tpi,lighter and bigger than comparable tires,bomber tubeless setup, excellent durability, $55usd retail. Get some.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G360P using Tapatalk


Agreed! Big fan of Bontragers....as you mention the 120tpi versions which are the 'team issue' versions. The 'expert' versions are 60tpi and IMO don't ride nearly as nice. Unfortunately, my local shop only stocks the Expert versions and the Team Issues are always a special order item from them and takes awhile. But have used XR1's front/rear and XR2/XR1 front/rear for XC racing and XR4's on my trail bike and love them all (all Team Issue)


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

pinkpowa said:


> Flat and Sandy? Sounds like South Florida. 2.35 Mezcals hard to beat for me in those conditions.


Thanks! That helps give me a perspective. I wlll probably stick with the Big Ikon since its the closest I have to that. Do you run higher than or lower than normal pressure on the sandy stuff?

Its basicly a sand highway in the forest:

https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/7000512/double-lake-marathon-loop


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

2.35 Ikon Rear, 2.4 Ardent front (non-race) for racing in Utah 2018. Lots of high speed chunk here therefore both with EXO protection. This is for an SC Tallboy. Seems I care more about not losing money via side wall cuts than race results. 

I was tire shopping for the season yesterday and it seems our team shop doesn't sell Maxxis tires without EXO. Replaced an 2.25 Ardent rear with the 2.35 Ikon so saves me some grams and rolling resistance there. That Ardent was developing wet spots when stored (around middles of knob area) so it seems sealant was leaking through? That was weird but better to replace than have an issue later. 

May replace Ardent front with Ardent Race later on to save some grams and roll. Also replaced my 32 front ring with a 30 for a 30-42 climbing gear.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> Its basicly a sand highway in the forest:
> 
> https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/7000512/double-lake-marathon-loop


For my local mountain races which are sandy like, I put on a Hans Dampf. Lots of flowy corners where keeping my speed up uses less energy than pushing the weight.



Poncharelli said:


> That Ardent was developing wet spots when stored (around middles of knob area) so it seems sealant was leaking through? That was weird but better to replace than have an issue later.


Funny enough, my front RaRa has been doing that since I mounted it. Holds air fine, sealant is fine, performs fine. Just looks weird all wet sitting in my garage.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

Sidewalk said:


> Funny enough, my front RaRa has been doing that since I mounted it. Holds air fine, sealant is fine, performs fine. Just looks weird all wet sitting in my garage.


I'm pretty sure that's a Schwalbe feature; nearly every Rocket Ron and RaRa I've seen does that to some extent. 
Contis do it too once the sidewalls get scuffed up & worn down a bit.


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

Poncharelli said:


> That Ardent was developing wet spots when stored (around middles of knob area) so it seems sealant was leaking through? That was weird but better to replace than have an issue later.


Since the rubber its porous with due time they will all get filled with sealant and look wet, nothing to worry about.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> Thanks! That helps give me a perspective. I wlll probably stick with the Big Ikon since its the closest I have to that. Do you run higher than or lower than normal pressure on the sandy stuff?
> 
> Its basicly a sand highway in the forest:
> 
> https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/7000512/double-lake-marathon-loop


Yup, that looks like alot of FL trails, Croom comes to mind. High volume and low rolling resistance are key. Ikons are popular here (I hate them but I'm in the minority there). As far as higher or lower than normal, sand is our "normal" so not sure how to answer that haha. I'm 170# and I run 20 front and 23 rear on 2.3" tires (specialized, vittoria, etc) on 23mm rims and it's a good balance of traction and rolling resistance. If there's any big berms you might roll a bead I'd go up a pound.

Ran 20/23 at Santos 6hr this weekend in the Vortex and it worked well on the big wooden stuff as well as the sandy paths in the woods (Barzo/mezcal 2.35's). YMMV


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

Oh okay good to know (thanks for responses). I've been running tubeless since 2003 and never notice this before. That Ardent was getting pretty bald so I'd figure the tire was just getting thin enough for sealant to go through. The leaking was getting progressively worst too.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Going to keep my Barzo around. I need a mezcal rear. Otherwise my OCD will be messed with.


----------



## slacker607 (May 25, 2005)

Sidewalk said:


> Was that the super loose/super steep climb after the drop line? If so, I never even tried it. No point in spiking my heart rate during an endurance race.


yeah, I think strava labeled it HeartAttack Hill. A guy behind me rode it out, looked like he was running around a 2.35 in the rear on a hardtail.

That headwind that picked up around 9:30am :madman:


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

bogeydog said:


> Vittoria USA says there are NOT any Barzo G+ in the shipping containers in route to USA at this time.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Could be an error but they are listed as in stock in all sizes for G+ TNT, and has 10% coupon: https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

westin said:


> Could be an error but they are listed as in stock in all sizes for G+ TNT, and has 10% coupon: https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


Must be an error because I spoke to Vittoria yesterday and hey won't see them u til April or so

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

It would be good if people posted the region, trail characteristics, and conditions they see. Make it easy for people to grab similar tires for their region. Some areas like super light semi slicks, other regions like heavier round profile tires, others like heavier semi slicks, and ect. Some people may be climbing a six mile fire road and taking an easy green to the bottom. Other people may be navigating 20 miles of twisty flowy wooded single track on sand.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

party_wagon said:


> It would be good if people posted the region, trail characteristics, and conditions they see. Make it easy for people to grab similar tires for their region. Some areas like super light semi slicks, other regions like heavier round profile tires, others like heavier semi slicks, and ect. Some people may be climbing a six mile fire road and taking an easy green to the bottom. Other people may be navigating 20 miles of twisty flowy wooded single track on sand.


I like pictures better than descriptions. I think folks do a good job of describing their terrain here for the most part. Once thing I have noticed (not in the XC forum) but in other forums is people tend to think their dirt is more severe than it is. I'll ride some regions on XC tires and people will describe a trail as "tire shredding" when it just isn't. Bentonville is an example of this. Nothing there is tire shredding.

There also seems to be a broad generalization of what "loose over hard" is. Is it decomposed granite/limestone kitty litter over hard clay dirt? River rock over hard? etc?

hall broke down andodered9 tires off of www.bike-discount.de . Thanks to this forum, I have found the marvelous Forekaster which really is a great all condition front tire


----------



## joshtee (Jun 30, 2016)

party_wagon said:


> It would be good if people posted the region, trail characteristics, and conditions they see. Make it easy for people to grab similar tires for their region. Some areas like super light semi slicks, other regions like heavier round profile tires, others like heavier semi slicks, and ect. Some people may be climbing a six mile fire road and taking an easy green to the bottom. Other people may be navigating 20 miles of twisty flowy wooded single track on sand.


Inner width of rims the tires are mounted on, would be helpful, also.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> I like pictures better than descriptions. I think folks do a good job of describing their terrain here for the most part. Once thing I have noticed (not in the XC forum) but in other forums is people tend to think their dirt is more severe than it is.


I agree. I did a race out of town recently and thought I was taking a gamble running my normal XC setup from the description of the course. The photos I saw made me think I would be fine. While on course I realized it was about the same as my local scene.

The same could be said about how "tough" trails are. I haven't gotten out much, but a friend of mine does a big trip a couple of times a year and was out hitting Moab, Sedona, etc for a few weeks camping out of his car. When he came back he talked up how great Sedona was, but not in a "our trails suck" kind of way, but in a "they have some awesome trails!" kinda way. I'm looking forward to going now.

I do have the distinct advantage of being able to direct people to Ben Goyette's social media (Youtube and Instagram) for visuals of the trails I'm on 



joshtee said:


> Inner width of rims the tires are mounted on, would be helpful, also.


That was mentioned at the beginning. Though it seems the "wider is better" trend has picked up steam, I don't seem to notice it. If anything, I like the way my wide tires (2.35) feel on my narrow (21mm) wheels compared to the 29mm on my other bike.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Sidewalk said:


> The same could be said about how "tough" trails are. I haven't gotten out much, but a friend of mine does a big trip a couple of times a year and was out hitting Moab, Sedona, etc for a few weeks camping out of his car. When he came back he talked up how great Sedona was, but not in a "our trails suck" kind of way, but in a "they have some awesome trails!" kinda way. I'm looking forward to going now.


I did Sedona last July and am planning a group trip right now for September. We rent a house that is right off "Airport loop" Its Fantastic. I have some good strava routes you are welcome too. I rode everything on an Anthem with Hans Dampf and Ikon. On Hangover, I wanted more rear tire than a bald Ikon on a few spots where I had tire slip and EXTREME exposure. Sedona is the only place I have ever slit an Ikon ever and it was in the middle of a walking path! You will want your endure bike for Triple H, but your FSI will be super fun on some of the other routes.

https://www.strava.com/activities/1088599321

My dirt experience is limited to: 
Sedona, 
Bentonville
North Shore
Santa Fe (mountain and High desert)
Santiago/Mendoza
Sandiego/Delmar/SLO
All of Texas
There is a cool marathon race in Texas that is like riding in Sedona.



Sidewalk said:


> I do have the distinct advantage of being able to direct people to Ben Goyette's social media (Youtube and Instagram) for visuals of the trails I'm on


Most of those races are depressing for me to watch.  I quickly have to switch over to BCPOV for trainer stoke.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

slacker607 said:


> yeah, I think strava labeled it HeartAttack Hill. A guy behind me rode it out, looked like he was running around a 2.35 in the rear on a hardtail.
> 
> That headwind that picked up around 9:30am :madman:


Yeah, I CX'ed it up the first steep, loose part (30'?), then remounted and pedaled the rest at a soft pace to get my HR back down. I don't want to speculate whether or not I could possibly have done it if I tried. It was definitely steep and loose, and I don't think my half worn RaRa would have been up to the task.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> but your FSI will be super fun on some of the other routes.


I would be on my 160mm 29er Enduro. For what ever reason I love riding enduro, but don't like the race format (though, the local enduro racing isn't that great and that might be why). And I love XC racing, but not XC trail riding.

I just mounted up a new 2.6 Butcher on the big bike 

My best friend's son goes to college in Prescott. So that gives us a great base of operations for riding. I'll be out there for the 6 hour late in the year, and probably Sedona with him on a weekend soon (owns his own business, so it's hard for him to get away).



FJSnoozer said:


> Most of those races are depressing for me to watch.  I quickly have to switch over to BCPOV for trainer stoke.


Why is that? If there are any suggestions on improving I'll mention it to him.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

westin said:


> Could be an error but they are listed as in stock in all sizes for G+ TNT, and has 10% coupon: https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


Thanks for that! Ordered a set of Mezcal 2.35's


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

For you guys running Mezcals, what size should I use if I like Ikon 2.25/2.35 or RaRa 2.2/2.35 front/rear? I am thinking about doing Mezcals 2.1/2.25 but maybe 2.25/2.25 is the better bet?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

FJSnoozer said:


> I like pictures better than descriptions. I think folks do a good job of describing their terrain here for the most part. Once thing I have noticed (not in the XC forum) but in other forums is people tend to think their dirt is more severe than it is. I'll ride some regions on XC tires and people will describe a trail as "tire shredding" when it just isn't. Bentonville is an example of this. Nothing there is tire shredding.
> 
> There also seems to be a broad generalization of what "loose over hard" is. Is it decomposed granite/limestone kitty litter over hard clay dirt? River rock over hard? etc?
> 
> hall broke down andodered9 tires off of www.bike-discount.de . Thanks to this forum, I have found the marvelous Forekaster which really is a great all condition front tire


It's a pretty common thing, and it doesn't appear to be regional. Most people like to think they are riding super gnarly trails, and ride bikes and tires that suit those aspirations, if not reality. It's an interesting phenomenon, really.

The loose over hard thing is probably a regional thing. When I lived in Hood River, OR, the dirt at Post Canyon would turn into "ball bearings" each summer. We wouldn't get any rain from May to September, and the soil would get removed from the surface and get polished, if that makes sense, into little hard balls. Which, if you got just a little off line, would put you on your face in a hurry.

In western VA, "loose over hard" is small, thin rock slabs over more of the same. Think of poker chips. There were a couple of short sections on one trail that were terrible for this. You'd just slide on top of tiny, sliding rock slabs.

Where I live in CO, "loose over hard" is basically just a 1/4" aggregate that can really only be countered with high volume tires. Tread doesn't seem to matter because you aren't touching anything solid underneath the aggregate anyways. Of course, in some areas, there's none of that. Or there's just a couple of handfuls that seem to be tossed onto the turn at just the wrong location.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

ohmygato said:


> For you guys running Mezcals, what size should I use if I like Ikon 2.25/2.35 or RaRa 2.2/2.35 front/rear? I am thinking about doing Mezcals 2.1/2.25 but maybe 2.25/2.25 is the better bet?


My Ikon 29x2.2 is much smaller than the Mezcal 2.25, and my Mezcal 2.35 is almost as large as my Ikon 2.35. Rim id 24 and 26mm.
FWIW, and somewhat related, I now run Mezcal in back only. Barzo 2.35 front.


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

ohmygato said:


> For you guys running Mezcals, what size should I use if I like Ikon 2.25/2.35 or RaRa 2.2/2.35 front/rear? I am thinking about doing Mezcals 2.1/2.25 but maybe 2.25/2.25 is the better bet?


2.25 front & back is the way to go with the Mezcal. IMO the Mezcal tread pattern needs a bit more volume to work well, the 2.1 is acceptable if you're riding on nothing but smooth buffed trails, but once things get a bit rougher or even if the trails start getting chewed up by a bunch of racers riding through them, the added size on the 2.25 gives better grip, comfort, and margin for error at pretty much no cost in weight & rolling resistance.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

aerius said:


> 2.25 front & back is the way to go with the Mezcal. IMO the Mezcal tread pattern needs a bit more volume to work well, the 2.1 is acceptable if you're riding on nothing but smooth buffed trails, but once things get a bit rougher or even if the trails start getting chewed up by a bunch of racers riding through them, the added size on the 2.25 gives better grip, comfort, and margin for error at pretty much no cost in weight & rolling resistance.


They have a 2.35 mezcal out now.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

party_wagon said:


> They have a 2.35 mezcal out now.


And my 2.35's weighed less than my 2.25's...


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

No one has mentioned this, so I'll bring it up. Another reason I'm running 2.35+ tires (Ardent, Ikon) is for a little bit more pedal clearance. 

I'm signed up and paid for True Grit 50 miler in a few weeks and during pre ride I "pedal banged" quite a bit on technical climbs with the 2.4/2.25 combo. I can feel the pedal clearance difference with different tires. I'll have to re level the seat too a mm or so.  haha call me crazy.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

pinkpowa said:


> And my 2.35's weighed less than my 2.25's...


Funny. How much less were your 2.35 vs 2.25?


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

westin said:


> Funny. How much less were your 2.35 vs 2.25?


around 20g each IIRC. Talked to a few other people who'd run both and they had similar experiences.

2.35 Barzos lighter than 2.35 Mezcals too by a couple grams. weird.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

I wanted a new bike but had to devote the cash for other priorities, so instead I went with new tires. I put away my inner weight weenie and tried the Addix Schwalbe Rock Razor 2.35s. 

I did a hard lap on our most technical trail yesterday with a racing buddy and I was very impressed at pacing him despite being a little out of shape. So much smoothness and float that the XC race bike felt quieter. Not as much climbing traction as a Rocket Ron, but the cornering knobs are bigger, so they corner great.

They're like a monster version of Thunder Burts. I'm sold and I can't wait till the first race.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I put the Barzo 225s on the c1 masters podium today, in cold dirt with some mud (not deep, but soft and fairly sandy), with lots of roots and rocks. Good grip all around, climbed one steep-short climb several of the other forward 1s were not climbing. 
Here's my kid, showing some of the trail conditions. It snowed a bit during both our races, snowed a lot part of the drive home!, kind of a scary drive. The kid is on Bontrager XR3s, he liked them quite well, but he hasn't tried a lot of different tires.


----------



## Kayce (Jan 25, 2018)

I talked to Vittoria NA today, the Barzo G+ are expected in late March.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

where are people getting all black barzo's 29x2.35? 

I want to try 1 up front

I just see the 2 tone tires / anthracite tires available.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Aby N said:


> where are people getting all black barzo's 29x2.35?
> 
> I want to try 1 up front
> 
> I just see the 2 tone tires / anthracite tires available.


The all black are the non-TNT, non-G+ variety. I've never seen one.

Do they even make the non-TNT Barzo in 2.35?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> The all black are the non-TNT, non-G+ variety.


 got it - thanks :thumbsup:.... makes sense now!


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Im going xr2 team front and xr1 team back, 

I tried to get an xr2 all last year with zero hope. 

Was going to run a dual fast trak 2.3” or a fast trak renegade combo and a xr2 came in this winter and i got the text my part was in. Totally forgot i ordered it. 

So yah. Xr2 front... xr1 rear haha


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Kayce said:


> I talked to Vittoria NA today, the Barzo G+ are expected in late March.


I found online last week, and confirmed with pics from shop (tire in shop employee hand). Barzo G+ TNT in some sizes available as of last week.

probikekit has much cheaper prices on their in-stock, but it's a much longer wait.
woner if biketiresdirect would price match.
Just the 27.5 version:
https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

jimPacNW said:


> biketiresdirect also claims to have the barzo G+ 29 in 2.25 and 2.35 ($55.25), same price for 27.5x2.35. When I bought mine last summer they said that they were g+, but that didn't turn out to be the case, they were just mistaken, I still got a good deal at $40ea for the non-G+.


In stock. Showed me pic of actual sidewall G+ TNT. Not stock photography.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

westin said:


> In stock. Showed me pic of actual sidewall G+ TNT. Not stock photography.


Biketiredirect?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

bogeydog said:


> Biketiredirect?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Yes. I referenced the vendor in other reply. Sorry for leaving it out.


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

westin said:


> Yes. I referenced the vendor in other reply. Sorry for leaving it out.


Which size did you see the pic?

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Geoff_L (Dec 20, 2016)

I ordered a G+ TNT 2.35 Barzo, 2.25 Mezcal from Probikekit . The Barzo arrived in a week. The Mezcal took 3 weeks. Now I see they don't have any 29" stock.

Mounted nice. Can't wait to get them on the trail. Still Fatbike conditions in where I live in North Dakota. The Mezcal Measures right at 2.25 but so does the Barzo. Both mounted on 21mm Crest rims.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Geoff_L said:


> I ordered a G+ TNT 2.35 Barzo, 2.25 Mezcal from Probikekit . The Barzo arrived in a week. The Mezcal took 3 weeks. Now I see they don't have any 29" stock.
> 
> Mounted nice. Can't wait to get them on the trail. Still Fatbike conditions in where I live in North Dakota. The Mezcal Measures right at 2.25 but so does the Barzo. Both mounted on 21mm Crest rims.


I wish someone made a round tire similar to the barzo or x king that was the size of a 2.4 ardent. I have heard if you leave Vittoria tires aired up in the sun they expand a good bit.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

@Geoff_L

how tall are those barzo knobs?

the tires look better mounted than in basic 4 sale pics!

Enjoy


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

party_wagon said:


> I have heard if you leave Vittoria tires aired up in the sun they expand a good bit.


Mine did quite a bit! Actual 2.35 on 24 amd 26 id rims.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

party_wagon said:


> I wish someone made a round tire similar to the barzo or x king that was the size of a 2.4 ardent. I have heard if you leave Vittoria tires aired up in the sun they expand a good bit.


Bontrager XR2 2.35 is very high volume and round. I've never run the ardent so I can't directly compare but it may be worth a look.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

solarplex said:


> Im going xr2 team front and xr1 team back,
> 
> I tried to get an xr2 all last year with zero hope.
> 
> ...


This remains a favorite combo of mine. 2.2 XR2? Newer or older style Xr1?


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

Geoff_L said:


> I ordered a G+ TNT 2.35 Barzo, 2.25 Mezcal from Probikekit . The Barzo arrived in a week. The Mezcal took 3 weeks. Now I see they don't have any 29" stock.
> 
> Mounted nice. Can't wait to get them on the trail. Still Fatbike conditions in where I live in North Dakota. The Mezcal Measures right at 2.25 but so does the Barzo. Both mounted on 21mm Crest rims.


So the Barzos from Probikekit *are* G+ after all! Good, because I had ordered some as well.


----------



## Geoff_L (Dec 20, 2016)

Aby N said:


> @Geoff_L
> 
> how tall are those barzo knobs?
> 
> ...


I get 3.0 mm on center knobs and 3.8 mm in the side knobs.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

:thumbsup::rockon:

Has the Barzo grown any since being mounted / inflated?


----------



## bogeydog (Apr 13, 2015)

steelhmr said:


> So the Barzos from Probikekit *are* G+ after all! Good, because I had ordered some as well.


Has anyone actually seen a 2.35 G+ in person. Vittoria says they are not here yet.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

bogeydog said:


> Has anyone actually seen a 2.35 G+ in person. Vittoria says they are not here yet.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


Vittoria NA?

They might not have them, but PBK (UK) seems to.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

I have a course-specific tire question for those of you who have raced there: The Keyesville Classic XC. I am planning on using my now-standard Ikon 2.25/2.35 Front/Rear combo. Any reason to not use these out there?


----------



## Geoff_L (Dec 20, 2016)

Aby N said:


> :rockon:
> 
> Has the Barzo grown any since being mounted / inflated?


Nope. Mine are still 2.25" My Crest 21mm internal width rims are a bit narrow by today's standards. I suspect that could be a contributor.


----------



## litany (Nov 25, 2009)

ohmygato said:


> I have a course-specific tire question for those of you who have raced there: The Keyesville Classic XC. I am planning on using my now-standard Ikon 2.25/2.35 Front/Rear combo. Any reason to not use these out there?


Been a few years since I raced that but I'd say no problem. Especially with the recent rain. Only thing is there is a sand trap, the trails are like a sand base. I ran x-king 2.4 because the bigger volume works better for me in sand.

It's a pretty tame course.

I am not going this year because it's the same day as the non dot aliso creek race. More technical and closer to home.

Have fun!


----------



## Pynchonite (Sep 2, 2013)

teleken said:


> I'm no racer but recently swapped out a front 2.3 Ground Control (Control version) for a 2.3 Barzo TNT and wow what a difference.
> I also upped my rims from 19 > 24mm internal but this tire is better in every way except weight. It rolls fast on that center "strip" and floats & grips the dry & loose Colorado Springs Death Granite and sand. The GC always had a dead zone in corners/switchbacks before the side knobs kicked in & the Barzo is very even. It reminded me of my previous favorite from 26" days the 2.3 Ignitor but the Barzo has even better grip.
> 
> I can only imagine how great it will be once summer comes and I can ride actual soil in the mountains.


Do you know if that was the revamped Ground Control? Thinking of putting one on the front for loose-over-hard duties.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Pynchonite said:


> Do you know if that was the revamped Ground Control? Thinking of putting one on the front for loose-over-hard duties.


That's a great question because the tread pattern is really different between the old Ground Control and the new Ground Control.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

@pynchonite & stonerider, i recently installed a 2.3 latest 2017 GC / - control casing, liked it a lot over my 2.25 rocket ron. yeah, it felt slower on the flats with the gc, but that was the only downside for me. strava didnt really care / show much with time in segments.

Not only was the cornering grip better with the GC, but the ride felt so much smoother & my ability to maintain / preserve momentum while climbing or just in general with bumpy terrain that typically slows me down a touch was improved with the GC.

wheels are crest mk3 w/23mm i.d.

now i recently installed a 2.35 Magic Mary up front; stopped laughing, yeah, i loved the aspect of picking up grip with the GC, so I swung for the fences & tried the MM. Wow, with regards to overall grip, let alone the telepathic response of the front end going where your thinking of going. simply crazy how responsive this tire is. Downside, felt like i was always going uphill or into a headwind.

Strava revealed / confirmed to me today on numerous segments, on just how much time im giving up with the MM vs GC-2017. Didnt matter uphill or downhill, MM made the bike feel slow/heavy.

i liked how well the GC performs. That will be going back on soon.

Just know that the sidewalls are thin with the GC; which maybe is another reason i liked the dampened feeling of the front tire.

I have a barzo 2.3 coming in the mail, should be here @ the end of the week.

im running a 2.2 ikon exo out back


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

litany said:


> Been a few years since I raced that but I'd say no problem. Especially with the recent rain. Only thing is there is a sand trap, the trails are like a sand base. I ran x-king 2.4 because the bigger volume works better for me in sand.
> 
> It's a pretty tame course.
> 
> ...


Cool sounds good. I will probably stick with the Ikons if I do go just because they're familiar now and I'm actually familiar with how they do in sand and they seem pretty decent.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Man the Ikons were on fire today. I think they really shine when the trail is just a tad moist. Not super muddy, but just enough to make other tires slip a bit in the sand. I swear I felt like I was parallel to the trail in the turns. I was pushing them but it seems like I could have even taken the turns harder.

So now knowing that I am thinking that they are my post-rain tire out here and then maybe I'll try running a different set of dry tires. Any thoughts on that? I heard today that Conti race/x-kings was a good dry combo to check out.


----------



## j102 (Jan 14, 2018)

Has anyone try the Maxxis Race TT?


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

Yes, the new GCs do look really different, they look like they'd be a good mud tire, I liked the old ones in mud but the new ones look even more open, - looks a little more like a rear tire to me. 

I put the Barzo 2.25s on the podium again, here's my kid showing off the dirt (he's on XR-3 2.3s). It was very moist, a little sticky in spots, I had heard it was going to be more muddy so I brought the bike with the Barzos, but I think the Mezcals would have been good too. It was very rooty in spots, and soft and moist in a lot of the faster corners (a little side slippage), - my only crash was in the bushes off the side and I can't blame the tires! Barzos are not slow on the harder packed stuff. 
My opinion remains that the Barzos are a great choice for 'do it all' if you are going to have mud.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> I have a course-specific tire question for those of you who have raced there: The Keyesville Classic XC. I am planning on using my now-standard Ikon 2.25/2.35 Front/Rear combo. Any reason to not use these out there?


I think Ben Goyette recorded his race last year (I think Elite). It be a nice course preview. He usually shares what tires he is running for the race.

I was thinking about racing in one of the throwback categories on a friends 26" Stumpjumper, but I made other plans.


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

bogeydog said:


> Has anyone actually seen a 2.35 G+ in person. Vittoria says they are not here yet.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk


I have now! Barzos arrived today from PBK. They are indeed G+. A little heavier than I expected: 29x2.25 = 749g; 29x2.35 = 762g. Probably won't get a chance to ride on them until next week. Weather and trail conditions here are still poor.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

steelhmr said:


> I have now! Barzos arrived today from PBK. They are indeed G+. A little heavier than I expected: 29x2.25 = 749g; 29x2.35 = 762g. Probably won't get a chance to ride on them until next week. Weather and trail conditions here are still poor.


Wow, that is heavier than expected. My Barzo 29x2.35 TNT was about 705 grams.


----------



## steelhmr (Sep 30, 2011)

westin said:


> Wow, that is heavier than expected. My Barzo 29x2.35 TNT was about 705 grams.


Yeah, they are listed at 720 and 745 grams on the website for the 2.25 and 2.35, respectively. Actually more disappointed with the 2.25 being 4% over than the 2.35 being 2% over.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

steelhmr said:


> Yeah, they are listed at 720 and 745 grams on the website for the 2.25 and 2.35, respectively. Actually more disappointed with the 2.25 being 4% over than the 2.35 being 2% over.


Vittoria's marketing material touts G+ as being.... Significantly less rolling resistance = Faster, Improved wet weather grip = More traction, Reduced wear = Longer lasting, Less material need = Lighter

Uh, what happened to the last on?


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

I raced the Stokesville 60k this past weekend. Not exactly an XC race but lots of folks on XC bikes so equipment seems relevant. I ran the 2.2 Team Issue XR3 front with a 2.2 Ikon EXO rear. 21/24 psi on a carbon hardtail with Arch EX rims. I liked the tire setup in the chunkier rocky parts. The XR3 really bites nice on ridge style rock riding. I hit the rear rim several times on rocks hidden below leaves and the ikon took it like a champ. I wouldn't have minded 2.35 front and rear but this is what I had on hand.

I found the video below online but it shows the final descent. Trail conditions were similar with recent rain and some PB mud on the machine built trails on other parts of the course.






My buddy got second to Bishop running 2.2 Ardent/Ardent Race.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

That's rough on the Barzo G+ weight, I've got a pair backordered so when they come in this month I'll weigh them. Been very pleased with Barzo non-G+ up front the first 5 races of the season, no durability issues so maybe ok to go non G+ if it's a 50g weight penalty each...


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

pinkpowa said:


> That's rough on the Barzo G+ weight, I've got a pair backordered so when they come in this month I'll weigh them. Been very pleased with Barzo non-G+ up front the first 5 races of the season, no durability issues so maybe ok to go non G+ if it's a 50g weight penalty each...


I've gotten holes in non tnt barzos that wouldn't seal up riding in areas I have never had problems with before. I would make sure you go with the TNT version even though the other version is lighter.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

party_wagon said:


> I've gotten holes in non tnt barzos that wouldn't seal up riding in areas I have never had problems with before. I would make sure you go with the TNT version even though the other is lighter.


I don't think the weight issue is with TNT. It's the G+ vs non G+.
For a front race tire I'll keep my Barzo 2.35 TNT and forgo the G+. I don't ride wet rocks and logs so the marketed claims of G+ aren't a must-have for race day. Having said that, my rear Mezcal TNT G+ is a better choice than the non G+ for my needs. I've fallen for the marketing of faster rolling which is where, mentally, I value the tire's attributes.
Thanks for posting weights. I'll get my gf a Barzo TNT non-G+ for the Juliana.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

If the G+ is not TNT I wouldn't get that tire. Some of their tires only option for TNT is G+. TNT is a much heavier sidewall. I believe the only option for the mezcal in G+ is TNT. I'm really not sure why they even make the lighter sidewall tire anymore. Unless your running a super heavy tube it just doesn't hold up in my experiences. Ordered a pair of the non TNT to barzos to save wait and both of them flatted and wouldn't seal in the first 500 miles of riding a rocky fire road thats never caused me problems before.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

party_wagon said:


> If the G+ is not TNT I wouldn't get that tire. Some of their tires only option for TNT is G+. TNT is a much heavier sidewall. I believe the only option for the mezcal in G+ is TNT. I'm really not sure why they even make the lighter sidewall tire anymore. Unless your running a super heavy tube it just doesn't hold up in my experiences. Ordered a pair of the non TNT to barzos to save wait and both of them flatted and wouldn't seal in the first 500 miles of riding a rocky fire road thats never caused me problems before.


True. Before I hopped on the Vittoria race tire bandwagon I posted something along the lines of "can I run non TNT" and it seemed 9 out of 10 shouted "no, unless you like flats and major air loss." There was one outlier who had great luck. TNT is the secret ingredient, ha.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

my barzo anthracite G+ tnt 29x2.35 just arrived & weighed in @ 755.3g

im enjoying the current spesh GC 29x2.3 @ the moment up front... not sure when the barzo will go on.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Aby N said:


> my barzo anthracite G+ tnt 29x2.35 just arrived & weighed in @ 755.3g
> 
> im enjoying the current spesh GC 29x2.3 @ the moment up front... not sure when the barzo will go on.


Seems the G+ added 50 grams to the 2.35 TNT. Disappointing to me.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

westin said:


> Seems the G+ added 50 grams to the 2.35 TNT. Disappointing to me.


That's my problem with the barzo. If it were in the 600's would be perfect


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

splitendz said:


> That's my problem with the barzo. If it were in the 600's would be perfect


When it gets sandy or a bit of mud the tire weight is moot. The Barzo TNT absolutely shines. Mine is 705 grams. If you want the mental bonus of 600 gram range simply add an ounce or two less sealant. Super fast tire!


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

My 2.35 Mezcals came in at 702 and 721g. Claimed weight is 710g so that's pretty bang-on :thumbsup:

I'll get some measurements this weekend.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

spsoon said:


> My 2.35 Mezcals came in a 702 and 721g. Claimed weight is 710g so that's pretty bang-on :thumbsup:
> 
> I'll get some measurements this weekend.


Good to know. My Mezcal TNT G+ 2.35 was 711g or thereabouts, I forget. It's the Barzo G+ TNT 2.35 that is surprisingly 50 to 60 grams heavy compared to the non-G+.


----------



## NH Mtbiker (Nov 6, 2004)

westin said:


> When it gets sandy or a bit of mud the tire weight is moot. The Barzo TNT absolutely shines. Mine is 705 grams. If you want the mental bonus of 600 gram range simply add an ounce or two less sealant. Super fast tire!


Good advice here. Running the 2.35 TNT on i30 rims @ 20-22psi. Its the perfect high volume tire for all conditions and sets up fine tubeless. To me grip, pressure and volume take priority over the weight of the tire under 800 grams.
Also running the even higher volume Ikon 2.35 rear, also on an i30 carbon rim with about the same pressure as the front, maybe slightly more on race day. Awesome xc tire that gives up little until it gets muddy. Geared up I go around 180lbs. Now go get a high volume tire a fly over trail obstacles and hammer the downhill sections....you'll see! :thumbsup:


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

My 2.35 Mezcal only came to 2.24" on a 24mm inner width rim. Somewhat disappointing. I hoped it would look like a 2.35 Ralph.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

spsoon, send it back and ask for a newer version that is true to size.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Nah, I'm not too fussed. It was a toss up as to which size to get anyway.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Can you order the g+ barzo from anywhere yet?


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

party_wagon: https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Schulze said:


> party_wagon: https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11581857.html


And one US retailer, at least, has Barzo 29 G+ TNT last week. Name escapes me at moment.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

probikekit had the 29er as of yesterday. Guess you guys bought them out!


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Last time I ordered a tnt from them I received a performance tire but I guess i'll give it another go since they are the only ones who have them in stock and someone posting above actually appears to have one in hand. Be sure to check your tires and make sure they say tnt G+ and have the grey side walls. I've had it happen twice now where I once ordered g+ mezcal and received performance and another time ordered tnt barzo and received performance. I had to send them back and order again both times.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

I still have not received my tires from PBK - ordered in January. They changed courier they say, I've been trying to get a refund. I ordered before and didn't have any issues. Just a FYI.


----------



## Dphoward (Jul 29, 2013)

Just an FYI - ran Vittoria mezcals all of last year and loved them. Bought new ones but could not get the old ones off the rims.. literally tried everything except taking a metal lever (carbon rims). Had to eventually cut them off and even that was tough. I had read a few years ago that others had this same problem. Check them before you’re too far away from home.

Rim- giant carbon 
Sealent- orange


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Dphoward said:


> Just an FYI - ran Vittoria mezcals all of last year and loved them. Bought new ones but could not get the old ones off the rims.. literally tried everything except taking a metal lever (carbon rims). Had to eventually cut them off and even that was tough. I had read a few years ago that others had this same problem. Check them before you're too far away from home.
> 
> Rim- giant carbon
> Sealent- orange


Yup, new Vittorias fit very tight on the carbon and aluminum rims I've put them on. Definitely stay true and don't warp like other brands, but are a ***** to get on and off. Luckily they're pretty durable so I haven't had to do so often.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Quick update: I had a practice session with a buddy last weekend on a course we'll be racing later in the season. Running Ikon 27.5x2.35 R (20psi) and AR 27.5x2.35 front (19psi). Not sure on total carriage weight - had two bottles and some gear - but bike was probably 24lbs or so, I'm in at 65kg right now. 

Both tires were beautiful on downhills. Very predictable in switchback loose cornering; stopping power wasn't perfect but very workable. 

Technical steep climbing was very bad. We were on loose over hard, and several sections were 15%+ with rock obstacles and ledges. I am not a pro, but consider myself a very strong technical climber, and for the life of me could not get the Ikon to hook up. I've ridden the same sections much better with Racing Ralphs. My buddy was using some ridiculous DH tires (don't recall the model) and just motored past me every time. Neither of us will use the tires he had on at the time, extremely heavy and slow on the flats, but were scratching our heads about the Ikon. 

Recommendations?

edit: I've sworn off Schwalbe, so only looking for non-Schwalbe options.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Try out a barzo in the rear. They are made for clearing big rocks and roots. They hook up on roots and rocks that my race kings slip all over on.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

winters.benjamin said:


> edit: I've sworn off Schwalbe, so only looking for non-Schwalbe options.


Why? Have you tried the new Schwalbes with the Addix compound? I've found the Racing Ralph to have better climbing traction than the Ikon.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> Why? Have you tried the new Schwalbes with the Addix compound? I've found the Racing Ralph to have better climbing traction than the Ikon.


Because I'm angry. I've punctured so many times on those damned things, snakeskin and non-snake. It's a love-hate relationship. Love the feel, hate the holes.


----------



## khardrunner14 (Aug 16, 2010)

Forekaster. Awesome grip/weight ratio. Best tire I’ve ridden.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

winters.benjamin said:


> Because I'm angry. I've punctured so many times on those damned things, snakeskin and non-snake. It's a love-hate relationship. Love the feel, hate the holes.


I'm angry too. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, you can't get fooled again. Fool me 4 pairs of $90/ea tires and you're dead to me.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> Because I'm angry. I've punctured so many times on those damned things, snakeskin and non-snake. It's a love-hate relationship. Love the feel, hate the holes.


Don't do it.

My 300 miles test of the Schwalbe 2.35 Speed addix Ra Ra has come to an end. I eventually couldn't stand the trade offs any more and added the 60 grams back and put my fantastic Ikon 2.35 back on.

Reasons: 
Poor climbing traction on rock slab with the hint of moisture.
Sub par braking traction on loose over hard (predominantly because of side and transition knobs.
Sub optimal/sudden breakaway in loose rock over hard turns(especially with big exposure)

In the end, it was the tread pattern that does not work for me; poor transition knobs and weak side knobs. I was already starting to rip off side knobs (a common problem I have seen with some schwalbes around here.

Both bikes are getting the F/R Forekaster/Ikon for the rest of the season.


----------



## newking (Nov 6, 2007)

Agree!!! Forekaster all the way



khardrunner14 said:


> Forekaster. Awesome grip/weight ratio. Best tire I've ridden.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

Funny that I've only flatted Schwalbe tires through the tread. Something the snakeskin doesn't help at all. It really is a love hate thing though... I've found the Racing Ralphs to be really great tires, better than the Ikon in the wet and that it certainly rolls better. 

But hate the flat tires.... 

The old Ralph 2.35 were kind of too "bouncy" feeling as well. Something about the rubber compound rebound I didn't like. That said I love punishment and have a set of the new Addix SS 2.35 sitting in a box at home. But I've also got Ikons and Forekasters on hand.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

I picked up a Forekaster to try in the wet on F, but hearing this I'm going to throw it on R and keep the AR on the front and see how climbing goes. Never had any issues with Ikon braking or cornering, even in the loose it was predictable and fun for my style, but man it just kept breaking loose on those steep loose climbs. Will try the Forekaster and let you all know how it gets on.


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

Do you guys run sealant or enough sealant in your tires? With all those stories about you getting so many flats through tread I'm starting to think its not the tire fault. 

In the terrain I'm used to ride there is a lot of things that can cause flats through tread, screws, thorns, cactii, rocks, etc. However, in all those cases the sealant does its work and keep the tire inflated. 

I have never had a flat trough tread on any RR, HF, ground control or raceking, I did however had an unsealable flat on a mezcal, but probably not the tire fault either, whatever I picked made some nasty hole in the tire through tread.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> Quick update: I had a practice session with a buddy last weekend on a course we'll be racing later in the season. Running Ikon 27.5x2.35 R (20psi) and AR 27.5x2.35 front (19psi). Not sure on total carriage weight - had two bottles and some gear - but bike was probably 24lbs or so, I'm in at 65kg right now.
> 
> Both tires were beautiful on downhills. Very predictable in switchback loose cornering; stopping power wasn't perfect but very workable.
> 
> ...


I've had the exact same results as you with the Ikon. I know a lot of people like them, but in anything loose, or wet, or roots... they simply don't hook up. Not sure why you've sworn off the RaRa /RoRo, but they are lighter, faster, and hook up better for me than the Ikon.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

TDLover said:


> Do you guys run sealant or enough sealant in your tires? With all those stories about you getting so many flats through tread I'm starting to think its not the tire fault.
> 
> In the terrain I'm used to ride there is a lot of things that can cause flats through tread, screws, thorns, cactii, rocks, etc. However, in all those cases the sealant does its work and keep the tire inflated.
> 
> I have never had a flat trough tread on any RR, HF, ground control or raceking, I did however had an unsealable flat on a mezcal, but probably not the tire fault either, whatever I picked made some nasty hole in the tire through tread.


I run Stans sealant. For comparison's sake: I've been on the Ikon R / AR F for several months now and have not had one ride finished early due to flats. On Schwalbe, I would have to put a tube in about every third ride or so. It was terrible.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I just checked:
Front RaRa 2.35: 455 miles
Rear RaRa 2.25: 520 miles

I flatted the front once when I forgot about sealant and had to put in a tube. But only that once. I put sealant in it when I got home and I've been using it since then.

Hans has 370 miles. It'll go back on later in the season when we head to the mountains. I put 800 miles on the original tires, no flats. Though the rear was basically a slick when I took it off.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Any opinions on SWorks Fasttrak 2.0? I actually found it abandoned at a race and think a pro rider (UCI event) changed it for the conditions, it was pretty wet and slick that day. Super light, thought about trying it on the rear for a race with ideal conditions just to save weight. My next two races are on UCI courses so have a good climb/mileage ratio, should be great on at least one of those (same race I found it, actually).


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

TDLover said:


> Do you guys run sealant or enough sealant in your tires? With all those stories about you getting so many flats through tread I'm starting to think its not the tire fault.


I have had flats from a few things.

Sidewall cuts where a sharp rock slices a sidewall open. No level of sealant will fix that. Time to boot or sew it up, but in an XC race your DONE.

Tread cuts where they are like sidewall cuts, but the hole is in the tread. They can be too big for sealant to plug and cause air pressure to go down. Some times you just need more air to get the sealant to work or need to add a plug to help fill in the gaps. If your sealant is low then smaller holes will start not sealing. With some CO2 and plug kit you can get back going without too much time. For Marathon and Endurance rides I carry an extra 2oz bottle of stans just incase. I can inject it through the removeable valve core. This faster and more reliable than tubing.

small hole punctures are pretty rare if your sealant is still good, but some days you just push it a bit too far.

As for pinches. I have never pinch flatted a tire. I have pinch flatted tubes when I still ran them. I have dinged a rim with a rock. Never lost air or damage the tire, but aluminium rim needed some attention after. My fault for running to low a pressure on too small a tire.

This is mostly on Ikon EXO 2.35F and Ikon EXO 2.2 / XR3 Team 2.2 rear.


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

winters.benjamin said:


> I run Stans sealant. For comparison's sake: I've been on the Ikon R / AR F for several months now and have not had one ride finished early due to flats. On Schwalbe, I would have to put a tube in about every third ride or so. It was terrible.


I won't argue with your experiences as they are valid, but what exactly happened when you punctured, the sealant didn't work in those cases?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I forgot that I did slice a sidewall on a Ralph about a year ago in a race. And I did pinch and ruin the RaceKing I put on to replace it (that was from enduro riding my XC bike...).


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

winters.benjamin said:


> I picked up a Forekaster to try in the wet on F, but hearing this I'm going to throw it on R and keep the AR on the front and see how climbing goes. Never had any issues with Ikon braking or cornering, even in the loose it was predictable and fun for my style, but man it just kept breaking loose on those steep loose climbs. Will try the Forekaster and let you all know how it gets on.


I am really liking the forecaster as an all around tire. A bit slow on the pavement but great where it matters. I am yet to ride them in off road conditions where I wasn't happy with them.

Haven't ridden them enough to know if they offer Ikon durability.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

khardrunner14 said:


> Forekaster. Awesome grip/weight ratio. Best tire I've ridden.


As a rear, my 29x2.35 is incredible. Makes me appear to be a decent descender with good cornering technique. On the Ikon 2.2 or 2.35 rear everything was good until I got a bit happy with the brake or got off line. The Forekaster can do no wrong for our trails, even hooking up climbing out of saddle. The Ikon lacks out of saddle grip when it gets a little loose. Took my FK off because trails are super tacky and wet (where it excels, but I'm saving it), but when things loosen up hopefully the Ikon will be destroyed and the FK goes on. Last late summer when sand was bad the FK was still fast for XC and moderately nasty trail use. My 2.35 is barely over 700 grams. I wouldn't use it on front cuz it is typical Maxxis narrow (rims 24 and 27 id).


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

Sidewalk said:


> Any opinions on SWorks Fasttrak 2.0? I actually found it abandoned at a race and think a pro rider (UCI event) changed it for the conditions, it was pretty wet and slick that day. Super light, thought about trying it on the rear for a race with ideal conditions just to save weight. My next two races are on UCI courses so have a good climb/mileage ratio, should be great on at least one of those (same race I found it, actually).


I bought on for a race that was straight, smooth and flat. I ran it on 21mm rim and it work great so I left it on for a while. It suffered in most other conditions. I moved it to my commuter with 30mm rims. It lasted for over 1000 miles but sucked both on and off the road. All the knobs migrated to the center of tire and no grip in corners.


----------



## broeli (Feb 15, 2008)

For Midwest xc and endurance racing I’ll be using 29x2.35 Mezcal front and 2.2 Conti Race King rear. I’ve tried all different kinds. I really liked my Bontrager XR2 2.35s and had good luck with Roro/Rara and roro/thunderburt combos. Also have used x king/race king combo and Ikons. I really like the race king protection for a fast hard pack tire. This will be my first time trying a Mezcal


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Anyone riding really flowy trails without a lot of climbing?


----------



## MTBKNG (Dec 30, 2015)

Sidewalk said:


> Any opinions on SWorks Fasttrak 2.0? I actually found it abandoned at a race and think a pro rider (UCI event) changed it for the conditions, it was pretty wet and slick that day. Super light, thought about trying it on the rear for a race with ideal conditions just to save weight. My next two races are on UCI courses so have a good climb/mileage ratio, should be great on at least one of those (same race I found it, actually).


No idea on the 2.0, but I have been running the 2.3 Fast Track Grid on the Front and trying on the Rear for a race tomorrow, had the Renegade 2.3 on but pulling it off, have had no issue with the 2.3, hooks up really good in the corners, no wash outs so far, so going to keep em on and see how the year goes..


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

MTBKNG said:


> No idea on the 2.0, but I have been running the 2.3 Fast Track Grid on the Front and trying on the Rear for a race tomorrow, had the Renegade 2.3 on but pulling it off, have had no issue with the 2.3, hooks up really good in the corners, no wash outs so far, so going to keep em on and see how the year goes..


What width of rim are you running them on? And how wide are they at riding pressure?


----------



## MTBKNG (Dec 30, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> What width of rim are you running them on? And how wide are they at riding pressure?


22MM internal on the Roval...I will have to measure them for you to get how wide they are, I am 6'3 200lb, I usually run 25-26 psi Front and almost always 28 psi Rear...had the 2.2 Ikon last year, really like the Ikons, but just there were times on loose over hard where I wanted to stand up on small little punchy climbs like right before I get to the top and those 2.2 would spin on me, finding the the 2.3 Fast Track really do a good job on the Rear, not spinning much at all....


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

broeli said:


> For Midwest xc and endurance racing I'll be using 29x2.35 Mezcal front and 2.2 Conti Race King rear. I've tried all different kinds. I really liked my Bontrager XR2 2.35s and had good luck with Roro/Rara and roro/thunderburt combos. Also have used x king/race king combo and Ikons. I really like the race king protection for a fast hard pack tire. This will be my first time trying a Mezcal


The mezcal is closer to the race king. The barzo is closer to the x king. I feel like Vittoria tires grip rocks and roots better than Continental protection do.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I might just try that Fasttrak then! At least for the one race that doesn't have anything tricky and has a lot of high speed stuff.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Lots of interest in 2.35s this year and I finished my first race on Schwalbe Rock Razors. The rider wasn’t great, but the tires did very well at 19/20psi front/rear. 

These are perhaps marketed as a rear DH or enduro tire but their weight is competitive and they race like mega-Thunder Burts, very fast and yet corner just as well as Nobby Nics.

While my old Jet 9 RDO fits them with plenty of clearance, they did rub on hard cornering due to fat tire squirm and maybe some flex from the Valors. The Boost frames I’m looking at shouldn’t have this issue.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

I just had every racers nightmare (or at least my own) of tearing a sidewall during a race.

I was running a 2.2 Ikon 3c, EXO, TR. Never had a probem with EXO tires before. I've had the same issue with a forecaster and Ardent race non exo on the rear, all while climbing.

Looking at new rear tire choices, I'm considering maxxis Ardent Race, Aspen, or Ikon again all in EXO, or mezcals TNT. I used swalbe rara for a month, it was fine just super worn out. Not sure I want one reading all the comments on sidewall tears. I'm not really a fan of specialized tires either. Any thoughts or suggestions for race tires with good sidewall protection?


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Haven't yet torn a sidewall on Exo. Much more sturdy than Snakeskin IME.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

winters.benjamin said:


> Haven't yet torn a sidewall on Exo. Much more sturdy than Snakeskin IME.


This was an EXO 2.35 Ikon. (this was back in my 26" rim brake days). I was in 5th at the time and fell to DFL.









Decided to sew it since I still had 35 miles left in the race and was all remote backcounty stuff. 















Could never get it to quite seal the seams so I was forced to tubed it, but the treads kept the tube from sticking out. Finished the race however. And more importantly I got back to the car.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

JoePAz said:


> This was an EXO 2.35 Ikon. (this was back in my 26" rim brake days). I was in 5th at the time and fell to DFL.
> 
> View attachment 1189672
> 
> ...


Wow, you get the backwoods survival award! I'm adding a sewing kit to my emergency gear stash.


----------



## miles e (Jan 16, 2004)

Is the 2.35 Mezcal the same volume as the 2.35 Barzo? I got a pair of the Barzos (29x2.35 TNT G+) and the volume seems on the low side for a 2.35, but there's lots of references to the Mezcal being a high volume tire.

And is it safe to say the Mezcal is the faster rolling of the two? Thinking of putting one on the rear with the Barzo up front. Had pretty good luck running a Thunder Burt on the rear last year, but want to try something a little more substantial without giving up much in the rolling resistance department.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Who has ridden the brand new redesigned Race King and Cross king? Anybody ridden the new and old ones to compare?


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

Just mounted the new Protection RK. Not too many rides though.

However, I'm very impressed. RK has been my rear tire for years. All versions but mostly Protection recently. Racesport is simply too vulnerable with its high, thin sidewalls. 

Protection was always sort of stiff. Not really supple like its ligher silbling. They seem to have improved this. Definitely more supple now. And ligher. I've weighed 5 tires, they are all within a few g of 610 g. Really a small variation. Definitely lighter now. 

Can't comment on the new tread, can't tell a difference. 

For me a long time wish came true. I've always struggled with this stiff casing but really appreciated the high volume and great performance of Black Chilli.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

and while this has never been an issue with Protection but it's now even easier to set up tubeless. I held its air for a very long time even without a sealant. I'm riding tubeless for almost 15 years but this has really impressed me. On a Notubes rim though.


----------



## chilla13 (Mar 27, 2017)

quax said:


> and while this has never been an issue with Protection but it's now even easier to set up tubeless. I held its air for a very long time even without a sealant. I'm riding tubeless for almost 15 years but this has really impressed me. On a Notubes rim though.


Are you running a XKing as front tire?


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

I got a non-TNT, non-G+ Beaux mescal 2.1 in trade ..560g. I'm planning to run the TNT, G+ Mescal 2.35 for the time in my next race but didnt want to mount it too soon so m****ed the freebie. Set out on a 40 miles on the in town trails where I th in I flatter once in the last decade. Rear tire made it 37 mile before the sidewall cut a cut rhat would heal. Just another data point.


----------



## GlazedHam (Jan 14, 2004)

I picked up an XC race bike after 4 years of mostly doing Enduro. The lighter tires are not a good match for my riding style as I'm getting only 1 to 3 rides out of rear tires ....FastTrack, Ground Control, Mescal ...none with beefed up sidewalls.

In the long run, I think I will better off with heavier tires and lighter rims. I can drop 120g off a rim for $160 and make that back up by slowing down this tire slashing. Thoughts?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

GlazedHam said:


> In the long run, I think I will better off with heavier tires and lighter rims. I can drop 120g off a rim for $160 and make that back up by slowing down this tire slashing.


Yes


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

GlazedHam said:


> I picked up an XC race bike after 4 years of mostly doing Enduro. The lighter tires are not a good match for my riding style as I'm getting only 1 to 3 rides out of rear tires ....FastTrack, Ground Control, Mescal ...none with beefed up sidewalls.
> 
> In the long run, I think I will better off with heavier tires and lighter rims. I can drop 120g off a rim for $160 and make that back up by slowing down this tire slashing. Thoughts?


Try bontrager xr3. Money back guaranteed even with a sliced sidewall


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

quax said:


> Just mounted the new Protection RK. Not too many rides though.
> 
> However, I'm very impressed. RK has been my rear tire for years. All versions but mostly Protection recently. Racesport is simply too vulnerable with its high, thin sidewalls.
> 
> ...


Thank you. Thats one reason i started using Bontrager tires the race kings were like riding a basketball. Had racing ralph 2.35 snakeskin front and race kimg 2.2 protection rear and it was like riding on two basketballs. I miss the race king in the rear though its so effort less to accelerate and you know exactly when its going to break loose when you lean it over on more flat type corners.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Xking 2.4 for the front? I had a 2.2 and it was noticeably smaller then the 2.2 race king.


----------



## quax (Feb 21, 2009)

chilla13 said:


> Are you running a XKing as front tire?


No, 2.2 was always too narrow and low volume for my liking. And 2.4 too heavy. Last season I ran a non-TR EXO Ikon 2.2 in the front. No need to pay the weight penalty for the TR version, it just seals (almost) as fine. Sub 600g for a sidewall protected, high volume tire. And I really like the grip in the front. However, for this very reason I wouldn't put in the rear.

Not decided yet if I keep the Ikon in the front or switch to the new RK as well. If I get the new Crest carbon rims I probably do the switch and use the Ikon-wheelset for training.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

GlazedHam said:


> I picked up an XC race bike after 4 years of mostly doing Enduro. The lighter tires are not a good match for my riding style as I'm getting only 1 to 3 rides out of rear tires ....FastTrack, Ground Control, Mescal ...none with beefed up sidewalls.
> 
> In the long run, I think I will better off with heavier tires and lighter rims. I can drop 120g off a rim for $160 and make that back up by slowing down this tire slashing. Thoughts?


I DNFd 3 times last season because of tire failures, all 3 times I went with lighter/no protection tires, all 3 times I was a podium contender (in theory). Improving your watts/kg by .001 won't help if you can't finish the race.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

quax said:


> No, 2.2 was always too narrow and low volume for my liking. And 2.4 too heavy. Last season I ran a non-TR EXO Ikon 2.2 in the front. No need to pay the weight penalty for the TR version, it just seals (almost) as fine. Sub 600g for a sidewall protected, high volume tire. And I really like the grip in the front. However, for this very reason I wouldn't put in the rear.
> 
> Not decided yet if I keep the Ikon in the front or switch to the new RK as well. If I get the new Crest carbon rims I probably do the switch and use the Ikon-wheelset for training.


Thanks for the tip on maxxis. Never rode them and they seem to have many different Ikon's. Race King surprised me last year with its grip at the rear. Not sure how it would do as a front tire..? I share your thoughts for the XKing. The 2.2 had good grip but I would have used more volume in the more rocky/rooty trails.


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Can anyone compare the maxxis Aspen 2.25 to the Ikon 2.2? Obviously the Aspen is a super fast tire, I'm just wondering how it would handle the trail on non race days since I only have 1 bike and wheelset.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

LMN said:


> I am really liking the forecaster as an all around tire. A bit slow on the pavement but great where it matters. I am yet to ride them in off road conditions where I wasn't happy with them.
> 
> Haven't ridden them enough to know if they offer Ikon durability.


Also a fan of the Forekaster for an all around tire. 2.35 and ridden on the front this winter. 20 psi on 21mm rims 160 pounds


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

Ksanman said:


> Can anyone compare the maxxis Aspen 2.25 to the Ikon 2.2? Obviously the Aspen is a super fast tire, I'm just wondering how it would handle the trail on non race days since I only have 1 bike and wheelset.


Can you give us more details on your trail conditions or where you live? If you have hero dirt, I wouldn't worry, but if you're in loose over hard I would put something else on for traiing or national forest riding.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

Ksanman said:


> Can anyone compare the maxxis Aspen 2.25 to the Ikon 2.2? Obviously the Aspen is a super fast tire, I'm just wondering how it would handle the trail on non race days since I only have 1 bike and wheelset.


I road the Ikon all last year and my new Scott Spark has 2.25 Aspens on it. Due to the current weather conditions in MI I've only been able to ride the trails a few times. So far I have noticed no difference in traction and prefer the Aspens. That being said, the ground has been mostly frozen or tacky . I haven't had the tires on loose over hard yet.


----------



## 834905 (Mar 8, 2018)

The Aspens are marketed as a loose over hard tire... I am currently running a Barzo front / Mezcal rear (2.35 on both) but had contemplated moving the Mezcal to the front and throwing a 2.25 Aspen on the rear for race day. I am curious what it is that you guys don't like about the Aspen in loose over hard? Is it corner? Braking? Both?


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Honestly I have the hardest time describing the terrain I ride. I live in northern Utah, but my races take place all over utah. In the fall I run Forekasters to beat the mud. Most of my races are hard pack. The next two months of races take place in southern Utah. It's real just hard rock terrain down there. I'm more worried about sidewall tears than traction. As the summer progresses, the trails up north transition from hard pack to dry, dusty, and loose and slate rock usually gets everywhere. That being said, most races courses are well taken care of and I had no problems running the Ikon in such conditions. I realize the loss of traction I was getting on steep loose climbs last year was due to body position and poor technique more than tire grip as this year I have climbed much better and more technical terrain. If the grip of the Aspen is drastically different from the Ikon and Ardent race then I might steer away from it. I am also a little scared of sidewall protection since I blew the exo ikon last week, but I guess tires aren't invincible.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

I just put some 2.25 Aspen's on my bike last week and put in a 45k/1000m ride on Saturday to give them a good test (along with a few other changes). They roll really well but I had the same issue on loose over hard. They felt solid generally until braking in loose terrain. I just felt like a lost all my modulation plus. I had one scare with a front wash out through a flat corner. But in the tyres defense that corner was completely blown out and I don't think the burliest of minions would have made a difference there. Climbing traction was better than the Ikon so I'm overall impressed with them and they'll be staying on until it gets muddy.

For reference, they where installed on 24mm id carbon rims and I'm probably an outlier here in that I run a cushcore in the rear. 20psi f+r.


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

*Advice ?*

Advice needed on tires and wheel set...

So, I'd like to get do a few a xc/endurance race or two this year. It's been quite a few years since I've done xc racing.

I post this question in this thread as it relates to rim width and tire size and tire availability.

I can get a killer deal on a new set of I9 Trail wheels

https://industrynine.com/trail-enduro/trail-270-32h-29

While listed as a xc wheel set they seem a bit burly. The internal rim width is 27mm. I've found that running narrower xc tires on too wide a rim slows them down by squaring them out. However, I would likely be using a 2.3" tire like a Spec Renegade. Seems this tire fills out quite well on a larger rim.

As I will be training for this race on trails much more rugged than the actual race, a burlier, more durable set up may be favored over a super light wheel set (2 wheel sets ain't happening).

As my geared up fighting weight will be about 175 I prefer to err with going with a larger tire. Bike handling skill are good - or so I like to think. Racing will be in the NE US. At least one race would be a 100 miler (if I can get in proper shape). Just looking to complete mid pack. Trails will be rocky single track, fire road, lots of big climbs, and while there is a good chance it will be wet, likely there won't be much mud. Tearing a sidewall will be a possibility due to a fair amount of jagged rocks.

So, what do you think about that wheel/rim/tire proposal?


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Bontrager rires team issue are on sale for 43.99. With a 30 day mony back satisfaction guarantee. Even if they are cut. Now go buy some and see the magic.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

Miker J said:


> Advice needed on tires and wheel set...
> 
> I can get a killer deal on a new set of I9 Trail wheels.
> 
> ...


I love I9 hubs and their aluminum rims but have had wayyyyyyyyyy too many bad experiences (read that as random rim killing cracks with no apparent strikes) with the reynolds/I9 collab to trust them again. Warranty is decent but tbh, I'm going to go with the santacruz wheels and their lifetime (yeah, really) guarantee.

btw, the linked wheels show 24mm internal. I'd agree that 27 internal and something like a 2.25-2.3 might be an odd combo. ymmv


----------



## Miker J (Nov 4, 2003)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> I love I9 hubs and their aluminum rims but have had wayyyyyyyyyy too many bad experiences (read that as random rim killing cracks with no apparent strikes) with the reynolds/I9 collab to trust them again. Warranty is decent but tbh, I'm going to go with the santacruz wheels and their lifetime (yeah, really) guarantee.
> 
> btw, the linked wheels show 24mm internal. I'd agree that 27 internal and something like a 2.25-2.3 might be an odd combo. ymmv


Thanks.

Not sure how I messed up that link. Corrected now.

No carbon rims.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Miker J said:


> Advice needed on tires and wheel set...
> 
> So, I'd like to get do a few a xc/endurance race or two this year. It's been quite a few years since I've done xc racing.
> 
> ...


https://www.wheelsfar.com/on-sale/2...8h-carbon-clincher-and-tubeless-wheelset.html

You won't be able to break these. If you do, 18m replacement guarantee. I've literally smashed through rocky descents on rim only (long story, but racing with multiple flats etc) and still using the same hoops. They're strong, light and cheap. And UCI approved if it matters to anyone.

Grab those plus a set of Lane's XR1s and you're in for less than $1k.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

winters.benjamin said:


> https://www.wheelsfar.com/on-sale/2...8h-carbon-clincher-and-tubeless-wheelset.html
> 
> You won't be able to break these. If you do, 18m replacement guarantee. I've literally smashed through rocky descents on rim only (long story, but racing with multiple flats etc) and still using the same hoops. They're strong, light and cheap. And UCI approved if it matters to anyone.
> 
> Grab those plus a set of Lane's XR1s and you're in for less than $1k.


Sorry just saw you said no carbon. So you can disregard, or try carbon.


----------



## Pynchonite (Sep 2, 2013)

First ride on the new Fast Trak went well. Running 2.3 front, 2.1 rear in the Control casing. Set PR's headed up areas with loose-over-hard and hard pack. If you're familiar with it, I was riding the Bonneville Shoreline Trail from City Creek up to the radio towers and back in Salt Lake City (if you were riding on Friday, I was the one on the BRIGHT PINK Epic). The switchbacks near the bottom get a nice deep coating of gravel but they held on like champs. Had trouble testing them on the descents because it was my first time out in two years without a dropper so pretty much everything pointed downward was slower. They certainly felt planted but that could be because I approached everything at basically a crawl.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Raced a demo bike today that had 2.3 Ground Control fr/rr. I flatted a tire on it the other day and weighed it while it was off at 748g.

They didn't seem spectacular. But I rode the bike on a long enduro'ish trail and hammered out some fast times on the trail (dropping 3000' in 13 miles). Mostly hard packed and rocks. And had some fast times on this race course in Fontana (can't directly compare, but probably my best result on this course in the 3 years I've been racing). So the tire/bike combo is fast, even if the tires didn't stand out.

TL;DR

They work.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Hey you Mezcal slappies, what are your 29x2.25 tires weighing. Just bought two because the Trek shop gave them to me for xr1 price. One is 664 the other is 672. I have had bontrager 2.35 xr2 that are 690. They seem heavier then i would expect. They did setup with a hand pump and the bead was completely set at 22psi and 25 respectively.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

The mezcal is a pretty legit tire. It actually is very similar to a race king in the way it drifts. Very predictable. Immediately from drift to bite. It rolls fast too. I need to see how it gets traction on seated loose steep climbs now.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

winters.benjamin said:


> I DNFd 3 times last season because of tire failures, all 3 times I went with lighter/no protection tires, all 3 times I was a podium contender (in theory). Improving your watts/kg by .001 won't help if you can't finish the race.


What are the opinions on protection vs. no protection tires and similarly TR vs. non-TR. I just bought a pair of TR but non-EXO Ikons. I used to ride non-protection Racing Ralphs and Thunder Burts and never slashed a tire. I ride and race on terrain that most people consider to be super tame here in northern California. Very few rocks at all, some roots, sandy or loamy. If I go somewhere that has any rocks at all I use protection for sure.

Maybe I should return those TRs for non-TRs though to save a little weight?


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

ohmygato said:


> What are the opinions on protection vs. no protection tires and similarly TR vs. non-TR. I just bought a pair of TR but non-EXO Ikons. I used to ride non-protection Racing Ralphs and Thunder Burts and never slashed a tire. I ride and race on terrain that most people consider to be super tame here in northern California. Very few rocks at all, some roots, sandy or loamy. If I go somewhere that has any rocks at all I use protection for sure.
> 
> Maybe I should return those TRs for non-TRs though to save a little weight?


Non TR tires are not reinforced in the sidewall and always felt draggy to me set up tubeless. Although TR tires are heavier I prefer the casing stability and ability to run a lower pressure without rolling in corners (and I'm a light rider).


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

ohmygato said:


> What are the opinions on protection vs. no protection tires and similarly TR vs. non-TR. I just bought a pair of TR but non-EXO Ikons. I used to ride non-protection Racing Ralphs and Thunder Burts and never slashed a tire. I ride and race on terrain that most people consider to be super tame here in northern California. Very few rocks at all, some roots, sandy or loamy. If I go somewhere that has any rocks at all I use protection for sure.
> 
> Maybe I should return those TRs for non-TRs though to save a little weight?


I have a non-EXO Ikon/AR setup I've used sparingly on terrain which destroys Schwalbe non-snakeskin tires. Non-EXO seems to hold up better than non-snakeskin. I haven't tried non-TR. And I don't mind the burlier casing on EXO. It feels more supple than Snakeskin IMO.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> What are the opinions on protection vs. no protection tires and similarly TR vs. non-TR. I just bought a pair of TR but non-EXO Ikons. I used to ride non-protection Racing Ralphs and Thunder Burts and never slashed a tire. I ride and race on terrain that most people consider to be super tame here in northern California. Very few rocks at all, some roots, sandy or loamy. If I go somewhere that has any rocks at all I use protection for sure.
> 
> Maybe I should return those TRs for non-TRs though to save a little weight?


Xr2 front race king protection rear. I would avoid maxxis for those conditions they are more for places where you can slash tires. They are generally* heavier than other brands. A 2.35 xr2 is bigger faster and lighter than an ikon and its 120 tpi and protection and the best bead interface in the game. Now that they have a new race king that isnt a basketball i would run that. Youll be flying and wont need to change tires for other courses. Xr2 2.35 is under 700 and race kimg 2.2 protection is under 640 if not under 620. Where as ikon would be 750~ in 2.35 and not as big, and like 660 in in 2.2 non exo non tr. Plus bontrager tires are 30 less retail and conti about the same price as maxxis so youll have lighter faster protected bigger tires and spent less or the same.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> I have a non-EXO Ikon/AR setup I've used sparingly on terrain which destroys Schwalbe non-snakeskin tires. Non-EXO seems to hold up better than non-snakeskin. I haven't tried non-TR. And I don't mind the burlier casing on EXO. It feels more supple than Snakeskin IMO.


Scwabe should rename the snakesin casing, basketball casing. Bounce all over the place and feel every micro bump. Not to be a broken record but bontrager is protected and 120 tpi. Liteskin tires are 120 tpi accidents waiting to happen and exo tires are semi truck tires.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

MessagefromTate said:


> Non TR tires are not reinforced in the sidewall and always felt draggy to me set up tubeless. Although TR tires are heavier I prefer the casing stability and ability to run a lower pressure without rolling in corners (and I'm a light rider).


Pretty sure you can get non TR but Exo in maxxis. So that would be reinforced sidewalls and non tr.


----------



## rallymaniac (Oct 12, 2011)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Xr2 front race king protection rear. I would avoid maxxis for those conditions they are more for places where you can slash tires. They are generally* heavier than other brands. A 2.35 xr2 is bigger faster and lighter than an ikon and its 120 tpi and protection and the best bead interface in the game. Now that they have a new race king that isnt a basketball i would run that. Youll be flying and wont need to change tires for other courses. Xr2 2.35 is under 700 and race kimg 2.2 protection is under 640 if not under 620. Where as ikon would be 750~ in 2.35 and not as big, and like 660 in in 2.2 non exo non tr. Plus bontrager tires are 30 less retail and conti about the same price as maxxis so youll have lighter faster protected bigger tires and spent less or the same.


all these poor silly WC riders on Maxxis tires. If only they could see this forum and your posts to get enlightened.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

ohmygato said:


> What are the opinions on protection vs. no protection tires and similarly TR vs. non-TR. I just bought a pair of TR but non-EXO Ikons. I used to ride non-protection Racing Ralphs and Thunder Burts and never slashed a tire. I ride and race on terrain that most people consider to be super tame here in northern California. Very few rocks at all, some roots, sandy or loamy. If I go somewhere that has any rocks at all I use protection for sure.
> 
> Maybe I should return those TRs for non-TRs though to save a little weight?


The TRs work incredibly well tubeless. They set-up easy and they are difficult to burp. Although non-TRs do work tubeless I find that they tend to burp when I make a mistake.

I would suggest that in a place where grip levels are high and corner loads are high you want a tire with really solid bead interface.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

LMN said:


> The TRs work incredibly well tubeless. They set-up easy and they are difficult to burp. Although non-TRs do work tubeless I find that they tend to burp when I make a mistake.
> 
> I would suggest that in a place where grip levels are high and corner loads are high you want a tire with really solid bead interface.


Serious question. Have you experimented with other brands lately just to check them out? Obviously you support who supports you and i respect that. Im just curious if you or your wife ever messa round and try other tires just to have a full perspective of all the options.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Scwabe should rename the snakesin casing, basketball casing. Bounce all over the place and feel every micro bump. Not to be a broken record but bontrager is protected and 120 tpi. Liteskin tires are 120 tpi accidents waiting to happen and exo tires are semi truck tires.


I'm with you on this. Liteskin shouldn't even exist for offroad applications.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

LMN said:


> The TRs work incredibly well tubeless. They set-up easy and they are difficult to burp. Although non-TRs do work tubeless I find that they tend to burp when I make a mistake.
> 
> I would suggest that in a place where grip levels are high and corner loads are high you want a tire with really solid bead interface.


+1 I was singing for joy when setting up my first Maxxis TRs. No soap, no air compressor, no gas-lighting (although this is super fun), no farting around with lifting the bead to sit on one rim. Just throw those things on and use a track pump.


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Took a chance and bought an Aspen 2.25 to replace an old ikon 2.2. I was a little hesitant because it's a lighter tire and less tread. I have two rides on it now, and I love it. Switched from a Forekaster 2.35/Ikon 2.2 to AR 2.35/Aspen 2.25 EXO/TR on 19mm rims. Running 24psi f/25 r. The tires are still new and stiff, so they bounce off everything but I'm sure that will go away as they wear in. I had the chance to ride these tires on all types of terrain: Hardpack, loose over hard, loose, greasy wet dirt, mud, snow, rocks, roots, sand. The most surprising thing to me was how quiet the combo is on tarmac. No noise at all. The Aspen felt fast, almost like it wasn't there. I constantly found myself in too high of a gear because it felt too easy. I had no problems on any of the terrain. I actually thing the Aspen is better than the Ikon. The grip felt good and it cornered/held it's line better than the Ikon, especially in muddy conditions. The Aspen did struggle on wet rocks. But I've never had success on with any tire on wet rocks, I always slip out. The other issue I had was on a loose/sandy/gravel base section that was put down on a fireroad over the winter. I found both tires sliding out in the corners, but I expect this from all tires. They eventually hooked up though it was just really scary. I really like the AR 2.35 over the AR2.2 I ran last year. The round profile gave me the same confidence as the Forekaster but it is lighter and faster rolling. I felt no compromise in grip or braking traction. The Aspen actually had better stopping traction than the Ikon. I'm really excited to try this combo in a race. The first one will be in St. George, on rocky terrain. I'm going to pray I don't get a sidewall tear again.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Right on guys. TR but non-EXO Ikons are going to be my standard race setup for around here at least. I'll experiment around a bit, but this seems to be the best for now.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Xr2 front race king protection rear. I would avoid maxxis for those conditions they are more for places where you can slash tires. They are generally* heavier than other brands. A 2.35 xr2 is bigger faster and lighter than an ikon and its 120 tpi and protection and the best bead interface in the game. Now that they have a new race king that isnt a basketball i would run that. Youll be flying and wont need to change tires for other courses. Xr2 2.35 is under 700 and race kimg 2.2 protection is under 640 if not under 620. Where as ikon would be 750~ in 2.35 and not as big, and like 660 in in 2.2 non exo non tr. Plus bontrager tires are 30 less retail and conti about the same price as maxxis so youll have lighter faster protected bigger tires and spent less or the same.


I tried the 2.2 XR2 up front because I had one sitting around and I really wanted to like it but I am giving up on it. I lost the front wheel 4-5 times or so and just could never get it to stick to anything except asphalt. I know the 2.35 has got to be much different but I think the sandy trails around here really like a big tire with small closely spaced knobs.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

winters.benjamin said:


> I'm with you on this. Liteskin shouldn't even exist for offroad applications.


I actually never had this problem. I rode Liteskin for 6 months not knowing any better and never had any issues. I only changed because these guys on this forum said they were dangerous. But I would race them again for sure. The only reason I haven't is because I like the Ikons better than the RaRas right now.


----------



## eb1888 (Jan 27, 2012)

ohmygato said:


> I tried the 2.2 XR2 up front because I had one sitting around and I really wanted to like it but I am giving up on it. I lost the front wheel 4-5 times or so and just could never get it to stick to anything except asphalt. I know the 2.35 has got to be much different but I think the sandy trails around here really like a big tire with small closely spaced knobs.


Performance'll depend on rim width and psi. 2.2 Team likes 30mm inner. 14psi depending on rim hits. What were you using?


----------



## dsills (May 13, 2017)

New Top Fuel 9.9 here. Went with the Bontrager XXX wheels with 2.4 XR3 front and 2.35 XR2 rear. I couldn't be happier. Grip forever and fast, fast. May switch to XR2 front when this one wears out. 

More people should listen to Lane Detroit City about this combo. I'm glad I did.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

eb1888 said:


> 14psi depending on rim hits.


I'd be hitting my rim a lot @ 14 psi.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

dsills said:


> New Top Fuel 9.9 here. Went with the Bontrager XXX wheels with 2.4 XR3 front and 2.35 XR2 rear. I couldn't be happier. Grip forever and fast, fast. May switch to XR2 front when this one wears out.
> 
> More people should listen to Lane Detroit City about this combo. I'm glad I did.


2.4 Eh? Me likey. How much does that beast weigh?


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

eb1888 said:


> Performance'll depend on rim width and psi. 2.2 Team likes 30mm inner. 14psi depending on rim hits. What were you using?


No. I am not going to ride any tire at 14 psi. The last time I tried it was a + tire and I still banged the rim.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> 2.4 Eh? Me likey. How much does that beast weigh?


About the same as a ikon 2.35. In xr3 they have 2.3 and 2.4. The 2.3 is more like a 2.25 and the 2.4 is more like a 2.35. Where as in xr2 the 2.35 is more like a 2.45 and the 2.2 is more like a 2.3 . The xr1 2.2 is also huge for its size, closer to a 2.3. One benefit of Bomtrager is they are 55 retail with a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. Go buy a couple try them out, and return them for a full refund if you dont like them. NO brand can touch that.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

dsills said:


> New Top Fuel 9.9 here. Went with the Bontrager XXX wheels with 2.4 XR3 front and 2.35 XR2 rear. I couldn't be happier. Grip forever and fast, fast. May switch to XR2 front when this one wears out.
> 
> More people should listen to Lane Detroit City about this combo. I'm glad I did.


Just readimg this brings joy to my heart because i can close my eyes and just picture the smile on your face everytime you RAIL a corner and yell out loud like a little kid. That bike, those tires. Thats pure unadulterated joy on two wheels. Hey, if everyone doesnt want to feel that feeling what can we say huh? Ride on man


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> About the same as a ikon 2.35. In xr3 they have 2.3 and 2.4. The 2.3 is more like a 2.25 and the 2.4 is more like a 2.35. Where as in xr2 the 2.35 is more like a 2.45 and the 2.2 is more like a 2.3 . The xr1 2.2 is also huge for its size, closer to a 2.3. One benefit of Bomtrager is they are 55 retail with a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. Go buy a couple try them out, and return them for a full refund if you dont like them. NO brand can touch that.


Well, you have me sold on giving them some more ride time at least. Maybe I'll take that XR2 2.2 for a spin on the rear wheel and put something bigger in the front.

The only thing I don't believe is that the XR2 2.2 is more like a 2.3. Just comparing it to the Ikon 2.35 it is not close in volume to my eyes at least.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Serious question. Have you experimented with other brands lately just to check them out? Obviously you support who supports you and i respect that. Im just curious if you or your wife ever messa round and try other tires just to have a full perspective of all the options.


Yes, I have ridden a lot of different tires.

I have even ridden your favorite combo. They are good tires, the second you install them you can tell they share the same base structure as Maxxis EXO Trs. And in warm weather, and in the conditions they are designed for they are as good as anything out there. My main complaint about them is the rubber is too hard for cold and wet conditions. I find them to be quite slippery on wet rocks and roots.

In Maxxis line-up I would say the XR3 is similar to an Ardent Race. Both great in dry and loose conditions and both slightly terrifying in the cold and wet.


----------



## dsills (May 13, 2017)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> About the same as a ikon 2.35. In xr3 they have 2.3 and 2.4. The 2.3 is more like a 2.25 and the 2.4 is more like a 2.35. Where as in xr2 the 2.35 is more like a 2.45 and the 2.2 is more like a 2.3 . The xr1 2.2 is also huge for its size, closer to a 2.3. One benefit of Bomtrager is they are 55 retail with a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. Go buy a couple try them out, and return them for a full refund if you dont like them. NO brand can touch that.


He's dead on the size and weights. I may try XR2 fro and xr1 rear someday but unlikely.


----------



## dsills (May 13, 2017)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Just readimg this brings joy to my heart because i can close my eyes and just picture the smile on your face everytime you RAIL a corner and yell out loud like a little kid. That bike, those tires. Thats pure unadulterated joy on two wheels. Hey, if everyone doesnt want to feel that feeling what can we say huh? Ride on man


Thanks man. You're right.. the TF 9.9, those XXX wheels and those XR's makes every ride seriously fun. Even racing is fun. Yes, even endurance racing. 😉


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> Well, you have me sold on giving them some more ride time at least. Maybe I'll take that XR2 2.2 for a spin on the rear wheel and put something bigger in the front.
> 
> The only thing I don't believe is that the XR2 2.2 is more like a 2.3. Just comparing it to the Ikon 2.35 it is not close in volume to my eyes at least.


I said the xr1 2.2 not xr2. The xr2 2.2 is just a normal 2.2. The xr1 is bigger than 2.2

Edit went back and read my post again. I did put that the xr2 2.2 is like a 2.3 but i confused myself in that situation. The xr1 is a huge 2.2 the xr2 is standard fare 2.2. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

LMN said:


> Yes, I have ridden a lot of different tires.
> 
> I have even ridden your favorite combo. They are good tires, the second you install them you can tell they share the same base structure as Maxxis EXO Trs. And in warm weather, and in the conditions they are designed for they are as good as anything out there. My main complaint about them is the rubber is too hard for cold and wet conditions. I find them to be quite slippery on wet rocks and roots.
> 
> In Maxxis line-up I would say the XR3 is similar to an Ardent Race. Both great in dry and loose conditions and both slightly terrifying in the cold and wet.


Good info, because ive never actually used them in the wet or cold. Thats why where we ride makes such a difference. Thanks for that tip. I am buying some Forekasters as my wet tire, ive seen your reviews on them and ive seen them in action. I had Nobby Nics as my wet tire in the past but they are heavy and bounce around too much.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Had Mezcal last year that weighted 720-730g but meadured 2.28 on my rims. Bought a Mezcal this year and it weighted 700g but measured 2.22 so far after 24h. Maybe with the arrival of the 2.35 Vittoria adjusted their sizing. It's pretty much as wide as the Barzo 2.25.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

Maxxis Apens (2.25) anyone?

They came with my new bike and I can’t decide if I like them. I keep playing around with psi (24/26, then 23/25 and lastly 22/24). Honestly, I can’t feel much diffence between the pressures. Can’t tell if they’re folding either. They are fast rolling and they seem predictable, meaning I know when and how they’ll slip when it’s loose, but they’re not super confidence inspiring in fast corners. 

Anyone else running these and if so at what pressures? Any psi suggestions. 

Bike: Scott Spark RC 900
Weight:181 lbs
I take smooth lines
XC racing: mostly smooth with some roots and not much rock. Plenty of sand.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Lane said:


> About the same as a ikon 2.35. In xr3 they have 2.3 and 2.4. The 2.3 is more like a 2.25 and the 2.4 is more like a 2.35. Where as in xr2 the 2.35 is more like a 2.45 and the 2.2 is more like a 2.3 . The xr1 2.2 is also huge for its size, closer to a 2.3. One benefit of Bomtrager is they are 55 retail with a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. Go buy a couple try them out, and return them for a full refund if you dont like them. NO brand can touch that.


All this information is of dubious value unless you can write it like this:

"Ikon 29x2.35 is 2.31" casing on an i22mm rim at 25psi"

See? clear and useful. The tool is a dial or digital caliper. They're ten bucks.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

Schulze said:


> All this information is of dubious value unless you can write it like this:
> 
> "Ikon 29x2.35 is 2.31" casing on an i22mm rim at 25psi"
> 
> See? clear and useful. The tool is a dial or digital caliper. They're ten bucks.


I have to ride my bike not measure tires


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

Just did a couple hours with a Forecaster installed on the front. I'm super impressed with that tire. Not as much volume as a 2.35 ikon, or the 2.35 RR I had on the rear. But, cornered very predictably on varied terrain. 

The trail had just opened for the season and parts were damp, velcro type dirt, a bit or mud here and there, and the rest bone dry/blown out. Never had a single issue with cornering traction and no real noticeable additional rolling resistance with it being on the front. I don't really need the Exo for my local area, but but this on for an upcoming trip to CO/UT. I might just leave it on!


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

SingleSpeedSteven said:


> The Aspens are marketed as a loose over hard tire... I am currently running a Barzo front / Mezcal rear (2.35 on both) but had contemplated moving the Mezcal to the front and throwing a 2.25 Aspen on the rear for race day. I am curious what it is that you guys don't like about the Aspen in loose over hard? Is it corner? Braking? Both?


I am done with my Apens that came on my bike after my experience at today's race. Not sure why I'm "trying" to like these. They're no good for the loose and sandy racing in Michigan. I've had 2 races this year with several wash outs. Not to mention the lack of confidence when cornering. Aspens are fine on hardback or when pointed up hill, but just too slick for me in the corners. Last year I ran Ikon/Ardent Race and was much happier.

I just ordered Mezcals 2.25 f/r and I'm hoping for a big improvement 爛


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

MI-XC said:


> I am done with my Apens that came on my bike after my experience at today's race.


Stock tires are usually the lowest quality and lowest performance version of the tire, even if its the same "model".

That's probably why you are making a good choice replacing them, however if you were to try a high performance aspen model you would probably feel different about them.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

TDLover said:


> Stock tires are usually the lowest quality and lowest performance version of the tire, even if its the same "model".
> 
> That's probably why you are making a good choice replacing them, however if you were to try a high performance aspen model you would probably feel different about them.


What's different about "stock" tires from after market ones? I agree that they seem different (and often way heavier), but are they made to less QC or with inferior materials? Genuine question...


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

BmanInTheD said:


> What's different about "stock" tires from after market ones? I agree that they seem different (and often way heavier), but are they made to less QC or with inferior materials? Genuine question...


They are custom made for manufacturers to include in their stock builds, usually they try to maximize profits so they request the cheapest tire they can source, some brands offer them cheap models, while others offer them known models, but made with cheaper rubber or less quality.

The thing is that is very hard to know who does that, the bike brand and tire manufacturer might now, but for the customer is practically impossible to know.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

MI-XC said:


> I am done with my Apens that came on my bike after my experience at today's race. Not sure why I'm "trying" to like these. They're no good for the loose and sandy racing in Michigan. I've had 2 races this year with several wash outs. Not to mention the lack of confidence when cornering. Aspens are fine on hardback or when pointed up hill, but just too slick for me in the corners. Last year I ran Ikon/Ardent Race and was much happier.
> 
> I just ordered Mezcals 2.25 f/r and I'm hoping for a big improvement 爛


Let me know what you think. I am running a Forekaster front and mezcal rear to experiment. Definitely shoukd see an improvement over the aspens. The mezcal reminds me of the race king how it transitions from center to side knobs when cornering, expect a sudden drift then bite. Nothing to worry about though once it hits the side knobs its stuck. Doesnt roll as fast and is heavier than a race king though.


----------



## 1ma2t (Aug 24, 2012)

Tires I have liked (in order, top being my favorite), I live in Northern Utah, race at a local ski resort with great hardpack dirt, another venue has loose gravely dirt and a section of pavement, the 3rd venue is loamy loose newly cut trails, and the last venue is dry dusty trails. We don't see much moisture at races, so wet ridding is not much of a concern.

XC (ish) Tires (for F-Si or Scalpel)
Mezcal 2.25 - G+ TNT - blew up to 2.3 on my 24id rim. This is my new favorite XC tire, I feel it has so much more grip then those little knobs would make you think, and it's very fast. I also like it's TNT casing, very supple and blows up with high volume. I will just get it for front and rear when I need a new tire.

Barzo 2.25 - TNT- This is currently my front tire on my F-Si, it's good, but I was not as surprised as I was with mezcal. It's fast, and grips well, but it didn't blow up as nicely and in general just don't see a need for it for my XC rides. 

Ikon 2.2 - 3C - Tried and True, but I think mezcal is better.

NN 2.25, 2.35 - Pacestar Pretty good tire, good for trail riding, but not amazing xc all-mountain tire. But they are light and blow up nice with decent side knobs.

RoRo 2.35 - Pacestar/Liteskin - meh, similar to Barzo, but not as good as grip, and not as fast as Mezcal. They are super-light so they get the job done with decent traction. 

RaRa 2.25 - Pacester - I thought I like these when I first started racing, but after trying other, they have moved farther and farther down my list. 

Ardent 2.4 - Similar to NN, decent all around tire, but the NN is better.


Enduro/All-Mountain tires (for my YT Jeffsy)
DHR II 2.3 - MaxTerra - This tire has impressed me the most, low weight for the segment (805g in 29x2.3). I have seen people call it slow, I think it's actually pretty fast with amazing cornering and braking grip. Not an XC replacement, but if it's all I had for the day, I don't think it would prevent me from placing.

Magic Mary - soft - I had this in the front of my trail bike, it was massive! 2.35 but measured 2.45 on 28id rim. It had incredible grip! Very fast when pointed down and weight was decent.

Aggressor 2.3 - dual - I heard a too many positive things about this tire but wasn't as impressed as the DHR II, I won't buy it again, and will just do 2x DHR II 

Hans Dampf 2.35 - soft- It's a good tire, but not unique enough to standout to me. I am interested to try the new tread.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

TDLover said:


> They are custom made for manufacturers to include in their stock builds, usually they try to maximize profits so they request the cheapest tire they can source, some brands offer them cheap models, while others offer them known models, but made with cheaper rubber or less quality.
> 
> The thing is that is very hard to know who does that, the bike brand and tire manufacturer might now, but for the customer is practically impossible to know.


I'm guessing that's why the guy at the race who had the same bike as me and made some of the same upgrades, was so shocked I still had the Aspens on my bike. His words, "you're still running the stock wheels?" Um, yes, yes I am ?. I guess he knew something I didn't.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

TDLover said:


> They are custom made for manufacturers to include in their stock builds, usually they try to maximize profits so they request the cheapest tire they can source, some brands offer them cheap models, while others offer them known models, but made with cheaper rubber or less quality.
> 
> The thing is that is very hard to know who does that, the bike brand and tire manufacturer might now, but for the customer is practically impossible to know.


You can tell that Maxxis does it with the white letters on their OEM tires. I prefer the white lettering to the garish yellow on the others, but I've taken off a few white letter Maxxis tires and they are a lot heavier than their yellow counterparts. Good to know they might be of lesser quality, I always take them off and give them away. Of course, Lane thinks ALL Maxxis tires are of lesser quality so maybe I should just dump them all!


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

BmanInTheD said:


> You can tell that Maxxis does it with the white letters on their OEM tires. I prefer the white lettering to the garish yellow on the others, but I've taken off a few white letter Maxxis tires and they are a lot heavier than their yellow counterparts. Good to know they might be of lesser quality, I always take them off and give them away. Of course, Lane thinks ALL Maxxis tires are of lesser quality so maybe I should just dump them all!


Huh, I was wondering why mine were white lettered.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

BmanInTheD said:


> You can tell that Maxxis does it with the white letters on their OEM tires. I prefer the white lettering to the garish yellow on the others, but I've taken off a few white letter Maxxis tires and they are a lot heavier than their yellow counterparts. Good to know they might be of lesser quality, I always take them off and give them away. Of course, Lane thinks ALL Maxxis tires are of lesser quality so maybe I should just dump them all!


This is interesting.

I would also swear up and down that the new OEM spec Aspen 2.25 has a much deeper tread depth than my Aspen 2.25 I put on my hardtail last year. Its now worn a bit no one carries a yellow aspen locally for me to compare on a showroom.

The showroom spec tire "looks" like a 680-700 gram tire, while my Yellow spec exo was 635g


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I know the stock RaRa's that have come on my bikes weighed more than replacement ones, but I never felt a performance difference with them.


----------



## mrbadwrench (Sep 13, 2016)

whats the general consensus on xr1 teams? come close to aspens, ikons, or ralphs?


----------



## Carioca_XC (Dec 30, 2014)

FJSnoozer said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> I would also swear up and down that the new OEM spec Aspen 2.25 has a much deeper tread depth than my Aspen 2.25 I put on my hardtail last year. Its now worn a bit no one carries a yellow aspen locally for me to compare on a showroom.
> 
> The showroom spec tire "looks" like a 680-700 gram tire, while my Yellow spec exo was 635g


I can't remember where I found it, but a guy weighed some parts of a Scott RC bike and the 2.25 Aspen that comes stock on them weighed 620g.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

I need to find some takeoffs asap and stockpile. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

Carioca_XC said:


> I can't remember where I found it, but a guy weighed some parts of a Scott RC bike and the 2.25 Aspen that comes stock on them weighed 620g.


When my Mezcals arrive I'll take the "white lettered" Aspens off my 2018 Scott Spark RC 900 WC and weigh them. I'll post the weight afterwards. In unrelated news...... I have some gently used Aspens for sale!


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

mrbadwrench said:


> whats the general consensus on xr1 teams? come close to aspens, ikons, or ralphs?


They are great depending where you ride. They are higher volume than most all 2.2, as light as most non protected but with protection, 120 tpi, 30 day unconditional guarantee, $55 retail, best bead in the game. Where are you riding? You can always go buy some and if you dont like them return them for full refund within 30 days. No brand can match that!


----------



## mrbadwrench (Sep 13, 2016)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> They are great depending where you ride. They are higher volume than most all 2.2, as light as most non protected but with protection, 120 tpi, 30 day unconditional guarantee, $55 retail, best bead in the game. Where are you riding? You can always go buy some and if you dont like them return them for full refund within 30 days. No brand can match that!


I currently live in south dakota where ardent races are the go-to xc tire because of all the rocks. I am moving to minnesota where it is extremely smooth hardpack.


----------



## slipstream (Feb 26, 2005)

I normally run Maxxis tires as the Exo tires seem to last the longest in my area: sharp rocks, not a lot of dirt, roots, long climbs and descents. My normal race combination are Ikons F 29x2.35, R 29x2.20, but I recently picked up one of the new Rekon 29x2.25 tires which I mounted up on the front before a XCO race. It is a slightly more aggressive looking version of the 2.2 Ikon, better side lugs, and it will probably become my new short course tire set up. For longer, more techy races, I run a 2.35 Forekaster in the front, and either a 2.2 Ikon, or 2.35 Ikon. The Rekon could be an interesting replacement as a rear tire. The Rekon is a reasonable weight at 670g for the TR/Exo version.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

mrbadwrench said:


> I currently live in south dakota where ardent races are the go-to xc tire because of all the rocks. I am moving to minnesota where it is extremely smooth hardpack.


I'd consider Thunder Burts, a set of those came on my fs bike and I was surprised at how much I liked them in various dry conditions. I haven't run Race Kings, but a friend really likes those and they would be worth considering for your smooth hardpack conditions.


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

TDLover said:


> They are custom made for manufacturers to include in their stock builds, usually they try to maximize profits so they request the cheapest tire they can source, some brands offer them cheap models, while others offer them known models, but made with cheaper rubber or less quality.
> 
> The thing is that is very hard to know who does that, the bike brand and tire manufacturer might now, but for the customer is practically impossible to know.


This is correct. Automobile manufactures also do this.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Quick update: I've had the Forekaster 27.5x2.35 out back for a few rides now. I've been on the hunt for something to replace Ikon in loose over hard. It has been brilliant: hooks up great on loose technical climbs, cornering is fantastic and it doesn't feel slow on the hardpack stuff. I think I'm set now. AR on front (27.5x2.35) and Forekaster on the back. 

Also, I've been experimenting with lower tire pressures. I ran 18/19 F/R today (65kg + 11kg bike) and was surprised that it didn't feel overly squishy, no rim strikes etc. But it did eat up some chatter, so I'm going to run that for a while.


----------



## zgxtreme (Mar 25, 2007)

Just a quick question, I stay up to date on this thread so I’m more prepared when I start back with our state XCO series. 

This year however, my first race back in the sport will be the Epic Rides Oz Trails Offroad doing the 35. For a ride such as this in Bentonville, should I be looking at tire choice differently than XCO or stick with what I’ve learned here?


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

zgxtreme said:


> Just a quick question, I stay up to date on this thread so I'm more prepared when I start back with our state XCO series.
> 
> This year however, my first race back in the sport will be the Epic Rides Oz Trails Offroad doing the 35. For a ride such as this in Bentonville, should I be looking at tire choice differently than XCO or stick with what I've learned here?


Hello, I live in Bentonville/Rogers. Not sure what you have learned on the forum regarding tires, but for our trails good protection is must because the rocks are pretty sharp. For example on the Maxxis line you want their tires with EXO casing. The Ikon seems to hold up well here. The Racing Ralphs do not.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

zgxtreme said:


> Just a quick question, I stay up to date on this thread so I'm more prepared when I start back with our state XCO series.
> 
> This year however, my first race back in the sport will be the Epic Rides Oz Trails Offroad doing the 35. For a ride such as this in Bentonville, should I be looking at tire choice differently than XCO or stick with what I've learned here?


My observation having ridden in Bentonville and other places now too. My friend flatted two rocket rons in two days. I ran xr3 and had insane grip. Definitely go with something that is lomger lasting and doesnt have a lot of space between the knobs for the sharp rocks to poke. Ikons are fine but maybe dont have as much traction on the real loose stuff. Definitely recommend Bontrager xr3.


----------



## zgxtreme (Mar 25, 2007)

Thank you both.



tgoods said:


> Hello, I live in Bentonville/Rogers. Not sure what you have learned on the forum regarding tires, but for our trails good protection is must because the rocks are pretty sharp. For example on the Maxxis line you want their tires with EXO casing. The Ikon seems to hold up well here. The Racing Ralphs do not.


Was thinking EXO Ikons but wasn't sure. Normally I just run my Minions on Slaughter Pen and The Back 40 (family farm is 20 mins north across the border) but obviously want to swap so something a lil lighter and faster for Oz Trails. Thanks for chiming in


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

Our team is a TREK GART team, I picked up several sets of tires since the price cant be beat. I just mounted some XR2 2.2 Team Issues on new ARCHES. They seem to handle well, but I have only been on the trail once. My son has been riding the 2.2 XR3 T.I'S since last year and does quite well. Like I said, I picked up 4 sets of TEAM ISSUE BONTRAGERS for about $150, cant be beat. 1 set of $92 ea. RR's at team shop discount = $130.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

LaneDetroitCity said:


> Definitely recommend Bontrager xr3.


Same here, really good all-rounder IMO.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

zgxtreme said:


> Thank you both.
> 
> Was thinking EXO Ikons but wasn't sure. Normally I just run my Minions on Slaughter Pen and The Back 40 (family farm is 20 mins north across the border) but obviously want to swap so something a lil lighter and faster for Oz Trails. Thanks for chiming in


Great! Yeah I can definitely vouch that the Ikon EXO and Ardent Race EXO are great tires for Back 40 and Slaughter Pen. I think a lot of people also use the Ardent EXO. Also, I know the Specialized XC tires w/ extra protection are popular.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

zgxtreme said:


> Just a quick question, I stay up to date on this thread so I'm more prepared when I start back with our state XCO series.
> 
> This year however, my first race back in the sport will be the Epic Rides Oz Trails Offroad doing the 35. For a ride such as this in Bentonville, should I be looking at tire choice differently than XCO or stick with what I've learned here?


the Back 40 is pretty tame, BUT the area around mile 10 and ledges has a different type of rock. Its likes a crushed flint with razor edges.

I had my first double flat of my life on that stretch. For reference, I have only every flatted an IKON twice before this and it was the same exact type of slice in the middle of the tread between knobs while JRA in Sedona and another trail with similar razor sharp chipped rock on a flat.

I could have sealed all of these with trail bacon or one of the others. I bought this DynaplugÂ® Online Store | DynaplugÂ® Micro Pro - Tubeless Bicycle Tire Repair Kit

I would actually run a big knob aggressive tire up front because the amount of momentum you can carry through the 40. My choice is a HD, also because it keeps those small rocks out with its tight tall knobs.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Found my xr1s a bit worn and it was such a fine line between grip and too little pressure. Was really showing after a year on them. 

Running a xr2 up front and found the loose over hard bite was alot better. Cand decide on a rear but i had a spare 2” fast trak so that went on. They seem to compliment eachother with their Stagard V patterns but we will see race day sunday. The fast track is definitely lighter and has deeper lugs. Running on i27 rims.

thinking if i dont like it being 2” and its small edge knobs i might go dual xr2 or get a new griptron 2.3” FT


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

J.B. Weld said:


> Same here, really good all-rounder IMO.


I was looking at this as a front but it looks more trail than xc.. Then i seen it being compared to an ikon and the tread is pretty similar. Might be decent after all...


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

zgxtreme said:


> Just a quick question, I stay up to date on this thread so I'm more prepared when I start back with our state XCO series.
> 
> This year however, my first race back in the sport will be the Epic Rides Oz Trails Offroad doing the 35. For a ride such as this in Bentonville, should I be looking at tire choice differently than XCO or stick with what I've learned here?


I've ridden all over Arkansas and have tried lots of tires. In some of the races you can get by with fast rolling tires and others you need more aggressive tread. The best all around tire I've found though is the Forekaster. After a lot of experimentation I feel it's the best compromise between traction and rolling resistance, and is a tire you can use any time of the year for almost any race.

Definitely go with EXO if you choose a maxxis tire.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

solarplex said:


> I was looking at this as a front but it looks more trail than xc.. Then i seen it being compared to an ikon and the tread is pretty similar. Might be decent after all...


Its an xc tire. Their trail tires start with SE not XR. Its lighter than a ikon and rolls faster, cheaper, and has a 30 day satisfaction guarantee. Go buy one, try it, if you dont like it return it. If lots of people returned them they wouldnt offer that. Thats a hint in itself.


----------



## LaneDetroitCity (Nov 10, 2015)

coke said:


> I've ridden all over Arkansas and have tried lots of tires. In some of the races you can get by with fast rolling tires and others you need more aggressive tread. The best all around tire I've found though is the Forekaster. After a lot of experimentation I feel it's the best compromise between traction and rolling resistance, and is a tire you can use any time of the year for almost any race.
> 
> Definitely go with EXO if you choose a maxxis tire.


Front and rear? Ive been testing one up front. It needs something to bite into or it drifts ive found, which is im sure part of the design, its not a hardpack tire.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

I've been finding hte Forekaster does a really good job on the front, even in hard pack. I think they nailed the knob stiffness. I'm very impressed with it. 

I have had it paired with a Racing Ralph 2.35 SS (Addix speed), Ikon 2.2, and Ikon 2.3 out back.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Just curious, is the Forekaster better than the Nobby Nic? They seem so similar and I love the grip of the 2.25 Nobby Nic up front and it rolls well for an XC/Trail tire. I'd like to hear from someone who has tried them both up front...pros and cons of each. Thanks.


----------



## MrEconomics (Aug 23, 2004)

The thing about these threads is that there is almost no consensus. What works for one, sucks for another....even if those two ride in the same area. I'm convinced ones riding style is more of a factor than the conditions they ride in. 

I'm riding Specialized FastTrak only because they are OEM. They suck for racing and despite minimal tread, are not great at rolling resistance. 

My second choice is always Racing Ralph but now they are hard to find without Addix, which is getting horrible reviews. I may try Maxxis this time.

What doesn't help either are the 4-5 different models within the same category. Look at Schwalbe. Racing Ralph, Rocket Ron, Thunder Burt, and Furious Fred. Those are just race. If one want's an all-around cross country you can add: Nobby Nic and Smart Sam to the pile.


----------



## rocketfuel (Jun 16, 2004)

I've been riding Ground Control all spring, they've been excellent in the rocky and rooty stuff we have here. Will switch for Fast track up front and Renegade rear.


----------



## machine4321 (Jun 3, 2011)

Ive been on some older prototype aspens I bought from a team that had some extras. If all aspens perform this way I'm sold! These have more grip then any other low knob xc tire ive used. More cornering grip then my fasttraks and even though they're 2.1 they feel pretty nice. Weighed in at 600 grams. 

I will be getting some 2.25 soon.


----------



## Litemike (Sep 13, 2007)

MrEconomics said:


> The thing about these threads is that there is almost no consensus. What works for one, sucks for another....even if those two ride in the same area. I'm convinced ones riding style is more of a factor than the conditions they ride in.
> 
> I'm riding Specialized FastTrak only because they are OEM. They suck for racing and despite minimal tread, are not great at rolling resistance.
> 
> ...


Interesting and I somewhat agree, there is no rhyme or reason. Its like that one time I podiumed and swore it was from a Tombstone Supreme pizza the night before. I had a lot of Supremes in the freezer, but never a result like the initial!!! Tires are the same, I'll swear by a set up, then wash out. The main problem is, the trail is always at a different "condition" - no matter what. Rain, humidity, sun, overcast, wind, wind direction, time of year -we've all been on our favorite trail when and felt unbeatable, but the conditions are difficult to duplicate and we misread our performance and instead look to our equipment. On a side note, I am liking the Bonty XR2 teams -


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Anyone tried the Onza Svelte? I currently have a Barzo front and Mezcal rear. Front Barzo is out until late June at the store.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

coke said:


> I've ridden all over Arkansas and have tried lots of tires. In some of the races you can get by with fast rolling tires and others you need more aggressive tread. The best all around tire I've found though is the Forekaster. After a lot of experimentation I feel it's the best compromise between traction and rolling resistance, and is a tire you can use any time of the year for almost any race.


Thanks for the feedback! I might give the Forekaster a try as I also ride in Arkansas. You run the Forekaster front and back?


----------



## m3bas (Dec 24, 2011)

At the risk of confusing things further, any experience on the Rekon?
2.25 width, good weight, could be a good front tyre?


----------



## slipstream (Feb 26, 2005)

I've used the Rekons as both a front and rear tire in races. I've been impressed so far, especially as a front tire, used in combo with a 2.20 Ikon on the rear. Rolls well, but has good cornering bite. Smaller knobs than Ikon 2.35, which is also another tire I often use as a race tire, but faster rolling and lighter. Seems like a happy medium between an Ikon and Ardent Race. I've been trying it out as a training tire on the rear. It rolls well enough, grips corners very well, but more pressure sensitive than the Ikon, too much pressure and it gets skatey in the corners, and doesn't quite hook up like the Ikon out the saddle (25 psi), I'm in the process of trying some lower tire pressure to see if that changes my impression as a rear tire.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Did a 6-hour race this weekend with the Mezcals front and rear. Felt a bit sketchy at first as I was used to a slightly knobbier front, but once I dropped the pressure a bit I really liked it.


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

spsoon said:


> Did a 6-hour race this weekend with the Mezcals front and rear. Felt a bit sketchy at first as I was used to a slightly knobbier front, but once I dropped the pressure a bit I really liked it.


How many PSI did you drop the two tires? I'm new to Mezcals, and am still experimenting.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

I ended up about 2 PSI lower than the 2.4 Mountain King/X-King combo I came from (the 2.35 Mezcals are fatter). Feels like I could probably go even a bit lower, but I'm paranoid ever since I rolled a tire and broke my clavicle


----------



## kriedel (Jun 17, 2017)

m3bas said:


> At the risk of confusing things further, any experience on the Rekon?
> 2.25 width, good weight, could be a good front tyre?


I've been trying a 2.25 Rekon on the front with a 25mm I/W rim, So Cal loose over hard rocky xc stuff. Rather impressed with it. Nice shape, hooks up predictably. Lighter than an ARdent race 2.2 with more volume, faster rolling surprisingly, though doesn't have that chainsaw corner bite that the race has. I've been swearing it's my new fav do it all XC front tire but not sure what to pair it with out back, Aspen, Ikon2.2, Mezcal 2.1, this fast trak 2.1 has to go.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Litemike said:


> Interesting and I somewhat agree, there is no rhyme or reason. Its like that one time I podiumed and swore it was from a Tombstone Supreme pizza the night before. I had a lot of Supremes in the freezer, but never a result like the initial!!!


This is the exact reason why I always wear my lucky socks and I never bone the wife or masturbate at least 2 days before a race. It just works.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

ohmygato said:


> This is the exact reason why I always wear my lucky socks and I never bone the wife or masturbate at least 2 days before a race. It just works.


Wow.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

I want to look into some 2" or smaller tires if they're still in production. I'm old school like that. I hate looking down at my Conti 2.2's and perceiving them as fat. It's a mind game.


----------



## scurry4 (Nov 28, 2009)

Eric Marshall said:


> How many PSI did you drop the two tires? I'm new to Mezcals, and am still experimenting.


I find them very picky on pressure. almost every ride I let out a few PSI in the front, when I cant get them to stick. I also find them to fold less at lower pressures than some others.

I do like the Mezcals, but have been feeling they are holding me back a little. They are amazing for training though, especially if you ride to and from the trails. Super durable, but my side knobs are finally starting to fall apart. Looking forward to trying a Ra/Ra Ro/Ro setup I have on the way. Also thinking about testing a thunderburt rear.


----------



## scurry4 (Nov 28, 2009)

Has anyone used tubulars recently, and been able to compare against modern tubeless? 

I happen to have a set of the nice DT 950t tubular wheels (I used them for CX) and a set of tubulars that came with them (racing ralphs). I actually was going to trash the rims as one has a small crack I dont trust for CX, but think for MTB it would be fine, atleast for testing.

Worth gluing them up?


----------



## Drider85 (Jan 12, 2009)

scurry4 said:


> Has anyone used tubulars recently, and been able to compare against modern tubeless?
> 
> I happen to have a set of the nice DT 950t tubular wheels (I used them for CX) and a set of tubulars that came with them (racing ralphs). I actually was going to trash the rims as one has a small crack I dont trust for CX, but think for MTB it would be fine, atleast for testing.
> 
> Worth gluing them up?


Tubular vs tubeless for mountain can be summarized like this in my experience with tubular Racing Ralph's. They were blazing fast with really good traction and they didn't fold under the same as a clincher. Better in a good predictable sort of way. However the lack of tire volume put them at a major deficit to even other 2.0 clinchers. The larger volume 2.2 or 2.3 are so much better at taking up roots and rocks. I'm going to turn mine into a gravel wheelset. 2 inch for gravel sounds about right. Think really good Monstercross and not large enough for real MTB.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Decided to ditch my plan of putting on the 884g 2.35 Hans for my mountain races and went with the 770g 2.25 Nobby Nic. We'll see if I regret it come race day!



ohmygato said:


> I never bone the wife


For some of us, this is easy!


----------



## Ketzal (Oct 30, 2016)

*New Schwalbe XC tires*

Seems there's a new XC tire in town. Featured on the new Cannondale FSi at today's media launch in Albstadt. They're called Racing Ray. They look somewhere between a Thunder Burt and Racing Ralph. Could be a great summer race tire...nothing official from Schwalbe yet.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Here's a link with more info on the new tires from Schwalbe: https://mbaction.com/schwalbe-announces-new-racing-ralph-and-racing-ray-tires/


----------



## scurry4 (Nov 28, 2009)

Those look very good, excited to get my hands on some.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

scurry4 said:


> I find them very picky on pressure. almost every ride I let out a few PSI in the front, when I cant get them to stick. I also find them to fold less at lower pressures than some others.
> 
> I do like the Mezcals, but have been feeling they are holding me back a little. They are amazing for training though, especially if you ride to and from the trails. Super durable, but my side knobs are finally starting to fall apart. Looking forward to trying a Ra/Ra Ro/Ro setup I have on the way. Also thinking about testing a thunderburt rear.


For me, the Vittorias outlast Schwalbes 5:1.

The Vittoria sidewalls are pretty stout, definitely going down a psi or even 2 from a similar setup with another brand may help get the feel you're looking for. Ran 2.35 and 2.25 combos of Barzo and Mezcal over the last year, currently on 2.35 Barzo/2.35 Mezcal and working great for our sandy trails. Probably going to try Barzo/Barzo next as that's the only combo I haven't done, just wish those G+ ones would get here. Or gumwalls.


----------



## scurry4 (Nov 28, 2009)

pinkpowa said:


> For me, the Vittorias outlast Schwalbes 5:1.
> 
> The Vittoria sidewalls are pretty stout, definitely going down a psi or even 2 from a similar setup with another brand may help get the feel you're looking for. Ran 2.35 and 2.25 combos of Barzo and Mezcal over the last year, currently on 2.35 Barzo/2.35 Mezcal and working great for our sandy trails. Probably going to try Barzo/Barzo next as that's the only combo I haven't done, just wish those G+ ones would get here. Or gumwalls.


Yeah, I am happy with their durability, and will continue to use them for most training. Compared to ardent races it is incredible, knobs would fall off those things in a few rides.

Barzo front Mezcal rear makes a lot of sense to me.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

Based only on their photos and the ad copy, so take it FWIW (not much): The Racing Ray looks like an Ikon and they are saying it is 'aggressive' and designed for a front tire. The new Racing Ralph looks halfway between the old RaRa and a TB. Definitely looks trimmed down and now a rear tire only option.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

euro-trash said:


> Based only on their photos and the ad copy, so take it FWIW (not much): The Racing Ray looks like an Ikon and they are saying it is 'aggressive' and designed for a front tire. The new Racing Ralph looks halfway between the old RaRa and a TB. Definitely looks trimmed down and now a rear tire only option.


Racing Ray looks like a Vittoria Barzo or Conti Cross King to me.


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

scurry4 said:


> Has anyone used tubulars recently, and been able to compare against modern tubeless?
> 
> I happen to have a set of the nice DT 950t tubular wheels (I used them for CX) and a set of tubulars that came with them (racing ralphs). I actually was going to trash the rims as one has a small crack I dont trust for CX, but think for MTB it would be fine, atleast for testing.
> 
> Worth gluing them up?


I ran tubulars for a year on SRAM Rise XX wheels-totally unimpressed. I tried Tufo 2.2 XC4 (I think) and Geax Saguaro 2.0 tires. Both tires were low volume and performed much worse than a Racing Ralph tubeless 2.1. I bought a set of Ralph tubulars and stretched one on the rim and inflated it-1.7-1.8". I sent them back and sold the wheels. I'm happier with tubeless and with more tire options too.


----------



## HEWSINATOR (Oct 9, 2006)

Tires for BC Bike Race (https://www.bcbikerace.com/the-journey/the-stages/)

I have a Rocky Element that came with Maxxis DHR II 29 x 2.3 (Front) and Minion SS 29 x 2.3 EXO TR (Rear). Wife switched ti Ikons and I am thinking that my set up may be too slow/burly for BC Bike Race. Thoughts? New to mountain biking and don't have any points of reference.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

How’s the volume of Rekon 29x2.25 vs Aspen 2.25 (or even vs ikon & Arden Race). Looking for a good rear with Forecaster 2.35 up front


----------



## Raikzz (Jul 19, 2014)

S-Works renegade,fast trak and ground control!
https://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/news/...orks-renegade-fast-trak-ground-control-52324/


----------



## creativefletch (Dec 1, 2014)

Current set-up I'm happy with:

29x2.35 Maxxis Ardent Race 3C/EXO/Tubless up front and 29x2.25 Maxxis Aspen 120TPI Tubless in the rear.


----------



## TTUB (Nov 9, 2010)

Raikzz said:


> S-Works renegade,fast trak and ground control!


I just went from Fast Traks front and rear to Ground Controls 2-bliss front and rear last night. 
Fast Traks were sketchy on loose over hard. (which is all we have here).

The GCs transformed my bike. Way more confidence. I went 2.1 in back and 2.3 in front. Feel fast and light enough. Some of the easiest tires ever to air-up tubeless, especially the 2.3.

I didn't know what to expect width wise... once I aired everything up, I took some measurements.
GC 2.3 measures barely 2.2 at the carcass, maybe 2.25 at the side knobs.
GC 2.1 measures barely 2.05 at the carcass and 2.1 at the side knobs.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Has anybody tried running a Race King as a front tire? What was your experience?


----------



## TiGeo (Jul 31, 2008)

Ikon 29x2.2 exo rear Ikon 29x2.35 exo front. Love the Ikons for an all-around lightweight tire. I run 21ish rear/19ish psi front. I'm 170. My rims are 24mm internal.


----------



## Pynchonite (Sep 2, 2013)

TTUB said:


> I just went from Fast Traks front and rear to Ground Controls 2-bliss front and rear last night.
> Fast Traks were sketchy on loose over hard. (which is all we have here).
> 
> The GCs transformed my bike. Way more confidence. I went 2.1 in back and 2.3 in front. Feel fast and light enough. Some of the easiest tires ever to air-up tubeless, especially the 2.3.
> ...


Are you using the S-Works versions? Also, how do they grip on hardpack?


----------



## TTUB (Nov 9, 2010)

Pynchonite said:


> Are you using the S-Works versions? Also, how do they grip on hardpack?


Standard issue 55$ 2bliss Griptron

I'm not sure that they make S-Works tires anymore. I have used S-Works tires over the years and they are nice and light... but the side-walls are just too fragile.
I am mainly into Endurance Racing and do not want my day to come to an end over a tire issue... for me, it's worth a few added grams to have a little piece of mind. I go with the standard issue 2bliss.
The Griptron rubber seems to grip very well on hardpack.


----------



## kave (Jan 7, 2013)

I use Continental Race King 2.2 Protection on my wheels which is 30mm inner width which I intended to use on this summers bike bike race in the alps. However, I have been using X-King 2.4's for many years and I totally forgot how slippery the RaceKings are in dry surfaces. I might go back to the all new Cross King 2.2 Protection or 2.3 but I don't know if its worth 100g/tire to go 2.3.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

*What's up with Aspens?*

I have a few weeks between races so I put an Aspen 2.1 on the rear to test and I freaking love it. Before I put it on I thought "looks like the Maxxis version of the Thunder Burt" but I was wrong in so many ways. Rolling resistance feels excellent, similar to TB. Cornering traction is good, which I could never get out of the TB. Climbing traction is outstanding and this is a major advantage against TB. Braking is good, unlike TB which feels like it instantly locks up. Weight? I dunno... maybe 500-600 grams or so? I changed from an Ikon 2.25 which is surprisingly the same actual width to my eyes when mounted up. I started at about 25 psi and dropped it the next ride to 23. It was noticeably better at 23. I think the one I put on is an older version I got in trade and I don't think it has any markings which indicate the casing or compound or anything. I think it is going to be my new rear tire for most of my (pretty tame) XC racing. I am considering buying a 2.25 Aspen to try in the front and I expect it will be close to the actual width of the Ikon 2.35.

Does anyone else here aside from Nino Schurter run Aspens? How about using them front and rear both? Is that just insane?


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

I use the Aspen where I can for the reasons you describe. biggest adv over the TB is braking (imo). Pretty sure "I" wouldn't use it up front - but that shouldn't be taken as you can't.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Anyone tried the Vittoria Peyote ? Looking for a Barzo alternative while it's out of stock. I noticed the BMC pros using it two weeks ago at the muddy WC.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

ohmygato said:


> I have a few weeks between races so I put an Aspen 2.1 on the rear to test and I freaking love it. Before I put it on I thought "looks like the Maxxis version of the Thunder Burt" but I was wrong in so many ways. Rolling resistance feels excellent, similar to TB. Cornering traction is good, which I could never get out of the TB. Climbing traction is outstanding and this is a major advantage against TB. Braking is good, unlike TB which feels like it instantly locks up. Weight? I dunno... maybe 500-600 grams or so? I changed from an Ikon 2.25 which is surprisingly the same actual width to my eyes when mounted up. I started at about 25 psi and dropped it the next ride to 23. It was noticeably better at 23. I think the one I put on is an older version I got in trade and I don't think it has any markings which indicate the casing or compound or anything. I think it is going to be my new rear tire for most of my (pretty tame) XC racing. I am considering buying a 2.25 Aspen to try in the front and I expect it will be close to the actual width of the Ikon 2.35.
> 
> Does anyone else here aside from Nino Schurter run Aspens? How about using them front and rear both? Is that just insane?


I ran the stock Aspens 2.25 (front/back) that came on my bike for 3 months and through two XC races. I thought they were pretty good in all my training and were light with great rolling resistance. I thought cornering at speed was not particularly confidence inspiring but was acceptable because they felt "predictable" when they did slip. I played around with PSI and settled on 23/25. However, after washing out several times at race speed in corners I was fed up with Aspens. I think I was trying to like them or justify them because Nino rode Aspens. I don't like them or they don't like my riding style.

Since then, about 3 weeks now, I run Mezcals front and back. Wow, what a huge improvement over my Aspens. I no longer slip in corners and feel a lot more confident railing turns. I don't think I've lost any rolling resistance but I've gained plenty of traction. I like my Mezcals over my Ikon/Ardent Race combo from last year as well.

*On my scale the Aspens weighted near 700 grams +/-

*Mezcals weighted 740-ish grams


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Been running Aspen 2.25's on my Pivot 429SL on 25IW rims at 18/21 PSI and they've worked well for me so far. Pretty good traction, cornering and climbing, and definitely faster than Ikons. At race pace, handling is always a little sketchier but haven't had any disasters as of yet on them, just a few skids here and there. Will keep trying them until I hurt myself I guess...


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Whys is the Aspen MSRP ($64ish) so much less than other Maxxis tires like Ikon and Ardent Race ($80ish)?


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

wheelzqc said:


> Anyone tried the Vittoria Peyote ? Looking for a Barzo alternative while it's out of stock. I noticed the BMC pros using it two weeks ago at the muddy WC.


I've got a Peyote, I raced it as a front in a couple of cx races (mostly grass, and dry, with TB rear), I liked it. The knobs are smaller and lower than the Barzo, I don't think it would be as good for heavier/slicker mud, I think of it as between a thunder burt and the barzo. I think it would be good in really watery mud, but I'd run something with bigger more open knobs in heavier mud, like the Barzo or Ground Control. I haven't tried the Forecaster, but I'm sure I would like it in slick mud.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

I rode the forekaster in slick mud after a big rain Yesterday. It was a trail with limestone plates and rock gardens that are typically like Ice. I pretty much cleaned everything. It was p[retty amazing. Those spikey knobs paired with 2-3 sipes per knob are amazing. The volume is nice too. Its not a true 2.35, but it is great. 

I had only run it on the front before this. 

My wife also rode it on the front in a muddy marathon race. I swapped it on 10 minutes before the race. She had all of the traction she needed and said it was awesome. I on the other hand had a 2.35 knobby nick in that race which was like a hippo on ice skates in the wet rocks. 

I will be ordering 4 more to have around for any time there are bad conditions for each of our bikes. We have had two races this season that turned into monsoon events. I may even start running them if the forekast is threatening.


----------



## Carioca_XC (Dec 30, 2014)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Whys is the Aspen MSRP ($64ish) so much less than other Maxxis tires like Ikon and Ardent Race ($80ish)?


Despite all the publicity they got from Nino, the new 2.25" Aspens don't have a 3C Maxxspeed option. I guess the price difference must have to do with that.


----------



## Carioca_XC (Dec 30, 2014)

MI-XC said:


> I ran the stock Aspens 2.25 (front/back) that came on my bike for 3 months and through two XC races. I thought they were pretty good in all my training and were light with great rolling resistance. I thought cornering at speed was not particularly confidence inspiring but was acceptable because they felt "predictable" when they did slip. I played around with PSI and settled on 23/25. However, after washing out several times at race speed in corners I was fed up with Aspens. I think I was trying to like them or justify them because Nino rode Aspens. I don't like them or they don't like my riding style.
> 
> Since then, about 3 weeks now, I run Mezcals front and back. Wow, what a huge improvement over my Aspens. I no longer slip in corners and feel a lot more confident railing turns. I don't think I've lost any rolling resistance but I've gained plenty of traction. I like my Mezcals over my Ikon/Ardent Race combo from last year as well.
> 
> ...


There is this handy thread on tyre weights

http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/29er-tire-weight-list-532607-10.html

There is something I couldn't quite get yet. 
I've heard great reviews on the Mezcals here, but it looks like they are roughly 100g heavier than some great tyres, such as Maxxis Ikons or Aspens.

People invest a lot of cash to shed 100g of each wheel. 
The point is, isn't 100g too much of a weight penalty?


----------



## litany (Nov 25, 2009)

Carioca_XC said:


> There is this handy thread on tyre weights
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/29er-tire-weight-list-532607-10.html
> 
> ...


I thought the Ikon was around the same weight? That thread you linked to showed an Ikon TR (not exo) at 680g. I have 2.35 mezcal 29 at 729g and the 2.25 is 710g in that thread. So pretty similar weight, plus you get the TNT sidewall which seems pretty good.

Seems like not much weight penalty imo for the larger, reinforced tire. Plus I prefer the handling and grip of the mezcal over the ikon.


----------



## Carioca_XC (Dec 30, 2014)

litany said:


> I thought the Ikon was around the same weight? That thread you linked to showed an Ikon TR (not exo) at 680g. I have 2.35 mezcal 29 at 729g and the 2.25 is 710g in that thread. So pretty similar weight, plus you get the TNT sidewall which seems pretty good.
> 
> Seems like not much weight penalty imo for the larger, reinforced tire. Plus I prefer the handling and grip of the mezcal over the ikon.


Yeah, tyre weights tend to vary a lot.

I was referring to the Mezcal & Aspen info I found there.


----------



## markus_krk (Jul 27, 2013)

MI-XC said:


> I like my Mezcals over my Ikon/Ardent Race combo from last year as well.


Can you say a bit more about it?
I'm particularly interested in cornering grip of Ardent Race vs Mezcal on the front especially when leaned hard. Moreover how would you rate rolling resistance and durability, also on pavement as I ride to my trails.
Currently I'm running Ardent Race/Ikon both 2.2 3C TR Non-EXO and in general I'm very happy with this combo, as for my riding style and trails they offer very good grip, are problem free and have excellent durability - still could be a bit lighter(esp. AR) and have less rolling resistance on pavement - on trail they roll very well, but on pavement the old S-works Fast Tracks were noticeably faster.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

My 29" Ikon 2.2 3C EXO TR 120tpi was 665g with residual sealant.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

A


Carioca_XC said:


> There is this handy thread on tyre weights
> 
> http://forums.mtbr.com/wheels-tires/29er-tire-weight-list-532607-10.html
> 
> ...


If you buy enough tires you start to realize that listed tire weight and actual tire weight can differ quite a bit. I weighed my tires on a very accurate scale and these were my results:

Aspen tire #1: 698g
Aspen tire #2: 687g

Mezcal tire #1: 724g
Mezcal tire #2: 742g

So I gained 26g and 55g per tire for a 81g total. I can guarantee for me I will be faster with better handling skills through corners in my Mezcals than any perceived weight penalty adding 81g (0.18 pounds). With a total bike weight including pedals and bottle cage I'm at 23 lbs 2 oz (10.5 kg) for my full sus. I can shed grams here and there but performance starts to suffer chasing weight.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

markus_krk said:


> Can you say a bit more about it?
> I'm particularly interested in cornering grip of Ardent Race vs Mezcal on the front especially when leaned hard. Moreover how would you rate rolling resistance and durability, also on pavement as I ride to my trails.
> Currently I'm running Ardent Race/Ikon both 2.2 3C TR Non-EXO and in general I'm very happy with this combo, as for my riding style and trails they offer very good grip, are problem free and have excellent durability - still could be a bit lighter(esp. AR) and have less rolling resistance on pavement - on trail they roll very well, but on pavement the old S-works Fast Tracks were noticeably faster.


I thought both cornered well. I've only had the Mezcals for a few weeks but so far so good. That being said, I always buy the most protection on a tire and I have never flatted riding in Michigan which is mostly loose over hard, roots and sand with not many rocks. I'm more of a choose a smooth line than mashing through obstacles.

I don't have a road bike so all my tires get plenty of gravel and pavement riding. I think the Mezcals feel good and I recently completed a 55 Mile mixed surface ride (pavement, gravel, mtb trail) and they were great.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

One more comment re the Peyote; It may be slightly better in real mud than the Mezcal, but at that point you'd be better off with a real mud tire, - I either choose the Mezcal or Barzo, the Peyote is lost somewhere in the middle.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Thanks for the info ! I tried a couple of times the Forekaster. It might be a better than the Barzo in the wet. Felt like it cleared better than the Barzo.


----------



## m3bas (Dec 24, 2011)

Where is everyone buying Vittoria tyres, particularly the Mezcal 2.35? Can't find online anywhere.


----------



## givemefive (May 26, 2007)

My old bike had Ikons, skinnier in the back, 2.3 in the front. I really hate that tire in the front. My new bike has regular TR Aspens. I feel so much more confident with the Aspens. They are really a surprisingly stable tire in corners.

BTW About Oz Trails.. I sliced an EXO cased Ikon 90% of the way through on Back 40. Not sure which part of the trail as the tire continue to hold air until I got home thanks to sealant and luck. Next time I ride Back 40 I'm going to take a heavier casing like WTB Tough for the rear.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

m3bas said:


> Where is everyone buying Vittoria tyres, particularly the Mezcal 2.35? Can't find online anywhere.


Those are damn near sold out in the US I'm told. I've had a set of Barzo 2.35 G+ on backorder since February.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Similar in Canada. I was able to grab a Mezcal but not Barzo. At least not until early July. Looking at alternatiuve.... and that includes Mezcal/Mezcal combo. Just tried quickly the Racing Ralph 2.35 (borrowed). Similar weight and width as the Mezcal 2.25. Grip was decent, coming from a Barzo front. Makes me more tempted to try full Mezcal if it has similar grip to RaRa !


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

wheelzqc said:


> Similar in Canada. I was able to grab a Mezcal but not Barzo. At least not until early July. Looking at alternatiuve.... and that includes Mezcal/Mezcal combo. Just tried quickly the Racing Ralph 2.35 (borrowed). Similar weight and width as the Mezcal 2.25. Grip was decent, coming from a Barzo front. Makes me more tempted to try full Mezcal if it has similar grip to RaRa !


A note on the barzos: there was an early batch of the non G+ 2.35's that measure skinny. I've been using one for the last few months and finally put a caliper on it. A good .1" smaller than the 2.35 Mezcal I'm running on the same width rims as a rear tire. So even though it's closer to 2.25 the Barzo was a good front tire for me. I'd run it front and rear if I can't get a 2.35 Barzo set for my next race.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

givemefive said:


> My old bike had Ikons, skinnier in the back, 2.3 in the front. I really hate that tire in the front. My new bike has regular TR Aspens. I feel so much more confident with the Aspens. They are really a surprisingly stable tire in corners.
> 
> BTW About Oz Trails.. I sliced an EXO cased Ikon 90% of the way through on Back 40. Not sure which part of the trail as the tire continue to hold air until I got home thanks to sealant and luck. Next time I ride Back 40 I'm going to take a heavier casing like WTB Tough for the rear.


I sliced an EXO forekaster and IKON within 2 miles of each other on the Back 40. Its only one area between the ledges and the 10 mi mark that has the nasty razor blade flint. Its worth noting I have only ever flatted an Ikon 1 time in 10K miles. It was a similar sharp crushed rock walking trail in Sedona.

I attribute some of it to going a little slower than usual.

The only thing that would have helped is a tire with more/taller/tighter knobs. I have had great luck running a Hans Dampf front there. I am not sure what I will run on the rear if I do the OZ trails race.


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

m3bas said:


> Where is everyone buying Vittoria tyres, particularly the Mezcal 2.35? Can't find online anywhere.


I've bought several from here this year:

https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11436054.html

I can see that they don't currently have any 29ers right now though, which is what I've been getting.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> The only thing that would have helped is a tire with more/taller/tighter knobs. I have had great luck running a Hans Dampf front there. I am not sure what I will run on the rear if I do the OZ trails race.


This is great (imo) info. i'm looking at doing that as opposed to early/mid-season cx and look forward to your (and others) insight on tires for that area. Love my Ikons for areas that I know little about but I also prefer riding to walking.

edit - replied in thread because I can't give you "reputation" apparently


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

I do like the HD tread design on the front for blown out trails in the dry. Rolling resistance is actually quite good. If it lasted longer I'd run it, but I moved on to Vittoria G+. 

Vittoria is enjoying quite a bit of popularity. Can't find their tires at all, lol.


----------



## Turd (Jul 21, 2005)

Eric Marshall said:


> I've bought several from here this year:
> 
> https://www.probikekit.com/bicycle-...ech-tnt-tubeless-ready-mtb-tyre/11436054.html
> 
> I can see that they don't currently have any 29ers right now though, which is what I've been getting.


Vittoria Mezcal lll G+ 29 x 2.35 TNT Tire from BikeBling.com

?


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Going to put my old 650b bike back together for a 24 hour race (130mm FS) and think I will try the Mezcal's on it.


----------



## Lemons87 (May 26, 2016)

midwestmtb said:


> Has anybody tried running a Race King as a front tire? What was your experience?


I run a 2.2 race king protection front and rear at 18-20 psi. They are very fast rolling. They do get sketchy on loose turns. They grip well for what the are. Mine are on 19mm mavic crossmax sl pro wheels. This is the widest tire mavic suggests for those wheels. Ill be doing my 2nd race of the season this weekend in Rogers Arkansas so we will se how they handle in the mountins. I ride alot of very rocky places and they have done well. Havent crashed yet, had a few close calls though. Hope this helps.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Lemons87 said:


> I run a 2.2 race king protection front and rear at 18-20 psi. They are very fast rolling. They do get sketchy on loose turns. They grip well for what the are. Mine are on 19mm mavic crossmax sl pro wheels. This is the widest tire mavic suggests for those wheels. Ill be doing my 2nd race of the season this weekend in Rogers Arkansas so we will se how they handle in the mountins. I ride alot of very rocky places and they have done well. Havent crashed yet, had a few close calls though. Hope this helps.
> 
> Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk


Thanks! Good info. I think I'll give it a shot and see how it works out.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

Anyone running both 2.35 front and back tires? or 2.5's for front and difference or same size for the rear tire?


----------



## Trhuster (Jun 8, 2018)

Just got my Vittoria Mezcal TNT G+ 27.5x2.25"

Advertised weight at Vittoria homepage 670g, sticker on tire says 640g. Real weight is 655g and second tire is 650g.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Swapped my 2.35 RaRa for a 2.35 NoNic for some bigger knobs before my last race. The course is up in the mountains and tends to be real soft, dry, and sandy. I was sliding all over the place! I hate to imagine how bad it was for those running narrow XC tires!

I already swapped it out for a 2.35 Hans Dampf. The course will be near identical. 884g better hold tight!



slimphatty said:


> Anyone running both 2.35 front and back tires? or 2.5's for front and difference or same size for the rear tire?


Currently 2.35/2.25. I would consider a 2.35, but not sure the extra weight is worth the cushion. But I would try it. Maybe I'll put my old 2.35 RaRa back there (hard tail).


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

Sidewalk said:


> Swapped my 2.35 RaRa for a 2.35 NoNic for some bigger knobs before my last race. The course is up in the mountains and tends to be real soft, dry, and sandy. I was sliding all over the place! I hate to imagine how bad it was for those running narrow XC tires!


From my experience NoNic is a terrible dry hard pack or sand tire. Super sketchy. I'd way rather run a true XC race tire.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

slimphatty said:


> Anyone running both 2.35 front and back tires? or 2.5's for front and difference or same size for the rear tire?


2.35 Forekaster R, 2.35 AR F. Love the way this combo hooks up. Probably could save some weight with a smaller, non-EXO tire but I'm having too much fun to care. Plus I haven't had a flat in a couple of months and that is near-miraculous given my history with Schwalbe.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

winters.benjamin said:


> 2.35 Forekaster R, 2.35 AR F. Love the way this combo hooks up. Probably could save some weight with a smaller, non-EXO tire but I'm having too much fun to care. Plus I haven't had a flat in a couple of months and that is near-miraculous given my history with Schwalbe.


Which has more aggressive tread? I was thinking running this combo other way as I would think AR would be faster roller.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

kevbikemad said:


> From my experience NoNic is a terrible dry hard pack or sand tire. Super sketchy. I'd way rather run a true XC race tire.


Interesting. I was wondering about this as I have an old knobby dick sitting around getting dry right now.

Would you say the nobby nic is mainly a mud/loamy type tire? And for sand are you mainly looking for volume rather than knobs?


----------



## 2AllBeef (Jan 19, 2017)

ohmygato said:


> I have an old knobby dick sitting around getting dry right now.


Use it or lose it


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

ohmygato said:


> Would you say the nobby nic is mainly a mud/loamy type tire? And for sand are you mainly looking for volume rather than knobs?


Loamy conditions are the only place I would consider the NN good. Anything else has been not great to even bad.

Yes to volume for sand, I also like lots of edges.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

durkind said:


> Which has more aggressive tread? I was thinking running this combo other way as I would think AR would be faster roller.


Forekaster looks more aggressive to me. I have it on the back because I need it for the steep, loose climbs.


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

BmanInTheD said:


> Been running Aspen 2.25's on my Pivot 429SL on 25IW rims at 18/21 PSI and they've worked well for me so far. Pretty good traction, cornering and climbing, and definitely faster than Ikons. At race pace, handling is always a little sketchier but haven't had any disasters as of yet on them, just a few skids here and there. Will keep trying them until I hurt myself I guess...


I've been riding the Aspens on new bike (SC Blur) for several weeks now. No question they are fast and sketchy but they remind me of some CX courses: some CX courses are sketchy as hell in preride but when racing starts, you go hard and forget about it. I think you nailed the pressure too, 18/20 seems best for me; 158 pounds and no rim strikes yet.

Our midweek races start next week so there will be plentiful Strava segments to see where these tires shine and fail. So far in practice they've been slower on the DH but way faster on climbs and flattish terrain.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

probikekit has 2.25 and 2.35 Barzo g+ back in stock.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

no 2.25 in 29er


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

That's odd. I bought a 2.25 literally two minutes before posting. Sketchy.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Schulze said:


> That's odd. I bought a 2.25 literally two minutes before posting. Sketchy.


Probably just sold out.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Feedback on those beloved bontrager XR2. They are fast tires. They make your legs feel fresh when they are not. The braking is enough for me and I have run it on the front of my hardtail and rear of my Top fuel. 

After 3 rides on the rear of my Top fuel, it stranded me with a sidewall pinch flat. I have never had this happen in 10K miles on Maxxis Exo. These tires are not for me on this terrain. 

I was thinking of running them at nationals since that course is really tame, But I still dont know if i want to risk driving 42 hours to pinch flat in a race.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

For those looking for Mezcal 29x2.25 there's a guy in another forum site called Paceline selling a pair for $50. He says just a couple rides. Here's the link:

https://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=223656


----------



## newking (Nov 6, 2007)

Winters: Are the 2.35 AR tires 'slightly' bigger or 'noticeably' bigger than the forekaster's? Been thinking about this combo. I really the forekaster as a rear tire and usually like something a little bigger up front.



winters.benjamin said:


> 2.35 Forekaster R, 2.35 AR F. Love the way this combo hooks up. Probably could save some weight with a smaller, non-EXO tire but I'm having too much fun to care. Plus I haven't had a flat in a couple of months and that is near-miraculous given my history with Schwalbe.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

Kabush wrote on his pinkbike PR feature this week that he's testing a new Maxxis XC tire. 
Apologies if this has already been noted. Didn't read past posts.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

newking said:


> Winters: Are the 2.35 AR tires 'slightly' bigger or 'noticeably' bigger than the forekaster's? Been thinking about this combo. I really the forekaster as a rear tire and usually like something a little bigger up front.


I haven't measured, but I can't tell much of a difference in size just by looking.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

westin said:


> Kabush wrote on his pinkbike PR feature this week that he's testing a new Maxxis XC tire.
> Apologies if this has already been noted. Didn't read past posts.


Probably this:
https://www.maxxis.com/catalog/tire-569-140-rekon-race


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

BmanInTheD said:


> Probably this:
> https://www.maxxis.com/catalog/tire-569-140-rekon-race


Looks like that tire Nino used for a race last year. Looks like an interesting option.

Edit - the promo video shows Nino used it at MSA in 2017. Interesting how long it took. So many similar Maxxis tires...


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

According to Maxxis, Their fastest to slowest (grippier) XC tires now are in this order: 
Recon Race> Aspen>Ikon. 

According to the Maxxis video, the Recon Race is best as a rear tire paired with either an Aspen or Ikon up front.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

So with all tire suggestions, what outweighs what--weight vs rolling resistance? It seems the Vittoria Mezcal may the lowest rolling resistance yet weighs more than an Ikon or Racing Ralph. I would think a weight savings on rear of 50-70 grams would be significant, but maybe not. Even the 29x2.25 Mezcal is over 700 grams (TNT version) but seems to get great reviews.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Unbrockenchain said:


> So with all tire suggestions, what outweighs what--weight vs rolling resistance? It seems the Vittoria Mezcal may the lowest rolling resistance yet weighs more than an Ikon or Racing Ralph. I would think a weight savings on rear of 50-70 grams would be significant, but maybe not. Even the 29x2.25 Mezcal is over 700 grams (TNT version) but seems to get great reviews.


Weight is less important to me that grip, Crr and puncture resistance.

The extra 50g per wheel is a relatively small consideration and doesn't really matter compared to the several watts of Crr difference, eating **** twice or puncturing over the course of a race.

I haven't had a single puncture in the year plus I've been running a Mezcal on the rear, FWIW.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Thanks for reply. What do you run as a front?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Thanks for reply. What do you run as a front?


Depends on the location and time of year. Barzo right now.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

What front tire would you guys recommend for situations where the trail is partially dry but there are still soft spots in corners which can cause a nasty surprise if you come in too hot? 

I find this is fairly common a day or two after rain.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Sidewalk said:


> I already swapped it out for a 2.35 Hans Dampf. The course will be near identical. 884g better hold tight!


Glad I made the swap. The HD was hard to push on the climbs, but totally worth it for all the loose, sandy stuff I had to deal with. Wasn't a lot of climbing, just climbing at elevation. Still managed to fall over at one point though


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

midwestmtb said:


> What front tire would you guys recommend for situations where the trail is partially dry but there are still soft spots in corners which can cause a nasty surprise if you come in too hot?
> 
> I find this is fairly common a day or two after rain.


Forekaster 2.35 for sure. I am buying 4 new ones to have ready for nationals in snowshoe, WV.

My normal front tires are am IKON, HD, NN or Forekaster. All 2.35s. The forkaster by far has the least volume of all of these. It weighs about 735 on my scales and is the lightest of all of these tires. There are also many conditions where it is just better than the HD. Those hard spikey knobs and the 2-3 sipes on each one work Hard for you.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Thanks. I'll put the Forekaster on the list. Have you (or anyone else) tried the Mezcal G+ as a front tire in these conditions?


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> Forekaster 2.35 for sure. I am buying 4 new ones to have ready for nationals in snowshoe, WV.
> 
> My normal front tires are am IKON, HD, NN or Forekaster. All 2.35s. The forkaster by far has the least volume of all of these. It weighs about 735 on my scales and is the lightest of all of these tires. There are also many conditions where it is just better than the HD. Those hard spikey knobs and the 2-3 sipes on each one work Hard for you.


Since you have experience with the NN and Forekaster, how do you feel the Forekaster is better than the NN? Those tires look strikingly similar.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> Since you have experience with the NN and Forekaster, how do you feel the Forekaster is better than the NN? Those tires look strikingly similar.


I've run both of these and Forekaster sticks better overall, and is more predictable in the corners. I'm on 27.5. Maxxis has better puncture protection IMO.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> Since you have experience with the NN and Forekaster, how do you feel the Forekaster is better than the NN? Those tires look strikingly similar.


I like both tires. I actually gave my NN to my wife when she tore her 3rd one apart. She is an avid NN user, but she also loves the forekaster now after we did an emergency tire change 10 minutes before a race with wet conditions. She had yet another NN get a side knob ripped off and it was losing air fast! It hurts every time this happens to a brand new NN.

The NN pros:
Rolls fast for a knobby tire
Good progressive tread
Big Volume on 2.35 (more than Forekaster) that lets you smash and punch off rocks and roots better. More enjoyable as a big front tire on really aggressive trails. 
Its a softer compound therefore it has better traction in certain conditions
Its smooth and quiet due to the above two reasons. 
Cons:
Might as well be on an ikon in wet conditions here. This is where the forekaster blows it out of the water.

Forekaster:
Its like a high volume rocket ron with taller knobs and a more reliable compound. Then added siping all over the side and transition knobs.

Pros:
Really good in the semi wet or slimie rock conditions you may have here. 
wide spacing and great mud clearing vs NN
Punches above its weight in Loose over hard. And really loose stuff (rocks over hardpack)
Little knobs can dig through decomposing leaves in loamy singletrack. 
Somehow hooks very well in our hardpack which is limestone/clay with limestone dust over the top when go 2 weeks without rain. The knobs dont squirm.

Cons:
Not as high volume as other 2.35s since it measures out from the flared knobs.
Widely spaced knobs could allow razor sharp chipped rocks to cut in between tread. 
Its a little more buzzy than NN in my 1/8 mile concrete hallway if that kind of thing bothers you.


----------



## westin (Nov 9, 2005)

FJSnoozer said:


> Cons:
> Not as high volume as other 2.35s since it measures out from the flared knobs.
> Widely spaced knobs could allow razor sharp chipped rocks to cut in between tread.
> Its a little more buzzy than NN in my 1/8 mile concrete hallway if that kind of thing bothers you.


Minutes ago mounted 2.35 Forekaster on rear. It was on front, but it's just so narrow. Running hands inside tire it had many small thorns due to the widely spaced knobs. We don't get much moisture, but on my HT the FK is a great tire when conditions get loose/sandy. Lets me stand and hammer whereas my Ikon would slip.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

midwestmtb said:


> What front tire would you guys recommend for situations where the trail is partially dry but there are still soft spots in corners which can cause a nasty surprise if you come in too hot?
> 
> I find this is fairly common a day or two after rain.


I would be happy with Mezcal in that, depending how soft I'd consider a 2.35 Barzo, I raced the 2.25 barzos most of the spring and I'd like to try a 2.35 front. I had 2.25 Barzos fr and rear (non G+) on the hardtail for the muddier races, and 2.25 G+ Mezcals on the fs bike for dryer and rougher races. I was very happy with both setups, zero flats or burps, they hold air very well too.


----------



## newking (Nov 6, 2007)

Agree while the forekaster may not be the biggest or widest 2.35 tire it holds great as a rear tire and is quite capable in the front. I have them F and R on my XC bike and trail bike. Great tire for a wide variety of conditions



FJSnoozer said:


> Forekaster 2.35 for sure. I am buying 4 new ones to have ready for nationals in snowshoe, WV.
> 
> My normal front tires are am IKON, HD, NN or Forekaster. All 2.35s. The forkaster by far has the least volume of all of these. It weighs about 735 on my scales and is the lightest of all of these tires. There are also many conditions where it is just better than the HD. Those hard spikey knobs and the 2-3 sipes on each one work Hard for you.


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

Just got sent some 2018 RaceKing 29x2.2 Protections to try out. WTF they measure barely 2.1 . The old race kings actually measure 2.2 .They were super fast though, and having one in the front was less scary than I thought it would be. I wish these things were 2.3's


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Anyone seen or used a 2018 Conti RaceKing?
> 
> The Protection version supposedly runs 605g, which is markedly lighter than the previous version. Does it have the same nice fat casing? Decent puncture protection?
> 
> I love my Mezcals but something that does the same thing, with less weight, would be great.


ya they measure 2.1 on a 23mm rim......


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

scooterman said:


> ya they measure 2.1 on a 23mm rim......


What was the actual weight?

Keep us updated on their performance and durability.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

jimPacNW said:


> I would be happy with Mezcal in that, depending how soft I'd consider a 2.35 Barzo, I raced the 2.25 barzos most of the spring and I'd like to try a 2.35 front. I had 2.25 Barzos fr and rear (non G+) on the hardtail for the muddier races, and 2.25 G+ Mezcals on the fs bike for dryer and rougher races. I was very happy with both setups, zero flats or burps, they hold air very well too.


Thanks Jim. Good info.


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

Finally got to finish a race with the 2.25 Aspens non-EXO (on SC Blur) last night. Last week I thought I compromised a bead but actually burped the tire, pumped it up, and turned out sealant had dried up. So didn't finish. 

This was open-age Expert Class at Mid Week series at Snowbasin ski resort, Utah. Pumped them up to 21 front, 23 rear at my current 157-158 pounds. There are some embedded rocky sections and it hit rim slightly just couple times. For most part course is rocky and dry with either bermed or bermish corners. 

Luckily there was good size gap to rider in front of me into the first DH, so I didn't have to hit rocks blind like last week. Next climb is long slightly uphill rocky, twisty section and this is where these tires shine. The low rolling resistance is something, it seems the bike maintains lots of speed as long as I don't overspeed and have to brake. There's a fine line there. 

On the DH, I thought the tires where okay, not as good as the 2.35 Ardent/Ikon combo I had last year on a Tallboy, but not that much slower. With bermed DH corners traction is not that advantages unless your making an inside pass. 

Final lap I went into the bushes after taking a swig water, then got tangled up with a lapped rider, so on the final DH I got caught by 3 other guys (Ugh), then it went into a paved uphill sprint finish in which I got last in this little group. So my 5th place went to 8th instead. As I'm aging my sprint is getting terrible. 

So I'll keep racing these tires until the rear gets worn, then I'll move the front Aspen to the rear and get a Ardent Race up front, most probably.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Broken, record here. But I think Forekaster/Aspen combo is going to be my future race combo. You might give it a shot for something different. Its just a better tire and is a lot lighter than the ardent or ardent race. 

I find the aspen to have an incredibly surprising amount of grip in the rear once the pressure is good. Its still great with a little too much. It doesnt really make since because there is very little tread, but that little sucker hooks (the 2.25). I dont brake much unless I am turning, so a lack of center braking isnt an issue for me. I dont think I would run it on the front ever unless it was a special course. Its super fast on pavement. 

Funny, I was going to post making for others experience with that tire today because I just put it on my top fuel 7 rides ago. Then you posted. I have previously run it on my hardtail.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> Broken, record here. But I think Forekaster/Aspen combo is going to be my future race combo. You might give it a shot for something different. Its just a better tire and is a lot lighter than the ardent or ardent race.
> 
> I find the aspen to have an incredibly surprising amount of grip in the rear once the pressure is good. Its still great with a little too much. It doesnt really make since because there is very little tread, but that little sucker hooks (the 2.25). I dont brake much unless I am turning, so a lack of center braking isnt an issue for me. I dont think I would run it on the front ever unless it was a special course. Its super fast on pavement.
> 
> Funny, I was going to post making for others experience with that tire today because I just put it on my top fuel 7 rides ago. Then you posted. I have previously run it on my hardtail.


This is quickly becoming my go-to combo for known courses. I'll stick an Ikon or AR on the back if I don't really know what i'm getting into. like you, the Aspen has surprising grip (I thought it'd be along the lines of the thunderburt). I still have one of the original versions in my tire stash if anyone is feeling nostalgic and wants a REALLY fragile tire.


----------



## Bay1 (Jan 19, 2014)

ROCKET RON

I have been using Racing Ralph’s on my Xc bike(29er) for racing, and Nobly Nics for trail riding. (enduro bike runs DHF DHR 27.5)

This year, For XC Racing and training I’m trying a ROCKET RON up front and a Racing Ralph on the rear, this combination feels a bit slower than just Racing Ralphs front and rear! On paper ROCKET RON is a fast tyre

What’s your thoughts on ROCKET RON ?

Ps. I see Cannondale team riders using thunder Burts🤙 That’s skilled


----------



## Rist (Oct 15, 2009)

Rocket Rons are awesome. So are Thunder Burts (unless you're descending in a wet conditions). I prefer Rocket Rons though - better cornering overall and steerability in wet/muddy conditions. When I switched from Thunder Burts to Rocket Rons (both 2.25 Snakeskin TLR), I didn't feel any less slower. But then again - I've never felt any difference in rolling speed of any of the tyres I've used in past (Fast Trak, Renegade, Thunder Burt, Rocket Ron, Mezcals) - it's all the same for me. If I had to choose one set of tyres for XC they would be Rocket Rons.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

It's great to hear your comments on the Aspen. I have been using an Aspen 2.1 rear/Ikon 2.25 front combo for the past 4 weeks or so and I love it. This is probably going to be my combo of choice next season for racing. I weigh about 150 lbs and run the Aspen at about 23 psi. It works great and I find that once I go up to 25 psi or so it has noticeably less grip. Another interesting thing about the Aspen is how huge it is compared to the Ikon... the 2.1 is just as wide if not wider than the 2.25 Ikon!


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Barzo tire pressure. I am finding that I actually prefer this tire at higher pressures. What are your thoughts? Anyone else have similar experiences?


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

ohmygato said:


> It's great to hear your comments on the Aspen. I have been using an Aspen 2.1 rear/Ikon 2.25 front combo for the past 4 weeks or so and I love it. This is probably going to be my combo of choice next season for racing. I weigh about 150 lbs and run the Aspen at about 23 psi. It works great and I find that once I go up to 25 psi or so it has noticeably less grip. Another interesting thing about the Aspen is how huge it is compared to the Ikon... the 2.1 is just as wide if not wider than the 2.25 Ikon!


I've had a few washouts with Ikons before, one that scraped me up pretty bad so now I'm scared of them. Nice thing about Aspens is I know I can't corner them that hard and if I do, I have to use great form, thus making it less likely to slide out (makes sense?). Ikons I found too unpredictable.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

party_wagon said:


> Barzo tire pressure. I am finding that I actually prefer this tire at higher pressures. What are your thoughts? Anyone else have similar experiences?


I'm within 1psi of what I ran with Specialized and Schwalbe rubber on my Barzos. Vittorias seem to have nice stiff sidewalls, take lower pressure without feeling squirrely to me.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

Did a race 2.25 Aspen's over the weekend and they rode awesome. Mostly hardpack with a little loose over hard in sections. Rear tended to drift a bit going around tight corners were I was trying to scrub speed under brakes. But that sliding felt really nice and controlled. Haven't had a chance to ride them in wetter/sloppier conditions but for dry they're becoming a favourite.

I think for a course where it's more slippery, say after rain or super loose over hard, I'll try a forekaster in the front.


----------



## teleken (Jul 22, 2005)

party_wagon said:


> Barzo tire pressure. I am finding that I actually prefer this tire at higher pressures. What are your thoughts? Anyone else have similar experiences?


At first I did run the same pressure as my 2.3 Spec Ground Cntrls around 18 PSI but now that everything is dry (Co Front Range Death Granite) I've been liking 1 -2 psi less.
The stiff sidewalls keep it solid on corners but the rounder profile needed the lower PSI to keep contact it was getting washy in the loose gravel and sand.


----------



## ekraft84 (Apr 18, 2013)

Bay1 said:


> ROCKET RON
> 
> I have been using Racing Ralph's on my Xc bike(29er) for racing, and Nobly Nics for trail riding. (enduro bike runs DHF DHR 27.5)
> 
> ...


I acquired a Trek ProCal at the end of last year. Came with the XR1's. Rode two times, couldn't believe how sketchy they were, IMO. Switched to the latest versions of the Rocket Ron (front) and Racing Ralph (rear). I couldn't believe the difference. Night and day. I weighed the tires on a triple beam balance. Nearly identical.

Have 500+ miles on them (varying XC-style single trails) and no issues so far. I've definitely caught the side of a few rocks where I thought I might have punctured the tire, but they've held up great. Love them.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

My new tires came from a heavy batch

Addix speedgrip Nobby Nic Evo Snakeskin
29x2.25 - 750 (advertised 710)
29x2.35 - 778 (advertised 760)

Maxxis Exo/TR
Aspen
29x2.25 - 682 (advertised 645)
Forekaster
29x2.35 - 740 (advertised 735) I bought 4 but only weighed 1.

Aspen casing is slightly larger than Forekaster...

My current Aspen was a lot lighter around 650. 

Scale is accurate, I moved it around and tested with other known tires.


----------



## mevnet (Oct 4, 2013)

They're all available on ProbikeKit but why get the 2.25 when the 2.35 is the same weight? I would rather have more cush and run lower pressure given the same weight.


----------



## MNSnoPro (Mar 1, 2016)

Walt Disney's Frozen Head said:


> This is quickly becoming my go-to combo for known courses. I'll stick an Ikon or AR on the back if I don't really know what i'm getting into. like you, the Aspen has surprising grip (I thought it'd be along the lines of the thunderburt). I still have one of the original versions in my tire stash if anyone is feeling nostalgic and wants a REALLY fragile tire.


What soil type and conditions are you finding this combo(FK front, Aspen rear) to do well in? Clayish hard-pack with some loose over hard? I'm running Aspens front and rear now and they do well on hard-pack but I want more bite up front for some of the loose over hard as trails dry out and don't want to go up to an Ardent Race and I don't think the IKON will be much help either.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

MNSnoPro said:


> What soil type and conditions are you finding this combo(FK front, Aspen rear) to do well in? Clayish hard-pack with some loose over hard? I'm running Aspens front and rear now and they do well on hard-pack but I want more bite up front for some of the loose over hard as trails dry out and don't want to go up to an Ardent Race and I don't think the IKON will be much help either.


Rekon Race? Rekon?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MNSnoPro (Mar 1, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> Rekon Race? Rekon?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Think so??? I never considered that for a front tire. Thought it was more of a rear tire.


----------



## Goran_injo (Jul 4, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> Feedback on those beloved bontrager XR2. They are fast tires. They make your legs feel fresh when they are not. The braking is enough for me and I have run it on the front of my hardtail and rear of my Top fuel.
> 
> After 3 rides on the rear of my Top fuel, it stranded me with a sidewall pinch flat. I have never had this happen in 10K miles on Maxxis Exo. These tires are not for me on this terrain.
> 
> I was thinking of running them at nationals since that course is really tame, But I still dont know if i want to risk driving 42 hours to pinch flat in a race.


I've ran XR2 TLR team on treacherous sharp limestone rocks (Mediterranean) for last 2 years with zero flats. Did you use the TLR team edition?


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Goran_injo said:


> I've ran XR2 TLR team on treacherous sharp limestone rocks (Mediterranean) for last 2 years with zero flats. Did you use the TLR team edition?


Yes of course. It did not puncture, it pinch flatted.

I was bombing a trail and it was instantly done and unrepairable.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Goran_injo (Jul 4, 2007)

Sealant didn't seal it? Curious as this is one of the thickest/resilient sidewalls in the market.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

ohmygato said:


> Another interesting thing about the Aspen is how huge it is compared to the Ikon... the 2.1 is just as wide if not wider than the 2.25 Ikon!


Maxxis measure the knob width. That's why the Ikon 2.35 and Ardent 2.4 measure differently on the same carcass. Share with the 2.2 Ikon and 2.25 Ardent.

Wonder what the carcass measurement is on the 2.2 Ikon vs the 2.1 Aspen.


----------



## MagicShite (Oct 20, 2015)

hey folks, any recommended tires for broken cement pavements (narrow single tracks)? 

We have a lot of fruit farms in the middle of the mountains and these cemented trails are unique to us. We usually run crossmark IIs but they are quite sketchy when it's wet and moss grows. Just a slight touch of the front brakes washes out the tires easily.

Or are mosses just something every tire fails to grip at?


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Goran_injo said:


> Sealant didn't seal it? Curious as this is one of the thickest/resilient sidewalls in the market.


No. I worked on it for a long while. I even hiked to a house and used their Pump and various things to try to get it to plug. It would not hold more than 12 psi. It was a snake bite right by the bead just above the rim.

Interestingly enough, My friend flatted on what looks like the same exact spot only days later. perhaps a rock or two has moved making the line just slightly different. I blame myself just as much as the tire, but an Ikon has never ever done that on a square edge hit like that. I was probably riding like a bull in a china cabinet that day.

I stumbled upon his on yourtube of all places. Its worth a watch. These are my "regular trails and is actually my drop in on my commute home. Its a great way to wind down from work. UNLESS you have to hike 3 miles back to work.






He was on 2.6 Rekon at 20 psi with Huck norris. Maybe the tire deserves another chance, but I think I would rather run the Aspen 2.25 EXO at this point.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

MagicShite said:


> hey folks, any recommended tires for broken cement pavements (narrow single tracks)?
> 
> We have a lot of fruit farms in the middle of the mountains and these cemented trails are unique to us. We usually run crossmark IIs but they are quite sketchy when it's wet and moss grows. Just a slight touch of the front brakes washes out the tires easily.
> 
> Or are mosses just something every tire fails to grip at?


Wet concrete is one of the nastiest things you could ever ride on. Moss or algae would make that even worse. Drop pressure down and ride something with plenty of siping. Once the sipes are gone, the tires will become inneffective.

I would check out some of the tread patterns and test a few of the mentioned tires out.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

MagicShite said:


> hey folks, any recommended tires for broken cement pavements (narrow single tracks)?
> 
> We have a lot of fruit farms in the middle of the mountains and these cemented trails are unique to us. We usually run crossmark IIs but they are quite sketchy when it's wet and moss grows. Just a slight touch of the front brakes washes out the tires easily.
> 
> Or are mosses just something every tire fails to grip at?


I would try bontrager xr2 2.3. If you don't like them they should give you a refund for them.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

I know a lot of love here for Barzo and mezcal, but in 6-7 years of running tubeless have literally had 4 flats and 3 tires have been Vittoria in the past two years. Last year a mezcal and Bomboloni and today a Barzo. Mezcal and Barzo are toast and Bomboloni has held a bacon strip. All tnt versions. Love Vittoria on road bike.


----------



## MagicShite (Oct 20, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> Wet concrete is one of the nastiest things you could ever ride on. Moss or algae would make that even worse. Drop pressure down and ride something with plenty of siping. Once the sipes are gone, the tires will become inneffective.
> 
> I would check out some of the tread patterns and test a few of the mentioned tires out.


Unfortunately that's the unique feature and only feature we have in Penang Island Malaysia. This is what most of our events/races are based on. Because of this, it is almost always impossible to see non-crossmark tires over here.

I already run very low pressures, around 19-20. Do tires with higher TPI and suppleness help?



party_wagon said:


> I would try bontrager xr2 2.3. If you don't like them they should give you a refund for them.


Thanks for chipping in, i'll ask the local trek dealer if they carry them.

I also have a pair of Ikons I bought to test earlier, not sure if they can handle the cement pavements properly.

It does seem like no one makes tires specifically for tracks like these.


----------



## trmn8er (Jun 9, 2011)

FJSnoozer said:


> My addix 2.35 Nobby Nicks are coming in at 750 grams. Near what the Ikon comes in at. I like how quickly it transitions to the side knobs the way it is designed. That cannot be said for the AR. I cant stand the AR and chalk up all of the praises to people that dont ride real loose over HARD. It is highly unpredictable on decomposed granite and limestone. I could see it being fine in loamy conditions or areas where the "hard" is black soil. The 2.35 Ikon front is far more progressive here than an AR. I too am used to the idiosyncrasies of the Ikon and am okay with the way it drifts.
> 
> I hate to sound like a broken record. The Forekaster 2.35 is another great option but has slightly less volume than those two tires. It does sound appropriate for your terrain. Those little knobs dig hard. I run that with teh Ikon 2.35 on my hardtail and it is a sweet combo.


Any thoughts on the AR 2.2 for a rear tire? I just mounted one on my trail bike Intense Primer with a Nobby Nic 2.35 on the front. I'm hoping yo more the AR to my new HT XC whip I'm building up and perhaps run a 2.35 Aspen up front. Any other recommendations for the front with the Ardent Race on the back?

Thanks in advance...


----------



## trmn8er (Jun 9, 2011)

Sidewalk said:


> Any opinions on SWorks Fasttrak 2.0? I actually found it abandoned at a race and think a pro rider (UCI event) changed it for the conditions, it was pretty wet and slick that day. Super light, thought about trying it on the rear for a race with ideal conditions just to save weight. My next two races are on UCI courses so have a good climb/mileage ratio, should be great on at least one of those (same race I found it, actually).


I ran them quite a bit a couple years back at OTH and Triple Crown. Their super fast and decent grip but weep fluid from paper-thin sidewalls. I prefer them in the Control casing...


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

trmn8er said:


> Any thoughts on the AR 2.2 for a rear tire? I just mounted one on my trail bike Intense Primer with a Nobby Nic 2.35 on the front. I'm hoping yo more the AR to my new HT XC whip I'm building up and perhaps run a 2.35 Aspen up front. Any other recommendations for the front with the Ardent Race on the back?
> 
> Thanks in advance...


I liked it on the rear, good climbing traction.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Race king black chili is supposed to be strong in wet too.


----------



## trmn8er (Jun 9, 2011)

NordieBoy said:


> I liked it on the rear, good climbing traction.


Thanks yea I ran the Ardent Race 2.2 I just installed on the rear today and climbed 3200 in 16 miles. It gripped fairly well in loose rock and scree. I was up pretty high and it was a lot of baby heads and rocky. I suspect I'll run it for the Epic HT but I'm the Primer I'll likely run something larger in the back.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

party_wagon said:


> Race king black chili is supposed to be strong in wet too.


I've done wet races with the old race kings and they were fine. The would be terrible in mud, but wet rocks and roots were not a problem. I have the new race kings and I posted a few weeks ago that they are very very small 52mm on 23mm rim. I broke my ribs last week at a DH park so I havent been riding. I pumped the race kings on the XC bike up to 50psi and have been "growing" them the last week. They now measure 54.5 @20psi.

I can tell you if you are worried about wet root and rock traction do not use the new schwalbe speed compound. It has zero wet traction. For mud/ soft soil and all other uses it's fine. Just not slick smooth surfaces.


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

midwestmtb said:


> What was the actual weight?
> 
> Keep us updated on their performance and durability.


a week @50psi stretched them out to 56mm at 50psi and 54.5mm @20spi.


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

Suddenly a bulge appears on my maxxis aspen tire 2.25. Any idea, what happened? I don't think this occured while I am riding.









Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## mevnet (Oct 4, 2013)

trmn8er said:


> Any thoughts on the AR 2.2 for a rear tire? I just mounted one on my trail bike Intense Primer with a Nobby Nic 2.35 on the front. I'm hoping yo more the AR to my new HT XC whip I'm building up and perhaps run a 2.35 Aspen up front. Any other recommendations for the front with the Ardent Race on the back?
> 
> Thanks in advance...


I would do AR F and Aspen R myself, I like a bit more grip up front.


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

blurxc11 said:


> Suddenly a bulge appears on my maxxis aspen tire 2.25. Any idea, what happened? I don't think this occured while I am riding.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You tire looks pretty worn. Guessing the casing is pulling apart due to age, maybe a hard strike on the tire... I think Kenda tires had these bulging issues years back and they said it was due to using sealant.

Are you using sealant? High tire pressure?


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

I am using sealant. For this tire I normally pump 40 psi but the pressure goes down after awhile

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

By the white vs yellow "Maxxis" lettering I'm guessing those Aspens are the ones that originally came on the bike or were pulled off a new bike, right? (vs aftermarket purchase) Relevance: I remember (I think) reading something in these forums (not necessarily this thread) that suggested the OE versions are not the same quality or compound or tpi as what you get in a regular aftermarket tire purchase. Quick search didn't pull anything up, but...


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

You are right, this came from original purchase of the bike. I just replaced it with another maxxis aspen 2.25 which I bought online, and it is yellow color

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

By the way, just additional info, when I removed the tire, no more sealant inside

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

blurxc11 said:


> I am using sealant. For this tire I normally pump 40 psi but the pressure goes down after awhile
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


40 psi seems pretty high, specially tubeless and 2.25. Is there a reason you run tires this high?


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

blurxc11 said:


> I am using sealant. For this tire I normally pump 40 psi but the pressure goes down after awhile
> 
> Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


The buldging occurs when you run non "TR" tires with sealant. When you run the "TR" tires this problem goes away. I ran Maxxis non TR tires with stans and had this happen. However many sets of Maxxis TR tires and never an issue. I think it has to due the internal compound and how it reacts with Stans.


----------



## Andy13 (Nov 21, 2006)

I have run non-tubeless Maxxis tires tubeless for years, still do, and haven't had this bulging issue, except with some early tires, but it has been well over 5 years. I have never run anywhere near 40psi though.


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

JoePAz said:


> The buldging occurs when you run non "TR" tires with sealant. When you run the "TR" tires this problem goes away. I ran Maxxis non TR tires with stans and had this happen. However many sets of Maxxis TR tires and never an issue. I think it has to due the internal compound and how it reacts with Stans.


I've been running non TLR tires with Stan's sealant for 10 years, never had this problem. Lots of Maxxis tires, Conti, Schwalbe, Bontrager. But I also run 18-25 psi depending on the tire, never even close to 40 psi. Might just be a random issue.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

40 psi - yikes! I might get a bulge in my back from bouncing around. I run 20.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

Anyone had any experience with the Onza Svelt tyres? Picked up a pair going cheap online (29x2.25 120tpi). Curious to hear any thoughts.


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

kevbikemad said:


> 40 psi seems pretty high, specially tubeless and 2.25. Is there a reason you run tires this high?


I only run 40 psi when I use my bike on the road, which I do on weekdays. When I go to trail on weekend I run 18-20 psi

Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## blurxc11 (Oct 2, 2012)

It also bulge inside the tire. This is a TR version according to the label









Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

blurxc11 said:


> It also bulge inside the tire. This is a TR version according to the label
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So the layers are pulling apart/separating, either a flaw in manufacturing or probably stretch/stressed and it is letting go. I'd bet it has nothing to do with the sealant at all. The tire is warn out, I would just replace it and not worry about it.


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

Have been collecting a few tyres lately. The michelin side walls particularly on the jet xcr seem a lot thinner than the exo and vitoria sidewalls.

About to change some worn ikons for next few races. Going to try aspen front rekon race rear.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

kevbikemad said:


> So the layers are pulling apart/separating, either a flaw in manufacturing or probably stretch/stressed and it is letting go. I'd bet it has nothing to do with the sealant at all. The tire is warn out, I would just replace it and not worry about it.


I'd lean toward an imperfection and 40psi.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Interested in getting a review on the Michelin xc tires. They look to have nice side knobs.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

blurxc11 said:


> It also bulge inside the tire. This is a TR version according to the label
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's a cord separation. It can happen with any brand of tires. It's of course very rare anymore. It used to be 'common' (guessing at the peak 1-2% were affected, so it was never really a huge issue) with Maxxis tires around 2006. Even three-quarters of the way through its life you may be able to warranty it. Personally, I'd just buy a new one and move on. It's not a widespread issue, so no worries replacing it with the same model.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

trmn8er said:


> ...my new HT XC whip I'm building up and perhaps run a 2.35 Aspen up front.


Aspens aren't made in 2.35. Typo?


----------



## trmn8er (Jun 9, 2011)

Not a typo I was unaware the Aspen did not come in 2.35. I just ordered a 2.25. Price was right but I’d have preferred a bigger front tire. It’s going on a new HT build so I’ll see how I like it. Ardent Race in the rear. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## markus_krk (Jul 27, 2013)

trmn8er said:


> It's going on a new HT build so I'll see how I like it. Ardent Race in the rear.


Should be other way round.


----------



## mevnet (Oct 4, 2013)

Just got the Vittoria Barzo and Mezcal 29 x 2.35 TNT.
I have read others reporting lower weight than spec, mine are at 

Barzo - 760g, spec is 730g
Mezcal - 705g with spec 710g

Now those are not exactly XC tire weights, hope they provide good volume.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

mevnet said:


> Just got the Vittoria Barzo and Mezcal 29 x 2.35 TNT.
> I have read others reporting lower weight than spec, mine are at
> 
> Barzo - 760g, spec is 730g
> ...


Graphene or non Graphene versions?

My Barzo 2.35 G+ came in at 735g +/-5g


----------



## mevnet (Oct 4, 2013)

pinkpowa said:


> Graphene or non Graphene versions?
> 
> My Barzo 2.35 G+ came in at 735g +/-5g


Graphene, both of them


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

Did an XCO length race on Onza Svelt 2.25" 120tpi tyres front plus rear on my hardtail.

Course conditions grip wise were about perfect. Tacky after a bit of rain earlier in the week. But a trail that's usually loose over hard. Lots of exposed, sharp rock usually results in seeing quite a few punctures. Last time I was here I was on the 2.25 Aspens.

It's been a while since I'd ridden my hardtail so I was a bit rough on the rear end with my line choice. Rolling speed was very good, nice and fast on the prologue road section into the singletrack and no noticeable "drag" on the dirt. Braking traction was great. There was one fireroad downhill that was pretty loose that I was getting a bit of rear end lock up but with modulation I had no problems scrubbing off speed. I really enjoyed the cornering grip. Lots of confidence through the whole lean from top to side lugs.

I was surprised with no punctures after a few dicey lines choices between some sharp rocks. It wasn't until a few hours later when I got home that I found the rear tyre flat with a small slice on the sidewall. I pumped it back up and shook it and the Orange Seal did its job. Still, I didn't have that issue with the Aspen's last time I was here.

Tyres weighed 650g on the dot before I mounted them. Overall I'm happy with their performance, considering I managed to pick them up cheap on runout.


----------



## Trhuster (Jun 8, 2018)

I also got Mezcal/Barzo 2.25" today.

Barzo - 759g, spec is 735g
Mezcal -744g spec is 725g


----------



## broeli (Feb 15, 2008)

Trhuster said:


> I also got Mezcal/Barzo 2.25" today.
> 
> Barzo - 759g, spec is 735g
> Mezcal -744g spec is 725g


Crazy.. the 2.35 Mezcal I just got weighed in at 697


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

I got two Barzo (2.35) and they had about 20-30g difference. My Mezcal's were more around 700. The Barzo 2.35 on a 22.5mm rim measures now 2.25 (2.20 at start). Mezcal 2.25 measures 2.25. 
To compare with other tires weights I'd like to have the same volume. Rocket Ron, Ikons at 2.2(5) are not much more than 2.15 on my rims but are lighter.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

Barzo ETRTO is smaller than the advertised width. Why they did this I don't know. The 2.35 is 57mm.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

So... anyone tried a 2.6? I see 2.35s are getting popular for XC.

I just received a Bontrager XR2 29x2.6 yesterday. Airing it up on my Lefty, there's plenty of clearance. It's only 760g with a generally racy tread. Call me crazy, but plowing through stuff with my 29+ trail bike makes me want to give it a go on the race bike (2.35 Rock Razor rear).

https://fat-bike.com/2018/07/comparison-of-four-29x2-6-tires/


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Schulze said:


> Barzo ETRTO is smaller than the advertised width. Why they did this I don't know. The 2.35 is 57mm.


Just measured another set of Barzos on my 23mm rims.

2.35" Barzo G+ measured 2.2235"
2.25" Barzo measured 2.2275"

They're the same, ignore the supposed size. 2.25 vs 2.35 Mezcals are visibly different, not sure why the Barzos don't follow suit.


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm really curious about that (xr2 2.6). I have a 27.5 wheel set and trying to burn through my nobby nics (3.0 up front, 2.8 out back) but they just won't die. They're notably slower (kinda duh) and quite a bit of self-steer but fun. Had a 2.6 Wtb ranger which rolled pretty nice (enough so that I should have stayed with it and compared vs. 29") but suffered a sidewall cut that I didn't feel like fixing.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

pinkpowa said:


> Just measured another set of Barzos on my 23mm rims.
> 
> 2.35" Barzo G+ measured 2.2235"
> 2.25" Barzo measured 2.2275"
> ...


My 2.35 Barzo was same size as my older 2.25 but not it's getting bigger. It also seems to have bigger knobs. It's now 2.25 at riding pressure (sub 20 psi) and was 2.2 at first. In any case; they worked great on technical terrain in the rain last week.


----------



## bikeguy0 (Aug 5, 2007)

chomxxo said:


> So... anyone tried a 2.6? I see 2.35s are getting popular for XC.
> 
> I just received a Bontrager XR2 29x2.6 yesterday. Airing it up on my Lefty, there's plenty of clearance. It's only 760g with a generally racy tread. Call me crazy, but plowing through stuff with my 29+ trail bike makes me want to give it a go on the race bike (2.35 Rock Razor rear).
> 
> https://fat-bike.com/2018/07/comparison-of-four-29x2-6-tires/


I have 27.5 Ardent Race 2.6s on my Nextie wheels. I really liked them and they steer a lot quicker than the 2.8 Rekon/Ikon setup I had. I haven't ridden them on my new Scott Spark yet but I'm a little worried about BB clearance. They roll really well and have not much less grip than the 2.8. I'd be curious your thoughts.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

2.6 Barzo is 2.65 at 20 psi on 30mm rim. 820g. Knobs .5mm shorter than the 2.35.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

chestr said:


> Have been collecting a few tyres lately. The michelin side walls particularly on the jet xcr seem a lot thinner than the exo and vitoria sidewalls.
> 
> About to change some worn ikons for next few races. Going to try aspen front rekon race rear.
> 
> View attachment 1208035


How do you like the Aspen/rekon race setup? Got now Aspen front and rear for in The Netherlands. Good setup but i'm looking for some aggressive front tire. Want to ride marathons in Belgium where you got a lot stones, mud, roots. You guys have some Maxxis advice?

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

JasperGr said:


> How do you like the Aspen/rekon race setup? Got now Aspen front and rear for in The Netherlands. Good setup but i'm looking for some aggressive front tire. Want to ride marathons in Belgium where you got a lot stones, mud, roots. You guys have some Maxxis advice?


To be honest I have not ridden that combo yet. The last 3 weeks i have had major bad luck with flat tyres.

Firstly i put aspen's on front and rear. But then first ride out 2km in on a mellow climb i managed to slice a 1" sidewall tear in the rear somehow. So put that in the bin. I had a major race the following weekend so i swapped to the Mezcals f&r and in that race i may have burped the rear and then pinched it in a big rooty section. used 2 co2's and a plug and managed to limp to the finish with about 8psi left in the rear.

So that was 2 tyres in the bin in space of 4 days. I then stuck on the michelin force xc/jetxrc combo. Did 1 test ride and then a race last weekend on them. No drama, had ok grip and rolled ok. Then yesterday riding home from the trails i tried to bunny hop a gutter and mistimed it bad and rear hit square on and put a large hole in that tyre too. 3rd tyre in the bin. None were really worth keeping as the holes were so large and struggled sealing even with plugs etc.

So now im on my 4th set in 3 weeks with 2 rekon races. I figure if nino can use one on the front.... maybe i can?  I have an XCM this sunday and then a 4 day stage race starting on Thursday so I hope my bad luck run is over. Any more flats and I'm going to have to start mixing brands as i have all these spare tyres now but nothing matches!

So really i can't offer much info about performance. Mezcals roll ok but are super heavy. The michelins seem ok but seem a bit fragile particularly the jet xrc. Maxis ikons have been my goto for last few years and aspens seem just as good as those.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

chestr said:


> Maxis ikons have been my goto for last few years and aspens seem just as good as those.


"just as good", how so? Cornering? I would hope the Aspens roll faster than the Ikons.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

Just my .02... Ikons have just never done it for me. Not a terrible tire, but the RaRa or RoRo have always performed better in every aspect than the Ikon for me.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

2.35 ikon up front has saved my ass more than a few times but I agree they're kinda slow rolling. I'm gonna switch it up this next season


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> "just as good", how so? Cornering? I would hope the Aspens roll faster than the Ikons.


Yeah i don't think they corner any worse. But will roll better for sure.

It is worth mentioning it is the 2.2/2.25 sizing that i'm dealing with. The 2.35 ikon should corner better i guess. But I'm not sold on larger tyres. At every race i see almost always the top half of field are still on 2.2/2.25 tyre sizes.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

chestr said:


> Yeah i don't think they corner any worse. But will roll better for sure.
> 
> It is worth mentioning it is the 2.2/2.25 sizing that i'm dealing with. The 2.35 ikon should corner better i guess. But I'm not sold on larger tyres. At every race i see almost always the top half of field are still on 2.2/2.25 tyre sizes.


I'm going from 2.35 back to 2.25 for the next set of race rubber on my SS & Top Fuel as I'm not sure I need 2.35 unless it's sandy (which my local trails are, but not many race courses). Just switched over on the Top Fuel, first race next week so we'll see...


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

splitendz said:


> Just my .02... Ikons have just never done it for me. Not a terrible tire, but the RaRa or RoRo have always performed better in every aspect than the Ikon for me.


Same. I can't do Schwalbes due to durability issues but they performed well for me. Ikons just did nothing for me, I know they're very popular with fast riders around here but I just don't get it.


----------



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

Race pace test run on AR 2.35 (front), Aspen 2.25 (rear) = Wow amazing! Its a bit loose but controlled in the corners. Great on hardpack, loose over hard. Not great on real loose/sand. Setup just flies once you get the PSI dialed in. Its a tough choice between AR/Aspen or FK/AR as my favorite pair.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I might be crazy but on hard pack it’s enough to ride aspen front and rear right? AR is better when it’s moisture etc. 


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

bikeguy0 said:


> I have 27.5 Ardent Race 2.6s on my Nextie wheels. I really liked them and they steer a lot quicker than the 2.8 Rekon/Ikon setup I had. I haven't ridden them on my new Scott Spark yet but I'm a little worried about BB clearance. They roll really well and have not much less grip than the 2.8. I'd be curious your thoughts.


After a week here's my experiences:

It, surprisingly, looks quite natural on the bike, no clown shoes effect. The XR2 is a true 2.6. On my Valors it's quite rounded, which is probably good for rolling resistance, but may cut back on the cornering.

The XR2, regardless of size, is a pretty time-established tread. It reminds me of a cross between a Specialized Renegade and a Racing Ralph.

At the 2.6 size I like how it:

* Feels very certain on descents, especially ruts
* Raises the BB a tad
* Slackens the front a bit (2.35 rear)
* Adds additional float for attacking rough stuff

With the tire's design, you wouldn't expect it to be outstanding in corners, but because of its great width, it is really great at it. I'll need some more time to test the limits of this setup, but it doesn't make my bike feel heavier.


----------



## broeli (Feb 15, 2008)

So far I'm loving my Mezcal 2.35 front with Race King 2.2 rear. I got 2 more 2.35 Mezcals and they are heavier..735 and 760g. Wish they were lighter like the current one on my bike at 696g.
As for those that say they can't run Schwalbe because of durability I've never had issues with Schwalbe snakeskin tires. They've actually been more durable than a lot of others I've used. And that's using them on some pretty gnarly trails


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

broeli said:


> As for those that say they can't run Schwalbe because of durability I've never had issues with Schwalbe snakeskin tires. They've actually been more durable than a lot of others I've used. And that's using them on some pretty gnarly trails


I believe the durability issues people are talking about with Schwalbe is the disintegrating knobs. I believe this issue has been remedied with the new Addix compounds.


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

i've read the comments on Mezcal being higher weight. I'm curious what tire measures actually it's size (and more) and weights less than 700g ? Honestly curious ! The ones I tried that are lighter always have less volume. My 2.25 measure at leasat 2.25 on a 22.5mm rim (not that big). Maybe the Racing Ralph 2.35 that would measure about that and be lighter (not as tough?). I've read Bontrager have a good ratio of weight\volume


----------



## daveinaus (Oct 10, 2011)

Switched from a 2.35 Ardent Race (Front) and 2.25 Ikon (Rear) to a 2.25 Ardent Race (Front) and a 2.25 Aspen (Rear) and have been incredibly impressed with the Aspen. Haven't really noticed too much of a drop in cornering speed going from 2.35 to 2.25 on the front either. 

The Aspen I think hooks up even better then the Ikon TBH which is crazy but looking at the profile the side knobs appear to be more aggressive than the Ikon so perhaps it makes sense? It definitely rolls faster and was lighter than the Ikon as well. 

Trails I ride are generally pretty rocky and hardpack and it has been incredibly dry here of late so very loose and slippery. Pretty happy with this combo for now.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

I've been trying to buy some Aspen 29 x 2.25 but all the Exo versions are sold out. Does anyone have any opinions of the non-Exo Aspens?  I ride mostly rooty singletrack with some occasional rides/racers on trails with some loose rocks. Thanks.


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

hesitationpoint said:


> I've been trying to buy some Aspen 29 x 2.25 but all the Exo versions are sold out. Does anyone have any opinions of the non-Exo Aspens? I ride mostly rooty singletrack with some occasional rides/racers on trails with some loose rocks. Thanks.


I will sell you my Aspens. I rode them for a month but they were too slick for all the sand in my local trails. They're in perfect condition.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I’m really curious what the opinions are about the rekon race


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## sducomb (Jul 2, 2007)

I've been riding the new Schwalbe Racing Ray/Ralph combo for a few weeks now. 29x2.25 Snakeskin, on 25mm internal rims, on an Anthem Advanced Pro 1 29. I ride in SE Michigan so trail conditions are rooty, minimal rocks, some sand pits and lots of dusty loose over super hard pack clay. These things are probably the best tires I've ever ridden for our trails. The new Ray tracks incredibly well. The first thing I noticed about it was how easy it was to point and nail a line that I would really have to work hard to hit in the past. It transitions from corner to corner incredibly quickly and smoothly too. The paddle shape of the new Ralph works great on a lot of the blown out, gravely climbs we have. Little to no slip. It just digs in and accelerates. It also powers right through the sand pits. Now just hoping these last a bit better than some of the older Schwalbe compounds.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

@sducomb, 

Thanks for the update! I've been eyeing that new Schwalbe combination.


----------



## PuddleDuck (Feb 14, 2004)

JasperGr said:


> I'm really curious what the opinions are about the rekon race


I'm also really interested in hearing people's experiences of the Rekon Race


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

I did an XCM with rekon race f&r and they seemed to work well. It was very fireroady so wanted fast rolling setup.

Ive since changed to aspen front rekon race rear and did a 4 day stage race on them with no complaints either. It's worth mentioned the guy who won the stage race was on rekon race's f&r so they can't be too bad. Other guys in the top 10 were using the usual ikons and racing ralphs etc so can't really make much conclusions from that.

On steep climbs it may lose traction and spin maybe slightly before an ikon but i think rolls better. I think i prefer aspens to them but its a toss up really.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I kinda find the aspen a little too slippery in loose / stone stuff. Will the maxxis rekon race be better? It’s hard to see if the aspen or rekon race have more traction on flat and corners. I want a set and forget tire for marathon races in dry to semi dry conditions.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

I still like the Ikon a lot, but haven't ridden a Recon Race. 

I can say the new Schwalbe Racing Raph/Ray combo is TERRIBLE. Strong "do not buy" recommendation. 

They are crazy narrow (smaller than most companies 2.1) and the back doesn't have any lateral stability. The front isn't terrible, but it just is so small. 

I used to like the older style Ralphs quite a bit, despite flatting many over the years (nearly all through the tread oddly enough, even the SS tires). I won't be buying any more of the new ones. 

I did try some Fast Trak 2.3 finally. Those were actually pretty good and have stretched out nicely in size after a few days. They did well on a damp track and have been really good on dry hardpack since then. I find my cornering style works well with the egg shaped profile tires than a more squared off tread. YMMV.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

briscoelab said:


> I still like the Ikon a lot, but haven't ridden a Recon Race.


Catharine was planning to race a set of Recon Races at la Bresse before the course was absolutely destroyed by the rain. They are a really good looking tire, I suspect they will become the go-to tire for most racers.


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

I notice nino was on rekon races even in the mud at la bresse. He seems to alternate between aspen and rekon race but im not sure what criteria he uses in deciding.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

briscoelab said:


> I can say the new Schwalbe Racing Raph/Ray combo is TERRIBLE. Strong "do not buy" recommendation.
> 
> They are crazy narrow (smaller than most companies 2.1) and the back doesn't have any lateral stability. The front isn't terrible, but it just is so small.


In what trail conditions did you try the Ray/Ralph combo? I saw this combo in use by Pauline Prevot at la Bresse and some of the other Schwalbe sponsored athletes. I know pictures can be misleading but they looked wider than the Fast Traks Annika was running.

https://www.pinkbike.com/photo/16275901/


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

hesitationpoint said:


> I've been trying to buy some Aspen 29 x 2.25 but all the Exo versions are sold out. Does anyone have any opinions of the non-Exo Aspens? I ride mostly rooty singletrack with some occasional rides/racers on trails with some loose rocks. Thanks.


I have a pair of EXOs new in package...just sold my 29er so for right now I have no use for them. PM me if interested.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

Stonerider said:


> In what trail conditions did you try the Ray/Ralph combo? I saw this combo in use by Pauline Prevot at la Bresse and some of the other Schwalbe sponsored athletes. I know pictures can be misleading but they looked wider than the Fast Traks Annika was running.
> 
> https://www.pinkbike.com/photo/16275901/


Slightly damp to dry conditions. They just sucked.

Anika is on 2.1 FT in the rear I'm sure. Those are crazy skinny.

The front Racing Ray did stretch a bit, but it still under 2.1" in measured size on a 25mm ID rim (after a couple weeks). The back looks like a CX tire still.

Again the front hooked up well(ish), it's just so undersized for a "2.25". If it were bigger I'd use it. The rear tire has really poor lateral stability, which you can see why just from looking at the treat design.


----------



## john_bikeguy (Nov 23, 2017)

hi, I installed the new ray/ralph tires a few days ago and did a 30km ride this morning to try them out. Tires were 29x2.25 on a 22mm inner wide rim. Measured width was 2.2inches on both from carcus to carcus. Width was 2.24 when including side knobs. PSI was 25 f/28r. 

My previous tires on this bike were racing ralph evo addis speed on f/r. The Ray is definitely a better front tire. Tracked better. Very solid in turns. Rolls the same or better. The new racing ralph gave me a few problems. Traction up a steep and loose hill gave me problems that I did not have with the previous racing ralph. could have been a fluke. i also had the rear slide out on me a few times which is not a big deal but this never happened wil the previous ralph. rolling was very good.


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

I've used Schwalbe Racing Ralphs 2.1s and then Ikon 2.2s recently. I was never a fan of the Ikon, I felt they slid around and had less grip than the Ralph. I don't know if others have noticed the same in their area but my local trails have all become much rougher in the last few years-more rocks, roots exposed, choppier etc. I don't know if it's the hotter summers or the advent of + size and fatbikes causing more erosion, but trails that 20+ years ago I rode on a 26" bike with 1.95 tires, 60-80mm of fork travel and 560mm bar with bar ends I wouldn't even think to use that setup today.

I recently bought the Vittoria Mezcal 2.35s based on some reviews here. They are heavy, easily 100+g heavier than the Ikon 2.2s. Set up was on 24mm internal rims, I took them to a local trail that includes lots of rocks, roots, small dropoffs and punchy steep climbs. I'd say they are the best tires I've used. Sections that used to have me dabbing I cleaned and never felt I needed more grip front or rear on technical climbs or fast downhill corners, etc. If only they were 100g lighter...


----------



## m3bas (Dec 24, 2011)

Just destroyed a Racing Ralph over the weekend so thought I'd try the Mezcals. Normally wouldn't buy them due to the weight but they seem so popular here going to give them a try. They are on Probikekit.com really cheap at the moment too.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

- wow!, lots of other tires cheap there too!


----------



## Poncharelli (Jan 13, 2005)

LMN said:


> Catharine was planning to race a set of Recon Races at la Bresse before the course was absolutely destroyed by the rain. They are a really good looking tire, I suspect they will become the go-to tire for most racers.


Are they similar size to the Aspens? (for same spec). If so, that's what I'll prolly go with next season.


----------



## Aby N (Jul 19, 2013)

Raikzz said:


> S-Works renegade,fast trak and ground control!
> https://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/news/...orks-renegade-fast-trak-ground-control-52324/
> View attachment 1199600
> 
> View attachment 1199601


May someone point me in the direction to where this rolling resistance data was obtained? I clicked on the link & couldnt find it there.

Also, do people know where to find current published rolling resistance data?

I know of this site, 
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/mtb-reviews
but it seems to be a bit dated, as the insertion / tested newer tires hasnt been added to the pool.

Thanks in advance


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Has anyone had any experience the Maxxis Rekon 29 x 2.25 on the front for loose XC courses? I'm wondering how it compares to the 29 x 2.35 Forekaster for cornering grip up front. Maxxis has it listed as lighter than the Forekaster. I like a grippier tire up front and can pair it with an Aspen for the rear.


----------



## Doingitright (Jan 9, 2014)

Rekon's were stock on my Blur TR. Raced Downieville on them. Surprised on their performance i.e mostly really good as this race is more burlier than most XC courses I've raced.


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

I have the new ray/ralph combo. They are not small. They are on a 23mm ID rim and look like a normal 2.25. I have not measured them since I first put them on but they were 55mm or more at 20psi. 

The new ray is great, corners and tracks well. I pretty much have no issues with it at all. 
The new ralph i'm still unsure about, I think it you lean it over enough to engage the side knobs it's ok. It seems to slide a lot if you just aren't doing some heavy leaning into a turn. This sliding is sometimes actually helpful to turn fastest as long as you can control it. A lot of the trails here in new england have tons of tiny trees and you aren't always able to lean a bike way over into a corner, unless you want to loose your head, shoulder or arm. 

I think I'm going to be keeping the Ray on the front, and I might stick an old ralph in the rear or maybe a race king.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

scooterman said:


> I have the new ray/ralph combo. They are not small. They are on a 23mm ID rim and look like a normal 2.25. I have not measured them since I first put them on but they were 55mm or more at 20psi.
> 
> The new ray is great, corners and tracks well. I pretty much have no issues with it at all.
> The new ralph i'm still unsure about, I think it you lean it over enough to engage the side knobs it's ok. It seems to slide a lot if you just aren't doing some heavy leaning into a turn. This sliding is sometimes actually helpful to turn fastest as long as you can control it. A lot of the trails here in new england have tons of tiny trees and you aren't always able to lean a bike way over into a corner, unless you want to loose your head, shoulder or arm.
> ...


I was wondering how a pair of Rays would be. New Ralph looks less good than the old one.


----------



## sducomb (Jul 2, 2007)

pinkpowa said:


> New Ralph looks less good than the old one.


It's different. It's definitely a dedicated rear tire and not the all-around tire the old Ralph is. I have noticed the same thing as scooterman, it occasionally breaks loose and does this sort of drifty powerslide. It caught me by surprise the first time, but now I'm starting to learn how to use it certain situations. I raced yesterday and several times I was able to go deep into a hairpin corner, brake way late, powerslide the rear around and accelerate out. Racers behind me would just overcook the turn, stop and I'd have a quick and easy gap. Where the new Ralph really shines for me though is punchy climbs. Our trails tend to get pretty gravely and loose in late summer. This usually means lots of rear wheel spin when attacking these climbs. The new Ralph doesn't do that at all. It just grabs and accelerates up the climb.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> I believe the durability issues people are talking about with Schwalbe is the disintegrating knobs. I believe this issue has been remedied with the new Addix compounds.


No it hasnt.

We ride nothing but Addix tires on my wife's bikes (she races open/cat 1 and is in the 130s) I spend a lot of money keeping her in tires.

Its kind of hit and miss with the batch. Ive had plenty of tires loose knobs in the first race. Although, our terrain is much more sever than anything else I have ever seen in a race. There are trails out there like ours, but I know its not the norm.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> No it hasnt.
> 
> We ride nothing but Addix tires on my wife's bikes (she races open/cat 1 and is in the 130s) I spend a lot of money keeping her in tires.
> 
> Its kind of hit and miss with the batch. Ive had plenty of tires loose knobs in the first race. Although, our terrain is much more sever than anything else I have ever seen in a race. There are trails out there like ours, but I know its not the norm.


That's why I steer clear of Schwalbe. Won some Addix Ralphs last season and I'll probably put them on the SS for training but hesitate to race on them with that kind of reliability in my experience.


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

Well, if any of you want 2 Racing Rays and 2 Racing Ralphs (new style) with 1-4 rides on them total hit me up. $100 for a set, $150 shipped for all 4. I just bought them direct from Schwalbe since I needed them before a race and no one had them in stock. Nearly $400 with the shipping. 

They didn't work for my wife or I, but they might work great where you live/ride. I will say the rear did stretch out and become a decent size. The Ray is actually a decent front tire, just not the volume we prefer.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

sducomb said:


> I've been riding the new Schwalbe Racing Ray/Ralph combo for a few weeks now. 29x2.25 Snakeskin, on 25mm internal rims, on an Anthem Advanced Pro 1 29. I ride in SE Michigan so trail conditions are rooty, minimal rocks, some sand pits and lots of dusty loose over super hard pack clay. These things are probably the best tires I've ever ridden for our trails. The new Ray tracks incredibly well. The first thing I noticed about it was how easy it was to point and nail a line that I would really have to work hard to hit in the past. It transitions from corner to corner incredibly quickly and smoothly too. The paddle shape of the new Ralph works great on a lot of the blown out, gravely climbs we have. Little to no slip. It just digs in and accelerates. It also powers right through the sand pits. Now just hoping these last a bit better than some of the older Schwalbe compounds.


I just mounted a Racing Ray in front. - I'm also in SE Michigan. I could not believe how well this tire performed. It really was a confidence booster and the tire rolls very fast. Running 24 psi. I'm 155 lbs with gear.

BTW, I'm running 2.25 Rocket Ron on the rear. Perfect tire for me in all conditions including the fall leaves.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Anybody running Kendas for XCO/XCM? The Saber Pro and Honey Badger look interesting to me. I'm pretty happy with my 29x2.25 TNT (non G+) Barzos for an all arounder but might like to try something different for hardpack fast courses. Saber Pro in 29x2.4 looks fast rolling and weight is good on paper, supposedly true to size on skinny XC rims.


----------



## litany (Nov 25, 2009)

pinkpowa said:


> Anybody running Kendas for XCO/XCM? The Saber Pro and Honey Badger look interesting to me. I'm pretty happy with my 29x2.25 TNT (non G+) Barzos for an all arounder but might like to try something different for hardpack fast courses. Saber Pro in 29x2.4 looks fast rolling and weight is good on paper, supposedly true to size on skinny XC rims.


I got some Regolith Pros to try out, which I haven't yet. Kenda guy says they are their fastest rolling tire now, which sounds great to me as it has actual knobs so it can bite on non-hardpack.

In the STC (reinforced) casing my 29x2.2 are 763g and 757g. I got the STC casing because I'm not going to be racing these tires (race season is over) and just want to try them out and wanted something I didn't have to worry about.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

that's basically what a reinforced (TNT & G+) Vittoria Barzo weighs in 2.25x29, not bad if they actually roll as good as advertised. Can't imagine they'd roll as well as the Saber or even Honey Badger just looking at them but who knows? Love to hear your thoughts once you get them installed.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

What are your thoughts about soft and supple casings? Are they faster for mountain biking? 

I ask because I have some Fast Trak griptons that are remarkably soft and compliant on the trail. Feels always like I have a bit of suspension. No deflection and the wheels seem to stay in contact with the ground even on a hardtail. Seems to carry speed really well over trail chatter.

I also run some Race Kings and the rubber is noticeably harder and the ride feels stiffer. More deflection over small roots and rocks. Doesn't seem to stay in contact with the trail as well as the fast traks.

I know the Race King really shines in rolling resistance tests but I am wondering if that translates into singletrack riding where there are roots, rocks etc.


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

hesitationpoint said:


> What are your thoughts about soft and supple casings? Are they faster for mountain biking?


Yes, soft and supple is faster.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

Has anyone tried the new schwalbe rubber?


----------



## flynbryan19 (Sep 9, 2010)

I'm running a Rocket Ron / Racing Ralph combo right now on my Top Fuel in the Addix compound. Put them on the start of the season here in NC. They were worlds better than the Bontrager XR1's the bike came with. I've ridden Maxxis Ikon's in the past and personally like the Schwalbes better. Tires seem to be a real personal preference thing though. I have not had any issue w/ the short life span on my Schwalbes.


----------



## expatrider (Feb 1, 2005)

slimphatty said:


> Has anyone tried the new schwalbe rubber?


I've used the new Racing Ralphs (Addix Speed) almost all season and had good success with them. Not really sure if with the Addix compound their rolling resistance is improved compared to pacestar compound (it's still very good), but it seems that puncture protection is improved. Wear/longevity has been good.

I've also recently tried Maxxis Aspens 2.25 F/R and Bontrager XR2 2.2 F/R and liked them. Both are good volume, fast rolling, decent cornering grip. The Aspen and XR2 seem to be more supple than the RaRa even though tpi is 120 vs 127.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

slimphatty said:


> Has anyone tried the new schwalbe rubber?


Meaning literally like new tires with Addix compount, or "new rubber" like new Racing Ralph/Racing Ray combo?  If first option, then I'm actually quite happy with blue Addix Speedgrip on Rocket Ron. For me Rocket Ron is probably best front tire there is, but problem was, that after some 800km it started to lose grip really bad (even though tire still looks like new). New blue Speedgrip version seems to last much longer. I wouldn't really say otherwise it's any different then old one, and it certainly doesn't provide soooo much better grip then old one as Schwalbe advertises, but it does last much longer. My have now some 2500km in it, and it still holds pretty damn good, as with old one I would be all over the place with same amount of riding in it.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

For a front tire, how does the new Racing Ray compare to the Rocket Ron in cornering grip for XC racing/riding? In the past, many liked the Rocket Ron on front with the old Racing Ralph on the rear. Now it seems Schwalbe has designed, or at least is marketing, the Racing Ray to take the place of the Rocket Ron for XC racing.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

After gashing my xr1 bontrager, I'm giving the 2.35 forekaster a chance on both front and rear. Does DC stand for dual compound? So it's dual compound, EXO and Tubeless ready?

https://www.jensonusa.com/Maxxis-Forekaster-29-Tire


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> For a front tire, how does the new Racing Ray compare to the Rocket Ron in cornering grip for XC racing/riding? In the past, many liked the Rocket Ron on front with the old Racing Ralph on the rear. Now it seems Schwalbe has designed, or at least is marketing, the Racing Ray to take the place of the Rocket Ron for XC racing.


Very well ! I'm on the new Ray/Ralph combo (ran a 40mi XC race on them last wknd)
Really liking the Ray. It has a much more aggressive profile than the Ron.. side knobs are tall and strong; looks almost like a DHF up there. The width and look of the new Ray alone give you more confidence than with a Ron. I had one washout with the Ray, but was in super slick mud, and I went into the corner too hot. The good thing about the Ray is it seems to roll just as fast as the Ron while giving better grip in the corners. New Ralph is interesting. More knobs than previous Ralph, also patterned differently and wider. I think this pattern is geared more towards loose loamy stuff. Works well till you get on wet roots/ rocks, but we all know how tough those conditions are with any tire.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

slimphatty said:


> After gashing my xr1 bontrager, I'm giving the 2.35 forekaster a chance on both front and rear. Does DC stand for dual compound? So it's dual compound, EXO and Tubeless ready?
> 
> https://www.jensonusa.com/Maxxis-Forekaster-29-Tire


That's what it says in the description.
"The Dual Compound tread provides the perfect balance of speed, grip and durability."
The next step up would be 3C.


----------



## newking (Nov 6, 2007)

Great tire I would run it in 2.35 size EXO / TR.

I run them Front and rear on 2 bikes: my XC bike and Intense primer.

Not as big as some 2.35 tires but they grip great in everything from wet to loose over hardpack to soft loamy conditions. No issues whatsoever with flats or tears - they hold up real nice.



slimphatty said:


> After gashing my xr1 bontrager, I'm giving the 2.35 forekaster a chance on both front and rear. Does DC stand for dual compound? So it's dual compound, EXO and Tubeless ready?
> 
> https://www.jensonusa.com/Maxxis-Forekaster-29-Tire


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

I like the forecaster as well but only issue is that there is a lot of exposed carcass with the knobs widely spaced. Did get a tear/hole from a sharp rock that required a bacon strip.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

newking said:


> Great tire I would run it in 2.35 size EXO / TR.
> 
> I run them Front and rear on 2 bikes: my XC bike and Intense primer.
> 
> Not as big as some 2.35 tires but they grip great in everything from wet to loose over hardpack to soft loamy conditions. No issues whatsoever with flats or tears - they hold up real nice.


It says dual compound in the tire description.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Tire weight verse rider weight. Are there any sort of studies out there on tire weight vs. rider weight? It seems like this would help a lot of people when picking casing volumes, casings, and knob selection.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

party_wagon said:


> Tire weight verse rider weight. Are there any sort of studies out there on tire weight vs. rider weight? It seems like this would help a lot of people when picking casing volumes, casings, and knob selection.


I've thought about this too. I see pros running very low knob tires, but I'm 20-30# heavier than guys like Grotts etc so I blow through the available traction immediately of a 2.1 Thunder Burt or Renegade (ignoring the massive difference in skill).


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

pinkpowa said:


> I've thought about this too. I see pros running very low knob tires, but I'm 20-30# heavier than guys like Grotts etc so I blow through the available traction immediately of a 2.1 Thunder Burt or Renegade (ignoring the massive difference in skill).


A young kid playing soccer typically gets something like a XR1 because he doesn't weight enough for the knobs to penetrate. An adult gets big spaced out knobs because they weigh enough to penetrate the soil. With tires options growing in size tire mass available is increasing while rolling resistance is staying close to the same.


----------



## expatrider (Feb 1, 2005)

pinkpowa said:


> I've thought about this too. I see pros running very low knob tires, but I'm 20-30# heavier than guys like Grotts etc so I blow through the available traction immediately of a 2.1 Thunder Burt or Renegade (ignoring the massive difference in skill).


You've got this backward. Your additional body weight means you can create a lot more traction than someone who is 20-30 lbs lighter......


----------



## expatrider (Feb 1, 2005)

party_wagon said:


> A young kid playing soccer typically gets something like a XR1 because he doesn't weight enough for the knobs to penetrate. An adult gets big spaced out knobs because they weigh enough to penetrate the soil. With tires options growing in size tire mass available is increasing while rolling resistance is staying close to the same.


Not sure I follow. Even a kid who weighs as little as 100 lbs has plenty of weight to cause tire knobs to penetrate soil.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Lol, lotta confirmation bias going on, but that’s ok. I don’t follow on the tread pattern argument but there’s something to be said for a heavier rider going with wider tires. 

Also wider, heavier tires aren’t necessarily slower uphill; they could be faster. Ultimately GMBN is one of the only groups actually putting this kind of conjecture to the test.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

newking said:


> Great tire I would run it in 2.35 size EXO / TR.
> 
> I run them Front and rear on 2 bikes: my XC bike and Intense primer.
> 
> Not as big as some 2.35 tires but they grip great in everything from wet to loose over hardpack to soft loamy conditions. No issues whatsoever with flats or tears - they hold up real nice.


Awesome. I'm gonna give them a shot.

For all of you riders do you guys use the 3c compound from maxxis? or EXO?

I weight 195lbs and I'm an aggressive rider. If I see something to send, I will send it. I'm a downhiller on a xc hardtail. Should I just go for the 3c and EXO out back and just the 3c in the front and no EXO?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

If you're sending, go for as much protection as you can get. It's not much added weight.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Always go for extra protection with XC tires. It’s worse to repair your tire mid race then the extra grams in the climb


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

expatrider said:


> You've got this backward. Your additional body weight means you can create a lot more traction than someone who is 20-30 lbs lighter......


You might be right in theory, but in practice it doesn't work for me. Must be that massive difference in skill between me and Grotts.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I noticed that the Specialized team has been running the 2bliss Gripton versions of the Fast Trak and Renegades rather than the S-works. Does anybody know if they are running the retail versions or prototypes? 

The retail versions are only 60tpi but I do have to say they are surprisingly soft and supple.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Don't forget that kids are getting into racing as well. The 85 pound 12 year old is likely looking for completely different tires than the 180lb adult.


----------



## newking (Nov 6, 2007)

This link pretty much explains everything about Maxxis tires. Can be confusing as they offer so many different casings, etc.

https://www.vitalmtb.com/features/The-Complete-2018-Maxxis-Mountain-Bike-Tires-Guide,1928



slimphatty said:


> Awesome. I'm gonna give them a shot.
> 
> For all of you riders do you guys use the 3c compound from maxxis? or EXO?
> 
> I weight 195lbs and I'm an aggressive rider. If I see something to send, I will send it. I'm a downhiller on a xc hardtail. Should I just go for the 3c and EXO out back and just the 3c in the front and no EXO?


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

So...I went for front and rear 2.35 Ardent Races 2.35 3c, EXO, TR and let's see how they do. so far they look like man tires! I will be going on a ride on sunday. They've been stretching for 24 hours now at 40psi

The forekasters looks like a rodie/xc tire. Too many spaces between knobs for stuff to happen.


----------



## peabody (Apr 15, 2005)

midwestmtb said:


> I noticed that the Specialized team has been running the 2bliss Gripton versions of the Fast Trak and Renegades rather than the S-works. Does anybody know if they are running the retail versions or prototypes?
> 
> The retail versions are only 60tpi but I do have to say they are surprisingly soft and supple.


They run both, and sometimes mix 1 regular and 1 Sworks


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I saw on Pinkbike that Maxxis was adding a 2.35 Rekon Race in the 29er size for 2019. That sounds like an awesome rear tire for XC courses if you have the clearance for it in your frame.


----------



## scooterman (Aug 10, 2004)

The new racing ray is a better tire than the rocket ron. The knobs are more stable.

Weight vs Traction

More weight = more traction. But more weight needs more traction to stay planted.

Less weight = less traction required around corners. There is less mass wanting to fly off the trail or road. This is why little guys can be so so good at technical corners. Also why super light race cars can stay on the road around a corner at over 100mph. 

Less weight = less power required to move forward and uphill = less traction required.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

scooterman said:


> The new racing ray is a better tire than the rocket ron. The knobs are more stable.
> 
> Weight vs Traction
> 
> ...


 The race car example is tricky; (light) race cars nearly always have downforce from wings/bodywork etc (remember the 'sucker' Can Am car with the snowmobile motors driving fans to provide suction?). Plus the car tires get warm and sticky, when they're cold they're ice skates. I once did a SCCA tour event in 108f weather (tarmac read 130f+ in places), there were a few chunks of asphalt that stuck to a tire that had stopped while hot, - lifted out of the track surface!, that's grip! Lighter weight is always a benefit, but I don't think a difference of 150g between bike tires is going to be noticeable in grip to 99% of us.
I also haven't observed that smaller guys are generally better in technical corners, if there is a maneuverability advantage, I think it is a small benefit, smaller than the difference in skills from rider to rider (obviously a rider who is overweight for height would have a disadvantage).


----------



## briscoelab (Oct 27, 2006)

slimphatty said:


> they look like man tires!


SMH.... wow.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

Anyone here have some hands on experience with the 29x2.25 120tpi Rekon as a front tyre?

Finished a 6hr yesterday and noticed my back tyre (2.25 Aspen) has a handy little slice on the sidewall so I might change it out. Went to the local shop and they had the Rekon on special so I picked it up.

Thinking of running that on the front, and move my front Aspen to the rear. It's coming into summer here in Australia so lots of rocky, dusty tracks are on the cards. A few sketchy moments on the weekend with some front wheel washing.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

yeah that aspen has never looked convincing


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

What do you then advice instead of the aspen? Going to Girona in two weeks and I got aspen front and rear


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

I've been happy with the Aspen's, but I probably should have gone for some exo protection. They've done a 3hr, a 6hr and 3 XCO races and they haven't let me down, other than now noticing the small slice. 72kg rider on a hardtail so the rear gets pretty abused.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

slider_phil said:


> Anyone here have some hands on experience with the 29x2.25 120tpi Rekon as a front tyre?
> 
> Finished a 6hr yesterday and noticed my back tyre (2.25 Aspen) has a handy little slice on the sidewall so I might change it out. Went to the local shop and they had the Rekon on special so I picked it up.
> 
> Thinking of running that on the front, and move my front Aspen to the rear. It's coming into summer here in Australia so lots of rocky, dusty tracks are on the cards. A few sketchy moments on the weekend with some front wheel washing.


If is is not leaking don't mess with it. Those light cuts don't grow. I ride in Arizona and see those all the time. If they are cut to the point it is leaking you have an issue, but if not leave it as you just cut the outer casting a bit. All Maxxis tires are fine unless you cut threads in the side wall. Once those are cut it will just keep on cutting. I only run Maxxis EXO. 2.35 Ikon in front, but moved to Bontrageer XR3 and now XR2 team issue for the rear. Better sidewall protection based on my personal experience and thousands of miles as a rear tire.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

JoePAz said:


> If is is not leaking don't mess with it. Those light cuts don't grow. I ride in Arizona and see those all the time. If they are cut to the point it is leaking you have an issue, but if not leave it as you just cut the outer casting a bit. All Maxxis tires are fine unless you cut threads in the side wall. Once those are cut it will just keep on cutting. I only run Maxxis EXO. 2.35 Ikon in front, but moved to Bontrageer XR3 and now XR2 team issue for the rear. Better sidewall protection based on my personal experience and thousands of miles as a rear tire.


That's good to know. I've got no races in the next few weeks so I'll keep running it locally and see how it gets on.


----------



## miles e (Jan 16, 2004)

slider_phil said:


> 72kg rider on a hardtail so the rear gets pretty abused.


That's not exactly a recipe for abuse in my book!


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

87kg here but 6'5 tall hahahah


----------



## SGreene (May 23, 2018)

chomxxo said:


> So... anyone tried a 2.6? I see 2.35s are getting popular for XC.


I bought a 2.6 XR2 for my front tire. I have a somewhat sandy race coming up in November and though it would work nicely with the 2.35 XR in the rear. A test ride confirms it to be the truth. I didn't really like the 2.35 in the front - seemed to wash out easily. The 2.6 has performed better....so far. Placed 2nd in a local fun short track race on the same sandy track, so they are looking good.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

miles e said:


> That's not exactly a recipe for abuse in my book!


Fair point . I come from bigger bikes and general trail riding and have only started XC racing this year. The hardtail has been a learning experience that's for sure. After checking over the bike after the 6hr on the weekend I found one spoke nipple on the rear wheel completely loose and multiple others needing a good tension, both front and rear.

I took the bike out last night on the local trails, not pushing hard at all and the rear held up fine. I might still change it out before a bigger race but it seems ok for the time being .


----------



## rupps5 (Apr 9, 2010)

Anyone have experience with the newer race king? 

My concern is with the side knobs. The old rc did not have big enough side knobs for me and when pushed over the limit, the tire would just let go in the corners with no warning. 

The new rc has supposedly better side knobs, but are they good enough?

Evolution Training Cycles


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Trying the Ardent Race 2.35 for the first time at a race SAturday. Decided to give it a try instead of my old RaRa. Decided to downsize from the Hans for a 10k climbing race 

Keeping the 2.25 RaRa on back.



jimPacNW said:


> The race car example is tricky


In MotoGP, the small riders have a hard time getting heat into their tires to get them to proper operating temperature. So I think the only other sport that would compare to MTB would be dirtbikes.


----------



## MNSnoPro (Mar 1, 2016)

I think the rider weight vs tread pattern has some validity. I'm +/- 190 lbs and trade places with some of the local "kings". We're constantly comparing tire setups and swapping them in an effort to shave time. We've all come to see that it appears the lighter guys can get away running a slightly more aggressive tread patterns than the heavier riders. As the heavy guy in the bunch when I put on the tires the lighter riders use it feels like someone puts the brakes on and my times aren't competitive. This is even after playing with air pressures to try and equal things out. Just for comparison's sake the lighter guys have good luck running Ardent Races/Mezcals/Ikons whereas when I put them on I'm consistently slower. I have my best luck with Aspens but when the lighter guys put them on they comment on how sketchy they feel and can't get them to bite. It seems reasonable in my mind to think that if more mass is applied over a fixed contact patch you could reduce the need for friction to get the same "traction". I'm no tire engineer though....


----------



## PuddleDuck (Feb 14, 2004)

rupps5 said:


> Anyone have experience with the newer race king?
> 
> My concern is with the side knobs. The old rc did not have big enough side knobs for me and when pushed over the limit, the tire would just let go in the corners with no warning.
> 
> ...


cc Rate it as their top pick, over the Mezcal. They state that due to "more open pattern towards the side knobs" that the tyre is "much more predictable in the corners than its predecessors"

https://www.competitivecyclist.com/sc/mountain-tire-guide


----------



## jms (Feb 4, 2006)

PuddleDuck said:


> cc Rate it as their top pick, over the Mezcal. They state that due to "more open pattern towards the side knobs" that the tyre is "much more predictable in the corners than its predecessors"
> 
> https://www.competitivecyclist.com/sc/mountain-tire-guide


I've got both, the RK is significantly lighter than the Mezcal. Ride quality is a tie. RK rolls better. Definitely better cornering than the previous version of the RK and lighter. 610 grams w/protection casing. That said, I'd be willing to use a Mezcal as a front tire, and I'd be reluctant to do so with a Raceking.


----------



## m3bas (Dec 24, 2011)

Couple rides on the Mezcals- 2.35f, 2.25r. Interestingly the 2.35 actually weighed less...

Love them. Feel like they roll well but plenty of grip and good feedback. They are heavy but not sure that is something we can feel as much as we think. Probably more noticeable is the rolling resistance.


----------



## Schulze (Feb 21, 2007)

scooterman said:


> More weight = more traction. But more weight needs more traction to stay planted.


Which is why weight has nothing to do with traction. If you write out the friction formula, mass divides out.


----------



## greginaz (Oct 14, 2008)

Due to all the positive feedback on this thread, I upgraded my front tire to a 29x2.35 Forekaster. I was running a 29x2.35 High Roller II and was looking to go lighter, less rolling resistance and not loose too much traction. I'm running a 29x2.2 Ardent Race in the rear on my 429SL with 22.5 IW rims.

I saved about 200 grams or so, and it feels less draggy compared to the HRII and with 2 rides on it so far, I haven't noticed any loss of traction. The sipes definitely throw some sand and small rocks up into your face though. I'm happy with the upgrade so far. SoMo Desert Classic is my home trail so it's loose sand, gravel etc over hardback with lots of rocks. I'm looking forward to using it on my upcoming races here in AZ.

It measures 2.35 wide on edges of tread at 20 psi after leaving inflated to 35 psi to stretch it out. The case measures 2.27, so I would say it's pretty true to size.


























Comparison of knobs vs HRII


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

greginaz said:


> Due to all the positive feedback on this thread, I upgraded my front tire to a 29x2.35 Forekaster. I was running a 29x2.35 High Roller II and was looking to go lighter, less rolling resistance and not loose too much traction. I'm running a 29x2.2 Ardent Race in the rear on my 429SL with 22.5 IW rims.
> 
> I saved about 200 grams or so, and it feels less draggy compared to the HRII and with 2 rides on it so far, I haven't noticed any loss of traction. The sipes definitely throw some sand and small rocks up into your face though. I'm happy with the upgrade so far. SoMo Desert Classic is my home trail so it's loose sand, gravel etc over hardback with lots of rocks. I'm looking forward to using it on my upcoming races here in AZ.
> 
> ...


The DHR2 is a much faster rolling tire if you need the bigger knobs.


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

party_wagon said:


> The DHR2 is a much faster rolling tire if you need the bigger knobs.


Than a Forekaster? I know the high roller is a bit of a dog but I thought the Forekaster was aimed at aggressive XC.


----------



## Kuttermax (Sep 4, 2011)

sducomb said:


> I've been riding the new Schwalbe Racing Ray/Ralph combo for a few weeks now. 29x2.25 Snakeskin, on 25mm internal rims, on an Anthem Advanced Pro 1 29. I ride in SE Michigan so trail conditions are rooty, minimal rocks, some sand pits and lots of dusty loose over super hard pack clay. These things are probably the best tires I've ever ridden for our trails. The new Ray tracks incredibly well. The first thing I noticed about it was how easy it was to point and nail a line that I would really have to work hard to hit in the past. It transitions from corner to corner incredibly quickly and smoothly too. The paddle shape of the new Ralph works great on a lot of the blown out, gravely climbs we have. Little to no slip. It just digs in and accelerates. It also powers right through the sand pits. Now just hoping these last a bit better than some of the older Schwalbe compounds.


Interesting to hear. I'm in Ohio so conditions here would be pretty similar. Are you using Speed or Speedgrip compound?

I put a set a of Racing Ralph SS in Speed compound, 2.25 rear/2.35 front, on a new set of Enve M525's attached to my Niner RKT recently. This is not the new tread pattern but is ADDIX Speed. The combo of the tires and wheels felt very fast and I was able to ride at a PR pace. The leaves haven't started falling yet, so conditions were optimal. I had plenty of grip. I'll have to bring out the calipers and measure them, but eyeballing them I find it very hard to notice the size difference and kept rechecking the side wall numbers to ensure I hadn't screwed things up.

I'm really interested to hear what feedback others have on the new Racing Ralph/Ray combo. Based on your description I really want to give them a go now. I'd been on Ikon's and AR's for the last couple of years on my XC bikes so switching back to Schwalbes has been interesting. I have a set of Nobby Nics in Speed Grip that I will try once the leaves start littering the trails over the next month or so.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Kuttermax said:


> I'm really interested to hear what feedback others have on the new Racing Ralph/Ray combo. Based on your description I really want to give them a go now. I'd been on Ikon's and AR's for the last couple of years on my XC bikes so switching back to Schwalbes has been interesting. I have a set of Nobby Nics in Speed Grip that I will try once the leaves start littering the trails over the next month or so.


From the reviews I've read, everyone loves the Ray on the front but there is not as much love for the new tread pattern of the Ralph on the rear. I've read that the new Ralph lacks lateral grip in the turns.


----------



## Kuttermax (Sep 4, 2011)

Stonerider said:


> From the reviews I've read, everyone loves the Ray on the front but there is not as much love for the new tread pattern of the Ralph on the rear. I've read that the new Ralph lacks lateral grip in the turns.


It seems leaving my Addix Speed 2.25 Ralph, which is not the new pattern, on the rear and then swapping out my front 2.35 Ralph for a 2.25 Ray in Speedgrip up front might be a good option. Call it the Old Ralph meets the New Ray combo...


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

I checked out the new Maxxis Recon Race and it's gonna replace my 2.2 Ikons as my "step up" XC race tire. Supposedly faster rolling and better cornering.

For reference I run a 4 tire quiver on my Spark RC:
Furious Fred in some crazy light casing for basically dirt roads (makes my bike sub 20lbs!)
Aspen Exo 2.25 for most XC racing and riding
Ikon Exo 2.2 for XC that requires a little more grip
Ikon Exo 2.35 for a local technical time trial that has more decending than climbing, and play riding


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

New gripton version of the S-works Fast traks and Renegades are now on the Specialized website


----------



## Boosted GP (Mar 10, 2007)

I can’t see the reason for the recon race over the aspen. It’s less grip ( as said by maxxis themselves) and are heavier. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Boosted GP said:


> I can't see the reason for the recon race over the aspen. It's less grip ( as said by maxxis themselves) and are heavier.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Huh, the guy at the Interbike Maxxis booth was making the Recon Race out to be a replacement for the Ikon 2.2 as the more grip, more drag step up from the Aspen. The Recon Race looked like it would corner better than the Aspen or Ikon and rolling resistance would fall between the two so his claims seemed reasonable. I was guessing a weight just below the Ikon.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Lelandjt said:


> Huh, the guy at the Interbike Maxxis booth was making the Recon Race out to be a replacement for the Ikon 2.2 as the more grip, more drag step up from the Aspen. The Recon Race looked like it would corner better than the Aspen or Ikon and rolling resistance would fall between the two so his claims seemed reasonable. I was guessing a weight just below the Ikon.


I think you have it mixed up, Maxxis suggests the Rekon Race suiting a rear only use, with an Ikon or Aspen up front for more grip: https://marathonmtb.com/2018/06/28/maxxis-rekon-race/


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Any thoughts on running Racing Ray front & rear


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Any thoughts on running Racing Ray front & rear


I have the Ray in the front and a Ron in the back. The Ray is incredible as a front tire in regards to grip and speed.

I think if you wanted to really lay a bike over in the turns, the Ray would work well as a rear. However, I can't comment on how it would climb or provide traction.

I do feel 2 Rays would slow you down on the flats or straights though.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> I think you have it mixed up, Maxxis suggests the Rekon Race suiting a rear only use, with an Ikon or Aspen up front for more grip: https://marathonmtb.com/2018/06/28/maxxis-rekon-race/


I got the Maxxis Rekon Race since 2 weeks and have the aspen too. I can say the Rekon Race is better in grip and cornering then the aspen. Bigger side knobs and nice mid section. When the aspen at the rear is gone I will definitely buy another rekon race



















Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Hmmm now I can't decide what to replace my worn Ikon on rear with--another Ikon or try the Rekon Race. How's the volume of Rekon Race vs Ikon given its a 2.25?


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I can’t say anything about it in relation to the ikon. Rode the ikon last year but I didn’t measured it. Vs the aspen the Rekon Race is wider at the side knobs. I also ride it .1 bar higher then a aspen at the front. 

The next 7 days I ride in Girona and inclusive the UCI la tramun marathon so after that I will write a review.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## nzambec2 (Jan 2, 2018)

My personal update since the beginning of the year - 

After significant bad luck with flatting thunder burts, I have eradicated my TBurt supply. I also tried the Gripton Fast Trak 2.3/2.1 (non Sworks) for a while, and "loved" (sarcasm) the vagueness in cornering and mediocre rolling resistance, coupled with the tires being overstated in width (even with a 25mm internal rim)

In come the Rocket Ron 2.25 Addix SpeedGrip - damn they're good in Michigan loose over hard conditions, plenty fast (1 watt slower in the same compound Racing Ralph), and I am more confident riding singletrack with them. 

I would like to try the new Ray/Ralph combo, but getting those Ron's at $40 a piece on Chain Reaction leaves me satisfied.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

^interesting. I was impressed by the suppleness, trail comformity, and wear durability of the fast track griptons. I agree that they break loose suddenly especially if you hit slightly loose dirt off the main line. But they always stuck well for me on the mainline except when wet. I know my times on rooty trails with lots of chatter are faster on the Griptons than Race Kings and XR1 Experts. But I have not tried Schwalbes yet.


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

durkind said:


> Hmmm now I can't decide what to replace my worn Ikon on rear with--another Ikon or try the Rekon Race. How's the volume of Rekon Race vs Ikon given its a 2.25?


Seems like a no brainer to me. The Recon Race weighs the same as the 2.2 Ikon while rolling faster, cornering better, and having more volume. It seems like it's gonna replace the 2.2 Ikon, though maybe they'll keep that around for the faithful.

For what it's worth, I think that article got it wrong, not me. They say it's meant to be a rear tire right below a photo of Nino running it as front. There's no way the Aspen or Ikon has more grip, just look at the intermediate and side knobs.


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

I'm going to somewhat disagree. Although the aspen intermediates are further spaced out they are higher than the rekon race by about 2mm. and the side knobs are same height just in pairs not evenly spaced. 

I run the aspen front and rekon race rear and haven't noticed any issues like front sliding out which you would get with less cornering grip in front vs rear.

If anything I think they are similar in grip. 

Nino runs in pairs. either both aspen or both rekon race.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Lelandjt said:


> For what it's worth, I think that article got it wrong, not me. They say it's meant to be a rear tire right below a photo of Nino running it as front. There's no way the Aspen or Ikon has more grip, just look at the intermediate and side knobs.


Nino "may" be a little more skillful than me. :thumbsup:


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

I believe ikon 30 grams lighter in EXO version


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

Lelandjt said:


> Seems like a no brainer to me. The Recon Race weighs the same as the 2.2 Ikon while rolling faster, cornering better, and having more volume. It seems like it's gonna replace the 2.2 Ikon, though maybe they'll keep that around for the faithful.
> 
> For what it's worth, I think that article got it wrong, not me. They say it's meant to be a rear tire right below a photo of Nino running it as front. There's no way the Aspen or Ikon has more grip, just look at the intermediate and side knobs.


I just do whatever Toast does even if I have only a sliver of his skillset


----------



## junior77 (Jun 19, 2015)

nzambec2 said:


> My personal update since the beginning of the year -
> 
> After significant bad luck with flatting thunder burts, I have eradicated my TBurt supply. I also tried the Gripton Fast Trak 2.3/2.1 (non Sworks) for a while, and "loved" (sarcasm) the vagueness in cornering and mediocre rolling resistance, coupled with the tires being overstated in width (even with a 25mm internal rim)
> 
> ...


Nzambec, have you considered or tried the Vittoria Mezcal G+? If no, I'm assuming because of weight. If yes, any thoughts or comments?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

junior77 said:


> Nzambec, have you considered or tried the Vittoria Mezcal G+? If no, I'm assuming because of weight. If yes, any thoughts or comments?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I've tried the Mezcal, Peyote, and the Barzo. While they are decent tires, they are no comparison to the Rocket Rons, or even the Racing Ray.

If you want grip and fast rolling with light weight then there is really no other tire. Yes they are more expensive, and yes, some people have issues with durability, but you get what you pay for.


----------



## junior77 (Jun 19, 2015)

Gotcha...

Racing Ray = Racing Ralph, correct?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

junior77 said:


> Gotcha...
> 
> Racing Ray = Racing Ralph, correct?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Racing Ray is a new front tire for this year. Completely different than Ralph.


----------



## junior77 (Jun 19, 2015)

Oops!!

So, how would you differentiate between RaRay / Ray Ralph / Rocket Ron?

Primarily Hardpack with some loose over hardpack. 
Gravel, roots, sandy bottoms...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

junior77 said:


> Oops!!
> 
> So, how would you differentiate between RaRay / Ray Ralph / Rocket Ron?
> 
> ...


Check them out for yourself: https://www.schwalbetires.com/node/3061

The Ray is a front specific tire while the new Ralph is rear specific. The old Ralph and Rocket Ron were designed to work as a front or rear tire.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Just ordered a set of Kenda Saber Pro 2.2 with SCT reinforced sidewalls to play with. Loving the Vittoria Mezcal and Barzo all this year but figured I'd try something different for a change. A little lighter, a little faster rolling?, and nobody around here runs em. Saw them at Oz Trails last week and they looked good in person.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

nzambec2 said:


> My personal update since the beginning of the year -
> 
> After significant bad luck with flatting thunder burts, I have eradicated my TBurt supply. I also tried the Gripton Fast Trak 2.3/2.1 (non Sworks) for a while, and "loved" (sarcasm) the vagueness in cornering and mediocre rolling resistance, coupled with the tires being overstated in width (even with a 25mm internal rim)
> 
> ...


Can't beat $40 for that tire. I'm getting $55.99ea quoted on Chain Reaction ?


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

splitendz said:


> Can't beat $40 for that tire. I'm getting $55.99ea quoted on Chain Reaction ?


Just quick note. Chain Reaction is expensive like hell  For everything I need it's quite cheaper to check German bike stores. Most of them have prices at pretty much same level (still for my tire combo, they are normally 10-15eur/tire cheaper then CRC), but it's worth checking all few big ones, as with order around 200eur, you can actually save 10 or 15eur easily. Here's few of those, where I shop:
https://www.bike-discount.de/en
https://www.bike24.de/
https://www.hibike.com/
https://r2-bike.com/
https://www.bike-components.de/en/
I think pretty much all of them ship to US too.


----------



## OldSkoolMark (Jun 8, 2006)

sducomb said:


> It's different. It's definitely a dedicated rear tire and not the all-around tire the old Ralph is. ... It just grabs and accelerates up the climb.


Way more climbing grip than the 2.35 Mezcal it replaced on the rear of my singlespeed.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

You guys that run Maxxis Ardent; how do you like it in wet/mud? I won a 29x2.4 at an event a while ago, I'm thinking about putting it on my kids bike for a front for our January - May spring series.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

So on paper a Rocket Ron front & rear might be the the best of all worlds. they are one the lightest (supposedly lighter than new ray/ralph), decent Rolling resistance, & good grip. Would like to try ray/ralph but that new Ralph just doesn’t look like there is a lot of bite.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

Rocket Ron front & rear works well. The Ray/Ralph combo may have a little less rolling resistance, and the Ray is well improved over the Ron as a front tire; much better bite/ side knobs. The new Ralph has better bite than the old Ralph...it's beginning to grow on me after couple of hundred miles.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

How’s the volume of ray/Ralph?


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

Looks like I'm changing from Rocket Ron to Racing Ray for front next year, but what about back. Currently I'm running Conti's Race King on back and I'm pretty happy both with grip as well as speed. How's new Racing Ralph compare to Race King? Old one was way slower, and didn't have much better grip if any better at all.


----------



## brent701 (Sep 17, 2012)

jimPacNW said:


> You guys that run Maxxis Ardent; how do you like it in wet/mud? I won a 29x2.4 at an event a while ago, I'm thinking about putting it on my kids bike for a front for our January - May spring series.


That's what my son and myself run on the front's unless I am running 3" tires and he is on his 27.5+ SS. 
His setup is 
Ardent Race ( current) or Ardent 2.4 front 27.5 wheels
Aspen rear or he will switch to a ikon if the race has a lot of climbs

I run Ardent 2.4 front
Ikon 2.35 rear 
bike is SS 
if I go 3" I run Bontrager XR2's front/back


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

Yes, 2.4 Ardent is a great front tire for XC courses where grip in loose or wet conditions, volume, and puncture resistance take some priority over speed. Very popular in the amateur classes of Breck Epic and especially among bigger guys in the 2.4 size. Think one step up from the Ikon 2.3. If your son is small and gunning for the win it might be more of a burden than it's worth.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Does the ardent don’t have the dead spot right? The ardent race is better right? Or maybe the rekon is also good?

Little review about the Rekon Race on the front and aspen rear. I can run the RR a little harder and it corners really good! I like it even more then the aspen. Did some corner tests and the rekon diggs deeper in the front then the aspen while my weight is more at the rear. Rekon race it is for sure in dry conditions. Need to try it in wed conditions but otherwise I put an Ardent Race or Rekon at the front.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Unbrockenchain said:


> So on paper a Rocket Ron front & rear might be the the best of all worlds. they are one the lightest (supposedly lighter than new ray/ralph), decent Rolling resistance, & good grip. Would like to try ray/ralph but that new Ralph just doesn't look like there is a lot of bite.


I never got along with the Rocket Ron on the front...I lost my front wheel one too many times with it. I would really like to try the new Racing Ray on the front though.


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> I never got along with the Rocket Ron on the front...I lost my front wheel one too many times with it.


This. Never felt comfortable with the rocket ron on front.


----------



## splitendz (Nov 13, 2015)

winters.benjamin said:


> This. Never felt comfortable with the rocket ron on front.


Highly recommend the Ray. I like the Ron on front, but the Ray is much more confidence inspiring than the Ron


----------



## junior77 (Jun 19, 2015)

splitendz said:


> Highly recommend the Ray. I like the Ron on front, but the Ray is much more confidence inspiring than the Ron


Rocket Ron or Racing Ralph for rear tire??

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

The new racing Ralph doesn’t inspire confidence but I bet it’s fast. never ridden it though.


----------



## brent701 (Sep 17, 2012)

Lelandjt said:


> Yes, 2.4 Ardent is a great front tire for XC courses where grip in loose or wet conditions, volume, and puncture resistance take some priority over speed. Very popular in the amateur classes of Breck Epic and especially among bigger guys in the 2.4 size. Think one step up from the Ikon 2.3. If your son is small and gunning for the win it might be more of a burden than it's worth.


He is little. reason he has the Ardent race on most the time now. 
He is only 4'6" and 84 lbs. Rides a 13.5" Trek Procal 9.7


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

splitendz said:


> Highly recommend the Ray. I like the Ron on front, but the Ray is much more confidence inspiring than the Ron


Nah. I'm done with Schwalbe. Gram for gram, Maxxis does a better job at puncture protection both on the reinforced (Snakeskin for Schwalbe, Exo for Maxxis) tires and non-reinforced IME. I gave Schwalbe a solid three years of my exclusive patronage, tried most of their lineup in both types of casings. Done with those guys.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

It's funny, I've slashed two tires. One a Racing Ralph, one a AR EXO.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

But what is a good alternative for the Schwalbe Racing Ray in the maxxis range? The ardent race is like 100grams heavier 


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

One thing I'm wondering for quite a while... What's all this hype with Maxxis? I agree they might be a bit more bulletproof then Schwalbe or Conti, but they are way heavier and way slower then any of previous mentioned ones, incuding on all possible tests that you can find nowadays. And on the end, they are not any cheaper, if not even more expensive (at least over here in Europe) as Conti or Schwalbe. So why everyone and their dogs are running them? Just because Schurter is running them? I believe Schurter would be running whatever they would give him if it would come with big/rich enough contract. I have been in pro sport, even if not mtb, long enough to know, once you are in that business, most important thing is money you earn not product quality. 
So ok, if reason for everyone being on Maxxis is pro athletes using them, fine, I understand, and obviously Maxxis invested their money good. But I'm sure there has to be some other reason then this, as I really hate to think, people blindly buy what they see on pro racer's wheels. Or am I wrong?


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

primoz said:


> One thing I'm wondering for quite a while... What's all this hype with Maxxis? I agree they might be a bit more bulletproof then Schwalbe or Conti, but they are way heavier and way slower then any of previous mentioned ones, incuding on all possible tests that you can find nowadays. And on the end, they are not any cheaper, if not even more expensive (at least over here in Europe) as Conti or Schwalbe. So why everyone and their dogs are running them? Just because Schurter is running them? I believe Schurter would be running whatever they would give him if it would come with big/rich enough contract. I have been in pro sport, even if not mtb, long enough to know, once you are in that business, most important thing is money you earn not product quality.
> So ok, if reason for everyone being on Maxxis is pro athletes using them, fine, I understand, and obviously Maxxis invested their money good. But I'm sure there has to be some other reason then this, as I really hate to think, people blindly buy what they see on pro racer's wheels. Or am I wrong?


People may not realize that Nino Schurter is racing on "pro only" Maxxis tires. His tires are 170 tpi (threads per inch) while us mortals can only purchase 120 or 60 tpi.


----------



## j102 (Jan 14, 2018)

primoz said:


> One thing I'm wondering for quite a while... What's all this hype with Maxxis? I agree they might be a bit more bulletproof then Schwalbe or Conti, but they are way heavier and way slower then any of previous mentioned ones, incuding on all possible tests that you can find nowadays. And on the end, they are not any cheaper, if not even more expensive (at least over here in Europe) as Conti or Schwalbe. So why everyone and their dogs are running them? Just because Schurter is running them? I believe Schurter would be running whatever they would give him if it would come with big/rich enough contract. I have been in pro sport, even if not mtb, long enough to know, once you are in that business, most important thing is money you earn not product quality.
> So ok, if reason for everyone being on Maxxis is pro athletes using them, fine, I understand, and obviously Maxxis invested their money good. But I'm sure there has to be some other reason then this, as I really hate to think, people blindly buy what they see on pro racer's wheels. Or am I wrong?


No, I don't care what the pro racers use. 
I chose Maxxis because I want maximum durability, flat protection and good grip (among other things). 
They could cost a bit more, but at the end, you could be saving money because they last a bit longer.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

JasperGr said:


> But what is a good alternative for the Schwalbe Racing Ray in the maxxis range? The ardent race is like 100grams heavier


I don't think Maxxis has a good alternative for the Racing Ray. I don't think the Ikon, Aspen, or Rekon Race would grip as well on the front. And as you said, the Ardent Race is a pig (heavy for XC).


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

primoz said:


> One thing I'm wondering for quite a while... What's all this hype with Maxxis? I agree they might be a bit more bulletproof then Schwalbe or Conti, but they are way heavier and way slower then any of previous mentioned ones, incuding on all possible tests that you can find nowadays. And on the end, they are not any cheaper, if not even more expensive (at least over here in Europe) as Conti or Schwalbe. So why everyone and their dogs are running them? Just because Schurter is running them? I believe Schurter would be running whatever they would give him if it would come with big/rich enough contract. I have been in pro sport, even if not mtb, long enough to know, once you are in that business, most important thing is money you earn not product quality.
> So ok, if reason for everyone being on Maxxis is pro athletes using them, fine, I understand, and obviously Maxxis invested their money good. But I'm sure there has to be some other reason then this, as I really hate to think, people blindly buy what they see on pro racer's wheels. Or am I wrong?


People buy what they know. They don't do their research or try new things.

I've ridden every brand tire, and Maxxis makes average tires at best. They are heavy and slow, or offer less than average grip. This is if course in the XC category. I have ridden DHF and DHR Minions and those are nice tires, but in a completely different category.

For XC, you cant beat Schwalbe Rocket Ron for speed, grip, and lightness.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

The fastest local guys around here run Maxxis Ikons, because they like the volume and suppleness. They have also run Schwalbes and didn't like the stiff casings. I didn't really understand the logic until I switched between Race Kings and Fast Traks. We all know the Race King tests really well, but the casing is stiff and the rear doesn't track the trail over chatter and roots. I put a Fast Trak Gripton on the rear and wow, it's so supple and tracks the trail so well that I am just consistently faster on them on the rooty trails that we have (according to Strava). Plus, they just add so much comfort to a hardtail. So now I am a supple tire convert. I don't care how well they roll on smooth drum tests or pavement tests. I have heard that Aspens are also large volume and supple so I will give them a shot. Has nothing to do with Nino.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

Not everyone is climbing miles of fire roads and switch backs. Some people are flying through flowing loops of trail and prefer the grip so they can carry more speed through the turns.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

I happen to really like the Bontrager XR2 and XR3 tires. I never tried the XR1, but for Arizona riding the XR3 and XR2 are good. Light durable and grippy. More durable than EXO maxxis tires for sure. And now that they are $55 per tire reasonably priced.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

I happen to really like the Bontrager XR2 and XR3 tires. I never tried the XR1, but for Arizona riding the XR3 and XR2 are good. Light durable and grippy. More durable than EXO maxxis tires for sure. And now that they are $55 per tire reasonably priced. 

I go with 2.35 Ikon front and 2.2 XR2 (used to run XR3) in the back. I will probalby repalce the 2.35 Ikon with a 2.35 XR2 in front, but even after 1500 miles Ikon still works great.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Hey Joe, how supple are the XR2s in comparison to Fast Traks? You bought an Epic right that came with Fast Traks?


----------



## broeli (Feb 15, 2008)

I don't understand how anyone thinks maxxis is durable or supple. I use to run ikons but stopped because of durability issues. I actually think schwalbe is not only more supple but also more durable..in my experience. Ive used about everything. I like how fast race kings are but they have stiff casings and the tread pattern area isn't durable at all. I currently use vittoria mezcals and really like them. They are high volume and are a good really good. I also had great luck and really liked the bontrager xr2.


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

broeli said:


> I don't understand how anyone thinks maxxis is durable or supple. I use to run ikons but stopped because of durability issues. I actually think schwalbe is not only more supple but also more durable..in my experience. Ive used about everything. I like how fast race kings are but they have stiff casings and the tread pattern area isn't durable at all. I currently use vittoria mezcals and really like them. They are high volume and are a good really good. I also had great luck and really liked the bontrager xr2.


And conversely I don't understand how anyone likes the mezcals. I have 4 of them and still a pair of them one my training bike and I find them slower than most tyres and not that durable. Not to mention the extra weight.

I ran them in a big race this year and it was my only in race flat for the year.

So I'm guessing we all will have our opinions and they will all differ.

I think why maxxis tyres are the most popular tyre where I live is also pricing. Maxxis tyres go for $60 Australian at LBS's while schwalbe are at least $80. Vittoria can basically only be ordered from overseas, and Bonti and specialized can only be bought from dealers in australia, Not online. And they go for 80 bucks a peice too. So Not only do people in my city think maxis perform well enough they are also the cheapest generally most available option.


----------



## broeli (Feb 15, 2008)

It really is preference and riding style. My mezcals roll faster than the ikons i use to use and they also grip better and have been more reliable. They also were lighter. Both mine are 2.35 on my ss and one is under 700g and the other like 710. So not bad for a high volume 2.35. Right now my backup bike has rr front rara rear. Good combo too. They're a little lighter but the mezcals just do everything better. I do national level endurance and xc races in some pretty techy places basically year around so i definitely am speaking from more than just trail riding experience


----------



## Lelandjt (Feb 22, 2008)

primoz said:


> One thing I'm wondering for quite a while... What's all this hype with Maxxis? I agree they might be a bit more bulletproof then Schwalbe or Conti, but they are way heavier and way slower then any of previous mentioned ones, incuding on all possible tests that you can find nowadays. And on the end, they are not any cheaper, if not even more expensive (at least over here in Europe) as Conti or Schwalbe. So why everyone and their dogs are running them? Just because Schurter is running them? I believe Schurter would be running whatever they would give him if it would come with big/rich enough contract. I have been in pro sport, even if not mtb, long enough to know, once you are in that business, most important thing is money you earn not product quality.
> So ok, if reason for everyone being on Maxxis is pro athletes using them, fine, I understand, and obviously Maxxis invested their money good. But I'm sure there has to be some other reason then this, as I really hate to think, people blindly buy what they see on pro racer's wheels. Or am I wrong?


Do Aspen EXOs test as slow rolling? They feel fast to me and not noticably slower than my weight weenie Thunder Burts (though obviously heavier and much more durable and better grip). I think many people like Maxxis XC tires because except for the Ikon they have well designed intermediate and side knobs that take what they learned from DH tires. Also, in places like the Rockies you need some flat protection and Maxxis was first to the party with EXO and seem to lead the pack in protection vs weight.

Also, yeah marketing and riding what you know. Our shop stocks the entire line of Maxxis in order from grippiest/burliest to fastest rolling/lightest so it's easy for a rider to come in and find what suits them for each end of the bike.


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

broeli said:


> It really is preference and riding style. My mezcals roll faster than the ikons i use to use and they also grip better and have been more reliable. They also were lighter. Both mine are 2.35 on my ss and one is under 700g and the other like 710. So not bad for a high volume 2.35. Right now my backup bike has rr front rara rear. Good combo too. They're a little lighter but the mezcals just do everything better. I do national level endurance and xc races in some pretty techy places basically year around so i definitely am speaking from more than just trail riding experience


No doubting your experience with them. It just didn't mirror my own. Funny thing is my 2.25 mezcals come in at about 730-740g while 2.2 ikons were 640-650! I've read a few instances of the 2.35's coming in lighter than the 2.25's. Seems quite odd. I also think soil types and even trail construction also come into our tyre preferences too.

Personally in the maxxis range I'm finding the rekon race and aspen doing better than the ikon. My brother is running a 2.25 rekon up front and it looks a good aggressive option up front over an ardent race. 50 grams lighter too based on claimed weight. 670 vs 720.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Maxxis should also make a good xc front tire. Rekon is way too expensive. 10 euro extra and I got the new ray AND Ralph from schwalbe 


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## chestr (Oct 15, 2016)

JasperGr said:


> Maxxis should also make a good xc front tire. Rekon is way too expensive. 10 euro extra and I got the new ray AND Ralph from schwalbe


 In Australia the rekon is cheaper than a single ralph! But we have never had cheap schwalbe prices.

29 x 2.25 3C Maxx Speed - EXO - TR Kevlar Folding Black
$74.95 (53 usd,46 euro) from an online store.

and from same store

29 x 2.25 Aspen Dual Compound - EXO - TR Kevlar Folding Black
$59.95 (42usd, 36 euro)


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Damn that would be perfect. As far as I know r2bike from germany has the rekon 2.25 but it cost 66 euro incl ship


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## markus_krk (Jul 27, 2013)

For those in Europe searching for Rekon Race

https://www.bike-components.de/de/Maxxis/Rekon-Race-EXO-Protection-29-Faltreifen-p66193/

Would appreciate if someone could post a photo of it next to Ardent Race.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Thats the Rekon Race at my bike, 25mm id

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

midwestmtb said:


> Hey Joe, how supple are the XR2s in comparison to Fast Traks? You bought an Epic right that came with Fast Traks?


I never used the fast tracks. They were not grid and did not want to run them due to sidewall cuts. I race, but most of my miles are just on trails that are pretty rocky. If they had been grids I would have tried them. Feedback from most of my friends was not good with non-grid tires. I need to put these on e-bay. 2.3 and 2.1 fast track zero miles. I doubt I can see them here in Arizona.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

JoePAz said:


> I never used the fast tracks. They were not grid and did not want to run them due to sidewall cuts. I race, but most of my miles are just on trails that are pretty rocky. If they had been grids I would have tried them. Feedback from most of my friends was not good with non-grid tires. I need to put these on e-bay. 2.3 and 2.1 fast track zero miles. I doubt I can see them here in Arizona.


I'm surprised. I've ridden some pretty rocky trails in Missouri on the Fast Trak griptons. No cuts or flats. Aren't the 60tpi fast Traks the equivalent of control casings which is the intermediate level - more durable than S-works but not quite grid?


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

What tire casing is the smoothest to ride and best suited for an endurance race rig?


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

midwestmtb said:


> I'm surprised. I've ridden some pretty rocky trails in Missouri on the Fast Trak griptons. No cuts or flats. Aren't the 60tpi fast Traks the equivalent of control casings which is the intermediate level - more durable than S-works but not quite grid?


I don't know, but I figure the tires would be worth something to sell new unused vs with a few miles and side wall slash. Plus I did not want to deal with a cut tire on the trails. A friend got new S-works Epic with the same tires, ran them for a ride or two and cut them right way. I have sliced a EXO Ikon from tread to bead and have seen Ardents cut the same way. I have put a few small holes in XR3 over the last 3 years of using these, but they are fixed pretty easily on the trail with a plug. Not so easy to fix sidewall cuts. So when I have found something that works I tend to want to stick with it unless I get lots of good local feedback from riders I know. Not saying your experience is invalid, but I don't know your trails and how you ride. I trust much more people who ride the same trails I do and I know their styles.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Having done one endurance event in Arizona, I know what kind of rocks you are talking about. They are very sharp, jagged volcanic rock. This isn't "rocky" like even my rocky trails. These are razor blades.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

JoePAz said:


> I don't know, but I figure the tires would be worth something to sell new unused vs with a few miles and side wall slash. Plus I did not want to deal with a cut tire on the trails. A friend got new S-works Epic with the same tires, ran them for a ride or two and cut them right way. I have sliced a EXO Ikon from tread to bead and have seen Ardents cut the same way. I have put a few small holes in XR3 over the last 3 years of using these, but they are fixed pretty easily on the trail with a plug. Not so easy to fix sidewall cuts. So when I have found something that works I tend to want to stick with it unless I get lots of good local feedback from riders I know. Not saying your experience is invalid, but I don't know your trails and how you ride. I trust much more people who ride the same trails I do and I know their styles.


Thanks Joe. So more generally speaking, do you find XR2s to be supple tires compared to similar tires that you have ridden?


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

midwestmtb said:


> Thanks Joe. So more generally speaking, do you find XR2s to be supple tires compared to similar tires that you have ridden?


I am not even sure what supple means for tires. I want a tire that is reasonably light. Has solid grip, low rolling resistanance, puncture resistant and will last a long time. How a tire feels to me is based on pressures. Some places tires slide more than others simply due to our loose ground. We have rocks over rocks over loose dirt. No place for a tire to feel "supple". What some people may say is "dry loose and blown out" is our normal every day riding. That is what happens when it rains 6" a year. Tires are that are too soft will get torn up on the rocks in 3-4 rides. Be junk in 200 miles. I can't afford that nor have the time to keep changing tires. I have been able to get 1000 miles from a rear XR3. No word on XR2, but I expect similar. Ikon 2.35 will get me 1500+ miles in front. For a time I ran X-king protection and those had hard sidewalls. Had to drop a couple PSI since they were so stiff. Overall not happy with their life span and tendency to show treads on the side wall.

I have run XR3 on my 26" HT, 29er HT, 29er SS, and 29er FS. Loved them, but after good feedback on the XR2 tried those to save a little weight and it seems to be good. They don't feel different from the XR3 and run them at the same pressures. This is good because I had not issues with feel, but was worried about grip levels with shorter/different tread. I can't tell they are lighter, but I know they are. This i just hard to compare back to back without very controlled testing.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

In order of increasing percieved suppleness. All tires ridden on an Arch EX on a carbon hardtail. Schwalbe Snakeskin RR 2.25 >2.2 Old Style XR1 > 2.2 XR2 > Ikon EXO TR 2.2 > Ikon EXO 2.2 (non TR). I always found the non TR Ikons to be almost too soft- I'd have to up pressures to keep them from feeling squirmy. Right now I run the 2.2 XR2 with 22 F/24 R and it's just right for me at 190lb. I think the Ikon's feel fairly similar I just don't like that they're lower volume than the Bontrager XR2.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

JoePAz said:


> I am not even sure what supple means for tires. I want a tire that is reasonably light. Has solid grip, low rolling resistanance, puncture resistant and will last a long time. How a tire feels to me is based on pressures. Some places tires slide more than others simply due to our loose ground. We have rocks over rocks over loose dirt. No place for a tire to feel "supple". What some people may say is "dry loose and blown out" is our normal every day riding. That is what happens when it rains 6" a year. Tires are that are too soft will get torn up on the rocks in 3-4 rides. Be junk in 200 miles. I can't afford that nor have the time to keep changing tires. I have been able to get 1000 miles from a rear XR3. No word on XR2, but I expect similar. Ikon 2.35 will get me 1500+ miles in front. For a time I ran X-king protection and those had hard sidewalls. Had to drop a couple PSI since they were so stiff. Overall not happy with their life span and tendency to show treads on the side wall.
> 
> I have run XR3 on my 26" HT, 29er HT, 29er SS, and 29er FS. Loved them, but after good feedback on the XR2 tried those to save a little weight and it seems to be good. They don't feel different from the XR3 and run them at the same pressures. This is good because I had not issues with feel, but was worried about grip levels with shorter/different tread. I can't tell they are lighter, but I know they are. This i just hard to compare back to back without very controlled testing.


By supple, I just mean reasonably soft side walls with decent volume so the bike conforms to small trail obstacles and roots rather than bounce off of them. It's really noticeable on a hardtail. I think your experience with the X-king vs the XR3 is a nice contrast. I noticed that with my RKs, I could never get the pressure just right - either it was high and would bounce or too low so I'd get frequent rim strikes. On the other hand, on my Fast Traks, I have about a 5psi window to play with without bouncing or rim strikes.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

midwestmtb said:


> By supple, I just mean reasonably soft side walls with decent volume so the bike conforms to small trail obstacles and roots rather than bounce off of them. .


Ok I get it now. I guess I am pretty insensitive to the feeling, but do understand the need to dial in pressures to balance rim strikes vs "too hard". Personally I run as low as possible without rim strikes. For 21mm wheels that is 21F/28r on my HT. 2.35ikon/2.2 XR3. For my FS with 24mm wheels 20F/26r 2.35 Ikon/2.2 XR2. I am about 170lbs. I can get rim strikes in front. (had one last night), but that was more due poor technique rather than too low a pressure. Anyway tires a always tough to figure. Had one guy talking up the Mezcal and other hated them and tossed them. Who is right? Who knows.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

How big are rock razors? The largest tire I ever fit was a 2.3 morsa and it is bigger than most 2.3 tires. It would very very lightly rub under very hard climbs as the frame flexed. I noticed they are on super discount right now and I'm tempted to try one. How much slower is the minion ss than say an Ikon?


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Another plug for the Rock Razors, front and rear, 20psi, after a muddy 24-hour race, in which my 4-man team won age group. They made me look good.

These are like mega Thunder Burts or Aspens. Not the best climbing traction on steep wet roots, but few race tires are. The side knobs are pretty burly so cornering traction is rarely in doubt.

At 740g, they weigh the same in 29x2.35 as Ikon EXOs.


----------



## party_wagon (Oct 10, 2008)

chomxxo said:


> Another plug for the Rock Razors, front and rear, 20psi, after a muddy 24-hour race, in which my 4-man team won age group. They made me look good.
> 
> These are like mega Thunder Burts or Aspens. Not the best climbing traction on steep wet roots, but few race tires are. The side knobs are pretty burly so cornering traction is rarely in doubt.
> 
> ...


How wide are your rims and how is the transition to those side knobs? Did you try minion ss as well?


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

What tires would you put on a light trail bike that gets ridden monday through friday with an ocasional xc race? I have a jamis dragon 27.5 and love dhr2 or hans dampf for the front tire. They are pretty fast and light for the traction they offer in 27.5. I kind of suck at bike handling but have a big engine from lots of riding. Where does this forekaster fall? Is it a nobby nic rival that can be used on the back of an aggressive all mountain bike or does it belong in the same category as an x-king?


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

party_wagon said:


> How wide are your rims and how is the transition to those side knobs? Did you try minion ss as well?


I'm racing them on 1st-gen Valors, which aren't super wide or narrow; but I think rim width is a tertiary concern.

Design-wise the Rock Razor and Minion SS look pretty much the same. The Minion SS lists at about 55g heavier though.

The transition between a semi-slick's smooth middle and rugged side knobs is not going to be smooth, but I think the design offers the best compromise for XC racing, and the Swiss team behind Nino is proving that.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

chomxxo said:


> Another plug for the Rock Razors, front and rear, 20psi, after a muddy 24-hour race, in which my 4-man team won age group. They made me look good.
> 
> These are like mega Thunder Burts or Aspens. Not the best climbing traction on steep wet roots, but few race tires are. The side knobs are pretty burly so cornering traction is rarely in doubt.
> 
> ...


Beautiful SantaCannon there.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Nice tires! And mud tires can be heavier Thats not a problem at all


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## J-Flo (Apr 23, 2012)

I’m very much an amateur midpack cat 2 guy, but am surprised at so much talk of heavy tires here. I would go from midpack to back-of-pack if I used a Hans Dampf. The only race I use heavy tires for (Minion DHF) is Downieville XC, and that’s because I want to rail the descent as best I can and feel safe even though those tires cost me at least 10 minutes on the climb. (For those unfamiliar, that race starts with a 9-mile, 3500 ft climb and followed by 17 miles of almost all downhill fun.) I love my Minions, but they are for rough riding not XC racing. 

I tend to run a Fasttrak front and rear for XC races. Those tires have more grip than it seems they should and are quite fast. The main downside is that they puncture almost as easily as Racing Ralphs. Granted, most of our NorCal races are not technically challenging. For a more challenging course I will put a Ground Control on the front. I’ve tried the Bontragers and found the rubber less grippy and too hard/more prone to slippage. Ikons are also very good. Try to stay under 650g for a race tire. Wish I had the skill to race with a Renegade or Pace tire but I don’t. 

The pros virtually never run anything with more tread and weight than a Fasttrak/Aspen/Ikon or similar tire. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## wheelzqc (Aug 31, 2016)

Are the S-Works totes too fragile for everyday riding ? What do the Spec rider do around here ? SWORKS front and grid rear ? I'm enjoying their cx line of tires so I am tempted to try their xc tires next. 2.3 SWorks Fast Track front, 2.1 grid rear ?


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

J-Flo said:


> I'm very much an amateur midpack cat 2 guy, but am surprised at so much talk of heavy tires here. I would go from midpack to back-of-pack if I used a Hans Dampf. The only race I use heavy tires for (Minion DHF) is Downieville XC, and that's because I want to rail the descent as best I can and feel safe even though those tires cost me at least 10 minutes on the climb. (For those unfamiliar, that race starts with a 9-mile, 3500 ft climb and followed by 17 miles of almost all downhill fun.) I love my Minions, but they are for rough riding not XC racing.
> 
> I tend to run a Fasttrak front and rear for XC races. Those tires have more grip than it seems they should and are quite fast. The main downside is that they puncture almost as easily as Racing Ralphs. Granted, most of our NorCal races are not technically challenging. For a more challenging course I will put a Ground Control on the front. I've tried the Bontragers and found the rubber less grippy and too hard/more prone to slippage. Ikons are also very good. Try to stay under 650g for a race tire. Wish I had the skill to race with a Renegade or Pace tire but I don't.
> 
> ...


This is why I built a 27.5 bike. A 29x2.35 ikon and 2.4 ardent weigh more than a 27.5 knobby nic and dhr2 and have a similar rolling resistance. My local trails aren't really known for miles of roots and rocks but I can definitely use the extra traction. Nino uses an aspen with a special casing that is a grippier compound and the casing is softer. There is no telling what they are doing with those tires behind the scenes to get everything they can out of them. Not to mention they are racing on a groomed surface that someone just took a backpack blower to and not a dusty trail with a bunch of pebbles littered around the turns.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I did an XC race recently that I know has a lot of soft sand in it all while going through switchbacks. I opted for a Hans Dampf 2.35 at 900g, and got a lot of funny looks from it. I finished pretty damn well in that race. I suffered more on the initial climb, but I saved energy later in the race when I got to the soft and tech parts where I could maintain more speed and not have to accelerate as much or as often.

Sometimes a light XC tire isn't the best choice, just because it is an XC race.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

wheelzqc said:


> Are the S-Works totes too fragile for everyday riding ? What do the Spec rider do around here ? SWORKS front and grid rear ? I'm enjoying their cx line of tires so I am tempted to try their xc tires next. 2.3 SWorks Fast Track front, 2.1 grid rear ?


That's what I'd like to know too. I don't think they make Fast Traks and Renegades with Grid anymore. Only the Ground Control comes in grid. I will probably try the new S-works griptons next season (getting cold and leaves are falling here so it's probably a bit time to try fast, light XC tires).


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

Where does this forekaster tire line up against a nobby nic?


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

J-Flo said:


> I tend to run a Fasttrak front and rear for XC races. Those tires have more grip than it seems they should and are quite fast. The main downside is that they puncture almost as easily as Racing Ralphs. Granted, most of our NorCal races are not technically challenging. For a more challenging course I will put a Ground Control on the front. I've tried the Bontragers and found the rubber less grippy and too hard/more prone to slippage. Ikons are also very good. Try to stay under 650g for a race tire. Wish I had the skill to race with a Renegade or Pace tire but I don't.
> 
> The pros virtually never run anything with more tread and weight than a Fasttrak/Aspen/Ikon or similar tire.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, my bike came with Fast Traks and I kept wanting to replace and did with a rear RK. But damn, everytime I ride a rooty trail with the FT, they just keep impressing me with the trail comformity and grip. I think that Gripton compound is for real. I haven't cut one yet (regular version not S-works) through over 1000 miles of riding in the midwest with some "midwest rocky" trails (lots of loose, fist sized or smaller rocks strewn over dirt)


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

winters.benjamin said:


> Beautiful SantaCannon there.


Thanks! Beyond the scope of this thread but by far the most difficult build I've concocted to date. Crickets on the Tallboy thread because they had no idea WTH I was doing, lol

Relevant to this thread: Leftys have been boost/plus compatible for a decade...


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

MillerC said:


> Where does this forekaster tire line up against a nobby nic?


To me it's a much better version, at least it is more we'll rounded. It's got great grip and rolls pretty well. As xc bikes get slacker, you need more grip on the front. This is going to be the go-to for more technical courses.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

euro-trash said:


> To me it's a much better version, at least it is more we'll rounded. It's got great grip and rolls pretty well. As xc bikes get slacker, you need more grip on the front. This is going to be the go-to for more technical courses.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


How does it roll compared to a nobby nic, 2.25 ardent, x-king, and ect? I'm looking at it as a back tire to pair with a dhr2 front on my 27.5 jamis dragon. I have had my best finishes with 2.25 ardent in the back.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Zerort said:


> For XC, you cant beat Schwalbe Rocket Ron for speed, grip, and lightness.


Do you run the Rocket Ron in speed or Speedgrip (or a combo)?


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

MillerC said:


> How does it roll compared to a nobby nic, 2.25 ardent, x-king, and ect? I'm looking at it as a back tire to pair with a dhr2 front on my 27.5 jamis dragon. I have had my best finishes with 2.25 ardent in the back.


I would say it rolls similar to all three of those, and the grip is substantially better than any of those. The Nic does really well on loam, but what doesn't? People seem to love or hate the NN, I certainly don't hate it, but still think it's been surpassed. It gets frightening on wet roots, the Forkaster seems much more versatile. 
I was never much of a fan of the narrow Ardent, the Forekaster seems to have nailed what they were trying to do with it. It has the grip of the 2.4 Ardent (which I like) without rolling like a tank. And the XKing, yeah, no thanks. Under any circumstances, no thanks.
Why not a DHF on the front if you're running that big a tire?

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

euro-trash said:


> I would say it rolls similar to all three of those, and the grip is substantially better than any of those. The Nic does really well on loam, but what doesn't? People seem to love or hate the NN, I certainly don't hate it, but still think it's been surpassed. It gets frightening on wet roots, the Forkaster seems much more versatile.
> I was never much of a fan of the narrow Ardent, the Forekaster seems to have nailed what they were trying to do with it. It has the grip of the 2.4 Ardent (which I like) without rolling like a tank. And the XKing, yeah, no thanks. Under any circumstances, no thanks.
> Why not a DHF on the front if you're running that big a tire?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


In the 27.5 size the dhr2 is supposed to be a lot faster and not give up much traction to the dhf. I don't notice much between it and a barzo up front in terms of rolling resistance but I notice a big difference between a race king and an ardent in the rear. I found the 2.25 ardent to be really good in the dry and could cash the checks that the dhr2 was writing but when it got wet at all it slipped all over the place. Most of my riding is on blue single track and very little is on fire roads or ect.


----------



## J-Flo (Apr 23, 2012)

To those who asked about the S-Works Fasttrak -it’s a race tire. Not built to take every day trail use. Very lightweight sidewall construction and very low weight overall. Great grip for the weight and low tread profile/rolling resistance, but it also won’t last long if you regularly ride in places with rocks or other sharp things. I think some racers put them in the front only while using the regular casing in the rear - it’s safer that way. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

Ground Controls were mentioned a few posts above, I've had my old GC Control casings on my hardtail all summer, I raced that bike in C1/2 masters cyclocross yesterday for a rough and slick course, - and had my best finish this season. The GC is still a good tire, I think I've got 5 or 6 seasons on the front and just a full season on the rear tire. I slid around a bit, but that can't be helped on 1" of wet ground-up sod over round rocks. The GCs clear well and have good predictable grip, still zero flats/failures in a lot of races (truckerco sealant). I ran Barzos last winter/spring, I'm going to move those Barzos to my kids bike, he's ready for a more mud-ready tire, I'm torn between running my old GCs or getting new G+ Barzos for the muddy races, I'm leaning towards a new set of Barzos, the GCs are pretty long in the tooth, and one less crash is worth a little $$.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

So the two combos that most interest me are the new Schwalbe Ray/Ralph and Maxxis Rekon/Rekon Race all in 2,25 with Snakeskin/Evo casing.
Lightest - Schwalbe
Rolling Resistance - Probably Schwalbe
Volume -?
grip/bite - ?
Durability -Equal?
Cost - Maxxis


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

durkind said:


> So the two combos that most interest me are the new Schwalbe Ray/Ralph and Maxxis Rekon/Rekon Race all in 2,25 with Snakeskin/Evo casing.
> Lightest - Schwalbe
> Rolling Resistance - Probably Schwalbe
> Volume -?
> ...


What about the Rocket Ron in the rear? The volume is there as I have always found them true to size, they are lighter than the Ralphs, roll better, and have better grip. For the front, I would use a Ray, but they seems to be a bit smaller - 2.20", but roll fast and grip incredibly.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Thanks Zerort, good suggestion. For the Rocket Ron I think they come in both Speed and Speed Grip. Any preference? I think I have heard the Speed (red) is sometimes heavier?


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

durkind said:


> Thanks Zerort, good suggestion. For the Rocket Ron I think they come in both Speed and Speed Grip. Any preference? I think I have heard the Speed (red) is sometimes heavier?


I've only ever bought the Red - speed. I think those are the lighter ones actually. Best place to verify that would be on their website.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Thanks


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I had the Aspen/Rekon Race but i wanted the Rekon Race/ rekon combo. The rekon 2.25 is hard to get in Holland/germany so I went for the new Schwalbe Ralph ray combo. Just because I want a do it all set and not want to stress out on What to use on a race day. First ride on the schwalbe were really good! 


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## mevnet (Oct 4, 2013)

Light // lighter usually comes down to whether they have reinforced sidewalls (SnakeSkin) or not (Liteskin). Or your luck, with the ADDIX compound most of them seem to be overweight by about 10%. Have a bit more about RoRo/RaRa/ Thunderburt here, after one season of use


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I don't mind mixing brands so I think a great combination would the the 2.25 Maxxis Aspen TR/EXO rear and the 2.25 Schwalbe Racing Ray SnakeSkin front.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

The new “prototype” Vittoria Agarro looks like a Rekon clone. 

Might be the ticket for us desert dwellers. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Yes but with higher knobs so I think it sit right between the rekon and rekon race which must be perfect.


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

Wonder when it will be out, looks like a tire I would use.


----------



## krumme (May 6, 2018)

Want more outright xc tyres for my 27.5 ht

Running rekon 2.6 terra front 2.4 dual on i30 now and have a i21 xc wheelset I want to put to use for race on light terrain. The rekons is fun and I love them but not xc at all.

I was thinking ikon 2.35 exo front and aspen exo 2.1 rear. Would that be fast - anyone running such a combo?

I am 72 kg and don't want to run low pressure on that xc wheelset as it's to draggy for the purpose.

Have tried rocket ron and it didn't work for me. Front slipping and rear was bouncy but gripped okey. Nn as front doesn't work either. And it's way too slow anyway.


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

krumme said:


> I was thinking ikon 2.35 exo front and aspen exo 2.1 rear. Would that be fast - anyone running such a combo?
> 
> I am 72 kg and don't want to run low pressure on that xc wheelset as it's to draggy for the purpose.


Yes to the Ikon and Aspen combo, but I'd suggest the 2.25 Aspen for the back.

Why do you think low pressure is too "draggy" (assuming you mean slow)? Low pressure can usually be faster, less rolling resistance and also more grip = faster. I am a similar weight and run 18-25 psi depending on the tire and conditions.


----------



## krumme (May 6, 2018)

kevbikemad said:


> Yes to the Ikon and Aspen combo, but I'd suggest the 2.25 Aspen for the back.
> 
> Why do you think low pressure is too "draggy" (assuming you mean slow)? Low pressure can usually be faster, less rolling resistance and also more grip = faster. I am a similar weight and run 18-25 psi depending on the tire and conditions.


Thanx. For 27.5 the 2.1 aspen is the only option as I can tell.
I am guessing that aprox 18 front 24 rear for that combo as a starter for evaluation. So I guess I just expressed myself unclear.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> The new "prototype" Vittoria Agarro looks like a Rekon clone.
> 
> Might be the ticket for us desert dwellers.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


That's a great looking tire, I think it would work well in the wet we have around here. I wonder when it will be available?


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

krumme said:


> Want more outright xc tyres for my 27.5 ht
> 
> Running rekon 2.6 terra front 2.4 dual on i30 now and have a i21 xc wheelset I want to put to use for race on light terrain. The rekons is fun and I love them but not xc at all.
> 
> ...


Well that's your problem right there, 27.5 HT, lol.

Rocket Ron and Nobby Nic are well-known to be the tires with the highest grip to speed ratio on the market. And everybody knows that lower pressure is better. 
Come on...


----------



## MNSnoPro (Mar 1, 2016)

Has anyone had a chance to compare the following tires?
Rekon Race
Aspen
Racing Ray / Ralph Combo


----------



## chuckc760 (Jul 15, 2015)

I have a Scott Scale 710 with various upgrades including the MK3 Crest wheels. Have run various tire combos including the Ikon 2.35 F / Aspen 2.1 rear. I recently switched the rear to an Ikon 2.35. I like it much better. 
Increased rolling diameter, an uptick in traction, comfort and control. This is on socal hard pack / loose over hard terrain.

I notice no difference in rolling resistance (road and dirt) and the bike feels better balanced.

I'm about 180 running 26F/27R tire pressures.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

MNSnoPro said:


> Has anyone had a chance to compare the following tires?
> Rekon Race
> Aspen
> Racing Ray / Ralph Combo


Me! My opinion is that you can't compare those tires with each other. Maxxis rekon race has better grip then the aspen in my eyes. Both rolls good but the rekon race corners better. Ray/Ralp combo is a more all-season set. More grip but rolls a little bit slower then the rekon race/aspen. I prefer the Ray/Ralph because of the climbing grip and overall grip. Aspen and rekon race is a no no in rainy conditions while the Ray/Ralph will handle good in those conditions.

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## krumme (May 6, 2018)

chuckc760 said:


> I have a Scott Scale 710 with various upgrades including the MK3 Crest wheels. Have run various tire combos including the Ikon 2.35 F / Aspen 2.1 rear. I recently switched the rear to an Ikon 2.35. I like it much better.
> Increased rolling diameter, an uptick in traction, comfort and control. This is on socal hard pack / loose over hard terrain.
> 
> I notice no difference in rolling resistance (road and dirt) and the bike feels better balanced.
> ...


What do you run front now then with the ikon back?


----------



## chuckc760 (Jul 15, 2015)

krumme said:


> What do you run front now then with the ikon back?


Running Ikon 2.35 front and rear.


----------



## krumme (May 6, 2018)

chuckc760 said:


> Running Ikon 2.35 front and rear.


Ok. Looking forward to try the 2.35 ikon I ordered.

You like the tyre setup on your scale 710?

I am wondering if I should try ikon 2.6 or 2.35 on my genius tuned 2018 with a brand new 29 i25 wheelset I have just collecting dust. Running 27.5 rekon 2.8 now but would like to have a faster wheelset to play with.


----------



## chuckc760 (Jul 15, 2015)

krumme said:


> Ok. Looking forward to try the 2.35 ikon I ordered.
> 
> You like the tyre setup on your scale 710?


The tires work real well on the terrain here and for my type of riding. Hardpack with rocks and loose sections. The volume seems to help the rather stiff ride of the 27.5 "Hammertail". The area I ride favors 29ers but my segment times don't seem to suffer in comparison. As a rider, there's always room for improvement though.


----------



## teleken (Jul 22, 2005)

FYI - I posted a 29x2.35 Barzo TR in the classifieds


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

teleken said:


> FYI - I posted a 29x2.35 Barzo TR in the classifieds


Didn't work for you either?


----------



## MI-XC (Mar 14, 2018)

Zerort said:


> Didn't work for you either?


I tried the 2.25 Barzo (front) and I don't like it either on a 24mm ID rim.


----------



## teleken (Jul 22, 2005)

Zerort said:


> Didn't work for you either?


At first yes but as the trails dried out (Colorado Kitty Litter & sand) not so much. Thought about throwing it on back but already had a new tire back there.
Like MI-XC stated I had it on a 24mm ID maybe a wider rim would square the tread out more?


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

Anyone running a rekon/ikon or rekon/rekon race?

Im on a 2.35/2.2 xr2 team issue and i can squirm the rear tire on our trails. They work not bad. Thinking the exo wall might be stiffer?

Or go to a expert 60tpi rear. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

For anyone racing loose/loose, loose/hard, those forekaster F/R combo is pretty great. Still 735 grams in the 2.35.

Oddly, a lot of my other tires have been coming in heavy. 

Had an aspen 2.25 exo come in at 684g! Must have come from that OE batch with the Blur tires. 

Schwalbe. NObby Nic ADDIX speedgrip
2.35 - 785
2.25 - 745!

Overall that’s 100 grams heavier for the set than the last one two. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Toddzilla (Nov 27, 2016)

I’m running forekaster front with ikon 2.2 rear. I’m very impressed with the forekaster’s grip in the loose stuff here.


----------



## tfinator (Apr 30, 2009)

Toddzilla said:


> I'm running forekaster front with ikon 2.2 rear. I'm very impressed with the forekaster's grip in the loose stuff here.


Ever try the rekon? I need to replace my FK and am not sure what I want

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Toddzilla (Nov 27, 2016)

tfinator said:


> Ever try the rekon? I need to replace my FK and am not sure what I want
> 
> Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


Only as a 27.5+ so it's not apples to apples.


----------



## nymb (Dec 3, 2018)

Sorry for the double post


----------



## nymb (Dec 3, 2018)

Can someone please point me in the right direction? I want to buy a 27.5 Rocket Ron to replace my son's rear Nobby Nic. He is 14 and races NICA in NY, currently on 23" rims. I see various versions and prices and am looking to find the best deal I can get since money is tight. Is the HS438 a lower end model? I see good prices on this version but am afraid of making the wrong choice. I'm guessing I want snakeskin/addicted/speedgrip. If you could refer me to a link with a good price Is really appreciate it! Thanks in advance!


----------



## slider_phil (Aug 27, 2014)

This is a 2.25 Rekon on a Crest mk3 rim. Pulled off the Aspen and stuck this on as it's getting loose and dusty here in Aus. Definitely more grip but still a very fast rolling tyre. Still got a 2.25 Aspen on the rear and it's noticeably breaking away before the front end.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I'm finally making tire decisions, my 'spring' series starts in about 5 weeks: I've got a Maxxis Ardent 2.4 mounted on the front, skinwall non-tubeless version, my shop team guy ran a pair of those last year and won quite a few cat1 SS races in our series, with no issues setup tubeless. Those are 750g claimed for 2.40, which I think it pretty light for a big knob high-volume tire.
I'm looking at one of those for the rear, but also looking at the Ardent Race 2.35 for rear, I'm thinking the rear takes more abuse and it might be good to have a TR bead on the rear, plus our 'mud' is most often wet sandy loam, not as often sticky/peanut-butter, and the Ardent Race still has substantial knobs with good open areas. Anyone running Ardent Race?, opinions?


----------



## Walt Disney's Frozen Head (Jan 9, 2008)

jimPacNW said:


> ... plus our 'mud' is most often wet sandy loam, not as often sticky/peanut-butter, and the Ardent Race still has substantial knobs with good open areas. Anyone running Ardent Race?, opinions?


I run the AR quite often but... not when it's wet. Granted I don't have a ton of "wet" conditions experience lately (riding primarily in CO/NM/UT) but one time for a wet Wednesday morning worlds I used it up front and it required a little more finesse than I'd anticipated. ymmv


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

The Ardent 2.4 front and Ardent Race 2.35 rear were my go-to combo on the SS until I converted to Ground Controls front and rear.
The GC is a better climbing tyre on the back than the AR on a single speed.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

I have a marathon race coming up that has a 27 mile out and 20 mile back road and gravel section (you ride a trail on each end. 

I’m trying to decide on whether to leave my standard hardtail setup HD front and IKON and conserve energy on the rooty pebbly trail or go out with a very fast tire and deal with less energy conservation due to slower cornering speed. 

Tires I have and potential F/R combos:
Hans Dampf/ Ikon 2.35
Forekaster 2.35/ IKoN 2.35
Forekaster / aspen 2.25
Ikon/ aspen
Aspen/aspen

I’m also tempted to buy and try:
Rekon 2.25/aspen

What overall strategy would you go with and why? Assume 50 miles of Rd and 25+ miles of trail. 

I make similar power to my opponents, but weight is higher so I think the flatter road course is an opportunity and I need to stay with a fast group to be in the mix for Top 5. 

I have ridden all of these combos on the street and notice very little difference at all with HD up front. I actually find the Forekaster to be a little draggy in the rear on street compared to Ikon.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## winters.benjamin (Feb 3, 2016)

FJSnoozer said:


> What overall strategy would you go with and why?


In races like that, I use tires better suited for the road and suck it up on the trails. I haven't ridden all the combos you're asking about, but I do know that it takes so much energy to ride trail tires on the road. You're probably looking at roughly the same amount of riding time (slightly more on road) assuming 12mph on trails and 20mph on road, so I would make it a goal to stay with the group on trails then push threshold on road, stay tucked, and make some gaps.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

NordieBoy said:


> The Ardent 2.4 front and Ardent Race 2.35 rear were my go-to combo on the SS until I converted to Ground Controls front and rear.
> The GC is a better climbing tyre on the back than the AR on a single speed.


Interesting; I ran a GC front for about 5 seasons (switched to Barzos last year), I think that old GC might finally be a little long in the tooth! I ran a newer GC rear with that for the '16 and '17 seasons. Both are control casings, but the newer one seeps air pretty badly from the sidewall (with sealant), I can barely get a couple of hours out of it before re-inflating. Other than one of them seeping air, I've had great luck with them all around, I put them back on for summer and did a couple of cx races with them this fall. They're not a slow tire imo, I had just passed a few of these guys and held them off (cat1 45-54), flat/road is not generally among my strengths. My shop/team guy used to be head mech at a Spec shop, and he says Spec casings sometimes are inconsistent, and have even bubbled and sort of delaminated.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Running a Gripton Control and a Grid on the Unit and the only weeping has been pinpricks from thorns.
Was surprised how well they rolled coming from an Ardent Race front and Ikon rear.
New tyre feel and all, but I swear they were faster.


----------



## Jami (Mar 2, 2018)

I have run roro liteskin 29x2.25 20 psi, for a long time with ok success. what will benifit be about to switch to roro snakeskin or Maxxis EXO. my rims are 30mm inside.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> Tires I have and potential F/R combos:
> Hans Dampf/ Ikon 2.35
> Forekaster 2.35/ IKoN 2.35
> Forekaster / aspen 2.25
> ...


I would go with the 2.35 Forekaster front and 2.25 Aspen rear as long as it isn't muddy in the single track sections. You will save so many watts on the road sections with the Aspen on the rear as the rear tire accounts for most of the rolling resistance on the road because of weight distribution.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

FJSnoozer said:


> I'm also tempted to buy and try:
> Rekon 2.25/aspen
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I really want to try this setup. Let us know what you go with and how it works!


----------

