# fat front skinny rear



## RollingAround (Sep 26, 2011)

My rear tire on my Response totally came apart and is now shot and I am looking to replace them. They are the stock Kenda Klaw XT. 

The front one is a huge, fat thing that is obviously larger around than the rear one by far.

Why is the front tire bigger around and fatter, also is it necessary to have a bigger around front tire vrs the rear? Will it cause problems in handling if I put same size tires on front and back?

I need a good All purpose, good road wear, loose and hard pack tire for what I do. I want a little lighter of a tire though.... So many choices, but I'm leaning toward "The Captains"

Thanks.


----------



## RollingAround (Sep 26, 2011)

I have a cheap tire on the back that I stole from an old NEXT Beach Cruiser so I can still ride lol.
It's like having a plastic tire and it sucks.


----------



## mr.chainsaw (Sep 7, 2010)

I usually ride a fatter tire up front and a skinny tire in the rear. IME The fatter tire soaks up some of the rocks and roots or in my case mistakes. As far as handling goes I think that's more to do with tread pattern. 

Right now I have 2.3 Geax Sturdy's on front and rear real fat, aggressive and kinda on the heavy side but they are bomb proof. Recently I had a 2.2 Geax AKA and a 2.1 Toro on the rear


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Lots of people have a bigger tire in front. You don't have to do things in any particular way - you could also do a fatter rear tire, although that wouldn't be a very common setup.

The Captain will take you some getting used to. It's a pretty racy tire. Some of my teammates like 'em. From pics, it looks like it should corner fine, so as long as you manage your traction when you're climbing and don't freak out when you hit mud, you'll probably like it okay.

What are you looking for in a tire? (Beyond not being a POS, of course, and with the understanding that you can't have both the grip of a high-profile knobby and the rolling resistance of a road tire.)


----------



## ring_basher (Apr 11, 2012)

I tried a 2.3 front and 2.1 rear, went to 2.3 front and rear and won't look back.
I have a Specy Ground Control 2.3 on the rear, it's pretty damn good for a $50 tire., it's doing fine in mud, sand, dry, it's does okay (not great but not bad) on slippy (slight mud/water) roots and cobblestone like rocks.


----------



## Koppuh Klyde (Jul 13, 2010)

Check with your LBS or others on the trails you ride. Ask what they prefer.


----------



## Kaptankaos (Feb 2, 2011)

As far as the narrow on the rear and fat up front goes you want the fat tire up front that way it will corner better (You dont want your front end washing out in a turn). And with a narrow rear the tire is lighter and in turn you wont have to work as hard to get it rolling making you quicker(which really helps on climbs and its not so bad having a little bit of rear drift)


----------



## Kaptankaos (Feb 2, 2011)

As far as tire combos I am currently running a 2.4 maxxis ardent up front and a 2.25 maxxis aspen on the rear. They both roll really fast but the ardent has bigger lugs so it has tons of grip the tread on the aspen isnt very tall so it isnt too good in leaves or really loose rocks but it is a super fast tire in hardpark or loose over hard.


----------



## jeffj (Jan 13, 2004)

I like the Captain as a rear tire for the trails here in SoCal, but you're in NY so that may not mean a hill of beans in the conditions you ride in. If you are concerned more about durability than weight (ie; you don't race), I would stay with the Control version of any Specialized tire as opposed to the S-Works versions which run a relatively thin sidewall.

As for the front being bigger than the rear, that is not uncommon, but you usually don't find a BIG difference (let's say >1/4") in size unless the conditions are somewhat extreme in some way.


----------



## RollingAround (Sep 26, 2011)

So I'll be fine with same size tires front and rear? I'm just worried putting a smaller diameter tire on the front from what it has now, will throw the handling off. There has to be a reason Diamondback arranged the tires like that.

Here in NY, I ride pretty much slightly moist, "mulchy" type packed trails with packed leaves and pine-cone needles. Also shale flat rocks, tons of roots, gravel and good amount of road riding. I'm not keen on riding heavy in mud, just if I have to I will, but I tend to go around heavy mud...So a wide spaced, deep lug tread is not what I am looking at. 

I'm thinking a hard compound of "The Captain" looks about right, but some mentioned the Control version...I'll have a look.

My LBS carries The Captains, so I assume those are the most popular in our local trails. They are also way lighter and more squishy than my Kenda Klaws...they look to be really nice and I bet they feel smooth on a ride.... Can't wait to get some great tires...

I love tires lol....on anything.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

RollingAround said:


> So I'll be fine with same size tires front and rear? I'm just worried putting a smaller diameter tire on the front from what it has now, will throw the handling off. There has to be a reason Diamondback arranged the tires like that.
> 
> Here in NY, I ride pretty much slightly moist, "mulchy" type packed trails with packed leaves and pine-cone needles. Also shale flat rocks, tons of roots, gravel and good amount of road riding. I'm not keen on riding heavy in mud, just if I have to I will, but I tend to go around heavy mud...So a wide spaced, deep lug tread is not what I am looking at.
> 
> ...


Generally on anything but pavement the fatter tire can operate at lower pressure, absorb bumps better and therefore have a lower rolling resistance and a smoother ride....(especially if you don't have to worry about pinch flats).

So people like to run fat tires....

Take a look at your bike the rear tire is normally limited to something like 2.35 inch (on a "trail" bike)....much bigger and it gets difficult to mount the rear wheel....

Now take a look and the front...lots more room...

So people will run as big a tire as possible in the rear....and even bigger in the front..

The front can run at a lower pressure than the rear and also takes a little less weight than the rear...so it gets even better traction and lower rolling resistance...all good...

On the other hand a big fat front say 2.5 inch generally starts to weight more...so some people trim the tire size back a bit...

Personnally I run a 2.35 inch (max size for the rear) and a 2.35 in the front (to save a little weight).

In the end you are gonna have to try out a few combo's and see what you like.


----------



## RollingAround (Sep 26, 2011)

It's a Response Sport and the stock tire set-up is 26x2.1 front 26x2.10" Rear, both Kenda Klaw XT.

So the advantage of a fat front is running lower pressure and overall absorb bumps better.... That makes sense now. Having a lower profile rear that is lighter weight gives some drift and better acceleration(lighter weight) 

So obviously putting that fat tire on the back will take away some acceleration, but increase bump absorption and trail performance better.

Hmmmm Just have to think what would be best for me and the trails I ride.


----------



## d365 (Jun 13, 2006)

RollingAround said:


> It's a Response Sport and the stock tire set-up is 26x2.1 front 26x2.10" Rear, both Kenda Klaw XT.
> 
> So the advantage of a fat front is running lower pressure and overall absorb bumps better.... That makes sense now. Having a lower profile rear that is lighter weight gives some drift and better acceleration(lighter weight)
> 
> ...


Did you like the Klaw in the back before? If you did, I would move the 2.1 to the rear, and get a new 2.3 or 2.5 to put on the front.

I personally don't run anything less than a 2.3 tire up front. I usually run 2.1 or 2.0 in the back.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

RollingAround said:


> It's a Response Sport and the stock tire set-up is 26x2.1 front 26x2.10" Rear, both Kenda Klaw XT.
> 
> So the advantage of a fat front is running lower pressure and overall absorb bumps better.... That makes sense now. Having a lower profile rear that is lighter weight gives some drift and better acceleration(lighter weight)
> 
> ...


I knew one guy that rode a fat rear and a skinny front.....He was pretty slow going down the mountains.....


----------



## jeffgothro (Mar 10, 2007)

Traction...takes me back to BMX days, the biggrer tire is up front for traction, at least on BMX bikes, in fact, visit and sanctioned BMX race, and you will see almost every kid there w/ a bigger tire up front (excluding mini's 20x1 - 1/8 and 20x1 - 3/8).


----------



## kimbroughhg (Apr 29, 2011)

i am currently running a panracer fire XC pro 2.1 in the rear and it holds on pretty well, it is actually hard to get it to break (ive tried severale times) but you could even try a 1.95 in the rear.


----------



## kimbroughhg (Apr 29, 2011)

also if your still interested in the captain and want to decide what type (sprot or control) http://forums.mtbr.com/specialized/captain-sport-control-705136.html


----------

