# 2020 XC Race Tires



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

Time for a new thread for the new year....

I’m currently running a 29x2.6 Rekon up front and a 29x2.6 Ikon out back and will most likely keep them on until Spring. I’ll then move to a 2.35 Ikon up front an either an Aspen or Rekon Race in the rear. I’m hoping to see that 2.35/2.4 Aspen this year.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

The newest versions of the Fast Trak Control 29x2.3 front and Renegade Control 29x2.3 rear. They provide decent volume, grip, and rolling resistance for XC racing. They are also more durable/reliable than the S-Works versions of those tires.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

My plan is Rekon 2.25 Front, Aspen 2.25 Rear. I have an extra Aspen and Ikon 2.2 handy if I want to you play setup. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Coming from the Pirelli Scorpion Mixes Lite 2.2 f/r for the marathons in Belgium and Spain. 2020 I'm going for the Maxxis Rekon Race 2.35. 

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G973F met Tapatalk


----------



## luchi87 (May 4, 2009)

Will probably stick with the 2.25 Rekon front and 2.25 Aspen rear. Seemed to suit me well last year. 

Though I might put on an Aspen up front for faster courses, the 2.25 Rekon has much better braking and cornering traction, and there doesn't seem to be too much of a rolling resistance penalty. Im actually surprised I don't see it mentioned more often as a front tire since it's pretty versatile and reasonably light.


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

We have an annual early-season XC race series that is almost always muddy. For that, I'm planning to use a Michelin Force AM front (great grippy rubber and burly shoulder knobs, but rolls fast) and a Barzo 2.25 rear.

Later in the year, will likely move to a Barzo 2.35 front/Rekon Race rear. 

I'm also curious to try the new Pepi's Tire Noodle pink inserts. Weight looks great, shape is interesting...


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

*Schwalbe Racing Ralph front, Thunder Burt rear ?*

Attached Pictures from Snowshoe World Cup, PFP and Cannondale HA are running Racing Ralphs Front and Thunder Burt Rear.

Anyone Tried the Racing Ralph on the Front ?

Advantages over Racing Ray or Rocket Ron ?


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I've got Forekasters in 29x2.2 dual compound, non-exo on my hardtail for wet races, they're in the low 600g range. 
If it's not going to be super wet I'll bring the fs bike with Rocket Ron 29x2.25s speed/addix/snakeskin, close to 600g. 
My kid has a good hardtail, with my old Barzo's, which are a bit heavy in the mid 700 range, but a tough and reliable do it all tire, imo.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

Vittoria Peyote Graphene 2.0 (tanwall of course!) 29x2.25 f/r on 25mm internal width rims, for Southern California.


----------



## careyj1 (May 12, 2017)

Spin Cycle said:


> Attached Pictures from Snowshoe World Cup, PFP and Cannondale HA are running Racing Ralphs Front and Thunder Burt Rear.
> 
> Anyone Tried the Racing Ralph on the Front ?
> 
> Advantages over Racing Ray or Rocket Ron ?


Interesting. For 2019 all of my XC races were using Racing Ray (2.25) front and Racing Ralph (2.25) rear. I thought they designed the Racing Ray for front with Racing Ralph rear. I believe a Racing Ralph (front) and Thunder Burt (rear) would be a faster rolling setup on hard pack.

In 2018 I raced Thunder Burt (front) and Thunder Burt (back) and it wasn't a good setup for me. (lost the front end a few times)

For 2020, I am trying Racing Ray 2.10 (front) and Racing Ralph 2.10 (rear). I bought a different bike and it had 2.10 on them. I might end up changing the setup to 2.25 size.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Spin Cycle said:


> Advantages over Racing Ray or Rocket Ron ?


There are no advantages to a Ralph in the front. Both Ron and Ray will provide more grip in ALL conditions.

Rons in liteskin are lighter too.

I usually run Ray front/ Ron rear.

For races I use Conti Race King/ Speed King unless its super dry.


----------



## MXIV424 (May 30, 2018)

Any experience here with Mitas tires? I’d never heard of them until offered a deal yesterday.


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

MXIV424 said:


> Any experience here with Mitas tires? I'd never heard of them until offered a deal yesterday.


People have posted great results on their tires but their marketing is soo poor that it's hard to tell which tire should be used for what conditions. They used to be rubena tires.


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

I like to tinker with tires a lot and my best finishes came on ardent rear and dhr2 front including multiple top 5 finishes in age group. This year I'm going to ride morsa rear and xr5 front. It should be a faster setup with more rear traction and just as much front traction. The Morsa was recorded by the germans as having the same rolling resistance as an ardent race and the xr5 is supposed to be a faster and lighter dhr2, even faster than the xr4. I ride 27.5.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I ran Ikons last year for the first time and was surprised how much I liked them for being such a simple tire. But that bike is gone, and I might try racing my old trail bike which is a 27.5. Shopping for tires now. Toss up between Ikons again, or a Ralph/Ray/Ron combo. Used in dry SoCal conditions.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Really impressed by the XR3s that came on my Top Fuel, probably comparable to an Ikon but slightly cheaper at retail prices.


----------



## MXIV424 (May 30, 2018)

MillerC said:


> People have posted great results on their tires but their marketing is soo poor that it's hard to tell which tire should be used for what conditions. They used to be rubena tires.


I found this document that has pretty good info: https://www.mitas-cycling.com/~/med...es/mitas_velo_catalogue2020_eng_web_final.pdf

I wish they had ultralight versions like liteskin or racesport in the lineup.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Vittoria Barzo 2.35” XC/Trail front
Vittoria Mezcal 2.35” XC/Trail rear

Actually measures to a true 2.35" on a 25mm IRD wheel.

Made it 160 miles before my first rock cut on the Mezcal on Arkansas trails. Really like the feel of these tires so far. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## VegasSingleSpeed (May 5, 2005)

2.6f/2.3r XR2s for single-track/technical-heavy ultra races, and 2.1 Thunderburts for the rest.


----------



## slimphatty (Sep 9, 2011)

I've been rocking 2.35 XR's front and back and actually pretty impressed with them. My rear tire has slipped a few times but that's due to shitty technique. I really want to try those XR3's. I think those are gonna be the ticket.


----------



## mrbadwrench (Sep 13, 2016)

2.25 Aspen front and rear.


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

2.35 Ardent Race Front/2.25 Aspen rear. Southern CA. Been on this combo the last two seasons and its been working extremely well for me, no punctures, fairly light weight and rolls fast. I've found its plenty of tire for trail rides on the weekends as well.


(Also would be helpful if everyone said where they were riding/what conditions, without that tire choice has no meaning)


----------



## gus6464 (Feb 18, 2014)

Decided to try out Racing Ralph/Ray for this year in SoCal. 2.25 in skinwalls on 29mm wide rims.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

gus6464 said:


> Decided to try out Racing Ralph/Ray for this year in SoCal. 2.25 in skinwalls on 29mm wide rims.


I have a set of those skinwalls for sale if anyone wants. 13 miles. I dont like the snakeskin.


----------



## 2_whl_boost (Jun 28, 2006)

@zerort - interested in your tires. Shoot me a PM if you still have them.


----------



## Skier78 (Jun 10, 2016)

Has anyone tried the Kenda Booster tires? https://bicycle.kendatire.com/en-eu/find-a-tire/bicycle/cross-country-marathon/booster/

I have been running Maxxis Ikons for the last 3-4 years and have been happy with how long they last but would like to have a bit more grip when cornering, and those Kendas seem to get good reviews in the magazines at least. I am looking at buying the 29x2.2 SCT version.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

That looks a lot like Rekon Race. Looks good


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

My big revelation for 2020 is that rubber compounds matter (shocker!), maybe more so than tread, when riding in wet conditions. And after years of using them, I don’t think Maxxis XC rubber is very good in the wet. After spending a bunch of time on Forekasters and Rekons here in the often-wet PNW, I tried some Barzos and Michelin Force AMs. These just feel much, much better over wet roots and rocks both climbing and descending. 

Vittoria and Michelin also wear very differently; the Maxxis tires seem to lose chunks and end up with undercut shoulder knobs, while the Vittoria and Michelin tires just get evenly worn down. YMMV obviously, and I love the Assegai on my enduro bike, but for wet riding I’m off Maxxis for 2020.


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Gonna run Rekon 2.25 front, Rekon Race 2.25 rear. Haven't raced in a few years, racing age is finally 60+, got tired of getting spanked by 50-55 yr-olds. This combo seems pretty fast with a surprising amount of grip, at least till it gets wet. But I don't do wet races too often, around here wet is just sticky peanut butter.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

BmanInTheD said:


> Gonna run Rekon 2.25 front, Rekon Race 2.25 rear. Haven't raced in a few years, racing age is finally 60+, got tired of getting spanked by 50-55 yr-olds. This combo seems pretty fast with a surprising amount of grip, at least till it gets wet. But I don't do wet races too often, around here wet is just sticky peanut butter.


I'm pretty impressed by both of them so far.

That said, I wish they'd slap the Rekon tread on a 2.35 Ikon casing. I know they make the 2.4 WT but that's a different beast.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BmanInTheD (Sep 19, 2014)

Le Duke said:


> I'm pretty impressed by both of them so far.
> 
> That said, I wish they'd slap the Rekon tread on a 2.35 Ikon casing. I know they make the 2.4 WT but that's a different beast.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah, the 2.4 is a nice "trail" tire. But is the Rekon Race 2.35 not on a 2.35 Ikon casing?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

BmanInTheD said:


> Yeah, the 2.4 is a nice "trail" tire. But is the Rekon Race 2.35 not on a 2.35 Ikon casing?


It is. I'd just like a Rekon/Rekon Race 2.35 combination. High volume, fast rolling. Just enough traction.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

The Rekon 2.6 actually pairs nicely with the RR 2.35. The former is a bit undersized, the latter oversized, so on my rims it was about a 2.5/2.4. Rekon 2.6 EXO is actually lighter than the 2.4 EXO, believe mine was ~730g while 2.4 was 800. I ran the 2.6 for a bunch of dry condition rides and even a few races and it worked well.


----------



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

Apr through May- 2.35 Forecaster (front) - 2.25 Rekon (rear)
June through Sept - 2.35 Ardent Race (front) - 2.25 Aspen (rear)


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

Currently running 2.35 Ardent Race front and 2.25 Aspen Rear in loose over hard Orange County. Anyone have any insight into how the Vittoria Mezcal F/B would compare to my current set up?


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

AFCFORME said:


> Currently running 2.35 Ardent Race front and 2.25 Aspen Rear in loose over hard Orange County. Anyone have any insight into how the Vittoria Mezcal F/B would compare to my current set up?


The morsa is like the ardent race. Less transition, more side knob, and the same rolling resistance.


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

Does anyone know where to find a Kenda booster pro 27.5x2.4? I want to try one on the back of my bike.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Except Morsa is wayyy heavier


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Except Morsa is wayyy heavier


mezcal is heavier than aspen by a bunch too.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

Give the Peyotes a try...now my fave for So Cal...after trying literally everything. Aspens second behind them.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

I raced the Rocket Rons yesterday, round rock/gravel trail start, pavement before wet singletrack with some hardpack and some mud, - I really liked them but flatted on the last lap and had to walk in. My bad for not adding enough sealant, and just guessing about how much to add last week without actually looking to see that there was enough sloshing around in there. I had a very similar puncture last year on this same course with Mezcals, but I had enough sealant to get me to the finish last year.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

jimPacNW said:


> I raced the Rocket Rons yesterday, round rock/gravel trail start, pavement before wet singletrack with some hardpack and some mud, - I really liked them but flatted on the last lap and had to walk in. My bad for not adding enough sealant, and just guessing about how much to add last week without actually looking to see that there was enough sloshing around in there. I had a very similar puncture last year on this same course with Mezcals, but I had enough sealant to get me to the finish last year.


I always found Rocket Rons to be prone to punctures...more so than similar tires.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I picked up some Barzo's for $15 each. I just wanted some cheap tires for a bike test, with 650B wheels I didn't want to spend a bunch if I was only going to use them once. Really liked them in the SoCal desert conditions. Very predictable.


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

MattMay said:


> Give the Peyotes a try...now my fave for So Cal...after trying literally everything. Aspens second behind them.


I raced on the 2.35 Peyotes last year, after racing on the 2.35 Mezcals the year before, and I liked the performance of the Peyotes better on both the front and the rear of my Scalpel. I'll be running a new set of Peyotes this year too, unless Maxxis introduces a larger Aspen this year, and I might try them just for fun.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

MattMay said:


> Vittoria Peyote Graphene 2.0 (tanwall of course!) 29x2.25 f/r on 25mm internal width rims, for Southern California.


+1 on the Front and Terreno rear XC race casing (Tan) in the Midwest


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

MillerC said:


> mezcal is heavier than aspen by a bunch too.


Aspen 2.25 658 grams
Mezcal XC Race Casing (Tan) 671 grams the ones I have owned & actually weighed


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

Spin Cycle said:


> Aspen 2.25 658 grams
> Mezcal XC Race Casing (Tan) 671 grams the ones I have owned & actually weighed


I wouldn't trust anything but tnt and it weighs in at 730 grams in 29x2.25.


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

MillerC said:


> I wouldn't trust anything but tnt and it weighs in at 730 grams in 29x2.25.


Oof, that not light.


----------



## sotak1 (Mar 9, 2018)

hi, i have a 29er HT, having maxxis ikon 2.35 both rear and front, i am looking for a grippier all around front tire.
I have seen the new Vittoria Barzo 2.35, new Continental Crossking 2.3 and Maxxis Ardent race 2.35.
What to you think from your experience ?
Thanks


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

sotak1 said:


> hi, i have a 29er HT, having maxxis ikon 2.35 both rear and front, i am looking for a grippier all around front tire.
> I have seen the new Vittoria Barzo 2.35, new Continental Crossking 2.3 and Maxxis Ardent race 2.35.
> What to you think from your experience ?
> Thanks


Where do you live/whats your terrain like?

I've been very happy with the Ardent Race as a front (paired with an Aspen rear) in dry, loose over hard, rocky, rutted Southern CA. I use it for XC racing a trail riding and it performs really well. Also havent had a flat on either tire in over 2 years (I just jinxed myself)


----------



## sotak1 (Mar 9, 2018)

mostly in dry conditions, all around tire
barzo and crossking have very similar tread
maybe do you know which of these 3 tires have the tallest knobs ?


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

sotak1 said:


> mostly in dry conditions, all around tire
> barzo and crossking have very similar tread
> maybe do you know which of these 3 tires have the tallest knobs ?


Center knobs the Barzo and Ardent race both have 2.9mm knob heights comparred to the x-king's 2.5mm (though it seems that sample was taken from a 2015 version so likely has changed). And side knobs both the barzo and x-king have 4mm .vs 4.2mm for the Ardent Race. All of this info came from bicyclerollingresistance.com btw.


----------



## Rod (Oct 17, 2007)

sotak1 said:


> mostly in dry conditions, all around tire
> barzo and crossking have very similar tread
> maybe do you know which of these 3 tires have the tallest knobs ?


I think if you gave me a blind test I'm not sure I could tell a difference between an Ikon and Ardent Race. I own both these tires in 2.35.

I've never tried the Barzo and I like the crossking. Opinions on the crossking are love it or hate it. I've used the 2.1 and 2.35 versions. Buy the larger size if you decide on this tire.

If you want a really grippy front tire I would recommend the regular ardent. It's not the fastest tire that has been posted, but the grip is there when you make a mistake or come in too fast into a corner. Having a grippier front tire has given me confidence and saved me more than once. Ignore knob height. Tall knobs can even flex.


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

I wouldn't rule out the morsa. It has way more grip than an ardent and rolls faster. Sure it weighs a little more but your talking about a pretty chunky set of tires if a 2.35 ikon isn't cutting it up front.


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

MillerC said:


> I wouldn't rule out the morsa. It has way more grip than an ardent and rolls faster. Sure it weighs a little more but your talking about a pretty chunky set of tires if a 2.35 ikon isn't cutting it up front.


Yeah but compared to a 2.35, say, Ardent race its more than 3/4ths of a pound heavier. thats a lot.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

sotak1 said:


> hi, i have a 29er HT, having maxxis ikon 2.35 both rear and front, i am looking for a grippier all around front tire.
> I have seen the new Vittoria Barzo 2.35, new Continental Crossking 2.3 and Maxxis Ardent race 2.35.
> What to you think from your experience ?
> Thanks


I have ridden a lot with the Cross King 2.3. It's actually a 2.25 tire on a 22mm rim. I like it and think it's a great all-a-rounder with a tough side wall.

Currently running the Barzo 2.35 which is a true 2.35 tire on a 25mm rim. 300 miles so far. It seems puncture resistant but I have noticed more bottom-out tendency than the Conti which I contribute to a suppler side wall. So I have to run higher pressure than the Conti. Also the Vittorias are WAY easier to mount than conti and hold air better. The feel of the Barzo has been equal or better than the Conti cross king.

I have had bad luck with Maxxis EXO with multiple nasty side wall cuts that I have not experienced yet with Conti or Vittoria.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

Sometimes I feel like flats are just a luck of the draw. I used Ikon 2.35 EXO front and rear at the Trans-Sylvania Epic 5 day race both in 2016 and 2019. To say it’s a rocky, technical stage race is an understatement. In 2016 I had zero flats...in 2019 I had 9...yep 9. Flats happen. I’m going back again this year. The question is and always will be, what tires should I use?


----------



## sotak1 (Mar 9, 2018)

barzo, cross king and racing ray have similar center tread pattern
what do you think about center knobs that are not in the same horizontal line ?
are these tires predictable when cornering/braking ?


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

sotak1 said:


> barzo, cross king and racing ray have similar center tread pattern
> what do you think about center knobs that are not in the same horizontal line ?
> are these tires predictable when cornering/braking ?


I think the asymmetrical nature of this tread works great. It creates something approaching a continuous line of rubber down the center of the tire, which rolls fast. When cornering obviously only one half of the tread matters, so no downside to asymmetrical tread.

I've tried both Barzos and Racing Ralph/Ray. Barzos are much, much more confidence-inspiring. They roll very quick, but really do have cornering bite particularly in the wet. Did my first race on them yesterday and they were excellent, really predictable and just excellent braking, cornering and climbing grip. It was wet, and the Barzos were point-and-shoot, never had to think about them. Running 2.35/2.25 f/r and it's a great combo.

The Schwalbe tires are fast and light, but I found grip on the limit to be lacking. Their knobs are pretty small and not very well supported, so they felt more squirmy and prone to deflecting and losing grip, particularly in the wet. I'm also not so sure the rounded knob shapes on the Schwalbes are a good idea; seems like you want edges that bite, and I don't know of any other tire that purposely uses rounded shapes like that. It's like they're pre-worn.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Liking the Barzo up front. Seems to corner and brake well. But I'm not impressed with the climbing compared to the Ikon.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

DrewBird said:


> Did my first race on them yesterday and they were excellent, really predictable and just excellent braking, cornering and climbing grip. It was wet, and the Barzos were point-and-shoot, never had to think about them. Running 2.35/2.25 f/r


I think we raced in the same place yesterday, 'soggy eagle?' My son was on Barzos, I liked my Rocket Rons 2.25s a lot, but I can see the value of a wider front tire in the 2nd mud hole where the my front sunk in and I went over. The guy who got 13th overall was on Thunder Burts, which would not have been my choice!, but he finished just ahead of me, so I guess they have good grip on those rocks and roots. At the start line I saw his tires and figured they would be a disadvantage, - go figure!


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

jimPacNW said:


> I think we raced in the same place yesterday, 'soggy eagle?' My son was on Barzos, I liked my Rocket Rons 2.25s a lot, but I can see the value of a wider front tire in the 2nd mud hole where the my front sunk in and I went over. The guy who got 13th overall was on Thunder Burts, which would not have been my choice!, but he finished just ahead of me, so I guess they have good grip on those rocks and roots. At the start line I saw his tires and figured they would be a disadvantage, - go figure!


Indeed, though that was the sunniest day we've had in the last few weeks so I'll take it. Looks like we ended up within a minute of each other on time; I was 9th in the Open cat. Shoulda raced age group, I would've won 35-49!

But to the matter at hand: Barzos were perfect yesterday. Definitely will be my tire of choice for the rest of the series.


----------



## jimPacNW (Feb 26, 2013)

DrewBird said:


> But to the matter at hand: Barzos were perfect yesterday. Definitely will be my tire of choice for the rest of the series.


 - nice job!, and I'm very happy if I'm at all close to the younger guys (but I think they did update results to correct for start gap timing errors, so both of us got moved back from the times/positions posted on the trailer, still you were super close to age group winner). 
Yes, I agree that the Barzo is a great do it all, I think the Rocket Ron is pretty similar, but lighter along with a higher risk of failure. It looks like I'm going to need that weight advantage this season!


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

jimPacNW said:


> - nice job!, and I'm very happy if I'm at all close to the younger guys (but I think they did update results to correct for start gap timing errors, so both of us got moved back from the times/positions posted on the trailer, still you were super close to age group winner).
> Yes, I agree that the Barzo is a great do it all, I think the Rocket Ron is pretty similar, but lighter along with a higher risk of failure. It looks like I'm going to need that weight advantage this season!


+1 on your comments that the Barzo and Rocket Ron are similar in grip.

Used both early last season and 2 x onback to back runs of my favorite loops.

Used on the front on two separate rims 26mm or 25 mm internal, Rocket Ron is slightly bigger 57.5 vs 56mm for the Barzo ( 2.25 Race Casing tanwall) .

Imo The rocket ron rolls a little better and is better on hard pack , both are equal in loose over hard pack and the Barzo is better is looser condtions.

I'm in the Midwest not to rocky where I ride and never have issues with Snake Skin Schwalbe

2.25 RoRO 624 grams 2.25 Barzo 684 gram xc race case, my Friend put 2.35 and 2.25 trail casings on and they both weighed 735 grams


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

tgoods said:


> I have ridden a lot with the Cross King 2.3. It's actually a 2.25 tire on a 22mm rim. I like it and think it's a great all-a-rounder with a tough side wall.
> 
> Currently running the Barzo 2.35 which is a true 2.35 tire on a 25mm rim. 300 miles so far. It seems puncture resistant but I have noticed more bottom-out tendency than the Conti which I contribute to a suppler side wall. So I have to run higher pressure than the Conti. Also the Vittorias are WAY easier to mount than conti and hold air better. The feel of the Barzo has been equal or better than the Conti cross king.
> 
> ...


Barzo TNT/G+ 2.35's on the Top Fuel right now with 700 miles on the front and 600 miles on the rear of NW Arkansas sharp rocks. Zero flats or ripped knobs, multiple KOMs (ok lil Sugar but still), rear definitely looking worse for wear but still rolling. I'm probably going to try the XC Trail Mezcal out back next, hoping the tighter knob spacing protects the casing a little better. Dozens of close calls upon visual inspection and I can see thread but it's still rolling.

Regarding pressure/casing of the reinforced Vittorias, running some lightweight inserts helps that bottom out issue. At 180# kitted up i'm at 15# front and 17# rear on 23mm ID rim, feels good. Casing on the Mezcal blows up bigger so I'm interested to see how they do with inserts out back.

Got a set of Mezcal/Terrenos in XC Race skinwall just waiting for a short track race to pop up on the calendar...


----------



## jps (Feb 7, 2005)

*Racing Tires*

Racing/training in Flagstaff, AZ. Unfortunately, our series starts in Jan. in the Phoenix area, yet I am at 7,000ft dealing with snow, ice, cold, etc. Races in the desert, loose over hard/kitty litter/high speed/slower speed chunk abrasive rock. Had two races already and preparing for one this weekend in Lake Havasu on a fast, flowy, loose over hard track. Raced so far on a 2.1 Mezcal TNT rear 21#, Ikon 2.2 EXO front, 19# at about 155 #. Age group Cat 1 40-49. Tires worked very well for first two races. Switching out to a 2.25 Barzo on the front, non-TNT for this race, as it has much more fast flowy turning (Was intrigued by the 2.25 Peyote) Ran the Mezcal 2.1 TNT/Barzo 2.25 much of last year, loved it. Tough tires and the Mezcal rolls very fast and I actually like the lower volume. Barzo corners very well, and also rolls quite fast. Have trained on the 2.25 Mezcal in the rear, lots of volume, but heavy, and use 2.35 Barzo/Forekaster as well in training. Last year I switched it up a bit and used Aspen EXO 2.25 rear/2.35 Rekon EXO up front for a few races too. Hard to believe I used the Kenda Karma 2.0's, 26ers at sub 500g 15 years ago in similar conditions! A bit envious of racing in some moisture/loam, this dry kitty litter stuff can be quite un-nerving!


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

pinkpowa said:


> .
> 
> Regarding pressure/casing of the reinforced Vittorias, running some lightweight inserts helps that bottom out issue. At 180# kitted up i'm at 15# front and 17# rear on 23mm ID rim, feels good. ...


What inserts?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

tgoods said:


> What inserts?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I've been running Tubolights in my Barzos. They seem pretty good and are quite light, though they're just a circular noodle-type thing.

I'd be really curious about the new pink-flavored Pepi's inserts. They appear to actually have a cross-section to them that makes sense, with a bit that projects into the rim bed and a groove under the tread to create a larger air pocket. Anybody tried 'em?

https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy...e-r-evolution-29-protection-insert-set-954895


----------



## redwarrior (Apr 12, 2007)

DrewBird said:


> I've been running Tubolights in my Barzos. They seem pretty good and are quite light, though they're just a circular noodle-type thing.
> 
> I'd be really curious about the new pink-flavored Pepi's inserts. They appear to actually have a cross-section to them that makes sense, with a bit that projects into the rim bed and a groove under the tread to create a larger air pocket. Anybody tried 'em?
> 
> https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy...e-r-evolution-29-protection-insert-set-954895


Those look interesting. Just wondering if airing them up would be more difficult due to they way they're designed to fit down into the rim. Maybe there's a hole for the valve? Doesn't look like it though.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

tgoods said:


> What inserts?


Pepe's Tire Noodles, Raceline, Small. 55g actual weight each, drop about 3-5# from your pressures without inserts with same overall feel. I'm a weight weenie but these are worth it to me for XCO/XCM racing, more grip.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

DrewBird said:


> I've been running Tubolights in my Barzos. They seem pretty good and are quite light, though they're just a circular noodle-type thing.
> 
> I'd be really curious about the new pink-flavored Pepi's inserts. They appear to actually have a cross-section to them that makes sense, with a bit that projects into the rim bed and a groove under the tread to create a larger air pocket. Anybody tried 'em?
> 
> https://www.bike-discount.de/en/buy...e-r-evolution-29-protection-insert-set-954895


I currently run Tubolights and have ran Pepi's in the past. Both are very good but the Tubolight had a bit of a lead due to lighter weight and being considerably more dense. 
Curious where the new pink Pepi's fit in cause if they provide advantages, I'll swap over promptly. 
I know this, I'll not ever be running without inserts with current tire tech.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

They are heavy but I use Vittoria Airliners for super technical endurance races. The feel of the lower pressure they allow and the extra protection they provide on my hardtail are worth it to me.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Has anyone had issues with the inserts soaking up the sealant fluid?

I was using some foam tubes from an industrial store that were drinking up all the fluid, especially after a snakebite on the side.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

jps said:


> Racing/training in Flagstaff, AZ. Unfortunately, our series starts in Jan. in the Phoenix area, yet I am at 7,000ft dealing with snow, ice, cold, etc. Races in the desert, loose over hard/kitty litter/high speed/slower speed chunk abrasive rock. Had two races already and preparing for one this weekend in Lake Havasu on a fast, flowy, loose over hard track. Raced so far on a 2.1 Mezcal TNT rear 21#, Ikon 2.2 EXO front, 19# at about 155 #. Age group Cat 1 40-49. Tires worked very well for first two races. Switching out to a 2.25 Barzo on the front, non-TNT for this race, as it has much more fast flowy turning (Was intrigued by the 2.25 Peyote) Ran the Mezcal 2.1 TNT/Barzo 2.25 much of last year, loved it. Tough tires and the Mezcal rolls very fast and I actually like the lower volume. Barzo corners very well, and also rolls quite fast. Have trained on the 2.25 Mezcal in the rear, lots of volume, but heavy, and use 2.35 Barzo/Forekaster as well in training. Last year I switched it up a bit and used Aspen EXO 2.25 rear/2.35 Rekon EXO up front for a few races too. Hard to believe I used the Kenda Karma 2.0's, 26ers at sub 500g 15 years ago in similar conditions! A bit envious of racing in some moisture/loam, this dry kitty litter stuff can be quite un-nerving!


Have you ever done a race on your training tires on a kitty litter course? I bet you have better results despite the "heaviness."


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

tgoods said:


> Has anyone had issues with the inserts soaking up the sealant fluid?
> 
> I was using some foam tubes from an industrial store that were drinking up all the fluid, especially after a snakebite on the side.


I've weighed brand new still on the shelf compared to the exact same model after months in the wheel with sealant and the used vs new insert doesn't even weigh one gram apart. That surprised me.
So no absorption from either Pepi's or Tubolight. That's with many cuts and slices as well as plenty of sealant. Also I use my inserts over several tires, no problem.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

Suns_PSD said:


> I've weighed brand new still on the shelf compared to the exact same model after months in the wheel with sealant and the used vs new insert doesn't even weigh one gram apart. That surprised me.
> So no absorption from either Pepi's or Tubolight. That's with many cuts and slices as well as plenty of sealant. Also I use my inserts over several tires, no problem.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


Thanks for relaying that. My homemade versions crafted from foam "backing rod" weren't so resistant and I was able to wring sealant from them after a month or so of use. Is there a consensus on which commercial version is best for XC and marathon racing? Is it a wash between Pepi's and Turbolights? Tyreinvader? I'm headed to Moab in a month and will be on my Rocky Mountain Element and think I might benefit from authentic tire inserts there and through the season. But at about $100 a set shipped from Europe, I don't want to do too much experimenting if it's already been done. Thanks!


----------



## jps (Feb 7, 2005)

FJSnoozer said:


> Have you ever done a race on your training tires on a kitty litter course? I bet you have better results despite the "heaviness."


Yeah, a number of times. I still like the feel of the bike with a narrower rear tire. Lowers the BB a bit without the voluminous 2.2 Mezcal. Looking back at the last 5 years of results, my best finishes (4th in Cat. 1 Nats in Mammoth, 1st Cat. 1 Cactus Cup XC and GC, 2nd W50 45 plus) have been with either a 2.0 Specizlized Fastrak Grid, or 2.1 Mezcal TNT. I know there are way too many variables to say it was just the tires, but the bike feels way more lively with the narrow rear set up. The IKON 2.2 is pretty darn good too, the Aspen 2.2 OK. These are all with 23mm LB carbon rim. Carbon Kona Hei Hei, 120mm Fox 34 (want to lower to 110 soon to quicken the steering and lower BB a smidge). 3 years prior a TallBoy II with a 120mm SID and an angleset 1 degree steeper).


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Ptor said:


> Thanks for relaying that. My homemade versions crafted from foam "backing rod" weren't so resistant and I was able to wring sealant from them after a month or so of use. Is there a consensus on which commercial version is best for XC and marathon racing? Is it a wash between Pepi's and Turbolights? Tyreinvader? I'm headed to Moab in a month and will be on my Rocky Mountain Element and think I might benefit from authentic tire inserts there and through the season. But at about $100 a set shipped from Europe, I don't want to do too much experimenting if it's already been done. Thanks!


I think the key is "closed cell" foam. Was that specified on the backer rod you used?


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

jps said:


> Yeah, a number of times. I still like the feel of the bike with a narrower rear tire. Lowers the BB a bit without the voluminous 2.2 Mezcal. Looking back at the last 5 years of results, my best finishes (4th in Cat. 1 Nats in Mammoth, 1st Cat. 1 Cactus Cup XC and GC, 2nd W50 45 plus) have been with either a 2.0 Specizlized Fastrak Grid, or 2.1 Mezcal TNT. I know there are way too many variables to say it was just the tires, but the bike feels way more lively with the narrow rear set up. The IKON 2.2 is pretty darn good too, the Aspen 2.2 OK. These are all with 23mm LB carbon rim. Carbon Kona Hei Hei, 120mm Fox 34 (want to lower to 110 soon to quicken the steering and lower BB a smidge). 3 years prior a TallBoy II with a 120mm SID and an angleset 1 degree steeper).


Those are classic easy XC courses though. I mean the technical loose courses. Do you ever preride on the other tire to see which is actually faster for the lap? I had deleted most of my post and just posed that question. I know most people dont preride a full gas loop, but I prefer to.

I'm the opposite. Looking back, all my Cat 1 wins and podiums have occurred on aggressive tires. Deciding factors are usually putting a gap on people through twisty section where my cornering speed is 1-2 mph faster and I develop a gap. Several times I even had a Hans Dampf up from from a recent bike trip to some magical place.

I am trying to convince myself to end the cycle of worrying about tires before a race and throwing on an aspen the night before. I say this, and I will probably remove the Nobby nics I have and put something light on before my XC race on Sunday. I shouldnt. Typing this is a bit of Therapy...


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

FJSnoozer said:


> Those are classic easy XC courses though. I mean the technical loose courses. Do you ever preride on the other tire to see which is actually faster for the lap? I had deleted most of my post and just posed that question. I know most people dont preride a full gas loop, but I prefer to.
> 
> I'm the opposite. Looking back, all my Cat 1 wins and podiums have occurred on aggressive tires. Deciding factors are usually putting a gap on people through twisty section where my cornering speed is 1-2 mph faster and I develop a gap. Several times I even had a Hans Dampf up from from a recent bike trip to.
> 
> I am trying to convince myself to end the cycle of worrying about tires before a race and throwing on an aspen the night before. I say this, and I will probably remove the Nobby nics I have and put something light on before my XC race on Sunday. I shouldnt. Typing this is a bit of Therapy...


It's heavy but morsa rear and xr5 front is a very fast trail tire combination.

I find the old mountain king 2.2 to be the most precise front tire i've ever ridden.


----------



## jps (Feb 7, 2005)

FJSnoozer said:


> Those are classic easy XC courses though. I mean the technical loose courses. Do you ever preride on the other tire to see which is actually faster for the lap? I had deleted most of my post and just posed that question. I know most people dont preride a full gas loop, but I prefer to.
> 
> I'm the opposite. Looking back, all my Cat 1 wins and podiums have occurred on aggressive tires. Deciding factors are usually putting a gap on people through twisty section where my cornering speed is 1-2 mph faster and I develop a gap. Several times I even had a Hans Dampf up from from a recent bike trip to.
> 
> I am trying to convince myself to end the cycle of worrying about tires before a race and throwing on an aspen the night before. I say this, and I will probably remove the Nobby nics I have and put something light on before my XC race on Sunday. I shouldnt. Typing this is a bit of Therapy...


Ha, ha, I know what you mean about obsessing about tire choice! Getting ready to leave for the race with my 2.25 Barzo on the front (which felt great compared to the Ikon I removed) and 2.1 Mezcal. I guess for me the rear tire isn't as important in handling. I like the front to be bigger for sure. Last year at the first two desert races I was too lazy to remove my 2.35 Forekaster, and was on the start line with 60 people, thinking to myself that I was way over-tired on the front. I had a 2.1 Mezcal on the rear. It turn out fine for those two races. This year I felt about the same with an Ikon on the front in similar conditions.  I could drive myself crazy thinking about it! My team mate, who is a great bike handler, chose to run the new race king ( way narrower than the old version he had used in the pasta) and he would do as you say, put time into me on every corner on those damn tires! We were pushing really hard and fast on the Black Canyon Trail North of PHX (rugged, primitive, loose trail) and I couldn't keep his pace with my 2.25 Mezcal rear, 2.35 Forekaster and dropper post! Some people....thanks for the back and forth. There seem to be many, many good tires these days, and I have quite the pile, but I seem to have it narrowed down to Vittoria, and Maxxis these days...used NN on front, and RRay, but can't afford those tires. Good luck this spring!


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

jps said:


> There seem to be many, many good tires these days, and I have quite the pile, but I seem to have it narrowed down to Vittoria, and Maxxis these days...used NN on front, and RRay, but can't afford those tires. Good luck this spring!


Likewise! My first XC race is Sunday.

My wife and I order Bulk from https://www.bike-discount.de/en/shop/schwalbe-1305

Tires there are dirt cheap ($35) and arrive promptly. We order lots of back-up tires and then we can sort through the inconsistencies in weight. Some NoNos are 780g and others are 710g She gets all the light tires and I get the heavier ones or they go on the Enduro bike.

We could start just selling off the heavier ones, but we havent yet. I'm so heavy, 70G on a tire isnt going to make a difference in my race.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

spsoon said:


> I think the key is "closed cell" foam. Was that specified on the backer rod you used?


I used a Closed Cell backer rod that soaked up all the sealant.

Sounds like the name brands are using a better more appropriate type of foam.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## DrewBird (Apr 11, 2007)

tgoods said:


> I used a Closed Cell backer rod that soaked up all the sealant.
> 
> Sounds like the name brands are using a better more appropriate type of foam.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I think it's hard to tell if inserts are soaking up sealant or just dispersing it. Adding an insert basically doubles the surface area the sealant has to cover and also creates some nooks and crannies inside the rim. Can make a normal dose of sealant look like very little in a hurry.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> I am trying to convince myself to end the cycle of worrying about tires before a race and throwing on an aspen the night before. I say this, and I will probably remove the Nobby nics I have and put something light on before my XC race on Sunday. I shouldnt. Typing this is a bit of Therapy...


Nobby Nics are great XC/Trail tires and not really too heavy for loose XC courses in my opinion.


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

spsoon said:


> I think the key is "closed cell" foam. Was that specified on the backer rod you used?


It was spec'd as "closed cell", but I don't have the experience to say wether it actually was or not. It was the consistency that I had expected from pics, but that's all I had to go on. I wish I had done the experiment of weighing the "dry" insert and the post use "wet" foam, but I'm pretty convinced my homemade insert picked up more tubeless mix than just what was sticking to the surface. I'm willing to go the more expensive route for my next go-around (Pepi's or Turbolights) to avoid the issue.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

DrewBird said:


> I think it's hard to tell if inserts are soaking up sealant or just dispersing it. Adding an insert basically doubles the surface area the sealant has to cover and also creates some nooks and crannies inside the rim. Can make a normal dose of sealant look like very little in a hurry.


Best way is to weigh them when they go in and weigh them when they come out.

I find the closed cell backer rod is pretty good, generally no weight gain. The Nube inserts on the other hand come out a lot heavier.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

I order Schwalbes and my inserts from r2bike.com
About $40 for Schwalbes and they have insert choices not available stateside.
There is a decent shipping cost so I'll order many things at once. 
They also have the Dissector tire which is always sold out in the US.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Bordeauxman (Jan 16, 2009)

New York & northeast trails (rocks, roots, hard pack, and mud).... Cross country racing all the way to epic endurance (La Ruta).

I've been on Maxxis Ardent Race the last two years and I'm picking up my new Specialized Epic EVO which is equipped with a Spesh Ground Control 29/2.3 on the front and Spesh 29/2.3 Fastrack, grid casing Gripton 2.3" on the back. I'd appreciate any constructive comments on the Specialized tires, especially in comparison with the Ardent Race tires. I'm planning keeping the stock tires on for now.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Zerort said:


> I have a set of those skinwalls for sale if anyone wants. 13 miles. I dont like the snakeskin.


Are these these still available?


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> Nobby Nics are great XC/Trail tires and not really too heavy for loose XC courses in my opinion.


It was a good choice for me. It ended up raining and the clay singletrack and wet river rock would not have played well with the Aspen. The course had los of wet wooden bridges with G outs.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

DrewBird said:


> I think it's hard to tell if inserts are soaking up sealant or just dispersing it. Adding an insert basically doubles the surface area the sealant has to cover and also creates some nooks and crannies inside the rim. Can make a normal dose of sealant look like very little in a hurry.


I have physically squeezed tubes and watched sealant pour out, like squeezing a wet sponge.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## snakemau (Feb 9, 2007)

I'm planning on doing La Ruta this year, but my current set up is with Aspens on a Blur. Have you done La Ruta with those Ardent? How it go?



Bordeauxman said:


> New York & northeast trails (rocks, roots, hard pack, and mud).... Cross country racing all the way to epic endurance (La Ruta).
> 
> I've been on Maxxis Ardent Race the last two years and I'm picking up my new Specialized Epic EVO which is equipped with a Spesh Ground Control 29/2.3 on the front and Spesh 29/2.3 Fastrack, grid casing Gripton 2.3" on the back. I'd appreciate any constructive comments on the Specialized tires, especially in comparison with the Ardent Race tires. I'm planning keeping the stock tires on for now.


----------



## Bordeauxman (Jan 16, 2009)

I've done La Ruta 2X and the course is always a little different. Having said that, they throw absolutely everything at you on Day 1. The mud on D1 in the Carrera National Park is insane. The tires must be able to shed mud so less aggressive is good. I had a brush to clean my drive train in streams. Having said that, strong sidewalls are important as well because there a is very wet rocky single track section in the last 3rd of day 1. Unless you have your own mechanic, there is no time to change tires after the fist day 1. 

Day 2 is more dirt/rock road and smooth road so fast rolling is the key.

Day 3 was changed this year with no railroad bridges or train tracks. The tracks are tough for anybody with tubes (pinch flats) and they can rattle your teeth. Instead of train tracks, we had a lot of Paris Roubaix rock infused dirt roads.

I'd error towards more durable, less aggressive tires for this race.

Highly recommend toe spikes for day 1 and day 2 because the hike-a-bike can be insane.

Any comments on the above mentioned specialized tires?


----------



## Renzo7 (Mar 25, 2015)

Bordeauxman said:


> .
> 
> Any comments on the above mentioned specialized tires?


I really like the Fast Trak as a rear tire, and the Ground Control as a front one. I've used both, and I prefer them to the Maxxis and WTB tires I've tried.

I'm currently using Fast Traks (2.2) on both wheels on my Epic FSR.

Sent from my SM-J710MN using Tapatalk


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Such small thinkers in this group. 
Keep running your Maxxis and any tire over 600 grams. Don't be afraid to get a clue.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

The new king for fast rolling MTB tires for hard pack and gravel is the 2020 Race King Protection: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/mtb-reviews/continental-race-king-protection-2020


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Stonerider said:


> The new king for fast rolling MTB tires for hard pack and gravel is the 2020 Race King Protection: https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/mtb-reviews/continental-race-king-protection-2020


It's a bummer Conti actually reduced puncture resistance on the tread area VS the old Race King.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

tgoods said:


> It's a bummer Conti actually reduced puncture resistance on the tread area VS the old Race King.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Looks like it is also actually undersized now, whereas the older version was oversized for the stated width. Blah.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

I thought this thread was XC "Race" tires??

Not, I'm a baby and need a tire I can run everyday, need puncture protection, and large volume so it's soft and squishy and doesn't hurt my body.

Hahaha. 

People complaining that XC "race" tires might get a flat. That's the chance you take for your "race". The object is to be light and roll fast. 

Any type of racing is expensive. If you can't afford it, throw on your Maxxis Minions and go ride your bike.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

The problem isn’t that I’d get a flat. It’s that I’d get multiple flats and run out of vanity to keep the tire inflated. 

I’m hardly big (143lbs) and I’m relatively quick (pro license holder), and we have a lot of sharp, pointy rocks here. And cactus. And other ****, like the odd drop into broken slabs of granite. Breaking a rim because I wanted to run


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> The problem isn't that I'd get a flat. It's that I'd get multiple flats and run out of vanity to keep the tire inflated.
> 
> I'm hardly big (143lbs) and I'm relatively quick (pro license holder), and we have a lot of sharp, pointy rocks here. And cactus. And other ****, like the odd drop into broken slabs of granite. Breaking a rim because I wanted to run


Yeah. Same, but with different environment.

Curious as to why the pros aren't breaking rims running their small tires.

Maybe you need better rims?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Yeah. Same, but with different environment.
> 
> Curious as to why the pros aren't breaking rims running their small tires.
> 
> Maybe you need better rims?


Well, most of the guys and gals in the XCO WC races are running EXO or like casings. And many of them are running foam tire liners now, too. Nino was running a 2.4 at one point this year.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Zerort said:


> I thought this thread was XC "Race" tires??
> 
> Not, I'm a baby and need a tire I can run everyday, need puncture protection, and large volume so it's soft and squishy and doesn't hurt my body.
> 
> ...


Didn't you already do this rant earlier in the tread?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> Looks like it is also actually undersized now, whereas the older version was oversized for the stated width. Blah.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I am curious if inserts would make narrow/light tires useable again. A 550 gram tire with a 100 gram insert might be one way of achieving that weight/durability ratio we are all looking for.

I think it was Chromax who did some testing with that set-up and had some positive results. I haven't tested it myself yet. I do have a set of Exception series 2.1 Aspens in the basement I could try when the snow melts.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Zerort said:


> I thought this thread was XC "Race" tires??
> 
> Not, I'm a baby and need a tire I can run everyday, need puncture protection, and large volume so it's soft and squishy and doesn't hurt my body.


A few observations.

You are trying to rip on a few folks who arent racing at the pointy end of Cat 1, so quite frankly, it doesnt matter and leave them alone. This is a thread of opinions and learning.

Some of us Race on trails and not Bullshit courses like I see most of you cats riding. Sometimes I dont have the time to change my tires and "just run what you brung."

Maybe you are OK with quitting a race, but that's not everyone's idea of a good time, especially if they drove 3 - 9 hours each way for a race.

Me...I dont puncture tires, I do get a little too sendy at times and pinch flat if my PSI is a little low, but Dynaplug can handle that.



Zerort said:


> People complaining that XC "race" tires might get a flat. That's the chance you take for your "race". The object is to be light and roll fast.
> 
> Any type of racing is expensive. If you can't afford it, throw on your Maxxis Minions and go ride your bike.


I thought the object is to to go the fastest around the course, not own an install the lightest and fastest rolling tire on your bicycle.

My time is better spent sitting with my legs up preparing for the race the next day vs changing tires for an hour. I'm also managing more than 1 race bike for each race because my wife races pro, so her bike gets prioritized as long as mine is functioning.



Zerort said:


> Yeah. Same, but with different environment.
> 
> Curious as to why the pros aren't breaking rims running their small tires.
> 
> Maybe you need better rims?


How would you know they aren't breaking rims? Or any other sponsored part for that matter which gets immediately swapped at the Van. a Specialized rider would never post on their instagram or Strava their broken rim like your average rider would.

Pros arent "running small tires" nor are they racing on anything like what I get the pleasure of riding. When they do, they spec their bikes accordingly, or pay the consequences.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

tgoods said:


> Didn't you already do this rant earlier in the tread?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope.
That was the 2019 XC Race tire thread where all the babies were crying about the same thing.

I want puncture protection

I want to race 2.6 or 2.8 tires

I don't want to buy "race" tires

I want volume

Etc. etc.

The truth is no one really wants actual race tires because "race" tires aren't everyday riding tires.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

FJSnoozer said:


> How would you know they aren't breaking rims? Or any other sponsored part for that matter which gets immediately swapped at the Van. a Specialized rider would never post on their instagram or Strava their broken rim like your average rider would.
> 
> Pros arent "running small tires" nor are they racing on anything like what I get the pleasure of riding. When they do, they spec their bikes accordingly, or pay the consequences.


Well because I watch the races. And rims aren't breaking.

And pros aren't running 2.6" or 2.8" tires either.

Most are on 2.25 or 2.35. Fact.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> How would you know they aren't breaking rims?


At the Rio Olympic my wife took some serious risks with her tire set-up. She raced on a special set of sub 500 gram 2.1 Crossmarks. At the time she was using the aluminum Stans crest wheels, at the end of her race that wheel had at least a dozen flat spots in it. It was actually a good thing those rims were so soft, if she had been running carbon wheels she would have flatted for sure.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

LMN said:


> At the Rio Olympic my wife took some serious risks with her tire set-up. She raced on a special set of sub 500 gram 2.1 Crossmarks. At the time she was using the aluminum Stans crest wheels, at the end of her race that wheel had at least a dozen flat spots in it. It was actually a good thing those rims were so soft, if she had been running carbon wheels she would have flatted for sure.


LMN,
You mean a pro was on a fast rolling 2.1" tire? Wow.

According to the experts in this thread I'm wondering how come your wife wasn't on 2.5 WT DHF with the DH casing?

HAHAHAHA

Too funny.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Zerort said:


> LMN,
> You mean a pro was on a fast rolling 2.1" tire? Wow.
> 
> According to the experts in this thread I'm wondering how come your wife wasn't on 2.5 WT DHF with the DH casing?
> ...


Yep, and she learned from that experience.

Now she, like nearly every top pro, is running a big tire with extra side wall protection. Even at the world cup level nowadays XC tires are yesterdays trail tires.

With modern descending speeds nobody runs narrow light tires anymore.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Well because I watch the races. And rims aren't breaking.
> 
> And pros aren't running 2.6" or 2.8" tires either.
> 
> Most are on 2.25 or 2.35. Fact.


And they are generally running EXO or like casings. And tire liners.

Like this:

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-...iz-mont-sainte-anne-xc-world-champs-2019.html

And this:

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/bike-check-kate-courtneys-scott-contessa-spark-rc2.html


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Exactly. KC is running 2.25 like I mentioned above.

I wouldn't call the Ikon and Aspen "yesterday's trail tires".


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Exactly. KC is running 2.25 like I mentioned above.
> 
> I wouldn't call the Ikon and Aspen "yesterday's trail tires".


My point was that they are riding nearly 700g tires, and yes, they are racing WCs on them.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

LOL,
A 29 x 2.20 Maxxis Ikon 3C Exo is 595 grams.

An Aspen EXO is 645.

Hardly 700. 

BTW - Schwalbe 2.25 Snakeskin Rocket Ron is 610.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

LMN said:


> Yep, and she learned from that experience.
> 
> Now she, like nearly every top pro, is running a big tire with extra side wall protection. Even at the world cup level nowadays XC tires are yesterdays trail tires.
> 
> With modern descending speeds nobody runs narrow light tires anymore.


I just saw Catharine's new rig in Instagram. I guess she doesn't have the full Specialized sponsorship as she has Stan's wheels shod with Maxxis Aspen tires.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> LOL,
> A 29 x 2.20 Maxxis Ikon 3C Exo is 595 grams.
> 
> An Aspen EXO is 645.
> ...


And no one in the Bike Checks is using those super light versions.

The version Pendrel is using in those pictures is 640g (claimed). The tire very clearly says Maxx Speed, EXO, *TR*, 3C.

The Rekon Race, which ol' Nino was running in 2.35 at various points this year, is 710g (claimed) in the 120tpi, EXO, TR, Dual compound version. 670g (claimed) for the 2.25. I've got a brand new Rekon Race 2.25 that weighs 699g.

Those tires are a good bit heavier than the 550g tires you think we should all be running.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> And no one in the Bike Checks is using those super light versions.
> 
> The version Pendrel is using in those pictures is 640g (claimed). The tire very clearly says Maxx Speed, EXO, TR, 3C.
> 
> ...


Why would you run a tire Nino runs? You're not even in the same league as he is.

You think because Nino pushes 700 gram tires and is fast, you will be too? You're foolish.

You'll be left in the dust.

Hey, if you want to exert another 25 watts more than me for every minute you are racing, go ahead. I'll wait for you at the finish line.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Nino could whoop your ass on a Walmart 26er.

Are you going to go out and buy that bike too?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Why would you run a tire Nino runs? You're not even in the same league as he is.
> 
> You think because Nino pushes 700 gram tires and is fast, you will be too? You're foolish.
> 
> ...


You really think that 100g a tire is going to cost me 25w a minute? Seriously? Do you have any proof of that claim, or are you just making it up? I'm guessing the latter. Please show me any reputable source that would back that up.

I'm not claiming I'm in the same league as anyone; you are the one who is claiming that anyone who is racing should be on super light tires. I'm showing you that people who are racing at the highest level are getting by just fine on tires nearly 150g heavier than the 550g tire you recently posted.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Zerort said:


> Nope.
> That was the 2019 XC Race tire thread where all the babies were crying about the same thing.
> 
> I want puncture protection
> ...


You're ranting at 5% of the posters in the race tire threads. There are all of 3 people in this thread discussing tires over 2.35 that they use. One of them says they race on Thunderburts, and the other is wanting to go to Aspens.

This thread must be like groundhog day for you. You wake up, read the first post all over again and post some skinny tire rant.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Zerort said:


> Hey, if you want to exert another 25 watts more than me for every minute you are racing, go ahead. I'll wait for you at the finish line.


I'd love to see the data for that.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> You really think that 100g a tire is going to cost me 25w a minute? Seriously? Do you have any proof of that claim, or are you just making it up? I'm guessing the latter. Please show me any reputable source that would back that up.
> 
> I'm not claiming I'm in the same league as anyone; you are the one who is claiming that anyone who is racing should be on super light tires. I'm showing you that people who are racing at the highest level are getting by just fine on tires nearly 150g heavier than the 550g tire you recently posted.


This thread isn't about pros racing at high levels. It's about MTBR forum posters who want to "race" or think they are wannabe racers.

As far as my 25w. I was making a point.

Look at Bicycle rolling resistance. The fastest Maxxis on that list is the Aspen EXO way down on that list (like 29th) At 30.6 watts, plus 100 grams heavier. You do the math.

Again, if you don't think 100 grams is a big difference (times 2) which is nearly a 1/2 pound of rotational weight, you are just clueless.

So many faster tires that what you "think" Nino is riding.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

FJSnoozer said:


> You're ranting at 5% of the posters in the race tire threads. There are all of 3 people in this thread discussing tires over 2.35 that they use.


Tell LeDuke that. 
LOL


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

richde said:


> I'd love to see the data for that.


https://www.wired.com/2016/06/cycling-physics-extra-mass-bike-wheels-enemy/


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Tell LeDuke that.
> LOL


What tire over 2.35 did I claim I use or intend to use? Please quote me. I'll wait.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Zerort said:


> https://www.wired.com/2016/06/cycling-physics-extra-mass-bike-wheels-enemy/


That doesn't say 25w.

Pretty sure it comes down to this:



FJSnoozer said:


> Some of us Race on trails and not Bullshit courses like I see most of you cats riding.


Try that featherweight tire noise at some races and we'll be seeing you standing by the side of the trail with a flat and we'll be the ones waiting for you at the finish line.

But I'm sure they're great for gravel rides on your MTB.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> What tire over 2.35 did I claim I use or intend to use? Please quote me. I'll wait.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Post #117 
The Rekon Race, which ol' Nino was running in 2.35 at various points this year, is 710g (claimed)


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

richde said:


> That doesn't say 25w.
> 
> Pretty sure it comes down to this:
> 
> ...


Continental Race King "Protection" 20.2 watts 
Maxxis Aspen Exo 30.6 watts

Time 2 is 20 watts.

Hey, I was close


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> https://www.wired.com/2016/06/cycling-physics-extra-mass-bike-wheels-enemy/


You just posted an article which doesn't even attempt to quantify the difference in power output based on changes in tire weights. The word "watt" doesn't appear in that article a single time. Not even once. Zero.

So, you made up a random ass number for some reason, and then suggested that you'd wait for me at the finish line of a theoretical race, in an attempt to shame me for being slow, or something.

Strange.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> You just posted an article which doesn't even attempt to quantify the difference in power output based on changes in tire weights. The word "watt" doesn't appear in that article a single time. Not even once. Zero.
> 
> So, you made up a random ass number for some reason, and then suggested that you'd wait for me at the finish line of a theoretical race, in an attempt to shame me for being slow, or something.
> 
> Strange.


Dude, the article is an example that weight matters. Keep running your 2.35 Maxxis that Nino runs and wonder why you finish ****.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> So, you made up a random ass number for some reason, and then suggested that you'd wait for me at the finish line of a theoretical race, in an attempt to* shame me* for being slow, or something.
> 
> Strange.


You must be a millenial


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Post #117
> The Rekon Race, which ol' Nino was running in 2.35 at various points this year, is 710g (claimed)


Do you understand that the word "over" means bigger than 2.35?

Please, read everything I say a couple of times before responding to me. Then, carefully think about what I wrote. Don't pick and choose the words you respond to.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> Continental Race King "Protection" 20.2 watts
> Maxxis Aspen Exo 30.6 watts
> 
> Time 2 is 20 watts.
> ...


Why are you comparing Crr when we are talking about weight? The link you just posted, and the post richde responded to, are posts specifically talking about WEIGHT. Not ROLLING RESISTANCE.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Zerort said:


> You must be a millenial


And you're a slow old dude.

See? I can make up facts about people I've never met before, too!


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

Maybe Zerort means zero rational thinking. Or maybe he’s related to Detroit Lane.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Zerort said:


> Continental Race King "Protection" 20.2 watts
> Maxxis Aspen Exo 30.6 watts
> 
> Time 2 is 20 watts.
> ...


Yup, solid choice for gravel racing....but I wouldn't use the same method of testing road bike rolling resistance for mountain bikes because I don't ride my MTB on the road.

and the Maxxis tested was 2.25".



Le Duke said:


> And you're a slow old dude.
> 
> See? I can make up facts about people I've never met before, too!


He just thinks everyone rides on the same non-threatening trails he does.


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

richde said:


> Yup, solid choice for gravel racing....but I wouldn't use the same method of testing road bike rolling resistance for mountain bikes because I don't ride my MTB on the road.
> 
> and the Maxxis tested was 2.25".
> 
> He just thinks everyone rides on the same non-threatening trails he does.


Smart. Gravel riding on a 2.25 tire. Makes sense.

Yes, the Maxxis tested was 2.25. The 2.35 will be heavier.

Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I remember an interviewer asking Gunn-Rita what tyres she was running and not believing her when she said they were standard Ikon's. Oh, prototype's - No. Oh, special from - No. Oh, really light - No.
She was almost getting a little annoyed


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Zerort said:


> Smart. Gravel riding on a 2.25 tire. Makes sense.
> 
> Yes, the Maxxis tested was 2.25. The 2.35 will be heavier.
> 
> Thanks for proving my point.


You failed to prove your point because you can't figure out the difference between apples (weight) and oranges (road test rolling resistance.).


----------



## Zerort (Jan 21, 2013)

richde said:


> You failed to prove your point because you can't figure out the difference between apples (weight) and oranges (road test rolling resistance.).


A lot of examples given in this thread were of Maxxis tires. You know, what Nino and Catherine run - must be good right.

And, my point is that those Maxxis tires that you all love are slow AF. Fact.

Also, the article proves weight does matter. Go ahead and do the math. But apparently you aren't smart enough.

A lighter, non-Maxxis tire from Continental or Schwalbe will be a faster RACE tire than some EXO Maxxis garbage tires that those PROS are running.

My point is proven. You just need to read, comprehend, use common sense and figure it out.

If you are too poor to buy "RACE" tires, or too lazy to swap to "Race" tires for a RACE, than use what you ride everyday. But those are not "Race" tires that this thread is talking about. And if they are, they are slow "race" tires.


----------



## richde (Jun 8, 2004)

Zerort said:


> A lot of examples given in this thread were of Maxxis tires. You know, what Nino and Catherine run - must be good right.
> 
> And, my point is that those Maxxis tires that you all love are slow AF. Fact.
> 
> ...


Your "race tire" is faster on the road, something you fail to take into account.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Zerort said:


> Continental Race King "Protection" 20.2 watts
> Maxxis Aspen Exo 30.6 watts
> 
> Time 2 is 20 watts.
> ...


That website is worthless. Here are the reasons why. Prepare to have your heart broken.
*
1. All tires in this test are tested with a Butyl Tube. His own testing with a butyl tube shows the drastic difference Tubeless makes vs Latex vs Butyl. In fact as the PSI gets lower, the Delta is dramatic.*

Their own article tests this, yet their testing protocols arent controlled enough. They should be testing ALL mountain bike tires as Tubeless. PERIOD.

See their own data:
https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/specials/tubeless-latex-butyl-tubes

What they havent tested is how their tube interacts with the inside of the tire. Schwalbe and Conti basicly feel like slick plastic on the inside of their tires. I bet that tube doesnt bind as much as it does on a Specialized or Maxxis tire which is very dry sticky rubber internally. They should test this, or throw out all results period for this test. Basically you have a worthless test of tires that doesnt apply to mountain biking.

2. Testing is done on a Steel Drum at 25 PSI. I dont know the last time any of us raced on a steel drum or at 25 psi. These tires should be tested at 5PSI increments from 15-30. Their own testing shows the diminishing returns as the go to 35. Basically you have a worthless test of tires that doesnt apply to mountain biking.

3. if you take a keen eye to the results, Use your brain, and actually ride a few of these tires, you will see some major issues with their results. Clearly this is due to rubber compound interacting with a metal drum and not how fast a tire is.

The tires are tested out of the box. Thats like testing a chain with Factory packaging grease. Maxxis are insanely sticky in their original packaging. I have a polished 1/8 mile concrete hallway at my house and they make an absolute racket when new and are even difficult to turn when new and clean. Schwalbe on the other hand are almost greasy and silent out of the box. The moment these tires get dusty everything changes.

Let me help you.

If we were to go by these tests, someone should be running a Hans Dampf instead of an Aspen. (See image and their results)

Have you ever ridden a Hans Dampf on the rear of your bike? I have.










You can even see the difference their sticky front tire compound plays on the metal drum. Its the same tire! it just has a softer coating of rubber on the knob, which makes more friction *on a steel drum. *

Lastly, for some non-scientific real world testing. I own almost all of these tires on the image and then some. I have yet to beat my Consistent times on Aspen/forekaster, aspen/ikon,(or other Schwalbe trail tires) with my set of Big Ones. I have tried! I wanted them to be so much faster for that 20 minute stretch of bike path. By your math they should save 18x2 = 36 watts since I run my aspens below 25 psi and my big ones at 45. They just aren't really faster at 20 mph.

I know you wont read any of this, but hopefully someone else does so they don't fall for any of the worthless data on that website as I once did.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

LMN said:


> Yep, and she learned from that experience.
> 
> Now she, like nearly every top pro, is running a big tire with extra side wall protection. Even at the world cup level nowadays XC tires are yesterdays trail tires.
> 
> With modern descending speeds nobody runs narrow light tires anymore.


There you go.

I've run my share of Sworks/Liteskin/skinwall/etc tires and they're intoxicatingly quick, but I pulled 15-20 positions in the 2018 Oz Trails Off Road passing guys fixing flats in the Back 40 while I cruised by on my 730g tires. Same thing happened in the Pro race the next day, 17 of the top 20 pro males had at least one flat. Same thing happened this year to many pros running less than EXO/GRID/etc on the same course.

Courses are getting more challenging and speeds are going up, tires have to get more capable and durable. Maybe we'll see them get lighter once the casing/compounds catch up? I'll go with durability and rolling resistance over saving 100g per tire these days, fewer mechanicals and DNF's for me that way.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

Zerort said:


> Fact.


If you don't figure out how to not be so inflammatory, I will just block you.

Fact

Your arguments are senseless and argumentative for no good reason. Having your own opinions on what you prefer is fine. Insulting the choices of others is at best annoying, counter productive at worst.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Tires are a very very personal preference,

1) there is some actual real engineering to the drum test and I do take this into consideration, albeit its not real world how we use the tires. As rolling resistance is about the deflection and the amount of energy it takes to go through this process.

2) Pro's Ride the brand they are paid to run and they do have access to prototype tires, as to when they are using them or off the shelf tire I won't know.

3) I never really destroy my tires , lived on the front range in Colorado and raced there for 15 years and just has never been a big issue for me, now I live in Minnesota and raced here last season and I will probably regret saying this but no sidewalls cuts and I did not flat once all last year racing or trail riding . What I ride here is not that hard on tires as I do pick my lines and do not just bomb through rock gardens.

4) Brand loyalty is natural some people love Maxxis ( I don't) I tried and raced a 2.25 NON exc Rekon Race beginning of the season. I raced and used Michelin in Colorado and loved them tried an Jet this year and if I had the clearance on the rear I might still be using it. Used Continentals Race King / Cross King set up here in mid west 2014-2016.
Had issues with full retail price Schwalbe a few years back and bead failed and pissed me off as they would not warranty it so I hated on Schwalbe for a couple years, now I'm back on the band wagon after picking a couple up cheap.

Finished the season on 2.25 Rocket Ron Snake Skin / 2.1 Thunder Burt Lite Skin

Also big big fan of Vittoria Tire tried Barzo, mezcal' Terreno and Peyote and for my trail I will have one set of wheel with Peyote / Terreno on them this year , I am old and slower than 20 years ago and I can feel the weight of the Vittoria when accelerating out of corners vs my Schwalbe setup.

5} Tire Size, I would never run a 2.4-2.6 tire to race that is just me( trail size imo), and I'm not fast enough to need that extra foot print, 2.25" on 25/26mm internal width rims works for me.

6) In stalking the tires the pro where using at snowshoe World Cup this year it was interesting (most run snake skin and exc)and some are using inserts/noodles in the rear to run another 3-4 psi lower, something I'm going to try experimenting with this year.

7) I'm buying a power meter this spring and then as I'm an Mechanical Engineer and I know enough to be dangerous I can match watts with times and have my own numbers 
as that works for me ! I did some back to back testing this year , Barzo vs Rocket Ron back to back Front only same rear tire and on this on loop I felt more confidence on the Rocket ron vs the Barzo and was approx. 40 seconds faster on RoRo on a 45 minute loop.

On another loop the Peyote was faster than the Rocket Ron, I learned a lot this year and there are so many variables in the tire condition that call for different tires.

Top Three tire attributes for me
1) How confident does it feel (to push harder in corners)
2) weight actual
3) rolling resistance (drum test)
4) Sum of 2 & 3 = acceleration out of corners and from an engineering stand point number do not lie and it adds up say 50 times a lap going from 7-8mph to 12-14mph

As with several others that posted on the thread I get very animated as what I use I believe in and don't get how or why anyone would run a 2.4-2.6" & 800-900 gram tires to race on, I just not that strong and outside of NICA racers that are using trail bike I don't see that size tire at the races and from days gone by we raced 2.0-2.25 for ever on 26" bikes and with the larger contact patch on a 29er I see no reason the run anything larger than my current 2.25" with nice volume and actural casing width of 55-58mm 

Thanks for the Rant !


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

When I am looking at tires there is a lot to choose from.

Brand loyalty is huge factor. If a brand has made a tire that you like you are probably going to stick with them. And if you have been burned by a brand you are probably going to avoid them. 

For me my absolutely goto tire is a Maxxis Ikon 2.2. Not the fastest tire, not the lightest tire but it is a tire that I can race with confidence. I find their handling characteristics match my riding well, I can ride them aggressively in a big variety of condition. To top it off they are the most durable XC tire I have used and I find their performance almost gets better as they age (to a point).


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Stonerider said:


> I just saw Catharine's new rig in Instagram. I guess she doesn't have the full Specialized sponsorship as she has Stan's wheels shod with Maxxis Aspen tires.


For bikes basically they only changed frames. She is on specialized shoes and helmets this year.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

I've been suckered by those drum tests too in the past.....and weight. When I first got my bike, it came with Specialized Fast Traks that weighed 700grams each. I immediately pulled them off and put 625g Race Kings on. After the knobs shredded on the RKs after only a few weeks, I put the Fast Traks back on and holy sh$t they rolled so much faster and I set new PRs on my regular loop by at least 15 seconds on my first ride. I am talking off road here, not road. The FTs were way more supple, and didn't bounce on every root so you didn't lose momentum with every trail imperfection. The RKs were fast on pavement but they either rim striked or bounced no matter what psi I experimented with. Lesson learned. I hope all my competition listens to Zerot.


----------



## brentos (May 19, 2006)

Wow, things got spicy in here.

A while back the Swiss Cycling federation tested and published a tire comparison test. In the test they included multiple brands and found the Race King 2.2 to be the fastest (even faster than the Aspen that the Scott team ended up racing). Does anybody have a copy of the report, it used to be available on PubMed, but I can't seem to find it anymore.

It was executed very similarly to this test between 26" & 29". https://www.researchgate.net/public...bikers/link/5669256008ae8d6928fbd04f/download


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

I remember that article. It was conducted on something like 30% grass, 30% mud and 30% gravel if I remember correctly. For me personally those conditions don't apply. I ride almost all singletrack with lots of roots and bumps. A fast roller on smooth surface with stiff sidewalls will not be fast on my trails. Continentals are about the worse tires I've ridden for my conditions.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I just set a PB up a 10 min XC climb by 30s tonight.
On a gravel bike with 45mm Specialized Sawtooths.
Previous best was Ground Controls on the Anthem.

Was about 5min slower on the 2min descent though. That was scary...


----------



## Lickety Split (May 4, 2007)

In Michigan, the land of sand and roots, I'm running 2.1 Renegade S-WORKS front and rear on my hardtail. On the full suspension I am sticking with last year's combo of 2.25 Racing Ray EVO TLE on the front and 2.0 Fast Trak.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

Lickety Split said:


> In Michigan, the land of sand and roots, I'm running 2.1 Renegade S-WORKS front and rear on my hardtail. On the full suspension I am sticking with last year's combo of 2.25 Racing Ray EVO TLE on the front and 2.0 Fast Trak.


I've become a fan of Speshy tires. I will try the S-works next. I found my times to be consistently faster on the regular Gripton Fast Traks than even Aspen exos, although I have never used the 170tpi version of the Aspens. My only complaint about the FTs is that actual weights can deviate quite a bit from claimed weights. I was really surprised that my stock FTs weighed 700g. But they were still fast so.....


----------



## dokker (Sep 25, 2013)

Le Duke said:


> And no one in the Bike Checks is using those super light versions.
> 
> The version Pendrel is using in those pictures is 640g (claimed). The tire very clearly says Maxx Speed, EXO, *TR*, 3C.
> 
> ...


Nino is not running normal 120 tpi tyres. He uses 170 tpi tyres that are just for pro riders. And those 170 tyres are light.

https://bikerumor.com/2017/03/06/ma...ikon-aspen-xc-race-tires-plus-casing-details/


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

I'm hesitant about S-Works after I and a racer I know both slashed at Bonelli last year getting DNF's. I know a lot of other riders slashed sidewalls too, but I don't know what tires they were running (though Specialized bikes are ultra common here). I don't consider Bonelli a technical course, just one rough section. The slash was barely even noticeable, but the paper thin sidewalls couldn't handle it.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

LMN said:


> For me my absolutely goto tire is a Maxxis Ikon 2.2. Not the fastest tire, not the lightest tire but it is a tire that I can race with confidence. I find their handling characteristics match my riding well, I can ride them aggressively in a big variety of condition. To top it off they are the most durable XC tire I have used and I find their performance almost gets better as they age (to a point).


I'll blame you if I have issues then 

To go on the Anthem's 25mm rims for a 4hr XC in a month.








Price-wise, I'd prefer FastTrak's (non-grid) at 2/3 of the price, but the possibly rockier conditions will play to the strength's of the Ikon's rubber compound.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Isn’t the Specialized Control casing similar to EXO? I even heard a rumor that Specislized tires come out of the Maxxis factory (no proof just something I heard).


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Isn't the Specialized Control casing similar to EXO? I even heard a rumor that Specislized tires come out of the Maxxis factory (no proof just something I heard).


The Control casing is very supple.
Grid is more like EXO.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Maxxis tyres are made in the Cheng Shin factory (sorta)


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

I’ve ridden on Maxxis EXO for years and switch at the the end of last year to Grid and found them way stiffer. Had to really reduce air pressure to (about 18/20 f/r) to get rid of harsh feeling. I do like the gripton thread.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Grid is a bit stiff for XC racing.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Zerort said:


> Why would you run a tire Nino runs? You're not even in the same league as he is.
> 
> You think because Nino pushes 700 gram tires and is fast, you will be too? You're foolish.
> 
> ...


And an FYI Nino was on a Prototype Aspen at Snowshoe WC and IDK if anyone outside the actual Team knows the size and TPI and construction of the tire ( I will find the pic we took) and for the Noodle he's running all I know is that they have PTN swag and stickers in there pit area


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

dokker said:


> Nino is not running normal 120 tpi tyres. He uses 170 tpi tyres that are just for pro riders. And those 170 tyres are light.
> 
> https://bikerumor.com/2017/03/06/ma...ikon-aspen-xc-race-tires-plus-casing-details/


Here is only 9 months old but similar to the Tires he was running at Snowshoes WC

https://bikerumor.com/2019/05/24/sp...ype-maxxis-aspen-race-xc-mountain-bike-tires/


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

hesitationpoint said:


> I've been suckered by those drum tests too in the past.....and weight. When I first got my bike, it came with Specialized Fast Traks that weighed 700grams each. I immediately pulled them off and put 625g Race Kings on. After the knobs shredded on the RKs after only a few weeks, I put the Fast Traks back on and holy sh$t they rolled so much faster and I set new PRs on my regular loop by at least 15 seconds on my first ride. I am talking off road here, not road. The FTs were way more supple, and didn't bounce on every root so you didn't lose momentum with every trail imperfection. The RKs were fast on pavement but they either rim striked or bounced no matter what psi I experimented with. Lesson learned. I hope all my competition listens to Zerot.


As I previously posted Drum Test are only one tool I use in my Tire selection, the main consideration is that they are pretty much apples and apples all tested the same.
I know he uses tubes in the test albeit we all run tubeless, if you read the blog on the tubeless test he ran on Continental Race Kings it others what most of us know regarding rolling resistance. 
AS for the noodles if World Cup racers are using them , they have found some benefit with there setup.

I am curious at a heavier rider I can get my PSI down a little more w/o squirm.
I also know that on the rear there is a wider psi range for me with Schwalbe Snakeskins vs Liteskin or Maxxis Rekon Race non EXO as the Lighter sidewall tires are a lot more sensitive to psi at my 200# as to squirming vs bouncy

Trying a PTN R Evolution in my snake skin Thunder Burt might be the best of both worlds, only a field test will tell


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Anymore tried the new PTN R-Evolution ?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

NordieBoy said:


> I just set a PB up a 10 min XC climb by 30s tonight.
> On a gravel bike with 45mm Specialized Sawtooths.
> Previous best was Ground Controls on the Anthem.
> 
> Was about 5min slower on the 2min descent though. That was scary...


OK, the Ikon's definitely roll slower than the Ground Control's which are slower than the FastTrak's.
But the quality of the rubber touching the ground was higher with the Ikons.
Just went 16s faster again.
Some good descending times too. Confidence inspiring grip.


----------



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

It just proves yet again that rolling resistance isn’t the be all end all unless you’re on a course that can really capitalize on that.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Bluebeat007 said:


> It just proves yet again that rolling resistance isn't the be all end all unless you're on a course that can really capitalize on that.


You're saying we should be using tyres suited to the course?


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

NordieBoy said:


> OK, the Ikon's definitely roll slower than the Ground Control's which are slower than the FastTrak's.
> But the quality of the rubber touching the ground was higher with the Ikons.
> Just went 16s faster again.
> Some good descending times too. Confidence inspiring grip.


All 29x2.25 / 2.3 ?
What compound and year are the specialized tires ?

I work at a Specialized Dealer and they have made several changes as they now have a plant that there tires are made , now the only brand bike tires being made there. Don't know were they where made before 2016 but they made several brand s of tire there

I ran the Rekon Race 2.25 non exo(618g) and S works Renegade 2.3(543g)

I liked the Renegade straight line traction and braking grip better but because it has a much more rounded tread it would slide out easier / before the Rekon Race would and for my area and riding style I prefer a slightly more squared off profile


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

Spin Cycle said:


> Anymore tried the new PTN R-Evolution ?


I installed a set this weekend -- my wrists and thumbs still hurt. These and two Schwalbe tires came to me from Germany.

Components:

Weight: 65 grams and 70 grams
Construction: Very tight/closed foam construction, I would assume much less likely to take up sealant than the closed cell foam backer rod I experimented with last fall, glued junction to close the circle.
Rim: The carbon rims (24mm internal width) that came stock on my 2018 Rocky Mountain Element
Front Tire: New Schwalbe Racing Ray 2.3, EVO TLE Addix Speedgrip, 720g
Rear Tire: Older Bontrager XR1 2.2, Team Issue Tubeless Ready, (really like this tire on the rear, bigger volume than the 2.3 Racing Ray)
Sealant: Trucker Co Cream II
Valves: Two valves were included with the insert. I broke one during inflation by pushing too hard with my compressor chuck -- never had that happen before, after using scores of tubeless valves over the years.

Installation: 

I had to use tire irons despite lots of soap on beads, video watching, trying to summon my inner Hulk. 
After breaking the valve, I had to disassemble one to put in a new valve and it went back together easier the second time (new Racing Ray, maybe a bit of a stretch in the tire bead? 
The sealant could not be added through the valve -- I tried. The insert forced it out around the bead. It has to be added with the bead not yet set -- a drawback as I like to top off my tires without disassembling over a couple of months. I'm the "put a tire on and let it set until I have a very good reason -- say replacement -- to take it off" camp...
The rear tire has a wobble that isn't in the rim, worked it out somewhat by letting the air out and wrenching the tire back and forth on the rim (with soapy water lubricating it) but didn't entirely get rid of it. As it was an old tire, I know it was "balanced" without the insert, so I'm blaming it on the insert. However, the front rolls balanced.

Hows it work?:
Don't really know, there's a lot of snow, ice and mud. Really it's fat bike and ski season.
Rode it on drier roads and sidewalks at very low (~10 psi) and regular (~20 psi), banging into curbs and square edges. My PSI's are not accurate, but the ~10 psi was approaching as soft as I would need to run the fat bike on soft snow, and the ~20 psi would have me worried about racing in the rocky terrain we have around here for fear of rim strikes. Didn't have the courage to go fast into obstacles at 10 psi, but the tires stayed on through tight turns that easily folded the sidewalls and never impacted the rim. Faster hits to square edges at 20 psi convinced me at that it would be a rare hit that got through to the rim at that psi. As far as rim protection goes, I think the PTN R-evolution inserts are as described. I'm anxious to see how they work during my 3 days in Moab coming up in mid-March.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Spin Cycle said:


> All 29x2.25 / 2.3 ?
> What compound and year are the specialized tires ?
> 
> I work at a Specialized Dealer and they have made several changes as they now have a plant that there tires are made , now the only brand bike tires being made there. Don't know were they where made before 2016 but they made several brand s of tire there


Gripton's bought last year.
I love the Ground Control's (non-grid) on the single speed. Excellent rolling and good climbing traction.
The FastTrak's roll better, don't climb as well (still good though) but trail brake through the corners nicely.
The Ikon's felt sluggish compared, but I've always loved the compound and the grip levels over roots and rocks.
Even on my moto's I preferred trials tyres to knobblies.


----------



## Corpus.iuris. (Apr 20, 2018)

Hi guys

Anyone here is sponsored by Maxxis? 

What tyre size are you using if you are sponsored by Maxxis, or if you only ride Maxxis tyres. 

In another word for pure XCO racing and some small portion of XCM.
I will be using Ikon and Aspen 29x2.2

But I see a lot of riders now use 29x2.35 -2.40


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

Any info about "Aspen ST" tyre? Seen on the Scottmtbracing instagram.
Weight and availability would be nice to know. They seem ready to hit the stores?


__
http://instagr.am/p/B8_6hfEpj-7/

I know that Nino have been running Aspen 2.4s but I not seen the Aspen ST name on his tyres.


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

aland33 said:


> Any info about "Aspen ST" tyre? Seen on the Scottmtbracing instagram.
> Weight and availability would be nice to know. They seem ready to hit the stores?
> 
> 
> ...


Im not seeing it listed in the 2020 Maxxis catalog.


----------



## carlostruco (May 22, 2009)

For 2020, I am using:

Vittoria Mezcal XC Race 29 x 2.25 (694g & 696g) for more technical courses
Continental Race King Protection 29 x 2.2 (623g & 624g) for hi speed courses

Last year I used Onza Svelt 29 x 2.25 (120tpi) and loved the speed and grip of them!!!


----------



## fongster (Dec 5, 2011)

Skier78 said:


> Has anyone tried the Kenda Booster tires? https://bicycle.kendatire.com/en-eu/find-a-tire/bicycle/cross-country-marathon/booster/
> 
> I have been running Maxxis Ikons for the last 3-4 years and have been happy with how long they last but would like to have a bit more grip when cornering, and those Kendas seem to get good reviews in the magazines at least. I am looking at buying the 29x2.2 SCT version.


 I've been running Maxxis Ardent Race 2.35 on front and Ikon 2.2 on the back for 4 years with good success but I recently switched to Kenda BoosterPro SCTs and love them. I have the 2.4 on front (narrow 21mm internal width rim, so calipers at 2.35) and a 2.2 on the rear (calipers at 2.2). They are high volume and round, roll way faster that the Maxxis combo and corner great. I'm in So Cal with dry, loose-over-hard, some baby head rocks, some chunk.


----------



## fongster (Dec 5, 2011)

sotak1 said:


> hi, i have a 29er HT, having maxxis ikon 2.35 both rear and front, i am looking for a grippier all around front tire.
> I have seen the new Vittoria Barzo 2.35, new Continental Crossking 2.3 and Maxxis Ardent race 2.35.
> What to you think from your experience ?
> Thanks


 I have used the AR 2.35 on the front for 4 plus years and like it a lot, fast and very secure in corners. Ikon 2.2 on back, but recently switched to Kenda's BoosterPro SCTs in 2.4 F and 2.2 R.


----------



## Raikzz (Jul 19, 2014)

Have ridden MAXXIS tyres for last 3 seasons, Aspen EXO 2.25 f/r and Recon race 2.35 f/r.

This year i'm thinking if i ride with 2.25 Aspen EXO f/r again or maybe trying 2.25 ray/ralph ? 

Does anybody have a side-by-side comparisons between aspen/aspen vs ray/ralph combo?

I have previously had a bad experiences with cutting rocket ron sidewalls, but would be interesting to try something different this season, although why change something that works ? 

I will be using them for XCO type races only, because for XCM i have 2.25 thunder burts, so i prefer to not give up on durability, because i like to ride rock gardens and technical places quite agressive, so no Liteskin and non-exos for me.


----------



## carlostruco (May 22, 2009)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Anyone else think you get significant aero drag from all those hairs?


----------



## carlostruco (May 22, 2009)

spsoon said:


> Anyone else think you get significant aero drag from all those hairs?


Probably if it was for down country

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

spsoon said:


> Anyone else think you get significant aero drag from all those hairs?


No, but I do think it gives a false reading on the Drum Test.


----------



## Sidewalk (May 18, 2015)

THey are high on the "Chewbacca Scale":

https://www.triathlete.com/gear-tech/bike/secrets-wind-tunnel/


----------



## Raikzz (Jul 19, 2014)

decided to ride aspen 2.25 exo this year, bought 4 tyres.

Claimed weight 660g, my scale showed: 641,645,642 and 680


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> No, but I do think it gives a false reading on the Drum Test.


Well that false reading must be an advantage because the 2020 Race King won the drum test. They are a nice weight also for current (2020) XC tires.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Just got some 29x2.6 XR2's. Came in at 774 and 735g. I think these are gonna be a great velcro tire


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

spsoon said:


> Just got some 29x2.6 XR2's. Came in at 774 and 735g. I think these are gonna be a great velcro tire


Measure true to width?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Le Duke said:


> Measure true to width?


Won't be mounting them up for a while, but they're about 160mm bead-to-bead


----------



## sotak1 (Mar 9, 2018)

Hi, i have installed Continental cross king 29x2.3 protection blackchili on 25mm inner width rims and i think is perfect front tire. Before that i had Maxxis Ikon 2.35 both front and rear. Now ck 2.3 front, ikon 2.35 rear. The ck is a little smaller than ikon but has taller side and middle knobs. I am very satisfied with this setup.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> Well that false reading must be an advantage because the 2020 Race King won the drum test. They are a nice weight also for current (2020) XC tires.


Yes, The drum test is bullshit. That was the point.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Ptor said:


> I installed a set this weekend -- my wrists and thumbs still hurt. These and two Schwalbe tires came to me from Germany.
> 
> Components:
> 
> ...


Any Updates ? I think I might try the Tubolights in Small 23 grams and Medium 44 grams


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

Spin Cycle said:


> Any Updates ? I think I might try the Tubolights in Small 23 grams and Medium 44 grams


 I have about 30 miles on off-road terrain on the PTN R-Evolution inserts. I definitely feel confident running my tires at around 2 to 3 PSI less than before, so probably around 18 in the front and 21 on the rear (best guesses as I don't have an accurate gauge for that range, just the one on the pump). No rim strikes when I would have expected it before, can drive the tires hard into corners with no sidewall collapse. So far, so good. I still have plans to be in Moab for a couple of days this coming week and that's where I figure to really get a feel for things.


----------



## Rist (Oct 15, 2009)

New Vittoria Mezcal TNT XC-Trail tyres are easier to mount than those they made few years ago. I still needed apply quite a lot of force and curse a lot, but other than the set of tyre levers I didn't need anything else. Unlike my old tyres which pretty much needed two sets of hands with iron grip to mount. Good thing that I didn't have a single tyre issue during 2 years of racing with the same tyres. I would have been ****ed if I had a flat during a race even if I had an inner tube with me.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

So i was on the rekon race 2.35 tires but because I don't trust them enough to ride some races I switched back to the Pirelli Scorpion M and H lite version. Both 2.2 at 660gr vs 750gr of the Rekon Race.

I already have good experiences with the Pirelli Scorpion M lite front and rear. Last long, good grip in dry rocky, dry sandy, wet roots, mud, and wet rocks. And it nailed it all!

Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G973F met Tapatalk


----------



## Ptor (Jan 29, 2004)

Ptor said:


> I still have plans to be in Moab for a couple of days this coming week and that's where I figure to really get a feel for things.


While it was't the extensive test I had envisioned for my tires with the PTN R-Evolution inserts, it was something. I rode about 15 miles of Moab trails (Mustang, Getaway, 7up, Whirlwind). My tentative conclusion is that the enhanced control stemming from the combined lower pressure (without rim strikes) for traction and the reasonable precise steering due to good sidewall support at that pressure is a boon. I hadn't ridden those trails before and did much better on Strava segments than I have previously on similar "new, semi-technical trails" (for me) -- top 30% in a few thousand unique user times on the downhill segments (usually right around 50%) and my standard top 15% or better on uphill segments. I also lost only a few seconds to my riding partner on any given section, a solid Cat1 in his day, where I formerly would have lost tens of seconds. So, I'm all in on the PTN R-Evolution inserts -- despite the hassle of mounting. The Racing Ray 2.3 front and Bontrager XR1 2.2 rear were just fine on that terrain -- I guess you could say they felt like they rode like much wider tires at the sub 20 psi with PTN R-Evolution inserts.


----------



## B_H (Oct 29, 2006)

Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.

Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

They are heavy and from my experience run small. I got a2.35 barzo and it was just a bit bigger that 2.25 rocket Ron (and 125 grams heavier). I sold it.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Rist said:


> New Vittoria Mezcal TNT XC-Trail tyres are easier to mount than those they made few years ago. I still needed apply quite a lot of force and curse a lot, but other than the set of tyre levers I didn't need anything else. Unlike my old tyres which pretty much needed two sets of hands with iron grip to mount. Good thing that I didn't have a single tyre issue during 2 years of racing with the same tyres. I would have been ****ed if I had a flat during a race even if I had an inner tube with me.


Funny, I've mounted Vittoria's this year and also Conti's. Compared to the Conti's the Vittoria's were a cake-walk to install!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Carioca_XC (Dec 30, 2014)

B_H said:


> Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.
> 
> Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.


Yeah, Vittorias are not light at all. 
I also found these weights a bit off, though.
They are pretty much the same weight as my 2.25" Barzo (745g) and Mezcal (735g), which are XC-Trail (reinforced sidewalls).


----------



## B_H (Oct 29, 2006)

Carioca_XC said:


> Yeah, Vittorias are not light at all.
> I also found these weights a bit off, though.
> They are pretty much the same weight as my 2.25" Barzo (745g) and Mezcal (735g), which are XC-Trail (reinforced sidewalls).


Yep, they are roughly 40 to 60g more than my previous sets. And a bit undersized as well but that wasn't a surprise.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

Ran a Kenda Saber SCT reinforced tire yesterday on a spare wheel doing the Back 40 loop. That 600g tire lasted 11 miles before slashing a sidewall on a section I've never had issues on. Another guy with me on Rekon EXO also flatted between tread blocks. Up here in NW Arkansas I don't see sub 700g tires being a good solution for racing unless you're packing a handful of plugs and CO2's. Back to "heavy" Vittorias for me...


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

pinkpowa said:


> Ran a Kenda Saber SCT reinforced tire yesterday on a spare wheel doing the Back 40 loop. That 600g tire lasted 11 miles before slashing a sidewall on a section I've never had issues on. Another guy with me on Rekon EXO also flatted between tread blocks. Up here in NW Arkansas I don't see sub 700g tires being a good solution for racing unless you're packing a handful of plugs and CO2's. Back to "heavy" Vittorias for me...


You are here too? My wife and I did the back 40 Last night at 5 pm. Did we pass you?

I'm on Rekon Race Front and Aspen rear. As I had been testing them out for our last races of the season (Steep and climby) I have two laps of the back 40 on these tires.

I usually ride on Forekasters out here. The forekaster front is better of course and I will probably race it in the future out here with the aspen rear. I just cant push as hard into the off camber turns as I can on the Rekon race of course.

I Have raced the loop a lot and dont really have issues flatting. Lots of people I see (and they admit) ride into the bench cut instead of on the edge and end up slicing on the chipped limestone/flintrock. The average racer also rides between rocks for a smoothger line which is a recipe for disaster.

Its worth noting that my wife is on 610 gram Rocket Rons F/R and has raced and ridden many laps with no issue. I really believe it comes down to riding style and line choice with a dab of luck And we carry a Dynaplug Kit to plug holes.

Regarding the Recon race 2.25 front and Aspen rear. The speed is intoxicating. Sure I give up braking ability which takes some learning when slamming into a switchback mostly. Most of my downhill times are actually faster than they were on More capable tires because I pick up a little more speed in the flats and out of turns. I'm a convert for now. The recon race on teh front can be a bit of a wild ride at times (surprise loose turns where you arent leaning) but the speed of this combo and the high volume is great for me. they each are 58mm on 24mm internal wheels. For reference, rocket rons are 56mm and Nobby nic 2.35s are 60mm on these wheels.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> You are here too? My wife and I did the back 40 Last night at 5 pm. Did we pass you?


We did the back 40 CCW starting around 5:10, finished after dark with all the flats in our group. I live off Blowing Springs but the rest of these boys came to escape the craziness in south FL to hide in the woods for a bit.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Another B40 rider here. I have cut so many tires on B40. I admit my line choices aren’t great a lot of the time.

My experience:
- Schwable: great if you like to hike your bike, or brag about lightweight on forums.
- Maxxis EXO: decent but I think the EXO casing is out-gunned. Have had a lot of nasty sidewall cuts
- Conti Protection: zero sidewall cuts but I have cut the tread area many times. Also Conti’s are pain to install.
- Vittoria: only have about 500 miles on one set but so far pretty decent with 1 sidewall and 1 tread cut on the rear which I repaired with marine adhesive. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

tgoods said:


> Another B40 rider here. I have cut so many tires on B40. I admit my line choices aren't great a lot of the time.
> 
> My experience:
> - Schwable: great if you like to hike your bike, or brag about lightweight on forums.
> ...


In other words, all tires suck to some extent?


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

B_H said:


> Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.
> 
> Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.


Card board is is 22-24 grams

My new XC Race (Tan) Casing Peyotes Weigh 652/670 gram These have a distinctly lighter Tan sidewall than last years tires

Last Years Mezcal XC race 671 g , Barzo XC Race 684 grams , Terreno XC race 690 Grams all 29 x 2,25

Friends XC Trail Barzo 2.25 735 Grams / Barzo 2.35 735 grams

I weighed these all personally on the same scale


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

B_H said:


> Ordered some Vittorias based on good experiences from last season. Wouldn't mind if they were a tad lighter, sidewall colour has changed a bit and weight has gone up a slightly from last year.
> 
> Might try Continental Race King (R) & Cross King (F) Bernstein Edition in the summer when it's dry, at least weights are tempting and local terrains are quite tame.


Card Board Packing and band weigh 22-25 grams

Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 684g 2019
Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.25 TNT XC Trail casing 735g 2019
Vittoria Barzo 29 x 2.35 TNT XC Trail casing 735g 2019
Vittoria Mezcal 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 671g 2019 
Vittoria Peyote 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 653g, 670g 2020 with lighter color tan sidewaal
Vittoria Terreno 29 x 2.25 TLR XC Race casing 690


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> I usually ride on Forekasters out here. The forekaster front is better of course and I will probably race it in the future out here with the aspen rear. I just cant push as hard into the off camber turns as I can on the Rekon race of course.


I think Forekaster/Aspen makes alot of sense for racing in NWA from the Maxxis catalogue. I'm settling in on Barzo/Mezcal which is roughly similar from the Vittoria catalogue. Good sized square front knobs and fast rolling rear hooks up good on these surfaces, enough loose stuff to make a less aggressive front tire be questionable.

And someone else said it above, but yeah, all tires suck to some degree. Gotta pick your compromise. Though they're getting alot better...


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

TDLover said:


> In other words, all tires suck to some extent?


Yep. In short Vittoria has been the best for me so far.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

pinkpowa said:


> We did the back 40 CCW starting around 5:10, finished after dark with all the flats in our group. I live off Blowing Springs but the rest of these boys came to escape the craziness in south FL to hide in the woods for a bit.
> 
> View attachment 1319653


Ha, wife and I started our CCW lap at 5:08!

We did not want to be finishing in the Dark, so we got in a 2:01 lap.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## dfishdesign (Apr 15, 2015)

Finally a wider Aspen! https://www.pinkbike.com/news/maxxi...en-and-rekon-race-tires-pond-beaver-2020.html

I've played around with basically every combination of maxxis tires over the last couple years, and also the Schwalbe racing ray/ralph combo. It's honestly a never-ending quest. My experience has generally lead me to choose faster rolling but wider tires for the types of racing and riding I do- Mostly backcountry endurance races in Spain/Italy/France.

My new bike this year came with Vittoria Barzos in 2.25...I really love them! I honestly think they are the most versatile XC/Trail tire I've used. I think a 2.35 up front would make it even better at the cost of added weight. Second would probably be an Ikon 2.35 upfront and Ardent race 2.20 in back.

I'm going to be playing with these setups this year.

*1. *2.25 Barzos TNT casing or maybe Barzo/Payote combo.
*2*. 2.4 Aspen front/ rear I don't know...I wasn't happy with braking traction of 2.25 aspens...maybe rekon or rekon race?
*3.* 2.35 Specialized Fasttrack/ground control combo in control casing


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

I think barzo runs narrow and heavy. The 2.35 barzo I purchase for front was same volume as 2.25 rocket ron and 120 grams more. Also FYI all specialized tires are 2.3 not 2.35 but I believe they run big


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

dfishdesign said:


> Finally a wider Aspen! https://www.pinkbike.com/news/maxxi...en-and-rekon-race-tires-pond-beaver-2020.html
> 
> I've played around with basically every combination of maxxis tires over the last couple years, and also the Schwalbe racing ray/ralph combo. It's honestly a never-ending quest. My experience has generally lead me to choose faster rolling but wider tires for the types of racing and riding I do- Mostly backcountry endurance races in Spain/Italy/France.
> 
> ...


Barzo Weights

2.25 56mm on 26mm rim XC Trail 735g XC Race 684g 2019 Model year
2.35 58mm on 26mm rim XC Trail 735g attached pictures

I really Like the Peyote over Mezcal on Hard Pack and small lose over Hard Pack
2020 Peyote XC Race 653g 57mm wide on 26mm rim
2019 Peyote XC race 671g 56mm wide on 26mm rim


----------



## dfishdesign (Apr 15, 2015)

Unbrockenchain said:


> I think barzo runs narrow and heavy. The 2.35 barzo I purchase for front was same volume as 2.25 rocket ron and 120 grams more. Also FYI all specialized tires are 2.3 not 2.35 but I believe they run big


It might run narrow and heavy, I haven't weighed or measure it. I can tell you It seems to roll around the same speed as Ikons or Racing ray/ralph combo. 
Rear I find it has better traction/braking than:
Ikon 2.2/Rekon 2.25/aspen 2.25/ardent race 2.2/racing ralph 2.25.

Out front it feels very similar to an Ikon 2.35, less volume but similar traction. yet I feel more confident/faster on the Barzos than with the Ikon 2.35, backed up on strava descents. When It gets really chunky the extra volume of the Ikon might be appreciated.

In my eyes, having gone through almost all of the Maxxis lineup and a couple of vairents of schwalbe I do think Barzos are a super versatile tire. It would be my choice for everyday training/racing tire if I wasn't trying to push 5w/kg and win races.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

Maxxis is finally releasing 2.4 WT versions of the Aspen and Recon Race. Pretty excited. I didn't mesh with the 2.35 Recon Race with a 30mm ID rim. I'll give it another chance now. But I'm more excited about the WT Aspen. I have some of the new pink Pepi inserts on the way too. I'm going to be dialed but with no fitness and no races!


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

I've been riding AR 2.35/Aspen 2.25 on 19iw for the past 2 seasons and it was great. Switched to 25mm rims same AR2.35 with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the rear. Seams to have more traction in the rear.

I am having trouble with the AR on the front that I did not have before. It works great in everything except loose over hard. It wanders and doesn't hook up anymore. AT about 185lbs running 15psi, I'm a little reluctant to run lower pressure.

I have another Rekon Race 2.35 that I might try again up front. Didn't really like it the last time I tried it and can't see my self liking it again in loose over hard. Same with the Ikon.

I've used a Forekaster in the past, which seemed like a great tire in everything except hard park. 

The Rekon looks promising, but it's either 2.25 or 2.4 WT, and the WT is heavy. I may try the Rekon 2.25/aspen 2.25 until the Aspen is gone.

I've also thought about trying another brand, specifically the Barzo. Reviews seem to compare it to the AR/Forekaster with similar grip but faster rolling. Same claimed weight as the AR (745g) as well.

Thoughts on a fast XC tire that hooks up well in loose over hard?


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Ksanman said:


> I've been riding AR 2.35/Aspen 2.25 on 19iw for the past 2 seasons and it was great. Switched to 25mm rims same AR2.35 with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the rear. Seams to have more traction in the rear.
> 
> I am having trouble with the AR on the front that I did not have before. It works great in everything except loose over hard. It wanders and doesn't hook up anymore. AT about 185lbs running 15psi, I'm a little reluctant to run lower pressure.
> 
> ...


We all have our go to Brand of Tire, take a Look at Vittoria XC Race Casing 2.25 Barzo 671g or Peyote 653g and Schwalbe Rocket Ron 2.25 LiteSkin 524 G or SnakeSkin 623g

I personally found for small size lose over hard pack I prefer the Peyote to the Barzo as the Barzo squirms more on hard pack, And for Medium Size over Loose I go with the Rocket Ron over the Barzo also, albeit I have friends that Love the Barzo.

These are actual weights of my tires.

And Maxxis just released there 2.4 XC WT Rekon Race and Aspen !! for 25-30mm rims


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Spin Cycle said:


> We all have our go to Brand of Tire, take a Look at Vittoria XC Race Casing 2.25 Barzo 671g or Peyote 653g and Schwalbe Rocket Ron 2.25 LiteSkin 524 G or SnakeSkin 623g
> 
> I personally found for small size lose over hard pack I prefer the Peyote to the Barzo as the Barzo squirms more on hard pack, And for Medium Size over Loose I go with the Rocket Ron over the Barzo also, albeit I have friends that Love the Barzo.
> 
> ...


I'm looking for 2.35 ~ 60mm to match my rear tire. Smaller up front would be weird. Looks like Vittorias run small so rules them out. I run sidewall protection. Too many sidewall tears without it.

Also, Maxxis has only announced WT XC tires. Release date is summer 2020, so still a few months out. I doubt they will be better on loose/loose over hard. Knobs aren't big enough to dig in.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

Ksanman said:


> I'm looking for 2.35 ~ 60mm to match my rear tire. Smaller up front would be weird. Looks like Vittorias run small so rules them out. I run sidewall protection. Too many sidewall tears without it.
> 
> Also, Maxxis has only announced WT XC tires. Release date is summer 2020, so still a few months out. I doubt they will be better on loose/loose over hard. Knobs aren't big enough to dig in.


On pinkbike Maxxis said they have them in stock already. 
Loose over hard is too broad a category. If you have really small material, pea gravel or smaller, like decomposed granite, over hard I think smaller knobs and volume can work really well. If you have bigger rocks over the hardpack I agree you need a meatier tread.

I think siping really helps with smaller materials, which is why the Mezcal gets more grip than you would think.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

euro-trash said:


> On pinkbike Maxxis said they have them in stock already.
> Loose over hard is too broad a category. If you have really small material, pea gravel or smaller, like decomposed granite, over hard I think smaller knobs and volume can work really well. If you have bigger rocks over the hardpack I agree you need a meatier tread.
> 
> I think siping really helps with smaller materials, which is why the Mezcal gets more grip than you would think.
> ...


On pinkbike, Maxxis said the 27.5x2.6 Assegai is in stock, and the wt xc tires will be available in June/July. I verified this on their webstore.

I've been waiting for the 2.4 Aspen for a while, because I think it will be great for technical xc races and races in the summer before everything gets blown out to hell.

Where I live is an ancient lake bed, so there is every type of loose over hard here. It's different from where I race though, where I race is usually more hard pack or loose, vs loose over hard of all varieties, loose, and rare hardpack at the higher elevations before it becomes pixie dust.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Ksanman said:


> On pinkbike, Maxxis said the 27.5x2.6 Assegai is in stock, and the wt xc tires will be available in June/July. I verified this on their webstore.
> 
> I've been waiting for the 2.4 Aspen for a while, because I think it will be great for technical xc races and races in the summer before everything gets blown out to hell.
> 
> Where I live is an ancient lake bed, so there is every type of loose over hard here. It's different from where I race though, where I race is usually more hard pack or loose, vs loose over hard of all varieties, loose, and rare hardpack at the higher elevations before it becomes pixie dust.


Barzo 29 x 2.35 ETRO 57 measured 59mm on Narrow rim of my friend I think 21mm I

Racing Ray or Racing Ralph 29 x 2.35 ETRO 60. maybe someone else has mounted these to have actual size ??

Are these to race on or Daily Tires ? , Where do you ride that XC races need so must tire ? I'm just in Midwest so we don't have a need for that much tire here.


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

Spin Cycle said:


> Barzo 29 x 2.35 ETRO 57 measured 59mm on Narrow rim of my friend I think 21mm I
> 
> Racing Ray or Racing Ralph 29 x 2.35 ETRO 60. maybe someone else has mounted these to have actual size ??
> 
> Are these to race on or Daily Tires ? , Where do you ride that XC races need so must tire ? I'm just in Midwest so we don't have a need for that much tire here.


I live in Utah. I live in the extreme North and the terrain is not like the rest of northern Utah. More rocks, more loose, less maintained, more cows.

The AR in exo has been great for racing and riding everywhere, but has 2000+ miles on it, the center tread is basically semi slick and side knobs are tearing off. I have many podiums with that tire. It just doesn't feel the same on the wider rim I have now. Or maybe I need to run even lower pressure. IDK, I thought 15psi was pushing it at 83kg.

Barzo seemed like a good option from Vittoria, but I've seen people measuring them around 2.2, which would be weird considering I have a 2.35 on the rear.

Forekaster is a go to tire I've used before. Great in the early spring and fall when it's wet. Never tried it in the dry though. I'm leaning towards brand loyalty by I might try my rekon race 2.35 again since the knobs are slightly taller than my worn AR.


----------



## vtsteevo (Jan 19, 2010)

I currently run a Rekon Race 2.35 up front and an Aspen 2.2 in the back. It's great for hardpack, but my front struggles in loose over hard. Rekon Race is not advertised as a loose over hard tire though, while the Aspen is. Is it because the knobbies on the rekon race are taller? I don't get why it's a good hardpack tire but does not excel at loose over hard, assuming small sandy pebbles? Considering running Aspen front and rear.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

I have found the Aspen to be overall a better front tire than the Rekon Race. On the rear they are pretty similar, I would say initial grip is better with Aspen but Aspen give up grip quicker as it wears.


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

Currently I am running Maxxis Rekon 2.25 front and Ikon 2.2 rear on 23mm id rims. As someone new to XC I am generally confused at Maxxis' line up of tires. In this video from MaxxisTiresUSA the guy states that the Ikon has more Grip than both the Aspen and Rekon Race.

Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

HT-XC said:


> Currently I am running Maxxis Rekon 2.25 front and Ikon 2.2 rear on 23mm id rims. As someone new to XC I am generally confused at Maxxis' line up of tires. In this video from MaxxisTiresUSA the guy states that the Ikon has more Grip than both the Aspen and Rekon Race.
> 
> Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?


Tires tend to be pretty personal and terrain specific. I think the Ikon is a great XC front tire, other equally competent XC riders absolutely hate it. Neither of us is wrong we just like a different feel from our tires.

For front XC tires:
Aspen, Ikon, Rekon, Ardent Race, Forecaster. Are your typical choices, ordered from lowest grip and fastest to highest grip and slowest. But within that range there is a lot of overlap and it comes down to personal preference.


----------



## Ksanman (Feb 15, 2016)

vtsteevo said:


> I currently run a Rekon Race 2.35 up front and an Aspen 2.2 in the back. It's great for hardpack, but my front struggles in loose over hard. Rekon Race is not advertised as a loose over hard tire though, while the Aspen is. Is it because the knobbies on the rekon race are taller? I don't get why it's a good hardpack tire but does not excel at loose over hard, assuming small sandy pebbles? Considering running Aspen front and rear.


I assume the RR is not as good over loose over hard because the knobs are closer together, so there is more contact with the ground. There is no where for those loose pebbles to go.

I've traded between the Rekon Race 2.35, Ardent Race 2.35, and an Aspen 2.25 in front the past few months paired with a Rekon Race 2.35 in the back. Even though the Aspen is slightly worn, I prefer it in the front over the other tires. Seems to have way more grip and cornering confidence in all conditions except for mud. Although, the Aspen does better in the mud than the RR because it sheds better. I've really hated the AR this year. That's probably from riding demo bikes with DHF and Forekasters.

Once the 2.4 Aspen becomes available, I'll probably go Aspen 2.4 front until late summer when everything is blown out and moon dust.



HT-XC said:


> Where does The Ardent Race fall in line? What about the Rekon in 2.25? I assume this is the grippiest tire of the bunch, correct? I'm running a non-EXO 29" 2.25 MaxxSpeed which has a claimed weight of 610g. Apart from potentially rolling slower, this seems, to me as a beginner at least, the logical choice for a front tire . More Grip and competitive weight. What am I missing?


Before the Rekon, the Ardent was Maxxis standard trail tire, and the Ardent Race was in between the Ardent and Ikon. AR is faster than the Ardent, Slower than the Ikon, but moer grip than the Ikon, debatable grip compared to the Ardent.

From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.


----------



## FJ40runr (Aug 27, 2017)

Ksanman said:


> From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.


Same, the jump from 2.25 Rekon to 2.4 Rekon is too great. Would love a lighter maxxspeed 2.35-2.4 Rekon to slot in as faster than a 2.3 DHF, but grippier than the full-on XC options.


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

Ksanman said:


> Before the Rekon, the Ardent was Maxxis standard trail tire, and the Ardent Race was in between the Ardent and Ikon. AR is faster than the Ardent, Slower than the Ikon, but moer grip than the Ikon, debatable grip compared to the Ardent.
> 
> From what I understand, the Rekon is replacing both of those tires. It's a fast, aggressive "trail" tire. I've only experienced the 2.4WT version, and it seemed like a great bridge between Ikon/Aspen/RR and DHF. I'm considering using it as a front tire once everything gets blown out, dusty, and loose. I do wish they made either a lighter 2.4 or a 2.35 to match the 2.35 RR race.


Thank you for the explanation. I'll skip the Ardent and will try out the faster options as I get a little more confidence in the corners and get my pressure dialed in. I've been running them quite low 20psi in the front 22 in the back (I'm 180lbs). The Rekon feels like on rails on hardpack and in the forest. The Ikon in 2.2 seems quite narrow on the back but grips really well. I've ordered one in 2.35 for the front and an Aspen in 2.25. Will try out the Aspen on the back as it's only available in dualcompound. I had the Forekaster in 2.35 on the front during winter and the Rekon on the back. Didn't like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? I'm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

HT-XC said:


> Didn't like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? I'm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.


All of those sound reasonable to me. Some other options: Bontrager tires are made by Maxxis so look at the XR3 and XR4 in Team Issue casing. They updated the designs last year and they look really good.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

Interesting. I didn't know that. Had originally XR1 front/rear on my Procaliber. Didn't like those tires at all. High volume is nice. But I lost grip on hardpack and washed out hard. Didn't even have time to blink. To which tire would the XR3 and XR4 be comparable? The XR3 looks like a higher knobbed Maxxis Ikon in my opinion. Maybe more like a thighter packed forekaster? XR4 looks much burlier than any of the xc maxxis tires.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

One question for anyone who has experience with both Schwalbe (Rocket Ron/Racing Ray) and Maxxis (Rekon/Rekon Race). I finally convinced myself to try this so hyped Maxxis tires and after 15+ years on Schwalbe (with short excursion to Conti), I landed on Maxxis Rekon race (rear) and Rekon (front) for this year.
As tires are different then what I'm used to, and to shorten "try and test" period, what sort of pressure are you guys running? I went for first ride with new tires yesterday, with same settings as I had previously with Schwalbe (27psi rear, 23psi front), and front felt sort of ok, while rear was running smoothly but had absolutely no grip in corners (it actually felt cool drifting on gravel , but that's not really something I'm looking for). I let some air out on middle of ride, and measured when I came back home so I did other half of the ride with something like 24psi on rear and 20psi on front and it felt much better.
I'm 86kg (i guess 189lbs) together with bike (75kg me and 11kg bike), and tires are Rekon Race 29x2.25 TR EXO (rear), and Rekon 29.2.25 TR EXO 3C MaxxSpeed (front)


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Another XC race tire question. Does anyone have any experience with the new 2020 Continental Race King Protection as a rear tire? I know it's the fastest on the metal drum test but how does it compare to the Maxxis Aspen, Rekon Race, new Racing Ralph, or Renegade as a rear tire on the trails? A friend of mine got a new Race King Protection yesterday and he said it weighed 585 grams on the scale. He hasn't ridden it yet. That's a great weight so my only question is how does it perform when cornering or climbing compared to the other speedy XC race tires I mentioned. Thanks in advance for any replies.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

HT-XC said:


> Interesting. I didn't know that. Had originally XR1 front/rear on my Procaliber. Didn't like those tires at all. High volume is nice. But I lost grip on hardpack and washed out hard. Didn't even have time to blink. To which tire would the XR3 and XR4 be comparable? The XR3 looks like a higher knobbed Maxxis Ikon in my opinion. Maybe more like a thighter packed forekaster? XR4 looks much burlier than any of the xc maxxis tires.


The XR3 is between a recon and recon race but with larger side knobs. I have one but haven't thrown it on yet, so I can't tell you anything more. The middle tread is siped.

I think siping on mountain bike tires works really well but they wear a bit faster, and once the siping is worn down the grip deteriorates rapidly. Same applies to the Aspen and Forekaster.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

euro-trash said:


> I think siping on mountain bike tires works really well but they wear a bit faster, and once the siping is worn down the grip deteriorates rapidly. Same applies to the Aspen and Forekaster.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


Generally, I use tires with sipes in wet and cold conditions. I find that tires with big solid lugs without sipes to be really slippery on wet rocks and roots. But those same tires work really well when it is hot and dry. A perfect example of this is the Ardent Race, I find them absolutely terrifying in the wet, but in dry and loose they are a good tire.


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

primoz said:


> I went for first ride with new tires yesterday, with same settings as I had previously with Schwalbe (27psi rear, 23psi front),


Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

miles said:


> Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).


What id rim are you running? I'm about the same weight and wouldn't want to go lower than 22 psi in the back on my 22.5mm id rims...


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

primoz said:


> I let some air out on middle of ride, and measured when I came back home so I did other half of the ride with something like 24psi on rear and 20psi on front and it felt much better.


77kg+13kg here.
20-22psi front and 22-24psi rear.
Leaning to the lower end with 2.3" tyres and the higher end with 2.1's.
i25 rims.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

miles said:


> Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).


I'm the same weight as you and cant run near those pressures. I have and it does not end well. Maybe your Pump reads much different.

Those PSIs result in Snake bites and triple pinch flats in the tire itself if I run them and ride down hill at the speeds I am capable of. I know because I have started rides with that PSI and ruined the tire or needed lots of Dynaplugs fairly soon into the ride.

I can run 21/24 on Schwalbe 2.35s. Anything less is a rim strike. If I actually braked going down hill I would protect the tires, but I wouldnt be using my strengths. 

Our enduro ( i just started riding while my XC bike is broken) has 36mm ID wheels with 2.35 Magic Mary at 17 psi front which snake bit This past weekend. I needed a megaplug and a regular dynaplug at the rim to get going. I was full send into a mild rocky G-out. I've had to bump psi to 19 front with even the 36mm ID and a 160 fork.

This is using a Topeak Smart Gauge and a Blackburn MTB pump which read identical.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> I'm the same weight as you and cant run near those pressures. I have and it does not end well. Maybe your Pump reads much different.
> 
> This is using a Topeak Smart Gauge and a Blackburn MTB pump which read identical.


Nice that those two read equal. I have probably 1/2 a dozen high-end pressure gauges and all of them read differently and significantly differently at low pressure. One gauges 17psi is 23psi on a different one.

I have also found that the calibration on different gauges has drifted over the years. I have one gauge that 20psi use to be unridable hard, and now 20psi is double pinch flat soft. (And no I have not gotten fatter).


----------



## rupps5 (Apr 9, 2010)

Since gauges clog up with sealant after a while, I consider them a disposable item. The Meiser 0-30psi gauges I have found to be the best quality vs cost. They also come in different psi ranges if 30 is not enough for you. I weigh 143 and run 17f/23r with either maxxis or Victoria tires.










Evolution Training Cycles


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

LMN said:


> Nice that those two read equal. I have probably 1/2 a dozen high-end pressure gauges and all of them read differently and significantly differently at low pressure. One gauges 17psi is 23psi on a different one.
> 
> I have also found that the calibration on different gauges has drifted over the years. I have one gauge that 20psi use to be unridable hard, and now 20psi is double pinch flat soft. (And no I have not gotten fatter).


I have found these two to be the most accurate possible (blackburn Chamber HV) and Topeak D2.

On the other hand:
The topeaks pumps (including Joe Blow) change over time and read "low" causing you to have to pump up to a higher number as you have stated with your older pump. They have two at my bike shop for self service and they each read differently.

The sks air checker gets clogged QUICKLY and is a sporadic Piece of crap anyway with 1.5 psi variance when checked back-to-back against itself.


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

I use the Meisner gauges mentioned above. I’ve got two In the pressure range for MTB tires and they both consistently read the same, and within margin of error on the gauge on my compressor. My Silca floor pump’s gauge is comically inaccurate, but consistent to itself so I can set the needle at the correct pressure and it’ll be in the ballpark. 

But yes, on my Schwalbe RR tires on Enve 525 rims I am happy at sub-20 psi.


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

Stonerider said:


> Another XC race tire question. Does anyone have any experience with the new 2020 Continental Race King Protection as a rear tire? I know it's the fastest on the metal drum test but how does it compare to the Maxxis Aspen, Rekon Race, new Racing Ralph, or Renegade as a rear tire on the trails? A friend of mine got a new Race King Protection yesterday and he said it weighed 585 grams on the scale. He hasn't ridden it yet. That's a great weight so my only question is how does it perform when cornering or climbing compared to the other speedy XC race tires I mentioned. Thanks in advance for any replies.


I use them front/rear-they are a bit undersized to a previous gen Racing Ralph 2.25. They hook up fine for me but definitely not a trail tire, fast XC only.


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

miles said:


> Are those really the pressures you run? Here in the rocky Southwest I run my Schwalbes at 17f/19r (I weigh 185 pounds).


Honestly no, I'm not 100% sure, as it could be my gauge on air compressor is wrong. It might show a bit different values, but they are still somehow in range of what gauge on floor pump shows. But they are constant, even if wrong, so I can use these numbers to have same pressure every time.
But even if they would be wrong, I doubt they would be for 50% wrong. And personally, I can't imagine running Racing Ray at 1.1bar (17psi) on front. If I go under 1.5bar (22psi) I have feeling like tire would be folding under me when going into corner.
But it could also be that it matters what rims you are using. I have some old DT Swiss xr1501 rims, which are probably way too narrow for today's standards (I think something around 22mm inner width), so maybe that's what matters too, and maybe with wider rims it would work with so low pressure.
Anyway... I have been playing a bit during last few days, and I'm currently on 18psi front and 22/23psi rear and it feels quite nice already


----------



## trysixty (Jun 21, 2016)

has anyone tried the schwabe Rock Razor 2.35 on the rear for loose over hard (larger rock). txs


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

trysixty said:


> has anyone tried the schwabe Rock Razor 2.35 on the rear for loose over hard (larger rock). txs


Yes and it's awesome and oh so fast. I ran several and really liked them. However, since I've went to a more aggressive tire.
Have a new RR 29er on the shelf I'd sell for $55 shipped in the USA.









Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

HT-XC said:


> Thank you for the explanation. I'll skip the Ardent and will try out the faster options as I get a little more confidence in the corners and get my pressure dialed in. I've been running them quite low 20psi in the front 22 in the back (I'm 180lbs). The Rekon feels like on rails on hardpack and in the forest. The Ikon in 2.2 seems quite narrow on the back but grips really well. I've ordered one in 2.35 for the front and an Aspen in 2.25. Will try out the Aspen on the back as it's only available in dualcompound. I had the Forekaster in 2.35 on the front during winter and the Rekon on the back. Didn't like the Rekon in the mud at all. Steep climbs in the woods were quite the challenge. What do you guys ride during winter on the back? I'm leaning towards forekaster/forekaster or even shorty/forekaster for the next season.


The Forekaster is spikier and works well in mud. The Rekon has a better compound and works better on hard slick surfaces like rocks and roots. I like it as a rear, but agree it's not ideal on slimy, muddy climbs.

The Rekon 2.6 is a great tire. I used to run an Ardent Race on the front in 2.35, but my 2.6 Rekons are all within a few grams of the 2.35 AR. With a stickier compound, tons of volume for the rough trails here in PA, and better mud performance, it's a big improvement in grip. I don't notice it being any slower, at least on the front. The center knobs are widely spaced, but extremely ramped.


----------



## ucdengboss (Apr 4, 2012)

I just took receipt of a Racing Ralph 29X2.25 Rear and 29X2.35 Racing Ray Front today, both Snakeskin. I do not race, ride for fun and fitness, nothing too technical, no chair lift days ever, some gravel road/double wide, some single track, on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon 110mm F/R travel bike. 

I wanted a fast rolling tire as I mostly ride solo, never stop pedaling, put a preference on sustained uphill Strava segments, and longer loops in excess of 1 hour.

I hope they serve me well and plan to get some use out of them this season. I should find my kitchen scale this evening to weight them prior to install if I can. Center portion of tire does feel a little thin.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

ucdengboss said:


> I just took receipt of a Racing Ralph 29X2.25 Rear and 29X2.35 Racing Ray Front today, both Snakeskin. I do not race, ride for fun and fitness, nothing too technical, no chair lift days ever, some gravel road/double wide, some single track, on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon 110mm F/R travel bike.
> 
> I wanted a fast rolling tire as I mostly ride solo, never stop pedaling, put a preference on sustained uphill Strava segments, and longer loops in excess of 1 hour.
> 
> I hope they serve me well and plan to get some use out of them this season. I should find my kitchen scale this evening to weight them prior to install if I can. Center portion of tire does feel a little thin.


Let us know the weights of those tires. I'm especially interested in the weight of the 2.35 Racing Ray.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> Let us know the weights of those tires. I'm especially interested in the weight of the 2.35 Racing Ray.


I just received mine in a shipment of 15 tires that has been quarantined for months.

2.35x29 Snakeskin Racing Ray
701 Grams


----------



## ucdengboss (Apr 4, 2012)

See photos.

Racing Ray 29X2.35 700g

Racing Ralph 29X2.25 654g.

To be honest I dont even know the claimed weights.









Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## Bicyclelist (Sep 5, 2006)

*2.35 Schwable Racing Ray and Racing Ralph Weights*

29 x 2.35 - Racing Ray - actual 717g - claimed - 770g
29 x 2.35 - Racing Ralph - actual - 702g - claimed - 770g


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> 2.35x29 Snakeskin Racing Ray
> 701 Grams


That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.


i'll give you measurements once installed on Roval Control SLs. On the eyeball test, it is within 1 mm of the large volume NoNo, and the tread looks wider. NoNos measure 60.x mm.

Surprisingly this batch of 4 2.35 NoNos range from 770g - 853g! I'll post all weights soon. The entire shipment of 15 tires were hung up for months.

Customs also accidentally threw a random Truck offroad LED light in the box during their search. Someone is going to be pissed!


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Isn't anyone here which use the Pirelli Scorpion H and M lite? I use them and they are durable, light and grippy. 2.20 version weights 640 and 660gr


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

tick_magnet said:


> Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.


I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.

Personally, it looks like I'll be switching back to Vittoria again. I've been riding Ikon 2.35/Rekon 2.25 front and rear, and, well, I just can't make them work for me and my local "soil", aka decomposed granite. Had two losses of the front end on relatively benign corners lately that left me with some pretty nasty road rash and some bibs in questionable condition. The tires aren't in that bad of shape and I was running pressures that should have yielded good grip.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

tick_magnet said:


> Just mounted some new Renegade Controls 29x2.3 and these were among the hardest tires I've ever mounted. I wasn't sure they were 29s at first and I had to do a double take on the sidewall to confirm a couple times. But after lots of cursing and elbow grease, I got them on. Weight was 660 grams and the initial measure 2.24 inches at about 30psi. I will let them sit overnight and remeasure.


620g for mine.
Went on my WTB Freq Team i25 rims without issues.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.
> 
> Personally, it looks like I'll be switching back to Vittoria again. I've been riding Ikon 2.35/Rekon 2.25 front and rear, and, well, I just can't make them work for me and my local "soil", aka decomposed granite. Had two losses of the front end on relatively benign corners lately that left me with some pretty nasty road rash and some bibs in questionable condition. The tires aren't in that bad of shape and I was running pressures that should have yielded good grip.


I'll measure mine, they've never been higher that 25psi, but have been on since March 12th.
I'll also measure the 2.35 FastTrak Grids that are on the i23 rims.


----------



## oliver37 (Jul 30, 2017)

Received 2x new S-Works Renegade 29x2.3 rated at 575g.

One was 567g and the other was 620g...that's quite a difference. I had to double check that it was actually the same tire. Sent it back, awaiting replacement.

Fairly easy to mount but the bead diameter is almost the same diameter as the rim base, so it's pretty snug. Took a few days to seal as there were some pourus sections of the sidewall.

Measured 2.28" wide on 23mm rims after a few days of riding the one I kept, which is the same as the day I mounted them.














Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

oliver37 said:


> Received 2x new S-Works Renegade 29x2.3 rated at 575g.
> 
> One was 567g and the other was 620g...that's quite a difference. I had to double check that it was actually the same tire. Sent it back, awaiting replacement.
> 
> ...


That heavy one looks to have thicker sidewalls the way the rubber band sits?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"


----------



## oliver37 (Jul 30, 2017)

NordieBoy said:


> That heavy one looks to have thicker sidewalls the way the rubber band sits?


Yeah, it may have. The replacement S-Works Renegade just showed up and it weighed 553g at about 2.24" after mounting.

I am replacing Maxxis Aspens, which are not what I would consider heavy tires, and this one is 100g lighter than the Aspen 29x2.25!














Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

NordieBoy said:


> Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
> FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
> FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"


Interesting that the Grid was larger. Too bad I find the Grid casing super stiff.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Interesting that the Grid was larger. Too bad I find the Grid casing super stiff.


My winter tyres on the Anthem are Butcher and Purgatory Grids and they feel more compliant than those damn FastTrak Grids.

I run 20psi front and 22psi rear on the Renegade/FastTrak Controls and 17f/19r on the FastTrak Grids and the Controls still feel more compliant.


----------



## dfishdesign (Apr 15, 2015)

oliver37 said:


> Yeah, it may have. The replacement S-Works Renegade just showed up and it weighed 553g at about 2.24" after mounting.
> 
> I am replacing Maxxis Aspens, which are not what I would consider heavy tires, and this one is 100g lighter than the Aspen 29x2.25!
> View attachment 1329411
> ...


I´d be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? I´m thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I have not ridden the Renegades that I just mounted yet, but I definitely prefer Fast Traks to Aspens. The FTs are a little more supple and seem to carry more speed over bumpy terrain. Cornering grip is similar.

The Aspens are also completely useless after about about 200 miles on dry technical standing climbs. You basically have to sit down to get as much weight as possible on the rear wheel to get any traction.


----------



## oliver37 (Jul 30, 2017)

dfishdesign said:


> I´d be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? I´m thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.


Sure thing. I have only two or three rides on the front Renegade so far (rear was still Aspen), as I just mounted up the rear last night. I couldn't help but notice that the Renegade sidewalls are thin and supple and it feels like the front tire rolls over rocks better. But that could be the placebo effect.

I like the profile of the Renegades. It's very round, so as I transition from leaning one way to leaning over the other way, there are no noticeable changes in grip or cornering attitude. Tires with sharp shoulders make me feel like I'm balancing on a knife edge when leaned over and give me the wobbles as I "climb" the edge of the tire. That is personal preference though; some people like to feel where that shoulder is and lean on it.

I was not smart enough to take any pictures of my Aspens before I removed them, but here is my Renegade and an Aspen picture I found online. Who knows if rim sizes are the same but you can kind of see what I'm talking about.

I'll have some real feedback over the next couple days.














Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.


Just remeasured and they came in at around 2.26-2.27 (some readings were 2.26 and others were 2.27 so probably 2.265 lol).

This is at 30psi with 25 ID rims. I plan to ride the front at 23psi and rear at 25psi.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I think the Renegade and FastTrak on the rear roll similarly, but the Renegade has better braking and hardpack climbing performance.
Under brakes the FastTrak will drift a little more in a corner (which I like), but the Renegade drifts more than the more rubbery grip of the Ikons.
The FastTrak definitely has better sideknobs for front use.

The Ikons are going to replace the barely worn FastTrack Grid's on the rigid single speed as the pressures I have to go down to to get some compliance are too sketchy for cornering support.


----------



## ucdengboss (Apr 4, 2012)

Stonerider said:


> That's a great weight if it's a true 2.35 size tire.


Measured 2.25 at 28psi. Don't know my rim width it is whatever came stock on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon.

They have been on for 3 days with one ride yesterday for 1hr 20minutes.









Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

JasperGr said:


> Isn't anyone here which use the Pirelli Scorpion H and M lite? I use them and they are durable, light and grippy. 2.20 version weights 640 and 660gr


I've been very happy with the Pirellis here in SoCal.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

miles said:


> I've been very happy with the Pirellis here in SoCal.


Measurements?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Measurements?


Labeled 2.2. Measures 2.3" (68mm) on an Enve 525 at 21psi.


----------



## euro-trash (Feb 9, 2008)

2.4 XR3 on a 30mm id. 
After 2 days it measures 2.41 at 18 psi.
The sideknobs appear to protect the sidewalls.









Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

miles said:


> Labeled 2.2. Measures 2.3" (68mm) on an Enve 525 at 21psi.


Which tire was it, exactly? H or M?

Sorry for all of the questions...


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I will measure my Pirelli tires this afternoon


----------



## miles (Jan 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Which tire was it, exactly? H or M?
> 
> Sorry for all of the questions...


No, I should have been more clear. I am running a pair of the Pirelli Scorpion H (for Hard terrain). Here in Southern California the ground is extremely hard.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

I run pirelli M Lite 2.2 on the front and H Lite 2.2 on the rear. Both come in at 660. 30mm id rims gr.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

dfishdesign said:


> I´d be interested to hear your thoughts on the renegade vs aspen, are you running them both front-rear? I´m thinking about trying a renegade rear-fast track front combo.


Just rode the Renegade for the first time as a front tire. I am honestly shocked at how much traction this tire has given the small side knobs. I would say grip was every bit as good as Aspens and near the end of my ride, I was cornering pretty aggressively with no washouts. Trail conditions were medium - soil was moist but not muddy. A couple hardpack sections. I expect that these tires will really shine in hardpack conditions which is what they are designed for. But I would not hesitation to ride them in anything but really wet to muddy conditions.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Agree with that but they are not durable and losing grip very fast as they wear


----------



## keifla123 (Mar 7, 2013)

Anyone considering trying out the new Rene Herse Fleecer Ridge when it is available end of the month?

https://bikepacking.com/news/rene-herse-fleecer-ridge-tire/

I have run the 38mm version of this tire for cyclocross and it is awesome. They roll quite fast and grip amazingly. This new size should be 650-670 grams in the Endurance Plus casing which is their heaviest and most protected version. They are not cheap unfortunately but I may give them a try as Rene Herse tires typically measure a bit larger than the stated size from my experience with the Bon Jon Pass, Snoqualmie Pass, and Steilacoom variants.


----------



## oliver37 (Jul 30, 2017)

oliver37 said:


> Sure thing. I have only two or three rides on the front Renegade so far (rear was still Aspen), as I just mounted up the rear last night. I couldn't help but notice that the Renegade sidewalls are thin and supple and it feels like the front tire rolls over rocks better. But that could be the placebo effect.
> 
> I like the profile of the Renegades. It's very round, so as I transition from leaning one way to leaning over the other way, there are no noticeable changes in grip or cornering attitude. Tires with sharp shoulders make me feel like I'm balancing on a knife edge when leaned over and give me the wobbles as I "climb" the edge of the tire. That is personal preference though; some people like to feel where that shoulder is and lean on it.
> 
> ...


After a few more rides on dust and small rocks over hardpack, I'd be lying if I told you I can feel any major differences between the S-Works Renegades and the Aspens. If I didn't know I changed the tires, I may not have noticed.

Circumstantially, I was able to climb an impossibly steep section yesterday that in no way did I think would work out, but the tire hooked up and I made it through. I've never climbed that section before though.

If there is a detectable improvement, it might be a slight rolling resistance improvement on asphalt at high speeds, but there are so many variables at play I'm not sure it's really much different.

For all intents and purposes they measure the same and feel the same to me at a savings of about 170g combined vs the Aspens.

Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## B_H (Oct 29, 2006)

My Race King Bernstein & Cross King Bernstein 2.2 combo arrived few days ago. Weights were close to specs, 581 & 585 grams. Rubber compound seems to be nice and works well on dry and hardpack soil. Downside is that they're quite a bit undersized, 51mm on my 23mm id spare wheels and the air volume is also on a low side. Maybe they'll stretch a bit still but they're a bit narrow for my liking on a HT.


----------



## vtsteevo (Jan 19, 2010)

You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!

Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?



NordieBoy said:


> Renegade Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.23"
> FastTrak Control 2.3" on i25 rim = 2.25"
> FastTrak Grid 2.3" on i23 rim = 2.35"


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

No, S-Works are a much thinner casing with basically no additional protective layers. 

I'd say something between the Control and GRID casing is equivalent to Maxxis EXO casing.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I try to avoid the S-Works casing because it is so thin. I find the Control casing to be pretty supple - more supple than my Aspen Exo. I have ridden fast trak controls in the past, and they have been plenty durable. I did pinch flat once from running too low of pressure and hitting a serious square edge rock but that was partly my fault.

More rides with the Renegade on the front and I continue to be impressed by the front end grip. I am not holding back at all now diving into turns because I know it will hold. Plus it's more supple that the Aspen which means it also doesn't get those little washouts that occur from the tire bouncing in bumpy corners.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

vtsteevo said:


> You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!
> 
> Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?


I think in general the Maxxis compound has the edge in grip over Gripton, but the Control casing is more supple (and lighter) than EXO.
Grid is heavier duty than EXO, but I'd hesitate to run it unless it was REALLY rocky or the area was known for sidewall cuts.

S-Works are pure race tyres with bugger all protection.

I've never tried the Rekon Race or Aspen to see what the rolling resistance is like as the price is just too high.

Over here a Maxxis Ikon EXO/3C/TR is about $100nz.
Specialized Fasttrak/Renegade Control/2Bliss/Gripton is about $60nz.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

vtsteevo said:


> You guys are making me wanna ditch the 2.25 710g aspen as a rear tire and get the 2.3 renegade s-works instead!
> 
> Not sure I am willing to switch the front tire from Rekon Race yet (hardpack, loose over hard), I realy like how supple and big that 2.35 Rekon Race is, but I've never tried specialized tires. How does the casing on specialized compare to the maxxis stuff? Are s-works versions comparable to maxxis EXO/TR in terms of protection?


Most of my aspens are 645 with a couple around 680. It took the onslaught of riding the Back 40 for hundreds of miles, so there's not much to convince me of going to a specialized tire even if you paid me. 

You know, my wife never once flatted a regular specialized ground control racing, but I've never ridden my home trails with other fellow racers on specialized casings where we weren't stopping for flats. This is all Bro Science, because there are tons of epics in our race series on Fast Tracks, and most other bikes in Cat 1 are running an Aspen these days. My buddy flatted his renegade on a pretty tame course here, but it did eventually seal.

Have you tried the recon race 2.25 rear?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

FJSnoozer are you talking about S-Works casings, Control or Grid when speaking about all these flats? I've ridden some pretty gnarly rocky Missouri trails on Fast Trak controls with no problems, except when I under pressured the tire, although I did flat an Aspen Exo on a mild Indiana trail running 25psi which is actually 1 psi above my norm so go figure.... I've also flatted on a Race King Protection. The most durable tire I have ridden is actually a Bontrager XR1 Expert, but I hated the tire overall and would trade one flat a year to avoid that tire.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

I ran S-works Renegades with inserts all last season, and they survived several 5-7 hour races. I was definitely very conscious of my lines with them though!


----------



## oliver37 (Jul 30, 2017)

Just logged a 4 hour, 6,000ft ride on the S-Worls Renegades. I probably have about 200 miles on them and they're now holding air for the whole ride (small wins).

I've covered all of the surfaces that I ride on by now including large, sharp gravel. So far so good from a puncture perspective. 

I also like the way that they break away when losing grip, especially the front. I feel comfortable exploring the limit since the front tire will slide a little bit without washing out completely, which is enough warning for me to get my sh*t together in time. It's fun. The Aspens (and Thunder Burts before those) felt like they broke away more suddenly, and as a result I wasn't as comfortable near the limit.





Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Nice ride!
I agree with you on the loosing grip part. I've overcooked a few turns on my Renegades and I can feel the front end giving away a bit and then grab again. Very confident tires. I"d say I like them as a front tire better than Fast Traks. Both Fast Traks and Aspens grip really will too but they don't give as much warning when they lose grip.


----------



## MXIV424 (May 30, 2018)

Mitas Scylla TD 29x2.45

Specs for measured width: 30psi on 25mm rim

Never ran Mitas but got a batch to try out this season. I was going to try this as a front tire but since there's nothing going on I'm gonna run it as a rear on the trail bike.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

Here are some Schwalbe weights. Got these within the last couple of weeks. Claimed weights are from the Schwalbe main (euro/German) site.

PS - i'm no racer lol, but I do love light tires!

Racing Ray 29x2.35 EVO Addix SpeedGrip Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)










Racing Ralph 29x2.35 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 770g)










Rocket Ron 29x2.25 EVO Addix Speed Snakeskin TLE (claimed 610g)


----------



## Fraction (May 20, 2020)

I've been using a set of standard Fast Trak 2.3s (60TPI and no Control casing) for the past few weeks after coming off a set of Ikon 2.2 3C/EXO (120 TPI). So far, I've been impressed with the Fast Traks for the terrain here in TX. The Fast Traks seem to roll a little faster and with the slightly larger volume, I can run a lower PSI (21/22 vs 23/24) without getting squirming. The Ikons do seem to have a little better cornering grip...at least, it's more consistent. I'm likely going to upgrade this set to a front Fast Trak Control 2.3 and a Renegade Control 2.3 in the rear. This should save me some rolling weight, offer enough sidewall protection and still be more supple than the EXO for the roots and rocks.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

I've been running the Rekon/Aspen EXO 2.25 Combo on my hardtail for a few weeks. I'm a big fan. The Aspen doesn't have the greatest breaking traction and you have to be cognizant of your climbing technique but it rolls really fast and corners well. I love the Rekon on the front. I've had one on there for over a year now and see no reason to try something else.


----------



## craign (Feb 8, 2006)

csteven71 said:


> I've been running the Rekon/Aspen EXO 2.25 Combo on my hardtail for a few weeks. I'm a big fan. The Aspen doesn't have the greatest breaking traction and you have to be cognizant of your climbing technique but it rolls really fast and corners well. I love the Rekon on the front. I've had one on there for over a year now and see no reason to try something else.


I'm running the same combo and have a similar impression. Super happy with it.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Fraction said:


> I've been using a set of standard Fast Trak 2.3s (60TPI and no Control casing) for the past few weeks after coming off a set of Ikon 2.2 3C/EXO (120 TPI). So far, I've been impressed with the Fast Traks for the terrain here in TX. The Fast Traks seem to roll a little faster and with the slightly larger volume, I can run a lower PSI (21/22 vs 23/24) without getting squirming. The Ikons do seem to have a little better cornering grip...at least, it's more consistent. I'm likely going to upgrade this set to a front Fast Trak Control 2.3 and a Renegade Control 2.3 in the rear. This should save me some rolling weight, offer enough sidewall protection and still be more supple than the EXO for the roots and rocks.


The Ikon's are draggier and grippier due to the rubber compound.
The Renegade has a little more braking grip than the FastTrak but still rolls really well.
The Ikon's are on my rigid single speed now and the Renegade/FastTrak combo are on the Anthem.

I run them both at 18f/20r psi for training and racing.
20f/22r on the Anthem if it's a really rocky trail or I feel more sidewall support might be needed.

Control is good, Grid is too stiff.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

500 miles in and the Aspen on my rear wheel is close to done. Center chevron knobs are about 1/2 the height they were when new and a couple have torn off. It rolls even faster than when new - but braking and climbing traction have become useless. With our trails transitioning from hero dirt to hardpack this time of year, these Aspens will need to be replaced.

The front Aspen on the front is going strong after about the same amount of time. Front end grip is really good though if they do brake loose, it's pretty unforgiving. 

Overall, these were very good tires. Better than the Bontragers and Race Kings I've had and nearly as good as the Renegade I am running now.


----------



## TommyL (Apr 18, 2012)

Got my new (to me) bike and I have a funny tire setup. Thought I'd crowd source some opinions on what direction I might go.

I'm in the NW Washington, and do adventure racing, which often involves 4+ hours on the bike with a mix of gravel and singletrack. I also love to hit the trails and just ride fast. Often wet, rooty, rocky, muddy. Lots of elevation.

My TB3 came with 29X2.3 Aggressor in the back and 2.9X2.3 DHR II in the front. Super fun going down but obviously not really the tires for me. I also was given an unused pair of 29X2.2 Ardent Races.

I'd love to just run the Ardent Races but it sounds like they don't do great in the wet? Maybe they'd be fine for the next couple of months but then that might be it. Thinking about selling them and going for something like a Barzo or Forecaster?

My old hardtail has 29x2.25 Ardents. It did fine but I descended super slow anyway due to geometry, crazy long stem, no dropper, etc. Now I'm descending fast with these enduro tires and I'm not sure how much is bike vs. tire.

Anyway, I'd be curious if folks had any suggestions based on my specific situation.


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

You might as well throw the ARs on and see how they do. It’s not like mounting them again will hurt the resale of already used tires. 

I am liking a 2.35 Ardent Race rear and 2.6 Rekon front for wet/gnarly XC riding, or just hammering our fast trail miles solo or with other XC racers.


----------



## TommyL (Apr 18, 2012)

Autoxfil said:


> You might as well throw the ARs on and see how they do. It's not like mounting them again will hurt the resale of already used tires.
> 
> I am liking a 2.35 Ardent Race rear and 2.6 Rekon front for wet/gnarly XC riding, or just hammering our fast trail miles solo or with other XC racers.


Sorry, I had a typo. I meant to say the ARs were _un_used. Fixed in my OP now.

Appreciate your two cents though.


----------



## OttaCee (Jul 24, 2013)

With the 2020 Race season pretty much blown up for the year, spent alot of time trying out tire combos. My standard was always Forekaster front and rear Oct-April, the AR/Aspen May-September. 

Rekon (2.25)/Rekon (2.25) - Master of nothing. For every positive about this setup (good rolling, very tough casing, great on loose/hard) it has its larger set of negative (not confident in wet, grip limited unless pushed, lots of wear after only 200-300 miles)

Rekon (2.25)/Ikon 3C (2.25) - The biggest upgrade from the above setup was the speed from the Ikon. Almost intoxicating how much faster the Ikon rolled. But once things got damp the Rekon up front needed to be replaced.

Ardent Race (2.35)/Ikon 3C (2.25) - Damn loved everything about this setup. AR bites better the Rekon. Set many PRs in this setup, doesnt feel fast but wow its moves and provide lots of confidence at high speed.

Ardent Race (2.35)/Aspen (2.25) - This setup pretty much tells me the AR is the right front tire. Aspen rolls a bit faster but has bit of less grip than the Ikon. Once things get wet, Aspen just doesnt cut it for me. For some reason the Aspen 2.25 measures wider than the Ikon 2.25 and the comfort is much better. Casing isnt perfect, have 2 tire cuts in the thread. Flip of the coin which of the last two I continue riding this year.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

OttaCee said:


> Ardent Race (2.35)/Aspen (2.25) - This setup pretty much tells me the AR is the right front tire. Aspen rolls a bit faster but has bit of less grip than the Ikon. Once things get wet, Aspen just doesnt cut it for me. For some reason the Aspen 2.25 measures wider than the Ikon 2.25 and the comfort is much better. Casing isnt perfect, have 2 tire cuts in the thread. Flip of the coin which of the last two I continue riding this year.


I've done the same thing. Your last stop is to try the recon race 2.25. it's intoxicatingly fast and the side knobs provide more saving grace if you really lean the bike in corners. The recon race 2.25 has high volume like the Aspen. It brakes better and is better for a hard charging rider.

Pick up a forekaster to play around with as well.

This year I tried:
Recon race 25 / Aspen 25 (oh so fast)
Forekaster 35 / Recon Race 25 (my pick!) I can be fast and still have all the fun I want.

I am still going to try out a recon race front and rear for certain races and times of the year.

In the past I have run and raced 
Ikon 35 / Aspen 25. (Fast and volume)
Forekaster/forekaster 35 ( HIGH grip, buzzy on pavement. Silly how well it does in wet races. Not the best for total mud fest.)
Forekaster/ Aspen (fast and grip, aspens don't brake for ****, they skip and

My rigid hardtail currently has:
Forekaster 35/ ikon 35 (volume is fantastic for hardtail) though it usually has an Aspen rear.

I found the AR to have poor transition knobs when I rode it and proceeded to clean and return it. I would much rather run an IKON 35 front, but its basically the same weight as a Forekaster which has far more grip. I've owned 20 of these tires and the were all 735-745g.

forekasters 2.35 have a low volume and achieve their width with their side knobs 
Ikon 2.35 are extremely high and are 2.35 at the casing alone. They have much larger knobs than the ikon 2.25.

My conditions are hardpack Clay and varying degrees of loose over hard rocks on rock. Lots of bare limestone. We go from slick and snotty to blown out dust bowl in a matter of days after each rain.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

FJSnoozer said:


> I've owned 20 of these tires and the were all 735-745g.


I just got a wider wheelset and bought 2 Ikons in 2.35". One is 700 the other 710g. I am running the Ikon in the front with a Rekon Race in 2.35" in the back (this one is 730-740g though). I really like this combo. It's fast, high volume and the weight is pretty competitive in my mind. I haven't pushed the Ikon to it's limit but am eager to get a hang of it this season. I still got a Forekaster from this winter in the bikecave somewhere and was wondering if the AR would be something in between those two tires (Forekaster and Ikon). Can you comment on that? The only downside I see with the Ardent Race is it's damn heavy...


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

HT-XC said:


> I just got a wider wheelset and bought 2 Ikons in 2.35". One is 700 the other 710g. I am running the Ikon in the front with a Rekon Race in 2.35" in the back (this one is 730-740g though). I really like this combo. It's fast, high volume and the weight is pretty competitive in my mind. I haven't pushed the Ikon to it's limit but am eager to get a hang of it this season. I still got a Forekaster from this winter in the bikecave somewhere and was wondering if the AR would be something in between those two tires (Forekaster and Ikon). Can you comment on that? The only downside I see with the Ardent Race is it's damn heavy...


I have a pair of Ikon and Ardent Race here, both 29x2.35 EXO. They are 773g for the Ikon, and 813g for the Ardent Race. I have a pair of 2.6" Rekons... 814g and 835g.

There's no clear speed/traction order with the Ikon/Ardent Race/Rekon/Forekaster because they all do different things well.

The Forekaster is the best of the bunch in mud, by a long shot. Probably loose powdery dirt, too. It's also the slowest rolling by a lot, but if you're racing in slick conditions, I still think it's worth putting on the front for sure. It's also a killer fall leaf tire.

The Rekon is the only one that is widely available in MaxxTerra. The Ikon has a couple big sizes, but that's it. The Rekon knobs are very fast - I'd say possibly faster than the AR, certainly not appreciably slower - and it's a much grippier compound. That makes it an awesome tire for me.

The Ardent race is a lot like an Ikon with sharper edges. It does a little better than the Ikon in slick stuff, but it's certainly not halfway between an Ikon and Forekaster - if the Ikon is a "1" in the wet and the FK is a "5", the AR is a "2" at best. I'd give the Rekon a 3. In hardpack and loose over hard, the Ardent Race bites very well. I've done some dry races with an AR front/Ikon rear, and it rolled well and had awesome grip.


----------



## Skarhead (Mar 15, 2018)

So I am in dilemma between Aspen and Rekon race, next month i have 110km marathon race and i want fast rear tyre, the course is not hard 40km singletrack, 35 fireroads and 30km tarmac, hardpack and loose overhard, couple of technical sections and puddles with mud, roots and rocks also. Which tyre is better in wet spots and mud?


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

Skarhead said:


> So I am in dilemma between Aspen and Rekon race, next month i have 110km marathon race and i want fast rear tyre, the course is not hard 40km singletrack, 35 fireroads and 30km tarmac, hardpack and loose overhard, couple of technical sections and puddles with mud, roots and rocks also. Which tyre is better in wet spots and mud?


If it's just a few spots, don't worry about it. I prefer the Aspens, but the tires perform very similar. You're fine either way.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

ucdengboss said:


> Measured 2.25 at 28psi. Don't know my rim width it is whatever came stock on a 2015 Camber Comp Carbon.
> 
> They have been on for 3 days with one ride yesterday for 1hr 20minutes.
> 
> ...


29x2.35 Ray, @ 19psi on a 26mm internal rim. This is after about 3 weeks. Measurement shown is casing width.


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

B_H said:


> Yep, they are roughly 40 to 60g more than my previous sets. And a bit undersized as well but that wasn't a surprise.


I just mounted a set of 29x2.35" Barzo/Mezcal, both XC-trail casing. They feel pretty stiff, more like a 60TPI EXO than a 120 TPI EXO

Barzo is 749g. Mezcal is 730. Both measured up at 2.23" on a 25mm rim. The casing is just a smidge wider than the knobs on both tires. I like big tires and I'm not impressed with the size/weight ratio, but I'll see how they ride.

I'm running the Barzo with a Tubilito S-Tubo spare tube for a test ride tomorrow, just to make sure it's not going to fail in five minutes if I ever need it. It's 46g, which is half the weight of the sealant I would normally run, which is nuts!


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

I got a nice long ride with lots of super techy wet singletrack, a little fast stuff, plenty of dirt road and a little pavement. It was a good test ride for the Barzo/Mezcal. They had plumped up to 2.3” overnight. 

There’s palpable drag on pavement. It’s not like a full trail tire, and I assume it’s mostly the sharp edges of the Barzo. There’s no ramping on the leading edges of the Barzo knobs, which is going to slow them down on pavement. 

Dirt roads felt pretty quick. Not nearly as free rolling as a Burt/Ralph combo, but tons of grip and they moved along well.

Wet roots and rocks were great. Not quite as good as a pair of 2.6 Rekons in MaxxTerra, but very close. The siped graphene feels much more like MaxxTerra than MaxxSpeed on the slick stuff. They slide when it’s really nasty, but in a fairly gummy, catchable way. The MaxxSpeed tires always feel like they shoot out instantly on me. 

The mud traction of the Mezcal is about what I expected - not great, but enough for just about any XC conditions. The Barzo was really good, kinda like a Forekaster. It’s better than a Rekon in actual mud for sure. Not unlike a Nobby Nic. 

Overall they seem like they will be an excellent winter/wet XC setup. I don’t know that I’d use them on a dry course with much pavement or smooth dirt. I have some Aspens on the slow boat that I may never get (it’s been well over a month from BikeInn), but I’m hoping they will be my dry-conditions tires. 

I really love the 2.25” LS Ralph (old version) front and 2.1” SS TB rear for lots of dirt/pavement. But I don’t trust the sidewalls for a rocky PA XC race. Maybe if the Aspens don’t show up I’ll do a Peyote/Mezcal combo? Or Peyote/Peyote? Mezcal/Mezcal?


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

I would enjoy hearing how the Peyote rides compared to the Barzo/Mezcal if anyone has experience?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

Autoxfil said:


> I got a nice long ride with lots of super techy wet singletrack, a little fast stuff, plenty of dirt road and a little pavement. It was a good test ride for the Barzo/Mezcal. They had plumped up to 2.3" overnight.
> 
> There's palpable drag on pavement. It's not like a full trail tire, and I assume it's mostly the sharp edges of the Barzo. There's no ramping on the leading edges of the Barzo knobs, which is going to slow them down on pavement.
> 
> ...


Thanks for sharing this. I'm not a racer but a high mileage (10,000+ annually) watt sensitive rider whose typical riding is well described by your "much pavement or smooth dirt" comment (much pavement doesn't mean road bike!). Than said have been a big fan of RaRa/RoRo tires too and currently trying a 2.35 Barzo/2.25 Peyote combo. So far my impressions pretty match yours in that the Vittoria's are a bit slower than the Schwalbe's but OK and much faster than the Ardent Race tires that came on my Pivot test mule. A couple of negatives on the Peyote are it measures out an OK 2.22in. at the carcass but only 2.12in. max tread width on what I'd consider an appropriate sized 25mm ID rim so lots of sidewall exposure and is wearing pretty fast (looks 50% gone after 400 mi.). Traction is better than I expected and as I said earlier speed is OK. I also have a Mezcal I'll be putting on when the Peyote's traction starts to fade so will report back on what I think.
Mole



> tgoods
> I would enjoy hearing how the Peyote rides compared to the Barzo/Mezcal if anyone has experience?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Was quite happy with the FastTrak/Renegade combo at a dry(ish) short track XC race on a CX track.
Same combo this weekend, but it's going to be MUCH wetter and MUCH slipperier 
I've also upgraded to a FiT/CTD damper in the Fox fork


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Guys, between the 2.6 Rekon 3c & the 2.35 Barzo, which is preferable for a front trail tire on a 31mm ID front wheel?


Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

TL;DNR: Barzo for softer conditions, Rekon for rockier and rootier trails. Both are very nice for what they are. But they are quite different. 

Detailed analysis: 
I have both. They are very different. Both are undersized and probably won’t quite measure up to spec on an i31. Depending on pressure and temp and the exact tire you get, about 2.3 for the Barzo or 2.5 for the Rekon. 

The Rekon is a stickier compound, but not by a ton. It’s obviously much higher volume and it’s a thinner, more supple casing. Mine weigh 815-830g. It’s an incredible tire for all-conditions rough-trail mileage covering at about 16psi, where it just soaks up trail chatter. And in wet conditions on hard surfaces like rocks and roots, the big size and siped lugs works very well. 

The Barzo has very sharp-edged lugs that also provide good traction in the wet, much more so than the Rekon in soft conditions. It feels slower on pavement and I bet the smaller size and thicker casing is slower all around, but maybe not. I’m going to do a roll-down test but I bet the Ikon/Rekon and Barzo/Mezcal combos are not going to be measurably different. 

So.... if you have any concern about actual soft wet mud, the Barzo is a clear winner. If you have a lot of rocks and roots and like that high volume ride, the Rekon is excellent, but the Barzo works better on hard stuff than the Rekon does in mud. 

That said, I could see the Barzo packing up more easily than the Rekon, but we don’t have much sticky mud around here. 

I have concerns that the Barzo is going to lose some of that grip as the super sharp edges wear off. The Rekon relies more on wide spacing and ramped knobs, which maintain effectiveness as it wears. This may be unfounded, but I’m mostly saving my Barzo for any wet races this summer. I’ll certainly throw them on as winter XC tires, where they will deal with slick over hard and frost heave better than the Rekon. 

For now the Rekon is my go-to everyday tire that I wouldn’t hesitate to use in a long race, especially a bumpy one, where I think the volume makes a marked difference in fatigue incurred.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

Autoxfil said:


> TL;DNR: Barzo for softer conditions, Rekon for rockier and rootier trails. Both are very nice for what they are. But they are quite different.
> 
> Detailed analysis:
> I have both. They are very different. Both are undersized and probably won't quite measure up to spec on an i31. Depending on pressure and temp and the exact tire you get, about 2.3 for the Barzo or 2.5 for the Rekon.
> ...


That was incredibly helpful. Rekon it is.

Thanks so much.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Freshly mounted tan sidewall Fast Trak measured 2.28 width at 35psi and weigh 650g. Will measure width again after letting it sit at 35psi for a day or two. 25ID rim.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

LCW said:


> Here are some Schwalbe weights. Got these within the last couple of weeks. Claimed weights are from the Schwalbe main (euro/German) site.
> 
> PS - i'm no racer lol, but I do love light tires!
> 
> ...


Just look back on this post...curious what combo you are running. I just thru on nobby nic 2.25 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 rear. Pretty decent volume...in fact near identical to 2.35 Barzo and much lighter


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Just look back on this post...curious what combo you are running. I just thru on nobby nic 2.25 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 rear. Pretty decent volume...in fact near identical to 2.35 Barzo and much lighter


Running the Ray 2.35 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 in the back. Didn't like the Ralph rear as much - felt slower than the Ron. May try another Ron (but in SpeedGrip aka blue stripe) in front.

Measured after a couple weeks. Width shown is casing. Mounted to Race Face Next SL rims 26mm internal width.

Racing Ray 29x2.35 @ 19 psi

2.29" / 58.2 mm










Rocket Ron 29x2.25 @ 23 psi

2.256" / 57.3 mm


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Thanks for reply. Hey is there much difference in Speed vs Speedgrip? May have to replace my rear Ron Speed with a Speedgrip. The Ron sure rolls nicely!!


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

I haven’t compared them back to back on the same end of the bike.

Speed (red) is a harder compound. More durable and faster rolling. Supposedly same grip as old pacestar but a bit faster rolling.

SpeedGrip (blue) is softer and grippier but still rolls well. Supposedly grip of old trailstar with speed of old pacestar.

This is according to Schwalbe. Not sure I truly believe their improvements over their old compounds although durability does seem better overall.

The new Racing Ray is meant as a front tire and comes only in SpeedGrip blue, and new Racing Ralph meant as a rear tire only comes in Speed red.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

LCW said:


> Running the Ray 2.35 front and Rocket Ron 2.25 in the back. Didn't like the Ralph rear as much - felt slower than the Ron. May try another Ron (but in SpeedGrip aka blue stripe) in front.
> 
> Measured after a couple weeks. Width shown is casing. Mounted to Race Face Next SL rims 26mm internal width.
> 
> ...


Interesting looking how different the side knobs are on these two tires. Contact angle and knob shape of the Ray look good for penetrating softer terrain but do they squirm on harder surfaces?
Mole


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

MRMOLE said:


> Interesting looking how different the side knobs are on these two tires. Contact angle and knob shape of the Ray look good for penetrating softer terrain but do they squirm on harder surfaces?
> Mole


I haven't tried a Ron on front but the Ray at first took some getting used as it provides really quick turn in. Pretty sure the side knobs are part of the reason as you observed.

I will be trying a Ron on the front sometime soon and will see which one I like better.

Haven't noticed any squirming or strange handling on hardpack with the Ray.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

Just dropped off by UPS... Ron 29x2.25 SS SpeedGrip.

Another Schwalbe below advertised! Can this be? Lol

Claimed 610g. This one is 597.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

tick_magnet said:


> Freshly mounted tan sidewall Fast Trak measured 2.28 width at 35psi and weigh 650g. Will measure width again after letting it sit at 35psi for a day or two. 25ID rim.


Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.


I am not sure. But a Specialized rider care agent told me the tan sidewall 2bliss ready Fast Trak is basically identical to last year's 2Bliss ready Fast Trak, just with different color sidewalls. So I suspect that the new Fast Trak Controls are a newer version that is replacing the standard 2bliss ready.

I do have some new Control Renegades and the compound does feel different. It's softer with almost a "wet" tacky feeling whereas the tan Fast Trak feels harder and dryer.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

tick_magnet said:


> I am not sure. But a Specialized rider care agent told me the tan sidewall 2bliss ready Fast Trak is basically identical to last year's 2Bliss ready Fast Trak, just with different color sidewalls. So I suspect that the new Fast Trak Controls are a newer version that is replacing the standard 2bliss ready.
> 
> I do have some new Control Renegades and the compound does feel different. It's softer with almost a "wet" tacky feeling whereas the tan Fast Trak feels harder and dryer.


I have the newer 2.3 Fast Trak Control front and 2.3 Renegade Control rear and love them for Summer/Early Fall riding in my area. After the leaves fall, I'll need to switch out the Renegade.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> I have the newer 2.3 Fast Trak Control front and 2.3 Renegade Control rear and love them for Summer/Early Fall riding in my area. After the leaves fall, I'll need to switch out the Renegade.


I really love the Renegades. Will probably run them front and rear when the Fast Trak wears out in about a year. They are big volume too. After a few weeks, my Renegades measure out to 2.33, which is pretty nice for a 657gram tire.


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
Mole


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Was that a rear tire? I can rarely find a rear tire that holds up well past 500-600 miles.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Our last batch of RoRo 2.25s were also just under 600 grams in snakeskin which is great! She also has these paired with a RaRay 2.35 front which was 700.

The 2.35 nobby nicks were a a mess of consistency.

5 tires weighing between 750 and 856 grams. 3 of them were right at 800g.

For comparison sake, our equal size Magic Marry on the enduro bike was only 896 and 905.

I'm staying on the more consistent Maxxis, forekaster/rekon race combo. But would love to test out the new 2.4 aspen when it's available.



MRMOLE said:


> View attachment 1348787
> 
> 
> This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
> Mole


That sure looks like a rear tire that has not been cornered hard and ridden predominantly on pavement.

Our RORos are basically destroyed after 700 miles. 10-25% of the ride knobs are ripped off and there is no siping left on the tire. Top compound of rubber on transition and side knobs are gone. This is under a 135 pound female.

Oldschool Racing Ralph's suck here so we don't use them, but they don't last any longer and are too flat prone. Also terrible after about 200 miles as a rear.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

tick_magnet said:


> Was that a rear tire? I can rarely find a rear tire that holds up well past 500-600 miles.


That was rear tire wear. Tire mileage is so rider specific but I typically get 2000+ miles from the Schwalbe's I mentioned or something like an Icon. I'm not sure how relevant this is anyway since Vittoria recently discontinued the Peyote. My first Vittoria tire in over a decade + a couple of other members showed some interest in this tire so figured it was worth posting this.
Mole


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

FJSnoozer said:


> That sure looks like a rear tire that has not been cornered hard and ridden predominantly on pavement.


COVID has killed a lot of my mtb. opportunities recently so sad but true.
Mole


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

MRMOLE said:


> This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
> Mole


2000 miles for a new tyre is insane while still having life left!

My schwalve tires also seem to last about 1000 miles or 1600kms at most. Damaged sidewalks or casing sometimes happen to me well within the tyre life which sucks big time.

Personally, such a poor life on tires is my biggest peeve about mtb. My road tires probably outlast my mtb tires 8:1.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

Hope this doesn't turn out to be bad for Vittoria lovers!

https://www.pinkbike.com/news/vittoria-sold-to-italian-equity-group-wise.html


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Had a chance to compare the Fast Trak, Renegade, and Aspen as front tires in similar conditions. The Fast Trak seems to have the most absolute bite. But when it goes, it goes. I was feeling so confident on my new Fast Traks that I started attacking corners more aggressively and found the limit the hardway on a damp tight 180. No warning, I was on the ground. 

The Renegade and Aspens have similar levels of grip but damn does that Renegade give you a lot of warning when it starts to slip. It slips a little, and then grabs so you know when to back it down. I haven't had many washouts on the Aspen but part of it might be that I'm not confident enough to take risks on them. I noticed that my turning radius was a little tighter on the Fast Traks due to the extra grip.

The Renegade is now on the rear of the bike and it is definitely better than the Aspens in every way as a rear. Cushier, doesn't break loose as much when braking, and more climbing traction. No noticeable difference in rolling resistance.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Thanks so much for the review. Were you testing the Control version of the Fast Trak and Renegade?


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> Thanks so much for the review. Were you testing the Control version of the Fast Trak and Renegade?


The Renegade was the control version. The Fast Trak is just the latest tan sidewall 2bliss ready.


----------



## dfishdesign (Apr 15, 2015)

Good feedback on the Renegade/Fastracks! I've blown through my second set of tires this season (Racing ray/ralph) and went to the LBS to pick up some Specialized tires.

I was thinking about running the Renegade rear and Fastrack front, shop guys where insistent that that was terrible combo,renegade had more grip they said. They said I should run Renegade f/r or Renegade front and fastrack rear...

I walked out of the shop with 2x 2.3 renegades in control casing, but I'll probably go pick up a Fast track to feel things out for myself.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Either FastTrak's front and rear or Renegade rear and FastTrak front.
Definitely Control's and not Grid's.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

The Fast Trak will have better cornering traction. The Renegade may possibly have better braking/climbing traction.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

dfishdesign said:


> Good feedback on the Renegade/Fastracks! I've blown through my second set of tires this season (Racing ray/ralph) and went to the LBS to pick up some Specialized tires.
> 
> I was thinking about running the Renegade rear and Fastrack front, shop guys where insistent that that was terrible combo,renegade had more grip they said. They said I should run Renegade f/r or Renegade front and fastrack rear...
> 
> I walked out of the shop with 2x 2.3 renegades in control casing, but I'll probably go pick up a Fast track to feel things out for myself.


I can see why the shop guys would say that because when the Renegades breaks loose, it's so controlled. But I would say for absolute grip, the Fast Trak still has more. There is this feeling that it just latches onto the trail, whereas the Renegades on the front will break loose a bit but give you plenty of warning.

On the rear, the Fast Traks have great straightline traction but when they do break loose, it's not as controlled as the Renegades. You can drift the Renegade all day long and feel completely in control. The Renegade is just so much better than the FT as a rear tire, I can't think of a scenario where I would run a Renegade front and a FT rear.

BTW the Specialized factory riders usually run FT front and RG rear on dry tracks. FT/FT on mixed terrain, and RG/RG on hardpack tracks. I've never seen them run RG front/ FT rear.


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

Maxxis Aspens are the real deal. 

I've been testing the classic Ikon/Arden Race combo, a Ralph/Burt setup for Wilmington Whiteface, Rekons in 2.4 and 2.6, and the Mezcal/Barzo combo I gave details on upthread. 

The Aspen are super fast - not as fast as the Thunder Burt on dirt roads, of course, but still really fast - and very, very nice to ride. Absolute grip level is not that high, but it's good, and they are the most predictable XC tire I've ever used. 

In the front, braking traction is excellent. Cornering is a smooth transition with no dead spot, and while ultimate grip in good conditions (tacky dirt or loam) isn't as good as an Ikon, it's at least as predictable, I think moreso. Once things get slick and wet, it gives up the ghost sooner, but retains that predictability. That is exactly what I'm looking for in a marathon XC tire - forgiveness and fast rolling. 

In real mud, or horrible greasy, slimy roots and rocks, the Vittoria compound and siping (or a MaxxTerra Rekon) absolutely smokes the Aspen. Duh. It's a dry-conditions tire, but won't kill you if there's a little mud or slickness here and there. If it's raining during a race, or lots of rain the night before, these are coming off and I'm putting on the Barzo/Mezcal. 

As a rear, braking is great, cornering is wonderful, but climbing traction is quite limited. It's fine for what it is - again, quite a bit better than a Burt - but in loose conditions an Ikon or Ardent Race is better. I'm very happy to make this trade for the speed. 

If climbing traction is really really important to you, perhaps a Rekon Race in the rear is better - I haven't run one to try, but it seems likely. 

The 2.4 Aspen should be really, really good... I'll at least get one for the front.


----------



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

I’m back on my trusty 2.35 Ikons front and rear in the North East on my SS hardtail. I didn’t realize how worn my old tires were. The Ikons were like glue in the corners in comparison.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

Really appreciating these detailed comparisons and feedback :thumbsup:

Wish I had something to contribute but with no events on the horizon, the XC bike hasn't left the garage.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

When are we going to be able to buy Maxxis Aspen 2.4s or Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.35s? The first to market with wide and light semi-slicks gets my business.

Nothing against Vittoria, other than I'm bitter at them for bringing back the skinwall.


----------



## Autoxfil (Sep 18, 2019)

chomxxo said:


> When are we going to be able to buy Maxxis Aspen 2.4s or Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.35s? The first to market with wide and light semi-slicks gets my business.
> 
> Nothing against Vittoria, other than I'm bitter at them for bringing back the skinwall.


Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!

Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Autoxfil said:


> Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!
> 
> Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.


I've not ridden an Aspen before, but I've taken 2.1 and 2.25 Thunder Burts through many races, including 100-milers. I know they're the fastest real tire on the market.

I've also raced the rare (almost forgot it existed) non-Snakeskin, sub-700 gram Racing Ralph 29x2.4 circa 2010.

I'm a Schwalbe fan but they need to jump on this. I'm not used to seeing Maxxis be more progressive, and possibly lighter.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

I recently picked up a Blur Trail and I'm running the 2.25 Rekon/Aspen setup on it. I'm really amazed at how well the rear grips. I'd like to try the 2.4 setup once they're available.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

Autoxfil said:


> Vittoria 2.35 actually measure 2.25 anyway. ETRTO is 57mm, not 60mm. Lies!
> 
> Have you ridden both the Aspen and Thunder Burt? They are massively different. The Aspen grips like a Ralph, not a Burt. And the Burt is appreciably faster on roads.


Interesting because my 2.35" Barzo / mezcal measured right at 2.35" on a 25mm ird wheel.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

Can anyone who has used the Mezcal in the XC Race casing report on the ride quality/suppleness of this tire compared to other popular XC tires like the Aspen, Fast Trak, Race King, etc?


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

csteven71 said:


> I recently picked up a Blur Trail and I'm running the 2.25 Rekon/Aspen setup on it. I'm really amazed at how well the rear grips. I'd like to try the 2.4 setup once they're available.


Im always amazed at how well my Aspen grips considering how minimal the tread looks.


----------



## kevbikemad (Jan 2, 2006)

hesitationpoint said:


> Can anyone who has used the Mezcal in the XC Race casing report on the ride quality/suppleness of this tire compared to other popular XC tires like the Aspen, Fast Trak, Race King, etc?


I used Mezcals most of last season. This year on Aspens. Many years ago on Race Kings. Less supple than the Aspens and RK - but a good fast high volume race tire.

Similar to Aspens, just not quite as fast IMO. Probably a little more climbing traction though.


----------



## Kirsa (Jul 5, 2011)

For fast races: non-exo Aspen TR 2.25" front and 2.3" s-works renegade back - 590/560gr
When it's wet: 2.3" conti crossking racesport front and back - 675gr
For rocky/technical rides: 2,35" schwalbe snakeskin racing ray/racing ralph - ~700gr

I think my first combo is as fast as race kings or thunder burts but has much more grip.
Aspen is very good front tire, fast with predictable handling and renegades is good rear tire, climbing traction is good.

Can't use Aspen in the rear - non-exo Maxxis have very thin sidewalls like 2 times thinner than renegade or conti RK racesport. And I don't like EXO - not secure enough but weighs more than conti protection or schwalbe snakeskin.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Kirsa said:


> For fast races: non-exo Aspen TR 2.25" front and 2.3" s-works renegade back - 590/560gr
> When it's wet: 2.3" conti crossking racesport front and back - 675gr
> For rocky/technical rides: 2,35" schwalbe snakeskin racing ray/racing ralph - ~700gr
> 
> ...


Ew. Hard to untangle all that, but if you're looking for speed and grip, I doubt any of those concoctions would beat a Rocket Ron front/Thunder Burt rear, on the drum or a TT lap (I've tested them myself).

You're actually going to want a narrower tire with more knobs for wet races (Rocket Ron 2.1 front/rear is the king of this). Besides more clearance for mud, it digs in better.

You'd want a wider tire for rougher courses.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

kevbikemad said:


> I used Mezcals most of last season. This year on Aspens. Many years ago on Race Kings. Less supple than the Aspens and RK - but a good fast high volume race tire.
> 
> Similar to Aspens, just not quite as fast IMO. Probably a little more climbing traction though.


Thanks. And were your Mezcals the reinforced TNT casing or the lighter XC race casing?


----------



## Raikzz (Jul 19, 2014)

I'm suprised by people saying EXO Aspens are not secure enough, in my experience they seem pretty much most secure tyre out there, especially when comparing to Specialized or Schwalbe tyres .

Switched from 2.25 exo aspens to 2.25 thunder burts F and R, was pretty suprised how much grip they have, even rode a XCO nats and one muddy XCM race with them, you could totally feel how they rolled fast! But then on the next XCM race happened what i scared about them from the beginning, had a rear flat on a pretty random spot, switched back to aspens now, can't really beat them, great grip, fast enough, nice volume and very secure casing.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Three rides on a new G2.0 Mezcal on the rear and I'm tearing side knobs off. No skidding or anything, just normal aggressive riding. 

I saw some mention of the Terreno but no opinions. Is it as sketchy as I could expect just by looking at it? How does it compare to a Thunder Burt or Race King?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Tomorrow's short track XC will be on the Anthem with 2.3" FastTrak front and Renegade rear.
Should be good


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> Is the tan sidewall Fast Trak the same tire as the Fast Trak Control? On their website, they list the tan sidewall as 640 grams and the Fast Trak Control as 650 grams.


Ok so after spending some time on the tan sidewall Fast Traks and reading some reviews of the new Epics, I have a sneaking suspicion that they are not the same. I just got a big cut on my tan sidewall FTs and I wasn't even riding anything particularly chunky. My Control Renegades are holding up just fine with no sign of cuts or even worn tread.

And I have been reading reviews of the new Epic and Epic evos. It seems some models come with the tan sidewall Fast Traks and others with the Control Fast Traks. It's interesting that the reviewers complained about tire punctures and needing burlier tires on the bikes with the tan sidewall tires. One reviewer also mention that the controls were like 100 grams heavier. https://flowmountainbike.com/tests/2021-specialized-epic-evo-s-works-review/

https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/b...ntain-bikes/2021-specialized-epic-pro-review/

I can't know for sure, but I suspect the new controls have been updated with more sidewall protection and the tan sidewall tires are lighter but weaker.


----------



## GSPChilliwack (Jul 30, 2013)

spsoon said:


> Just got some 29x2.6 XR2's. Came in at 774 and 735g. I think these are gonna be a great velcro tire


Any feedback on the XR2's? I'm debating the trade-off between weight and comfort between a 2.3/4 and 2.6 for the rear. My hardtail is stiff AF in back.


----------



## spsoon (Jul 28, 2008)

GSPChilliwack said:


> Any feedback on the XR2's? I'm debating the trade-off between weight and comfort between a 2.3/4 and 2.6 for the rear. My hardtail is stiff AF in back.


I will try to mount them up this week. Just haven't had any use for the XC bike this year.


----------



## le_pedal (Jul 10, 2018)

Fast Trak 2.3 or Aspen 2.25 for XC racing in the north east?


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

At this point, I'd probably recommend the Aspen because the new Control Fast Traks weigh over 700g and the tan sidewall Fast Trak is light but not durable. I still like the new Renegade Control though especially on the rear.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

tick_magnet said:


> At this point, I'd probably recommend the Aspen because the new Control Fast Traks weigh over 700g and the tan sidewall Fast Trak is light but not durable. I still like the new Renegade Control though especially on the rear.


I got 695g for a 2.3" FastTrak Control.
620g for the Renegade.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

NordieBoy said:


> I got 695g for a 2.3" FastTrak Control.
> 620g for the Renegade.


Those are pretty good weights for the Controls. My Renegade Control was around 650g. And the Fast Trak control weights being reported by some reviewers can hover above 730g.


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

Anyone have actual widths for the 2.25" racing ralph/ray combo?

I'm running the tan version of the 2.35" rekon race front and rear. Love the volume and performance but they are incredibly heavy with one just over 800g and one just under. They are about 75g heavier than the black version of the same tire. It's like the tan layer is added on to the black tire so not a true skinwall. 

Tried the fast traks but they profile of the tread is so rounded that it is almost impossible to engage the side knobs (27mm internal rim). Felt like I was cornering on the transition knobs at near full lean. On the plus side they are wider than stated on my rims and the stated weight it accurate. 

I am looking for a 2.3-2.4" fast rolling tire. Prefer skinwall and as close to 700g if possible. Lighter would be even better. Terrain is rolling here so braking traction is almost a non factor. Only really care about the corners. Any suggestions would be appreciated!


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Have you tried Aspens? Mine weighed around 650g with the exo sidewalls. More squared than the Fast Traks.


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

I've tried the 2.25, like it as a rear for sure and have run it front and rear for short track. I like a little more cornering bite in the front and I need me some tan walls to get the look I'm going for. I ride faster if I know I look cool


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

rusty904 said:


> I ride faster if I know I look cool


lol, well then I guess the Aspen is out. Maybe the Mezcal in XC Race casing? Tan sidewall and about 700g. I have not used it myself so maybe someone else can chime in about their performance.

OT: Just go another Renegade Control and it weighed 658g. Remarkably consistent with my other one. Must have come from the same batch. Nordieboy's are consistently lighter than mine.


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

tick_magnet said:


> lol, well then I guess the Aspen is out. Maybe the Mezcal in XC Race casing? Tan sidewall and about 700g. I have not used it myself so maybe someone else can chime in about their performance.
> 
> OT: Just go another Renegade Control and it weighed 658g. Remarkably consistent with my other one. Must have come from the same batch. Nordieboy's are consistently lighter than mine.


I will probably get the mezcal in 29x2.35 once they become available. I reached out to vittoria to see when that might be. In the meantime I'll keep on those heavy ass rekons. Love em aside from the weight.


----------



## AFCFORME (Dec 12, 2017)

Renegade Control similar to the Ikon?


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

The new schwalbe thunder burt, racing Ralph and racing ray will come in the skin wall and below the 700gr


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## aerius (Nov 20, 2010)

TylerVernon said:


> I saw some mention of the Terreno but no opinions. Is it as sketchy as I could expect just by looking at it? How does it compare to a Thunder Burt or Race King?


I've ridden the cyclocross version and thought it was sketchy as hell as soon as I left pavement or super hard hardpack. I'd guess that the mountain bike sizes would be similar to a Thunder Burt, but possibly even faster and more sketchy.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

AFCFORME said:


> Renegade Control similar to the Ikon?


Nope.
Renegade is faster rolling and lighter.
Ikon has grippier rubber and thicker sidewalls.

The rockier, rootier, damper it gets the more I'd lean toward the Ikon.

The Renegade needs something to dig into, whereas the Ikon can use the mechanical grip from the rubber compound.

I've got Ikons front and rear on the Single Speed and Renegade rear, FastTrak front on the XC full suss.

I'd run an Ikon on the front, but not a Renegade.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I actually don't mind the Renegade as a front tire. While it doesn't have the absolute level of grip as a Fast Trak, it's more predictable at the limit, at least on hardpack and loose over hard. I've gone down without warning three or four times on Fast Traks. They are really grippy until they are not.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Those of you who have used both the Ikon and the Mezcal, which do you prefer? Pros and cons of each?


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

JasperGr said:


> The new schwalbe thunder burt, racing Ralph and racing ray will come in the skin wall and below the 700gr
> 
> Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


Very nice! just found the new 29x2.35 super race versions on the Schwalbe site.

https://schwalbe.com/en/mtb-reader/thunder-burt

Ugh, more nasty skinwalls. I can get through this...


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

chomxxo said:


> Very nice! just found the new 29x2.35 super race versions on the Schwalbe site.
> 
> https://schwalbe.com/en/mtb-reader/thunder-burt
> 
> Ugh, more nasty skinwalls. I can get through this...


Wonder when/where you can get em? I think the ray front/burt rear might be my next combo.


----------



## MattMay (Dec 24, 2013)

tick_magnet said:


> I actually don't mind the Renegade as a front tire. While it doesn't have the absolute level of grip as a Fast Trak, it's more predictable at the limit, at least on hardpack and loose over hard. I've gone down without warning three or four times on Fast Traks. They are really grippy until they are not.


My experience as well. I actually like them better for current Southern Cal conditions than Ralph/Ray combo. Everything is so dry and hard here these days.


----------



## pk1 (Mar 25, 2010)

rusty904 said:


> Wonder when/where you can get em? I think the ray front/burt rear might be my next combo.


i think i saw somewhere they would be available in september. german sites tend to get new schwalbes first however they are struggling with shipping at the moment

i'm pretty sure the super race are exactly the same as the old lite skin anyway and super ground is exactly the same as snakeskin - just new names to clarify casing purpose


----------



## EdSawyer (Mar 20, 2020)

It’s disappointing to see how much heavier the new Schwalbe tires are. Will have to stock up in the current versions I think.


----------



## brentos (May 19, 2006)

chomxxo said:


> Very nice! just found the new 29x2.35 super race versions on the Schwalbe site.
> 
> https://schwalbe.com/en/mtb-reader/thunder-burt
> 
> Ugh, more nasty skinwalls. I can get through this...


This is pretty exciting, Ralph, Ray, & Burt all in 2.35" Super Race. And now the Ray is also available in the fastest compound. Not a fan of the tan walls though, I don't like the look on many bikes, and if you want the heavier casing in the rear, you'd have on tan wall and one black tire.

Also I do not think Super Race is the same as their old LiteSkin/TL-R casing as someone had suggested. It has a puncture protection belt under the tread and is 67 tpi vs the old 127 tpi. Also the Super Ground tires are about 50g heavier than their SnakeSkin counterparts.

With a lighter 2.35 tire now available, maybe I can stop hording all the NOS 2.35 LiteSkin Racing Ralphs that aired up to 2.4" and came in at 600 g...but with a compound that is unfortunately aging to a hockey puck consistency. It's a bummer too that there is no Super Race or LiteSkin Jumbo Jims any more...so it's time to start hording those for fat bike race season.


----------



## GSPChilliwack (Jul 30, 2013)

Any word on availability of the WT XC (Aspen/Rekon Race) tires from Maxxis? I emailed them awhile back, but never did get a response other than an acknowledgement that they’d received my email.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

MRMOLE said:


> View attachment 1348787
> 
> 
> This is what my Vittoria Peyote looks like compared to a new one after about 450 miles. Decent performance but I still prefer RaRa's and RoRo's that don't show similar wear till about the 2000 mile point. I hope the Mezcal I'm replacing it with lasts a bit longer but if not its back to Schwalbe's.
> Mole


Peyote is one of my Favorite Tires , It discontinued for 2021


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

chomxxo said:


> When are we going to be able to buy Maxxis Aspen 2.4s or Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.35s? The first to market with wide and light semi-slicks gets my business.
> 
> Nothing against Vittoria, other than I'm bitter at them for bringing back the skinwall.


Schwalbe NA late November for Super Race RaRay, RaRa 2.35 TB 2.35
per Schwalbe NA Ops Manager

Sooner from r2-bike.com


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

rusty904 said:


> I will probably get the mezcal in 29x2.35 once they become available. I reached out to vittoria to see when that might be. In the meantime I'll keep on those heavy ass rekons. Love em aside from the weight.


 From Vittoria NA

08/17/20 - eta for Terreno 29 x 2.25 XCR

Still no eta on the Mezcal 29 x 2.35 XCR

Inside Sales/Service Representative
Vittoria Industries North America


----------



## MRMOLE (May 31, 2011)

Spin Cycle said:


> Peyote is one of my Favorite Tires , It discontinued for 2021


No complaints about the performance of the Peyote, it just didn't last very long. I've replaced it with the same sized (2.25) Mezcal (which is actually .1 wider tread width) and am hoping for a longer service life. Also hoping for some cooler weather so it's safe to mtb ride. Its still been at or near 100° @ midnight for the last couple of months and too hot for anything other than flat and slow for me.
Mole


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.

Disappointed regarding the weights:
Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.

The casing is different than the old snake-skin. You can definitely feel it from the inside of the casing. Volume is huge compared to the old 2.25 snake-skin.

Mounted them with Pepis R-Evolution inserts so I'm not able to give any reviews how the tyres will work as "normal" tubeless.

Just wanted to let you know about the weights.


----------



## EdSawyer (Mar 20, 2020)

The weights are disappointing. Time to hoard the older versions that were actually light weight. IMNSHO, schwalbe's best selling point was the fact that they had many lightweight offerings. Now, not so much... :-/


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

aland33 said:


> Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.
> 
> Disappointed regarding the weights:
> Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.
> ...


With those downhill tires (I'm referring to the weight) do you REALLY NEED the inserts? Don't drink the cool-aid just because all the cool kids are doing it. I can see using inserts on light weight tires, 500 to 600 grams. But not with heavy tires like that if you're using them to ride XC.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

Stonerider said:


> With those downhill tires (I'm referring to the weight) do you REALLY NEED the inserts? Don't drink the cool-aid just because all the cool kids are doing it. I can see using inserts on light weight tires, 500 to 600 grams. But not with heavy tires like that if you're using them to ride XC.


Probably not necessary but will be fun and interesting to test. I'm doing xcm (endurance) in rocky terrain so no 1hr full gas for me.
Ran 750g Barzos last season so the weight increase is not massive.

Anyway, I was surprised of the weight. Hoping that they will perform good anyway. If not, then I replace them with Aspens 2.4 when available.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

aland33 said:


> Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.
> 
> Disappointed regarding the weights:
> Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.
> ...


Good lord. Claimed weights are 750g each, with the Super Race casing ~45g lighter.

Schwalbe used to be known for having the lightest tires at the expense of durability. I thought they corrected that with Addix, and in my experience they did.

Not sure who asked for the Super-casings, or those godawful skinwalls.


----------



## tgoods (Jan 22, 2018)

tick_magnet said:


> Those of you who have used both the Ikon and the Mezcal, which do you prefer? Pros and cons of each?


To me very similar performance as a rear tire! Ikon possibly grips on loose climbs better. As a front tire I give the nod to Mezcal because it seemed to be more planted in the loose stuff. I personally think the Mezcal has a tougher casing that is more resistance to punctures. Also note the Ikon 2.35" is quite a bit different from the 2.2". Much more volume and bigger lugs.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## brentos (May 19, 2006)

To me the new Conti Race King Protection is promising. Maybe rin with an insert to lower pressure and up the grip.

If it was offered in a true 2.4, I’d be all over it.

Aspen looks promising, but every Maxxis tire I’ve ever run feels draggy to me.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

brentos said:


> To me the new Conti Race King Protection is promising. Maybe rin with an insert to lower pressure and up the grip.
> 
> If it was offered in a true 2.4, I'd be all over it.
> 
> Aspen looks promising, but every Maxxis tire I've ever run feels draggy to me.


I hear you on the size of the Race King. I'd be all over that if it were offered in a 2.3 or 2.4. A 2.2 is smaller than I want to run on the rear of my hardtail.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

tgoods said:


> To me very similar performance as a rear tire! Ikon possibly grips on loose climbs better. As a front tire I give the nod to Mezcal because it seemed to be more planted in the loose stuff. I personally think the Mezcal has a tougher casing that is more resistance to punctures. Also note the Ikon 2.35" is quite a bit different from the 2.2". Much more volume and bigger lugs.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Thanks, good info! I am leaning Mezcal because I am interested in a front tire.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Le Duke said:


> I'd be interested in how much those tires grow. Initial measurements are useful but plenty of tires grow a good tenth of an inch, or more after pumping up to higher than riding pressure and leaving them in the sun for a couple of days.
> 
> Personally, it looks like I'll be switching back to Vittoria again. I've been riding Ikon 2.35/Rekon 2.25 front and rear, and, well, I just can't make them work for me and my local "soil", aka decomposed granite. Had two losses of the front end on relatively benign corners lately that left me with some pretty nasty road rash and some bibs in questionable condition. The tires aren't in that bad of shape and I was running pressures that should have yielded good grip.


My 2.3 Renegades on the rear now measure 2.33 inches after about 200 miles. 25ID rims and 24.5psi


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

aland33 said:


> Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.
> 
> Disappointed regarding the weights:
> Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.
> ...


Well, I did some testing today in very technical but familiar terrain. 
To be honest, I can't say that I noticed the heavy weight of the tyres. What I did notice how smooth and fast they rolled over the roots and rocks and the grip was unbelievable (in the rear).
Did total of 18 miles, no long climbs just steep and technical. According to Strava some PR:s and most in the top 3 from previous runs.

Funny also that the power output was not higher when comparing to same segment times. HR was a little lower. Of course this depends on form and outside temp.

I had 16 psi in front and 17 in rear, this with Pepis R-Evolution S/M inserts.

I'm not saying that the weight does not matter since it does. But in very demanding terrain and shorter distances without long climbs it is not that important compared to grip and plushness.


----------



## rusty904 (Apr 25, 2008)

euro-trash said:


> 2.4 XR3 on a 30mm id.
> After 2 days it measures 2.41 at 18 psi.
> The sideknobs appear to protect the sidewalls.
> 
> ...


That's the first of these I've seen true to size. Mine measured at 2.24 on a 27mm ID rim at 40 PSI after three days of stretching. Wasn't super pleased with it as most other Bonty's I've tried have been nearly true to size on the same rims.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I'm currently running a 2.3 Fast Trak Control front but looking ahead I'd like something with a little more grip for fall/winter riding for east coast single track when the leaves fall. I want a tire not over 800 grams and that still rolls ok...the new Nobby Nic is heavier than I want. I'm currently considering Maxxis Forekaster 2.35, Specialized Ground Control 2.3, Vittoria Barzo 2.35, or Continental Cross King 2.3. Any thoughts or suggestions on the tires I've mentioned or other suggestions for a grippier front XC tire for fall/winter?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I like the 2.3 Ground Control Control front and rear.
Rolls well and great climbing traction. They roll better than new Ikons, but not as well as worn Ikons.

I'd lean toward the Cross King just for some smaller, sharper knobs that'll penetrate leaves better.


----------



## LCW (May 5, 2008)

aland33 said:


> Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.
> 
> Disappointed regarding the weights:
> Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.
> ...


Whoa!!! I had Ray and Ralph 2.35 Snakeskin at 655 & 710 respectively. Major let down with these new casings.

Going to stick to 2.25 Ron Snakeskin. Picked up some extras from Jenson for $50 each while I still can.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

LCW said:


> Whoa!!! I had Ray and Ralph 2.35 Snakeskin at 655 & 710 respectively. Major let down with these new casings.
> 
> Going to stick to 2.25 Ron Snakeskin. Picked up some extras from Jenson for $50 each while I still can.


The previous generations really suffered from punctures. Those kind of weights is about what I expect from a durable tire in that size.

For me, at least, sufficient durability is the most important characteristic of a race tire.


----------



## pk1 (Mar 25, 2010)

LMN said:


> The previous generations really suffered from punctures. Those kind of weights is about what I expect from a durable tire in that size.
> 
> For me, at least, sufficient durability is the most important characteristic of a race tire.


i've had good luck with snakeskin schwalbes. the liteskin were very fragile (but fast if you can keep them inflated).

it seems like now we have super race and super ground which are each heavier than their respective liteskin and snakeskin predecessors. super race certainly sounds like its more protected than liteskin, but probably well short of snakeskin, despite being possibly similar weight to snakeskin. i'm not clear that there is any reason to expect super ground to be more protected than snakeskin - its still got snakeskin as its puncture protection layer but given that it is significantly heavier you would assume there is some additional protection from that extra material.

the rubber compunds remain the same so grip and basic weight/protection shouldn't be different unless there is simply more rubber

i'm happy that i just bought some snakeskins as they are a sweet spot ofr me of weight/rolling/protection. i might order some more while i can


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I'd love to try some faster Maxxis stuff, but here, all we get are Ikons and the complete Enduro and DH range...


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Anyone try Vittoria Terrano 2.25s? They'd seem to compare to Thunder Burts.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

NordieBoy said:


> I'd love to try some faster Maxxis stuff, but here, all we get are Ikons and the complete Enduro and DH range...


I have Aspens on one wheelset and Renegades on the other so I often ride them back to back numerous times throughout the year. The Aspens are great tires when trail conditions are close to hero dirt or a little wet. But on blown-out, slippery hardpack, the Renegades are way more confidence inspiring. On the Aspens, I adjust my riding style to be more cautious. On the Renegades, I pretty much ride the same way as I do in other trail conditions.


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

durkind said:


> Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?


A friend of mine has a 2.4 mounted on a 23 internal rim and it looks smaller than my 2.3 Fast Trak mounted on a 25 internal rim. So I would say it is not a true 2.4.


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

aerius said:


> I've ridden the cyclocross version and thought it was sketchy as hell as soon as I left pavement or super hard hardpack. I'd guess that the mountain bike sizes would be similar to a Thunder Burt, but possibly even faster and more sketchy.


lol, thanks!


----------



## TylerVernon (Nov 10, 2019)

Spin Cycle said:


> Peyote is one of my Favorite Tires , It discontinued for 2021


Seems like a victim of bad marketing. I had no idea the knobs were that aggressive. One thing I like about Maxxis is that they keep producing the same tire for decades so you can try them all. Heck, you can still get 2.1 Ignitors.


----------



## Jurgiuks (Apr 5, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> The sks air checker gets clogged QUICKLY and is a sporadic Piece of crap anyway with 1.5 psi variance when checked back-to-back against itself.


You mean old generation air checker or a gen 2?


----------



## 2_whl_boost (Jun 28, 2006)

durkind said:


> Kenda Booster 2.4....anyone try? As mentioned it looks like Rekon Race. Weight looks good but is it a true 2.4?


I was looking into the Kenda's as I thought their race version at 2.4 looked great. Here's the thing, it measured out small and was 7xx grams. I sent them back.


----------



## Skarhead (Mar 15, 2018)

Guys, whats the weight of the Ardent race 29. 2,35 3c/exo/tr?


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Skarhead said:


> Guys, whats the weight of the Ardent race 29. 2,35 3c/exo/tr?


According to my spreadsheet I got 720g for a 2.2".
I'd swear it was a 2.3 though.


----------



## Jefflinde (Mar 26, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> Anyone try Vittoria Terrano 2.25s? They'd seem to compare to Thunder Burts.


I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.


----------



## Skarhead (Mar 15, 2018)

Scott-Sram using new maxxis tire


----------



## litany (Nov 25, 2009)

Looks like a maxxis x-king but more open. I’d be worried about punctures with the tread being that open.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Looks like they've removed half the knobs from an Ardent Race?


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Jefflinde said:


> I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.


Cool, good to hear. I know of lot of guys probably ride the same tire to race and normal trail riding. For race day only, semi-slicks are the way to go IMHO.

Just got a pair of the Vittoria Terreno 2.25s and will give them a shot at next weekend's race. They appear to have almost zero middle tread, but the side knobs are bigger than Thunder Burts. That sounds pretty good to me, but I've liked Thunder Burts very much.

The first semi-slick I ever saw was the WTB Vulpine.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

litany said:


> Looks like a maxxis x-king but more open. I'd be worried about punctures with the tread being that open.


Sure looks like it is a mud racing tire.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> Sure looks like it is a mud racing tire.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Reminds me of a Barzo.


----------



## 2_whl_boost (Jun 28, 2006)

The 29x2.4 Maxxis Aspen and Recon Races are out there for purchasing. I just put in an order on biketiresdirect for the Maxxis Aspens!!!


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

2_whl_boost said:


> The 29x2.4 Maxxis Aspen and Recon Races are out there for purchasing. I just put in an order on biketiresdirect for the Maxxis Aspens!!!


I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Stonerider said:


> I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.


I think it would be worth giving it a try. I know will be putting them on some 25mm rims when I get them.


----------



## Jefflinde (Mar 26, 2015)

Stonerider said:


> I'd love to try those but I'll need some 30i wheels first. I'm afraid my 25i wheels are a little too narrow.


Don't believe everything you read in marketing material designed to get you to buy new stuff. i25 rims are easily capable of running a 2.4 tire.


----------



## Jefflinde (Mar 26, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> Cool, good to hear. I know of lot of guys probably ride the same tire to race and normal trail riding. For race day only, semi-slicks are the way to go IMHO.
> 
> Just got a pair of the Vittoria Terreno 2.25s and will give them a shot at next weekend's race. They appear to have almost zero middle tread, but the side knobs are bigger than Thunder Burts. That sounds pretty good to me, but I've liked Thunder Burts very much.
> 
> The first semi-slick I ever saw was the WTB Vulpine.


those fish scales provide a shockingly high amount of grip on hard pack dirt. i was expecting it to be a little sketchy but braking traction was very good.


----------



## GSPChilliwack (Jul 30, 2013)

Jefflinde said:


> Don't believe everything you read in marketing material designed to get you to buy new stuff. i25 rims are easily capable of running a 2.4 tire.


From Maxxis's own site, the 25's are still within range:

Aspen and Rekon Race tread patterns*29x2.40WT size*
• 30mm internal rim width recommended
• 25-30mm internal rim width acceptable


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Jefflinde said:


> those fish scales provide a shockingly high amount of grip on hard pack dirt. i was expecting it to be a little sketchy but braking traction was very good.


I just put a set of Terreno Zeros on my gravel bike and I have been pretty surprised at how loud they are when I lean them onto the fish scales. I have yet to push them through any turns but I am really looking forward to trying them out on my sandy twisty flat course when it opens back up. They're also very sticky on just the slick portion. I took it down a ~20% grade the other day braking hard and it was tough to get it to slide.

I'm looking forward to hearing how these work out for you.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

ohmygato said:


> I just put a set of Terreno Zeros on my gravel bike and I have been pretty surprised at how loud they are when I lean them onto the fish scales. I have yet to push them through any turns but I am really looking forward to trying them out on my sandy twisty flat course when it opens back up. They're also very sticky on just the slick portion. I took it down a ~20% grade the other day braking hard and it was tough to get it to slide.
> 
> I'm looking forward to hearing how these work out for you.


I've got 35c Terreno Zeros on my Boone, 38mm wide on 25mm ID rims, and I'll agree they're shockinlgy grippy. Took em on some "green" singletrack flow trails in Bentonville yesterday and no issues. I've got some Terreno Dry in 35c for the CX bike if these are too sketch and a pair of 29x2.25 Terreno skinwalls for the XC bike if I can find a short track race next season to break em out for...They're as good or better than Thunder Burts IMO.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Jefflinde said:


> I have these now. they actually hook up very well on hard pack and the side knobs held much better than I thought they would. these tires definitely have their limit but if the trails are the right surface then they are great. having run thunder burts too, i would say the burts are a bit more versatile.












The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didn't do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know they're grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didn't lost traction once. I'd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

Just mounted Aspen 2.4WT on Duke 6ters wheels. They came in at 744g and 739g.
Just by pressing on them I will start with around 14.5 - 16psi at front on 29id rim.

I did put a R-Evolution insert in the back since the rim is only 26id at rear but let's see if I can take it out after I have found correct pressures.

And yes, these tyres fit in the Sworks Epic EVO (-21) frame.


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Do you have some photos?


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)




----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

That is a bad ass bike with some nice tires! Do you have some shots of the clearance?


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Where are you guys buying tires for decent prices shipping to USA? I am probably going to be buying a bunch of Maxxis tires and possibly some Vittorias. Bikeinn seems to have good prices on Vittorias but not so much on Maxxis.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

JasperGr said:


> That is a bad ass bike with some nice tires! Do you have some shots of the clearance?
> 
> Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


Thanks, it's a great bike!

I can take some pictures but I did measure the clearance and the tightest spot is on the right chainstay where the rubber guard goes around the chainstay. The gap there was +7mm to the protector. Everywhere else is more than this.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

aland33 said:


>


How much did that frame actually weight and what size is it?

I'm sad those tires weight that much, but as long as they keep their durability I guess it's all good. glad I held off a little from pulling the trigger for now and just got the very large 2.25 for the rear with new Forekaster front (734g).

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jefflinde (Mar 26, 2015)

I have been very happy with R-2bike. They have great prices and even with shipping included they are generally cheaper than any US based retailer. Lead time has been an issue during the covid but pre covid I was getting my stuff in a few weeks.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Isn’t shipping from R2 like 80 Euro right now?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Question, Are the knobs larger on the 2.4 Aspen or are they the same size as the knobs on the 2.25 but just spaced further apart?


----------



## Jefflinde (Mar 26, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> Isn't shipping from R2 like 80 Euro right now?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Had to check if they changed it but orders under 600 euros is 35 euros. it does not makes sense to buy one or 2 tires but if you are ordering more than a set it does.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

FJSnoozer: It's a XL frame and it was 1910grams without seat collar (can't remember if I had the rear axle installed when weighted). I don't think that 740g is that much weight for such a big sidewall protected tyre. 

Stonerider: Sorry can't answer your question since these are my first Maxxis tyres. I have been running Schwalbes and before that Vittorias...


----------



## louit32 (Jul 20, 2014)

nice bike! you like the 2.4 wt tyre? how is the braking and the climbing with the aspen if you can compare to a "classic" fast track 2.3.


----------



## peabody (Apr 15, 2005)

chomxxo said:


> The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didn't do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know they're grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didn't lost traction once. I'd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No words for that setup, just beyond belief!


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> The Terrenos performed well today, even though I didn't do great today. They are fast and silent like moccasins, but have an audible buzz from the knobs in corners to let you know they're grabbing, which is terrific. I had to climb out of some steep fall-line gullies but didn't lost traction once. I'd love to get them in 2.35 or 2.4.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Why is the derailleur in such strange position?

Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

peabody said:


> No words for that setup, just beyond belief!


Kiddo, I'm 6'4". You're keeping on talking and following me thread to thread like a real loser. Don't do that.

The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but it's garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JasperGr (Sep 3, 2015)

Okay good to know, it is a shame sram doesn’t want to make a 10-45 or something like that. 


Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

JasperGr said:


> Okay good to know, it is a shame sram doesn't want to make a 10-45 or something like that.
> 
> Verzonden vanaf mijn iPhone met Tapatalk


This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.

As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but it's garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.


Garbage how?

I have both and I far prefer the e13. I do have it set up properly. Which involves applying pressure to the face of the aluminum plate against the hub and tightening the bolt a little above spec. Then everyone seats well and shifts lightning quick. You must also grease the contact points between the two plates. (I have to degrease every so often depending upon terrain and washes.)

Also, your B screw looks completely wrong. There is no way it could shift properly with it that far out. It would be super slow and hunt for gears at times. Here is mine for reference in the same gear.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

aland33 said:


> This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.
> 
> As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.


Choosing between a Shimano or SRAM cassette is a compromise between light weight and shifting quality. Doesn't matter if you are using a Shimano or SRAM derailleur, it seems the shifting quality depends on the cassette more than anything. Well mechanic competence is also a big one, these 12-speed drivetrains are much more difficult to get right than 11-speed.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

LMN said:


> Choosing between a Shimano or SRAM cassette is a compromise between light weight and shifting quality. Doesn't matter if you are using a Shimano or SRAM derailleur, it seems the shifting quality depends on the cassette more than anything. Well mechanic competence is also a big one, these 12-speed drivetrains are much more difficult to get right than 11-speed.


Absolutely, and also the chain in Shimano case. (HG+) And if you want a perfectly silent drivetrain with the Shimano chain you also need a HG+ compatible chainring.


----------



## afalts (Dec 7, 2011)

chomxxo said:


> The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but it's garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.


No cassette is going to run nice with the b-tension that wrong.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> Garbage how?
> 
> I have both and I far prefer the e13. I do have it set up properly. Which involves applying pressure to the face of the aluminum plate against the hub and tightening the bolt a little above spec. Then everyone seats well and shifts lightning quick. You must also grease the contact points between the two plates. (I have to degrease every so often depending upon terrain and washes.)
> 
> ...





afalts said:


> No cassette is going to run nice with the b-tension that wrong.


Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.

I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.

Back to the tires: Again, good impressions of the Terreno. I took it out on some damp (not wet) trails yesterday and noticed some sliding on roots, but that's to be expected. I don't expect semi-slicks to be good in all conditions, only dry XC courses. For wet I'd stick with the Rocket Ron, but I am very eager to see a 2.35/2.4 Terreno come to market, or I'd consider going with the 2.4 Thunder Burt. Right now the Terreno tread pattern seems superior in that it's more extreme.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.
> 
> I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.


You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it won't shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?

We are just trying to help you not waste money.

AND your chain is too long... you will see this once you fix your b tension.

I actually like the looks of your bike, this has nothing to do with aesthetics.

Here is another shot of how AXS derailleur will sit in such a gear.

https://www.bikeradar.com/reviews/c...ram-x01-eagle-axs-wireless-drivetrain-review/

That type of mis-adjustment would take place if someone had an eagle cassette, swapped in e13 and didn't shorten the chain by four links, then adjusted the b screw waaay out in order to get the proper tension in the 9t.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## afalts (Dec 7, 2011)

chomxxo said:


> Different bike than yours, and a wireless derailleur, unlike yours. No, it's set up properly with the supplied gauge.
> 
> I'm willing to believe that the cassette could be adjusted better, or maybe it works better with cabled derailleurs, but I find the installation process to be overly cumbersome and imprecise, just like you mentioned, just to get a 9t. Nice trick by E.Thirteen to make that possible, but not worth it to me.


It actually doesn't matter if it's wireless for setup, b-tension is set the same for all eagle mtb derailleurs. You're likely using the gauge incorrectly (assuming chain length is correct, which it may not be)






Anyways, I would agree that e.13 cassettes are subpar, but not quite garbage or non-functional, they have their place


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I thought this was the 2020 XC Race tire thread. Take the drivetrain stuff to the drivetrain forum.


----------



## Suns_PSD (Dec 13, 2013)

aland33 said:


> This is now off-topic but you can use XTR 10-45 cassette with AXS derailleur. To get it properly to work you need to replace some other parts in the drivetrain but it is possible.
> 
> As you see in my earlier picture I'm running AXS rear derailleur together with XTR 10-51 cassette. By using the Wolftooth HG2+ chainring and Shimano XTR chain the operation is flawless. In my opinion better than a pure SRAM drivetrain.


Sorry, I know this is OT, but what did you do about mismatch between the AXS lower jockey wheel and the HG+ chain? I get a lot of noise there (I think).
Thx

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it won't shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?
> 
> We are just trying to help you not waste money.
> 
> ...


Why bother, the guy has shown he knows more than everybody else advocating for 35mm stems for XC, bald tires, improperly adjusted drivetrains, saddles adjusted at negative 20 degree angle and I think I recall some weird suspension tuning theories coming from him as well?


----------



## peabody (Apr 15, 2005)

chomxxo said:


> Kiddo, I'm 6'4". You're keeping on talking and following me thread to thread like a real loser. Don't do that.
> 
> The derailleur is AXS XX1 with a 9-46 E.Thirteen cassette. I thought I could save a little weight and money but it's garbage, returning it and putting on an XX1 cassette tomorrow.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm not following you, we just happen to have the same interests. Then you throw stuff up like this pic and my mind is blown. 2 things that are quite obvious from this pic: 1-You have no clue how a rear derailleur works, which others it seems are trying to explain to you. 2-I'd bet a paycheck that your seat height is a good 1" too high. Everything about your setup screams compensation for not being able to reach the pedals under a load.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> You have three people clearly commenting that your drivetrain is so poorly adjusted that it won't shift correctly. Since we can see that on the internet that shows you how bad it is. You have chain wrap on maybe 27% of the cassette?
> 
> We are just trying to help you not waste money.
> 
> ...





MessagefromTate said:


> Why bother, the guy has shown he knows more than everybody else advocating for 35mm stems for XC, bald tires, improperly adjusted drivetrains, saddles adjusted at negative 20 degree angle and I think I recall some weird suspension tuning theories coming from him as well?


You guys need something else to do--like racing. I don't follow either of your posts closely enough to know your tendencies.

FJSnoozer, I do find it funny that you are basically admitting "I'm an internet expert." I was just about to say the same thing about y'all but you beat me to it 

Trying to stay on topic, I'll address only the bald tires: there's a reason that the Aspens won out as the premier XCO race tire from Maxxis, when they weren't popular before, team studies showed they were faster, and yet semi-slicks are grippy in the corner where it's needed. Thunder Burts are pretty popular as well among pro racers. That doesn't always mean anything, but I find them to be demonstrably faster. Of course there's a penalty in grip but for a race over 90 minutes, it's worth it to me. A good foil or complement to a TB is a Rocket Ron, which is probably the grippiest race tire I've ever used.

Neither this, nor longer top tubes and shorter stems, nor wireless electronic shifting are the lunatic fringe, in fact they're becoming the norm. Again, you all just need something better to do than covet your Klein Mantras


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> You guys need something else to do--like racing. I don't follow either of your posts closely enough to know your tendencies.
> 
> FJSnoozer, I do find it funny that you are basically admitting "I'm an internet expert." I was just about to say the same thing about y'all but you beat me to it


As a matter of fact, I raced this weekend and podiumed on an Aspen.  So did two other Bikes I am responsible for. I take care of a fleet of bikes for racers and several of them have e13 and shift amazingly.

I don't know what bad blood you have with these other guys, but I was just trying to help you. Your derailleur is set up so wrong it's visible in pictures.

Good luck.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

aland33 said:


> Just received new Schwalbe "Super Ground" Ralphs and Rays in 2.35.
> 
> Disappointed regarding the weights:
> Ralph 815g and Ray 789g.
> ...


Here's my Super Ground Racing Ray / Ralph Weights

2.35 Racing Ray 779 grams 61mm wide at 22psi

2.35 Racing Ralph 781 grams 61 mm wide at 24psi

Mounted on Ibis 28,6mm rims set up at 40 psi and set in sun and ridden a couple times at 22/24 psi then measure to above widths.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Spin Cycle said:


> Here's my Super Ground Racing Ray / Ralph Weights
> 
> 2.35 Racing Ray 779 grams 61mm wide at 22psi
> 
> ...


How much do you weigh? Those pressures seem a little high for big XC tire but it depends on your weight.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Stonerider said:


> How much do you weigh? Those pressures seem a little high for big XC tire but it depends on your weight.


215# with kit

My standard Pressure for 2.25 Schwalbe or Vittoria has been 21-22 psi front and 23.5-24.5 Rear , so I just started at 22-24 psi as a reference for the casing width measurement . I will go down, I have been running the Addix Speedgrip 2.35 (2020) evo snakeskin at 21-21.5 on the front , I was lucky and got a real light one 664g, new Super Ground have a more little substantial casing vs snakeskin.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

*Rock Razor aka Thunder Burt on Steroids*

While waiting for the 2.35 Thunder Burt Super Race , I thought I would give the 2020 2.35 Rock Razor Speedgrip Snake Skin a try.

Came in Heavy 832 grams vs 740 grams spec'd
60mm on Ibis S28 i28.6mm rim picture @ 24psi

Second Pic of 2.35 Rock Razor & 2.25 Thunder burt.

Sans the Weight this is an awesome tire on the rear, I was hoping to get one closer to the spec;d weight of 740 grams

Definitely feel the weight accelerating out of corners and on the climbs 
832g vs 610 grams for a Thunder Burt

222 grams is right at 1/2#

Hope the New 2.35 Super Race come in at its spec'd weight of 745 grams

As this new 2.35 Thunder Burt @ 745g is virtually the same as the 2020 Rock Razor at 740 grams it will be awesome if the new TB has side knobs like the Rock Razor one can dream right .................


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Rock razor is a Magic Marry Semi Slick, so it will be nothing like that tire.

2.35 TB likely to have the Rocket Ron side knobs, or get some updated tread from the Racing Ray horizontal side knobs. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Spin Cycle said:


> While waiting for the 2.35 Thunder Burt Super Race , I thought I would give the 2020 2.35 Rock Razor Speedgrip Snake Skin a try.
> 
> Came in Heavy 832 grams vs 740 grams spec'd
> 60mm on Ibis S28 i28.6mm rim picture @ 24psi
> ...


I've raced and tested the Rock Razor, and yes despite a compelling design, it is heavier duty than would be advantageous for XC racing, it's significantly slower. Not only the weight that you mentioned, but the center tread pattern is significantly deep.

Now it's doing duty as a rear tire (Nobby Nic 2.6 front) on my trail bike wheels, and it does well there.

If true that the Thunder Burt's side knobs will be bigger in the 2.35, that'd be a welcome addition.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Jefflinde said:


> I have been very happy with R-2bike. They have great prices and even with shipping included they are generally cheaper than any US based retailer. Lead time has been an issue during the covid but pre covid I was getting my stuff in a few weeks.


I'm not really finding any deals there, whereas I'm seeing $36/tire for Vittorias on Bikeinn.


----------



## madfella (May 23, 2016)

I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
Thanks


----------



## TDLover (Sep 14, 2014)

madfella said:


> I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
> Thanks


Definitely too narrow, those work great in my experience in 19-23ID so 27 is way out of range.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

madfella said:


> I'm hoping to stick with my beloved RR's, but wondering if a Racing Ralph 2.10 Snakeskin would be ok on a rim of 27mm Internal Diameter? Would the tyre be too narrow for the rim do you think?
> Thanks


its 1 mm per side , 0.0394 of an inch, try it so many people who are not engineers put way to much into a 1 mm of rim width.
if its 5 mm you will run into some issue.

Gravel crowd are running 38 and 42c tires on i25mm rims


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

Spin Cycle said:


> its 1 mm per side , 0.0394 of an inch, try it so many people who are not engineers put way to much into a 1 mm of rim width.
> if its 5 mm you will run into some issue.
> 
> Gravel crowd are running 38 and 42c tires on i25mm rims


Just to clarify, do you believe 5 mm *per side* or *in total* is an issue?

Thanks.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Eric Marshall said:


> Just to clarify, do you believe 5 mm *per side* or *in total* is an issue?
> 
> Thanks.


Since 2019 even Specialized has made i25mm rims a standard on most Mountain bike, so the 1 mm per side was a reference based on a i25mm rim.

the 5 mm statement was if you went to a i30mm you might see the tire getting to straight of a sidewall.

For 15 years i21rim where used with all Mtb tires, I run Ibis S28 rim i28,6mm same design as a Stans Flow that they co designed with Ibis stan list it as 29mm if you dig deeper its the same 28.6mm internal width.

I run Vittoria 2.25/55mm and Schwalbe 2.25/57mm on this rim.

If you look at your tire its is a 54mm ETRTO size the american 2.1 or 2.25, 2.35 is a general number the number to use is the ETRTO number.
Having said that a 54mm tire will be just fine on a i27mm rim.

A lot of pro's and everyday riders run a 55/57 etrto tire on a i30mm rim.

So YOUR 54mm Thunder Burt will not know if it has 1mm or 0.039" on each side take a Caliper and look at what 1mm is ? it's a moot point !

Run it and be happy






https://www.notubes.com/stans-tech/wide-right

Stan's uses a more conservative rim width chart

Hope this helps


----------



## pokemonjohn (Sep 17, 2020)

*Ikon skinwall*

I've been using maxxis ikon's for a number of years in the 3c EXO maxx speed versions with out any issues...

They needed replacing so bought the skinwall version as i thought they looked good  but they lasted a total of 4 rides before both tyres got holes / rips in them.

I've since got a mezcal tnt g2.0 which weighs alot more - yet to see how it rides properly... i've only ridden it round the block and although it rolled well, i could feel the weight.

So has anyone noticed that the maxxis skinwall tyres are weaker then the normal black ones...

I tempted to get another set of ikon in normal black walls... 
Not a fan of schwalbe tyres.. they seem too floppy in the corners when run at a comfortable psi.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

pokemonjohn said:


> So has anyone noticed that the maxxis skinwall tyres are weaker then the normal black ones...


The only difference is the skinwalls aren't 3C.
They're still EXO.


----------



## pokemonjohn (Sep 17, 2020)

NordieBoy said:


> The only difference is the skinwalls aren't 3C.
> They're still EXO.


My say 3C on them 
could not upload an image so heres a link - https://1drv.ms/u/s!ApWxLFzQYaHZgP8bN8S-VGEau-OLRg

the last cut happened just above the rim / tyre bead.. went almost through the entire side wall. Not repairable


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

That's interesting. My skinwall Fast Trak tire was also cut within its first few rides. And I've read a few reviews of the new Epics and Epic Evos and the reviewers also suffered cuts on their skinwalls.


----------



## pokemonjohn (Sep 17, 2020)

it sems the skinwall tyres are a weaker tyre.

I need to somehow find out what my old tyre tpi was so i can compare it. I think my new skinwall tyres were 120tpi which is the weaker of the 2 versions (judging by the weight they were the 120tpi)

I have since found an IKON online for sake which is a 60 tpi.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

pokemonjohn said:


> My say 3C on them
> could not upload an image so heres a link - https://1drv.ms/u/s!ApWxLFzQYaHZgP8bN8S-VGEau-OLRg
> 
> the last cut happened just above the rim / tyre bead.. went almost through the entire side wall. Not repairable


I didn't read the the specs on the Maxxis page well enough.







The skinwalls should be tougher as they're 60tpi?

I just put a set of 2.35 Ikons on to replace the 2.3 FastTrak/Renegade Control combo that was 1,000km old.
The front FastTrak is still in mint condition, the Renegade is 3/4 shot. Stan's sealant is oozing through the sidewalls leaving a tacky, oily surface.
No complaints from running that combo at all.

Man the Control sidewalls are paper-thin compared to EXO.
18f/20r psi in the Controls is nice but too much with the extra sidewall support in the EXO's.
The Renegade had better standing climbing traction when I pulled it off then the Ikon does new.
Hopefully that'll change when I get the pressure more dialed. Come to think of it, I've never run 2.35 Ikons on 25mm rims.
19-23mm on the the Kona Unit was the widest before this.

Got a backcountry marathon (2.5hr single lap) race coming up next weekend and there's basically 50min of solid climbing on shaley rock followed by a 20min descent down down "Boulder Valley".
I was thinking the 2.35 Ikons would be better (grip, cush and protection) on the shale and rocks.
If it was more dirt based, I'd have left the Specialized tyres on no worries.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Yes skinwalls are weak. In all brands I have held and used. Teravail, specialized, maxxis. Some are exo, some are non exo 60tpi. I’m unsure about Vitoria.


It’s important to note that maxxis makes skinwall and tanwall.


Their Tan Wall EXO which seems to be their regular EXO casing with a layer of colored light brown rubber over them. These look amazing and I do plan to try a pair front and rear for vanity and speed. 

I know these come in 2.25 rekon Race as their only race tire. I am guessing these will tip the scales around 720. My regular weight 700. 

They also make them in a 2.4 Rekon, which I have personally weighed at 890g! No thanks. 

They make a few Minions in this tan wall as well as skinwall. 

60tpi does not make tires stronger in my experience. It allows more rubber to flow between the threads. It’s a toss up as to whether that ends up making a stronger tire. I’ve seen maxxis employees state that without their additives and carbon black that go into the regular rubber that you end up with a weaker tire. This is noticeable when you hold the tires as they are noticeably flimsy and supple. It’s not the best type of supple like a 170tpi, it’s a hard tread base with a softer more squirmy sidewall. You can literally see light transmitting through the sidewall on a true skinwall. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

NordieBoy said:


> I didn't read the the specs on the Maxxis page well enough.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I haven't run the Ikons but on the Exo Aspens 2.25s, I had to run it a full 2psi's higher to avoid rim strikes compared the Renegade Controls. That really left me in a catch 22 - The exo sidewalls are stiffer so you want to run less pressure, but I had to run higher pressure to avoid rim strikes. The Renegades are impressive in their ability to be both supple and not rim strike.

The Ikon 2.35 is a bigger volume tire though, so I'd be interested in hearing your experience.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

At 185-190, I run 23 on 25id rim. For a 140 pounder I would run 16-17. So you can scale in between. These are for rear psi.

I just do not really rim strike on ikon 2.35s until things get crazy. I've done races in super rocky course where I have burped early and done 15 miles on 18 psi. It sure felt amazing at that pressure. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

I was about 200lbs geared up when I was running 18f/20r on 2.35 Ikons on the Unit.
Now I'm about 180 ready to roll and and even 2.25 Ikons on the Unit have to go to 17f/19r.

I've never burped a tyre and the only rim strike I've had was on a tubed rear X-King at 16psi 
I ride light and am a wimp in the corners.

Over here the Specialized Control tyres are about $40us and normally Maxxis are about $68us and up.
The Ikons came up on sale for $50us so I grabbed some otherwise I would have just got a new Renegade rear.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

I recently replaced my front 2.3 Fast Trak Control with the new Maxxis Aspen 2.4. So far it seems to have better cornering grip than I thought it would. I've always wondered why Nino Shurter and Kate Courtney favored the Aspen over the Ikon. They never use the Ikon.


----------



## pinkpowa (Jun 24, 2007)

FJSnoozer said:


> Yes skinwalls are weak. In all brands I have held and used. Teravail, specialized, maxxis. Some are exo, some are non exo 60tpi. I'm unsure about Vitoria.


Vittoria Skinwalls (XC Race casing) are somewhere between an Sworks and Control Casing. It's definitely not paper thin but you won't see me running them in NWA so they stay in the parts bin for a short track or race elsewhere. Not a huge weight savings either. Hoping for some Terreno's in XC Trail (grey sidewalls) to run similar to an Aspen use case...


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

pinkpowa said:


> Vittoria Skinwalls (XC Race casing) are somewhere between an Sworks and Control Casing. It's definitely not paper thin but you won't see me running them in NWA so they stay in the parts bin for a short track or race elsewhere. Not a huge weight savings either. Hoping for some Terreno's in XC Trail (grey sidewalls) to run similar to an Aspen use case...


I ran those skinwall teravails in NWA what finally did them in was a dry rot tear in the sidewall. Plugged it and still almost got a sub 2hr lap of b40 with about 10 stops with the frame pump.

I felt like I was playing with fire every ride on them though.

I meant to do a tire review of them, so here is my halfassed attempt.

2.5s measure only 58mm and came in at 730 grams. 
2.3 measured at 54mm and were a hair under 700 grams. Both tires are well under advertised weights.

It rolls extremely fast on hard pack and pavement. I mean this thing is whisper quiet too. It has a little more traction than a recon race and better manners than an XR3(garbage and undersized). No where near something like a nobby now or Forekaster.

In some ways it's better and worse than an ikon 2.35 if you are used to that tire. Better side log, but worse in transition.


















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Wow that is ugly. I thought I was a cheapass running a 5 year old Racing Ralph but I think you have me beat.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

NordieBoy said:


> I was about 200lbs geared up when I was running 18f/20r on 2.35 Ikons on the Unit.
> Now I'm about 180 ready to roll and and even 2.25 Ikons on the Unit (23mm rims) have to go to 17f/19r.


Just tried the 2.35 Ikons at 17f/19r psi (25mm rims) and still not as much standing climbing traction or cush as the worn Renegade @20psi on the back.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

NordieBoy said:


> Just tried the 2.35 Ikons at 17f/19r psi (25mm rims) and still not as much standing climbing traction or cush as the worn Renegade @20psi on the back.


Yeah the Renegade is an amazing rear tire. My experimentation with rear tires is over. This is the tire.

I am still experimenting with different front tires. The Renegade is pretty good upfront too but not the standout it is in the rear.


----------



## louit32 (Jul 20, 2014)

Stonerider said:


> I recently replaced my front 2.3 Fast Trak Control with the new Maxxis Aspen 2.4. So far it seems to have better cornering grip than I thought it would. I've always wondered why Nino Shurter and Kate Courtney favored the Aspen over the Ikon. They never use the Ikon.


interesting, how do you compare the climbing traction and the braking grip with the fast track?

I'm interesting to change my fast track with the aspen or the rekon race in 2.4wt.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

ohmygato said:


> Wow that is ugly. I thought I was a cheapass running a 5 year old Racing Ralph but I think you have me beat.


These tires are 1 year old with about 200 miles. I can not recommend! But boy do they look good.

Search continues for useable fashion.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

louit32 said:


> interesting, how do you compare the climbing traction and the braking grip with the fast track?
> 
> I'm interesting to change my fast track with the aspen or the rekon race in 2.4wt.


Since I only changed the front tire I can't comment on the climbing traction of the 2.4 Aspen. Braking traction seems to be just as good as the 2.3 Fast Trak.


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

Speaking of worn out tires...

How long are you willing to let used tires sit on the shelf before you just throw them away? I have 3 or 4 Ikons sitting that are 3-4 years old, perfectly good when I used them, and just chilling right now on the shelf in the garage. I live in a fairly temperate climate. I'm actually considering using a couple of them again.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

ohmygato said:


> Speaking of worn out tires...
> 
> How long are you willing to let used tires sit on the shelf before you just throw them away? I have 3 or 4 Ikons sitting that are 3-4 years old, perfectly good when I used them, and just chilling right now on the shelf in the garage. I live in a fairly temperate climate. I'm actually considering using a couple of them again.


Good question. I have a large collection of tires, it's getting to Imelda Marcos levels. Age of rubber doesn't matter until it starts to dry rot. In the case that you start to see that you'll find that it's hard to keep the tire sealed, even if it has little wear. These days there's no reason to keep a stockpile of any bike parts, you can get replacements so quickly. I'm trying to ride what I've got before I buy new but the. 2.35 race tires are too tempting...

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

Here is Continental's tips for storing tires. While it's for car tires, I bet many of the same principles apply for any tire.

https://www.continental-tires.com/car/tire-knowledge/tire-care-maintenance/storing-tires


----------



## ohmygato (Mar 8, 2011)

chomxxo said:


> Age of rubber doesn't matter until it starts to dry rot.


Does the riding performance of the tire decrease with storage? I thought I have heard that the rubber dries out and gets less supple or something. I have never really found that to be true myself but I maybe I am just less sensitive to it.


----------



## hesitationpoint (Aug 11, 2017)

If you talk to tire experts, they will tell you that performance can degrade, especially if the tires are improperly stored (like in a garage rather than a dry, cool basement). The other thing to consider is that the manufacturers are constantly improving their compounds so having four years worth of tires stored up may prevent you from using the latest rubber tech.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

ohmygato said:


> Does the riding performance of the tire decrease with storage? I thought I have heard that the rubber dries out and gets less supple or something. I have never really found that to be true myself but I maybe I am just less sensitive to it.


Yes, that's dry rot.

https://itstillruns.com/causes-dry-rot-rubber-5981174.html

Keeping tires out of UV light will help.


----------



## Stefan.W (Jun 13, 2018)

General rule for car/truck tires is anything after 5 years from mfg date dont bother. Storage: out of the sun in a not humid or hot location where you would get lots of change in temp(heat cycling the rubber), usually in black plastic trash bag and away from any garage compressors or motors that would expose them to ozone. Bike tires after that old def would not be as dangerous as a car application but probably not perform as well as you would like. 

Used to keep car race tires stored in guest room closet in black trash bags.


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

New Mezcal G2 TNT 29x2.25. Weighs 708g and measures 2.23 upon initial installation at 40psi. Will remeasure at normal pressure after a couple weeks. 

This tire was about 10 times easier to mount than Renegade/Fast Traks even though its sidewall felt much thicker.


----------



## pokemonjohn (Sep 17, 2020)

I bought the Mezcal g2.0 tnt tyre to run on the back and although it was too much heavier than an Ikon... i could really feel the weight difference when trying to pick up speed. 
Once it was rolling it was fine.. and possibly better than the ikon... 

But i decided to go back to a black 120tpi ikon exo 3r maxx speed ( so many letters  )

This seems to suit my riding the most and for now i'm giving up experiemnting with tyres. Its coming up to winter in the UK, which means the maxxis shorty will be coming out on the bigger bike to cope with the mud


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

pokemonjohn said:


> I bought the Mezcal g2.0 tnt tyre to run on the back and although it was too much heavier than an Ikon... i could really feel the weight difference when trying to pick up speed.
> Once it was rolling it was fine.. and possibly better than the ikon...
> 
> But i decided to go back to a black 120tpi ikon exo 3r maxx speed ( so many letters  )
> ...


I am running the Mezcal on the front not the rear, so acceleration is less of an issue. I've learned the hard way that running light front tires and risking flats is high consequence. I've settled on the Renegade control for the rear which is reasonably light, long lasting, and grips way beyond what it should given the small knobs. Still experimenting with the front.


----------



## Ausable (Jan 7, 2006)

@Primoz - once you have found the perfect pressure for your new Maxxis it would be interesting to hear your opinion of how they compare to the Schwalbes - I have been running German tires for 15 years as well. Thanks!


----------



## primoz (Jun 7, 2006)

Ausable said:


> @Primoz - once you have found the perfect pressure for your new Maxxis it would be interesting to hear your opinion of how they compare to the Schwalbes - I have been running German tires for 15 years as well. Thanks!


@Ausable to be honest, I quite like them. I mean they are definitely different then Schwalbe. They ride different, and they feel different, so next to finding out what right pressure should be, you need to get used to how they feel too. With Schwalbe, I knew how they behave, and I knew when it's too much and will lose grip. Once I switched to Maxxis on beginning of season, I basically started from zero. First it was some experimentation to get proper pressure. My setup is now Rekon Race EXO/TR/Dual 2.25" on rear and Rekon EXO/TR/3CMaxspeed 29x2.25" on front, and I'm running 1.3bar (I guess 19psi) on front and 1.5bar (22-23psi) on rear, and I think that's about right for me (75kg+11kg bike and 21mm internal rims... obviously ancient DTSwiss XR1500).
After few weeks I got used to this how they behave and in general, there's not much difference to Schwalbe. I still have feeling that Schwalbes (my combo was Racing Ray Speedgrip front and Racing Ralph Speed rear) work a little bit better on gravel, and quite a bit better in wet, but Rekon/Rekon race combo is not that far behind. As for rolling, I don't think there's much difference, at least the way it feels. 
But what I really like is, that I don't need to bother about stones, rocks or roots anymore. Tires are pretty much indestructible. With Schwalbe I had whole bunch of flats (and not sure if it's true or not, but I tend to believe it, that sealant doesn't really work good on Scwalbe... not Stan, not Schwalbe not Mariposa CaffeLatex), and you need to be super careful on rough terrain. With these Maxxis you just bomb down and don't worry. Maybe it's just luck, but until now I didn't have single flat, and after I got used to that, I'm riding way harder over such sections then I did ever before.
So for next year, I'm definitely staying on Maxxis, so if you ask me, definitely worth to try.


----------



## Ausable (Jan 7, 2006)

Interesting feedback. I am currently having a lova affair with the Race Kings but your combo is worth trying . Thanks!


----------



## dinsum (May 31, 2016)

I been riding thunder burt 29 x 2.25 snakeskin rear and rocket ron 2.25 liteskin front on my spark rc 900 for the past few years and really like the combo for my local trails.

I recently started using racing ray 2.35 and racing ralph 2.35 and my 20km lap times only lost about 20 seconds and some sections I am faster, its mostly on the climbs that I lose a little bit of time. I think its worth the trade off unless you are racing because the tires have a lot of tread and it seems a lot stickier then my old setup, I don't slide on roots nearly as much.

Might try the new super race tires once they come out, waiting for peoples opinions on them, tire being more supple would be nice

Also I don't think tire brand plays too big of a role anymore because all of the top tire manufacturers make really good tires now.... Pauline and Henrique just won the XC races on the weekend and they are both running schwalbe racing ralph on rear and I think racing ray up front possibly racing ralph up front as well


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

FWIW, R2 is blowing out their Rocket Ron stock right now.

Makes me think that they know something that the public doesn't, given that they are a massive German retailer for Schwalbe, a German tire company.

New RoRo on the way? It hasn't been updated in a long, long time.


----------



## ualar (Sep 18, 2020)

jps said:


> Racing/training in Flagstaff, AZ. Unfortunately, our series starts in Jan. in the Phoenix area, yet I am at 7,000ft dealing with snow, ice, cold, etc. Races in the desert, loose over hard/kitty litter/high speed/slower speed chunk abrasive rock. Had two races already and preparing for one this weekend in Lake Havasu on a fast, flowy, loose over hard track. Raced so far on a 2.1 Mezcal TNT rear 21#, Ikon 2.2 EXO front, 19# at about 155 #. Age group Cat 1 40-49. Tires worked very well for first two races. Switching out to a 2.25 Barzo on the front, non-TNT for this race, as it has much more fast flowy turning (Was intrigued by the 2.25 Peyote) Ran the Mezcal 2.1 TNT/Barzo 2.25 much of last year, loved it. Tough tires and the Mezcal rolls very fast and I actually like the lower volume. Barzo corners very well, and also rolls quite fast. Have trained on the 2.25 Mezcal in the rear, lots of volume, but heavy, and use 2.35 Barzo/Forekaster as well in training. Last year I switched it up a bit and used Aspen EXO 2.25 rear/2.35 Rekon EXO up front for a few races too. Hard to believe I used the Kenda Karma 2.0's, 26ers at sub 500g 15 years ago in similar conditions! A bit envious of racing in some moisture/loam, this dry kitty litter stuff can be quite un-nerving!


i have ordered

1* Vittoria Barzo G+ TNT 29 - 2.35
1* Vittoria Barzo G+ TNT 29 - 2.25
1* Vittoria Mezcal lll G+ TNT 29 - 2.10 (ordered wrong :S, 2.25 i wanted :/, now too late, they are shipped internationaly)

Guys torn between 2.10 mezcal rear & 2.25 Barzo front vs 2.25 Barzo Rear 2.35 Barzo front combo

29 mm rim width, it say can hold 2.00 to 2.40 tires, but ! 2.10 should be fine at rear or too narrow ? how much faster are we talking about mezcal vs barzo ?

Are you satisfied with your 2.1 mezcal / 2.25 barzo combo ?


----------



## cabanaboy (Apr 25, 2019)

If anyone is familiar with both Bontrager and Maxxis XC/light trail tires could you provide which Maxxis tire is the best comparison for each of the Bontrager XR1-4 tires?

In general the Maxxis tires seem to be slightly heavier than the Bontrager tires. I assume they have better flat protection though. I have ruined a few XR tires this season and am looking to test out Maxxis.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

cabanaboy said:


> If anyone is familiar with both Bontrager and Maxxis XC/light trail tires could you provide which Maxxis tire is the best comparison for each of the Bontrager XR1-4 tires?
> 
> In general the Maxxis tires seem to be slightly heavier than the Bontrager tires. I assume they have better flat protection though. I have ruined a few XR tires this season and am looking to test out Maxxis.


I can't speak for xr1. For the sake of my discussion, assume all tires are EXO. Weights are what I have personally seen in the scale.

XR2 vs Aspen 
2 is better at breaking. Both are very fast. Aspen (645-670) has better cornering grip on the shoulder. I actually ran the 2 up from with an aspen rear for a long time on my hardtail.

Yes, aspen seems to stand up much better to pinch flats. I don't know how but I think I have never pinch flatted an aspen, though there are other maxxis I have a lot.

Both have similar real life weights. In many cases the aspen 2.25 will be lighter than the 2.2 xr2.

Aspen lasts longer. Xr2 wears somewhere in between a Schwalbe (least life) and a maxxis.

When you get through the dimple in the xr2 you better replace, with an aspen, kinda the same. Watch the cornering knobs as the rubber degrades.

Xr3.

Pretty awful for what it is. 2.4 is extremely narrow for a 2.4. And because of that it is heavy for what it is.

Compare this to rekon Race2.25 and alternatively IKON 2.35. Because I have risen all of these tires side by side and they are both better, but in different ways.

Rekon race (680-705g) will be lighter semi slick. Brakes much better than aspen straight line, and has more aggressive shoulder knobs to lean into. Fast on dirt and pavement. YMMV

ikon is Huge. (730-740g) it's not good jn wet. Boy is it good in rocky terrain. You can get away with low pressures. Great for hardtails. Doesn't feel as fast on pavement, but this is a mountain bike.

Xr4

Now you are in real trail tire territory. It's hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)

I do pinch flat forkasters in situations I wouldn't pinch flat a Nobby Nic. These are full send situations. Something about the tire, but I suspect it would be better on a 30mm rim.

Forekasters are amazing in wet weather and with wet rocks and roots. If I had a race like this, I would at least run it up front. It might be the difference maker to win/podium. It's also one of the best tires period in blown out loose over hard until you get to a minion or Magic Mary HR II TYPE tire. I would rather run a forekaster rear than an aggressor for cornering grip. Aggressor is a full in trail/enduro rear tire. But again, I would never race the forekaster in enduro because I do occasionally pinch flat them. But then again, I can trace all of these instances back to being maybe 1-2 psi low. I got too aggressive with my psi in really cold race starts where I knew the weather would heat up and raise psi.

On my wheels, the rekon race is 57, forekaster is 57.5, aspen is 58mm and ikon is 60mm.

An xr3 2.4 was barely 57

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MillerC (Oct 25, 2018)

XR5 is faster and grips better than xr4. Run morsa rear and xr5 front if you want a fast rolling big grip setup.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

*2021 Vittoria Tires *

I received my 2021 Vittoria's Today

Spec's are on 28.6mm internal Ibis S28 rims @ 25psi

All these tires are 29" TLR XC Race Casing Tan Side walls

Vittoria ERTRO is 55mm for 2.25", 57mm for 2.35"& 65mm for 2.6"

Mezcal 2.25 - 660, 681 grams 58.5mm
Mezcal 2.35 - 679,684,688,690 grams 60.5mm just mounted today to 40 psi and reduced to 25 psi
Barzo 2.35 - 698,709 grams
Peyote 2.25 - 653 grams old stock tire is discontinued 57mm
Mezcal 2.6 Trail Casing 875 grams





















Glad to see the Weights are lower for the 2021 and are close the published weight and consistent 
Mezcal 2.25" 690 grams 2.35" 680 grams Barzo 2.35" 690 grams Mezcal 2.6" 870 grams

I will update when I try out a 2.35" Barzo the 2020 2.25 Barzo was smaller (55mm on i25mm rim)than the Mezcal, I'm hoping the 2.35 Barzo will have a bigger volume like the 2.35 Mezcal Added this pictures, 1 day at 40 psi then at 25 psi in these pictures !


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I’d had a bad stretch of overweight and undersized Vittorias. Bought two 2.35 Barzos that were just over 2.25 and 30-40g overweight.

Good to see they are back on track. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

dinsum said:


> I been riding thunder burt 29 x 2.25 snakeskin rear and rocket ron 2.25 liteskin front on my spark rc 900 for the past few years and really like the combo for my local trails.
> 
> I recently started using racing ray 2.35 and racing ralph 2.35 and my 20km lap times only lost about 20 seconds and some sections I am faster, its mostly on the climbs that I lose a little bit of time. I think its worth the trade off unless you are racing because the tires have a lot of tread and it seems a lot stickier then my old setup, I don't slide on roots nearly as much.
> 
> ...


Racing Ralph up Front and They are running a 2.35 Thunder Burt Proto Type also up Front there are some pictures on Pink Bike but of the sideway not the tread. I was at World Cup last Fall Snowshoe and they where running the Racing Ralph on the front . I tested in on the front and being a flatter tire it was very quick turn in and grabby, maybe on my new bike that's a little slacker headtube angle and wider bars it would be worth trying again, must roll faster than the 2020 speed grip Racing Ray, now with the Super Race out and Racing ray available in speed grip compound I thought they would be on that tire, but I did not see it in the two weeks of races on the front


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Spin Cycle said:


> I received my 2021 Vittoria's Today
> 
> Spec's are on 28.6mm internal Ibis S28 rims @ 25psi
> 
> ...


Out of curiosity, where did you get your Vittorias?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> Out of curiosity, where did you get your Vittorias?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Retail from there web site, they just got the 2.35 in stock about a week ago, it would let me add them to my cart so I ordered and in about a week they showed up


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> I'd had a bad stretch of overweight and undersized Vittorias. Bought two 2.35 Barzos that were just over 2.25 and 30-40g overweight.
> 
> Good to see they are back on track.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Vittorias are correct for there ERTRO size 2.25" are 55mm and 2.35" are 57mm and that's what they are on a 25mm rim its on the tires and there web site.

Most other companies 2.25" are 57mm ertro size Both MAxxis and Schwable list there 2.25" at 57mm ertro and 2.35" as 60mm some 2.35" Maxxis are 57mm.

So Vittoria are not small they are the ERTRO size , if you email any tire company they will tell you the tire is sized off of ERTRO 622x55 etc

2.25 barzo are smaller volume than a 2.25 Mezcal just like the 2.25" Schwalbe Racing Ray are smaller than 2.35 Racing Ralph

I hope these 2.35 Barzo are bigger Volume tooo....


----------



## cabanaboy (Apr 25, 2019)

FJSnoozer said:


> "Now you are in real trail tire territory. It's hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"
> 
> Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.
> 
> If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.


----------



## rupps5 (Apr 9, 2010)

cabanaboy said:


> FJSnoozer said:
> 
> 
> > "Now you are in real trail tire territory. It's hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"
> ...


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

cabanaboy said:


> FJSnoozer said:
> 
> 
> > "Now you are in real trail tire territory. It's hard to go wrong with a forekaster 2.35. This is a super grippy tire you can race XC on. (735g and a casing which is more 2.29 but knobs protrude beyond casing. Some types of dirt I would take a Nobby Nic 2.35, but Schwalbe is getting aggressive with their weight ranges. (750-835g)"
> ...


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

cabanaboy said:


> Thanks for the detailed comparison of tires between the brands. I just mounted a Forekaster 2.35" as a potential front tire for when conditions get sloppy.
> 
> If things get really messy what do you think about an Aggressor as a rear tire. I only ask because I already have one for trail riding. So I wouldn't have to purchase and mount another new tire.


I just bought a Barzo to pair with my Forekaster 2.35 up front. Will report back on how I like it, if you're interested


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

Here is my current winter XC tire setup. Maxxis Forekaster 2.35 f / r Vittoria Barzo 2.35. The Barzo seems pretty round even on my 28mm id rims. Mounted by hand without issues. Get to ride it this afternoon. Will post initial ride impression and maybe even swap them out to see how the Barzo performs as a front tire.


----------



## rupps5 (Apr 9, 2010)

HT-XC said:


> Here is my current winter XC tire setup. Maxxis Forekaster 2.35 f / r Vittoria Barzo 2.35. The Barzo seems pretty round even on my 28mm id rims. Mounted by hand without issues. Get to ride it this afternoon. Will post initial ride impression and maybe even swap them out to see how the Barzo performs as a front tire.


That tire combination is really good. I had a lot of fun riding it that way. Unfortunately for me the barzo is too flat prone and i just could not keep them together.

Evolution Training Cycles


----------



## HT-XC (Apr 20, 2020)

What are you running now? Do you have a suggestion for another rear tire to pair with the Forekaster in the front? So far I really like the Barzo as a rear tire. Definitely more draggy than the Rekon Race it replaced but so much more grip. Nice.


----------



## rupps5 (Apr 9, 2010)

I still have not found an xc rear tire that has checked all the boxes yet. Most of this year I have been on the trail bike so the xc bikes have gotten less use than normal. But my favorite xc rear tire this year has been the aspen.


----------



## louit32 (Jul 20, 2014)

hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

Speaking of Rekon Race, how does it compare in size to the 2.35 Ikon? I’m assuming it’s built on the (strangely) smaller Rekon 2.4 casing and not the big Ikon casing. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

louit32 said:


> hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
> I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks


I've not used the Rekon Race, but the 2.3 Renegade is better than the Aspen in every way as a rear tire. Better climbing, braking, and cornering traction. Breaks away with control rather than suddenly. Measures out to 2.33 at about 23.5psi on 25ID rim. Have 700 miles on it and it's still going strong. Aspen was done at a little over 500.


----------



## GT87 (Mar 18, 2014)

louit32 said:


> hi, I'd like to know if some of you try the new maxxis 2.4 wt rekon race. I have a fast track 2.3 control on my epic sworks 2021 with roval control sl 2018 25mm wheels, I'm happy with the tyre but I'm considering the new maxxis. I'd like to keep a good performance in braking and climbing traction, that's why I think the rekon race is better as the aspen 2.4.
> *I didn't rule out other tyre like racing ray in 2.35 but I think that the extra volume is a good option*. Let me know your opinion on the 2.4 wt maxxis tyre. thanks


I can't weigh in on those treads specifically, but I highly doubt that the 2.4 maxxis has any more volume than the 2.35 schwalbe, despite what the numbers say.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

GT87 said:


> I can't weigh in on those treads specifically, but I highly doubt that the 2.4 maxxis has any more volume than the 2.35 schwalbe, despite what the numbers say.


It's bigger, I'm quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.

I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.


----------



## dinsum (May 31, 2016)

aland33 said:


> It's bigger, I'm quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
> I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.
> 
> I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.


Are both your racing rays 2.35"? do you happen to have the weights of both the tires for comparison?


----------



## GT87 (Mar 18, 2014)

aland33 said:


> It's bigger, I'm quite sure. I have both and can measure the difference on Monday.
> I have the 2.35 Super Ground casing which has more volume than the old Snake Skin.
> 
> I can also confirm that the Super Race casing has a smaller volume than the Super Ground. At least the versions I have is like that.


Thanks for the info. My experience with various snakeskin 2.35s is that the casing often measures close to 2.5 on i30s.

Can you comment on how the super race casing compares to the old Ralph snakeskin?

Any other thoughts on the racing ray tread? I'm considering getting one for the front.


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

GT87 said:


> Thanks for the info. My experience with various snakeskin 2.35s is that the casing often measures close to 2.5 on i30s.
> 
> Can you comment on how the super race casing compares to the old Ralph snakeskin?
> 
> Any other thoughts on the racing ray tread? I'm considering getting one for the front.


Racing Ray is a fantastic front tyre. The tread pattern has not changed from the "old" snakeskin" models.

Super Race is more supple than snakeskin. Sidewalls are probably a little thinner but it feels that there is more rubber in the tread.

Super Ground has a more robust and the sidewall is thicker than snakeskin.

The new series is a lot heavier overall. I believe that they use more rubber in all tyres which give them very good damping. But the weight...

They are easier to make tubeless and they keep the pressure better than the old ones.

I'm doing a lot of tests now between Maxxis 2.4s, Mezcal 2.35 and different Schwalbes. Unfortunately the season is ending and the climate is getting colder so testing continues in the spring..


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

dinsum said:


> Are both your racing rays 2.35"? do you happen to have the weights of both the tires for comparison?


Racing Ralph Super Race 2.35 743g
Racing Ralph Super Ground 2.35 815g
Racing Ray Super Ground 2.35 789g

Aspen 2.4 744g & 739g

Mezcal 2.35 XC/Trail 741g & 714g

All on same scale so it gives some reference.


----------



## pk1 (Mar 25, 2010)

aland33 said:


> Racing Ray is a fantastic front tyre. The tread pattern has not changed from the "old" snakeskin" models.
> 
> Super Race is more supple than snakeskin. Sidewalls are probably a little thinner but it feels that there is more rubber in the tread.
> 
> ...


interesting, thanks for the info.
i found the snakeskin to be a sweetspot in terms of weight/protection so stocked up on them. even the super race is notably heavier than the old snakeskin and while it might have as much or even more tread protection i can only imagine the sidewalls are vulnerable. super ground just seem too heavy.

i really don't like that they made the lighterweight version narrower either - you should at least be able to rely on variants of the same make and model measuring the same!


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

pk1 said:


> interesting, thanks for the info.
> i found the snakeskin to be a sweetspot in terms of weight/protection so stocked up on them. even the super race is notably heavier than the old snakeskin and while it might have as much or even more tread protection i can only imagine the sidewalls are vulnerable. super ground just seem too heavy.
> 
> i really don't like that they made the lighterweight version narrower either - you should at least be able to rely on variants of the same make and model measuring the same!


I was really surprised how well these new Super Ground tyres work in technichal terrain. The damping is magical and better than the snakeskin variants, my opinion.
It's really annoying that they are so heavy because they just feel better.

So it's all up to what you require from the tyres and also on the terrain that you are riding.

I'm only doing xcm so for flatter technichal courses these new ones could be better. For course with a lot of long climbing the old ones are probably better for their low weight.

But as seen during the last World Champs all three riders from Cannondale team rode on the old tyres. Pretty strange since it's a Schwalbe sponsored team.


----------



## dinsum (May 31, 2016)

aland33 said:


> Racing Ralph Super Race 2.35 743g
> Racing Ralph Super Ground 2.35 815g
> Racing Ray Super Ground 2.35 789g
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info, so looks like the difference between super race and ground is about 75 grams which isn't too shabby but I agree that 815 grams for an XC tire is pushing it. Is super race more supple then super ground?

my racing ray 2.35 tle snakeskin is 700 grams, my Racing ralph tle snakeskin is 670 grams, these weights are very respectable for a 2.35 XC tires in my opinion and I can definitely notice a difference in rolling resistance and acceleration compared to my old setup, thunder burt snakeskin 2.25 rear and rocket ron liteskin 2.25 front, but its really not a crazy difference

That being said I prefer the ray ralph 2.35 combo because it gives that much more grip but if its not a technical xc course and its just mostly flat and smooth you will probably lose 30 seconds to a minute for every hour you ride compared to Tburt and Rocket ron

I blast corners with much more confidence with this setup, makes me feel like i'm actually a good rider lol.. When going really fast with tburt and rocket ron things can get really sketchy sometimes, with 2.35 ray ralph things are much more in control at all times for me especially on loose over hard. I think in time I will continue to get even faster with my 2.35 setup as I keep gaining more and more trust in the grip


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.

Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.


----------



## GT87 (Mar 18, 2014)

Le Duke said:


> I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.
> 
> Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.


They've offered that for a while now. They still had some in stock last weekend... I almost ordered one while they were having the sale. They must have sold out since then.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

GT87 said:


> They've offered that for a while now. They still had some in stock last weekend... I almost ordered one while they were having the sale. They must have sold out since then.


Interesting. I've never seen the "para" (XC casing) version of any 2.35 offered in any online store, and I had no clue that they were doing the 2.35 in the XC casing for either the Barzo or Mezcal at all.


----------



## GT87 (Mar 18, 2014)

Le Duke said:


> Interesting. I've never seen the "para" (XC casing) version of any 2.35 offered in any online store, and I had no clue that they were doing the 2.35 in the XC casing for either the Barzo or Mezcal at all.


I can't say how long it's been an option, but I remember seeing them on their site before earlier this year. I was tempted by the sale last weekend and they were in stock and i added exactly that combo to my cart... Mezcal+barzo, both 29x2.35para. Ended up deciding aganst it to be responsible and use up some tires that are sitting in my bin before I buy anymore.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Le Duke said:


> I just saw on the Vittoria page that they'll be offering a 2.35 Barzo in the XC casing.
> 
> Hopefully it ends up as wide as the 2.35 Mezcal.


Just Put a few Miles on the 2.35/57mm Barzo XC Race (tan) casing, It is nice sized but after being mounted a few days now ( was at 35psi on and off) its not as big as the Mezcal, Much better than the 2.25/55mm Barzo that was small in Volume compared to the Mezcal.

Dimensions @ 25psi 28.6 mm rim

2.35/57 Barzo 58-58.25mm
2.25/55 Mezcal 58.7-59mm
2.35/57 Mezcal 59.2-59.5mm

I can't really tell much if any size difference between the 2.25 and 2.35 Mezcal the 2.35 is about 2mm larger in height measuring from inside of 
rin to top of tread.

I really like the size and tried to order a couple more and they where sold out already at Vittoria, a friend of mine got one at Bike Tires Direct.


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

delete


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

delete


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

*2021 Schwalbe Thunder Burt 2.25/57 Super Race are here *

Just Order a Couple of the New 2.25/57mm Super Race Thunder Burt's, I was told these would not be in North America until early December and out of no where had an email yesterday and the 2.25 are available on Schwalbe web site for sale. They are listed at 625 grams I will post actual weights and width on Friday


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

About to receive a set of Maxxis Aspen WT 29x2.4s to pair with 30.5 ID rims after an abortive effort to get Thunder Burt 2.35s from BikeInn... buyer beware, they sent me 2.25s across the pond. Waste of time, but they did give me a full refend.

Question: for those using Racing Rays, would you consider it for front and rear? I'm a big fan of the Rocket Ron, but there's no 29x2.35 version yet. The Racing Ray seems to be based on the Ron, and it has better cornering knobs than the Ralph, and maybe slightly lower rolling resistance according to the drum test (.1 watt). I don't have problems with climbing traction much but I do like the feeling of tall cornering knobs on the rear. 

So, Racing Ray 2.35 front and rear?


----------



## pk1 (Mar 25, 2010)

chomxxo said:


> Question: for those using Racing Rays, would you consider it for front and rear? I'm a big fan of the Rocket Ron, but there's no 29x2.35 version yet. The Racing Ray seems to be based on the Ron, and it has better cornering knobs than the Ralph, and maybe slightly lower rolling resistance according to the drum test (.1 watt). I don't have problems with climbing traction much but I do like the feeling of tall cornering knobs on the rear.
> 
> So, Racing Ray 2.35 front and rear?


i haven't tried ray in the rear but i know of others who have and liked it. for me ralph is good. i'm with you though in that i'd love a 2.35 ron in front


----------



## Goran_injo (Jul 4, 2007)

So the new Bonty XR3 2.4 is not using the same casing as XR2 2.35? XR2 2.35 was my tire of choice so far after years of experimenting due to weight/volume/durability with decent grip.


----------



## FJ40runr (Aug 27, 2017)

Goran_injo said:


> So the new Bonty XR3 2.4 is not using the same casing as XR2 2.35? XR2 2.35 was my tire of choice so far after years of experimenting due to weight/volume/durability with decent grip.


Nope, can confirm the XR3 in 2.4 is a fair amount less volume than the 2.35 XR2.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

FJ40runr said:


> Nope, can confirm the XR3 in 2.4 is a fair amount less volume than the 2.35 XR2.


Agreed, it's horribly small and a terrible tire for the weight.

It may even me smaller than my old 2.2 xr2. I returned the tires after 2 rides.

A rekon race 2.25 can just beats that tire in every aspect. A rekon race/forekaster front combo just down right puts it to shame, and it's lighter.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Has anyone laid eyes/hands on a Rekon Race 2.4 yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cabanaboy (Apr 25, 2019)

Here's a pic of both tires mounted on kovee pro 30 wheels @ 20psi.

2.35" xr2 (bottom)
2.4" xr3 (top)

Not sure why the photo got rotated


----------



## Goran_injo (Jul 4, 2007)

Le Duke said:


> Has anyone laid eyes/hands on a Rekon Race 2.4 yet?


I have it - haven't ridden it yet, waiting for the test turn.
True to size, but comparable to XR2, tiny. XR2 2.35 is almost the same as a Nobby Nic 2.6, but I wish it had larger side knobs, such as Xr3, but same volume. A bit dissapointed now


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Goran_injo said:


> So the new Bonty XR3 2.4 is not using the same casing as XR2 2.35? XR2 2.35 was my tire of choice so far after years of experimenting due to weight/volume/durability with decent grip.


Bonty Spec's 
XR3 29 x 2.4 _*58-622*_

XR2 29 x 2.35 _*58-622*_

These are the ERTRO spec's from Bonty's web page these numbers are the only way to compare tire sizes, as you can see when rated to a Standard both these are 58mm

https://www.etrto.org/Home


----------



## Spin Cycle (Nov 6, 2004)

Spin Cycle said:


> Bonty Spec's
> XR3 29 x 2.4 _*58-622*_
> 
> XR2 29 x 2.35 _*58-622*_
> ...


Maxxis

Rekon Race 2.4WT
TB00211100	29X2.40WT	61-622	120	FOLDABLE	759	SINGLE	50	EXO/TR

Aspen 2.
TB00211500	29X2.40	61-622	120	FOLDABLE	721	SINGLE	50	EXO/TR


----------



## Goran_injo (Jul 4, 2007)

I know what ETRTO (not ERTRO) stands for.

I also know my xr2 in 2.35 is 59.98mm on a i25 rim and was hoping xr3 in 2.4 is using the same casing, which is apparently not the case.


----------



## Stefan.W (Jun 13, 2018)

Swapped out my 2.35 Barzo/mezcal setup for 2.4 Aspen front and rear. Noticeable rolling improvement and I like the grip to sliding transition more. The front is more vague as it starts to go but is seems to go slower when it does. The added volume makes rocky trail feel so much smoother. 

Guys running the the 2.4 what pressures are you using (160lbs rider)? I tried 18f/22f and seems like a good place to be for me, would like to see what tire noodles and a bit less would feel like(16f), I dropped the front to 14 just playing around and it was super vauge but it had grip.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Stefan.W said:


> Swapped out my 2.35 Barzo/mezcal setup for 2.4 Aspen front and rear. Noticeable rolling improvement and I like the grip to sliding transition more. The front is more vague as it starts to go but is seems to go slower when it does. The added volume makes rocky trail feel so much smoother.
> 
> Guys running the the 2.4 what pressures are you using (160lbs rider)? I tried 18f/22f and seems like a good place to be for me, would like to see what tire noodles and a bit less would feel like(16f), I dropped the front to 14 just playing around and it was super vauge but it had grip.


I think at your weight, 16 psi front and 18 psi rear would be fine with 25-30mm internal rims and no noodles. Noodles are a great idea though.

I raced last weekend at 195 pounds with the 2.4 Aspens on some old 22mm Valor rims (new 30.5 wheel build soon) at 18psi front/ 20psi rear, did well and perhaps could've gone lower. I agree it's not the bitey-est tire in corners but it's not the worst either. For a tall guy like me, the advent of 2.4 racing tires is really a boon, it feels proportional to everything else I've been doing with the bike. I clearly dropped some guys in a concentrated tight, twisty stretch of trail.


----------



## Bluebeat007 (Mar 17, 2004)

The 2.4 Aspen front and rear combo may be perfect for my singlespeed racing needs. I’m pretty much an Ikon 2.35 front and rear guy though I did run the 2.35 Rekon Race in the rear for a few races in 2019.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

Stefan.W said:


> Swapped out my 2.35 Barzo/mezcal setup for 2.4 Aspen front and rear. Noticeable rolling improvement and I like the grip to sliding transition more. The front is more vague as it starts to go but is seems to go slower when it does. The added volume makes rocky trail feel so much smoother.
> 
> Guys running the the 2.4 what pressures are you using (160lbs rider)? I tried 18f/22f and seems like a good place to be for me, would like to see what tire noodles and a bit less would feel like(16f), I dropped the front to 14 just playing around and it was super vauge but it had grip.


I'm still experimenting with 2.4 aspen pressure

155 pounds
35mm rims
Front = 18 psi
Rear = 21 psi

Very impressed with these so far. I'll have my first race on them this coming weekend, and will get to test at another race the week after.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## louit32 (Jul 20, 2014)

if you compare the grip between 2.4 aspen, 2.35 ikon and 2.35 rekon race, you notice difference for climbing or braking?


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

My question is why would one choose either 2.4 EXO Aspen and/or Race Race vs a 2.3 Control Fast Trak and/or Renegade? The Specialized tires are way lighter and volume just slightly smaller. Grip and RR fairly equal. Always been a Maxxis fan but might switch.


----------



## MessagefromTate (Jul 12, 2007)

Unbrockenchain said:


> My question is why would one choose either 2.4 EXO Aspen and/or Race Race vs a 2.3 Control Fast Trak and/or Renegade? The Specialized tires are way lighter and volume just slightly smaller. Grip and RR fairly equal. Always been a Maxxis fan but might switch.


Because I would not run Specialized tires on a non-Specialized bike...


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

MessagefromTate said:


> Because I would not run Specialized tires on a non-Specialized bike...


Yeah I guess you should only run Maxxis tires on a Maxxis bike!!🤯


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Unbrockenchain said:


> My question is why would one choose either 2.4 EXO Aspen and/or Race Race vs a 2.3 Control Fast Trak and/or Renegade? The Specialized tires are way lighter and volume just slightly smaller. Grip and RR fairly equal. Always been a Maxxis fan but might switch.


I have found the latest incarnation of the Fast Trak Control and Renegade Control in size 2.3 to be great tires. I tried the Maxxis Aspen 2.4 on the front but was disappointed because it was heavier and didn't grip as well as the 2.3 Fast Trak Control.


----------



## louit32 (Jul 20, 2014)

Stonerider said:


> I have found the latest incarnation of the Fast Trak Control and Renegade Control in size 2.3 to be great tires. I tried the Maxxis Aspen 2.4 on the front but was disappointed because it was heavier and didn't grip as well as the 2.3 Fast Trak Control.


the ikon 2.35 would be more the equivalent tire from maxxis?


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

My Renegade control on the rear simply won't wear out. It is the longest lasting rear tire I've had. 800 off road miles plus a bunch of ride-to-trail paved miles and the dimples on the center knobs are still there. My Aspen started loosing those center chevron knobs at about 400 miles. 

But I've also discovered some of the Renegade's limitations as a front tire. In certain types of loose-over-hard corners that you enter with a lot of speed, it does give away more than the Aspen or Fast Trak. Right now, my favorite front tire is kind of a tie between the Mezcal and Fast Trak. Will be testing them more since I have them mounted on two front wheels so can switch them out in a couple minutes before rides. The Aspen is a pretty decent front tire just not as good as the other two.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Running Ikons and Cushcore XC as my "rocky/rooty" tyres and FastTrak/Renegade Control combo as the lightweight racing setup.

Been looking for a 2nd wheelset so I can leave them mounted up.

If you want to wear out a Renegade, do some standing climbing, still takes a while


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

NordieBoy said:


> Running Ikons and Cushcore XC as my "rocky/rooty" tyres and FastTrak/Renegade Control combo as the lightweight racing setup.
> 
> Been looking for a 2nd wheelset so I can leave them mounted up.
> 
> If you want to wear out a Renegade, do some standing climbing, still takes a while


Are you running 2.35 Ikons? I'm trying to debate your exact two setups for endurance racing. My bike on heavier side (not a pure bread race bike) and trying to lighten up wheels/tires.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

Unbrockenchain said:


> My question is why would one choose either 2.4 EXO Aspen and/or Race Race vs a 2.3 Control Fast Trak and/or Renegade? The Specialized tires are way lighter and volume just slightly smaller. Grip and RR fairly equal. Always been a Maxxis fan but might switch.


The knock on Specialized XC tires historically has been flat resistance and rubber compounds that don't perform as well in cold or wet conditions. I don't know if this is still true.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

Unbrockenchain said:


> Are you running 2.35 Ikons? I'm trying to debate your exact two setups for endurance racing. My bike on heavier side (not a pure bread race bike) and trying to lighten up wheels/tires.


Yep, 2.35.
For me, the rockier and rootier, the more I lean toward the Ikons. Tougher sidewall and better compound on rocks/roots.
The FastTrak/Renegade Control combo are lighter, more supple and faster rolling.
FastTrak/Renegade Grid are much too stiff in the sidewalls for my taste and I had to drop 2-3psi each end to get some compliance.

The last endurance race was rocky and had a 20min descent that was rocky and bermed, which is why I went for the Ikons at 18f/20r psi (my normal race pressures) and CushCore XC for a bit more rock protection and sidewall support in the higher G bermed corners.
Otherwise I'd have had to run 20f/22r or more so I wouldn't roll a bead and my arms would have been hammered to hell by the bottom with 45min of techy riding still to do.

This weekend is a "normal" XC race with a bit of everything, one of the courses where there's not really a "wrong" tyre choice. There'll be people running everything from worn ThunderBurt's to new DHF/DHR's

I'm going to leave the Ikons and CushCore on to see how they go on a shorter course.


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

LMN said:


> The knock on Specialized XC tires historically has been flat resistance and rubber compounds that don't perform as well in cold or wet conditions. I don't know if this is still true.


I'm pretty easy on tyres, but still get the feel that the Maxxis compound is better and the Specialized Control casing is more race type supple.
If the FastTrak and Renegade had the Maxxis compound, they'd be amazing. For one race. Then they'd be toast.
EXO feels about slightly more than halfway from Control to Grid.


----------



## LMN (Sep 8, 2007)

NordieBoy said:


> If the FastTrak and Renegade had the Maxxis compound, they'd be amazing. For one race.


I find both the Aspen's and Rekon races wear really quickly, and they do give up significant traction when they are worn.

Not sure that the combination of quick rolling, decent grip and decent wear life exists.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

LMN said:


> The knock on Specialized XC tires historically has been flat resistance and rubber compounds that don't perform as well in cold or wet conditions. I don't know if this is still true.


I believe it is the S-Works version of Specialized XC tires that is (was) notorious for leaving racers on the side of the trail with flats. I've had great luck (knock on wood) with new Control version of Specialized XC tires. They also have the new Gripton compound and seem to work decently on wet roots and rocks. I have no idea about their grip in cold weather as I live in southeastern USA and am not fond about riding in cold weather...I can just wait a day or two and it'll be warm (today's high is forecast for 75 degrees and sunny).


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

I think the new Controls are probably tougher than the old Controls given the weight increase. The new Fast Trak is in Mezcal territory - maybe even heavier. The Renegade is still only 650g or so but that's 50g above published weight.

As for rear tires, one thing I immediately noticed when switching from an Aspen to a Renegade is that my riding style had to change. With the Aspen, the rear end was always drifting out when cornering and I started to rely on it to pivot. The Renegade would not drift. The Renegade was also better at braking and standing climbing. I didn't notice any major issues with climbing over roots etc - at least not compared to the Aspen. Finally, the Renegade is just way more supple and yet has fewer rim strikes. As a rear tire, there is just no comparison between the two IMO. But I would run the Aspen over the Renegade as a front tire.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

tick_magnet said:


> I think the new Controls are probably tougher than the old Controls given the weight increase. The new Fast Trak is in Mezcal territory - maybe even heavier. The Renegade is still only 650g or so but that's 50g above published weight.
> 
> As for rear tires, one thing I immediately noticed when switching from an Aspen to a Renegade is that my riding style had to change. With the Aspen, the rear end was always drifting out when cornering and I started to rely on it to pivot. The Renegade would not drift. The Renegade was also better at braking and standing climbing. I didn't notice any major issues with climbing over roots etc - at least not compared to the Aspen. Finally, the Renegade is just way more supple and yet has fewer rim strikes. As a rear tire, there is just no comparison between the two IMO. But I would run the Aspen over the Renegade as a front tire.


What you described is also the difference between running a rekon race vs Aspen as a rear.

My last three rekon race Tan walls exo are all 671 grams.

I run them all in the rear back and forth. I run the rekon ok front too and can't imagine putting the aspen up front as poorly as it brakes. It would be fine for racing, but not for regular trail bombing for me and emergency stops for other trail users.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tick_magnet (Dec 15, 2016)

FJSnoozer said:


> What you described is also the difference between running a rekon race vs Aspen as a rear.
> 
> My last three rekon race Tan walls exo are all 671 grams.
> 
> ...


That's interesting about the Rekon Race. Do you find it more supple than the Aspen?

One thing I can't figure out is why the Aspen is more drifty than the Renegade in the rear but feels more locked in than the Renegade on the front when leaned. The Renegade seems to have a controlled drift in the front which is not where I'd like to have drift. It's almost like their performance reverses when moving them from front to rear.


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

FJSnoozer said:


> What you described is also the difference between running a rekon race vs Aspen as a rear.
> 
> My last three rekon race Tan walls exo are all 671 grams.
> 
> ...


What size Rekon Race?


----------



## j102 (Jan 14, 2018)

I just changed from a pair of Aggressors to a pair of Rekon Race 2.25 EXO dual compound. 
Between work and rain I have not tried them yet. I wanted faster tires with some durability. Let’s see.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

j102 said:


> I just changed from a pair of Aggressors to a pair of Rekon Race 2.25 EXO dual compound.
> Between work and rain I have not tried them yet. I wanted faster tires with some durability. Let's see.


That's a pretty dramatic change. Be safe!
In between that step would be a regular Rekon, or forekaster. If that combo is too Racey for you, move it to the rear and check out a forekaster 2.35 front.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

tick_magnet said:


> That's interesting about the Rekon Race. Do you find it more supple than the Aspen?
> 
> One thing I can't figure out is why the Aspen is more drifty than the Renegade in the rear but feels more locked in than the Renegade on the front when leaned. The Renegade seems to have a controlled drift in the front which is not where I'd like to have drift. It's almost like their performance reverses when moving them from front to rear.


Wish I could multiquote.

In the tan wall, yes, for some reason. I don't know why that would be because it is not a skinwall.

It's almost 1mm more narrow than the aspen 2.25 but I have been riding some of the rockier trails in the country on them (and Bentonville) front and rear.

The aspen corners well at the limit, because the side and transition knobs work well when leaned. The center is pretty purpose driven, provides great traction on hardpack, roots and bare rock gardens. It struggles and skips under breaking on an unweighted rear.

Renegade should be very progressive by design, similar to a 2.35 ikon.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Unbrockenchain said:


> What size Rekon Race?


2.25 front and rear. I don't think a larger tire would be much help. And might make cornering worse if it got more rounded off. It might be ok in the front. If I had a 30mm wheelset, this would be a different story.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## j102 (Jan 14, 2018)

FJSnoozer said:


> That's a pretty dramatic change. Be safe!
> In between that step would be a regular Rekon, or forekaster. If that combo is too Racey for you, move it to the rear and check out a forekaster 2.35 front.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Will do. Thanks for the advice!


----------



## kecinko (Aug 2, 2020)

I'm looking for late winter setup (wet leaves, roots, snow). I try to avoid muddy conditions. Currently running Racing Ray/Ralph 2,25 combo but I could use something that would give me more confidence.
I have been thinking about putting my 2,25 Ray to rear and put 2,35 Ray or 2,35 Forekaster to front, but I'm not sure if I will be able to feel much difference. (maybe put a light tire insert to rear wheel and lower the pressure). I have 25mm wheels.
I would like to avoid very heavy tires (over 850g).
Any ideas? Thank you


----------



## kecinko (Aug 2, 2020)

I'm looking fo winter setup (wet leaves, roots, snow). I try to avoid muddy conditions. Currently running Racing Ray/Ralph 2,25 combo but I could use something that would give me more confidence.
I have been thinking about putting my 2,25 Ray to rear and put 2,35 Ray or 2,35 Forekaster to front, but I'm not sure if I will be able to feel much difference. (maybe put a light tire insert to rear wheel and lower the pressure). I have 25mm wheels.
I would like to avoid very heavy tires (over 850g).
Any ideas? Thank you


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

kecinko said:


> I'm looking fo winter setup (wet leaves, roots, snow). I try to avoid muddy conditions. Currently running Racing Ray/Ralph 2,25 combo but I could use something that would give me more confidence.
> I have been thinking about putting my 2,25 Ray to rear and put 2,35 Ray or 2,35 Forekaster to front, but I'm not sure if I will be able to feel much difference. (maybe put a light tire insert to rear wheel and lower the pressure). I have 25mm wheels.
> I would like to avoid very heavy tires (over 850g).
> Any ideas? Thank you


I've been very impressed with the new Specialized Ground Control 2.3 on the front with wet roots and leaves. It is a big 2.3...bigger than Maxxis 2.35 tires. It's also under 800g. I'm running it with a 2.3 Fast Trak Control in the rear.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Stonerider said:


> I've been very impressed with the new Specialized Ground Control 2.3 on the front with wet roots and leaves. It is a big 2.3...bigger than Maxxis 2.35 tires. It's also under 800g. I'm running it with a 2.3 Fast Trak Control in the rear.


I've had this setup on my list to try for a bit. Seems promising.


----------



## mcc666 (Nov 27, 2017)

Anyone knows why the hell they made Ray Super race so much heavier than the previous version? I am considering set for next season for XC and marathon racing, but not any longer sure if I'll stick to Schwalbe product. Ray+RaRa were working fine in almost all conditions for me in 2020 - from mountain hardpack through sandy and rooty to swampy races (with some pressure modification) anyhow i am tempted to try e.g. Rekon race (f) and Aspen (r) or Cross King (f) and Race King (r), but i am not sure how it will work in different conditions. I was trying Iknon (f) + Race King (r) and Ikon (f) + ThunderBurt (r) and i wasn't pleased with Ikon stability in more difficoult conditions (e.g. sand). RK i damaged in a week or so so can’t comment on its performance. TB i found quite nice on the back - one drawback was the braking ability for XC racing (i was simply blocking the wheel in steep and loose terrain). I am fine with rear wheel "dancing" on surface if front goes where i want, but if it impact overall times i prefer better grip. I've been recently using on other wheel set CST tires - rabbit ii + b-trail - but these (especially b-trail) is even less grippy than thunderburt and i didn't see any speed gains over RaRa+Thunderburt set. This is good wheel set for marathons in grippy conditions. BTW - these are very good training or marathon tires - require a lot of balance in more difficult conditions, they’re very light but there is a penalty - they’re are not true to size. I like running low pressure - so it's important for me that the tire is stable in cornering @ 20psi on 27mm rims in tubeless setup. Do you have some comments regarding options I am considering – pros and cons comparing to my existing set ray+rara 2019?

Thanks in advance!
MCC


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

I've heard that the new Super race Schwalbe compound is indeed heavier, but plusher. Haven't tried it yet but plan to try Racing Ray 2.35s

Here's some caliper measurements for an Aspen 2.4 and Renegade 2.3 with my new 30.5 int. rims. It's a necessary compromise due to frame clearance issues with wide rims and tires, but seems to be a winner 17/19 psi front/rear


















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## mcc666 (Nov 27, 2017)

thanks for feedback

MCC


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

chomxxo said:


> I've heard that the new Super race Schwalbe compound is indeed heavier, but plusher. Haven't tried it yet but plan to try Racing Ray 2.35s
> 
> Here's some caliper measurements for an Aspen 2.4 and Renegade 2.3 with my new 30.5 int. rims. It's a necessary compromise due to frame clearance issues with wide rims and tires, but seems to be a winner 17/19 psi front/rear
> 
> ...


That Aspen has gteat volume. My only concern with Aspen is all the exposed carcass. The Renegade (and maybe Rekon Race) might have more protection due to tighter spaced knobs

Thanks for posting..very helpful


----------



## mcc666 (Nov 27, 2017)

Unbrockenchain said:


> My only concern with Aspen is all the exposed carcass.


I've been riding Schwalbe Thunderburt 2.25 for a while, in mixed conditions - and never had an issue big enough so sealant wouldn't be able to address. TB has more knobs - but super small and packed tight. 
I had aspen on my daughter bike - and no issues so far - but she is super light (less than half of my weight).

A few examples from my end:









CST Rabbit II 2.2 on 23mm rim









Schwalbe Rara 2.25 2017 lite skin on 27mm rim









the same Schwalbe Rara 2.25 2017 lite skin on 23mm rim









2019 Rara 2.25 - 27mm rim









Thunderburt 2.25 on 25mm rim

BR,
MCC


----------



## Vin829 (Mar 29, 2019)

Maxxis just released there 2.4 Aspens....Gonna try those next


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

I have two races on 2.4 Aspens with 35mm internal width rims. I’ve tried a lot of tires, and these are among the best I’ve used. 

The amount of braking and cornering traction really messes with my mind. I would never believe the tire could be ridden so hard when looking at the little knobs. In the race yesterday I set several PRs on the downhills.

I have a couple night rides on my local trail that’s covered in leaves. The tires struggle a little in those conditions, but for the most part they are predictable and controllable. I might switch to something else up front through the winter, but I plan to ride the tires in more conditions before changing anything.

Overall I highly recommend these if you’re looking for a fast rolling tire.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## GSPChilliwack (Jul 30, 2013)

Interesting. I was looking at a set of wheels with 35mm internal rims, and was worried they wouldn't work well with anything in the "XC" tire world. I think Maxxis recommends 25-30mm?



coke said:


> I have two races on 2.4 Aspens with 35mm internal width rims. I've tried a lot of tires, and these are among the best I've used.
> 
> The amount of braking and cornering traction really messes with my mind. I would never believe the tire could be ridden so hard when looking at the little knobs. In the race yesterday I set several PRs on the downhills.
> 
> ...


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

GSPChilliwack said:


> Interesting. I was looking at a set of wheels with 35mm internal rims, and was worried they wouldn't work well with anything in the "XC" tire world. I think Maxxis recommends 25-30mm?


35mm may not be optimal but it works. I sometimes run 2.6 which is why I have 35mm. If I didn't run the larger tires, I think 30mm would probably be better for 2.4

Here are a few pictures to show the profile.




























Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

Anyone been able to compare the Rekon Race 2.35 vs 2.40? 2.35 is Dual compound while 2.4 is Single. Is 2.4 volume much bigger? Does the Single make it more flat prone (Aspen in 2.4 also single)? Can't decide to try these vs Ikon in 2.35 3C.


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

anybody tried the Pirelli Scorpion XC RC yet? i saw Jasper's post on the M/H. 

Hutchinson-made with better distribution and arguably better shoulder knobs and looks to work well front or rear.


----------



## PlanB (Nov 22, 2007)

durkind said:


> Anyone been able to compare the Rekon Race 2.35 vs 2.40? 2.35 is Dual compound while 2.4 is Single. Is 2.4 volume much bigger? Does the Single make it more flat prone (Aspen in 2.4 also single)? Can't decide to try these vs Ikon in 2.35 3C.


I don't have an answer, but I also find it odd that Maxxis' latest and greatest XC race tires don't feature the 3C MaxxSpeed compound. And that the much-touted 2.4 actually has "only" a single compound. I've been programmed to seek out 3C for the best performance... Is Maxxis admitting dual compound is just as fast and grippy as MaxxSpeed? Anybody have the specific durometer numbers on these various compounds?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

So it’s a bit strange with the Aspen & Rekon Race 2.4s. Maxxis website lists them as Single Compound but Pinkbike and QBP list as Dual. And as stated about I always thought the 3C was the Maxxis gold standard compound.


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

PlanB said:


> I don't have an answer, but I also find it odd that Maxxis' latest and greatest XC race tires don't feature the 3C MaxxSpeed compound. And that the much-touted 2.4 actually has "only" a single compound. I've been programmed to seek out 3C for the best performance... Is Maxxis admitting dual compound is just as fast and grippy as MaxxSpeed? Anybody have the specific durometer numbers on these various compounds?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The Aspen could use something different, but here are








the various durometers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Kirsa (Jul 5, 2011)

Unbrockenchain said:


> So it's a bit strange with the Aspen & Rekon Race 2.4s. Maxxis website lists them as Single Compound but Pinkbike and QBP list as Dual. And as stated about I always thought the 3C was the Maxxis gold standard compound.


3C Maxx Speed is not a good compound - Dual is much better (softer and grippier) I would even say that dual compound has better traction on wooden bridges and wet roots than max terra.

Don't know yet about new 2.4" aspens and rekon race's - I doubt they use cheap and hard compound.


----------



## cabanaboy (Apr 25, 2019)

Unbrockenchain said:


> So it's a bit strange with the Aspen & Rekon Race 2.4s. Maxxis website lists them as Single Compound but Pinkbike and QBP list as Dual. And as stated about I always thought the 3C was the Maxxis gold standard compound.


I think their website is inaccurate on the 2.4WT. I emailed them a question about the difference between the 2.35" and 2.4". Here is an excerpt from the response:

"The Rekon Race 29x2.35 & 29x2.40WT-XC are only available in dual compound (no single or 3C)."

They also mentioned that the 2.4" is only available in 120TPI. Whereas, 2.35 is available in 60 and 120 TPI. So the only difference between the 2.35 and 2.4 in 120 TPI is 0.05".


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

The details y’all are concerned about. Seem to be applicable to larger knobs. 

If you made a 3c aspen, it would likely rip the chevrons right off. The knobs aren’t high enough to have all of those layers of bonding. Same for rekon race I guess unless you want them to wear as fast as an old Racing Ralph did. 

My forekasters are dual, the knobs are high, but smaller and spikey. I’d imagine if it were triple compound, it would be much more squirmy and the sipes might melt away in a matter of 300 miles, rendering them pretty mediocre. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> The details y'all are concerned about. Seem to be applicable to larger knobs.
> 
> If you made a 3c aspen, it would likely rip the chevrons right off. The knobs aren't high enough to have all of those layers of bonding. Same for rekon race I guess unless you want them to wear as fast as an old Racing Ralph did.
> 
> ...


I had the same thought last week when I had my xc and enduro tires together. The knobs on the Aspen are so small, that the rubber doesn't have to be soft for them to be compliant.










Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

cabanaboy said:


> I think their website is inaccurate on the 2.4WT. I emailed them a question about the difference between the 2.35" and 2.4". Here is an excerpt from the response:
> 
> "The Rekon Race 29x2.35 & 29x2.40WT-XC are only available in dual compound (no single or 3C)."
> 
> They also mentioned that the 2.4" is only available in 120TPI. Whereas, 2.35 is available in 60 and 120 TPI. So the only difference between the 2.35 and 2.4 in 120 TPI is 0.05".


https://marathonmtb.com/2020/04/28/maxxis-aspen-rekon-race-wide/

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

coke said:


> I had the same thought last week when I had my xc and enduro tires together. The knobs on the Aspen are so small, that the rubber doesn't have to be soft for them to be compliant.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Jekyl and Hyde picture you got there.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

FJSnoozer said:


> Jekyl and Hyde picture you got there.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah I had an enduro race on a Saturday followed by an XC race Sunday on the same trails. I constantly had to remind myself during the xc race that I didn't have an Assegai up front lol

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## durkind (Jul 8, 2005)

FJSnoozer said:


> The details y'all are concerned about. Seem to be applicable to larger knobs.
> 
> If you made a 3c aspen, it would likely rip the chevrons right off. The knobs aren't high enough to have all of those layers of bonding. Same for rekon race I guess unless you want them to wear as fast as an old Racing Ralph did.
> 
> ...


Good explanation.. thanks


----------



## Unbrockenchain (Aug 21, 2015)

Anyone compared knob height between Aspen/Rekon Race 2.25 vs 2.4? I know (or believe) in the Ikon the 2.35 just seems burlier than the 2.2


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

I've setup my "gravel and exploring" hardtail with 2.25 aspens for winter. It's an amazingly fast tire on dry singletrack and paved roads. I can overwhelm it quickly on wet leaves but that's not what it's designed for. They've convinced me that a hardtail with fast rolling tires may be the best gravel bike out there.


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

csteven71 said:


> I've setup my "gravel and exploring" hardtail with 2.25 aspens for winter. It's an amazingly fast tire on dry singletrack and paved roads. I can overwhelm it quickly on wet leaves but that's not what it's designed for. They've convinced me that a hardtail with fast rolling tires may be the best gravel bike out there.


I feel the only downside to riding my Scalpel on gravel is that I run out of gears (1x drivetrain) trying to keep up with the fast guys riding actual gravel bikes with significantly larger chain rings.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

Eric Marshall said:


> I feel the only downside to riding my Scalpel on gravel is that I run out of gears (1x drivetrain) trying to keep up with the fast guys riding actual gravel bikes with significantly larger chain rings.


My solution is an e13 cassette with a 38t chainring.

I also bought a carbon fork, we have a 70 mile marathon with 50 miles of groad. It will be 19 pounds.

Going to race the same bike at BWR on Thunderburts, at around 18.0 lbs or even lower.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

i bought some Pirelli Scorpion XC RC Lites from Lordgun in Italy since there are ZERO in the states. 

I REALLY like them so far. review and pics coming soon.


----------



## Eric Marshall (Nov 28, 2012)

csteven71 said:


> I've setup my "gravel and exploring" hardtail with 2.25 aspens for winter. It's an amazingly fast tire on dry singletrack and paved roads. I can overwhelm it quickly on wet leaves but that's not what it's designed for. They've convinced me that a hardtail with fast rolling tires may be the best gravel bike out there.


While we're talking about using mtbs for gravel riding, are folks increasing their tire pressure for the gravel rides or just leaving them at single track pressures?

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Stonerider (Feb 25, 2008)

Eric Marshall said:


> While we're talking about using mtbs for gravel riding, are folks increasing their tire pressure for the gravel rides or just leaving them at single track pressures?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


If I'm using the same tires that I run on single track, I'll normally add about 2 pounds of psi for gravel.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Eric Marshall said:


> While we're talking about using mtbs for gravel riding, are folks increasing their tire pressure for the gravel rides or just leaving them at single track pressures?
> 
> Thanks in advance.


I run the Aspen 2.25s at 25 psi on gravel which is pretty close to my normal pressures.


----------



## csteven71 (Jan 15, 2009)

Eric Marshall said:


> I feel the only downside to riding my Scalpel on gravel is that I run out of gears (1x drivetrain) trying to keep up with the fast guys riding actual gravel bikes with significantly larger chain rings.


I run a 34 with eagle and it's typically fine. Sometimes I fight the weird 10 to 12 jump on pavement.


----------



## dinsum (May 31, 2016)

Curious about the new super race thunder burts. I am using the 29x2.25 snakeskin speed and it really is a fast tire in dry conditions. I am wondering if anybody notices them to be more supple when riding resulting in better grip making it just a better tire in general compared to the old snakeskins? I can't really find any reviews on this matter. I imagine everybody would make the switch as long as the super race has comparative puncture resistance vs the snakeskin, the super race is actually a little bit heavier then the old snakeskin so it makes me think they are basically the same tire but the super race is slightly heavier but more supple

BTW, How has schwalbe not made a tire between the thunder burt and racing ralph yet? The ultimate tire would be a thunder burt with bigger and more side knobs but not to the extent of the rock razer, it would only add like 30-40 grams and make the tire much more confident inspiring around corners.... racing ralph has good side knobs but I find the center tread pretty useless tbh, only seems marginally better at breaking and climbing over the thunder burt at too much rolling resistance expense


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

dinsum said:


> Curious about the new super race thunder burts. I am using the 29x2.25 snakeskin speed and it really is a fast tire in dry conditions. I am wondering if anybody notices them to be more supple when riding resulting in better grip making it just a better tire in general compared to the old snakeskins? I can't really find any reviews on this matter. I imagine everybody would make the switch as long as the super race has comparative puncture resistance vs the snakeskin, the super race is actually a little bit heavier then the old snakeskin so it makes me think they are basically the same tire but the super race is slightly heavier but more supple
> 
> BTW, How has schwalbe not made a tire between the thunder burt and racing ralph yet? The ultimate tire would be a thunder burt with bigger and more side knobs but not to the extent of the rock razer, it would only add like 30-40 grams and make the tire much more confident inspiring around corners.... racing ralph has good side knobs but I find the center tread pretty useless tbh, only seems marginally better at breaking and climbing over the thunder burt at too much rolling resistance expense


The Vitoria Tereno pretty much meets these specs. It has a surprising amount of climbing traction too. Wish they made a 2.35 version.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

Today i learned Pirelli MTB tires are made by Vittoria, or at least the same factory that Vittoria uses (Lion tires?). so if you like vittoria casing, etc but want a different tread, take a look at Pirelli.

same casing, same "B.01" marker on mine. the rubber layer terminates the same way. rubber compound may be different.

i haven't tried the G2.0 MTB tires, tho do have them on CX bike, but i like the rubber compound better on the pirellis as well. not as dead and spongy feeling. seemingly more grip on slickrock and polished roots. they seem to roll much faster than mezcal does as well. cant speak to barzo. ill post pics and full review if people are interested.

I'm really liking the *XC RC* on the rear with the *XC M* on the front.




























"Vittoria's Lion Tyres factory in Bangkok not only produces Vittoria branded tires, but it is a large OEM tire maker for numerous high-end tire brands. "









Bangkok Flood No Threat to Lion Tyres


BANGKOK, Thailand (BRAIN)—Vittoria’s Lion Tyres factory in Bangkok not only produces Vittoria branded tires, but it is a large OEM tire maker for numerous high-end tire brands. As floodwaters continue to rise in Bangkok, officials at Lyon Tires say so far its factory is not affected. “The water...




www.bicycleretailer.com


----------



## aland33 (Dec 10, 2016)

What is the actual width of those Pirellis and do they have descent bag size?

Do the side walls have the same grey tone as Vittorias?


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

aland33 said:


> What is the actual width of those Pirellis and do they have descent bag size?
> 
> Do the side walls have the same grey tone as Vittorias?


tire specs below. widths are pretty healthy. effectively 2.25in. the dye is much darker, basically black, but the threads are the same copper color underneath.

what is bag size?

Scorpion XC RC LITE 2.2 (a la TLR Vittoria)
Weight 617/620
Rubber width flat 72.59
Tread width flat 59.27
Folded casing thickness 1.1??
Casing width installed 53.69 *56 after 280mi*
Tread width installed 54 *55.5 after 280mi on 25mm ID rim*
Shoulder tread depth 3.3
Int tread depth 1.6
Center tread depth 1.5

Scorpion XC M 2.2 Prowall (a la TNT Vittoria)
Weight 740
Rubber width flat 73
Tread width flat 60
Folded casing thickness 1.8-2
Casing width installed 54.6new *56.5mm after 60mi*
Tread width installed 53.8new *55.2mm after 60mi*
Shoulder tread depth 3.5-3.7
Int tread depth 2.2
Center tread depth 2.2

XR3 2.2
Weight 648 (some sealant)
Rubber width flat n/a?
Tread width flat 58.7
Folded casing thickness 1.8?
Casing width installed 52.84
Tread width installed 54

XR3 2.4
Weight 755 (spec weight)
Rubber width flat
Tread width flat
Folded casing thickness
Casing width installed 58.6
Tread width installed 59.2

XR1 2.0
Weight 574 (some sealant)
Rubber width flat 66
Tread width flat 57
Folded casing thickness 1.32
Casing width installed 52.80
Tread width installed 50.88


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

FactoryMatt said:


> what is bag size?


Casing width.


----------



## fatcamper (Dec 17, 2009)

According to a review on Singletracks the Pirellis are a single compound. It'd be interesting to compare durometer readings to see how firm the compound is compared to the center and side knobs of a multi-compound tire. I have wondered if multiple exotic rubber compounds (ie. 4c G2.0 or 3c maxxspeed) are really any better on a xc bike or just marketing hype.


----------



## dinsum (May 31, 2016)

Some decent info on tires here









Round Up: 25 Different XC World Cup Tire Combinations - Pinkbike


From the more conventional lightweight setups to some wild handmade custom options there are plenty of variation among the top XC riders.




www.pinkbike.com





The Chaoyang Phantom Speed is exactly what I feel Schwalbe should do with their Thunder Burt, or make two versions, one with good side knobs


----------



## NordieBoy (Sep 26, 2004)

A pity they didn't remove the 10 year old tyres off the list when redoing it this time.



dinsum said:


> Some decent info on tires here
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

fatcamper said:


> According to a review on Singletracks the Pirellis are a single compound. It'd be interesting to compare durometer readings to see how firm the compound is compared to the center and side knobs of a multi-compound tire. I have wondered if multiple exotic rubber compounds (ie. 4c G2.0 or 3c maxxspeed) are really any better on a xc bike or just marketing hype.


im not sure but its very very good. like really good. the shoulder knobs are plenty soft, i know that. compound works way better on roots and wet rocks than vittorias, which IME, were downright scary. they also seem to wear better so far than Bontragers, which are notoriously soft (without being DHF slow that is). they feel firmer to the fingernail than bontragers, but not drastically so.


----------



## FactoryMatt (Apr 25, 2018)

NordieBoy said:


> A pity they didn't remove the 10 year old tyres off the list when redoing it this time.


that piece was a low-effort joke. pinkbike really phoning in the requisite content for that XC quota.


----------



## EdSawyer (Mar 20, 2020)

dinsum said:


> BTW, How has schwalbe not made a tire between the thunder burt and racing ralph yet? The ultimate tire would be a thunder burt with bigger and more side knobs but not to the extent of the rock razer, it would only add like 30-40 grams and make the tire much more confident inspiring around corners....


That would be the Rocket Ron, IMNSHO. Almost as light as the Thunder Burt, at least when both are in the LIteskin version. I am not a fan of the newer/heavier compounds from Schwalbe, I stocked up on the older/current Liteskin versions of TB and Rocket Ron.


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

FactoryMatt said:


> that piece was a low-effort joke. pinkbike really phoning in the requisite content for that XC quota.


Pink bike is a complete joke.


----------



## chomxxo (Oct 15, 2008)

Rocket Ron is plenty fast but I wouldn't consider it middle ground between Thunder Burt and Racing Ralph, it's a completely different design. Thunder Burt is a semi-slick, which I think is the ideal XC race (and gravel) tire: light, fast for the majority of your ride, but with cornering knobs to get traction when you need it most.

I think dinsum is right in wanting better side knobs. I'm currently with the Aspen 2.4 and I'd say it's got that middle ground, besides side knobs, a little better climbing traction. Of course that probably means it rolls a little slower. Some other semi-slicks I've tried: WTB Vulpine, Challenge Gravel Grinder, Rocket Ron with trimmed center knobs, Vittoria Terreno (GREAT tire, as fast or faster, durable, corners better, but like Thunder Burt, not available in 2.35).


----------



## AbyN (Dec 28, 2020)

off topic:



FJSnoozer said:


> My solution is an e13 cassette with a 38t chainring.
> 
> I also bought a carbon fork, we have a 70 mile marathon with 50 miles of groad. It will be 19 pounds.
> 
> ...


What bwr location & which distance?


----------



## FJSnoozer (Mar 3, 2015)

AbyN said:


> off topic:
> 
> What bwr location & which distance?


Cali 2021 (counting on 2022 at this rate) full distance, 140 ish miles.

On that topic, i just set it up in that form last night.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Jared Falck (Apr 10, 2021)

FJSnoozer said:


> That website is worthless. Here are the reasons why. Prepare to have your heart broken.
> 
> *1. All tires in this test are tested with a Butyl Tube. His own testing with a butyl tube shows the drastic difference Tubeless makes vs Latex vs Butyl. In fact as the PSI gets lower, the Delta is dramatic.*
> 
> ...


I really appreciate this, I've been looking for new tires and using this website, thanks


----------

