Big Apple tires question
 

I commute on a stock Surly Cross Check complete, and the time has come to replace the tires. The stock tires are 700x32's.

I would love to put Big Apples (I'm looking at the 29x2.0) on my bike, but I'm worried that the rims are not wide enough and wanted to see what experiences people might have had. Would I need to build a real 29'er wheel to run a tire like this?

Any thoughts? Other suggestions (I'm also considering the Marathons in one of their iterations, etc., etc.) . . .

thanks--

Measure the internal width of the rim and use Sheldon Brown's tire sizing chart (the red and green chart) to see if it will work.

I love Big Apples. I used to think Continental was the best German tire brand but Schwalbe has really given them a run for the money. You can't go wrong with the tires. While you're at it, check out the Fat Franks!

They Can work, but a narrower rim will give the tires a less round profile. Cornering goes off a little, and there is a small chance of the tire rolling off the rim.

I've tried Big Apples on my crosscheck, they barely fit but were a nice ride. My teenage son had BAs on his MTB converted to touring bike- they rode well and were nice on limestone trails.
IMHO- 47 or 42 mm regular Schwalbe Marathons not only fit better but were better suited to a mix of road, dirt, sand surfaces encountered during a commute. The 42 mm size is especially effective, have about 5000 km on the current set, still going well.

Thanks for the replies. I've looked at the chart on SB's website, but I haven't had a chance yet to pull the tires off and measure the rims. According to his chart, it would seem that the BA's are not an option on the wheels I'm currently running--the stock tire is a 32, and no rim (on his chart) gets a green x for both 32 and 50.

Guess I'll go a little bit thinner, unless somebody pipes up with other experiences/suggestions.

Thanks again!

I've run 29x2.3 big apples on these for 3k miles and haven't had a problem. Schwalbe recomends not inflating over 40psi on narrow rims I ran 45-50 rear and 30-40 frt. http://www.jensonusa.com/store/produ...+Td17+Rim.aspx the rim width measurment they list is for the outside. I believe the inside is 20mm due to the anti snakebite.

Schwalbe's website gives reccomended rim widths for their tires. For the BAs they say a narrower rim will be ok.

Two suggestions;first,do you really want tires that big? I had a 29er,but sold it. In the dirt big wheels may help you roll over things easier,but on the street all that extra weight that much farther from the hub means extra effort to spin up every time you pull away from a stop. If I'm going to go past 32mm,I much prefer to run 26" wheels.

Second,if you really want big tires,forget the Big Apples,they're heavy. The LiteSkin's weigh 700gr and the standards weigh 885. Marathon Supremes are more expensive,but the 40mm's only weigh 510/570gr. That's a big weight difference. I run 26x2" Supremes on my daily commuter and love them. I'd also recommend Conti Contact Extralights in 42mm,they're only 500gr. I ran these for awhile on my 29er and liked them better than the stock 1.9"s and a set of 38mm Infinitys I ran.

You're all over the place with your weights... why would you pick the widest Big Apple to use against a MUCH narrower tire for comparison?

Anyway, I've always thought something was off with the Schwalbe quoted weights on the Big Apple.

In my garage, I have a 26x2 Big Apple (790g), a 26x2.35 Big Apple (895g), a 700x35c Marathon Supreme (440g) and a 26x1.35 Marathon Plus (830g) and these quoted weights simply aren't right. For one, the Marathon Plus weights at LEAST twice what the small Big Apple does.

I felt the weight increase when moving to Big Apples from a 1.3" tire, but cruising speed actually went up with them.

--------------

Anyway, for the OP... the Marthon Supreme rides similar to the Big Apple if that's what you're after. Unfortunately, they're twice as expensive and seem to roll a little slower.

Thanks for all the comments. The discussion of tire weights is interesting--

At this point, I am leaning towards the Marathons, largely because of the increased ability to run fenders with them. I still think the Big Apples would look fantastic and I'm curious to see how they ride, but I'll probably have to wait a while yet to find out.

This isn't the Tour de France we're talking about though. I like having wheels with enough momentum that bumps and rocks aren't stopping them. As far as getting them up to speed - stand and mash for 2-3 pedal strokes and you're there. No big deal.

The OP said he was looking at 29x2" Big Apples. I quoted the weights for the reg and light versions,then compared them to other wide tires. I'd say 40-42mm is pretty wide. I also suggested those other tires as still being able to give the ride he was looking for without all the weight.

Donno,all I can say is I weighed my Supremes with a digital fish scale before I mounted them and they were within like 5-10gr of what Schwalbe says they're supposed to be.

I've never ridden Big Apples or reg Marathon's,but I'm extremely pleased with my Supremes. They handle extremely well,stick like sportbike radials in the rain,have shown little wear in 9 months of daily use,zero flats,and are noticeably easier to spin up and climb hills with than the Specialized Crossroads they replaced. Recent weather has shown they are only ok in snow/slush,but then they were never intended for these conditions. When these wear out I will replace them with another set,and really wish Schwalbe would make them in 1.5" so I could put them on a couple other bikes.

I'm no weight weenie,but DC is a very hilly area. My regular route home means twice dropping into the 26 ring and either 2nd or 3rd gear out back(depending on how I'm feeling) to haul my 31lbs bike up a long steep hill. In the OP's case,the difference between the 29x2 folding Supreme(no wire in that size) and the wire Big Apple is 195gr. According to Google,that's about .43lbs,or almost half a pound. That's alot of weight to put around the outer part of your rim where it's going to require extra effort to spin up.

This discussion has been very interesting--I have to admit that most of the Big Apple's allure for me lies in its bizarre size. I am curious to see how a tire like that would ride.

In reality, other tires probably fit my needs better--the Conti GP 4 seasons, the Marathon (in any of its incarnations), the Michelin Krylion (if it ever resurfaces) . . .

After three years on the stock tires (with only three flats, might I add), I am mostly excited to try a new tire!

Well, I have to say once I went Big Apple I am not going back. I wonder about the weight advantage of the marathon supreme but there is a) the price disadvantage and b) I read somewhere that its pressure sweet spot is closer to 60 psi while I roll the BAs around 40 psi. That could be a completely misinformed view but hey it was enough to talk me out of the budgetary hit anyway.

Yeah, but you only spin up as often as you stop. The only situation where I can see caring is if you have a *lot* of stops in the middle of high-speed traffic. So if you're going from 20 to 0 to 20 to 0.... a few times a minute, that might get old. Otherwise, we're talking about 3-4 pedal strokes, no big deal. Believe me, I've got some nice hills on my commute, and I've seen some of the worst hills in N. Va. on a 40+lb bike (like the bike trail from the river up to Reston). Good for your quads.

There's also the fact that he's presumably wanting 2" tires for a reason, and that reason is to run them at lower pressures than 32mm tires will accept without risking a pinch flat. Obviosuly, if his goal is to run at a pressure range that his current 32mm tires will handle, then there's no reason to get new tires at all. But I'm assuming that the OP is making a conscious choice between the comfort and stability of wider/lower pressure 2" tires vs. the slightly higher speed of the 32s.

There are advantages to wider tires; many people like them and don't mind the rather minimal performance impact.

As Mr. Underbridge notes, I am interested in the ride quality afforded by (much) wider tires running a (much) lower pressure. That said, I have no real experience as to what those characteristics might be (I can repeat the information I have read online--smoothing out bumps, rolling easily over cracks, etc.--but I don't know much beyond that). dynaryder brings up salient points concerning weight/size trade-offs. I would be interested in more detailed comments from any of you (like HardyWeinberg) who have spent some time on the Big Apples.

I imagine that to a certain extent the change to Marathons/GP 4 seasons might be as drastic for me coming off of the stock cross tires that are currently on the bike (32s).

Thanks again for all the info.

As I previously posted I have riden them for 3k miles of commuting, riding with groups and even a century. They have performed great for flats(only a handfull in that time) and the ride quality is excelent they are heavier, but not noticably. For a short period of time I rode wtb alteranasaurus and they were slower for sure. everyone that rides them has commented on the good ride quality. I have just recently switched t panaracer t-serv 28's and other than the gear ratiochange I have not noticed a huge change in speed or ease of pushing the t-servs are just a harder ride.

For me the performance of the BAs has been everything I might hope for from big fat low pressure tires. They glide over the road, absorbing all obstacles, and the large contact patch sticks me to the road in any kind of the crazy wet slippery conditions I get so much of. Except black ice, I am currently using schwalbe snow-studs until the black ice season is over (considering switching back to the BAs tonight).

I don't notice the weight, or any meaningful acceleration burden.

They are bomber tough, we have wretched conditions for road debris. My 1st pair of BAs I went ~2k miles w/ no flats. My current bike I did replace the rear tire after 4k miles, basically when it started getting flats. 2k miles along the new rear tire now has treadwear that looks a lot like the front tire (which is ~6k at this point).

Again, I am curious about the marathon supremes but last time I looked at the schwalbe site, they give equivocal bullet ratings relative to the apples, they cost more, and then somewhere I picked up that factoid about supremes being better aimed at higher pressures than I've become accustomed to w/ the apples. Now I am curious about the BA 'liteskins'.

My bike is a 54cm LHT by the way, I am running 26x2.0 BAs w/ plenty of room for cascadia fenders.

Thanks lapher and Mr. Weinberg. That's the kind of info I was hoping to get. It's good to hear that you can get the fenders over the BAs. That's a major plus. Looks like I might be giving them a try after all.

exapkib: what are your stock tires? What psi?

Don't know if this'll be helpful,but I did a tire swap on my Big Buzz after the alloy fork started to bother my carpel tunnel(I was using it as a nice weather commuter for a time). Stockers were Vittoria Randonneurs in 28mm @85psi. Swapped them for Randonneur Pros(folding bead,lighter weight) in 32 @75. Noticed enough of a difference that I was able to ride the bike daily without my CT kicking in.

The stock tires on my Surly are Ritchey SpeedMax Cross 700 x 32c. I keep them inflated to 80psi most of the time. I really don't have many complaints about the way they ride or their weight. (I don't have much to compare them with, as I've never put any other tires on this bike.)

I'm of the mind that one should use a piece of equipment for as long as possible before replacing it. (Being a grad student for so many years will do that to a person.) Hence, I have not considered other tire options until now (my once 'knobby' cross tires are now slicks . . . )

I have 3 bikes that I use to commute on. I can tell a significant difference between my road bike - which I run with 25mm tires at 80-110psi, compared to my hybrid which has 37mm tires at 45-65psi. In fairness, my road bike has an Aluminum fork too, which might play a role, but still.

One thing you might want to try - you can probably get away with a decent amount less than 80 psi on your 32s without risking a flat. Drop the pressure and see if you notice a difference in comfort.

Note, I get fenders over BAs on 26" LHT which has more clearance than the 700c version.

One other thing, my driveway is pea gravel which is just a hellacious surface, but the BAs pretty much float over it so that is another plus for them. I remember trying to burrow through that crap w/ higher pressure 1.5" Michelin Transworld Cities and it was not pretty.

Old thread but maybe useful to someone. I've used 50mm Big Apples on my Crosscheck and they work well without a prob even with fenders too. They are really excellent tires that I recommend for anyone to try out. The tire/rim charts err on the side of caution, but as long as you don't max the psi on the tire, you should be fine. I keep mine between 35-45psi.

Here are some pics. I've used them on both of my crosschecks with different rims.

With stock rims
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/...218f2fa0_b.jpg

With Mavic Open Pros
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3312/...04558ce0_b.jpg

With Salsa Delgados
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3628/...b344cdb9_b.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3410/...81fcf147_b.jpg

With Aerospokes on my fixed gear
http://i647.photobucket.com/albums/u...o/DSC05936.jpg