Tire sizes
#1
Ellensburg, WA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 3,749
Bikes: See my signature
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 443 Times
in
155 Posts
Tire sizes
Being new to mountain biking I still have a lot to learn. Take tire sizes for instance - it there an optimal. I'm currently running 26" X 2.1 on my Klein but have some 2.35 Klein Death Grips I could use also. Is there that much of a difference? Better grip on which ones? What are the benefits to wider vs. narrow from an mtb perspective? Some of the guys on our 24 hr race team this last weekend were running 2.0's which to me didn't look that much different from a width perspective. I even heard of someone this past weekend running a narrower rear tire in the race than in the front.
__________________
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
#2
one less horse
Yes. But it's contingent upon terrain, bike, rider style, psi, etc.
The difference is 0.25. You may be able to ascertain other differences but it will involve actually putting the other tires on your bike.
Generally wider tires grip better, but there's grip that you may want (side knobs for cornering) and grip that you may not want (rolling resistance). Also all contingent upon terrain, bike, rider style, etc.
Benefits of wider tires generally include better cornering, better braking, better traction under load, and ride comfort.
The difference is 5%. You should be aware, however, that published widths can vary by manufacturer and definitely will vary based on rim width.
That's perfectly acceptable.
Generally wider tires grip better, but there's grip that you may want (side knobs for cornering) and grip that you may not want (rolling resistance). Also all contingent upon terrain, bike, rider style, etc.
Benefits of wider tires generally include better cornering, better braking, better traction under load, and ride comfort.
That's perfectly acceptable.
#3
Fool O' crap
Also - a wide light tire can lead to flexy side walls - that can lead to really poor handling.
#5
Ellensburg, WA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 3,749
Bikes: See my signature
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 443 Times
in
155 Posts
I guess I'm trying to figure out a good balance as my confidence and handling improves. It might also deal more with tread design. I ran two bikes this weekend - one had Ritchey Climb Max tires which I found are horrible in soft, loose gravel. The Klein ran Bontrager Jones ACX on the rear and a Kenda Nevegal on the front but I didn't feel I could get as much grip on flatter corners - it wanted to wash out to the outside of the bend on the fire roads. For single track the Klein did real well. I may just pop on the 2.35's and see if I like how they ride. 2.1's might end up being a compromise.
__________________
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
#6
Moar cowbell
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The 509
Posts: 12,481
Bikes: Bike list is not a resume. Nobody cares.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
^^ This plays into one of your questions ("I even heard of someone this past weekend running a narrower rear tire in the race than in the front.") The reason for running the wider front is generally to take advantage of the wider tire's cornering footprint for better bite, while leaving the rear narrower to cut down some rolling resistance, maintain the narrower tire's quicker acceleration, etc. As you found at the Riverside venue, cornering traction is everything on those loose-over-packed surfaces.
If you try 2.35s, I'd say give the 2.35 front/narrower rear combo a try first before going fat at both ends and see if that works for you.
Sometimes, though, you don't need to go that drastic; sometimes all it takes is a pattern/compound change front-to-back to accomplish a similar effect without giving up the inherent speed in the narrower tire. I love my 2.35 Nevegals at Riverside - - but I’m a goofy fatter-tire nut and run a way-overkill 6.5/7” trailbike there all the time. When I ride my XC hardtail there on the 24-Hour course, I’m running a Maxxis Ignitor 2.1 front and a Larsen TT 2.0 rear. When I finally switch the to Kendas (shhhhh!), I’ll may go Excavator 2.1 front / Small Block 8 2.1 rear. I’m not crazy about the SB8 as a front as (for me anyway) it felt a bit washy in the corners - - even in 2.35.
If you try 2.35s, I'd say give the 2.35 front/narrower rear combo a try first before going fat at both ends and see if that works for you.
Sometimes, though, you don't need to go that drastic; sometimes all it takes is a pattern/compound change front-to-back to accomplish a similar effect without giving up the inherent speed in the narrower tire. I love my 2.35 Nevegals at Riverside - - but I’m a goofy fatter-tire nut and run a way-overkill 6.5/7” trailbike there all the time. When I ride my XC hardtail there on the 24-Hour course, I’m running a Maxxis Ignitor 2.1 front and a Larsen TT 2.0 rear. When I finally switch the to Kendas (shhhhh!), I’ll may go Excavator 2.1 front / Small Block 8 2.1 rear. I’m not crazy about the SB8 as a front as (for me anyway) it felt a bit washy in the corners - - even in 2.35.
__________________
RST Suspension | Canfield Bikes | 7iDP Protection | Maxxis | Renthal | Hayes | VonZipper Optics | GoPro
Originally Posted by Mark Twain
"Don't argue with stupid people; they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
Last edited by dminor; 05-31-11 at 04:07 PM.
#7
Ellensburg, WA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 3,749
Bikes: See my signature
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 443 Times
in
155 Posts
Thanks for the info dminor. I'll be back over in a couple of weeks so maybe I'll put the 2.0 tire I have on the rear of the Klein and run it on the course and see how they do. I didn't have a lot of trouble on the cornering with the Nevegal - but, then I'm not running as fast as a lot of those guys (1:03 was the best) so I probably didn't get to the limit. The Bontrager wanted to wash out a little on the gravel roads at higher speeds but did ok on the single track - even across the fields below Devil's Down. However, over here the roads are a combination of light gravel to heavier 1.5 to 2" rock and it tears the Bontrager to pieces.
After being a roadie for so long I have to get used to mixing up tires and tread front to rear off road.
After being a roadie for so long I have to get used to mixing up tires and tread front to rear off road.
__________________
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
#8
.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Summit of Lee
Posts: 10,939
Bikes: Hecklah
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
2.35's:
I have run a few combo's that I like and a few that suck. I was a Nevegal fanboi until Kenda released the excavator. I still run a Nevegal on the rear b/c I won't go less than 2.35" and the Nevegal is slightly narrower than Excavator with the same casing label. The 2.35" Excavator rubs just a tad in hard leans and crooked tranny's. So now, I roll on a 2.35" Nev Rear / Excavator front. The Excavator is an amazing tire...predictable, grippy. The Nev will roll a bit faster, but breaks loose sooner. I don't care about rolling resistance (to a point)...IMO the added traction benefit trumps it by far. I did try a 2.5r / 2.8f setup for XC for a bit, but that was a bit over the top and killed me.
2.1's: I have a 1998 Komodo that I'm running rigid. If I could fit a 2.35 in the frame, I totally would...but since I can't, I run a 2.1" Kenda Smallblock 8 rear with a 2.35" Nevegal front. I had 2.1" SB8's on F & R to begin with, and it was super fast...but just blasting a 30-40mph gravel path "felt" a bit sketchy. As soon as I threw the 2.35" Nev up front...I grew some serious confidence in the bike. I pushed so much harder. Added volume lets me run lower pressure for added traction, smoother ride on a rigid which equated to increased confidence allowing me to push harder / more aggressive.
Tread pattern, durometer, casing thickness all have equal bearing on a tire purchase. I don't do straight up DH or FR, so I run a Kevlar bead. If I did the prior, I'd go wire with DH casing.
I tried Conti Mtn Kings when I tried to XC'out my Komodo...I hated them. They actually caused me to hit a tree due to their crappy grip. I've done the uber light Python's, most of the older IRC line, some WTB's...including Raptors. (decent for mud) A couple different Tioga's. I'm still sold on the Excavator for over all traction though. I've never rolled with Maxxis, so I can't comment. I've heard great things though.
I'd like to give the Slant Six and High Roller a shot. Looking at the tread pattern though...I'd most likely only be happy with them as a rear tire with a more aggressive tread up front.
I have run a few combo's that I like and a few that suck. I was a Nevegal fanboi until Kenda released the excavator. I still run a Nevegal on the rear b/c I won't go less than 2.35" and the Nevegal is slightly narrower than Excavator with the same casing label. The 2.35" Excavator rubs just a tad in hard leans and crooked tranny's. So now, I roll on a 2.35" Nev Rear / Excavator front. The Excavator is an amazing tire...predictable, grippy. The Nev will roll a bit faster, but breaks loose sooner. I don't care about rolling resistance (to a point)...IMO the added traction benefit trumps it by far. I did try a 2.5r / 2.8f setup for XC for a bit, but that was a bit over the top and killed me.
2.1's: I have a 1998 Komodo that I'm running rigid. If I could fit a 2.35 in the frame, I totally would...but since I can't, I run a 2.1" Kenda Smallblock 8 rear with a 2.35" Nevegal front. I had 2.1" SB8's on F & R to begin with, and it was super fast...but just blasting a 30-40mph gravel path "felt" a bit sketchy. As soon as I threw the 2.35" Nev up front...I grew some serious confidence in the bike. I pushed so much harder. Added volume lets me run lower pressure for added traction, smoother ride on a rigid which equated to increased confidence allowing me to push harder / more aggressive.
Tread pattern, durometer, casing thickness all have equal bearing on a tire purchase. I don't do straight up DH or FR, so I run a Kevlar bead. If I did the prior, I'd go wire with DH casing.
I tried Conti Mtn Kings when I tried to XC'out my Komodo...I hated them. They actually caused me to hit a tree due to their crappy grip. I've done the uber light Python's, most of the older IRC line, some WTB's...including Raptors. (decent for mud) A couple different Tioga's. I'm still sold on the Excavator for over all traction though. I've never rolled with Maxxis, so I can't comment. I've heard great things though.
I'd like to give the Slant Six and High Roller a shot. Looking at the tread pattern though...I'd most likely only be happy with them as a rear tire with a more aggressive tread up front.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 269
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I don't know much about racing, but when I changed out my front 2.1 stock tire (granted it was a Felt tire labeled as some sort of trail hybrid thing) to a 2.35 Kenda excavator (good tip from chelboed) I noticed a huge increase in grip and handling, and very little, if any, loss in speed. For me the excavator was also one of the more inexpensive options. It has given me confidence to descend noticeably faster than previously, and has improved my ascent as well. I don't know if it is simply the tread/rubber that make it so much better, or the increased width.
The stock tire (2.1) is still on the back, and for now in what have been until yesterday dry conditions I am really liking the combo. I may have to switch it out in muddy conditions.. I think I'll be able to tell after tomorrow.
The stock tire (2.1) is still on the back, and for now in what have been until yesterday dry conditions I am really liking the combo. I may have to switch it out in muddy conditions.. I think I'll be able to tell after tomorrow.
#10
Moar cowbell
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The 509
Posts: 12,481
Bikes: Bike list is not a resume. Nobody cares.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts
Speaking of mud - - I have not been in any wet conditions yet that have been so sloppy that my stock Excavators have not handled it; BUT . . .
A tip for those of you who may want to run Exs in consistently muddy/greasy conditions: take each center tri-knob and cut out the middle one. It essentially turns the Excavator into a dedicated mud tire. (A cutting tip straight from Eric Carter himself.)
A tip for those of you who may want to run Exs in consistently muddy/greasy conditions: take each center tri-knob and cut out the middle one. It essentially turns the Excavator into a dedicated mud tire. (A cutting tip straight from Eric Carter himself.)
__________________
RST Suspension | Canfield Bikes | 7iDP Protection | Maxxis | Renthal | Hayes | VonZipper Optics | GoPro
Originally Posted by Mark Twain
"Don't argue with stupid people; they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
#11
Ellensburg, WA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 3,749
Bikes: See my signature
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 443 Times
in
155 Posts
Great info. You have me convinced to try the larger front/smaller rear combo. I think I'll go ahead and move the 2.1 Nevegal to the rear for now and put on one of the 2.35 Klein Death Grips on the front and see how it feels. The nice thing is I have a year to dial in the ride before I try to break the hour mark on that course. That would actually make my day after only a couple of years of riding off road regularly.
__________________
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
#12
nOOb
Fits though. The rear one of my Maxxis Ignitor 2.35 had that look (I bought it used). That someone had done something. Didn't look like normal wear and tear. Would there be an advantage to doing so? I changed it out for a new one when it flatted. But I have it. Gonna take a closer look.
#13
Wood Licker
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Whistler,BC
Posts: 16,966
Bikes: Trek Fuel EX 8 27.5 +, 2002 Transition Dirtbag, Kona Roast 2002
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 23 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
^^ This plays into one of your questions ("I even heard of someone this past weekend running a narrower rear tire in the race than in the front.") The reason for running the wider front is generally to take advantage of the wider tire's cornering footprint for better bite, while leaving the rear narrower to cut down some rolling resistance, maintain the narrower tire's quicker acceleration, etc. As you found at the Riverside venue, cornering traction is everything on those loose-over-packed surfaces.
#14
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Valley of the Sun.
Posts: 40,708
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 70 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9893 Post(s)
Liked 4,868 Times
in
2,543 Posts
#15
Moar cowbell
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: The 509
Posts: 12,481
Bikes: Bike list is not a resume. Nobody cares.
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 29 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times
in
4 Posts


__________________
RST Suspension | Canfield Bikes | 7iDP Protection | Maxxis | Renthal | Hayes | VonZipper Optics | GoPro
Originally Posted by Mark Twain
"Don't argue with stupid people; they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."
#16
.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Summit of Lee
Posts: 10,939
Bikes: Hecklah
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Great info. You have me convinced to try the larger front/smaller rear combo. I think I'll go ahead and move the 2.1 Nevegal to the rear for now and put on one of the 2.35 Klein Death Grips on the front and see how it feels. The nice thing is I have a year to dial in the ride before I try to break the hour mark on that course. That would actually make my day after only a couple of years of riding off road regularly.
No offense man but the "Death Grip" appears to me like a tire that contradicts itself:

I wouldn't be surprised if you actually don't like that setup b/c I suspect the Nevegal will stick harder than the Klein. Before judging the 2.1r / 2.35f...I'd think long and hard about coming up with a better 2.35 front tire.
Just sayin.
#17
.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: The Summit of Lee
Posts: 10,939
Bikes: Hecklah
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Tell ya what, man...I've got a 1/2 used 2.35" Nevegal DTC that I can send ya if you PM me your shipping addy. I'd rather see someone have a good experience with a setup that I recommend than just let it sit on a shelf as a back up.

Last edited by ed; 06-01-11 at 04:29 PM.
#18
Ellensburg, WA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ellensburg, WA
Posts: 3,749
Bikes: See my signature
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 309 Post(s)
Liked 443 Times
in
155 Posts
The only reason I had contemplated using the Death Grips is they are hanging in my shop and readily available. My wife would cringe at me buying a tire after having already had a wheel true and new helmet today to make up for the crashed one. I have to bide my time on bike purchases and space them out a little.

__________________
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
1984 Gitane Sprint; 1984 Gitane Tour de France; 1968 Peugeot PL8; 1982 Nishiki Marina 12; 1972 Peugeot PX-10; 1984 Peugeot PSV; 1993 Trek 950 mtb; 1975 Gitane Olympic; 1982 Nishiki Maxima, 1983 Vitus 979; Colnago Super x 2, mid-80's Bianchi Veloce, 1984 or 85 Vitus 979
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
johngwheeler
Road Cycling
13
07-09-17 03:38 PM
rojeho
Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg)
3
12-27-11 07:39 PM