Strengths: When new, they roll with little resistance. Hold air very well without sealant if you want.
Weaknesses: The wear on these is terrible. 6 rides in loose gravel and the knobs were rounded. traction became non-existant. With what I paid it turned about to cost be about $8 per ride.
Bottom Line:
I just can't see the value in these tires. Way too many choices out there to have them wear so fast. I have had good luck with Maxxis but this is my second High Roller and got the same results. It will be my last purchase of these.
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
norcorider95
a Downhiller
from London, England
Date Reviewed: January 26, 2012
Strengths: Its a highroller, it's sitff, its medium weight, good tread, can be ridden in all weather, does everything a highroller should do.
Weaknesses: Expensive
Bottom Line:
stop complaining about the tyre, man up, its decent, it rolls well, theyre thicker than running tyre and tube, theyre also lighter unless you do xc and cry because everything on your bike isnt carbon or ti.
personally id recommend it, i like maxxis for Dh tyres, but make sure you get the UST and not the LUST its pretty much the difference between single and dual ply, but stop reading reviews and worrying about tyres, just buy it and get on with your life, it makes no major change to say michelin UST but it sure rolls faster...
Similar Products Used: High roller dual ply 60 a and a maxxis minion
Bike Setup: Spesh big hit
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
eastie
a Cross Country Rider
from Australia
Date Reviewed: March 6, 2011
Strengths: easy to mount
Weaknesses: heavy and narrow
Bottom Line:
After riding highroller 2.1 exception series which are light, fast and ok on stans I tried the wider UST version. I was wanting something wider and thought these would be up there in terms of speed of the 2.1's - wrong! They aren't 2.35, they are heavy (above stated) and a they are slower than the excpetion series +stans. I didn't notice any increase in tracktion over the 2.1's either. If you want wider/increased grip at a reasonable weight and rolling resistance sacrifice my legs and trip computer say look elsewhere.
Submitted by
tjakino
a Cross Country Rider
from Durango, CO, USA
Date Reviewed: August 10, 2010
Strengths: Great tire, works well in all riding conditions, seems durable although I have not been riding as much as I would like, 2 year old and all.
Weaknesses: Recently the layers de-laminated and a large aneurism was created (2 inches tall and 3 inches long) on the tread surface. Too bad cause there is still a lot of good tread.
Bottom Line:
Great tire that I would probably buy again. I am guessing I just had a little bad luck.
Submitted by
CarlosG
a Racer
from Ft.Lauderdale, FL.
Date Reviewed: July 14, 2010
Strengths: Hard to find a tire like the High Roller that works well in all the different trail surfaces we ride on here in Florida. On a 10 mile loop you run into hard pack, loose gravel, sand, roots, slick bridges so on and so on.......
Weaknesses: Warranty not limits not on packaging. Rode them for two weeks and the tread sepperated bubbled up on the right side of the tire of 1/3rd of the tire tread.
Bottom Line:
I’ve been using the Maxis Crossmark and Monorail Tires with Stans tire sealent for over 2 years with no problems.
I bought this tire because the shop was out of the Crossmark I wanted so I figured I'd grab another Maxis product.
I took the deffective tire to the shop and they said Maxis wouldn't cover the Warranty because I used tire sealent. (Who doesn't use sealant???)
Sure it says that on the warranty on the web site, but it sure would be nice if they put that information on the product card the tire is attached to on the shelf.
Similar Products Used: Maxis Monorail, Maxis Crossmark,WTB Exiwolf, WTB Wolverine.
Bike Setup: Titus RacerX, Fox f-100 fork, Sram X-O, Race Face Carbon Cranks...................
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
lange photography
a Cross Country Rider
from albuquerque, NM, USA
Date Reviewed: May 2, 2010
Strengths: cornering beast. bites hard and consistent.
Weaknesses: rolling resistance and weight.
Bottom Line:
high rollers are touted as XC/all mountain tire. for the first couple of rides i dug the biting intensity of the tires, but soon found that rolling resistance and weight offset the power of the cornering. even when pedaling, the tire would become very very heavy feeling and slow. the UST sets up easily enough, but the LUST sidewalls make for one HEFTY tire. perhaps this would make for a good DH tire? with its almost square profile, the tire seems to lose some apparent volume. it looks pretty skinny considering it is a 2.35. i got so bummed by the added weight and rolling resistance that i ended up chucking the fairly new pair for a set of 2.4 specialized purgatories, which have similar cornering characteristics to the high rollers without the exhausting rolling resistance.
Similar Products Used: specialized purgatory 2.4, WTB weirwolf
Bike Setup: 2010 enduro with RS lyrik, stock elixir CRs. fox RP2 rear, etc.
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
kwilas
a Cross Country Rider
from Kentucky, USA
Date Reviewed: April 13, 2010
Strengths: Speed / Rolling resistance, weight (for those that actually care), durability.
Weaknesses: Grip when cornering in almost any condition. Occasional slips when climbing over root sections.
Bottom Line:
I've only ridden this tire for 1 month. This is a great tire for pure XC riders. Very light and fast. However, if you plan on descending and cornering at high speeds then this tire is not for you. I loved the high roller when I was on the flat, hardpack trails but had no trust in it when descending.
Overall it gets 3 chilis because it was the wrong tire for my type of riding. If you're a cross country racer then this might be perfect for you.
Submitted by
CDA MTBer
a Weekend Warrior
from CDA, ID USA
Date Reviewed: July 4, 2009
Strengths: excellent grip, shed mud, wear has been good
Weaknesses: Narrow tire for being rated at 2.3 compared to my specialized adrenalized 2.0 which is wider with more volume
Bottom Line:
these tires do it all well. they run narrow and have a lower volume than specialized tires so keep that in mind when purchasing. Due to the stiff side wall the lower volume has been a none issue other than looks. They grip the best for most condition compared to all of the other tires I have tried. The Speicalized Captian is one of the biggest let downs for a tire, plus one Specialized tire will cost you around $65-80. I replaced the Specialized Captains with these tires and haven't looked back since.
Submitted by
sweetchiba51
a Downhiller
from spokane wa.
Date Reviewed: June 25, 2009
Strengths: strong side walls, awesome tread pattern, sticks to the dirt....
Weaknesses: rolling resistance uphill
Bottom Line:
These are simply the best tires I have ever used! I ride downhill, xc(up/downhill is what i would rather call it) and these are great for both. I will suffer a lil bit on the climbs to have unlimited traction. I converted to tubless and i will never look back...if you are thinking about going tubeless these tires are the ones to get!
Submitted by
BLURPILOT
a Cross Country Rider
from Orange County, CA
Date Reviewed: March 30, 2009
Strengths: I use this only as a front tire (Maxxis UST Larsen 2.0 rear) in 2.35. Awesome cornering and handing through rocks, roots, hardpack/loose, sand, berms. I've thrown everything at it and it just hooks up. Very stable at high speed over technical terrain. Rolls pretty well for a bigger tire even with low air pressure (I run 28-30 psi).
Weaknesses: Heavy with high rolling resistance. Also, the tire says 2.35, but I think it's more of a 2.2 (but that hasn't really bothered me).
Bottom Line:
GREAT front tire. Inspires confidence on all terrain at any speed.
Similar Products Used: Michelin, Panaracer, Bontrager, Hutchinson
Bike Setup: 2007 Santa Cruz Blur LT- XTR/RaceFace drivetrain, Fox Talas 140 RLC, Mavic x819/Chris King wheelset, Chris King headset, Selle Italia SLR gel flow saddle, Thomson Elite stem/post, RaceFace Next SL carbon risers, Avid Elixir CR brakeset, Oury ODI lock-on grips.
Strengths: Awesome traction and hook up on almost all terrain.
Weaknesses: Significant rolling resistance.
Bottom Line:
I rode the Revolt Super X until the side walls frayed (which wasn't long at all). I picked up a set of High Rollers which were touted as a XC tire with low rolling resistance. POSITIVES: They mounted relatively easy. I noticed immediately they had an aggressive tread (similar to the WTB Velociraptors) and hooked up like velcro with the terrain. I could aggressively ride corners where I was used to some slide out. I am very satisfied with the way they track and hold a line especially on loose stuff (sand, gravel, etc.). Too early to tell how they wear. NEGATIVES: These are expensive tires. They retail for $60+. They are closer to an all mountain than an XC tire. The rolling resistance is significant and translates to working harder for the same speed. Bottom Line: A very good all around tire with awesome hook up if speed is not the number one criteria.
Submitted by
Slowpat
a Weekend Warrior
from Denver, CO
Date Reviewed: June 17, 2008
Strengths: Decent rolling resistance for a reasonably grippy tire.
Did better than I expected in mud, and surprisingly well on wet tree roots. Good overall performance.
Weaknesses: Dishonest specs.
No clear advantages compared to other tires in this category.
Heavy.
Bottom Line:
Maxxis I hope you read this. You need to have your engineers publish your tire specs, not your marketing people!
You say "LUST" stands for "Light Ultimate Sidewall Technology..."
I say "LUST" stands for "Laughably Understated Specifications on Tires."
The LESSER of the two problems is that the tires are heavier than you claim. If you were off by +/- 5% you could claim normal variances for rubber manufacturing. But the claim doesn't hold up for being 50-100g over ... and never under ... claimed weight [to be fair, you are not the only bike tire company that does this].
The bigger issue is the tire width. Using a digital caliper I measured your 2.35 tire and it was only 2.1" at the widest tread (tire pressure set to 40 psi). Likewise your 2.1 is actually a hair over 1.9". This is NOT normal manufacturing variance; by comparison my Kenda Nevegals were within 0.03" of stated width.
So your lightweight "technology" really amounts to making a tire narrower than labeled so you can say gee, that's one light tire!
The most disappointing part is you don't need to lie about your specs. Maxxis engineers design many fine tires with excellent characteristics for a variety of trail conditions. You just need to get your marketing people to tell the truth... you may miss a few first time buyers, but you will get many more repeat buyers.
I might have rated this tire 3 or 4 for how it rides, but must knock down the score to a 2 due to the specification gamesmanship.
Similar Products Used: Nevegal, Fire XC Pro, Weirwolf, Python, Larsen TT, Crossmark, Diesel, Kinetics, Small Block 8, Serac XC, Michelin XC AT, Fast Freddy, Smoke, Dart, Bontrager ACX. I like to try out tires.
Bike Setup: Titus Switchblade, RP3, Talas fork.
In 2007 I had a 2.35 UST High Roller front and 2.1 UST High Roller rear.
Overall Rating:
Value Rating:
Submitted by
slowpat
a Weekend Warrior
from Denver,co
Date Reviewed: June 17, 2008
Strengths: Decent rolling resistance for a reasonably grippy tire.
Did better than I expected in mud and on wet tree roots. Good overall performance.
Weaknesses: Dishonest specs.
No clear advantages compared to other tires in same category.
Heavy.
Bottom Line:
Maxxis I hope you read this. You need to have your engineers publish your tire specs, not your marketing people!
You say "LUST" stands for "Light Ultimate Sidewall Technology..."
I say "LUST" stands for "Laughably Understated Specifications on Tires."
The LESSER of the two problems is that the tires are heavier than you claim. If you were off by +/- 5% you could claim normal variances for rubber manufacturing. But the claim doesn't hold up for being 50-100g over ... and never under ... claimed weight [to be fair, you are not the only bike tire company that does this].
The bigger issue is the tire width. Using a digital caliper I measured your 2.35 tire and it was only 2.1" at the widest tread (tire pressure set to 40 psi). Likewise your 2.1 is actually a hair over 1.9". This is NOT normal manufacturing variance; by comparison my Kenda Nevegals were within 0.03" of stated width.
So your lightweight "technology" really amounts to making a tire narrower than labeled so you can say gee, that's one light tire!
The most disappointing part is you don't need to lie about your specs. Maxxis engineers design many fine tires with excellent characteristics for a variety of trail conditions. You just need to get your marketing people to tell the truth... you may miss a few first time buyers, but you will get many more repeat buyers.
I might have rated this tire 3 or 4 for how it rides, but must knock down the score to a 2 due to the specification gamesmanship.
Similar Products Used: Nevegal, Fire XC Pro, Weirwolf, Python, Larsen TT, Crossmark, Diesel, Kinetics, Small Block 8, Serac XC, Michelin XC AT, Fast Freddy, Smoke, Dart, Bontrager ACX. I like to try out tires.
Bike Setup: Titus Switchblade, RP3, Talas fork.
In 2007 I had a 2.35 UST High Roller front and 2.1 UST High Roller rear.