Michelin Mountain X-trem UST Tubeless Tire

Michelin Mountain X-trem UST Tubeless Tire 

DESCRIPTION

The Mountain X’trem has an appetite for speed. Ideal for full-suspension bikes, it delivers amazing traction thanks to a race-proven knob design. And in loose conditions, it’s simply phenomenal. A true pro-level tire that excels in extreme situations. If there’s a tire that loves adrenalin, it’s the Mountain X’trem.

USER REVIEWS

Showing 1-5 of 5  
[Feb 24, 2011]
nestortuganestor
Cross Country Rider

Strength:

i've been using those tires for the last year and i love them i was looking for them about six months i have a giant trance and those tires work very good in this bike

when i am riding everybody look my bike so its different

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
[Jul 25, 2009]
zahgurim
Downhiller

Strength:

cheap
long-lasting due to high durometer

Weakness:

wet rocks = death
easy to pinchflat the sidewall compared to a true DH tire

Great for dry conditions.
Hardpack, dusty, loose... handles them all until the ground gets wet. Then you die.

OVERALL
RATING
3
VALUE
RATING
3
[Jul 02, 2009]
ZipZip
Downhiller

Strength:

Heavy-duty UST casing. Grippy, corner well, good braking, cheap.

Weakness:

Uh...they're red. And they're heavy, but that's to be expected, given the casing.

The X'Trem is one of the few large (bigger than 2.35) UST tires. Props to Michelin for making a big UST tire with a heavy-duty casing. More companies need to get off their cans and do the same, because if you're still running tubes on a big bike...uh...well...you are dumb.

Having compared these head to head with Kenda Nevegals, I'm going to go with the Kendas. The Michelins aren't bad, but in loose conditions the Kendas (the Stick-E's in particular) have a higher level of grip and more predictability when on the limit of adhesion. That said, the Michelins seem to wear very well and roll better, plus they're cheaper.

OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
4
[Oct 19, 2008]
aika
Cross Country Rider

Strength:

Great grip, good rolling resistance, awesome stability, actually round (lots of tires are put together not-so-round)

Weakness:

UST's can be tough to put on a rim if you don't know what you're doing- ask someone who does. And a little soapy water goes a LONG way.

I would recommend them wholeheartedly. I used Kenda Nevagals for a long time in really rocky to hardpack to loose shale, and thought no way would I ever switch. But when I got tubeless wheels, I figured what the hell. I tried the Michelins because not many others had, and I figured I'd check it out. I'm VERY glad I did. I got the 2.5 tire, which has a 2.5 casing, but the knobs don't stick out to the side as much as the Nevegals, so they look smaller. But the grip is just as tenacious. And they roll better. And they're lighter. And they're cheaper than the Nevegals. And they're tubeless, which means with a little Stan's inserted, they're near worry-free in terms of punctures. By the way, I ran this tire for a day without stan's, just ust, and as advertised, they hold air. The stan's is just an insurance policy for thorns. All said and done, this tire holds it in rock, loose gravel, pine needled trails, shale, everything. And does so well. I see no reason to go with anything else...unless you don't have tubeless rims, and don't want to convert your rims. For fifty bucks each, this tire is kind of a no-brainer- buy 'em!

Similar Products Used:

Kenda Nevegal 2.5, panaracer fire xc pro, panaracer duster

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
[May 28, 2008]
k1dude
Weekend Warrior

Strength:

Good grip. Great cornering. Fast. Predictable. High volume. Mount easily. Tough!

Weakness:

Heavy. No good for mud/wet or deep sand.

In dry conditions here in Northern California these are awesome tires. They are fast rolling, tough, have great grip and corner really well. They are my favorite performing tires. They are very predictable. They also seem to last. I've also had no problems getting them on my rims unlike many other tires I've tried.

The only drawbacks are weight (1100g for 2.5 UST) and color (red/black). Red is fine if you have red on your bike or your bike looks good with red. They make a grey/black version in 2.5 UST and tubed, but almost no one carries them for some odd reason. The red also winds up looking muted bubble-gum pinkish when dirty.

I imagine the weight penalty is why these tires are so tough though. The 2.5" is really more like 2.25". They might not be a true 2.5, but they sure look fat with all that volume. The tread knobs don't protrude way past the sidewall like most other tires. So that's probably why Michelin refers to them as 2.5's since they have more volume than many other tires that are labeled 2.5.

These might not be good for the east or northwest due to bad mud and wet conditions performance. They seem to pack the mud in between the close tread pattern. They have also slipped on wet roots/rocks. But since we rarely have wet weather, I haven't had that much opportunity to ride them in those conditions. So perhaps I'm being unfair in my appraisal of their wet/mud performance. They do seem to wallow a bit in deep sand though.

But overall, these are the best tires I have ridden in our conditions. But I still try other UST tires because I want a lighter weight than 1100g. I hate climbing so I don't want to lug extra weight if I don't have to.

Similar Products Used:

Hutchinson Barracuda, Kenda Nevegal, Maxxis Minion, Maxxis High Roller.

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Showing 1-5 of 5  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

mtbr.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.