Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Continental 29er tires: raceking VS x-king?

Jump to Latest
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
D

Devincicx

· Registered
Joined
·
337 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
I have a set of race king 2.2 racesport. I just came back from a ride on humid/wet trails covered in leafs and pines. The conditions were far from muddy, only some wet spots here and there and some wet roots.

I need to test those tires more but my first observations are not so good

-they lack both uphill traction and cornering traction
-they do not stick that much to wet stuff
- the volume is good
-they roll super fast
-they do not inspire confidence in corners

OK, I know, it's not like if they were mild-conditions tires, far from it. But I know my Ikons are more versatile they those RK. The Ikons can take on some wet and muddy conditions from my experience. Hell, even my small block 8 rode better in mixed conditions.

Im far from a noob bike handler. While im not the best out there,im pretty fast and I like to lean the bike in corner. The SB8 have a rounded profile and the side knobs go pretty far on the tire, which inpires confidence when leaning the bike in corners. Same applies to the Ikon but with a square profile.

What are you guys observations on the race king and most importantly, are the X-king more of an all-around tire?
 
#2 ·
The X-king wasn't much of an improvement to me under those conditions, better, but not by enough for it to really matter to me. Both of them are fast hardpack race tires to me, I have no confidence riding either one of them fast & hard in wet leaves or loose conditions. Personal preference for me is the Trail King, they're not fast but they have tons of traction in all conditions and they really inspire confidence. Lots of volume, corners well, sticks to wet stuff pretty well, and they always feel solid and planted.
 
#4 ·
I haven't ridden the 2.4" version of the MK2, only the 2.2". I like it, it has far more traction than the X-king especially under hard braking or on loose surfaces. Corners well, but you must commit and lean the bike over hard to get the best out of it, if you get caught at the wrong lean angle it can get a bit scary. I found that it rolled surprisingly well, not as fast as the Race King but close enough to the X-king that I probably wouldn't notice or care unless it was on pavement.
 
#5 ·
I have had about four sets of 2.2 Supersonic Race Kings on 26" wheels and one season on Racesport 2.4 X-Kings. IMHO the Race King the RK handles soft loam, mud, roots, etc better. In terms of mud I think they handle sticky mud very well, but very loose thin mud not so much as the knobs are just too small.

If you like to really lean the bike over in the corners this is not the tire for you. However, they should provide you better traction than what you described. One thing you could try is to play with the tire pressures. These tires have a narrow window for optimum pressure. Too much pressure and they lack traction, too little and they are squirmy. Once you find the right pressure they are amazing in terms of speed and traction. I have yet to find a better tire than these for how I ride.
 
Discussion starter · #6 ·
thanks for your comments.

Im actually after a good race tire from continental preferably. Do you think the RK rear and XK front would be a good combo for hard cornering or cornering confidence? The x-king 2,4 is appealing.

Do you have nay other suggestions from continental? I love the maxxis Ikon and raced on them, I love the big volume and versatility they have. But they are freaking expensive. My sponsorship deal includes swchalbe, maxxis, continental, michelin, kenda and maybe some more lower brands. I want to try and keep the cost low. Continental seems like a good compromise.
 
#7 ·
I'm not a racer. I started out on my new 29er with My favorite front tire in 26"....the 29" version of the Maxxis Ardent, 2.4 with the EXO casing.. As I said, I'm not a racer, so the weight is really not an issue for me. At the shop I got the bike from, they had a sale on Conti X-King 29 tires, in 2.2 and in 2.4. I bought 1 of each. I mounted the 2.4 on the front wheel first. I was hoping for a good volume, decently grippy front tire, and to save a little weight.. After around 3 rides, I took it off and went back to the Ardent. I'll live with the extra grams, because the Ardent was hands-down a much more reliable feeling front tire than the X-King. I'm thinking about trying the 2.4 X-King as a rear tire. I don't have any idea what use I will ever put the X-King 2.2 to. I might try it as a rear tire, but even there, X-Kings just feel sketchy to me.

BTW, I don't think Kenda makes their SB8 29 tire in the 2.35 size, but if they did, I'd really like to try one as a rear tie, with the Ardent 2.4 up front. I use SB8's on my 26" single speed, with the 2.35 on the front, and the bike handles the Socal coastal trail surfaces amazingly well with them, and rolling resistance is nil, and the weight is low, which matters to me in a single speed. Their only downside is that as a rear tire, they wear down pretty fast.
 
#8 ·
I use MK2 Protection in 2.4 size on my 26er. Actually it's 2.25 in real life, but continental labeled it wrong. The pattern is quite agressive. It may have higher rolling resistance than X-King, but the corner traction and puncture protection is excellent. I had only 1 puncture in 6 months because of a rock hard spike. (I almost couldn't take it out of the tire) It wears very slowly even though I have to ride 10km on road to the mountain. It's good in wet and dry. I couldn't try it in snow yet.
Before I bought them I had to choose between low rolling resistance and traction. I chose traction so I can push harder downhill and clear sections I couldn't with a slicker pattern. Decide whether you want to rush uphill or bomb downhill.
I wanted to try out a MK2 front Schwalbe SS rear combo but I think the traction of the rear is also important. If the rear slips and flies away the grippy front won't save from a crast. (just at small slips)
 
#9 ·
I found the Ikon to be equally bad in wet conditions compared to the Race Kings, but if you like Maxxis tires so much, you should just use them anyway if confidence is more important than saving a few bucks.
 
#10 ·
hmm I have no problems setting PRs on my Race Kings. I thought Race King in the rear was excellent and decided to make it my 'base' rear tire. I may throw something chunkier up front during the fall and winter though. I prefer them over Rocket Rons. Race Kings isn't ideal for greasy stuff though. I will probably switch to rocket rons for snow.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#12 ·
I just replaced my X King front with a Nevegal and what a world of difference!!! Just like stated, the X King never inspired confidence in soft cornering. The Kenda on the other hand brakes great in soft stuff.

I am running a Conti Race King as my rear tire and so far I have had positive experiences.
 
Discussion starter · #13 ·
a nevegal and a x-king is hard to compare, not really the same type of tire. One is a race tire, the other is more what I consider like a heavy, very grippy tire, not for racing.

I am most likely going to get some maxxis ardent 2.25. I gave up on continental
 
#14 ·
Just put on a set of 29er MK2 black chili protection, 2.4 tires front and rear to replace Nevegals, 2.2. Wanted better rolling resistance and a lighter tire. The new MK2's are smaller than the Nevegals, which is what I wanted. Also, out them on tubeless. The Nevegals were with tubes. Tried them out on one ride, so far so good, rolled better than the Nevs and the grip seemed comparable. Will know more after more rides. Followed the Conti tubeless setup using their RevoSealant, including pre-treating the inside of the tires. I did try the MK2, 2.2's and they were too narrow for me. i did not like the x-kings, I am on the east coast, lots of wet roots and muddy.
 
#15 ·
I just removed my first ever set of Continentals. They were on the bike for 6 weeks, riding about 2 times a week. One Super D race, and some mild DH type stuff,so they did see some use.

The rear X-King 2.4 Protection was shredded really bad, and there were many deep looking cuts that were deep enough to bleed a little stans. The sidewalls were starting to show the threads and they were bleeding a little too.

The front Race 2.4 Mountain King felt really good traction wise, but ended up loosing the battle with a small stick, as that stick poked a HUGE hole in the sidewall. I have not ripped a front tire sidewall in YEARS, let alone blow a hole big enough to fling stans in my face and not seal. Front tire was looking good and sealing great, up until the sidewall failure.

Could be a fluke on the front tire, but Continental did not impress on durability... Back on Maxxis......
 
#16 ·
thuren said:
The front Race 2.4 Mountain King felt really good traction wise, but ended up loosing the battle with a small stick, as that stick poked a HUGE hole in the sidewall. I have not ripped a front tire sidewall in YEARS, let alone blow a hole big enough to fling stans in my face and not seal. Front tire was looking good and sealing great, up until the sidewall failure.
Click to expand...
I think the problem is you bought the Race instead of the Protection version. The Race Sport version is pretty much what it sounds like, it's a lightweight race tire that's a bit lacking in durability, the sidewalls are just too thin for my taste and I can't say I'm too surprised that they were ripped apart.
 
#17 ·
aerius said:
I think the problem is you bought the Race instead of the Protection version. The Race Sport version is pretty much what it sounds like, it's a lightweight race tire that's a bit lacking in durability, the sidewalls are just too thin for my taste and I can't say I'm too surprised that they were ripped apart.
Click to expand...
Coming in at 690g, I would not categorize that a super light "race" tire. My 26" 450g Schwalbe Nobby Nicks scared the piss out of me, and I ran them through many many rock gardens, but never failed like this, on a stick....
 
#18 ·
Race Kings - on ice and snow

Thought I would share my impressions of this tire.

I rode 10 miles today in this:
As you can see, there was substantial ice. The Race Kings did not handle the FLAT ice very well, but really, what tire would unless they were studded?

However, on the snow, or packed snow with areas of raised ice they were just fine. Obviously I wasn't racing, but they are manageable. Note - I did not have this on the front as I was running a Rocket Ron.

If someone has these tires, they should not panic and run off to buy some other tires. Like I said, on the rear, they are manageable in these trail conditions. They climbed just fine as long as my butt was planted in the seat and, traction was not a problem on the flats as long as there was some snow.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#20 ·
Devincicx said:
I have a set of race king 2.2 racesport. I just came back from a ride on humid/wet trails covered in leafs and pines. The conditions were far from muddy, only some wet spots here and there and some wet roots.

I need to test those tires more but my first observations are not so good

-they lack both uphill traction and cornering traction
-they do not stick that much to wet stuff
- the volume is good
-they roll super fast
-they do not inspire confidence in corners

OK, I know, it's not like if they were mild-conditions tires, far from it. But I know my Ikons are more versatile they those RK. The Ikons can take on some wet and muddy conditions from my experience. Hell, even my small block 8 rode better in mixed conditions.

Im far from a noob bike handler. While im not the best out there,im pretty fast and I like to lean the bike in corner. The SB8 have a rounded profile and the side knobs go pretty far on the tire, which inpires confidence when leaning the bike in corners. Same applies to the Ikon but with a square profile.

What are you guys observations on the race king and most importantly, are the X-king more of an all-around tire?
Click to expand...
I haven't ridden with the race kings but my comments about the x-kings would be about exactly the same as what you just said about them.

I ran them front/rear for a few hundred miles and retired the front in favor of a chunkier AM tire. No complaints with the x-king as a rear tire though.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
About this Discussion
25 Replies
13 Participants
Last post:
zephxiii
Mountain Bike Reviews Forum
posts
16M
members
534K
Since
1990
A forum community dedicated to Mountain Bike owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about bike parts, components, deals, performance, modifications, classifieds, trails, troubleshooting, maintenance, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
General Discussion Downhill - Freeride California - Norcal Shocks and Suspension Passion