Which one is better tires for a mountain bike..26x2.0 or 26x2.10 or much bigger? does the bigger width will affect the breaking power of a bike?
26x2.0 or 26x2.10 or bigger?
kamidsake
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
The numbers rarely reflect real size of the tyres. I have Specialized Revolution 2.0, which is larger, than most 2.3 tyres I have ever used. Like mmisko, I prefer running a larger tyre in the front. Partly because it makes the head tube angle a bit slacker, but mostly I just like how it looks.
BTW, actual width of tyre depends to some extent on the rim, on a wider rim the same tyre will be wider as well.
BTW, actual width of tyre depends to some extent on the rim, on a wider rim the same tyre will be wider as well.
Joined
·
12,224 Posts
Agreed, agreed^^. It certainly depends on rim size and real measurement is usually different than what it says.
I'd hardly take credit for this trend but I used to think/feel like I was the only one that ran a bigger tire in front. Now it seems like everyone does. I also like a front tire with a more rounded profile, and the back squarer.
Local terrain has a lot to do with it also. See what locals are using and test ride 'em on there bike.
BTW, on my trail bike I run around 2.0 rear / 2.3 front, with a bit more air in rear.
I'd hardly take credit for this trend but I used to think/feel like I was the only one that ran a bigger tire in front. Now it seems like everyone does. I also like a front tire with a more rounded profile, and the back squarer.
Local terrain has a lot to do with it also. See what locals are using and test ride 'em on there bike.
BTW, on my trail bike I run around 2.0 rear / 2.3 front, with a bit more air in rear.
Joined
·
772 Posts
I ride 2.1-2.3" tires. It all depends on preference, riding style and trail conditions. Bigger tires with bigger knobs certainly get more traction and braking power, but they're heavier too.
I asked the saleslady at the bikeshop if size 26 rim is compatible with tire like KENDA NEVEGAL of about 2.10, 2.2 or 2.3 then she answered " yes " .... then my friend told me that bigger tires is only for downhill..so I wanna know which width of tire is suited for all typed of trails, roads..downhill or not...and guys a little bit questions for GT frames..most likely made from taiwan? which is more definite to know if it is original aside from triple triangle design, embedded on tube, serial number... ?
In my opinion, the knob pattern is more important, than tyre width. I like smaller knobs in tight pattern (my current tyres are GEAX Saguaro 2.2 both F and R). It is faster and generally better for hard surface, but not particularly good for muddy conditions.
Nevegals are known for good traction, but also being slow (everything in life comes at cost). They came stock on my GT Avalanche, but eventually I opted for faster tyres.
Joined
·
42,655 Posts
I use Continental Mtn King tires on my mtb right now, 2.4 front 2.2 rear. I run wider tires because my local trails are very sandy, and big tires and low pressure make it easier to ride in sand. I like the knob pattern for where I ride. medium-sized knobs with good spacing give me enough traction when I need it but are not so tall that they're excessively slow on smoother sections.
bigger tires are not just for downhill. they are for any time you want more cushion or traction (or both). there are some downhill-specific tires that are very thick and heavy, but not all big tires are built like that.
bigger tires are not just for downhill. they are for any time you want more cushion or traction (or both). there are some downhill-specific tires that are very thick and heavy, but not all big tires are built like that.
Joined
·
5,127 Posts
Big tires rule. Running 2.4 for the traction, pinch flat prevention (still tubes in there, archaic I know), and ride quality. I also match tire sizes because I like the predictability of the tires having the same amount of traction. I often found when running a smaller rear tire that the rear tire would break free sooner (probably due to a higher pressure to reduce pinch flats) and cause a uniquely handling bike.
Bigger tires generally give a larger contact patch so they would improve braking (not breaking) over a smaller tire.
Remember that every manufacturer is different in their sizing so you might find that a 2.1 Kenda could be the same size as a 2.35 Maxxis.
Bigger tires generally give a larger contact patch so they would improve braking (not breaking) over a smaller tire.
Remember that every manufacturer is different in their sizing so you might find that a 2.1 Kenda could be the same size as a 2.35 Maxxis.
Joined
·
54 Posts
Mountain Kings 2.4 front, 2.2 rear. I do own some smaller tires (Michelins 2.0 front and back). I liked the weight and nimble feeling of the 2.0's, but the 2.4 up front really rolls over logs and rocks more easily.
The 2.4 Mountain King, although a big tire. is noticeably smaller than a set of Vredestein Bull Lock 2.35's that I used a few times, which are like tractor tires. Too big and the aggressive tread is a tad slow and a lot more work than the Mountain Kings.
Really happy with the Mountain Kings for the trails I ride. Can't see a reason to use anything else.
The 2.4 Mountain King, although a big tire. is noticeably smaller than a set of Vredestein Bull Lock 2.35's that I used a few times, which are like tractor tires. Too big and the aggressive tread is a tad slow and a lot more work than the Mountain Kings.
Really happy with the Mountain Kings for the trails I ride. Can't see a reason to use anything else.
Joined
·
54 Posts
FWIW, the Vredestein Bull Lock 2.35 wouldn't fit in the rear. Almost no clearance around the chainstays on my FS rig.
Joined
·
42,655 Posts
I went bigger on the front only because for me, on my local trails, I only had traction problems in the front on sandy corners when using 2.0's F/R. Too many washouts resulting in face plants. Narrow rear is fine, but the 2.2 Mt King is only a tiny bit bigger than the 2.0 Speshy tires I was using. Now that I have mixed tire sizes, I feel that my traction is balanced between front and rear.
Joined
·
5,891 Posts
Usually run 2.1f/1.9 or 2.0r, the only way I'll use high volume tires (2.4+) is if riding with a rigid fork.
Joined
·
17,018 Posts
Your friend is wrong. Plenty of folks run Nevs in 2.1 and 2,35 for general trail riding.
However, if you are looking for a tire for road use, then Nevs are probably not what you want.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
