Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I just purchased a 2011 Trek HiFi Deluxe 29er that came with these tires and yes it is weird to say Trek HiFi, because I also had a Fisher HiFi. Anyway I am not real thrilled with the rear tire, because it is pretty narrow and doesn't seem to grip to well.

I was wondering if anyone else is running these and there thoughts. I haven't set them up tubeless yet so I am running more pressure than normal and really don't know it that would help.

Thanks for any help or advice.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
cycling51 said:
I just purchased a 2011 Trek HiFi Deluxe 29er that came with these tires and yes it is weird to say Trek HiFi, because I also had a Fisher HiFi. Anyway I am not real thrilled with the rear tire, because it is pretty narrow and doesn't seem to grip to well.

I was wondering if anyone else is running these and there thoughts. I haven't set them up tubeless yet so I am running more pressure than normal and really don't know it that would help.

Thanks for any help or advice.
AFAIK they are not yet available aftermarket, just OEM.

"Normal" pressure is normal pressure. If you are having traction issue do not run them higher than you think you should be using. I use the same or higher pressure in tubeless tires as I do with inner tubes.
 

·
Never trust a fart
Joined
·
4,444 Posts
What is normal?

Everyone has a different "normal" tire pressure. Experiment with pressure to find the best of both worlds.

FYI - I run less on a tubeless setup than I do with tubes. Just the opposite of what Shiggy uses. YMMV though.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
frdfandc said:
What is normal?

Everyone has a different "normal" tire pressure. Experiment with pressure to find the best of both worlds.

FYI - I run less on a tubeless setup than I do with tubes. Just the opposite of what Shiggy uses. YMMV though.
Explanation: My lower pressure limit is usually set by tire squirm, not pinch flatting. The same tire without an inner tube requires higher pressure to achieve the same casing/tread stability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
Shiggy is 100% correct, never understood this tubeless and lower pressure I also find I have to run 29" wheels harder than 26" wheels as 29"'s squirm more.

I often find, I get more more traction by adding more pressure as it makes the knobs harder and more pronounced as the bike roles over them, lower pressures you might aswell just ride a slick as they just fold in, which is good on rocks but bad on mud.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
Turveyd said:
Shiggy is 100% correct, never understood this tubeless and lower pressure I also find I have to run 29" wheels harder than 26" wheels as 29"'s squirm more.

I often find, I get more more traction by adding more pressure as it makes the knobs harder and more pronounced as the bike roles over them, lower pressures you might aswell just ride a slick as they just fold in, which is good on rocks but bad on mud.
Yup. There are times when lower is not better. I have found that even with a few small knob tires on hardpack.
 

·
Never trust a fart
Joined
·
4,444 Posts
shiggy said:
Explanation: My lower pressure limit is usually set by tire squirm, not pinch flatting. The same tire without an inner tube requires higher pressure to achieve the same casing/tread stability.
Sorry Shig, was asking a rhetorical question with the "normal" thing.

I was just trying to add information to the OP that pressures vary from rider/equipment/terrain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Yeah I feel the same way. It loses traction on most climbs and I don't like the way it feels cornering. It does not inspire confidence going into a turn. I just changed them out for Maxxis Crossmax and what a difference.
 

·
Plastic homer
Joined
·
592 Posts
pgutierrez012 said:
Yeah I feel the same way. It loses traction on most climbs and I don't like the way it feels cornering. It does not inspire confidence going into a turn. I just changed them out for Maxxis Crossmax and what a difference.
Well, cr*p.:madman:

I was hoping the 29-2 would be a great next tire for the back since XDX is on the way out. The XDX has been great on the back of my SF100 and a couple HTs too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Hey guys...my comment about normal was normal for me which is usually around 28psi for larger volume tires. I like the 29-2 on the front but the back tire looks more like a 1.8 or 1.9 which is way smaller than the 2.3 tires I am used to.

I have tried running them low pressure and they are squirmy and at around 32 - 35 they grip good but seem to bounce off of rocks instead of absorbing them if that makes since. So I really don't have much confidence in them right now and will probably go to either an Exiwolf or Ignitor on the rear and leave the 29-2 on the front.

Might put my Rampage on the front too since that is what I was running before with an Exiwolf on the back. We have a lot of big rocks and roots here and this combination with 25psi front and 28psi rear just seem to absorb them.

Thanks for your comments.
 

·
Uncle
Joined
·
4,329 Posts
rider weight

cycling51 said:
Hey guys...my comment about normal was normal for me which is usually around 28psi for larger volume tires....
I have tried running them low pressure and they are squirmy and at around 32 - 35...

Might put my Rampage on the front too since that is what I was running before with an Exiwolf on the back. We have a lot of big rocks and roots here and this combination with 25psi front and 28psi rear just seem to absorb them.

Thanks for your comments.
The numbers are useless without mention of rider weight. Generally speaking, heavier riders will need at least a few psi more than lighter riders, with all other variables static. Your successes or lack thereof can shed light for the rest of us if we get a clear account.
Thanks.
-E
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
I weigh 185lb's so probably with all my gear about 200lbs. I am not asking someone to tell what psi to use I was just wondering what others were doing if they had this particular set of tires.

I have just about made up my mind that these tires or at least the rear tire isn't the right ones for me. If I road buff single track all of the time they would probably be sweet, but I don't and really think I need a higher volume tire.

I haven't totally given up on them and might see if I can get another front tire for the rear and see how that goes. I have almost broken my neck 2 days in a row on a down hill with a couple of rock gardens that I have never had a problem with.

Thanks...
 

·
No longer 26
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
The 29-2's are one size only. Are you sure you are not talking about the 29-3's which have a 2.25 "front" tire option and a 2.0 "rear" tire matched with it? Sounds like it to me when you mention the front tire is ok but the rear is narrow.

G
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
I'm running 29-3 2.0 rear and 29-3 2.25 front

The rear 2.0 is nowhere near 2.0, as you can see. The 2.25 front is not 2.25 either. I'm running them both tubeless although the front "team" tire is not designed as a tubeless tire. (Whatever). I have Duster rims with strips on both wheels and Stans inside. The rear tire DOES hold air better. I ordered two tires through my LBS both in the 2.0 model and returned the front because I thought it was too narrow. I got the 2.25 to replace it and it has a much different tread pattern. I run them both at about 28 and they work well on my sandy and root-infested trails. No real rocks to speak of though. I don't have a problem with squish and I find if I run them over 30 they bounce all over. I think that 2.0 is a little narrow but it seems to work for me and I'm north of 200 myself.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
467 Posts
See my post on 29-3s above

I wanted it to go after your post and you are correct about the distinction between 29-2 and 29-3
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
The 29-2's are the same way, the back is a 1.9 at best but I would say it is closer to a 1.8. If they were actually the 2.1 they say there are it would be great, but there not. Maybe I just need drop the pressure some more and see what happens.

I had about 30psi in them today and they were like a frickin basketball.
 

·
Uncle
Joined
·
4,329 Posts
Wow, that 29-2 is pretty small. I measure my tires by laying a seamstress' measuring tape across the tread, so that the tape is contoured with the tire, which provides higher numbers than using a straight edge. Either way, that tire doesn't get any wider. Any idea what it weighs? Thinking it would make a good monster cross candidate.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
Turveyd said:
Shiggy is 100% correct, never understood this tubeless and lower pressure I also find I have to run 29" wheels harder than 26" wheels as 29"'s squirm more.
That's probably because there aren't any sharp rocks where you ride. If you run under 30psi with tubes on many of the trails around here, you are guaranteed to pinch flat just about every ride.
 

·
No longer 26
Joined
·
3,090 Posts
cycling51 said:
The 29-2's are the same way, the back is a 1.9 at best but I would say it is closer to a 1.8. If they were actually the 2.1 they say there are it would be great, but there not. Maybe I just need drop the pressure some more and see what happens.

I had about 30psi in them today and they were like a frickin basketball.
Are you saying that there are 2 different 29-2 tires? Or did your bike come with a 29-3 front 29-2 rear? Again, I see 1 size, 2.1, for the 29-2's on the bonty site.

G
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
199 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
What I am saying is they say the are 2.1, but the back is more like a 1.8. I don't know why the back tire is more narrow, but it is. They only show one tire on there website, but they are front rear specific.

If the rear tire was actually a true 2.1 I would love it or I might try to get another front and put it on the rear.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top