Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
bike-zilla
Joined
·
241 Posts
The tread width is pretty close to 2.4 (2.37 off the top of my head???) The casing is a bit smaller than most 2.4's though. I will try to find the link. They are great tires, I am running a 2.4 protection on the front of my trailbike, and a 2.2 cheapo model on the back, both set up tubeless with stans. The black chili compound is amazing, and I just ordered another 2.4 protection to replace the 2.2. PS they are pretty cheap at blue sky cycling

edit: just found link http://www.gramslightbikes.com/2009/02/conti-mtbr-review.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
Greengreer: Thanks for the reply!

Also, does anybody know if let's say my kenda blue groove 2.35 fits as my rear tire, will a Bontrager big earl fit also? I ask because on mtbtires, it lists the Bontrager as 2.39 tread width and 2.12 casing width and the Kenda Blue Groove as 2.41 tread width and 2.17 as casing width. The bike is a Yeti 575.

Thanks!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
46 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Jeff, thanks for the feedback. I know that many 575 riders have used the 2.4 MK with great success. Since manufacturer tires sometimes are true 2.4s or 2.35s it's hard to tell which tire fits. The 2.4 MK is a great example since the 575 is only rated for a 2.35 tire while the 2.4MK is a 2.4. And good call on the Yeti forum.
 

·
local trails rider
Joined
·
12,300 Posts
The MK is not particularly big.

Don't know if it is any help but my MK 2.4 SuperSonics are clearly smaller than my Nobby Nic 2.4s

Good tire, IMO. Pretty small changes in pressures can affect its behavior quite a lot, though. Takes some experimentation.
 

·
Ride the dream
Joined
·
1,381 Posts
cwang said:
Greengreer: Thanks for the reply!

Also, does anybody know if let's say my kenda blue groove 2.35 fits as my rear tire, will a Bontrager big earl fit also? I ask because on mtbtires, it lists the Bontrager as 2.39 tread width and 2.12 casing width and the Kenda Blue Groove as 2.41 tread width and 2.17 as casing width. The bike is a Yeti 575.

Thanks!
The bluegroove is generally seen as a front tire (a good one), I wasnt as happy with it on the rear (and I'm not alone on this).

Sidewalls are not particularly tough. Kenda sidewalls tend to be thin, 2.35 nev's are notorious for blowing (or being cut open on rocks) long before the tread wears down because the sidewalls are so thin and the bluegroove shares the same issue.
That said, for general trail/AM riding they're plenty useable and the flipside of this is that they're pretty lightweight and conform well to the trail.

For the 575 (longtravel xc/AM) the BG would be a pretty good choice - matched up with a 2.35 excavator on the back is a really good combo.
Kenda used to suggest the bluegroove (f) and nev (r) combo, but doesnt really seem to push it anymore. Perhaps its because the nev isnt a great rear tire (the excav is though) or perhaps its just because the nev is alot more popular on its own.

The 2.4 MK is smaller (especially the casing) than any of the 2.35 Kenda's I've tried. If you're used to maxxis highrollers/minions, you'll find its still quite a bit bigger than those are in 2.35 (as older maxxis "2.35" tend to be more like 2.2).
Generally speaking, the MK (along with the highroller and nevegal) is a tire I consider to be vastly overhyped and overrated.
Not a bad tire by any stretch, but definately nothing magical (which it is often claimed to be), there are plenty of other tires designed for the same kind of conditions (dry-intermediate) which outperform the MK in my experience - the bluegroove/excavator combo is one of them, hutchinsons barracuda and their toro are also generally better (the 2.3 'cuda is bigger than the 2.4 MK, but if you look at them make sure its the medium rebound compound).
If you're looking for something more heavy duty (AM/FR than slow/grippy XC-AM) then the 2.35 single ply "lite" version of the intense "909" is a great choice (and their "edge" is a great rear for loose conditions too).

There you have my recommendations to look into.
You might notice that I tend to favor tires without ramped knobs (which may be why I'm no particular fan of the highroller), though there are exceptions, like the edge.
 

·
Bicyclochondriac.
Joined
·
15,214 Posts
cwang said:
Does anybody know what are the actual sizes for the Conti MK 26x2.4s? I checked mtbtires.com and it's not listed there.

Thanks!
My 2.4 protection measures exactly 2.4 tread width and 2.2 casing on Mavic XM321 rims. I think it is a kick-ass tire in the rear. I also run the MK 2.2 29er in the rear of my 29er, and I don't think it is all that good of a tire. Must be the lack of Black Chili?
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top