Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 69 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
373 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The title....im looking at tyres again and again....i like both the visual appearance and the grab of 2.5's...but really question their weight and useability out on the trail....

So do any of you run these? Any product reccomendations?
 

·
Old man on a bike
Joined
·
12,395 Posts
I run them on a Nomad (TimberWolf 2.5 Race). Depends on where and what your trails are I suppose...not much of a socal tire particularly although I've ridden in your area with them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
106 Posts
The guys I ride with run 2.5's in the front on their Blurs, Hecklers, and Bullits, but usually something like 2.3's in the back. That way they get more grip up front, but save some weight on the wheel they're having to spin on the climbs.
 

·
from 0 - sideways 3.2 sec
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
I loved my 2.5s, until if found a 2.4 that was even bigger.:thumbsup:
That sounds like a Shwalbe Big Betty? No?

They are a great high volume tyre and @ 2.4 they are bigger than any maxxis 2.5 i've tried.

I've also tried the 2.6 Al Mighty but jesus its heavy! :) :madman:

Big Betty 2.4 front / Nobby Nic 2.4 rear = Sweet/Light/Fun! :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,308 Posts
William42 said:
If you like going fast all around, I'd stay away. If you're muscling up the climbs so that you can enjoy the downhills, then sure, go for it. I would steer clear of 2ply though, and especially grippy tires like minion DHF's
Take it with a grain of salt.

Rolling restistance due to tread pattern and rubber compound has more of an effect than weight (IMO).

If you are over 200lbs, I would suggest staying away from single-plys, as any potential speed gains are offset by time spent changing tubes (IMO).

If you are into building muscle and suffering for a couple of weeks until your legs adjust, then go for it. You can be just as fast on bigger tires, you just have to be stronger.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
87 Posts
Tires are such a personal thing. What works from some may not work for all. I love trying new tires and found that for true all mountain, which means earning your turns that anything around 2.3 is perfect. Tread pattern and rolling resistance has alot to due with it but weight is also equally important. Rotaional weight when climbing long distances is huge. Do you really want to be turning and extra two pounds over and over for hours? I weigh 220lbs run single ply tires and have no problems with flats. My advice is for you to experimnet and find what works good for your style.
 

·
Ride and Smile
Joined
·
736 Posts
2.5 Maxxis but they are small. Do run tubeless cause love the low pressure. Agree with C-Zero but I'm 150 and run 2ply cause of the terrain and you just get used to doing stuff you can't get away with on single ply.
I'm thinking about giving as UST version (not Maxxis) a try to see if it can hold up cause it would be a little liter going up
 

·
Just roll it......
Joined
·
7,621 Posts
Radam77 said:
Tires are such a personal thing. What works from some may not work for all..
What Radam77 said.

Beyond the type of terrain where you live/ride, your fitness and riding style is also a big factor. I've found some folks love certain tires that I couldn't get comfortable on.

For me and my terrain (PNW), there are three aspects that I look for.

1. grip on the slick and nasty roots and rocks. Our trails are wet a big chunk of the year, so it's gotta have good wet weather traction. I'll sacrifice wear and/or rolling resistance for better wet weather traction any day.

2. Cornering - I like predictable cornering tires. I probably care less about when a tire breaks loose on a corner than "how" they break loose. I want something that is dependable/consistent so I know where the threshold is when I'm laying the bike over or railing an off camber section. Of course, I'd prefer a tire that holds a corner as long as possible, but unpredictable cornering tires = no bueno for me. Worth noting I'm a lighter dude, so I might not push a tire as hard through corners like some folks would.

3. Weight - notice this is my last concern. Since we are in the all mountain forum and you'll likely want to climb on these tires....so weight does end up as a concern, but only to a point. IMO, if the two points above don't work, then it's a moot point. A ligght, but thin sidewalled tire that folds on hard corners or on jumps/drops isn't gonna work for me.

Generally, my advice is to ask folks/buddies in your area that are at or above your skill level what tires they ride. They likely will steer you in the right direction if they also know how you ride firsthand.

Cheers,
EB

P.S. Back to the original question. Yes, I ride 2.5's on my trailbike. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,549 Posts
I've been running 2.4-2.5's for everything from XC, AM, to DH.
For XC or AM or what ever you want to call anything that is not lift assisted I like single ply 2.5 on the front and a 2.4 rear.

The single ply nevegal is a good true size 2.5 with a reasonable weight. Also running a Maxxis Advantage 2.4 rear that is almost as big as the Nevegal (guess a true 2.4 should almost be as big as a true 2.5). You can feel the rolling resistance with any of these big tires, and its a personal preference if the weight and resistance is worth the trade off for the benefits of the bigger tire. For me it is.

I loved the Nevegals but am really liking the Advantage and will be trying one up front as well.

Other 2.4/2.5's I've tried....Big Betty - good meaty all around tire with strong sidewalls and the WTB Dissent 2.5 which I found to be a little too much of a round profile for me and found it a little more sketchy on loose rock and gravel compared to other tires.
 

·
Riiiiiide...
Joined
·
691 Posts
Hell yeah!

I use 'em! 2.5 dual-ply Minions (more like 2.35 from other manufacturers, but quite tall). Soft rubber up front, hard in the back. Most of my riding is flat and uphill, earning the downs.. quite rocky and techy at times as well.
All day rides every weekend. Im only 1650lbs and 6"2'. I dont hesitate when the going gets rough though.. ive already proven to myself and others that this combination makes sense for our riding and terrain.. even if its slower sometimes. Certainly not for everyone, but dont rule it out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
197 Posts
I run a 2.6 Kinetic up front and a 2.35 Nevegal in the rear. I will replace the front with a 2.5 Weirwolf in the future. On the question of weight - it's a concern for me but the Kinetic and Weirwolf are both under 800g, which I consider acceptable. If you look hard, you'll find a few light large volume tires out there. I use a big one in the front for better traction but opt for a lighter tire in the back, hence the 2.35. In terms of "usability on the trail", I can only say good things about larger tires. I'd go 2.5 in the back if weight didn't matter.
 
1 - 20 of 69 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