Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I just got the ExiWolf 2.3s. I'd have to say they are a little smaller than expected. They are a tick over 2.1 (55cm casing/25.4 = 2.16 inch casing ) so I guess they can call them 2.3. You could call them 2.2 and they still be under 2.2, but I guess nobody would buy a 2.2. They could almost be considered 2.2 if the footprint was larger than the casing like the Motoraptor.

As far as reality goes I got the cushiest tire for a Ridged SS 29er. THey are larger than my Motos, and Nanos. I'm happy with that.

I'm not sure why they call them 2.3 and get away with that. They could have called them 2.4 for that matter. I would have bought them if they were advertised as 2.2. Infact I did.

I really like the pictures. I guess they are not to scale in relationship to one another. I guess it's just coincidence the Exiwolf is larger in proportion to th difference in the inch scale
http://www.wtb.com/products/tires_29er.html

I think I feel better now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
667 Posts
shiggy said:
Old news. Been discussed here since the day they appeared at Interbike last year.
Indeed. Expecations are a tricky thing.

Though it is shocking when you first mount up an Exiwolf, as I did last night for the first time. They are just a hairrr bigger than everything else available.

Shiggy, in your experience, will the steel bead or Kevlar bead Exiwolf work better at low pressures (25psi) in tubed applications?
 

·
Klydesdale
Joined
·
305 Posts
This got me thinking... Maybe one reason WTB says that a "real" 29er rim has to be at least 27 mm wide is so their tires will actually come closer to their stated size. ;)

Recently I mounted a 26" WTB Motoraptor 2.24" on a 47mm wide Try-All XXL rim that I'm using on a set of snow wheels. That sucker actually measures 2.24" wide. I think that's the first time I've ever had a WTB tire measure as large as it stated width and WTB has been my favorite brand of tire for several years now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
Width isn't the only thing that is not as advertised...how about that weight? It is just a little off, just 200 grams or so. That has been discussed too, but I felt the need to get in another kick.

Hexonxonx said:
I just got the ExiWolf 2.3s. I'd have to say they are a little smaller than expected. They are a tick over 2.1 (55cm casing/25.4 = 2.16 inch casing ) so I guess they can call them 2.3. You could call them 2.2 and they still be under 2.2, but I guess nobody would buy a 2.2. They could almost be considered 2.2 if the footprint was larger than the casing like the Motoraptor.

As far as reality goes I got the cushiest tire for a Ridged SS 29er. THey are larger than my Motos, and Nanos. I'm happy with that.

I'm not sure why they call them 2.3 and get away with that. They could have called them 2.4 for that matter. I would have bought them if they were advertised as 2.2. Infact I did.

I really like the pictures. I guess they are not to scale in relationship to one another. I guess it's just coincidence the Exiwolf is larger in proportion to th difference in the inch scale
http://www.wtb.com/products/tires_29er.html

I think I feel better now.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
klydesdale said:
This got me thinking... Maybe one reason WTB says that a "real" 29er rim has to be at least 27 mm wide is so their tires will actually come closer to their stated size. ;)

Recently I mounted a 26" WTB Motoraptor 2.24" on a 47mm wide Try-All XXL rim that I'm using on a set of snow wheels. That sucker actually measures 2.24" wide. I think that's the first time I've ever had a WTB tire measure as large as it stated width and WTB has been my favorite brand of tire for several years now.
The rim width does not make a huge different in the tire width, depending on the tire. WTB's own Global Measuring System uses a 26mm rim (outside, ~20mm inside) with the tire inflated to 60psi for at least 24 hours. My test show that tires can be 1-3mm wider at 60psi vs 40psi and they also can "grow" 1-2mm after a day at 60psi.
You can see some examples here: http://www.mtbtires.com/tech/rim_difference.html
I have an updated version in the works (and a 45mm rim to take it a step further).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
shiggy said:
The rim width does not make a huge different in the tire width, depending on the tire. WTB's own Global Measuring System uses a 26mm rim (outside, ~20mm inside) with the tire inflated to 60psi for at least 24 hours. My test show that tires can be 1-3mm wider at 60psi vs 40psi and they also can "grow" 1-2mm after a day at 60psi.
You can see some examples here: http://www.mtbtires.com/tech/rim_difference.html
I have an updated version in the works (and a 45mm rim to take it a step further).
Shiggy, can you explain why the volume goes down on some tires? on some tires going from 26mm rim to a 32 mm rim caused the volume to go down. That seem counter-intuitive. Up to a point, going wider will allow for a greater air volume. I noticed a big difference for instance when I went from a Salsa Delgado rim to a narrow Open Pro a couple years ago. (I have since gone back to wider rims) I can't imagine that going to a 32mm rim would cause less air to be in the tube at the same air pressure.

Obviously at some point, going wider would lessen the air volume but the rim would have to be way wider than anything bikes use normally. Anyway, clarification would be great, especially if I don't understand the data correctly.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
48,238 Posts
OrBikbldr said:
Shiggy, can you explain why the volume goes down on some tires? on some tires going from 26mm rim to a 32 mm rim caused the volume to go down. That seem counter-intuitive. Up to a point, going wider will allow for a greater air volume. I noticed a big difference for instance when I went from a Salsa Delgado rim to a narrow Open Pro a couple years ago. (I have since gone back to wider rims) I can't imagine that going to a 32mm rim would cause less air to be in the tube at the same air pressure.

Obviously at some point, going wider would lessen the air volume but the rim would have to be way wider than anything bikes use normally. Anyway, clarification would be great, especially if I don't understand the data correctly.
Nope. I do not know why. Only that it does. Seems that every tire has a rim width sweet spot.
Also note that my "volume index" is not an actual volume measurement. It is simply casing height (above the rim) X casing width. May not be as directly comparable from rim-to-rim as it is from tire-to-tire- measured on the same rim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
Weight

OrBikbldr said:
Width isn't the only thing that is not as advertised...how about that weight? It is just a little off, just 200 grams or so. That has been discussed too, but I felt the need to get in another kick.
I weighted every part on my Titus 29er. I went with the WTB Nanos and I also have a set of Motos for those days when a knobby is needed. Their weights were close, maybe I got lucky. The ExiWolves felt a little heavier, but they are going on my Single Speed. It's a Karate Monkey and weight isn't so much an issue so I didn't weight them. The funny thing is I like the way their tires ride and I'll continue to buy them . . . (Unless Kenda makes a Blue Groove and/or Nevegal 29er tires) . . . It's the ride that counts. I do say though 200 grams is like being off 25%. That's a big tolerance. Wait 620 listed +200 . . . that's about 33%.

Is this the biggest misrepresentation of a product ever? Althought it does say 55mm casing on the side of the tire I guess I should have done the math.

Thank you all, I feel better now! Although now I'm going to have dreams . . . Errrrrr Nightmares of the WTB Secret Police coming after me :rolleyes:.

Donald Trump: "Hexonxonx, Your Fired!"
 

·
Recovering Weight Weenie
Joined
·
8,821 Posts
Nat said:
I thought the Jones XR was a hair bigger than the Exiwolf. Am I remembering that incorrectly?
I think you are right that technically it's higher volume.
But, in my real world testing, the Exi feels more so. Perhaps this is because I tend to run less pressure in them?

For long long rides and racing, I choose the XR. For fun and for fast dh, i choose Exi.
 

·
Recovering couch patato
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
Someone just gave me what I'd call a first-hand rumor on a Kenda Nevegal Tomac 29x2.3". I believe it's true, but at the rate of the Karma 2.2", it will take tiill 2008 to get here, and when it does, it will look like a 2.0 anyway, years of high hopes for nothing.
 

·
what a joke
Joined
·
2,279 Posts
Cloxxki said:
Someone just gave me what I'd call a first-hand rumor on a Kenda Nevegal Tomac 29x2.3". I believe it's true, but at the rate of the Karma 2.2", it will take tiill 2008 to get here, and when it does, it will look like a 2.0 anyway, years of high hopes for nothing.
I hope your right Cloxxki, I have a 2.35 Nevegal StickE on the rear of my 26er, it is a great tire! It works well as a front tire to. I would pay up front for those if they were true to size as the 26er is. The DTC rubber would be the best as the StickE's wear out quick!
 

·
Recovering couch patato
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
The more you want it, the easier Kenda is going to take it, and the smaller they're going to make it.
What's with tire companies? After years of pleading from the movement for a BIG tire, WTB decides to invest serious money in an Exi 29", and they make it ever so slightly wider than the 2.1's they already offered. Kenda seems to have 2.2" Karma in production, but contrary to their 26" offerings, it's reported to be extremely undersized. Schwalbe's Little Albert 2.1" is the narrowest 2.1 they've even made.
Have other sizing guidelines come into place for 29" for some reason?

Re: volume going down as rim gets wider. Indeed there must be a sweetspot in tire volume. If you have a tire with a 5" casing, spread flat out, that means that on a 5" wide rim, volume would in theory be zero. An infinitely narrow rim would even bring more volume.
I wonder which factors infuence casing shape, and which formula would calculate it based on rim width.
 

·
Harmonius Wrench
Joined
·
8,254 Posts
A sizing guideline, you say?

Cloxxki said:
.............
Have other sizing guidelines come into place for 29" for some reason?...............
Cloxx, I remember talking to a Schwalbe employee at FrostBike last February. He said that Schwalbe is reluctant to design and manufacture any 29" tire that is truly 2.3 + because it is their belief that it won't fit any currently available frame. If it won't fit in a frame, as their reasoning goes, than it will not sell.

It seems like a vicious circle, doesn't it? No frame makers are going to bother designing a frame for really big volume tires, because they do not exist, and tire makers will not make a big volume tire because there is not a frame that will fit one.

While there are frame makers that have had the foresight to add in a little extra clearance for a tire "down the road" that is not available yet, the tire manufacturers don't see that, and they are not going to pop for a tire mold when they do not see a way for the tires to fit. Walt has chimed in here before on the complexities of designing a frame for larger volume tires before. Perhaps he could re-iterate his wisdom here again? If it presents too big a challenge for a mass manufacturer, than perhaps the large clearances for a future big tire will never be realized? It seems that even a small mistake in frame manufacture can cause big problems, ala Fishers chainstay debacle.

Anyway, I think this is what may be holding the whole "big tire" thing back. Just my opinion.
 

·
Recovering couch patato
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
Every fork can take a 2.4" easily. Isn't that one of the main reasons axle-crown length seem to be increasing for the same 80mm travel?
Right now the biggest tires we got, the XR 2.25" and Exi 2.3, fit fine in all current mainstream offerings. Customs are typically built to take even more.
Was your Schwalbe contact riding a first model Salsa Dos Niners? Owners of Dos Niners, with little room for tires, seem to be happy with the Little Albert, and ofcourse the softtail helps keep it nice and cushy.

Schwalbe is so convinced there's no market in 29" tires anyway. After they launched a 47mm skinny, monster-knob $60 tire they labeled "28x2.1" surely they've done everything to please as many 29" owners they possibly could? This was their ultimate test to test the waters, and well, the 29" movement has spoken in silence. They must be relieved that they opted for the relatively inexpenvice "Light" carsing for this tire, rather than the "Evolution" casing seen on the Racing Ralph and Noby Nic tires they just can't enough of in 26". 29" being a new thing, it was better to use an outdated tread design with lots of traction, don't the 29" people love their traction? With those big wheels surely this will roll fast enough for everyone's taste?


I can live without a big tire just fine. I honestly think that a preper "race" tire will sell better than a "big" tire, though it's a solid second. For some reason, tire comps will rather be the 20th to join in and offer a 13 to the dozen allround rding tire than to burn their hands on the easy money to be made in filling the huge gaps in the market.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
No Really

Cloxxki said:
Someone just gave me what I'd call a first-hand rumor on a Kenda Nevegal Tomac 29x2.3". I believe it's true, but at the rate of the Karma 2.2", it will take tiill 2008 to get here, and when it does, it will look like a 2.0 anyway, years of high hopes for nothing.
What's with the tire selection? I thought at first it must be a big expense to create a mold and whatever they do . . . I guess this is where I'm ignorant . . . However on the outside I can tell you it seems like every day there is a new tire for Crusiers . . . Stuff Like Electra's Rat Fink. I mean how many 24x3.0 slicks w/ Flames can you sell? Not to mention the tread patterns . . . I live in the midwest and maybe it's a little different other places.

OK now assume there are the same number of cruisers to 29ers. I know this for a fact that probably every 29er owner has at least 3 or more different sets of tires for that bike, while the Cruiser rider is just going to have the set on the bike. I'm now up to 4 sets now for myself. I used to have 6 different sets for my 26". I'm saying if there is one 29er specific item you can sell "each" rider multiple times it's tires.
 

·
Recovering couch patato
Joined
·
14,019 Posts
You are so right, and the market is so blind and ignorant. Really, the bicycle industry, especially the part that gets to contribute to the actual evolution of he mountainbike, as just plain stupid "engineers" with their mind all knotted up, totally stuck. Old grey fat people that used to be excellent roadies in the days that all it took to be a good roadie was to have an empty mind and a big set of lungs, you you could make the huge mileage "that was needed" to become a good racer. With all due respect to the farmers I know, simply put, stupid farmers. Some of them have completed a technical college and call themselves tire engineers. some I know actually aren't fat and old, but live by more or less the same standards. Old=good, new=bad.

Schwalbe recently launched the 20x2.35" Big Apple, in an attempt to make folding bikes more comfortable, I would guess. But of course making a 29x2.35" version in their Evolution carcass, creating a 29" Supermoto which is the fastest rolling road tire on the face of the earth, would offer much smaller sales for them. Despite the www.balloonbikes.com thing.
They totally forget that everyone who has ever tried or contemplated the 28x2.35" Big Apple will surely jump on the lightweight version that cuts over a pound off the bike, offering better rolling and comfort, plus even acceptable offroad capabilities for dry but fragile trails. 26" Supermoto's are a bit of the standard on a not-so--local dunes trail here. People set their best lap times on them. A 29" version, that'd just be another level. I've be able to race those in many XC events even, thanks to the low pressure thing and it's suptle casing with grippy compound. I inquired though a bike company how many tires I'd have to order to get a 29" Racing Ralph or Super Moto, making clear that I understaad it would be 4-digits. The response was that Schwalbe was not planning to increase it's 28" offerings. Talk about saying "no" to money!

WTB has been so cool for us over the years, but they too seem to struggle to keep up. When they make a "big" tire, really EVERY customer is disappointed by it's size. This thread tire is almost a montly occurance. "My Exi's are smaller than I'd hoped". They should never have been called a 2.3, period. Then, it's should also not been attempted in 2.2. A 2.4" would still have fitted most bikes of current 2.3 owners (they bought it hoping for more after all), and opened up new opportunities that are all about MTB evolution. But it's just too small to be ridden hard on the same level as a 26" FR/DH bike. Under the smallest size a DH rider would consider, probably.
 
1 - 20 of 34 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