The difference is noticeable to me. There are pros and cons to the sizes however so it’s not all bad.
Smoothness:
2.8 is noticeably smoother even given the same tire and compound than 2.6. There is significantly more air volume and that just allows less psi before bottoming out.
Traction:
Again 2.8 will have better traction. The difference is not as pronounced however like it is with ride smoothness. Plus you can always run a more aggressive rear tire for the same weight as a less aggressive 2.8 and that traction gap gets smaller. Conversely a 2.8 rear can have too much traction for certain riding conditions like pavement when riding to trails (in addition to the ones I prefer 2.6 for below) for me so I tend to prefer less aggressive tires like the Rekon or at most the old style NN.
Nimbleness:
2.6 wins here. The 2.6 is more playful for sure. Lighter weight typically, easier to tail whip, faster acceleration. I prefer it on flow trails, pump tracks, jumping etc.
Smoothness:
2.8 is noticeably smoother even given the same tire and compound than 2.6. There is significantly more air volume and that just allows less psi before bottoming out.
Traction:
Again 2.8 will have better traction. The difference is not as pronounced however like it is with ride smoothness. Plus you can always run a more aggressive rear tire for the same weight as a less aggressive 2.8 and that traction gap gets smaller. Conversely a 2.8 rear can have too much traction for certain riding conditions like pavement when riding to trails (in addition to the ones I prefer 2.6 for below) for me so I tend to prefer less aggressive tires like the Rekon or at most the old style NN.
Nimbleness:
2.6 wins here. The 2.6 is more playful for sure. Lighter weight typically, easier to tail whip, faster acceleration. I prefer it on flow trails, pump tracks, jumping etc.
