Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've heard a lot of good things about this tire and i'm thinking of putting them on my bike. I was wondering what this tire's best use is in and what is the actual size of the 2.3 version?

Cheers :thumbsup:

[bEn]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,125 Posts
[bEn] said:
I've heard a lot of good things about this tire and i'm thinking of putting them on my bike. I was wondering what this tire's best use is in and what is the actual size of the 2.3 version?

Cheers :thumbsup:

[bEn]
Not sure of the size but the tire is sort of an all arounder. They maybe best in hardpack but do well in a variety of conditions, just not stellar in any one. The thing i liked about them is that they roll very fast for the amount of traction you get and the tread lasts the longest of any tire I've used in the last couple of years.
 

·
Team Weak & Feeble
Joined
·
136 Posts
They are wider than some others

I just took a pair of Spider 2.1 UST's off after about 1 year or use. THey are great all around tires. Replaced them with a set of IRC Serac UST also in a 2.1 and there is a visable width difference. THe Spider makes the Serac look like a 1.9 and not a 2.1. Not sure who is right with their measurment, but my guess is that the Spider runs a little wide.
 

·
LA CHÈVRE
Joined
·
9,429 Posts
dlmlaw said:
I just took a pair of Spider 2.1 UST's off after about 1 year or use. THey are great all around tires. Replaced them with a set of IRC Serac UST also in a 2.1 and there is a visable width difference. THe Spider makes the Serac look like a 1.9 and not a 2.1. Not sure who is right with their measurment, but my guess is that the Spider runs a little wide.
The Spider is a big 2.1 but the Serac not only looks like a 1.9, it is a 1.9!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
192 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I've noticed the 2.1 version of the Spider is wider then its actual size by looking on shiggy's site. Would this make the 2.3 version wider then what it actually is?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,837 Posts
[bEn] said:
I've noticed the 2.1 version of the Spider is wider then its actual size by looking on shiggy's site. Would this make the 2.3 version wider then what it actually is?
I have a folding Spider 2.3 and it's about 2.15" wide on an x317 rim, so mine is not wider than claimed, so for now I've got it on the shelf. Not sure if the wire-bead version is wider or not.
 

·
trail rat
Joined
·
7,825 Posts
Are you measuring knobs or casing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,837 Posts
slocaus said:
Are you measuring knobs or casing?
Tread width (knobs). I don't have it mounted right now so can't give an exact measurement. I had checked it with calipers, to find it about the same tread width as my NBX 2.3, which is 2.15", and the NBX has a bit more agressive pattern, which clears mud better too, so that's what I'm running right now.
 

·
trail rat
Joined
·
7,825 Posts
fsrxc said:
Tread width (knobs). I don't have it mounted right now so can't give an exact measurement. I had checked it with calipers, to find it about the same tread width as my NBX 2.3, which is 2.15", and the NBX has a bit more agressive pattern, which clears mud better too, so that's what I'm running right now.
And, of course, different rim width will affect measurement. That is why Shiggy uses the same rim and air pressure to get an honest comparison between tire measurements and stated size.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top