[Coach417]

Posted a similar thread in the Evil forum. From all the research I have done, the M3 seems to be the most "poppy", "playful" B+ bike out there. However, I have read there may be issues with tire clearance. The Following is supposed to be very playful even in B+ configuration. Also, the Evil will handle Rocket Ron 2.8's without issue. Is anyone running that tire on a i35 rim? Are there clearance issues? One of these bikes will most likely be my next bike. Any help is appreciated.

 

[bdundee]

I ran 2.8 RoRo on I35 on my m3 without issue.

 

[NorCalTaz]

I ran Nobby Nics 2.8 on mine, great bike. To tell you the truth, I think it would be better with 2.6 tires. For me, the 2.8's while they allow to run low psi, they rebound/deflect more than I like. Good Luck!

 

[ReXTless]

Posted a similar thread in the Evil forum. From all the research I have done, the M3 seems to be the most "poppy", "playful" B+ bike out there. However, I have read there may be issues with tire clearance. The Following is supposed to be very playful even in B+ configuration. Also, the Evil will handle Rocket Ron 2.8's without issue. Is anyone running that tire on a i35 rim? Are there clearance issues? One of these bikes will most likely be my next bike. Any help is appreciated.

I had a 2.8 Rocket Ron on the rear of my Mojo 3. 30mm rim. The tire would hit the frame on every jump/drop.

I switched to 2.35 tires as a result. But, despite Ibis' claim of no diameter difference between regular and plus tires, running 2.35 lowers the bottom bracket appreciably. It's enough of a drop to make pedal strikes a significant issue, depending on where you ride. Disappointing, for sure.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Libikerdad]

Have no time on the following so I can't help there but I am finding 2.6 minnion dhf and 2.6 recon to be the sweet spot for traction and rolling resistance on the trails I ride with the mojo 3. Smiles for days on this bike

 

[Coach417]

This is part of my dilemma. Within 8 minutes I am getting replies that don't confirm one way or the other. I don't want to be the stimulus for any bad blood, but I have no way to demo the set up I want to run (RR 2.8), and I have read there are clearance issues. I had a Ripley V1 that had tire clearance issues. Absolutely LOVED the bike, but could not run it the way I wanted and had to look elsewhere. Hoping to not repeat that. If the tire hits on BIG drops, that may not be an issue as 90% of my riding is tight technical riding with short steep climbs and drops. I am looking for the most playful bike I can get that will run 2.8's.

 

[mannyfnz]

Are you set on Rocket rons? I was interested in those for my mojo 3, but am running rekon/dhf 2.8 on 35mm rims and am very happy with them. They run narrower than 2.8 so no worries about clearance on either bike.

 

[bdundee]

Some of the early m3's had a suspension link that would rub under impact but they fixed that issue.

 

[desertwheeler]

I have run rekons, nobby nics, dhr2, and currently on a slaughter. The only time any of them rubbed was when a rock got caught in the side lugs. All were 2.8’s on the rear.

 

[chuckyuen]

I’ve been running a rocket ron 2.8 mounted to some wide derby rims for the past year and haven’t had any issues. I also ran a Nobby Nic 2.8 before that and it was fine too.

 

[Coach417]

Some of the early m3's had a suspension link that would rub under impact but they fixed that issue.

AHA!!! This would explain it. Moving forward, my confidence is restored. I appreciate the insight folks.

I am not totally set on just the RR, but I have spent the last year testing tires and sizes (27.5+, 29, 29+) to determine my next DD, and the RR was good enough in my area to build a bike around it.

 

[bdundee]

AHA!!! This would explain it. Moving forward, my confidence is restored. I appreciate the insight folks.

I am not totally set on just the RR, but I have spent the last year testing tires and sizes (27.5+, 29, 29+) to determine my next DD, and the RR was good enough in my area to build a bike around it.

I've tried them all as well and to be honest the 2.8 RR is a great trail tire. The only issue I found with them was a little squirm on real hard landings which is not a deal breaker for most.

 

[ReXTless]

I've tried them all as well and to be honest the 2.8 RR is a great trail tire. The only issue I found with them was a little squirm on real hard landings which is not a deal breaker for most.

Agree. It is a great tire for where I ride. My 2.8 also weighed in at 690 grams. Even with some sealant residue. Crazy light.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bdundee]

Agree. It is a great tire for where I ride. My 2.8 also weighed in at 690 grams. Even with some sealant residue. Crazy light.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you have an early m3 before they modified the link for tire clearance?

 

[Coach417]

Agree. It is a great tire for where I ride. My 2.8 also weighed in at 690 grams. Even with some sealant residue. Crazy light.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My two samples were 765g (Evo SS non Addix), 785g Addix Evo SS

 

[ReXTless]

Did you have an early m3 before they modified the link for tire clearance?

Yes. You are correct about that, too. Although I never explicitly verified the link was where the tire was making contact. I just changed the tires out and moved on.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Crossmaxx]

Why do you necessarily need to run 2.8"? Why not 2.6 for instance, getting the best of both worlds + additional tire clearance.

 

[chuckyuen]

For me personally, I didn’t feel I got the same traction and comfort out of the 2.6 compared to the 2.8. I’ve also never had any issues with clearance running 2.8.