Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Praise Bob
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I have been riding on regular Nevegals for quite some time and really liked them. They have abundant traction in most riding conditions and had reasonable rolling resistance.

I was running the DTC version as a tubeless with Stan's on my Crossmax. My rear tire just needed to be replaced so I decided to try the "real" tubeless version (2.35" UST DTC) so I dont have to mess with sealant and can take advantage of the thicker casing to run lower pressures without fear of burping air.

I have to say I am thoroughly disappointed in the performance of that tire. It literally feels like I am dragging a boat anchor. I *was* a fan of the Kendas and now I am second guessing myself. Has anyone else shared this experience? Should I just go back to ghetto tubeless with the same brand? Has anyone tried another brand of UST with good results (thinking about Conti Mountain Kings).

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
 

·
Just a flesh wound
Joined
·
2,373 Posts
Heavy stuff

UST has to be thicker to hold the air without any help. The warranty claims would be off the charts. An inner tube is light, but it prevents the air pressure from escaping into the casing. That's why people complain about air bubbles in the treads and side-walls. The regular tires aren't designed to hold air. The UST rigs are, and that takes more rubber. Ghetto or tubes are better, IMHO.

I prefer tubes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,762 Posts
Agreed, in part...

a UST tire will ALWAYS be noticeably heavier than the "standard" version of the same tire for the reasons stated. That is why many riders prefer to use standard tires with sealant on their UST or Tubeless Ready wheels. I don't agree that going to a gehtto set up would be better. Your Crossmax rims are UST so they don't require rim strips or split tubes, etc. The bead hook is nice and agressive so they'll hold even a standard tire better than a "converted" rim. So why go back? You're better off with a wheel that is specifically designed to run tubeless. The big plus is you don't have to fiddle with rim strips or spliting tubes, etc. You still have to deal with sealant either way. I run standard Nevegal DTCs tubeless on a set of Bontrager TLR rims and haven't had a problem with the tires at all. Yes I could run lower pressures with a full UST tire, but the performance I get with this set up is great as it is, and I have not burp, roll off or blow off problems. The extra weight required to run a few PSI less pressure just isn't worth it.

Anyway, your call. I'd just stick with the Crossmax wheels and the standard Nevegal.

Good Dirt
 

·
Praise Bob
Joined
·
490 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I was afraid of that

Thanks for confirming my suspicions!

BTW I mis-used the term Ghetto Tubeless -my apologies. I was running a standard tire with sealant on UST rims so I thought that was the same as GT. I didnt realize that GT also implied using rim strips or cut up inner tube.

Sooo...does anyone want to buy a Kenda Nevegal UST with only 15 miles on it? ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,669 Posts
UST is heaver than "tubeless ready" with sealant.
Also, I would feel more confident knowing I had sealant in my tire.
You won't find me running UST tires.
 

·
err, 27.5+
Joined
·
4,928 Posts
The Nevegal in particular is an extreme example of UST portliness :( It is about 300g heavier per tire than the standard nev. Rolling resistance is about the same as a tubed DTC with a tube in it, definitely not as good as a converted tubed dtc though. It is moot for me though as I ride in too rough of a place to run the standard tire tubless without ripping off knobs and tearing the sidewalls.

I think true UST tires disappoint a lot of people who have tried converted tube tires. UST is just not as supple. It is heavier. It is bomb proof though and I far prefer it to all the fiddling around with conversions.

Depending on where and how you ride the MK2.4 is not very impressive. I think it is okay as a rear tire, but isn't nearly as large of volume or traction in loose. There is a rather involved MK2.4 discussion thread around here if you search for it. A lot of people are underwhelmed with the performance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,083 Posts
Yeah that makes sense UST = boat anchor....

Lest see just one example Conti Mountain King standard tubbed 580 grams...

Conti Mountain King UST 750 grams...

So add a tube say 120 grams so we have 700 vs 750 grams...or lets say rimstrip at say 100 grams plus sealant at 46 grams...hmmm 726 grams....

I occasionally run sealant in the UST but only 1 oz ao that would make the UST 778 grams.


Gotta say though the Nev is a pretty good rear traction tire it rolls like a pig.....
 

·
You wanna go ridin?
Joined
·
297 Posts
I switched to the small block 8 UST because I felt the same thing with the Nev in the back. SB8 rolls a lot better traction not quite as good but for me the Nev was overkill. Still running the Nev in the front and I really like it.
 

·
transmitter~receiver
Joined
·
9,333 Posts
jeffscott said:
Yeah that makes sense UST = boat anchor....

Lest see just one example Conti Mountain King standard tubbed 580 grams...

Conti Mountain King UST 750 grams...

So add a tube say 120 grams so we have 700 vs 750 grams...or lets say rimstrip at say 100 grams plus sealant at 46 grams...hmmm 726 grams....

I occasionally run sealant in the UST but only 1 oz ao that would make the UST 778 grams.

Gotta say though the Nev is a pretty good rear traction tire it rolls like a pig.....
ha... haha... HAHAHAHAHAH! :D
whoa... ha... excuse me.
you're actually right... UST set-ups weigh exactly the same... :skep: hmmm... let's see (humor me):
geax barro race folding - 450g
geax barro race UST - 740g
the difference when set up (for me) would be... 740g-450g=290g per wheel
same valve, same stan's yellow, and same amount of sealant. no reason to change.
yeah... keep the UST tires... all 3 models or whatever.
i can feel 580g in my tires. call me a princess and UST a pea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,083 Posts
meltingfeather said:
ha... haha... HAHAHAHAHAH! :D
whoa... ha... excuse me.
you're actually right... UST set-ups weigh exactly the same... :skep: hmmm... let's see (humor me):
geax barro race folding - 450g
geax barro race UST - 740g
the difference when set up (for me) would be... 740g-450g=290g per wheel
same valve, same stan's yellow, and same amount of sealant. no reason to change.
yeah... keep the UST tires... all 3 models or whatever.
i can feel 580g in my tires. call me a princess and UST a pea.
Geez thought sealant weighed about equal to water???

Why use the same amount of sealant in a UST as compared to a non UST tire???? it certainly doesn't need as much....but then you wouldn't know cause you havn't tried it.

Geez I though you didn't have to use a rim strip/ or split tube on a UST rim....
 

·
transmitter~receiver
Joined
·
9,333 Posts
jeffscott said:
Geez thought sealant weighed about equal to water???

Why use the same amount of sealant in a UST as compared to a non UST tire???? it certainly doesn't need as much....but then you wouldn't know cause you havn't tried it.

Geez I though you didn't have to use a rim strip/ or split tube on a UST rim....
sealant might weigh about as much as water... about 28g per ounce. so?
ok... ok... you're right. say i use 1/2 the sealant (like you) in a UST tire... so only a 524g weight penalty. you're right... they're about the same. :arf:
i guess you don't have to use a rim strip/split tube on a ust rim. oh damn... i forgot... you don't have to use one on my stan's rims either. just 5g worth of yellow tape. forgot that part... well, not really... as i wouldn't go out and buy a new ust wheelset to go with my ust tires. it's a bit shy of closing the gap anyway. we'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and say you might not know that if you never tried. so... where were we... oh yeah... my non-ust rims set up with both ust and non-ust tires just fine, so why would i add unessesary complication and weight if i didn't need it? oh right... to make up some silly example whereby i can maybe convince myself that a ust set-up does indeed weigh the same as non-ust tubeless. GOT IT! :thumbsup: :crazy:
choor loco, mang!
but have at all 3 of those ust models while you can. they seem to be dying off. wonder why? hmmm...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,669 Posts
No reason to get so ornry. Jeff Scott gave an example where the weight difference of UST is not much, and melting feather gave an example where the use of UST tires would mean a big weight penalty. they are both valid examples, and illustrate the need to evaluate your own equipment and options to know what the best decision is for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,071 Posts
I have noticed that a brand new Nevegal on the back feels like a boat anchor compared to a slightly worn Nevegal. I'd also recommend trying the Small Block 8 on the back - inexplicably good traction in most conditions and much faster rolling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,006 Posts
Yes the Nevegal 2.3 UST is a boat anchor.

I much rather run stan's in a regular Nevegal.

However, the regular Kendas are too lightweight for Downieville, so I decided to run the UST as a heavier tire that is not wire bead.
 

·
transmitter~receiver
Joined
·
9,333 Posts
smilinsteve said:
No reason to get so ornry. Jeff Scott gave an example where the weight difference of UST is not much, and melting feather gave an example where the use of UST tires would mean a big weight penalty. they are both valid examples, and illustrate the need to evaluate your own equipment and options to know what the best decision is for you.
jus' havin' some fun. didn't mean to come of as ornry.
all good over here.
:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
504 Posts
meltingfeather said:
i guess you don't have to use a rim strip/split tube on a ust rim. oh damn... i forgot... you don't have to use one on my stan's rims either. just 5g worth of yellow tape. forgot that part... well, not really... as i wouldn't go out and buy a new ust wheelset to go with my ust tires. it's a bit shy of closing the gap anyway. we'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and say you might not know that if you never tried. so... where were we... oh yeah... my non-ust rims set up with both ust and non-ust tires just fine, so why would i add unessesary complication and weight if i didn't need it? oh right... to make up some silly example whereby i can maybe convince myself that a ust set-up does indeed weigh the same as non-ust tubeless. GOT IT! :thumbsup: :crazy:
choor loco, mang!
but have at all 3 of those ust models while you can. they seem to be dying off. wonder why? hmmm...
Ok for you chaps who know what you're talking about but.....for me?

Are you saying that you still use yellow tape on UST rims? If so, why?

Fwiw, I'm not being a clever dick, I'm seriously thinking of going tubeless and am now so confused as to the best way to go about it I have no idea.

From what I've seen so far reading every thread I can find is that maybe UST rims (I take it they're the ones with no spoke holes through rim), sealant, standard tyres.

Is that close or nowhere near it?
 

·
err, 27.5+
Joined
·
4,928 Posts
ireland57 said:
I'm not being a clever dick, I'm seriously thinking of going tubeless and am now so confused as to the best way to go about it I have no idea.
There is no best way :madman: Many different ways. IME UST tires on UST rims with 1 scoop of stans is pretty bomb proof. A close second is the split inner tube method of conversion with standard tires. BUT, and that is a big but, it all boils down to individual tire and rim combinations. Use the search and read about all things tubeless, try it for yourself, and decide if it works for you ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,669 Posts
ireland57 said:
From what I've seen so far reading every thread I can find is that maybe UST rims (I take it they're the ones with no spoke holes through rim), sealant, standard tyres.

Is that close or nowhere near it?
Sounds good to me.
Or consider tires that say "tubeless ready", like Bontragers. They are between standard and UST, and meant to be used with sealant, but give you a better bead seat than standard.
 

·
transmitter~receiver
Joined
·
9,333 Posts
ireland57 said:
Ok for you chaps who know what you're talking about but.....for me?

Are you saying that you still use yellow tape on UST rims? If so, why?

Fwiw, I'm not being a clever dick, I'm seriously thinking of going tubeless and am now so confused as to the best way to go about it I have no idea.

From what I've seen so far reading every thread I can find is that maybe UST rims (I take it they're the ones with no spoke holes through rim), sealant, standard tyres.

Is that close or nowhere near it?
UST does not mean the rim can not be drilled. that's a bit of a misconception. i think there is some confusion (perhaps on purpose) about what exactly the UST spec is and what manufacturers who use it say about it. it is also apparently not publicly avaialble to read. that said, i don't know of a ust rim that you would use yellow tape on.
my point was that with ust or standard tires, i would use my stan's rims with yellow tape, so there's no need to add tubes or split tubes or anything, really, when comparing standard vs ust tire set-up weights. hell, some ust rims even require strips (bonty).
there are 1000 answers to your question. there is no 'best way.' some people think ust rims and tires is the only way to go. i've seen friends face plant after blowing a ust+ust set-up off of a rim in an off-camber bedrock descent. plenty of people have had bad experiences with just about every tubeless set-up. i'm luckily not one of them. some people think you should use rim strips if you want to run non-ust tires on ust rims. stan's bead design is superior to say a mavic ust rim for setting up non-ust tires, in my experience.
in concept and practice i really like ghetto tubeless alla mtnbiker72's blog. bombproof.
i think tubeless set-ups would probably be a lot more successful if people weren't using them to push the low pressure envelope, but that's one of the main benefits, soooo...
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top