Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
never ender
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
what up folks, I'm moving back to the Bay Area in a couple of months and need some tire recommendations. In the past I've tended to go for smallish tires with tall knobs like the 2.35 High Rollers, but I want to find something that's a little fatter with less rolling resistance. Maxxis Ignitors, WTB Mutanos, and the new Specialized Resolution are all on my list. Braking and cornering are of primo importance, and Soquel Demo is kind of my acid test for tires; if it works there it will work anywhere as far as I'm concerned. BTW, this is for a 35lb Heckler and a 200lb rider. Can anybody recommend anything in a 2.4 or smaller? Many thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
913 Posts
I've been running a 2.24 Mutano rear with a 2.3 Weirwolf front for years now. Everyone I've suggested the combo to has loved it - coincidentally, the WTB guy I spoke with at the Cougar Mountain Classic ran the same combo.

The Mutano rear rolls well and has good lateral grip, while the Weirwolf front provides fantastic lateral grip and braking power. The 2.24 / 2.3 sizes seem to have just enough sidewall to smooth the ride out.

That being said, they're not the best tires once the trails start getting muddy.
 

·
IPAs make me wanna puke.
Joined
·
1,598 Posts
fat_weasel said:
what up folks, I'm moving back to the Bay Area in a couple of months and need some tire recommendations. In the past I've tended to go for smallish tires with tall knobs like the 2.35 High Rollers, but I want to find something that's a little fatter with less rolling resistance. Maxxis Ignitors, WTB Mutanos, and the new Specialized Resolution are all on my list. Braking and cornering are of primo importance, and Soquel Demo is kind of my acid test for tires; if it works there it will work anywhere as far as I'm concerned. BTW, this is for a 35lb Heckler and a 200lb rider. Can anybody recommend anything in a 2.4 or smaller? Many thanks.
Rear = 2.1 Specialized Resolution
Front = 2.3 Specialized Enduro

I love this set-up

Michael
 

·
011100000110111101101111
Joined
·
1,247 Posts
I found the highroller had more bite in teh corners than the 2.4 Mutanos, and 2.25 Trailbears.
They are great so far... I have a highroller on the front of my hardtail and find it equally great, and 2.4 spec'd enduros on the front of my dualie. They are very large high volume tires, and work well only if you inflate the tires ~5psi over your normal psi.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Michelin All Mountain EXR's

I recenty put on a set of Michelin All Mountain EXR's in the 2.2 size. They are folding bead and 670 grams. I run them on Mavic Cross Max XL Disk wheels so the rims are basically the same as 819's. Inflated, the tires look like 2.3's. I have been really impressed with these tires so far and have ridden them in dry and wet conditions. Face it, it's going to be wet for a few months now. Anyhow, I also ride a heckler and am 230lbs. I picked them up on Ebay as a set for less than what 1 tire usually cost. I read about them in MBR magazine and those guys in the UK know a little about wet riding. They gave them high marks too! I am running these tires tubed but could run them tubeless with Stans. The tires hook up well and have very little rolling resistance. Check them out.
 

·
bicycle rider
Joined
·
2,718 Posts
I bet this thread gets as many unique recommendations as posts.

On my fs bike, for fun, I have 2.3 UST Maxxis High Roller front, 2.1 UST WTB Weirwolf rear, like it. For racing I have a pair of 2.1 UST Schwalbe Racing Ralphs and I like them for fast sandy stuff. (Sea Otter, CCCX)

On my singlespeed, only three rides now, I have a pair of 2.35 UST Maxxis Ignitors. Like them too, but at 30psi they're too hard. (I'm 200lbs.) They match the big, long-wheelbase, momentum-heavy riding the Chameleon seems to like.

The only tire I'd diss is the 2.1 UST Maxxis High Roller, which I had on the rear and which sucked mightily. No climbing grip.

Problem is, I'd probably like most of the tires out there. I'm not that discriminating. For fun I like fat, durable UST tires. For racing I like supple, light fast-rolling UST tires.

I used to pinch-flat way too much, so UST rocks for me.

NorCal encompasses so much different terrain that this isn't really a NorCal thread - I mean we don't have Moab slickrock or southeast mud, but otherwise we've got most of it. My riding is Joaquin Miller / Redwood / Chabot, Pine Mtn / Tamarancho / ahem, occasional peninsula rides, Downieville, Tahoe and whatever races I can get to (Billycross / Sonoma, CCCX / Monterey, Downieville, Sea Otter, etc)

I have a pair of Michelin XCR Mud UST tires in the garage I want to try on my ss this winter.

Maybe this was useful?

Morgan, rebuilding my winter road bike with SRAM Rival today...
 

·
Fireball in the Night
Joined
·
1,624 Posts
I'm still riding the 2.55LT in the front. The large contact patch gives a great amount of confidence over gravel AND it's fast rolling on hardpack/moistpack/and my little brother's backpack.

For that matter, the Maxxis Larsen TT 2.35K or the Kenda Tomac Small Block 8 are good competitors on the front. My brain prefers the linear tread of the 2.55LT

From there, add any paddle tire to the rear. A more narrow one that clears mud for now / A more wide one that handles loose the other 6 months of the year. Width is frame-dependent.
Chunder Pro XC
Mythos XC
WTB AmnesiaRaptor
 

·
M070R-M0U7H FR3NCHI3
Joined
·
3,584 Posts
Hutchinson 2.3 Barracuda. This tire is as wide as a 2.5 Maxxis High Roller and lighter.

you can get a MRC Med wich will give you a nice compromise between grip and rolling resistance. it won't be as grippy as a Maxxis ST compound, but the Hutch will roll much faster, give you a good amount of grip and offer a sweet footprint.

jsut an option...
 

·
never ender
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Acadian said:
Hutchinson 2.3 Barracuda. This tire is as wide as a 2.5 Maxxis High Roller and lighter.

you can get a MRC Med wich will give you a nice compromise between grip and rolling resistance. it won't be as grippy as a Maxxis ST compound, but the Hutch will roll much faster, give you a good amount of grip and offer a sweet footprint.

jsut an option...
Yeah, I tried a 2.1 Barracuda on the rear after reading your Pinkbike review and didn't like it too much...the 2.35 High Roller is about the same size and rolled better somehow. Still might buy a 2.3 for the front, as I like the big side lugs.
 

·
bicycle rider
Joined
·
2,718 Posts
One thing I've noticed about the 2.35 High Roller is that the side lugs are starting to tear off the casing. They're not torn off, but each one has a tear at its base that allows the lug to flex on corners. Makes it less solid on the corners. I have a feeling I'll have to replace it before it's anywhere near worn out, and it will probably never cut, it's just too tuff.

Tire's about a year old, bike gets ridden about once a week. I blame Downieville.

Morgan
 

·
Paper or plastic?
Joined
·
10,727 Posts
Rex_Skidmore said:
I'm still riding the 2.55LT in the front. The large contact patch gives a great amount of confidence over gravel AND it's fast rolling on hardpack/moistpack/and my little brother's backpack.

For that matter, the Maxxis Larsen TT 2.35K or the Kenda Tomac Small Block 8 are good competitors on the front. My brain prefers the linear tread of the 2.55LT

From there, add any paddle tire to the rear. A more narrow one that clears mud for now / A more wide one that handles loose the other 6 months of the year. Width is frame-dependent.
Chunder Pro XC
Mythos XC
WTB AmnesiaRaptor
I rode a 2.1 Specialized Enduro this morning on the front of my hardtail, and I like so far for winter riding. For SOC, I'm thinking about putting the 2.55LT back in the front to float over the sand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,213 Posts
Michelin All Mountain EXR's

fat_weasel said:
Yeah, maybe I shoulda said "greater Bay Area" instead of NorCal. All good suggestions though...I do like the looks of those Michelins.
Yeah, I'm liking them more and more. I rode them today and they just plain hook up. They are reasonably light too! I had Nevegal 2.35's in the Stickee compound and they they hook up about the same as the Michelins. They are also heavier and very slow rolling in my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
768 Posts
I picked up a pair of michelin mountain x-trems in 2.5. I run the ust mavic crossmax xl's, and weigh over 200lbs as well.
I got them this summer because I was having issues with burping my tires on landings, but I've been very pleased with how they grip the wet trails around here. I was expecting to have to buy some mud tires this winter, but I've been climbing all kinds of mucky crap with almost no slippage. So not only are these tires tough and pretty burp resistant, they also grab hard.
 

·
Uncle
Joined
·
4,390 Posts
Second the Mutano Raptor suggestion

beaverbiker said:
2.24 dual compound mutano raptors front and rear. i ride this combo about 90% of the time, year round. works KILLER.
I use a smaller tire on the rear (FSussie), but I prefer the Mut.raptor 2.24 on the front of both of my bikes. Clearly understand that this tire has much better bite in the turns than the the 2.4 sized version.
 

·
Natural body armor
Joined
·
2,178 Posts
datenschwanz said:
Conti Vertical Pro's 2.3 front and rear on my hardtail and on my dualie i run a Vertical Pro 2.3 on the front and a Gravity Pro 2.3 on the rear.
Funny. I use the same combo, but Gravity front and Vertical rear.
The gravity gives me more the idea of a directional tire, with good grip on loose stuff, therefore 'front' tire.

How do you like the Gravity as front?
ZT
 

·
GASing
Joined
·
508 Posts
Anyone know how the Michelin Mountain X'trem compares to the All Mountain? According to Michelin, it's heavier, but better cornering and accelerating.

I used the XCR Drys over the summer, and they worked great for fast smooth trails.
 
1 - 20 of 25 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