Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
808 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm a trail rider, and I need a tire (UST) that need to be good on all, but not great on one thing!!

I tried Nobby Nic but extremely slippery on wet roots, rocks and the front it was untrustful.
Right now I'm on good old Serac 2.1 UST, and are good on all terrain.

A frined that have the same Serac wants to try a bigger tire (don't know if only to front), and I told him to try Nevegal 2.1 UST or Fat Albert 2.35 UST ...
But I reed this review on Fat Albert at Bike Radar http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/categ...untain/product/fat-albert-evo-snakeskin-35719

Only 2 stars :madman: I remember Mike Ferrentino (old Bike mag editor) recommend that tire!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
457 Posts
That seems to be a review of the old Fat Albert. The FA comes in front and rear specific form now. I am running a FA Front 2.4 now. Do I like it? Yes, it's pretty good. Will I buy it again? Most likely not. Price and weight are two factors against it, and it has a dead spot when leaning it over, plus I want to try the Conti Rubber Queen (now Trail King) 2.4 in the front next. I have the 2.2 RQ on the rear and it rocks.
 

·
Rider and Wrench
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
I have run the Nobby Nick EVO 2.25, Nevegal DTC 2.1, and the latest version Front and Rear specific Fat Alberts that come in the std Snakeskin in 2.25's. I agree with the NN on wet roots etc.. they are just not very trust inspiring, but they have a great casing so they do work surprisingly well for their weight and fairly low rolling resistance (oh yea except the race thin sidewalls). The new version Fat Alberts had a great aggressive tread but they did not offer much more in terms of wet root grip- and the snakeskin sidewall seemed to make the tires feel almost numb compared to the Std. EVO sidewall. I imagine on dry rocky rough knarl they would excel but for the Mid/North East rooty wet stuff they only performed so/so. I only used the FA's for a short time so can't give a full account, but as much as I wanted to like them it was hard to find anything that outdid the venerable Nevegal DTC...except the price being double. For the price the Nevegal is tough to beat but the DTC or even Stick-e up front may be the way to go-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,300 Posts
Surfas said:
And hows the Nevegal perform in term of rolling resistance between them and NN??
LOL - the Nevegal feels horribly slow, period.

The FA and NN both feel like they roll about the same to me - the FA being a bit slower IMO. I have run them rear only, neither is chunky enough for me to run up front.

As a heavier rider, I appreciate the Snakeskin sidewall. As a rider in really rockier terrain, I appreciate the Snakeskin sidewall.
I have heard that some lighter riders don't like the reboundiness of the Schwalbe Big Betty, but haven't seen comparable feedback on the FA.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,300 Posts
EBbiker said:
What pressure are you running? I use the Nic front and Ralph rear (both 2.25) run at 20+/- psi. I find the grip to be incredible even through thick slop.
ME?
Well I am running 32psi.

More pertinent information, as PSI doesn't mean squat unless you know:
1. UST configuration
2. DT 5.1 Rims
3. 2.4 Fat Albert UST Snakeskin EVO
4. Rocky/rooty/technical austin singletrack.
5. 235 lb loaded rider

That being said, I assume you were asking someone else, as I never said they lack grip!
 

·
Rider and Wrench
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
Surfas said:
And hows the Nevegal perform in term of rolling resistance between them and NN??
The NN was for sure the faster of the three but with less time on the FA's I can't say which rolled faster with this VS the Nevegal. The Schwalbe tires I have Run EVO Racing Ralphs, EVO Nobby Nicks and New style Fat Alberts (snakeskin, F/R specific) were all hyper PSI sensitive- for me if they were not dialed perfect for the bike/terrain their performance was not nearly as good. All were std tube type 2.25's on DT 4.1d rims used by a 220lb rider with a tube with anywhere from 28-34 psi depending on the tire/bike/terrain. The Nevegals seemed more adaptable to small variances in PSI. I ran 2.1 Nevegals which were DTC so a bit faster than a Stick-E and also compared to the 2.35. I tried a number more tires (hutchinson, Michelin, Kenda, Specialized, IRC, Bontrager, etc...) than the above mostly on the same ~5" Travel rig and never really felt that the 2.1 DTC Nevegal was a boat anchor of a tire- not as fast as a Small block 8 or Racing Ralph but that was no surprise. The 2.35's in the nevegal as well as the 29X2.2 are another story all together but they have deeper tread, are heavier etc... so they are noticeably slower-

I find that a bit more aggro tire in the front gives me more confidence and the rear is less of an issue so I run a bit lower profile tread - of course this depends on where you are riding and what time of year it is-

For my riding and tire preference the difference between the std EVO (forgive me as to what the actual name is as Schwalbe has 25 different versions) and the snakeskin was huge- the things felt bullet proof but the feel was numb. The Nobby Nics with the std casing tore quite quick and I had to run them with a boot so I would not use them for a long term trail riding tire but for fast trails they have silly traction for the fast rolling they offer. To me the casing has so much impact on traction by way of conforming to terrain VS depending on the actual tread for everything- it is a system that needs both to work best- one or the other and you end up with an "OK" tire rather than a rocking one.

If you go Schwalbe make sure you do your home work on the casings, treads, triple compounds etc... available- a bit overwhelming. the cost is the most prohibitive for me, which I don't mind if it is a notable improvement but at ~$65-80 per tire VS ~$70 for a set of Nevegals it makes my choice even easier-
 

·
Rider and Wrench
Joined
·
1,478 Posts
Surfas said:
And hows the Nevegal perform in term of rolling resistance between them and NN??
The NN was for sure the faster of the three but with less time on the FA's I can't say which rolled faster with this VS the Nevegal. The Schwalbe tires I have Run EVO Racing Ralphs, EVO Nobby Nicks and New style Fat Alberts (snakeskin, F/R specific) were all hyper PSI sensitive- for me if they were not dialed perfect for the bike/terrain their performance was not nearly as good. All were std tube type 2.25's on DT 4.1d rims used by a 220lb rider with a tube with anywhere from 28-34 psi depending on the tire/bike/terrain. The Nevegals seemed more adaptable to small variances in PSI. I ran 2.1 Nevegals which were DTC so a bit faster than a Stick-E and also compared to the 2.35. I tried a number more tires (hutchinson, Michelin, Kenda, Specialized, IRC, Bontrager, etc...) than the above mostly on the same ~5" Travel rig and never really felt that the 2.1 DTC Nevegal was a boat anchor of a tire- not as fast as a Small block 8 or Racing Ralph but that was no surprise. The 2.35's in the nevegal as well as the 29X2.2 are another story all together but they have deeper tread, are heavier etc... so they are noticeably slower-

I find that a bit more aggro tire in the front gives me more confidence and the rear is less of an issue so I run a bit lower profile tread - of course this depends on where you are riding and what time of year it is-

For my riding and tire preference the difference between the std EVO (forgive me as to what the actual name is as Schwalbe has 25 different versions) and the snakeskin was huge- the things felt bullet proof but the feel was numb. The Nobby Nics with the std casing tore quite quick and I had to run them with a boot so I would not use them for a long term trail riding tire but for fast trails they have silly traction for the fast rolling they offer. To me the casing has so much impact on traction by way of conforming to terrain VS depending on the actual tread for everything- it is a system that needs both to work best- one or the other and you end up with an "OK" tire rather than a rocking one.

If you go Schwalbe make sure you do your home work on the casings, treads, triple compounds etc... available- a bit overwhelming. the cost is the most prohibitive for me, which I don't mind if it is a notable improvement but at ~$65-80 per tire VS ~$70 for a set of Nevegals it makes my choice even easier-
 

·
local trails rider
Joined
·
12,300 Posts
Surfas said:
tire (UST) that need to be good on all, but not great on one thing!!
I have not (yet?) tried Fat Albert. Continental Mountain King 2.4 SuperSonic is working great for me now (not great at anything but works in a variety of conditions). Don't remember if the UST has the same rubber compund. Also, MK 2.4 is clearly smaller than Nobby Nic 2.4.

Getting the pressure right for the tyre and your riding is important.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
464 Posts
knottshore said:
The NN was for sure the faster of the three but with less time on the FA's I can't say which rolled faster with this VS the Nevegal. The Schwalbe tires I have Run EVO Racing Ralphs, EVO Nobby Nicks and New style Fat Alberts (snakeskin, F/R specific) were all hyper PSI sensitive
I use the older FA 2.35 on my Slayer SXC and it rolls a lot better than a 2.35 Nevegal that I've used on friend's bikes. I haven't tried out the newer F&R specific FAs yet but they should have a similar rolling resistance.
As for the pressure sensitive nature - I completely agree. :thumbsup: All the Schwalbe tyres I've run (NN 2.1 Evo, FA 2.35 Snakeskin, RR 2.1 Evo, SS 2.25 Snakeskin) have a pressure "sweetspot". If you are outside this pressure range the traction can be pretty uninspiring, but when in the range they begin to come alive and grip well IME.

knottshore said:
I ran 2.1 Nevegals which were DTC so a bit faster than a Stick-E and also compared to the 2.35. I tried a number more tires (hutchinson, Michelin, Kenda, Specialized, IRC, Bontrager, etc...) than the above mostly on the same ~5" Travel rig and never really felt that the 2.1 DTC Nevegal was a boat anchor of a tire- not as fast as a Small block 8 or Racing Ralph but that was no surprise. The 2.35's in the nevegal as well as the 29X2.2 are another story all together but they have deeper tread, are heavier etc... so they are noticeably slower-
Friends of mine run 2.35 Nevs on their Reigns, one got a 2.1 Nev as a warranty replacement. He was loving the lower rolling resistance compared to the 2.35 version but tore the sidewall on our normal terrain. He went back to the 2.35 as he wasn't going to risk another 2.1 and the thinner sidewall.

knottshore said:
If you go Schwalbe make sure you do your home work on the casings, treads, triple compounds etc... available- a bit overwhelming. the cost is the most prohibitive for me, which I don't mind if it is a notable improvement but at ~$65-80 per tire VS ~$70 for a set of Nevegals it makes my choice even easier-
Again, totally in agreement here - definitely do your home work before you buy as it can be very expensive. :eekster: Thankfully they are cheaper in Europe.
 
1 - 12 of 12 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