Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
So I'm in the process of building a carbon hard tail for general trail use here in Arkansas. The trails I ride are pretty tame and mostly just normal dirt trails (hard pack?)..

After quite a bit of reading I've narrowed my tire choices down to:

2.4 Ardent front and 2.35 Ikon Rear

or

2.35 Ikon front and 2.2 Ikon rear


Obviously, I think I'm going Maxxis but I'm still open to changing that as well. My main concerns are: Fast rolling, great traction.

I'll take a slight weight penalty if need be (Ardent) but from what I'm reading about the 2.35 Ikon I may not have to step up to the Ardent. I'm leaning towards the 2.35 Ikon rear and 2.4 Ardent front.. but am concerned I may not even need that much tire and could save weight going with Ikon.

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. This is the final purchase to be made for the build and, for me, is proving to be the most difficult.

Thx.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter · #2 ·
Holy crap.

Now that I've narrowed it down to the most likely the Ikons, I thought the decision making process was over. What the hell is with all these choices?

BikeBling.com - 1-800-BIKEPRO is Bike Bling

I'm lost here. There's only one choice for the 2.35 version so that's easy.. but I'm most likely using a 2.2 in the rear (or just go ahead with another 2.35??) and there's way too many choices here. Exo, TR, 3c, k tire.. This is ridiculous lol.. I just want some damn tires.

I'm running tubeless on Sun Ringle Charger wheels that have licensed the Stans rim tech... Which 2.2 to get? If I get the exo one, it's not tubeless ready.. if I get the tubeless ready one, it's not exo.. I was thinking exo would be good in the rear but hell idk..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,309 Posts
Wheel size? 26/27.5/29? Tubeless? If it's 29, 2.2 would be fine. If it's 26 (or any size, given the conditions you describe) the Ardent, which I love, is overkill. If you are running tubeless, I recommend the TR version. It holds air very well. If you have no rocky sections, the EXO is, again overkill. If you have choice between 3C or not, I recommend 3C.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,309 Posts
Here's the Maxxis tire catalog: Ikon | Maxxis USA. There are multiple versions of each. From what I have read, on the 29er forum, folks love the 29x2.2. Tubeless? 3C/TR version. Not tubeless? 3C version. Like I said, if you have rocky terrain, add in EXO for sidewall protection. I'm unfamiliar with the dual compound version. I'd pass on the 2.35, unless more serious cornering is required, as the tread is inside the carcass width on the 2.2, but outside the carcass width on the 2.35, at least in the 26 version.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,269 Posts
Compromise might be

Ardent 2.25 front or Ardent Race 2.20 (still hard to find and expensive IMO) front

Ikon 2.2 Rear

Saves weight and doesnt look like from your description you need the 2.4 front.

Doesn't sound like you need EXO. Looks like the first link and more expensive of the 2 is with EXO based on weight. 3C on the ikon is needed for rear IMO to save on wear.

I would not run an ikon on the front, hardpack means you are likely continuing to push the limits of your cornering ability if you want to continue improving your skills and pushing yourself ikon front just isn't the tire for that, go with something grippier.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,309 Posts
Thanks for the help MSU Alum (Go Hawgs! ;))

Anybody care to take a stab at what the difference is between the two tires I linked above is? I've emailed BikeBling and am waiting for a reply.
I agree....and go Bobcats too ! The other MSU.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
^^ hmmm.. okay, thx. That's the type of input I'm after.

And I literally just received a reply back from BikeBling and You're exactly right: The first link is the EXO model it just isn't listed.

So your suggestion is Ardent 2.25 front and Ikon 2.2 rear. Seems reasonable. I guess I might be looking at larger tires than I actually need but there is something about that fat Ikon 2.35 that I really like, but I've nothing to base it on other than I almost bought a fat bike and thought I might as well get some fat ass tires since I didn't.. but that could be and probably is faulty logic. Thanks again.. I realize you could be dead on about getting something a bit grippier up front. From what I've read the 2.35 Ikon is loads grippier than than the 2.2 but I guess still doesn't reach ardent grip levels. First and foremost is safety and fun.. I'm not racing.

I'm also now considering Specialized. Reasonably priced. Great reviews. Considering the Ground Control 2.3 or 2.1 rear and Purgatory 2.3 front.

Honestly.. I've over analyzed every component purchased for my build.. tires are the hardest me thinks.

edit: Just found the Ardent race in stock for $63. I'm good with that and will start doing some review reading. Looks like it could be a good compromise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
72 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Okay.. leaning Ardent race 2.2 up front and Ikon 2.2 rear. Both in EXO bc that's what's in stock and 50 grams seems like a small price to pay for added durability. But yeah.. The EXO probably over kill for me.

I'm now realizing how horribly I titled this thread.. I hadn't made my tire choice at all.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top