Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Back of the pack fat guy
Joined
·
4,008 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
For as few 29'er tire options there are out there, this topic certainly gets brought up a lot doesn't it? :)

Anyway, I'm the proud owner of a not-so-new anymore '06 Rig, and I have come to detest the stock Jones ACX tires. No cornering grip in loose over hardpack whatsoever. In fact, basic cornering grip (or lack thereof) in loose/sand over hardpack is a rectum puckering experience nearly every time. Well, there's that, and the fact that yes, the rear Jones ACX does rub the stays, like nearly every other Rig out there. I already replaced the front ACX with an Exiwolf and I'm still trying to learn its handling proclivities - it doesn't seem much grippier around corners than the ACX, but it is cushier and faster rolling and doesn't produce that annoying harmonic vibration on pavement.

Now, it's time for a rear tire replacement. Thinking a 2.1 Ignitor would not only fit the stays of the Rig better, but would also be a bit grippier on corners (and standing hill climbs) in loose over hardpack. The Nano is smaller on the tread height than what I want, and I'm not sure an Exi would be a very good rear tire in the loose conditions around here, especially for steep, standing climbs on loose over hardpack. I'm also concerned that the Exi wouldn't fit the rear stays either. How about the 2.1 Mythos? The 2.1 Klaw? Decisions, decisions. :confused:

The one tire I never see mentioned here is the 29 x 2.35 Nevegal. Anybody out there running that? Probably wouldn't fit the stays, but I could use it on the front and try the Exi in the rear.
 

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
16,540 Posts
Earthpig said:
The one tire I never see mentioned here is the 29 x 2.35 Nevegal. Anybody out there running that? Probably wouldn't fit the stays, but I could use it on the front and try the Exi in the rear.
Rumored to be available in Sept. Also rumored (more like confirmed) to be more like a 2.1. Most likely we'll see it at Interbike this fall.

MC
 

·
Bodhisattva
Joined
·
10,843 Posts
I've been running the ignitor in the rear & exi up front here in Colorado.
We haven't seen rain for almost a year and our conditions define loose over hardpack. It's mostly sand/silt over rock or just sand/silt over more sand/silt.

I really like this combo and am able to stand & hammer provided I keep the weight back where it should be. Will be trying the Ignitor/Ignitor combo soon. I find it has better traction than the Exi as a rear tire and is significantly lighter.
 

·
Powered by ice cream.
Joined
·
6,356 Posts
I just got a front Ignitor on my Rig and am in love with it.. just blows the Exi away in the corners.

I run a rear Nano which is okay, but will probably go Ignitor once it wears out.

I usually keep tires until they are dead, but the Exi and I did not get along.
 

·
highly visible
Joined
·
3,284 Posts
Unlike a lot of people on this board, I've always hated the Nano for loose-over-hardpack conditions, at least in central and eastern OR: sketchy cornering up front, weak traction in back.

Ignitor is a much better choice IMO. I've only logged a few miles on it as a rear tire, in the Leslie Gulch area of eastern OR (not far from you). Better than the Nano, but I thought it still had noticeably less traction as a rear tire than the Klaw, even in those conditions. I've experimented with a few different front tires, but out back I keep coming back to the Klaw.

Nevegal isn't available yet.
 

·
Bodhisattva
Joined
·
10,843 Posts
Earthpig said:
Ignitor or Klaw it is. Sounds like I may have to order 2!

On the Nevegal, why does Webcyclery have the 29 x 2.35 listed for sale if it's not on the market?

http://www.webcyclery.com/product.php?productid=17636&cat=373&page=1
Good question. I'd like to know too. Not in stock through QBP.
I've used the Nevs extensively in 26" format. Great tire for traction but very slow rolling. Not sure it'll be the ticket for a 29er/SS but I'll likely give it a go.
 

·
Always Learning
Joined
·
9,608 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
why does the site say to use the ignitors for race and the exiwolf for daily use? I don't race but I'll be in the market for new tires soon as my Bontrager Jones XR tires are gettin down there..
 

·
Always Learning
Joined
·
9,608 Posts
Earthpig said:
For as few 29'er tire options there are out there, this topic certainly gets brought up a lot doesn't it? :)

Anyway, I'm the proud owner of a not-so-new anymore '06 Rig, and I have come to detest the stock Jones ACX tires. No cornering grip in loose over hardpack whatsoever. In fact, basic cornering grip (or lack thereof) in loose/sand over hardpack is a rectum puckering experience nearly every time. Well, there's that, and the fact that yes, the rear Jones ACX does rub the stays, like nearly every other Rig out there. I already replaced the front ACX with an Exiwolf and I'm still trying to learn its handling proclivities - it doesn't seem much grippier around corners than the ACX, but it is cushier and faster rolling and doesn't produce that annoying harmonic vibration on pavement.

Now, it's time for a rear tire replacement. Thinking a 2.1 Ignitor would not only fit the stays of the Rig better, but would also be a bit grippier on corners (and standing hill climbs) in loose over hardpack. The Nano is smaller on the tread height than what I want, and I'm not sure an Exi would be a very good rear tire in the loose conditions around here, especially for steep, standing climbs on loose over hardpack. I'm also concerned that the Exi wouldn't fit the rear stays either. How about the 2.1 Mythos? The 2.1 Klaw? Decisions, decisions. :confused:

The one tire I never see mentioned here is the 29 x 2.35 Nevegal. Anybody out there running that? Probably wouldn't fit the stays, but I could use it on the front and try the Exi in the rear.
Why would the Ignitors fit the stays of the Rig better than the ACX's? Because the tread width is .9mm less?

Maxxis Ignitor 29 [29 x 2.1]
tread width = 52.8 / 2.08
casing width = 51.8 / 2.04
casing height = 49.2
volume index = 25.5

Bontrager Jones ACX 29 [29 x 2.2 (52/54)]
tread width = 53.9 / 2.12
casing width = 51.5 / 2.03
casing height = 49.0
volume index = 25.2

If you are having rubbing issues as it is with the ACX, you need a slimmer tire back there if trying to get rid of the rub is a goal. Schwalbe Little Albert's, IRC Notos and WTB Nanoraptors are all slimmer. Everything else - either in casing or in tread width is equal to or greater than the ACX in width.

If you can live with the rubbing and just want to find some traction back there that works for you, you could buy an Ignitor, a Klaw, and the largest volume tire made for 29"er's to date - the XR (you can run the front XR on the rear without issues). Experiment with psi on all of those and find the poison that works best for you. I love the ACX's and XR's in loose, but everyone has their own personal preference and psi they love to run.

What do I know, I'm racing and riding on Crows with minimal tread....leaning into corners on sand, loose dirt, hardpack, grass, gravel, mud and loose rocks over hardpack.:D

BB
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
653 Posts
BruceBrown said:
(you can run the front XR on the rear without issues). Experiment with psi on all of those and find the poison that works best for you. I love the ACX's and XR's in loose, but everyone has their own personal preference and psi they love to run.

BB
I just noticed after running downievill and some local stuff (salmon falls) that I had the front and rear tires switched - maybe that is why I bailed at downieville... but I doubt it :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Ignitors

Just started using Ignitor/Ignitor I like it so far. They are quite a bit lighter than the Jones XRs I weighed and I think they are a little better in sand too
 

·
Back of the pack fat guy
Joined
·
4,008 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
BruceBrown said:
If you are having rubbing issues as it is with the ACX, you need a slimmer tire back there if trying to get rid of the rub is a goal. Schwalbe Little Albert's, IRC Notos and WTB Nanoraptors are all slimmer. Everything else - either in casing or in tread width is equal to or greater than the ACX in width.

If you can live with the rubbing and just want to find some traction back there that works for you, you could buy an Ignitor, a Klaw, and the largest volume tire made for 29"er's to date - the XR (you can run the front XR on the rear without issues). Experiment with psi on all of those and find the poison that works best for you. I love the ACX's and XR's in loose, but everyone has their own personal preference and psi they love to run.
The rubbing of the ACX doesn't really bother me - the lack of cornering traction does. So, the goal really is better rear traction - less rub would be a side bonus, not the primary goal. With its non-directional tread and widely-spaced, medium to low height square knobs, I think the ACX would be a fine tire on maybe pure hardpack (ala the 26" Kenda Cortez, which has a similar tread pattern to the naked eye), but it doesn't cut the mustard on the loose over loose, sand, and loose over hardpack here. The Nano looks like a semi-slick, and I can't imagine I'd get a lot of bite out of it on steep, loose climbs on the SS.

On my 26" FS/XC bike I run 2.4 Mutanoraptors, which are a fantastic tire for around here, but I can't find anything with a similar tread pattern in the 29 size. (The 29 x 1.8 Mutano would be way too small for my application.) The Ignitor tread looks a little like the tread on the 26" Conti Vertical Pro, which a lot of people use around here and seem to like. Long ago, I used the 26" Mythos XC, and it worked well as a rear tire. The 29" Mythos looks like it has a very similar tread pattern. However, the Mythos looks like a pretty small volume tire. For me, the Klaw seems to be the wildcard - I don't think I've used a similar tire and I can't tell from photos what the tread really looks like.

As for psi, I'm still experimenting - for example, it seems like the Exi must have a magical psi where it grips, but doesn't feel like it wants to roll off the rim, and I haven't found that psi yet.

Thanks for the info on the tire size specs!
 

·
Always Learning
Joined
·
9,608 Posts
Earthpig said:
The rubbing of the ACX doesn't really bother me - the lack of cornering traction does. So, the goal really is better rear traction - less rub would be a side bonus, not the primary goal. With its non-directional tread and widely-spaced, medium to low height square knobs, I think the ACX would be a fine tire on maybe pure hardpack (ala the 26" Kenda Cortez, which has a similar tread pattern to the naked eye), but it doesn't cut the mustard on the loose over loose, sand, and loose over hardpack here. The Nano looks like a semi-slick, and I can't imagine I'd get a lot of bite out of it on steep, loose climbs on the SS.

On my 26" FS/XC bike I run 2.4 Mutanoraptors, which are a fantastic tire for around here, but I can't find anything with a similar tread pattern in the 29 size. (The 29 x 1.8 Mutano would be way too small for my application.) The Ignitor tread looks a little like the tread on the 26" Conti Vertical Pro, which a lot of people use around here and seem to like. Long ago, I used the 26" Mythos XC, and it worked well as a rear tire. The 29" Mythos looks like it has a very similar tread pattern. However, the Mythos looks like a pretty small volume tire. For me, the Klaw seems to be the wildcard - I don't think I've used a similar tire and I can't tell from photos what the tread really looks like.

As for psi, I'm still experimenting - for example, it seems like the Exi must have a magical psi where it grips, but doesn't feel like it wants to roll off the rim, and I haven't found that psi yet.

Thanks for the info on the tire size specs!
Thank Shiggy. Go to his site where all the specs for the majority of 29"er tires available are in his data base. Casing width, casing height, tread width, tread height, volume index, weight, etc.... .

I was just suggesting to buy one of each tire and give it a go to find the mustard that cuts it for you personally. You'd only be out $86.54 ($39 for Klaw, $19.99 for XR, $27.55 for Ignitor) and know first hand what works and doesn't work for you. I had great success last summer in NorCal in the sand and loose running the huge volume XR's. Then again, that was not on a SS, but did include a lot of out of saddle grunt climbs in dry and loose dirt and I laid the bike over as tight and low as I can on bombing descents and never lost traction. Thorns are another question, but I ran Bonty slime filled tubes to keep me sane and rolling in spite of their weight.

Best of luck dialing in your tire choice. A few more tires coming by year's end and I would imagine next year may bring even more choices. The ignitor weight and volume looks like a tire well worth the $27 and change. The ACX gets up their in price at $40 per tire making the XR at $19.99 pretty attractive for the volume/weight. Nano's - in spite of the visual look at the tread - hook up pretty darn well and don't handle at all like a semi-slick. One never knows until they try it. I'd throw in a Nano as well as a Specialized FT into the "testing" mix to find what works.

Now, off to pre-ride the weekend's NORBA course on my Crows...

BB
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top