crembz


0 points (view top contributors)
> Forum Activity
 

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #303878

    Just an update on wear.

     

    Have ridden about 110kms on the tyre now and I certainly won’t be going back to spec tyres unless they were considerably cheaper.

     

    Both the MM and HD have performed real well, and the wear is inline with most other tyres I’ve used. on the back of the hardtail they are certainly wearing a lot better than my previous spec purgatory.

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #290190

    Hey mate,

    Yeah I’ve been riding the mullet all along. I have one mullet 29er and another mullet 27.5. I rode a 29er for about 400kms the 27.5 for about half of that before converting them.

    I ride in Victoria, two main areas, one is an XC style track with a few blacks and a commonwealth games competition track. This is mainly hardpack, rooty, loose over hard. The other is more aggressive downhills, blue/black/double with long steep fire road climbs between them. That is mainly rocky, loose over hard. 100kms in and the tyres are holding up fine so far. I tried a nobby nic on the rear instead of the hans, can’t say I’m a fan of that tyre tbh.

    Locally Schwalbe are about the same price as the Spec grids which makes the decision pretty easy. If you like spec grids and they’re heaps cheaper, I’d probably go with a butcher purg combo, I much prefer that over the Eliminator.

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #290030

    Updating this with initial impressions.

    I ended up mounting a 29×2.35 MM and a 27.5×2.35 HD both on soft.

    Measuring them up them came within 1mm of the old Spec 2.6″ tyres. Overall they are lighter and roll much better.

    First ride out I wasn’t 100% comfortable as I had the pressures up a little higher than in the spec. Lowered them on the next 2 rides and I can’t be happier with the results. I’m glad I stuck with ‘normal’ width tyres in this instance. I have since PRd several climbs and downhill sections locally so the ‘narrower’ tyres don’t seem to have had a negative affect.

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #289063

    Incorrect 4 to go lol

    Purchase, Receive, Mount, Inflate, Shred

    Hopefully I’ll be too lost in shredding heaven to remember to post hahahahaha. Just kidding I’ll post my thoughts.

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #289051

    Thanks I think ‘ignore the stated width’ and go by actual is the guidance I’m looking for.

     

    Purchased now I wait for delivery. Thanks again

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #288990

    Yes agree however I’m, comparing Bontrager, Maxxis and Sepcialized on the same width rims (i30), all of them supposedly 2.6″ wide.

    The Bontrager actually measure 66mm so pretty much spot on. The maxxis not far off, 65mm. The Spec however measures 61mm. The same is true of the rear tyre also.

    So this is my question. I hated the feel of the Bontrager tyres, didn’t care much for the maxxis, but like the feel of the spec @61mm. According to quite a few internet reports most Schwalbe 3.25″ tyres actually measure ~60-62mm. Would I be better off with those or 2.6″ Schwalbe with the apex casings?

    in reply to: 2.35 or 2.6" tyres? #288921

    I’m currently running the speciailzed combo in 2.6 and I like the feel of them, just want something different. They actually measure a touch over 2.4″ which is what has got me confused. I’f I’m happy with the feel of my current tyres (marked 2.6 but actual 2.4) should I be looking at ~2.4″ tyres or 2.6″ tyres as a replacement to keep a similar feel?

    My bikes a mullet so I would want to keep the same tyre width front to back.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)