You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / MTB Gear / Tyres for Fast Rocky Stuff
Tyres for Fast Rocky Stuff
So after the sidewall on my rear tyre gave out just 10k into the Half Fling yesterday (on a fast, rocky downhill bit - subsequently repaired with gel wrappers and a bit of cardboard) I'm in the market for a couple of new tyres for my Specialized Stumpy.
Currently I am (was!) running the standard Specialized 'The Captain' tyres, but back in the UK, when I've known the trail is going to be rough & rocky (eg at the Welsh trail centres), I've tended to use Maxxis Minions, which are robust but pretty heavy.
The Fling was my first race, but I wouldn't mind doing another - so what would be the recomendations for a tyre than can be used with confidence on the faster rocky downhills that Sydney seems to have plenty of (and that caught me out yesterday), but isn't too heavy to be used for XC as well? I don't really want to change to tubeless at the moment, as I'll probably be in the market for a new bike in the not-too-distant future.
[Mod. more generic title - there are fast rocky sections everywhere]
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
Spesh tyres are to lightweight to cope with Sydney conditions. I've done so many sidewalls on them riding the northern beaches.
I now run crossmark rear and monorail front.
Both ust. A little heavy but bombproof for general trail riding.
I've got a feeling this post will go on for a while though with lots of different opinions???
Conti race king / x king protection I think are a good mix between lightweight and durable - coming in around the 500 - 550 grams mark.
I think they now have a new 'race sport' version which is lighter still - sub 500 grams - but haven't personally tried them.
Very fast rolling and great in yesterday's conditions - but I guess most tyres would ave been pretty good yesterday.
5' dually Maxxis Aredents LUST front and rear, I usually train at LCNP they have handled the rocky conditions well, bounced off a stump on the weekend, was surprised to not even see a mark on the side wall.
29er hardtail Ardent front, Crossmark back, more my race set up.
Again it comes down to personal choice.
Maxxis Ignitors 2.35. these things are unstoppable. They will last 2 years and still be grippy on loose gravel climbs.
Captains are great....but I assume you had the S-Works which is no good on the rear for rocky trails with the thin sidewalls. I kept an S-Works on the front for a long time of good service and no problems at all. If you like the tyre other than the cut issue, try the Control version for tougher sidewalls.
... of the evolution version of the Racing Ralph's then.
I was the guy standing at about 60ks in asking for a spare tube after I first tore my sidewall of my rear Racing Ralph and then managed to rip the valve of the spare tube while just adding that last bit of extra pressure.
Was running them tubeless when it happened (and have been for a couple month and never had an issue).
Love that tyre though and will definitely get another one, but this time in the double defense version.
And FYI the Rocket Ron Evolution on the front looks pretty shredded too. Some near misses in the sidewalls.
Should probably point out that when I started with these tyres I was running tubes.
Oh, and if anyone here is or knows plate number 788, thank you for stopping and helping me out with your spare tube. please flick me a message so I can send you a new one.
I have three bikes with 3 very different tyre combos.
Giant Anthem - Maxxis crossmarks from and back
Giant Reign - Maxxis Ignitor front, maxxis high rollers
Intense M9 - Maxxis Minions
For XC racing I would never put the Ignitor, High roller or minions on the Anthem. Far to much rolling resistance.
You need a tyre with low rolling resistance in the centre blocks but good grip on the outside edges.
I wouldnt use Ardents either of XC racing. Again to much rolling resistance.
I do a few XC races on my anthem running the crossmarks and have never been over taken on the downhill sections of any track. I do a hell of a lot of overtakeing myself though. You might need to do more practise and get used to your tyres.
Minions are for serious downhill - no need for them apart for oxford falls downhill. 10 k's in and got a flat - what a shocker. I have Captains on my trek remedy all mountain bike. They are slow for a cross country race (but I still beat last years time by more than 1 1/2 hours - on Ardents). Tubeless is what you need. "Captain" tubeless is all I use in Sydney. They are good for everything. If you want a good time in the fling - or any other cross country race use crossmarks or something like them. Ardents or captains are awesome for anything sydney has to offer but if you are flatting with tubes maybe your pressure should be up a bit. YOU KNOW YOU NEED A REMEDY - CROSS COUNTRY RACE TIMES AREN'T AS GOOD AS BIG DROPS.
I wish I could go faster in cross country races!!!!!
If only that Remedy still saw big drops. Let it go Captain Slow, those times are behind you, getting faster in marathons and 24 hours races is what you need to be thinking about in your stage of life.
I ran the stock (for the bike) Specialized S-Works Fast Trak on the front and Renegade on the rear in the Fling on the weekend and despite some nasty sounding contact with rocks, they held up really well. They are tubeless specific so assume that they have thicker sidewalls than the standard S-Works tyres. Having said that, my other bike that sees its action at the Dam, Red Hill, etc. has Ignitor up front and Larsen on the rear and that seems to be a pretty bullet proof combination for Sydney sandstone (and very popular albeit sometimes swapping the Larsen for a Crossmark). Not sure I would want to run the Ignitor in a race though.
If you are a bit of a lazy rider, and let the tyre slide down the side of rocks etc, instead of picking clean lines. Then go for a dedicated UST tyre. The UST Racing Ralphs and Nobby Nics are all but indestructable, The 2.25 NN weighs in a smidge lighter than a 2.1 UST crossmark. The advantage is insanely better rolling and infinatly better grip.
I run the Performance series (much lighter and cheaper) around here with no probs at all, without trying to sound like a douch, I've concentrated on improving my riding style, from just bombing stuff and am concious of not grinding the sidewalls around rocks etc. I also make sure I try and pick lines that work instead of smashing though and hoping for the best.
I am, as Muvro puts it, 'a bit of a lazy rider' - with a background of MX and enduro, it's very much a case of make sure the front wheel's OK and the back will sort itself out - especially on the fast stuff. I was running 50 psi in the rear on Sunday, so don't think that tyre pressure was the issue - but with hindsight I should probably have been a bit more 'conservative' in my riding and followed riders down the smooth line rather than just having fun on the rough stuff.
Just to clarify the suggestion of using a dedicated UST tyre - is that just because they've got a stronger sidewall?
I also found a 'Kenda Blue Groove 2.5' in the garage - brand new, forgot I had it. Anyone used one of these?
Mike,
I've had bike shop guys recommend UST tyres for me (110kg, can be a "lazy" or just plain "tired" rider at times) when I've asked about tyres with stronger sidewalls. That way you can keep the better rolling of an XC style tyre and get better sidewall protection without resorting to a DH tyre with their weight and rolling resistance penalties.
I've not ripped any sidewalls, but I get a XXX wear pattern on many sidewalls which starts to show the fabric and have had some rear tyres start to give along the line where the rim cuts in just above the bead when the tyre bags a bit. If I'd kept riding either situation (usually it happens before the tread is sufficiently gone to warrant replacement) I'm sure I would have had a fail at some stage. I run the rear at about 40 psi now I have a decent pump with a gauge in it, but used to put it up as hard as I felt safe doing.
I'm currently running Maxxis Crossmarks UST 29's, (with tubes coz I haven't got around to going tubeless as yet) and they seem to be holding up OK so far.
I have switched back to a control tyre after getting a split in the sidewall of a schwalbe NN 2.35 with snakeskin protection. I am a bit of a hack rider and 120kg on the bike so when i hit a rocky section the sidewalls can cop a flogging. Have previously split the maxis lust crossmarks to but so far havent had any issues with captain controls. They grip well to, definately slower at climbing the the fast traks but overal for me they are as fast when considering a complete loop of ourimbah or awaba xc circuits as i can pick up the time decending.
Not sure they exist.
I currently have Minions on my bike (Butcher), when I kill this set I'm going to switch over to a set of Kenda Slant 6's they come in single (xc) or double ply (dh) side wall versions
the best tyres are the ones T7 has on special at the time!
with heaps of air in em
Anthem with crossmark front and monorail rear is a goer.
However the Yeti 575 came with Fat Alberts - took a while to get them right but they seem bombproof so far....
I'm a self confessed rubber freak & have tried almost all of the tyres mentioned above.
For speed you want a fairly constant centre line & for durability you need tough sidewalls.
I don't know if there's loose stuff there but generally pea gravel requires decent side lugs up front to avoid the front end letting go too easily.
Rear choices for me would be pucker UST versions of the following:
Schwalbe Racing Ralph - fastest
Maxis Crossmark 2.1 - toughest
Conti - Race king 2.2 - between the two above but no Conti front to recommend yet.
Front. Once again all proper USTs
Maxxis Ignitor 2.35 - grippy & tough & rolls surprisingly well but a bit heavy for racing
Schwalbe Nobby Nic - bit faster & lighter than the above but still pretty tough & grippy. 2.1 is faster 2.25 grippier.
Also the Specialized Fast track 2.25 Armadillo is pretty good run UST (2Bliss) fast & proving tough enough. The Captain in the same casing is a bit heavier but has bigger & grippier side walls.
Regards T
I'd agree with CT's comments, but would add that the Maxxis rubber is tougher than the Schwalbe, albeit with a weight penalty.
I had my first sidewall cut in the rear with a Racing Ralph Evo UST in September, although the tread was starting to look well-used and the spot that let go had been looking like potential trouble for a month or so.
For resistance to rough conditions, tubeless is the go. Go with either a Stan's kit, or buy the sealant separately and use the Bontrager rim strips and valves appropriate for your rims. These are much easier to seal as they do a much better job of mimicking the UST rim profile - I mounted a set of Maxxis UST tyres without sealant, just idly mucking around with my compressor just to see what would happen, not expecting them to be that straightforward at all. The Stan's kit I most recently put on my youngster's bike was more fiddly.
Tubeless would either increase the resale value of your bike or make it easier to sell, and besides being more puncture resistant increases your grip and sense of control.
Another good rear is the ever-popular Maxxis Larsen TT 2.0, which teams well with a 2.35 Ignitor on the front. For damp races, an Ignitor 2.1 on the rear would clear mud better without sacrificing too much rolling resistance but would not be the best option on a dry track.
I run RR on front and back with Stans and have not blown a sidewall yet, although I am pretty picky on my lines and weigh a nice and light 80kgs.
I've a motocross/enduro back ground and tend to do the same on the downs, get the front wheel sorted and bomb, i never had any problems with the Captains i had, but replaced them when i noticed some pretty serious scuffs on the side wall that looked ominous. I'd done a few 4 and 8 hour rides with the captains and like them. I changed to Ralphs recently (I too run tubes) and have had more pinch flats with them three in a day once! And so will possibly explore something else after reading some of the options listed here!
Gazza was on the money when he said you would get a lot of opinions so I will try and add some science based on lab tests that one of the german bike magazines get done on a regular basis.
The tread pattern isn't the main contributor to rolling resistance, sidewall flex is the main factor so the cross mark pattern is really just a marketing gimmick (I still run a crossmark on the back so hopefully all those cross mark fans out there won't shoot me).
Tyre width doesn't make that much difference to rolling resistance.
Based on the way the lab does the tests a good tyre takes approximately 20 - 25 watts so my theory is that the difference in most good tyres won't be noticed by the riders. This is based on most people being able to push 250+ watts so tyre difference should only impact up to 30% of the 10% associated with the tyres rolling resistance.
Bottom line is that you should be safe in anything that is UST e.g. My wife still runs a captain on the front and fast track on the back without issues.
Cant work out how to attach one of the spreadsheets a guy who translated the magazine test put together. If you want a copy drop me a PM with your email address.
@Gazza, seems the Maxis tyre designer is now with Spesh so expect more good designs like the renegade to come out in the next few years.
I'm a bit confused by your comments above.
If I read the same German article that you're talking about the conclusion was that a fat tyre with low, closely spaced knobs running at fairly low pressure was the most efficient (Fastest). If sidewall flex is the main issue then fatter tyres must have more of it or be heavily reinforced to prevent flex therefore heavier.
We are also sold lighter sidewalled, higher tpi tyres as race tyres and led to believe that a more flexible casing absorbs more surface imperfections and therefore rolls better (Another argument for running USTs over tubed tyres).
However, to my way of thinking there are just too many variables in the real world for the test to take into account. Rider weight, speed ridden, surface, pressure, tread pattern, compound, weight etc etc.
I'd like to see a test that runs exactly the same route of offroad and measures wattage applied. Each set of tyres gets three runs and the amount of watts used to complete the circuit is measured. An 85kg robot running singlespeed would be even better but you don't see many of them out on the trail at the moment.
In the meantime I'll be applying my own experience to run tyres that feel fast, give control and don't blow apart on the first rock strike due to cack handedness by the aging have a go rider:-)
"An 85kg robot running singlespeed would be even better but you don't see many of them out on the trail at the moment."
You've obviously never been to a 24hr solo event then, by 2am the track is full of SS robots
I run 2.3 dual ply on back and single on front to save weight. This is on my chameleon and enduro.
They have dual compound so run well and soft on edges for cornering.
Ride Red Hill and Oxy regularly. Great for drops and rubble. I weigh 80kg and run 35psi.
As a tyre I rate it as a more pedally lighter minion. Not quite as sticky when rolling which is a good thing.
I just think they contradict some of the assumptions most people have been working with when choosing tyres for themselves and providing recommendations to others.
I think your initial comment & recommendations made sense. Here is a link to a google spreadsheet with most of the test results.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Atw...
Guess your confused by my comment that I don't believe a rider can notice the difference between a tubed cross mark exception that measures 27.4 watts resistance vs a nobly nick that in the best of the tested spec tyres rated 27.8 watts. Sorry to pick on you Murvo but thats not "insanely better rolling" for the NN in my book. Personally I doubt that I could tell a difference of less than 5 watts while riding.
I know the pro boys do have days where they tyre test and try and interpret the results. Also know that a few years ago specialised started using the lab to test their road tyre designs pre production once they found out they were off the pace.
It's generally considered that the limit of human differentiation is about 4% i.e. you cannot tell if one thing is less than 4% lighter/faster/warmer than what you are comparing it too. It doesn't apply in all cases but is a good rule of thumb. On that basis the 1.4% difference in tyres would be imperceptible
Like it!
PS, no offence taken. But to me the difference is definitly noticable.
Hmmm... I reckon the difference is noticeable at threshholds much lower than 4%, especially when testing a change back-to-back with everything else held constant. That's the only proper way to test a change in my opinion.
The lab tests are done at 20kph with 50kg of weight and a consistent pressure (something like 2kpa). Now we all know that wind resistance is the major factor limiting speed so if it takes 200w (your mileage may vary depending on seating position etc) to ride a mountain bike on the flat at 20kph then I don't think a person can reliably tell the difference between a 20w and a 25w tyre.
5W out of 200W effort is only 2.5%. btw the magazine does say that you can notice a 5w difference so just my 2c worth.
Hmm.
"Now we all know that wind resistance is the major factor limiting speed so if it takes 200w (your mileage "Wattage"? may vary depending on seating position etc) to ride a mountain bike on the flat at 20kph then I don't think a person can reliably tell the difference between a 20w and a 25w tyre."
I understand what you're getting at but it's the same as reducing weight. 50g less on the bars isn't much but represents a 25% reduction for that component. Now apply the same to every component and you're 25% lighter.
If you've reduced the inefficiency of the tyre by 25% (20w rather than 25w) that's very good. Now, if it could be applied to everything else you'll be going 25% faster!
BTW, is the power needed to accelerate up to 20kph taken into account?
re:BTW, is the power needed to accelerate up to 20kph taken into account?
Not that I can tell from googles translation of the original articles that are written in german. Therefore the results may be a bit misleading because the lust tubeless seem to have a lower wattage resistance that the tubed tyres although with the weight penalty included the real world difference may not be that great if you were on a course that needed acceleration. Don't know if running the non lust tyres with sealant is better (or by how much) than tubes.
I am not against going faster by reducing weight or rolling resistance or improving my fitness. For me at the time I couldn't draw any definitive conclusions and knew that improving my skills and fitness would provide greater improvement at the time so thats the direction I went.
Anyway it seems most people who have done tyre testing or research use:
Schwalbe Racing Ralph
Maxis Crossmark 2.1
Conti Race King
or small block 8 or the new spec renegades etc... and I don't think anyone has found a silver bullet with any of those comb's but all will allow you to be competitive. For what its worth i have a rocket ron on the front at the moment and its been good in all conditions so I don't think there is much between a ron and a ralph.
i just got a set of schwalbe black jakes 26 x 2.25
very light and fat 5mm knobs once the rain pisses off ill let you know how they go
i just got a set of schwalbe black jakes 26 x 2.25
very light and fat 5mm knobs once the rain pisses off ill let you know how they go