Tubeless tire width

[scuzzy]

So I'm finally doing the tubeless thing.

 

Any thoughts on what the best option is for the typical MTB riding on tar roads, gravel roads and the Jonkershoek, Tokai, Majik Forest, Hillcrest, etc cross country type riding/racing is.

 

2.2 or 2.0 inches on a 26" wheel

[Dicky DQ]

Depends on the tire, some 2.2 are like 2.4's and visa versa.

[scuzzy]

I'm think of getting the Conti Race Kings

[ridr]

You on a hardtail or full-susser? Definitely go the wider option if on a hardtail.

[scuzzy]

It is a full-susser. Does that mean 2.0" is a no go? I'm worried about the rolling resistance and weight, or would the width not influence this, or am I just getting a bit anal?

[dirtrider]

Anal .

[dirtrider]

2.1 sounds like the tyre you need . But like Dick said some tyres are wider than others . But the tyres you look at I would go for the thinner ones .

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

THe Contis are a mad-thin tyre already, so I'd suggest the 2.2 as a minimum. The tyres are so narrow that Conti have gone back to the drawing board and are re-launching with better sizing. So the 2.2 will most likely now be a 2.1 or 2.0 and so on.

 

I'd go with a Mountain King up front. The Race King, although being a fantastic tyre, will nto offer the levels of grip that you'll need if you start getting serious and are fast on the downhills.

 

Just saying...

[scuzzy]

Don't you think the Mountain King has to much rolling resistance for Cross Country? Would you rather go for Maxxis? Or Specialized tires?

[Thumper]

Don't you think the Mountain King has to much rolling resistance for Cross Country? Would you rather go for Maxxis? Or Specialized tires?

 

I run a 2.2 Maxxis Cross mark at the back and a 2.4 Mountain King up front.

Some guys like the cross mark / Mono rail combo.

 

Maybe Burry and the boys worry about the rolling resistance, for the rest of us its not even worth thinking about.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Thumper

[Just Keep Pedaling]

Some dude did a thesis on rolling resistance on mtb tires. He found that on most terrain (tar excluded) wider tires have lower rolling resistance. The differences were very small though...

Edited February 1, 2011 by Just Keep Pedaling

[Thumper]

@ Just Keep Pedaling - didn't schwalbe have something about that on their website a while back?

[Just Keep Pedaling]

"@ Just Keep Pedaling - didn't schwalbe have something about that on their website a while back? "

 

 

Just did a google.

 

It is the same research. See page 6. They say the difference is significant.

 

http://www.bernhansen.com/Tester/Dekktrykk,%20bredde%20og%20knastens%20innvirkning%20-%20schwalbe.pdf

[Giant]

If you like conti:

race king 2.2 on the back and

Mountainking 2.4 on the front

[Headshot]

If you want strength ignore the conti's unless they've strengthened them this year. Great tyres but a far cry in sidewall strenth to Maxxis tubeless. Im running a Xmark 2.2 at the back and a Maxxis Ignitor 2.35 on the front. So far so good but a heavier set up than the Conti's.

[patham]

If you want strength ignore the conti's unless they've strengthened them this year. Great tyres but a far cry in sidewall strenth to Maxxis tubeless. Im running a Xmark 2.2 at the back and a Maxxis Ignitor 2.35 on the front. So far so good but a heavier set up than the Conti's.

 

At last someone else also admits to an Ignitor up front. They are very thin in relation to the nominal size on the box, my 2.1 Ignitor up front is far skinnier than the 2.1 Kenda on the back. I just need to devote an afternoon & a bit more Stans to address the situation with a 2.35 up front - should be sorted then.