Cycle Fan Posted February 24, 2011 Share Sorry, but what is the difference between the various sizes/widths (1.95", 2.0", 2.25", etc)for MTB tyres and what difference does it make to your riding? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnydabutcher Posted February 24, 2011 Share It has to do with both width & size. It generally tells the witdth of the tyre in inches. However you will find that not all 2.2 tyres are the same width. Also - 2.4 tyre has a bigger volume. Here is an example: Bakkie tyre 205/75/15 205 - width of tyre in cm75 - % of width that stands out above the rim - thus low profiles are 55 or 4515 - size of rim in inches Back to MTB 2.2 - width in inches - thus 2.2/65/262.4 - width in inches - but 2.4/80/26 The wider the tyre the bugger the volume - fatter tyre from the side - more cussioning - softer ride. PS bigger tyres also need lower pressure to run - better grip! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cycle Fan Posted February 24, 2011 Share THanks, so for general XC riding is a fatter better? Would I be correct in assuming that the narrower tyres (1.95") are more for racing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Fastbastard Mayhem Posted February 24, 2011 Share Couldn't have said it better myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreZA Posted February 24, 2011 Share It generally tells the witdth of the tyre in inches. However you will find that not all 2.2 tyres are the same width. Some measure across the cassing and others from outsides of knobbies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndreZA Posted February 24, 2011 Share THanks, so for general XC riding is a fatter better? Would I be correct in assuming that the narrower tyres (1.95") are more for racing? Fatter is better if they fit your frame. XC frames does not as much tyre clearance as trail, all mountain and DH bikes. Also fatter is heavier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnydabutcher Posted February 24, 2011 Share Normally a smaller tyre 1.8/1.9 will be for mud riding. Higher pressure to cut trough the top sludge and get grip on the hard pack below. I ride 2.4 front - more grip - 2.2 rear - higher volume/softer ride Most guys go 2.2 front 2.0 rear - depends on terain/frame clearance/skill lever ect. Personal choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho! Posted February 24, 2011 Share It has to do with both width & size.It generally tells the witdth of the tyre in inches.However you will find that not all 2.2 tyres are the same width.Also - 2.4 tyre has a bigger volume.Here is an example:Bakkie tyre 205/75/15205 - width of tyre in cm75 - % of width that stands out above the rim - thus low profiles are 55 or 4515 - size of rim in inchesBack to MTB2.2 - width in inches - thus 2.2/65/262.4 - width in inches - but 2.4/80/26The wider the tyre the bugger the volume - fatter tyre from the side - more cussioning - softer ride.PS bigger tyres also need lower pressure to run - better grip! Oi! Give that man a Bells! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now