- This topic has 38 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 11 years ago by singletrackjenn.
-
29" Rubber Grouptest
-
razorFull MemberPosted 11 years ago
Disappointed that this group test came out just after I spent weeks agonising over this subject, but glad I didn’t wait because it didn’t really come up with the winner.
Surely what everyone wants is a light-weight, fast-rolling but grippy, hard-wearing, tubeless-ready, reasonably-priced, readily-available, not too skinny, easy to fit tyre for their 29er? Why wasn’t that the objective of the test? If you’ve bought a 29er, you’re probably not looking for a downhill weight tyre, or a semi-slick hybrid tyre.
The Racing Ralph should have been just the ticket, but in normal ‘woodland’ use it tears like a tissue and leaves holes too big for Stan’s to seal. Surprised that didn’t come up in extensive testing.
Not included in the test was the Specialized S-Works 2bliss Captain or Ground Control that I am trying out at the moment. They fitted easily and sealed straight away. They have only had half a dozen rides so far, with no problems in the wet, etc., but by that time I had had three unsealable punctures in the Schwalbes on exactly the same terrain. My only criticism so far is that the Captain only measured 1.8 when it was inflated, and consequently got put on the back instead of the front, but that hasn’t caused a problem (plus I thought I couldn’t really send it back once it was filled it with sealant).
Can’t understand why such good all-rounders weren’t included in the test when such obscure and big heavy old monsters were.
jimjamFree MemberPosted 11 years agoWhat do you consider a “heavy monster” or a “downhill weight” 29er tyre?
jimjamFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI haven’t seen the group test you are referring to but I am assuming 880 grams was for a UST trye?
I’m sure you realise 880 grams isn’t downhill weight for a 26″ tyre much less a 29er. 880 Grams is about the normal weight for a middle of the road 2.25 26″ tyre. I think my single ply 2.5 high roller weighs about that.
jezanduFree MemberPosted 11 years agoWas that the racing Ralph snake bite defence ones? They have a much better sidewall making them more tubeless and lower pressure friendly. The 2.25 still weighs in at 650g. Or were you seduced by the much lighter ’tissue’ ones?
thomthumbFree MemberPosted 11 years agogot some 880g 29er tyres they’re awesome.
Can’t understand why such good all-rounders weren’t included in the test when such obscure and big heavy old monsters were.
seems to imply we should never find out about the tyres we don’t know about?
YoKaiserFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI thought the test was pretty good, covered a wide spread of tyres. You say ‘surely we are all looking for…..’ but I wouldn’t say so, the diversity of 29ers now available mean were looking for loads more specificity from tyres. Would the carbon Niner rider be looking for the same as the Yelli Scream owner? It wasn’t a comprehensive test of every tyre available but it did educate to an extent in what you can expect and you can vary your choice to suit.
ahwilesFree MemberPosted 11 years agoi was wondering about 29″ tyres…
and then i got an email from on-one; 2x folding smorgasboards for £30.
they’re round, black, averagely* knobbly, and averagely* wide.
they even inflated ghetto tubeless with no sealant, and no more faff than any other tubeless setup.
(*based on my 25ish years experience looking at mtb tyres)
razorFull MemberPosted 11 years agoAll good points well made.
I guess the plus side is the test has shown me what not to buy (for a carbon hard tail). Leaving aside the 950g Kenda which is obviously intended to be a burly old beast, nearly all of the others were not tubeless-ready, let alone UST. Ironically the light-weight Ralph was.
I like the idea of the Maxxis, but they still sound heavy for something that isn’t tubeless, and they seem relatively expensive too. I’d like a group test to be a comprehensive list of the best available, but it sounds like this was a report on what they each happened to have ridden recently.
ClinkFull MemberPosted 11 years agoThe Maxxis might not say tubeless, but they work fine. I’ve run Ardent and Aspens tubeless with no probs.
weeksyFull MemberPosted 11 years agoThe Ardents are big heavy fellas IMO… i’ve got them and love them… .but not for XC stuff….they weigh about a tonne each
ClobberFree MemberPosted 11 years agoAll my non tubeless maxxis have gone up tubeless far easier than any schwalbe tubeless ready tyre I’ve used.
firestarterFree MemberPosted 11 years agoAnother shout for maxxis here, my non tubeless ones have inflated and held better than various other makes of tubeless tyres
steveoathFree MemberPosted 11 years agoSurely what everyone wants is a light-weight, fast-rolling but grippy, hard-wearing, tubeless-ready, reasonably-priced, readily-available, not too skinny, easy to fit tyre for their 29er?
I don’t give a sh1t about tubeless to be honest.
Capt.KronosFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI thought it was a good grouptest myself… mainly as I am hopefully within a few days of putting my order in for a 29er 😉 Thinking the big boy Ardents are going to be my starting point!
razorFull MemberPosted 11 years agoSounds like Maxxis are missing a trick on their marketing. Also can’t understand why the big brands seem to want to keep the weight of their tyres a secret (including Specialized). Still at least we’ve managed to avoid talking about compounds and TPI 🙂
yesiamtomFree MemberPosted 11 years agoWTF are you doing to your ralphs to puncture them so easy? I ran one on a weeks holiday in yorkshire and use it for racing with a nobby nic on the front. For general riding though I don’t know why you’d look elsewhere than a nobby nic…unless you’re a fair weather rider of course.
ClinkFull MemberPosted 11 years agoWTF are you doing to your ralphs to puncture them so easy? I ran one on a weeks holiday in yorkshire and use it for racing with a nobby nic on the front. For general riding though I don’t know why you’d look elsewhere than a nobby nic…unless you’re a fair weather rider of course.
Agree with RR bit. But NN no good in winter slop for me.
firestarterFree MemberPosted 11 years agoBest allrounder I’ve used are the bonty acx decent imho all round and in mud and can be run tubeless if you want seems light enough and is cheap 😉
ClinkFull MemberPosted 11 years agoBest allrounder I’ve used are the bonty acx decent imho all round and in mud and can be run tubeless if you want seems light enough and is cheap
But not made any more 🙁
razorFull MemberPosted 11 years agoHas there been some fair weather?
Couldn’t help but think they would have stayed up with a tube in, but they fact is the same tyre tore three times in six rides and left a hole too bug for Stan’s to seal each time.
firestarterFree MemberPosted 11 years agoAh that’s what I get for goin away for two years lol I’ve a nice pair in the shed 😉
honourablegeorgeFull MemberPosted 11 years agoyesiamtom – Member
WTF are you doing to your ralphs to puncture them so easy?This comes up time and again on here – people buy the really light, thin-walled Schwalbes and complain that they’r really light and thin walled.
Meanwhile. the snakeskin ones are excellent.
pedalheadFree MemberPosted 11 years ago+1 for Snakeskin Ralphs. I originally used the thinwall one & hated it’s fragility so much I set fire to it in my back garden, which did make me feel a lot better. Reluctantly I later tried the Snakeskin version and discovered it was a completely different proposition, & it’s now my default all-year-round tyre (I’m too lazy to switch tyres in the winter).
bikebouyFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI use (tubeless)
Specialized S-Works 2bliss Captain or Ground Control
too and on Stans. So far.. having only riden them twice so hardly a recomendation I’ve found them grippy and cope well with the mixed woods/forest S’Downs trails I ride.
Don’t normally bother reading tests, but this one I might.
RR & NN’s never crossed my mind when choosing tyres, always been a fanbouy of Spec’s stuff.
I was told by my LBS when fitting the tyres (I was away with work before you lot call me a fanny) and turning tubeless that the tyres took a while to seal, about an hour on the rear by all accounts, in fact he said cheaper tyres seal much quicker..I’ll let you know how I get on with this weekends two solid days riding ahead..
Woofekinhoo
jezanduFree MemberPosted 11 years agoAs an added bonus on-one are selling the racing Ralph 29er snake bite protection ones for £30 🙂
wobbliscottFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI run Rapid Rob snakeskin 29ers, which as far as I can tell are identical to RR’s, and they have proved to be tough as old boots on knarly roots and rocks. I’ve just invested in a Hans Dampf and Nobby Nick Evo’s to run front and rear respectively over the winter. They’ve just arrived so not on yet. That combo has been recommended to me by a few people and seem to be quite popular on forums such as this. The only downside so far seems to be the price. £90 for bike tires! I’ve spent less on car tires. I wouldn’t normally spend that much, but I had a voucher. I was considering Specialized Purgatory’s before I got the voucher. We’ll see how I get on, but I’m not after something that will grip like a train in all conditions.
zippykonaFull MemberPosted 11 years agoI’ve not done a huge amount of riding on them but Bonty Muds roll really well on tarmac,have a great reputation for mud and went on tubeless easier than I could possibly imagine.
chunkypaulFree MemberPosted 11 years agoMud x’s are pretty skinny though – so I’ve ran them on the rear only with an ACX on the front
The Purgatory’s fit the op’ s requirements fairly well
jamesoFull MemberPosted 11 years agoI’ve not needed more than 2 sizes of Ardent (UST 2.25 and EXO 2.4) and the Purgatory 2.2 2bliss so far for everything. As for weight, 850g or so is average for these and seems ok to me, I picked up some of those thinner / lighter Schwalbes and thought they felt too flimsy, didn’t want to chance it.
Rubber Queen 2.2 BC is the only one left on the try-out list but since for dry trails the Ardents are great, Purgatorys work so well in looser or wet conditions and sometimes I like a 2.25 Ardent on the back and the Purg on the front for tail-slidey riding, so I’ve not bothered yet.
mick_rFull MemberPosted 11 years agoI also thought the 29er tyre test was a bit lacking…..
They tested two Panaracer tyres – one was a semi slick and one was for hardpack. How useful is that for a UK magazine in October?
I’ve been running 29er Panaracer Rampage 2.35 front and rear for 18 months. Would have been nice to learn how they compared to the opposition.
They are a bit draggy but as a true all round non-race tyre they have been great – grippy, robust, big volume, don’t clog, not superlight but also not overly heavy. I began using them with the Schwalbe ultralight tubes on Crests (thinking I’d swap to tubeless once tubes trashed) but never bothered converting – just 2 punctures (pinches) in all this time 🙂
wobbliscottFree MemberPosted 11 years agoI was after some 29″ Rampage’s but they seem to be discontinued now.
alandavidpetrie79Free MemberPosted 11 years agoI just got myself a pair of Conti Mountain King 2, 29 x 2.2″ Protection.
Hope to try them out soon 🙂
singletrackjennFree MemberPosted 11 years agoThanks for your thoughts, folks.
We wanted to include Specialized in this test, so asked several times if they would send us some tyres. They didn’t send any. That’s why none were tested.
As the responses above clearly illustrate, there is no one right tyre which does every job for every rider. It simply doesn’t exist, because we all want different things. Hence the test’s conclusion, which offered some suggested pairings for more specific purposes.
While you may not have encountered the need for particularly burly or suicidally slick rubber in your own personal travels, there are all sorts of riders out there doing all sorts of riding on their 29ers, on all sorts of terrain. Variety is the spice of life and all that. Long may it continue 🙂
The topic ‘29" Rubber Grouptest’ is closed to new replies.
