Are either of the above tyres any good?
Iain
Bike Forum
[closed]
Conti race king or speed king?
-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
they are both really light... that makes them good in my books.
Posted 1 year ago # -
They're completely different tyres.
Race King is one of the fastest tyres out there, but hopeless in mud.
Speed King is OK as an all terrain tyre but I prefer a Nobby Nic.
RK is puncture prone and needs Flataway tape ideally.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I run a Mountain King 2.4 on the front and a Race King 2.2 Supersonic on the back. Not had any issues with the RK, they are super light so I thought they may tear but so far so good. The RK offers surprisingly good grip even on wet grassy climbs. I have run RK's on the front and rear but I like t throw the front at stuff and it was a bit lose. A good option or a light setup would be a SK on the front and a RK on the rear.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mountain Kings are great but 2.4 might not fit between the stays when fully pumped up so go for 2.2
Posted 1 year ago # -
speed kings are my fav tyres for round here, and seem to last well if you're easy on the back brake
Posted 1 year ago # -
Schwalbe work better tubeless if that matters! I prefer the Rocket Ron to the Speed King.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Can't get on with speed kings .. thin carcass and bendy knobs feel very vague when cornering IME .. not used race king (just stay away from mountain kings!!)
Posted 1 year ago # -
Race kings are THE tyre for hardpack XC.
Posted 1 year ago # -
running innertube race king protections 2.2 front and rear for dry weather up here in ludlow, shropshire. at 50psi grip very well in dusty singletrack, over roots, on grass, big rocks. pick up speed fast when they're rolling, really happy with them.
went out after 3 solid days of rain expecting them to be sliding all over the place, but they didn't. lowered the pressure very slightly to around 45psi and got me through with just a few skips on wet root step ups.
impressed.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Wow thanks for all the responses I thought it would be dead due to it being another tyre thread.
Iain
Posted 1 year ago # -
+1 for Race Kings, 2.2 are a lot better than the 2.0 although clearance can be a bit tight in some frames, didn't really fit my old frame, new one is fine.
Tried speed kings, they are ok, but Race kings are miles better, I use mine in all conditions, only changing the front to a Nobby Nic when it really wet. If running the 2.2's ignore the recommended pressures on the side, it makes them feel horrible, but at run lower pressures they are amazing.Posted 1 year ago # -
both are great,both are fast. speed king 2.3 ss is better than the 2.1 and pretty much the same weight.race king is huge!other contis seem smaller size than stated; mk's etc. i run them ghetto tubeless for xc
Posted 1 year ago # -
I struggled with the speed kings that were already fitted on my bike. As soon as the going got slightly greasy they were all over the place. No good on wet clay, mud, or slippery roots (IMHO).
Frickin fast in the dry though...
Posted 1 year ago # -
Only tried the Speed Kings but like them. I just went for the cheap wire bead ones and they seem fine.
If u do a lot of inter-linking road sections or ride in very rocky areas the rear won't last long.
Posted 1 year ago # -
"I'm speed king see me fly"
Use speed kings tubeless on stans olympic.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Speed kings are the fastest tyres I've ever used by miles, they are also not good in the wet at all.
Posted 1 year ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
