rode them tonight. the hans sometimes feel like they drag more and at other times dont. they grip stoopid good. i love the rq feel though . shame i cant mix the 2.
will test further
for those who asked for the comparison
Bike Forum
conti rubber queens v scwalbe hans dampf
-
Posted 4 months ago #
-
Really liking the Hans Dampf myself. Ages since I rode the RQs, can't really remember if they were as good, but the Schwables are tubeless ready, while the 2.4RQs were a bit of a battle. Sidewalls of my Rubber Queens deformed too, to the extent that they wouldn't spin in my frame, also had one blow off a flow rim.
Hans Dampf all the way.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Probably a stupid question, but what conditions were you using them in?
Posted 4 months ago # -
yeah thats the problem i had with the rqs too. i wish the hans were a bit narrower
Posted 4 months ago # -
Are they proving any better than the queens in sloppy conditions? I got some ust BC queens for Xmas (2.4 and 2.2) but am putting off installing them.
Posted 4 months ago # -
mud and dry tonight on xc singletrack
Posted 4 months ago # -
Apparently the wear rate of the Hans Dampf is ridiculous?
Posted 4 months ago # -
I might get some Conti BC Barons for my hardtail, but I'm also interested in these two.
Posted 4 months ago # -
mikey74 - Member
Probably a stupid question, but what conditions were you using them in?Rooty off camber singletrack, mud, pine needles, all sorts.
Posted 4 months ago # -
HD I found fantastic at the weekend on mendip singletrack, with limestone and greasy roots thrown in for good measure.
On a 29er, rigid with 22 psi.
Would highly recommend
Posted 4 months ago # -
Are you using trailstar or pacestar?
Posted 4 months ago # -
mine are evo triple compound mofos
Posted 4 months ago # -
Trailstar for me..... think they're all triple compound, but the trailstar are the stickier of the two kinds.
Jedi - am running them on Crossmax SX, as recommended by yourself. Delighted with the wheels, they ooze quality.
Posted 4 months ago # -
yeah man. loving my crossmax!
loving tubeless too. new feel of the trail
Posted 4 months ago # -
loving tubeless too. new feel of the trail
LOL
I remember saying to you how good it was a mere 8 years ago or so!
Good that you came round in the end... hehe
Posted 4 months ago # -
mboy- high5
Posted 4 months ago # -
I love the feel and grip form the Black Chilli (BC) Conti's I have. Currently running 2.2 BC RQ on the hardtail and 2.3 BC Baron's on the FS - both were a bitch to get to seal as none of them are UST. Over the summer I ran 2.4 BC RQ's on the FS until I tore through the rear tyre sidewall, after which I fitted a UST. On all of them the sidewalls seemed to have a tough life with threads showing and some deformation, which means I doubt I would get much more than 6-12 months from any of them (the candle that burns twice as bright burns half as long?). The 2.4 UST tyre on the back removed some of the feel which I liked from them but it stood up to some very hard riding.
The Baron is a lot better in the gloop than the 2.4 RQ but only a bit better than the 2.2... not a full on mud reccomendation from me but still a good compromise all rounder. For summer I suspect I'll go back to 2.4 RQ's on the FS for better driftyness and rock gripping.
Interested in the Hans Damff reports - but the last Schwalbe's I tried were Big Bettie 3C which were great in the dry but near lethal on wet roots and rocks. The tread hardly wore in six months but one sidewall went through and one of the beads deformed.
Options seem to be... run 1.5kg triple compound DH tyres and get 1-2 years of rather "solid feeling" life, or run expensive 700-900g tyres and get 6-12 months of "better feeling" life... for feel and grip on the type of riding I do I can see me spending lots on tyres unfortunately
Posted 4 months ago # -
my rubber queens lasted 6 weeks! and deformed badly on the rear
Posted 4 months ago # -
This is the thing that worries me about trying Conti tyres again. The last Black Chilli RQ I had was seriously flimsy.
I'm not sure how the Baron compares. The Hans Dampf looks a stronger tyre, but the comment above about it wearing fast is worrying. For £90 a set I want them to last a while.
Posted 4 months ago # -
For those who have seen both, which is the bigger of the two 2.4s, the hans dampf or the rubber queen? Wider, taller?
Thanks!
Posted 4 months ago # -
2.4 RQ is MASSIVE - it has a huge, round, fat carcass (hence all the deformation problems, I'd say). Hans Dampf is a 2.35, looks a teeny shade smaller than a 2.4 Nobby Nic, deffo smaller than the RQ.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Thanks for that honourablegeorge, appreciated.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Mikey74, you can get a pair of Hans Dampf from http://www.actionsports.de/ for £62
Posted 4 months ago # -
Whats the difference between Trailstar and Pacestar?
Posted 4 months ago # -
i had 2.2 rubber queens, never had 2.4!
Posted 4 months ago # -
stevenk4563, from the Schwalbe site:
http://www.schwalbe.com/gbl/en/produkte/produkthighlights/triple_star_compound/
Pacestar:
Extremely fast XC compound
Easy rolling base layer (base)
Fast center (medium)
Grippy shoulders (medium soft)Trailstar:
Enduro & Freeride Compound
Easy rolling base layer (base)
Grippy center (medium soft)
Extra-grippy shoulders (soft)Posted 4 months ago # -
Trailstar is a softer compound, supposedly to enhance grip, my Pacestar seemed foine for me and didn't drag anything noticeable
Posted 4 months ago # -
i'll maybe trail the harder compound on the rear
Posted 4 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
