Hi guys’s, i have a new giant trance 2 06, currently have some bontrager mud-x tyres fitted, looking to try something else in the hope it will stay reasonably dry like it’s been the last couple of weeks in Kent.

Quite like the idea of a 2.35 high roller on the front with a 2.10 on the rear. Does this sound like a good combo for all weather riding? I ride singletrack/trails with good downhill sections, jumps and drops etc Looking for something good for both uphill and downhill, don’t want anything too slow rolling.

I have a 2.35 larsen tt in the garage that i may put on the rear when summer finally kicks in!

Thanks

Hugh

If you don’t want slow rolling, make sure you get the 60a compound ones not the Super Tacky.

No. Came on my bike, absolutely rubbish. They might be ok for DH, but not for XC.

Arnt the 2.1s made of plastic?

great tyres but the 2.1″s are pretty small compared to a 2.35″. I run the 2.35″ at each end and they’re ace.

No. Came on my bike, absolutely rubbish. They might be ok for DH, but not for XC.

Silly statement really – depends where/how you ride surely. For my riding they suit me pretty well and are VERY grippy. I’m not bothered about being fast uphill and am more concerned with having excellent grip, especially when its wet.

Kevlar 2.35 High Roller 60a on the Fr & Kevlar 2.25 Advantage on the Rear.

This is my current trail centre set and i’m loving it. The High roller is so dependable in all conditions, I love its grip on the fast downs. Had cinder before which were rubbish, they kept washing out on descents, tried all pressures in them.

The Advantage on the back rolls v well but has great grip, first used it in a snow covered cannock and it was great, tractored through the crap, rolled and cleared excellently.

My mate has the 2.10 H Rollers on his meta, they are too narrow for our type of riding, not enough tread on the back.

kiwijohn
No. Came on my bike, absolutely rubbish. They might be ok for DH, but not for XC.

If your idea of xc is riding fire roads, green lane and fields then there’s probably some truth in that – there might be better rolling and lighter tyres, but even so to say they are rubbish…… . If you like to ride forest trails and you actually have some degree of bike handling skills then high rollers would be an excellent choice for most conditions, they roll very well and give excellent puncture protection, they are amazing in corners. The harder you push them the better they get.

Some xc riders dont get them, but generally they are the same ones who dont “get” jumping, cornering, drops, bike control etc

cool, thanks guy’s, sounds like the tyres to go for. I hear the 2.1 comes up very small?

As “andylux” said should i go for an advantage rear or another 2.35 high roller?

Hugh

I run 2.35s all round for cross country/trail riding in summer (want something faster in winter as I’m unfit). They’re good tyres and give a good level of protection for the weight. I’ve not tried the 2.1 version, but I imagine it’ll give you a bit more zip than the 2.35s.

I don’t know why kiwijohn says they are “rubbish” without expanding further on it. They’re not a race tyre and can drag a bit, but they have good grip in most conditions. Tyres do depend very much on where and how you like to ride.

Hey Hugh, The Avantage is just a more rounded tread which rolls that little bit quicker.

What bike are they going on?

All Maxxis tyres are so durable and great value IMO

They are to go on a new 06 trance 2 (old stock).

With regards to bike handling skills these seem ideal, I’ve ridden trials for the last 8-9 years and got pretty good at it but I’ve moved onto this type of riding now to get some fitness and have some fun with friends.

If the 2.35 doesn’t come up too wide i may go for that on the rear aswell, the only thing that concerns me is weight (although i will switch to light weight tubes) and rolling resistance up hills. I basically ride all mountain, i enjoy the down hills most but I like the challenge of the uphills.

Hugh

Thing is they have such good grip that they work really well for techy climbs, its just that they are a little slow on extended climbs.

It may be the OEM ones I had, I don’t know. After one washout too many where Verticals wouldn’t. There are better tyres that grip well, don’t drag & are better if you ride with finesse.

Hugh,

Mine are on an 07 Stumpy fsr with pikes and Pro2 wheels, so i guess its a slightly burlier build. I too love attacking the techy climbs as much as the downs and in my opinion I do not require the bigger high rollers on the back like i do on the front. Generally I get the impression that most riders prefer some thing slightly faster rolling on the back for extended fire roads etc.

Also the 2.25 on the rear as opposed to the 2.35 will slacken your head angle a fraction for better descending.

“No. Came on my bike, absolutely rubbish. They might be ok for DH, but not for XC”
Now theres a sweeping statement. Which ones were they? What size? What compound? What sidewalls?
Theres at least 20 different ones!

“Arnt the 2.1s made of plastic? “
In a 70a apprantly. Theres also the 62a eXception compound in folding and UST versions. The 1.9/2.1″ ones are a high roller XC tread with lower cornering lugs/more spaced out tread. 2.35/2.5/2.7″ have bigger cornering tread/closer spaced tread

“great tyres but the 2.1″s are pretty small compared to a 2.35”
But the 2.35″s are still quite small. On a narrower rim is not much bigger than a 2.1″ kenda nevegal/blue groove o 2.1″ maxxis advantage. Even on a wider rim aren’t as big as 2.25″ maxxis advantage/ardent, or 2.35″ Kenda Nevegal/Blue Groove or Panaracer Rampage 2.35″. Though all are quite big

“If the 2.35 doesn’t come up too wide i may go for that on the rear aswell, the only thing that concerns me is weight “
The 60a folding (not single ply – thats wire) comes in arounf 646-695g (according to JustRidingAlong and maxxis), and I rate my mine. Suprisingly quick on the road too (At 35/45 psi) and nice and grippy elsewhere. I say get them

“It may be the OEM ones I had”
OEM maxxis tyres? With 80a compound or something? I’ve not heard of that before – though possible of course?

“Also the 2.25 on the rear as opposed to the 2.35”
There is no 2.25″ high roller. Maxxis do the advantage/ardent/crossmark in a 2.25″ which bizarely comes up the same volume as a 2.5″ in a high roller/minion/etc ..

Top rant/educating there james!!

“Also the 2.25 on the rear as opposed to the 2.35”
James for your info I was talking about the advantage on the rear that i have been all link.

LUST 2.35″ at each end here and absolutely no complaints, quick and very grippy.

If the 2.35 doesn’t come up too wide i may go for that on the rear aswell

I’d check the tyre clearance on your new Trance before ordering a rear tyre for it to be honest. From what I can remember, they do come up a little “close” in the tyre clearance stakes due to the Maestro suspension design. You should probably get away with a 2.35 High Roller on a narrowish rim, though anything larger I should think is a no go.

Great bike though, and good choice of tyres (though 2.1’s are WAY narrow, even for a 2.1, would only use these on their own front and rear as a lightweight XC tyre myself)

“”Also the 2.25 on the rear as opposed to the 2.35”
James for your info I was talking about the advantage on the rear that i have been all link. “

I apologize, I didn’t read your post correctly then.
My 2.25″ Advantages come up much bigger than my 2.35″ high rollers, not sure I’d choose this forward tipping combo myself

Highrollers are awesome, truly awesome.

They ain’t fast rolling though, not by any means. 2.1 70a’s might roll well enough.

2.1’s as said come up narrow, they seem to cut into mud well but roll no better on tarmac than the 2.35.

I like high rollers but am impressed with the ardents a mate has got.

I’d be inclined to try a pair of ardents or ardent front advantage rear.
just to throw you off!

Ok guy’s well i’m going to go with a 2.35 folding front single ply which should be around 650g from what i can gather?

I have fitted a 2.35 larsen on the rear to check for clearance and that was fairly good although the high roller may be tighter due to the tread pattern.

These are going on x317 rims by the way, not sure weather that is classed as wide or narrow? Probably more towards the narrow side of things. I think the 2.1 may be a safer choice in terms of tyre clearance.

Hugh

“2.35 folding front single ply “

Just don’t get confused with the wire one – which is usually called the single ply one. (800-850g or so). The folding one is usually called single ply (from when I was looking for the folding ones anyhow)

Maxxis Tyre weights under 1kg here

Is that XM317s?
I’ve got a 2.35″ HR on an XC717 on the rear (XM719 on the front) at the moment. Probably a bit narrow for it. Only being running it at 35 – 45psi ish, though (nothing lower) and its been nice and stable so far (or I’ve just not noticed it).

yep, sorry meant xm317, hopefully they’ll be ok then! I’ve found the single ply kevlar 2.35 on chain reaction now too. Guess i better get ordering!

Still unsure on what to go for on the rear, shame they don’t make a 2.2 high roller then i’d be sorted!

Hugh

Thanks for the help everyone, I went for a high roller 2.35 kevlar 60a and a 2.1 high roller 70a for the rear, i figure it would be best to have something thinner for better clearance, can always change at a later date.

Hugh