Looking at getting some new tyres for the Soul. Have come down to either Mountain King 2.4 or Rubber Queen 2.2 (both black chili version).

Anyone got experience of both? I hear the RQ is very good and how do they size up?

Cheers,
Dan.

Haven't tried the Mountain Kings, but loving the Queens, running tubeless at about 25psi they grip almost everything and still roll well. Only struggle in deep claggy mud, but what tyre doesn't?

The 2.2 is as big as I can fit in the back of the Trek.

Mountain Kings have a bit of a bad reputation generally I think and a friend of mine who owned a pair certainly didn't get on with them.
I'd go for the Rubber Queens as they're generally raved about and from personal experience they just tend to keep you planted with minimal slip.
I tried the 2.4s which were enormous! Like tractor tyres! The 2.2s are pretty wide and deep too but should be fine for most bikes.

I've run 2.2 mountain kings UST and 2.2 rubber queen UST. The mountain kings are light, and climb very well I found. Grip isn't fantastic, but its nothing to cry about.

Rubber queens are the best tyre in the world. They don't climb quite as well because they're not as light, but for everything else they rock. I don't think I will ever use another tyre ever except for XC racing.

I have 2.4 Mountain Kings – standard folding models. Only ever had a problem with them at Whinlatter in the wet, where they slipped horribly on the wet slate. Mind you, wet slate is like oiled glass so i doubt many tyres would cope well in those conditions.
They grip well on my local sandstone/millstone grit and roll well on hardpack, not too bad in the mud either, been using them as my winter tyres for the last few months.
The 2.4's are huge though, and are draggy on tarmac.

Not tried the Rubber Queens yet.

Never had an issue with the Mt kings (ust) I picked up dead cheap due to some-one taking their 'bad' rep as gospil, and had the shop change them without even trying them.

I didn't like the mountainking for 'natural' stuff where you occasionally came across damp grassy/peaty type surfaces. I think the tread was too small and pointy which meant it tore the surface up quicker and left you spinning out.

The rubber queen, despite its weight (650g/700g UST isn't bad!) is the most surefooted tyre I've ever used on climbs. 2.2" UST has amazed me on wet rocky stuff where a MXer mentallity and faith in the tyre will see you bashing up some silly pitches. Great fun!

I just moved from Mountain King Protection 2.1s to Rubber Queen Folding 2.2s, both black chili. The difference in grip particularly on rock is amazing, and I was a fan of the Mountain Kings.

looks like rubber queens are winning this one!

Not tried Mountain Kings but Rubber Queens are frickin superb

Are rubber queens good on the front too ?

Ridden MK 2.4" UST and thought it was pants as soon as you showed it a hint of H2O. It was OK elsewhere and quite nice in the loose drifty stuff but as we live in the UK…..

I have both 2.2" and 2.4" RQs and think they are awesome. The 2.2" come out the same size as 2.4" MKs, and although the UST's aren't Black Chilli they grip nicely in both wet and dry, roll very well, and although not light, they feel pretty perky. The 2.4" USTs are Black Chilli and are just massive. They sit on the freeride bike and that's where they'll live!

Not tried Mountain Kings but Rubber Queens are frickin superb

The rubber queen, despite its weight is the most surefooted tyre I've ever used on climbs. Great fun!

Rubber queens are the best tyre in the world. They don't climb quite as well because they're not as light, but for everything else they rock. I don't think I will ever use another tyre ever except for XC racing.

+1. An awesome tyre. Light enough (apart from racing duties) and with exceptional grip and rolling characteristics. I run 2.4" on my Enduro and have yet to reach the limit of what they are capable of. Superb tyre. Buy some.

I'm running some Supersonic MK 2.4's at the mo and have been really pleased with them other than the lack of protection they offer. Moving over to RQ's next as no one really has a bad word to say about them so must be worth a look!

I ran a 2.2 and 2.4 black chili mountain king combo for a while. Horrendous in the wet, just about adequate in the dry. Nothing like fast enough to make up for the lack of grip. Never again.

Just put a set of black chili Rubber Queens on the hemlock, very different kettle of fish. Oh, one thing, tubelessing the non-UST ones is hard going, they're incredibly porous. But, that aside they're great. Not as much grip as, say, a 2.35 Nevegal stick-e but faster, on roots and rocks they're fantastic. Not so great when leaned over in slightly loose stuff, but still decent. Very tall which makes for a lot of air volume, I'm not sure I'm going to stick with them in the longterm but I'm going to try the 2.2 in the back of the Soul just to see how all that extra air feels in a hardtail. I would say though that in most ways they act like a smaller tyre- they don't have the grip you'd expect when you see the tread and size, but then they're much faster than you'd expect too.

They're not the second coming as some people reckon, but they're far and away the best conti tyre I've used, they've finally got something that can compete with Maxxis and Kenda.

Rubber Queen fan here have used MKs but the RQs are in a differant grip league running tubeless 2.2 on a rigid bike looking out for a 2.4 for the front for more suspension!