Any advice appreciated.

i Have the panaracer fire xc pro and they are a cracking all rounder. Not much to compare them to but they roll well. grip like a bugger when u need them. 😀

i Have the panaracer rampage and they are a cracking all rounder. Not much to compare them to but they roll well. grip like a bugger when u need them. 🙂

FFS!

qwerty – Member

i Have the panaracer rampage and they are a cracking all rounder. Not much to compare them to but they roll well. grip like a bugger when u need them.

??????????????????????????

easyrider007 – Member

qwerty – Member

i Have the panaracer rampage and they are a cracking all rounder. Not much to compare them to but they roll well. grip like a bugger when u need them.

??????????????????????????

I think this would suggest their performance is very similar!

To add to the general unhelpfulness 🙂 – I've tried both and while I marginally prefer the Fire XC Pro they were pretty similar tyres. Think the rampage was slightly wider but heavier.

i dont know about the rampage but the fire`s are a good summer tyre.When they see any mud the fill up the treads and spin out.Then when you get out of the mud the flick all the collected mud that is in the treads in your face

Any sensible replies?

Or should I got for a conti very pro?

you cant go wrong with the xc pros ive got them on the HT and there great!!!!! been riding 400+ miles and there looking great still. ive got the folding kevlar ones are there a good weight to 500ish grams

there rolling resistance on the road is good a slight buzz but at a high psi there the best off road tyre ive ridden on road. and off road there even better not many slips except on the ICE we have at the mo.

i use to have a slick tyre wheel combo before i had the xc pros, but i sold the extra wheels and tyres and ride the xc pros everywhere/anywhere.

and therer a good price too.

i hate the xc pro's, just shite imo.

Whats wrong with them?

I have used both, and also the Cinders that came with my 456. The Fire XC were 2.1 I think while the Cinders are bigger and the Rampage are on a 29er. The Fire and the Cinders have a slight advantage at this time of year as in my hands at least they seem to give more grip in the mush/mud, but it's not a huge advantage. The 29er started with SB8's but they simply couldn't cope with the winter mud and although they may go back on for summer MTBO events the Rampage seems to be a good all round, all condition, all terrain – including tarmac – compromise for what is basically my ride out the gate and see where I get bike. Seriously thinking of moving the 456 off the Cinders and onto Rampages as well to see if I get a bit more roll without a huge loss of grip.

i had them on an old xc bike of mine

and they were terrible, just lost traction without warning and i ended up just binning them as they made me too cautious when riding, on the plus side they last an age!!

Hi
I run both!!! I run a 2.35 rampage SCon the front and a fire xc 2.1 on the back and in my option (for what’s its worth) I think this combination works quite well although I do find in the mud we have around here in Leicestershire the fire does seem to loose traction quite quickly and isnt great over wet roots but hay what is? I also found dropping the pressure on both tyres helped a bit, I was recommended to run them at 40psi and although they rolled well the grip was not good I now run them at 30-35 psi and It seems to be the right combination for me ,also mine are not UST although I am thinking of going that route and also changing the rear fire xc for another rampage not sure if to go 2.35 or 2.1 or if its worth going for the SC compound on the back though it does seem to grip well on the front??
That’s my thoughts hope it helps.
Tony