Just playing around with tyre configurations and the Continental Rubber Queen 2.4 hardly fits in my Reba's! 😆 😯

There is clearance but not a whole lot…..

Reba + Rubber Queen + Fail.

christ alive.
want!

Makes the bike look Surly Pugsly esque!

May be available soon as I think that the only thing I will be able to ride through will be dirty water before the brace clogs! 😆

Are they actually any good?

not just rad to the power of uber cool… but actually good in real world riding situations?

angryratio – Member

Are they actually any good?

not just rad to the power of uber cool… but actually good in real world riding situations?

I have no idea and guess I never will now 🙁

You bought 2.4 tyres and then was surprised they were big? 🙂

Been riding them for two season now and wouldn't go back to high rollers. Use the 2.2's (Non black chilli) on the little bike and the 2.4s (UST) on the big bike.

I have the 2.2 RQs and they're brilliant.

adstick – Member

You bought 2.4 tyres and then was surprised they were big?

Was given 2.4 tyres 8)

My amazement comes though that it is significantly wider than my 2.5 Maxxis High Roller…..That fits

This fella is more like 2.6''

there isn't a lot of room under that arch. I run Nobbly Nics (2.25) and I can't get one of those fork guards in there as the velcro rubs the tyre.

Great forks, Californian clearance!

Hahaha freeride tyres and xc forks? How did you think that would work out?

Alex – Member

there isn't a lot of room under that arch. I run Nobbly Nics (2.25) and I can't get one of those fork guards in there as the velcro rubs the tyre.

Great forks, Californian clearance!

I reckon there is less than 5mm 😈

May do a ride with it though….just one 😆

I agree about the sizing. I've seen the 2.4s and they're miles bigger than a 2.4 Mountain King. 2.4 MK is about the same size as a 2.2 RQ.

in your defence the rq 2.4 are bigger than any other 2.4 on the market.fact

Great, aren't they? 🙂

knott4me – Member

in your defence the rq 2.4 are bigger than any other 2.4 on the market.fact

Possibly a true 2.4" tyre then 🙂

stonking tyres. roll well uphill / on tarmac too

I like them.

All set for the Trans Provence. GRR

What is clear from the last couple of posts is that I need bigger forks 😈

They are particularly massive, a 2,2 RQ dwarfs a 2.4 MK…

Ive a pair of 2.2 RQ on my Soul and they are more than tyre enough. 2.4 are for really big bikes. Great tyre rolls very well and good grip but not so good in the present muddy ice melting conditions better in drier times!

Are they actually any good?

Yes, they're actually very good.

Roll much better than expected, grip great, lean over much nicer than HRs and make drifting fun.

Just added them and a 710mm bar to my Reign and it's like a new, much more lairy, bike.

Are we now posting pictures of bikes because of the tyres on them?!
Christ alive…..
😉

Now available for a swap

Notter – Member
Are we now posting pictures of bikes because of the tyres on them?!
Christ alive…..

Yeah, people posting pics of bikes with discussed tyres on. Shocking on a bike forum… Whatever next.

The pics give an idea of how big they really are..

Jesus look at the size of them!

They've gotta alter the HA at least a degree

Reba + Rubber Queen + Fail.

I think no brakes and no drivetrain = more fail 😉

Sense of humour failure from Chunky…..

Because this forum never takes the mick out of tyre related threads does it…..

Sorry to have offended your day.

Are they actually any good?

not just rad to the power of uber cool… but actually good in real world riding situations?

Indeed they are. They are also rad to teh power of sick. Oh, and they have the best name for a tyre EVER!

As mentioned above, they roll well, wear well and grip really well. What more could you want?

Yup I prefer them to the big Minions I was using before. Definitely roll better, and just as grippy I reckon.

Read some where that they are called something else in the USA, wonder why?
Trail king or something like that. Will they change the name in Europe?

have 2.2 rubber queen black chili's on my trance and there is only about 3mm mud room in the rear a 2.4 would probably not fit.
much bigger than the 2.2 michelin all mountains i was using before but a fair bit lighter.
not ridden them in anger yet.

Word up kids. Yes, these tyres are the nuts. I would rather swap my forks so I could run these tyres than get something else.

Measure them, the 2.2s are 2.2" and the 2.4s are 2.4". It's not Continental's fault others lie about the size of their tyres.

2.2s are brilliant, doubt if I will ever use another tyre for general trail riding.

2.4 NN on a 5.1 rim in a 456 – not a lot of room

Big ass tyres he hee

Christ just had a look on the Conti website – how heavy are those Rubber Queens!

650g for the folding 2.2 is not too bad.

"You bought 2.4 tyres and then was surprised they were big?"

Perhaps he recklessly assumed they'd be the same size as 2.4 Mountain Kings. We should have a whipround and buy Continental a ruler.

"Measure them, the 2.2s are 2.2" and the 2.4s are 2.4". It's not Continental's fault others lie about the size of their tyres. "

Hah, I say ha. Conti are probably the worst for tyre sizing, at least most companies are consistent.