Opionions sought. ❓

Gee reckons they’re much better as per a recent thread. I bought a couple as a result so I hope he’s right, as the non-snakeskin Ralph I had was utter rubbish.

Much much tougher.

They are Crap! But what do I know 🙂

The Snakeskins are almost indestructable & Dual Defence Snakeskins are indestructable.

But heavier and slower. So pretty much like normal tyres then

The snakeskin ones are excellent! I’ve had the same set of Alberta on my 29er for 2 seasons, which is unheard of wig normal Schwalbes. The tread has finally worn out before the sidewalls, which is a refreshing change. I’ve also got the 29er Ralphs in a snakeskin version which are equally durable. I probably to 3-4 3hr MTB rides a week on them, they’re now 4 months old and the sidewalls still look new. Tread is starting to wear, though.

The Double Defense ones are horrible – the rubber is basically solid and so they ride like crap. They are indestructible, though.

GB

Both my UST Fat Albert snakeskins have bitten the dust in quick succession. The last suffering a sidewall puncture at Glentress (hardly a rocky gnar fest), and the first time was coming down Carn Ban Mor, which admittedly is a bit of a rock fest in places, and I suffered a double puncture on the sidewall, one of which needed a tubeless patch as the hole was too big for sealant.
At over 900g (for the 2.35 UST ones) I thought they’d be a lot tougher than that.

They are better than the normal ones, making then shite instead of proper shite.

fine tubeless on stan’s for me so far.