Sorry, tyre thread...
Anyone know how Nevegals size up against Conti Verts (eg 2.3). I'm looking for similar size to the Verts but knowing that Conti come up small (or more to the point actually similar to their quoted size...) so do I go for the 2.1 or 2.35?
I've had Conti Verticals (Gravity's are same size as well). They're both 2.3" - if you want 2.1" the Explorer is that size & same tread as the Verts. A 2.35" Nevegal is bigger volume, noticably wider. Nevegals are grippier as well, at least compared to the older ones (the new Black Chilli have increased grip, but not sure by how much).
I've run the stick-e and DTC Nevegals. If I was going to run them again, I'd go for a stick-e front & DTC rear. The DTC last much longer than the stick-e. But next time I'm going for Maxxis, cheaper & grippier.
Haven't got comparison pics unfortunately as the Contis are gone.
[edit] forgot to mention that the Nevegals give almost the same amount of warning before they wash out as the Verticals do.
Ok, so how do verts and nevegal 2.35 compare I'm terms of drag? I don't want a really draggy tyre as I need all the help I can get these days...
Verts are faster rolling than the Nevegals. I don't notice too much but there is a difference.
Cool. Thanks for that.
I don't know about the Vert sizing but all the Nevegals measure exactly what it says on the side. Kenda spent some of their R&D budget on a ruler one year, and it's paid off.
2.1 nev is very close to a 2.3 vert and get the stick-e
I did think that might be the case - anyone else changed directly from one to the other who could comment?
Tsk.. what's stw coming to when a tyres thread gets this few responses!
Don't put a stick-e on the back. That is all.
Nevs are a good all-round tyre. They are not the fastest or the grippiest, but that's because tyre design is always a compromise. You can go with something faster in summer, or something better in mud in winter, but they will do most things well.
If you find the rolling resistance of Nevegals is holding you back, then you probably need to MTFU and blame your legs not the tyres. Unless of course it's mid summer and all your friends are riding slicks or something...
Don't put a stick-e on the back. Unless you ride particularly hard, or lots of rock, don't put a stick-e on the front either! (IMO of course)
just measured and the carcass on the nev is bigger than the vert.
LOL thanks for that 
No one able to categorically say how a 2.1 Nevegal compares on width with a 2.3 vert?
Poppa wrote,
"Don't put a stick-e on the back. Unless you ride particularly hard, or lots of rock, don't put a stick-e on the front either! (IMO of course) "
I dunno, I find the 2.1 stick-e more effective than the 2.35 DTC on the front,and faster... But I didn't like the 2.1 DTC much on the front at all, not anywhere there was roots or rocks anyway. I love my nevegals but that combo, nooooo.
Conti's width include the side knobs where as kenda's width is to the edge of the side walls. My 2.3 verti's are narrower but higher ie bigger rolling diameter. My 2.1 nevegals are wider but shallower ie smaller rolling diameter. Prefer the conti vert's to the nevegals especially with the protection side walls. Good all round tyre.
Found the nevegals a bit draggy, good grip but even the DTC seemed a bit slow/ hard work. Probably needs a faster fitter rider than me, to get the most out it!
I've used both back to back and the direct comparision is that a 2.3 Vert is about the same width as a 2.1 Nev.
I find the Nev grippier and a much better all round tyre but it does have more resistance than the vert. IMO the Nev (DTC in my case) is a much better tyre for all but the driest and fastest trails where i still wouldn't use a vert i'd use a Small Black 8.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
