I Love them!!! SO Good! do you know of any better? 
Bike Forum
[closed]
Trailraker 1.95 best mud tyre ever???
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
They're nowt special IMO, Mud X thrashes it as an all round winter tyre, whilst the 1.5" Schwalbe Blark Shark is wildly superior in proper mud. TRs lack the side lugs to be any good in anything other than mud, but are too wide and prone to clagging.
Both also weigh less, and work better tubeless!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Maxxis MOFO's?
great on mud, liability cornering on wet tarmacPosted 2 years ago # -
njee20 - will have to give a 1.5" Schwalbe Blark Shark go sometime, stick one on the back and a half worn trailracker on the front may be a good combo!?!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Tr's are ok, just seem a bit slow rolling compared to mud x's, they prob have more traction in really sloppy sections but I think on balance they are less accomplished overall
Posted 2 years ago # -
off camber, a TR is astounding. i remember when i first got them i was blown away but i think the mud-x feels less sketchy on the wet stone. both are amazing really arent they
Posted 2 years ago # -
Trailraker last year, Mud X this - TR better for real mud, but Mud X better as a 'winter' tyre.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I like em for Peak mud and clag. The sidewalls are a bit fragile when it gets rocky but as a real winter tyre for real winter conditions, they are ace. I don't use em in trailcentres or rooty stuff though so they may be crap at that...
In what way are Mud X's better and in what conditions? Sorry that sounds a bit arguementative... just want to know why I should change when my TR sidewalls finally pop...
Posted 2 years ago # -
I found them brilliant in deep mud but a bit too squirmy on rocks and roots and haven't used them since last winter. Having a go with Kenda Nevegals which seem a decent all-rounder so far.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Mud Xs are much more rounded than TRs, so they work far better on rocks/roots etc where TRs just skip off.
They're also designed to run tubeless, I use mine at 20-25psi a lot of the time, gives tonnes of grip in most conditions.
As I said before though, if you're only going to encounter proper clag (think Mayhem or SiTS) the Black Shark is a better option.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I love my TR 1.95s
Posted 2 years ago # -
You are all wrong , of course .
Conti cross country 1.5s .Posted 2 years ago # -
conti edge are ok as a not totaly mud tyre.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Biggest problem with naming the best mud tyre 'ever' is that they don't make mud the same all over the country
Posted 2 years ago # -
Conti cross country 1.5s was thinking about them for the single speed. they ok on road?
Posted 2 years ago # -
they don't make mud the same all over the country
Perhaps we need European standard mud? Quick someone ring Brussels...
Posted 2 years ago # -
what tyres for riding through brussels and other brassicas?
Posted 2 years ago # -
trailrakers are awesome. winter trails can be ridden with summer confidence. mm-mmmmmmm.
Posted 2 years ago # -
The Maxxis Medusa in 1.8" eXCeption flavour is also better in really sticky mud a la Mayhem/SITS too, and weighs less than the 1.95" TrailRaker too, I think....
Posted 2 years ago # -
Tootled around today for a few hours on these:
Medusa 2.0 LUST up front
Half worn trailraker 1.95 that I haven't got round to ghettoing on the back.
The mud was mostly either frozen or drained though, but they've been happy in the rest of the winter slop. They roll pretty well too.
I've used Mud-x's as well. They're fantastic as a winter trail centre tyre but only OK in deep loamy mud. Piss weak sidewalls though.Posted 2 years ago # -
Constant riding through gloopy mud then TR's are very good but for more typical winter riding (i.e. patches of mud, some rocks/roots, hard ground etc.) then Mud-X's are far better IME.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Exactly what FuzzyWuzzy said - I replaced my TRs with Mud-Xs a couple of years ago. I ride them through the year now - they even work well enough in the dry.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I use tr my regular riding mate uses bonty mud x we both seem to manage in the winter ok
Posted 2 years ago # -
Another to echo Fuzzy wuzzy's comments here. Trail rakers are just a bit too mud specific, resulting in them being to osketchy on wet rock and roots for me.
The Mud-X is much better for all other winter conditions, except for thick, loamy mud, where it lacks the penetration of the taller tread that the trail raker has.
I mourn the loss of the mighty IRC Mud Mad TBH. That was better than either.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I mourn the loss of the mighty IRC Mud Mad TBH
Curently got a pair [F & R specific] on one of my bikes; great here in the FoD in the wet, non-claggy mud we get. Bit hairy on wet grassy cambers though
Posted 2 years ago # -
Conti 1.5's or Black Shark muds (although sadly discontinued now) are awesome when its really sticky & roll pretty well too-just not comfortable.
Maxxis Medusa 1.8's for me as a compromisePosted 2 years ago # -
TR's ace through proper mud, but by god I wonder if there really worth it as their so draggy everywhere else!
Couldn't imagine using one on the front though, mud-x up front here.Posted 2 years ago # -
Prefer my TR 1.95s to my old Mud Mads. Much more consistent traction.
The Mud Mads were good for making ghetto ice tyres, though. Every knobble had a pre-drilled hole in the top
Must have been from the moulding or something.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I've been happy with 2.1 TRs on my H/T for most of the past 12 months, even on the rockier stuff ....BUT.... the sidewall gave up at the weekend on my back tyre "in big style" and I was faced with a walk back from the foot of Dubbs to Ambleside
TR sidewalls in std form certainly would not inspire me with sufficient confidence to go tubeless.2 off MudX currently on order - will try these as ghetto.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Conti cross country 1.5s .
HA!
What you want is a 1.3" Hutchinson cross-comp...
Posted 2 years ago # -
I would say that 2.2 maxxis wetscreams have ultimate mud grip.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Once more you are all wrong......the best and ONLY mud tyre is one off these.
(http://www.dirty-pages.net/images/nieuws/14_1247685183.jpg)
dugasts are and tubs are the way forward..nothing compares 20 psi and jobs a good un.
BrucePosted 2 years ago # -
Anyone want a pair of one ride old 2.1 folding Trailrakers? £35 the pair...
Posted 2 years ago # -
All you Mud-x lovers - What is the difference between these and ACX's I like running?
When I looked I could barely tell them apart.Posted 2 years ago # -
Spacings are a little wider, sipes are diffrent on the new ACX. On the older AC and ACX, the only difference was the spacing. Still got a set of half decent ACs in the garage actually - they're good too.
Posted 2 years ago # -
i like the 2.1 tubeless better as i can run them at low pressures with a larger footprint
Posted 2 years ago # -
irc mudmad for the schloompy stuff as opposed to the clouty/claggy stuff.
Shame they don't make them anymore, or appear to have a direct replacement either.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Mudmonster , yea . The conti 1.5s will take a bit of pressure and roll ok . I've used em for a cycloX -ey race I did , ( HTN 1.5 ) , and they were ace.I was on a cannondale Rize BTW . Bonkers combination.
Then ,I used em for a few months hoofing about up Rivi on my HT. Great .
Only on really rocky drops were they a bit too skinny , I thought .I run em with Latex tubes , which puncture less , apparently .
Oh , I have a nearly new set of IRC Mudmads , too . Bit heavy . DHs.
No
Posted 2 years ago # -
Just gone from TRs to MudX and have to say that in thick, deep mud, the TR is better, but overall, the Mud X suits mixed conditions and general winter use.
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
