2.3" tyres with str...
 

[Closed] 2.3" tyres with strong sidewalls that are good for tubeless?

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

On stans flow rims with yellow tape? Ligher the better (and NOT HIGH ROLLERS!!)


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 1:34 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Hmm- Just come back from Alps using Conti Rubber Queens 2.4 and 2.2 tubeless.
They blow up massive so 2.2 would easy be enough and the side wall is mega strong although not 'really' light ๐Ÿ˜‰


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 3:12 pm
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

strong sidewalls and light? :mong:

Cheap Thai conti's have good sidewalls, not light though.


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 3:15 pm
Posts: 3573
Free Member
 

maxxis ardent 2.25" ?


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 34938
Full Member
 

Lighter?

Than what?


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 2906
Full Member
 

bonty big earls


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 3:55 pm
Posts: 19914
Free Member
 

Specialized Eskars.

Gave mine a battering in the Alps, no puncutres: 2.3in, lightish, roll well, good tyres
Pretty cheap too, especially if you can find some fashion victim selling them off....
๐Ÿ™‚


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 4:01 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

2.2 Rubber Queen UST is 850g IIRC. Sidewalls much stronger than say a 2.35 Ignitor LUST, but Ignitors are aroung 100g lighter. I'd recommend either (on the Contis currently) - its the old weight vs. strength conundrum.


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 5:29 pm
 RicB
Posts: 1540
Free Member
 

The 2.2 RQs don't have the black chili soft rubber though do they? I've heard very bad things about mountain kings without the BC rubber...

RR - what's wrong with high rollers?


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 5:53 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

3 with damaged sidewalls last summer is why


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 6:37 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Currently running std. 2.35 Hutchinson Toro's tubeless. Only about 650g's, roll well and grip well. Sidewalls seem very tough, even though they are light. They recently had very good reviews in Dirt mag and another mag that I can't remember. They are on the small side for 2.35's, more like 2.25's.


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 7:26 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

run some gaffer tape round the wall of the tyre.

i have some if you want me to send you some. its EasyJet proof!


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 7:31 pm
Posts: 30
Free Member
 

RicB,
thats cos mountain kings are rubbish tyres (not just personal, also according to a fair few people i know)

2.2 rubber queens are pretty good rob. i just got one on the back of me ht, plenty strong, wide, and super grippy (despite not being black chilli)

in the real world, its not that different between std/black chilli ones...


 
Posted : 07/07/2009 7:58 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Kenda Nevegal 2.35 DTC/SWS (Side Wall Shield) 730g

Don't know if they'll be OK without the Stan's rim strip though - I'm running the 2.1's version on an Arch rim, but with the rubber strip (40g) not just the yellow tape. Sealed up very easily with Stan's sealant and stayed that way at 30 PSI at Cwmcarn last weekend. Pleased so far and the 2.1 is a proper width too, 55mm IIRC so the 2.35 should be suitably large.

Only downside is the SWS has glitter in it!


 
Posted : 08/07/2009 6:24 am
Posts: 3573
Free Member
 

anymore suggestions ? i need new tyres for my 819 tubeless rims...

tia ๐Ÿ˜ฎ


 
Posted : 13/07/2009 10:35 am