[Closed] B+... Anyone else just find it disappointing and pointless?

I had a demo at Afan on a Cotic Rocket with B+ and I thought it was great fun. Great grip going up, and bouncing around like a space hopper on the way down. I loved it!

I would have bought it but I figured my lack of skill and aging body would land me in casualty enough to stretch even the limits of the extra £350M a week the NHS will be getting from leaving the EU.

It's tyres. How "interesting" can you make them? Perhaps they could build in a random self destruct mechanism or cut the tread so it plays "Yankee Doodle Dandy " when cycling on tarmac?

Maybe you were just on the wrong type of ride.

Horses for courses I guess. I find my Primal Plus on 3.0" Bridgers almost perfect for my local riding Spring to Autumn. Winter is fatty territory though. It's true it doesn't have a huge amount more grip than the 456 it replaced however. I do like the extra squidge though and don't find it squirms too much in the corners.

So less B+ and more of a C- ?

Though my bike has the ability to run B+ wheels i've no interest in trying them. As i suspected (and you found out) running soft tyres just feels crap. Anything less than mid 20s and tyres feel awful ime. I'm sure they will suit some riders/terrain but just not for me.

I think you are probably too fast/gnarly/whatever for them. Not a pisstake, I think after a certain ability level any advantages or fun elements of plus will flip around and be a hindrance. I don't have that problem (un)fortunately therefore plus tyres are good for me.

Just you wait until you destroy the tyres riding over a pebble, then you'll really question what you spent the money for!

scotroutes - Member

It's tyres. How "interesting" can you make them?

Tyres are interesting! They can ruin any bike, they can keep you upright or not... And you can measure them and make a spreadsheet and make hilarious jokes about maxxis rubber rulers!1!!

And fatbike tyres are definitely interesting, they change how you ride. I was hoping for a bit more of that, after all that's what everyone keeps banging on about when they talk about plus tyres. But it's just not very present.

imnotverygood - Member

So less B+ and more of a C- ?

Until I come to sell them, at which point they will be the best thing since sliced bread 😆

I don't think the i35 rims will be helping matters with a 3.0in tyre.

Maybe you need to take it where you ride fat and then compare. Personally I find B+ to be a good compromise between full fat and skinnier stuff. For instance they make rough terrain on rigid forks a bit less bashing but also seem to work well with suspension forks if required.

Not tried a FS B+, only hardtail. Maybe better suited?

On tyre pressures i was fannying about trying to get rear wheel to seal this afternoon and had them pumped up to 18-20 psi (on 3" WTB) found that a bit too high (felt like the equivalent of 30-35 in a 2.3" 29er).

I don't think the i35 rims will be helping matters with a 3.0in tyre.

Yea I was thinking that.

Though still new to it I've loving my B+, widest I got on my 29er was 2.4 and was ok but this B+ (i45 WTB Scraper) climbs the loose gravel/slate/granite/sand near me like nothing I've ridden, comes down it well to.
I'm yet to try it at a local trail centre but around home it seems promising

Cheers, Steve

Is the i35 35mm wide? Is that really wide enough to get the benefits of plus. I'm very happy running 35mm rims with Maxxis 2.35 can run those down to 12-15psi which is perfect on a rigid bike. had tried a 3.0 but it was abit too lightbulb shaped and odd

I ran a set of i35(F)/i29(R) NN/trailblazer on the Solaris which was enough for me to know I liked it (and that I'd like to try 'proper' i45/3"....).

Maybe it's the bike. I like my stache on scrapers/3.0 WTB (bridger/ranger) and my Flare Max on i35s (Rekons). Both I just find have loads of grip and the Cotic is ridiculously comfy while still being an absolute blast to ride. Took it too Antur yesterday and the lakes today and over the two days preferred it to my Aeris.

I didn't quite get the 29'plus' bit tho. Felt like a poor mans fat bike whereas 27.5+ feels like a normal mountain bike but differently interesting. Better? Dunno, too many ways to cut that. Faster, in some places for me yes (amazingly on a couple of Antur runs but then I'm not troubling the top of any leaderboard) and in some places (esp tarmac) no.

Here's mine at the top of the Garbon pass earlier.. no other bike I'd rather be on

[url= https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5710/30251911272_fd0bdd7a6c_b.jp g" target="_blank">https://c1.staticflickr.com/6/5710/30251911272_fd0bdd7a6c_b.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/N6fXg7 ]Untitled[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/alexleigh/ ]Alex Leigh[/url], on Flickr

I've a feeling the i35s aren't helping with tyre stability, that's a fair point. But that's not really the problem I think, I'd put up with the cornering if it was giving a more significantly different feel, and I don't think the rims can be the issue there. Definitely doesn't seem like going down to 2.8 will do the job I want- I want more plusness not less! But then lots of the positive chat about plus comes from people using 2.8.

Hmm. I need to explain this better I think. I don't so much mind the downsides, which possibly I've made worse with the rim. It's the lack of difference, which I don't think the 35mm rim is causing. I want to swap wheels and have the bike ride interestingly different. Not just worse! I can do that by putting bad tyres on it or randomly spinning the dials on the suspension. But what I love with the fatbike is I can ride the same trail and it feels totally different- same reason I've had rigid mtbs.

scotroutes - Member

Maybe you need to take it where you ride fat and then compare.

I did! I've been out doing the most typical rides I can, best way to test.

I think maybe I need to get the rocket ron off it, maybe get a bridger and stick it on the front, put the nic on the back, see what that does?

On the rim width front, it's an interesting ish topic. Cy @ Cotic specs the Flare (and I think the Rocket) b+ with i35s. They reckon the profile is better and the rear of the flare max can only take a 2.8 anyway so not much point having a wider rim.

I need to run the bikes back to back to see if I can tell the difference between 2.8s on i35 and 3.0 on Scrapers. I'm sure there's something in the profile that should be noticeable.

What pressures were you running? One thing I have found in b+ seems pretty sensitive. I ran the Stache originally at 18/16 and it was a bouncy mess, no I run it at 13/11 and that seems a sweet spot. Flare runs a bit more. Yesterday I stuck 24 in the back so I didn't mong the rim on the blacks at Antur and it wasn't as nice but tamed by the rear suspension I guess. And I didn't have any tyre issues..

put the nic on the back, see what that does?

Puncture repeatedly if my experience is anything to go by.

Gone back to 29 for now.

I find it better on my spectral than the 29ers, in all conditions except proper slop. My local trails have a bit of everything, and the lower bb height and extra grip are ace. Bike is a lot more playful too, more confidence inspiring on the jumpy stuff too.

It's not the messiah, but it's also not the naughty boy.

Edit - 35mm is plenty wide for a 2.8nn, not so long ago we were all riding 2.3 on 19mm mavics.

Fwiw I only have a 2.5 wtb breakout on the back, and 2.8nn on the front, so in between really.

35mm rims aren't really + imo, i run 45mm & it seems a good balance between grip & RR
NN 2.8f 20psirekon 2.8r 25 psi

For me B+ gives me enough of what fat did without being stupidly heavy slow overkill.

Can't say I can tell much difference between tyres(beyond decently grippy looking ones being OK, semi slicks being as you'd expect etc) , folk I've ridden with who've talked about tyre performance/limitations* have been behind me on descents so I've ignored them.

*I've not ridden with the OP

Well...

I'm not really sure. I kind of get what the OP is saying as it's a little how I felt on some on first b+ rides but then I realised that I was riding rigid at much the same speed as I rode a FS (though my trails aren't overly rocky where I think it would be less like a FS).

As in the thread below, I've done B+ on 25mm and 35mm (internal) rims and found them to work well though I'm wondering about going up to 40 or 45 for the b+ frame I have on the way but the internet reviews I can find are quite conflicting with many saying going from 35 to 40/45 doesn't really make any real world difference to the ride.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/650b-and-other-plus-sizes-if-you-like-rim-tyre-frame-fork-combinations

Not sure what you were hoping to get putting them on a fairly long travel fs, it's undamped squished. If your suspension set up properly then the most I'd expect you to pick up is extra climbing traction. I run them on the stooge but they're providing the cushioning on that.

[quote=cynic-al ]For me B+ gives me enough of what fat did without being stupidly heavy slow overkill.+1

I'll still be running fat over the winter if (when) we get some decent snow. Other than that. B+ is floaty enough.

Personally I didn't like the feeling of the tyre rolling over when leaning it in to corners. I can understand what people like the grip and squish, but they're not for me. I hate my tyres folding over, but then I run >30psi in my Minions for that very reason. I also like to feel what the ground is doing and the big soft tyres masked that.

I'm also not sold on sidewall strength in big tyres

Tom kp

Isn't the whole 3" tyre thing just oh-so stupidly 2006 anyway?

Please try some chronicles

Maybe depends what terrain you are riding.
For me i've had my trailblazers on mostly dry buff forest tracks and they've been great. Only roll a fraction slower than XC 29er tyres, but gobble up small roots and offer improbable levels of grip.

Running at 12-14psi i find they give quite a nice magic carpet feeling over small level chatter, but can pogo a bit on bigger hits.

Bear in mind we dont have access to b+ enduro tyres yet, so if you want to compare wait until the HR2 and minion arrive or run XC tyres on your 29er wheels.

2.8 magic mary is what I'm waiting for.

At a very wet cannock today my 3.0 nobby nics performed faultlessly. I'm not that experienced but I am quicker on this bike than any I've had previously.

OK, cheers folks, this is really helpful (it's helping me put my own thoughts in order and there's some really good stuff I'd not thought about)

"There's no enduro plus tyres", well thing is, the nic/ron pair is very comparable to a minion/ardent pair. Similiar weight, similiar rolling resistance, but worse grip. So it seems a pretty fair comparison. The only thing these have in common with XC tyres is, I suspect, durability and names.

Hmmmm. I think my main hanging doubt is the tyres, I have no idea why I decided to go with schwalbe now I think about it. Mostly just because the choice was bewildering I think. So I'm either going to call it a bust, or try a different front tyre and shift the nic to the rear. I don't like anything about the ron, it's not fast or grippy.

I was going to say Bridger, but holy ****, 1200g. And that's the TCS Lite! If they ever make a TCS Tough it'll have its own gravitational field. That slighly defeats the point of the exercise... Can anyone remember a grippier front that's not as heavy as a dualply? Has to be no bigger than a 3.0 skwabbly, I'm right on the margins of what fits in the frame.

mrhoppy - Member

Not sure what you were hoping to get putting them on a fairly long travel fs, it's undamped squished

That's exactly what I was hoping for 😆 A bit of float and bounce. And there's a wee bit of it, but really not much.

I guess the thing with BB height is, lowering it is awesome if it's too high, but mine isn't so probably it's not the advantage it could be.

Pressures, I've been working through the range (helped by the fact that neither tyre is quite airtight yet so they auto-adjust for me :lol:) I'm light and not really a wheelsmasher so I started out at 15psi and I've tried down to 10, too scared to go lower because I might want to see these wheels... TBH I didn't think they worked at all til I got below 12, they might as well have been normal tyres. At 10 I'm happiest with them for straight lines and most unhappy in corners, at 12 it's probably a balance but they feel less.. plussy. So it's a bit like my definition of when they're working best, is when they're more like a thinner tyre. That's not too encouraging.

Go for the stretched look. I've got trail blazers on 52mm hugo's. Maybe what you've got is a bit iffy, kinda like what I was talking to someone about yesterday.. an IRC Kujo on a 717 disc rim :OD

I was out on mine earlier and said to myself 'this is just so spot on' (comfort) but I think I get on better with 2.35's on the bike if I need control. I know that I can't rag down stuff on this setup, but I never fitted them to rag.

There's plenty of people happily using the i35s. Thing is, like I say I can totally buy that the tyres might not be working at their best. But the big thing for me is the lack of, well, [i]plusness[/i]- and I'm pretty sure a little more rim width won't change that fundamentally. If I thought "well, plus tyres are cool but not stable enough" or "these tyres are too rounded off" then I'd be thinking about rims but that's not really the issue.

Northwind, I would suggest you are dehydrated, perhaps a little more
[img] [/img]
and you will be back on track - I thought the first rule of plus was don't criticise plus 😉

I wasn't impressed. They weren't bad and when I first got on them the initial feeling was of endless grip, but doing back to back runs with a conventional 29er I was not faster on them. Also i've been on 2 demo days and on both the 650+ tyres punctured with the sealant failing to seal them, so did alot of hanging around while they stuck a tube in them.

They knumbed the trail out for me too much. I sort of prefer my suspension to be doing the suspension bit and the tyres doing the grippy tyre bit, i.e. two separate jobs. If I had a rigid bike then the + tyres might work better, enabling you to take on bumpier terrain, but on a full suspension bike I just think the bigger softer tyres hampers the suspension and slows you down.

Interesting re suspension, I was thinking of trying a 29er fs frame but it seems you can get only 2.8s in at best.

Happy with my 3" Nic, less so the Ron, but as I say ie never experimented hugely with tyres.

My plus bike was an opportunity purchase - the open I had previously cracked due to me being stupid and that presented an opp to try something different, so I went for their One + frame and built some new wheels with LB 38mm wide rims. Have to say it's an absolute hoot - I can now climb faster, descend with more confidence and it's still almost as light as my 29er. (19lb with plus wheels, 18lb with 29er wheels).

Someone made a comment here about plus being suited to people who are not Gnar and that may be the answer to this particular conendrum.

You're right to question, I'm not sure B+ makes sense on a FS for pissing around the the woods tech riding.

I've had a think (as I'm not going to splash the cash until I kill either of my current bikes) and the plus stuff would make sense on either

- rigid bikes to give them some squish, therefore some compliance & traction

- big mountain rocky riding. I was humiliated by a fella who rode all the way up Skiddaw on a plus* bike!

*was also an e-bike, that may have helped.

Someone made a comment here about plus being suited to people who are not Gnar and that may be the answer to this particular conendrum.

Absolutely. Did an uplift day at inners on Saturday, no way would I have used the spectral for that. For my local night rides and bigger XC days, it's good.

Can't imagine you'd feel much benefit or difference from swapping to B+ on a longish travel full suss.

As it is I have gone from mostly riding a rigid 29er to a rigid B+.

I appreciate the extra cushioning and the fact that, after a long, dry summer, I can ride over hard-baked, rutted clay and finish the ride with the sensation that my fillings are still attached to my teeth.

Faster up and down most techy bits of trails, too, according to Strava. Although that could be to do with conditions/fitness/phases of the moon/whatever.

The B+ felt a bit steamrollerish before I swapped to tubeless and trial-and-errored my way to an appropriate tyre pressure of about 12 front 14 rear.

Absolutely. Did an uplift day at inners on Saturday, no way would I have used the spectral for that. For my local night rides and bigger XC days, it's good.

Took mine to Antur and it was great. Rode all the trails except the double black because I was tired and getting a bit crash-y at that point. Maybe not on the limit, but I do okay up there and didn't seem to be any slower than on my 'proper' FS. Point being bike not the limiting factor. Was concerned about tyre strength but two others on 'normal' rims taco'd theres. I was fine. Might be me being a woos tho 😉

Also as I alluded to earlier, fitting bigger tyres to bikes not designed for them might be negating any advantage - perceived or otherwise. I don't think they are in any way a game changer, but speaking as a sample size of 1, I really enjoy their feel on both the HT and FS.

@northwind - I'd say get some Rekon's. 2.8, decent weight, strength and profile. But so expensive. The Bridger is a bit of a weight-y item but it's been a good choice on the rear of the HT.

It doesn't matter what it rides like when they're making bikes that [i]look[/i] like this

[img] [/img]

It doesn't matter what it rides like when they're making bikes that look like this

I find it pointless on FS bikes. The real advantage I find is on the rigid, where it takes the sting out of things and it grips nicely.
On a FS the suspension is doing the exact same job as the tyres on the B+.
I don't trust any of the B+ tyres I've used for more serious riding either. The sidewalls are just too thin.

I've a set of Plus wheels for the Solaris which currently has a set of rigid carbon forks on and they definitely make a difference. I rode a comparison loop with keeping everything from the clothes I wore to the amount of rest beforehand to the amount of water I carried as constant as I could and the Plus wheels were about 7% faster overall, some Strava segments were all but identical, maybe +/- five seconds for a two minute segment, some were a bit slower but quite a few were significantly faster.

The wheels/tyres [b]are[/b] heavy but then they were cheap (Alpkit Rumpus 45mm rims). In fact they are only 300g lighter for the set than the wheels on my fat bike so any perceived saving in that department is minimal if not illusory.

Like most things they don't fit every situation but they do have their place.

so bland it's trying to blend into the background??

Braaaap

I've been running 2.8s on a Sonder Transmitter with a 120mm fork up front for five or six months now and they work pretty well up to the point where you hit a rock and pinch puncture the rear again. Stuff that's worth bearing in mind is that there's a narrow window of functional tyre pressure where they give great cushioning and grip without feeling squelchy or bouncy. It's a matter of a psi or so either side.

Current tyre choice is pretty dire. Too light, too thin, too fragile. The WTB Tough casing tyres are getting good feedback from two very good riders I know who've been using them. I've got a Rekon+ on the rear now, but it's not notably more robust feeling than a TB or a RR to be honest, though I have more trust in EXO than Schwalbe's SS thing.

I don't think the NN / RR combo is anywhere near a Minion/Ardent set-up. The rubber compounds are still horrible imho. That's Schwalbe for you.

Do you think maybe you're simply too good for the tyre set-up and size?

Have you read this and tried any of the tyres he used:

http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/article/are-275-wheels-and-tyres-better-than-29ers-47047/

I was sceptical about plus bikes until I read that article - now I'm content knowing that my normal bikes are fast enough as a non-competitive racer at best! 😉

I'm sort of surprised at all the comments on tyres. I started with FatBnimbles front and rear - that was a disaster. They may be light but in any slop at all there's just no grip. With a NN 3.0 on the front it's all good. I'm happy letting the back end wander a bit if the bike is generally going where I point it. I'll likely try something else on the rear this winter. Might wait to see what pops up on the classifieds.

I find it offers a good compromise between 29er and fat. Im more comfortable on b+ than my old rigid 29er but a fair chunk faster than on my fatty. Now speed isn't an issue for me I go as slow as I like but it is easier to pedal up hill on the b+ than it was on the fatty. Unfortunately it's also slower going down. It's swings and roundabouts. It's a bike I like bikes

I don't think it can be me being too good really. Nice as it would be to think so 😆 I'm pretty good, I'm not awesome.

BadlyWiredDog - Member

I don't think the NN / RR combo is anywhere near a Minion/Ardent set-up. The rubber compounds are still horrible imho.

The grip isn't but the rest of the performance is, which is why I'm making that comparison- tyre performance isn't just about grip, or we'd all be using supertackies, you need to take into account the all round usability of them and that puts them right in the same envelope as a minion/ardent.

Baically the closest performance comparison I can make is bad enduro/trailbike tyres not XC tyres. On a slippery descent, sure, they feel like XC tyres but across the whole day they're not.

Right. **** it, it's not for me is it? Essentially all of my posts say the same thing, regardless of good or bad I'm just not liking how it works and feels. Changing tyres or rim won't change the basic ride character of the bigger tyre, and it's not giving me the one thing I really wanted, it's the wrong compromise.

Rode on a demo ride B+ a few months back and first try I was looking for negatives and couldn't find any... Then went back to a normal 27.5 bike and found that great. Went back to the same B+ and all of a sudden it wasn't quite the same. It felt like it wanted to understeer everywhere and just felt really, really vague in comparison. That was with 3.0 Maxxis Chronicles. Loads of grip don't get me wrong but the whole feel I look for wasn't there. Am about to order some 2.6 Nobby Nics as an experiment to see how I get on with semi, semi fat. Hopefully they fit in my T130!

I'm not sure if it's a gnar/fast thing. A couple of friends love their tyres soft and go fast and and steep. It's a control thing and the bike doing what you want it to do, when you want it to. Coming from a bmx background with rock hard tyres and no suspension probably influences my preference for firm suspension and tyres. I like being in control of the bike at all times. I don't get that with softer suspension and it's much worse combined with soft tyres. A soggy bike feels like a vague, drunken bike and that doesn't give me any confidence.

Do people really buy stuff to go faster/improve strava times?

7% faster...you should tell the world class xc guys 😛

@cynic-al No, I was using Strava as a means to check if there was any difference, empirical data is better than "They feel really fast" or whatever. It was only one ride on each set of wheels so really I'd need to do quite a few more rides on that same loop to get a better comparison.

I also wore a HRM and those values were comparable (average for a segment was +/- 2bpm or so, maximum during a segment was also very similar) so I wasn't putting more effort in just to prove a point. I'd also ridden with the wheels for a few weeks before doing the loop to try and avoid the new gear halo effect.

Edit: [i]I was on my own for both rides as well so no drafting.
[/i]
Ultimately it was one set of figures from one rider on one loop of about 25Km, someone else might find the opposite for their riding. I tried the Peak200 ITT earlier this year using them and after 180Km they felt hard work but I don't know whether I'd have been better with the 29er wheels as there were other factors involved.

I don't think I'd use them as my main wheelset but they are useful to be able to swap in should the occasion require.

Fair enough, you've made a good effort to be scientific and caveated it too

*approves*

Do people really buy stuff to go faster

surely the whole bike industry is based around this premise?

Fair enough, you've made a good effort to be scientific and caveated it too

*approves*

Oooh! Ta 😆

jam bo, surely owning a bike is at least partially (if not mostly) based around having fun, and most people don't need to go KOM speeds to have fun.

I regularly have people ask if I compete, but I've no interest in that, I 100% ride for the enjoyment of it.

I think (unsurprisingly) that tyres are the key.

I stuck a set of B+ wheels with WTB Trailblazer tyres on my Solaris last year. This was just at the start of a prolonged dry spell and initially I thought they were great. A touch more grip, a touch more comfort and a slightly lower BB. Nothing dramatic, but I thought it made the Solaris a better trail bike. Right up to the point where it rained and the TBs became lethal.

I then switched to Nobby Nics for the winter, but found that setup pretty pointless. It was slower everywhere (up and down) than it was with the same tyres in 29er format. No more grip as far as I could tell and any improvements in comfort or float were so small as to hardly be worth the effort. So, I gave up and went full fat! But I sold the B+ wheels and tyres to metalheart who enjoyed them so much he ordered a "proper" plus bike. Which just goes to show that we're all different I guess.

I do wonder whether those who claim a plus bike offers some of the advantages of a fat bike without the downsides ever tried a fatty with 4.8" JJ tyres.

I bet they're the nuts in California, against Cumbrian sludge and slate however....

I do wonder whether those who claim a plus bike offers some of the advantages of a fat bike without the downsides ever tried a fatty with 4.8" JJ tyres.

I've got 4" Husker Du's on mine. I've absolutely nothing to compare them against as it's my first fat bike. From what I've read, the HDs are 3 season tyres so might not be the best in snow/slutch/mud. As I noted above: the Alpkit Rumpus wheels (with Bridger on the front and TB on the rear) are only slightly lighter than the fat wheelset.

Personally, I only really care about speed when I'm racing, faster isn't necessarily more fun for normal riding imo. [i]Feeling[/i] fast, sure, but feeling fast on a rigid bike or fatbike happens at a different speed to an enduro bike or downhill bike.

roverpig - Member

I do wonder whether those who claim a plus bike offers some of the advantages of a fat bike without the downsides ever tried a fatty with 4.8" JJ tyres.

TBH this is probably a big part of it, with me- getting a wee sniff of big tyre feel isn't making me feel "this is good", it's making me feel "I know this feeling but there's not enough of it"- if I was only used to narrow tyres I imagine it'd feel more interesting, if you're used to water then skimmed milk is probably good, but I'm used to full fat so it just tastes of disappointment 😆

(that perfect metaphor happened completely unplanned, usually I like a really strained metaphor so I'm not sure how that happened)

But there's plenty of folks who've tried them all and still like the plus compromise, Scotroutes frinstance in this thread...

Northwind - Member

if I was only used to narrow tyres I imagine it'd feel more interesting, if you're used to water then skimmed milk is probably good, but I'm used to full fat so it just tastes of disappointment

It's was semi skimmed that was in my coffee. It was coffee that was in my mouth.
Now it's on my keyboard.

Thanks for that 😉

I've been happy with the grip and rolling characteristics of my 2.8 nobby nics, but a combination putting holes in the rear tyre every time it gets a bit rowdy, tight clearances with 2.8 tyres and dartmoor about to turn into a bog pushed me back towards 29.

Some of the newer 2.6 tyres from maxxis might tempt me back next year but until then, does anyone want to buy a set of alpkit rumpus wheels + 2.8 NN's. done about 600 miles, some marks on the freehub, set up tubeless, front tyre in good condition, back tyre comes with 6 free tubeless plugs.

I'm pleased I'm not the only one who doesn't like soft tyres for cornering etc. I thought I must have it wrong based on what the industry was saying, but phew I'm not alone.

jam bo - Member

Do people really buy stuff to go faster

surely the whole bike industry is based around this premise?

Of course, but some folk aren't interested in being its servant.

4.8 tyres? No thanks, I tried 4" and it was too much, I can ride the beach, or most if it on 3", and it doesn't feel like a barge.

4.8 tyres? No thanks, I tried 4" and it was too much, I can ride the beach, or most if it on 3", and it doesn't feel like a barge.

That was my point though. There is such a big difference between the feel of different tyres (especially with plus/fat wheels) that it's hard to talk about size on its own. A Surly ICT with a Bud/Lou combo is indeed a barge. A fun barge, but a barge none the less. The same bike with Jumbo Jims on feels totally different though. Pump those up from their usual 6psi to 12psi and it's a whole other ball game again.

I get that, but are you suggesting 4.8" JJs are closer to 3" tyres than 4"?

Well I guess they might be closer to some 3" tyres than some 4" tyres, but my point really was just that there is as much difference between different tyres of the same size as there is between different sizes.

I read it as there are more to a tyres riding characteristics than just the width it is available in.

/Mid fat /plus size/B + whatever it's called this week is

Rearrange this popular phrase 😆

Money a easy parted and fool his are

Late to the party but here's my experience!

Stanton Sherpa with 140mm Pikes and WTB Scraper i45's. Originally with WTB Trailblazers 2.8s. Upped the front to a Trail Boss 3.0. Rode great at 20psi but grip was rubbish in the loose and they bounced a bit. Anything lower and they felt like they were coming off the rim. Sidewalls too weak. Didn't take them anywhere rocky as was scared they'd tear!

Along come MAXXIS with their Rekon EXO's and we're flying with 12psi front and 15 in the back. Awesome grip, still fast, great fun! Orange Segment is left the garage unless I'm expecting BIG stuff!!!

Cheers,

Dave.

I've done a LOT of tyre testing on B+ this year with the new MAX bikes coming out (granted only on WTB, but they're my supplier, so, y'know).

Currently I'm completely sold on Plus for my hardtail. I love 2.8s on my Solaris and can find very little in the way of drawbacks. It's fun and grippy and comfy and not a deal heavier than the setup I'd normally ride. I also have timed testing data on everything from rocky to smooth singletrack trails which shows they're as fast or faster than 29er wheels on the Solaris which helps me get over myself when the 'feel' slow.

It gets a little more complicated on FS. As someone mentioned the MAX bikes only go up to 2.8" on the rear anyway so that's what I have been working on, but in my experience the higher grip you have on FS and therefore the higher cornering loads you can generate - particularly on anything even mildly supportive/bermed - presents Plus setups with difficulty with tyre roll and feeling like the tyre is coming off if you're running low enough pressures to get the advantages on bumpy/rooty sections. I couldn't find a sweet spot where I could leave tyre pressures alone for most situations, but found they worked brilliantly as low as 10 front/12 rear on off camber roots and tech sections, but needed as much as 18 to stop tyre roll on high energy bermed trails (I'm 85 kg btw, so if you're lighter you might get away with less). So, on FS I think you have to take Plus tyres as something else you tune, like suspension, and perhaps have to be a little location specific about it. One thing I haven't managed to test yet is how the stiffer Tough casing works out for the rear as we have only just got these in. My guess - based on running Tough 29er rear on my RocketMAX - is that it will help.

This is all on 35mm internal rims, which was the decision we made based on the balance of weight vs performance. You do get more support from wider rims, but there's also a big weight penalty. The WTB i35 rims weigh around 600grms, which is already over 120grms more than the KOM i25 29er rims we use on the equivalent 29er wheels. The Scrapers were over 700 grams each! This had a significant effect on the feel of the bike. Of the WTB range, the Ranger 2.8 Light weighs 800 grms and the Tough version we just got in 1050. This is similar the 29 x 2.3s I usually run so the big differentiator in wheel weight becomes the rims and over 200 grms per wheel is a serious increase in weight. Unless you go carbon there's still a line to walked in terms of width/support/weight I feel. WTB showed the Scraper i40 at Eurobike which might hit the sweet spot on that compromise a little better. We'll see.

This opinion might also be related to using the i35 rims, but I prefer 2.8s myself. They are less pressure sensitive whilst still having plenty of float and being 10% smaller than the 3.0" tyres they're 10% lighter too which seems to put 2.8s into the 'on the heavy side' category rather than the 'how heavy?!' of some 3.0. See the Bridger for example. We use 3.0 front with the Trail Boss which is a great tyre, but I am CONSTANTLY nagging Mike at WTB to make 2.8 Trail Boss. These front and rear would be MINT. IMHO. YMMV.

Haven't tried it but it is clearly not a case of snake oil or Coolaid drinking.

I spent 6 months on 1.9 tyres then changed to 2.4 and the 2.4 were better in more ways than they were worse. The only time they were worse was on road or very compact fire roads.

Going from 2.4 to 2.8/3.0 is going to be the same, there will be pros and cons - just all depends if they weigh in your favour.

Interesting comments Cy. I wish I had your resources to test out rim/tyre combos! I'm more than happy to offer my 'real world' testing skills for you.... 😉

I have to admit, 3" tyres and scrapers ain't exactly light. Will probably try 2.8" once the tougher tyres percolate through to the unwashed masses... And please keep up your nagging of Mike 😀

Very interesting thread.

I have a plan to get a 27.5+ front wheel made up for my cannondale trigger. It has a lefty with bags of clearance so I don't need a new fork (or bike) to experience some plus-ness.

I thought it was a way to slacken my front end while adding more grip. At the moment I run a 2.4" Mary on the front and a lesser grip tyre on the back - a set up I love around the Peak - I was hoping for more of the same.

This thread gives me lots to think about re my assumptions. Tyre choice being a big one, I'd grab a 2.8 Mary if it were available. A lot of puncture talk too - presumably more on rears of HTs?

A lot of puncture talk too - presumably more on rears of HTs?

Yep. But I've seen one blow on the front too. At speed. On the Hagg Farm descent. I think there's some going back to first principles stuff here.

1. B+ ime is very pressure sensitive. There's a window of around 2psi between too soft and too hard and it varies a little with tyre, terrain and riding style. Too hard and they just ping off stuff, too soft and they feel drunk.

2. B+ tyres blow through their 'travel' really fast when run at Goldilocks, 'just right' pressures, presumably because they're like a high volume shock at low pressure - whoomph... Rims hit rock, tyre pinches. The answer to this is probably tougher sidewalls - WTB Tough seem to be working for people who've used them - and/or maybe something like Pro Core... both are heavier than the current crop of lightweight, skinny-walled tyres but at least you won't spend hours levering pinch-flatted rubber off your expensive dinged rims.

3. B+ tyres vary like any other tyre. Trailblazers, for example, are pretty dire. Nobby Nics still have nasty rubber compounds. Fast tyres are still fast, grippy tyres still drag a little at the back. Grippy front, fast rear still works.

4. Everyone's different. A lightweight whippet on the South Downs could have a completely different experience of the same tyre/wheel format as a 20-stone thug, but the binary, black and white screen settings of STW don't make much allowance for this.

5. Don't even think about putting a WTB Trailblazer on the front of anything [in this case point 4 above does not apply]