Forum menu
As title really, not used Conti before . Usually 2.25 is my choice.
X King's are small. 2.2" is narrower than some 2.1's I've seen.
The 2.4" is more like a "normal" 2.25 Maxxis or Schwalbe for size.
Yep. Small. I ordered a set of 2.2s off the back of the size of my 2.2RQ's, but they were way smaller!
There you go...
[img] 
[/img]
(with 40psi in on a 29er)
Great tyres, I run them as a pair front & rear = very happy 🙂
Ok, cheers. Have ordered a 2.2 folding to see for myself, if its too narrow (for my liking) i can order another in 2.4 flavour for front wheel duties and use 2.2 on rear as i did a few years back with Nevegals.
Currently use to using 2.25 ralphs/nics.
I had a Ralph rear / Ron front combination before switching to the 2.2 x-kings. The biggest difference is on the back, the x-king grips where the Ralph would have spun up.
The width also suits my bike, there's not much spare room between the stays and the Ralph used to clog up with mud - not been a problem with the x-king.
My X-King 2.2 Racesport on Crest rims is wider than 2.25 Nobby Nics on crossmax st.
So I'd say depends on your rim.
FWIW the 2.4 X-King is a mm or so wider than a 2.2 Rubber Queen but a mm or so less tall. IIRC they're both around 58mm wide on a Flow, widest point being carcass, not knobs. X-King is very round profile, RQ is taller and squarer.
Mounting on Mavic XM317 rims fwiw