[Closed] Continental X-King opinions

I use them year round and really like them. Raced the national marathon champs on them and have ridden them on muddy moorland rides. Use them at Glentress, Hamsterley, Kielder and the like.

Good allrounders for XC. 2.2 are pretty narrow so shouldn't be a problem if the TKS fit.

Use mountain kings on my SS because they were cheaper and that thing hacks through mud six months of the year.

I am a fan of the X-Kings on my 120mm hardtail / rigid bikes. Prefer them in everything apart from full on mud and snow, where I run Mountain Kings. 2.2 are apparently narrow, I run 2.4. The Trail King 2.2 supposedly come up big.

I had these on my anthem, still got them in my tyres bin..
Great on the dry dirt/mud, but do find they can let go in the corners early with out warning. Didn't like them when things got wet after a downpour.
Still prefer racing Ralph's.

I used them for a while, don't like them as much as schwalbe rocket rons, not as grippy and I found no noticeable reduction in rolling when switching to rons.

Bontrager XR2 a lot better than x-king

The 2.2 is very small imo and the 2.4 is more like a 2.25/2.3. Decent volume on the 2.4.

I quite like the 2.2 for winter xc - quick without clogging due to it's small size. The protection case isn't that tough either, but probably on par for a light xc tyre. I've slashed one on a pointy root.

If I wanted a fast conti for the summer, it would be a 2.2 race king. Better in the dry in almost every way than the x-king.

I tried these on my hardtail, but I had two major issues.

Firstly, they simply don't last very long. Chunks of rubber came off the rear tyre after a couple of rides.

Secondly, they are a colossal PITA to set up tubeless.

Quite like em myself, decent grip/speed mix, I wouldn't have them on the front for anything but racing or dry weather though, and the protection model still isn't very tough... (though, still tougher than my racing ralphs, which punctured if you broke wind sharply)

Yak - Member

The 2.2 is very small imo and the 2.4 is more like a 2.25/2.3. Decent volume on the 2.4.

I hate Conti for this tbh- there's a 2.2 and a 2.4 but if you want a 2.2 you have to buy the 2.4. It's basically false advertising, especially with racier kit where weight's a selling point

I have a 2.4 on the front of a hardtail, very nice and grippy. I went for the Racesport as it is lighter and the sidewalls are constantly leaking Stan's (not that bad to make it a real issue); if you can't live with that, you can go for the Protection ones, as they have a slightly thicker carcass.

l.e. They are also quite fragile when abused; the carcass will deform permanently if you hit something sharp square on, I have seen this happen to a few.

I had one on the back of my HT 29 for the Dyfi

Compared to the Schwalbe offerings (RR, NN - take your pick) it has either worse rolling resistance or worse grip, but better durability, so fine by me.

If you want a significantly faster tyre than your MK I'd look at whatever the next faster one in the Conti range is. Race King?

^^^ Assuming the expensive and protection versions of all tyres named, the non black chili ones are nasty.

I'm running the X King Race Sport Black Chilli version on my Soul, so 26x2.2 version.

Really liking them, more than I expected - light, surprisingly thorn proof, the fastest rolling mountain bike tyre I've used on road sections, though I'm not an ever changing tyre fetishist to be fair. Proving pretty durable as well, showing hardly any sign of wear after 2-300 miles.

Seem to cope with most surfaces OK - give up on proper mud, as most tyres do, but actually clear pretty well.

They are quite narrow and the protections ones have served me well. Seem to grip well, be reasonably tough and quite fast rolling. Bit like a Rocket Ron but a bit heavier construction than the Schwalbe snakeskin

Unless you are in monumental mud they are OK as a rear in the winter

I have a X-King 26" 2.2 in racesport version. Decent fast tyre in my opinion. Copes well in a variety of conditions, from hard pack to dusty to muddy. Knob height is shallow so it will have limits when the ground is soft but it copes better than you think at first.

The racesport version is supposed to be tubeless ready but I found it very porous even after 1 year and 3 / 4 top ups with sealant it still is not 100% airtight and requires regularly pumping up to keep at correct pressure.

I prefer the Rocket Rons, appeared to have more grip and rolled just as well but they do cost a bit more.

thanks for all the thoughts on the X-King, for those of you who don't recommend them on the front? what do you use paired up with one on the rear?

Not really considering anything from scwhalbe as i have destroyed a few of there tyres waaaaay too quickly.

Another tyre i have been considering is the Ardent race

Meant to say they do deform like f#"k. Just had 3 replaced under warranty. Run at low tubeless they will deform if you give them a large sideways load eg slide out, hit a dip hard and not square on etc

I know you said not schwalbe but I had a nobby nic 2.2 on the front, which I thought was great for the kind of riding that fast tyres imply. It doesn't wear so fast that end. (Then again loads of people hate NN as a front tyre, I thought it was great both ends apart from the sidewalls being made of cheese. Won't buy again so I'll probably get a mountain king to replace it, or put the xking on front and something faster on the back).

I like them for rolling resistance and grip. Used on the rear all year round. In 29 format they're decent in mud and was surprised just how much grip they maintain for a tyre of such a tread.

Gashed a race sport version on Flint. Deformed a protection version mid race. But that's with around 2000 miles of riding.

They go up tubeless very easily on stans rims. But they do dry out the stans very quickly - so am guessing it's a permeable sidewall.

Not much in it between the x King and a rocket Ron