[Closed] Lightweight fat bike tires

Husker Dus

Hardly lightweight. Looking closer to 1kg ideally

1.2kg. The same as a FBN?
https://fat-bike.com/2012/01/tire-weights-for-fat-bikes/

I think only the JJ will be lighter, unless you go for Black Floyds

Just fitted a Fat B nimble to the back of my fatty. Running Nate upfront still. So far so good, rolls much faster than a nate. Grip has been surprisingly good from what little i have seen. Of which the majority of the riding was on battle of the beach. i wouldn't say its a light weight tyre mind. I have the folding 120tpi version and its not much lighter than a nate if i remember correctly. Installed tubeless straight away on my BR710's. Tyre does seem slightly buckled out of the box despite the bead sitting correctly. Must say i have not noticed it riding though. I would also say the compound is pretty hard. I am hoping it will be an ideal tyre for spring conditions and liven the bike up a little.

The LiteSkin 4.8 JJs are about 1.2 kg. The 4" version is just under a kg

The 4.8s are fast and grippy in the dry but all sorts of wrong in mud

Jumbo Jims are about as light as they go although there are some new 800g Maxxis apparently. Lightweight tyres also means thin sidewalls, so also depends on your expected ride conditions. If you really want to notice a difference, go for 65mm carbon rims

Thanks guys.
Not really interested in rebuilding my wheels at the moment so looking to drop the weight from the tyres before new rims.

Easier to go from a floater to a JJ and still drop 1lb an end to go with the 180g tubes I've used for the past three years.

New rims will probably see the same saving again but can't be bothered with the hassle right now.

got the heavier Jims in 4.0 flava. running tubeless, so wanted slightly thicker sidewalls. came in at 1190g rather than 1090, but they roll way better than the Vee Bulldozer/Bud combo. Rolling on the road next to my mate on 2.4 Ardents, it didn't seem like I was having to pedal any more than he was.

Running tubeless makes a huge difference to rolling resistance too - I pulled about a dozen thorns from my tyre at the end of the season, none of which I noticed whilst riding.

to go with the 180g tubes

Yep, that's the ones.
No punctures in three years. Probably the best single upgrade per £ I've done on any bike.

Cheers have had some for a couple of months in 4.8 JJs they seem fine

just wondered if there were any others

You may have a look at the Kenda Juggernaut Pro 4" that comes in at about 800g.

Yeah, it seems like they're finally a) making it to shops and b) actually fit for purpose unlike the original press launch.

4.0 JJ is alright. Poor in mud and a little flimsy, I had to run higher pressures than i wanted to, to avoid flats. If you think of it as a big racing ralph you won't go far wrong. 4.8 is quite a lot better IMO and well worth the weight penalty- grippier, can run lower pressures, rolls pretty similiarly. Still not great in mud but I'm using one on the rear and it's working alright in a sort of "vaguely following the front" manner.

At the mo, I'm trying to decide between pulling the trigger on a set of 26x4.0 Jumbo Jims, or a set of 26x4.0 Kenda Juggernaut Pro.
But my biggest concern is the cost and their wear rate, if used for tarmac commuting duties, in addition to off-road fun.

So I think I'm going to order up a set of 26x3.5 On-One BSCs (re-badged Vee Speedsters) for ~£30 and possibly a set of 26x4.0 Missions as sacrificial lambs, along with some other bits in the current 40% PlanetX sale.

I was late to the party, reading about Schwalbe SV13Fs ~180g tubes coping with 4.0 fat tyres, but if they hold they are worth it over the ~390g SV13J (bought as spares) and the ~420g Vee tubes that came with my Wazoo.

Used sv13f for a while, should be ok with.4" tyres, may be a pump too far with 4.8"s