[Closed] Maxis Ardent

It's not a wide tyre, I run a 2.4 and that's got a bit more volume. 2.25 definitely comes up a bit narrow.

Nah they'll stay small, ok tyres in the dry (better in 29 than 650b)
On one smorgasbord is a good cheap alternative if looking elsewhere

Ardents come up pretty narrow, my 650b bike came with them and the tyres looked lost.

They're not a bad rear tyre, it's probably the wrong time of year to fit them, though. We've had a lot of rain this summer, I expect an early and wet Autumn, so I'd be putting my Ardent away until Spring - unless you live somewhere with good drainage.

Thanks everyone. I find it bad when tyres are advertised as 2.25 and come up 2.1...they are going back.

Thanks everyone. I find it bad when tyres are advertised as 2.25 and come up 2.1...they are going back.

2.25 always looked a bit narrow but are great fast summer tyres for me with enough grip. Much prefer the 2.4/5 as it's got a much deeper tread than the smaller one and is an ideal compromise rear when you want rolling and enough grip.

Tyre sizes are all over the place, even same brand. New 2.3 maxxis tyres can be bigger than older 2.35. Unless I wanted skinnies I'd be looking at 2.3 or more for maxxis tyres.

It also depends on the rim width on how they set up.

I have a Ardent 2.4 it comes up huge! Easily as large in volume as my old conti rubber queens/Trail kings in 2.4. Sounds like you need the next size up.

Will the Maxis become broader after some running??...

Why would they change shape unless you change pressure or perhaps rim width?

A lot of tyres do grow over time, it's most noticable with fatbikes/plus bikes but sometimes it's notable even on a skinny.

IME Maxxis have consistently come up small for as long as I can remember.

I've just built a SS play bike out of old (really old) spares and stuck an old Butcher 2.3 DH on the front and High Roller 2.5 dual ply on the back. The Maxxis is smaller.

Maxxis sizes... My 2.35 and 2.5 swamp things were exactly the same size. My 2.7 highroller was 2.5 and my 2.5 highroller was 2.35, the 2.35 was about 2.2.

Likewise conti, if there's a 2.4 and a 2.2 version of a tyre it seems fair to assume that if you want a 2.2 wide tyre, you shouldn't have to buy the 2.4.

A lot of tyres do grow over time, it's most noticable with fatbikes/plus bikes but sometimes it's notable even on a skinny.

Really? I've never noticed this on any bike type I've used. Maybe I don't keep my tyres for long enough.

How much are we talking and which bit stretches? Obviously not the bead. And are there certain brands that are more prone to i?

My experience with Ardents has been threefold.

All 29"

My 2.25" "regular" Ardents are a little undersized
My 2.4" "EXO" Ardents are disappointingly undersized
My 2.2" Ardent "Race" is almost as big as my 2.4"

😕

On checking, Ardents I've got are actually 2.25. Not been a concern that they're skinny. Both on 26 and 650b. It was that or 2.4 which seemed a bit big.

Running them on rear they work well with Minions up front, which I run 2.3 and they come up a little larger.

Anyway, digging out that helpful tyre database site for FYI...

http://www.reifenbreiten-datenbank.de/reifen.html

In German, but you can use browser / google translate tools, or easy enough just get the gist anyway.