Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop
Hi all,
When i bought my bike (orange r8 pro) it came with these tyres in the 2.25 guise,
For the bike i find them massively over volumed, however they are a great tyre.
Does anyone know if there is much difference between the two volume wise? Is so
I will be fitting the smaller version.
Thanks
The 2.1" is a much smaller volume. It's also a slightly harder compound (62a v 60a) and a lighter, more fragile carcass (120tpi v 60 tpi).
they do a 2.1 in a 70a 60tpi. the 2.1 is just slightly smaller than a 2.35 minion. i personally would try 2.1 rear and leave the 2.25 front
Didn't realise they were selling R8's with 2.25" maxxis. It does strike me as on the big side for that bike (100mm XC Hardtail?)
What rims are they on?
I know orange (used to) supply complete bikes with largeish 2.25" maxxis on pretty narrow 17mm mavic rims, which would explain the 'massively overvolumed feeling'
ime 19mm mavic rims with 2.25" maxxis is on the limit (and 2.1"new/2.35"old on a 17mm)
You'll likely find the 62a 2.1" more expensive than the 60a 2.25" or 70a 2.1".
Supposidly the 62a has similar rolling resistance to the 70a and similar grip to the 60a. Though I'm going with what I remember of the marketting spiel
There on mavic 317's, yep thats the bike
My R8 with 317s had them on too. I have swaped to 2.1s and have suffered no loss of traction, lack of cushioning or whatever. I also think they suit the bike's looks better but that would be shallow of me so I won't mention it.
Not at all! Was there a massive difference in volume angus?
Not at all! Was there a massive difference in volume angus?