[Closed] tires...high roller or nevegal?

Highroller for me. On both bikes all year round up here in Scotland/going abroad. Only tried the Kendas once and thought they were utter guff.

Really...so do they roll pretty well? and what kind of setup do you have them on? if you don't mind me asking.

Nobby Nics better in mud/ soft stuff, High Rollers if you want durability/ grip on harder surfaces.

High Roller on the front, good for grip but not very fast rolling which is why I have an Aspen on the rear which I bought for the summer but it hasn't been dry since July and I can't be bothered taking it off. My mate swapped his Nevegals for Trailrakers when it turned muddy.

rubber queens all year. high rollers aren't great at shedding mud.

GW will get upset at me if I recommend a Nevegal

It depends. Both good. Neither's fast though. Bear in mind they're not the same size, the HR comes up way undersized, the Nev is bang on. Assuming the sticky compounds... The HR's faster most of the time, the Nev is IMO all round grippier but it does vary, HR finds more grip in wet loam, Nev better on rock. HR clears sticky mud better, both clog a bit

To me the Nev is more predictable/consistent and the better allrounder but not everyone agrees. I've a feeling the HR's got more cornering ability but I find it harder to trust, the Nev might actually be less good when canted over but I can get more out of it.

So it's kind of push and shove and neither will kill you. Oh and just to mess you up, the Minion's pretty similiar too. (I like Nobby Nics but found them pretty poor in mud, way worse than either of these. But a lot faster and very grippy for their speed)

I used to have high rollers and whilst they are really confidence inspiring on rough stuff and corner beautifully, I found them unbelievably slow, the bike felt really lethargic and dead. I had a 2.1 nevegal on the front for a bit and it was good, though felt a bit nervous comapred to the high roller. I wouldn't lose sleep over it anyway, you'll be fine with either.

I've used both and found the highroller to be less draggy, but only marginally, they're neither fast rolling. overall, I'm sticking to the Highroller in future as they also seemed to perform better in other areas (possibly trying some nobby nics with tubeless). some people recommend highroller front and advantage rear.

Thanks for all the input so far, I would almost run a 2.1 in the back but last time I tried that my terrain shredded them no matter the psi...
@ Fortunateson09: I've looked at the Nobby Nics, but I've heard they get a bit sketchy when things get wet...
@ peachos: I've looked at rubber queens as well, but thought they looked a little slow, tho not any slower looking than the High rollers I guess, lol

keep the suggestions coming!

Personally I wouldn't bother with Nevegals in rocky terrain, absolutely shredded my old ones at Inners, 3 sidewall gashes and 2 holes in the tread in 2 hours.

Edit - I felt the 2.4 F, 2.2R Rubber Queens that replaced a 2.35 F, 2.1 R Nevegals were actually faster, subjective though, I admit.

those rubber queens are a fair bit lighter aren't they?

Out of interest, why does nobody ever mention WTB tyres? I tried a Weirwolf on the front a few years back and can't remember it being that bad, although I hadn't tried many others to be fair.
I sold the bike it was on and now use a Minion on the front of my Meta which I find far better than a Highroller.

I think they're both around the 750g mark, I doubt its lighter given that the RQ is visibly larger than the Nevegal.

No punctures in nearly a year since I started using them too. *touches wood*

My rubber queens (2.4, black chili) were around 840g. Not too shocking considering the size, they're not much wider but they're [i]tall.[/i] Faster than either the HR or Nevegal too. But, less grippy, a bit unpredictable in the wet... And just not very good in mud, the size was too big for them to cut but the knobs were too small to shovel I think. All the weight of a huge tyre, all the grip and rolling resistance of a smaller tyre. Still the volume is nice. [i]Almost[/i] a really good tyre.

Oh Nevegal weight is all over teh shop btw, I have a 2.35 that weighed 640g and another that weighed 770g. Oh and a weird singleply 2.5 that's 620g. Yes I know i've just admitted to weighing tyres, sorry.

I've used both in 2.35 and much prefer the High Rollers. The Nev's in DTC compound I found, pretty much grip the same, but have so much drag it's not funny. I tend to use a super tacky up front and maxx pro on the rear. Good for all round conditions unless it's really muddy. Everyone has their own preference though for tyres!

@ swavis: I've always wondered that too, the prowler works well as a front, though a bit porky, not as good rear tho in my opinion...I'd like to find a faster high(ish) voulume for the rear, just looking for some options, nothing of wtb's is of my liking for the rear.

why does nobody ever mention WTB tyres? I tried a Weirwolf on the front a few years back and can't remember it being that bad

Dunno, a few years back you couldn't move for WTB Weirwolf recommendations, which I though was surprising about, as they were the worst tyre I'd ever tried.
Personnally I'm taking a RQ off the front of my fun bike and replacing with a NN. My XC bike has Mud-X on the front and a summer tyre on the back (it works surprisingly well), and will stay like that until the trail dry up properly.

I currently have 2.2 RQs on one bike and High Rollers on the other.

Currently running a 2.5 and 2.35 HR (UST) on one bike, but other wheelset will probably see a 2.35 HR and a 2.1 Larsen (UST) going on it soon. The wheels swap between a HT and a susser.

I've run 2.4 and 2.2 RQs and love 'em, especially in rockier areas. HRs are also great tyres unless it's claggy, when I'd run proper mud tyres. Last year in the dry I was running a RQ on the front and a Race King on the rear - the RK is quick, but not great in the wet (which is why the Larsen is going on for the Spring).

Overall I don't think you can go massively wrong with either outside deep winter.

lol @ NW 😆

High rollers for me. I've tried kenda nevergrips and really didn't get on with them - poor life, much less grip than the high rollers and prone to punctures.

If you can tolerate fairly poor pure mud performance may I suggest Ardents?

I am a big fan of Maxxis tyres and have ridden Minions, HRs, Advantage and with different combinations.

They are all good tyres but i am a recent convert to Ardents which roll faster than the above but still give the confidence in the corners when canted over. But they are not as good in the mud.

ps Advantages are pretty good all rounders, I would not recommend the folding ones if you are tough on side walls.

I've fallen out with nevegals of late. Too many ripped sidewalks. HR's too draggy. Spesh Eskar control 2.3's are my flavour if the month. Cheap too.

bikeryder85 - they are 2.35 super tacky front and 2.35 60a rear. I'm not one for blasting up climbs, but never found them slow and they climb fine. Pointing down, they and Minions are the best I've used. Nobby Nics as mentioned, again, I found utter, utter guff! Everyone likes different things really.

Panaracer Rampage 2.35's - tread look like Nevegals but IMO a better all round tyre (and I have both)

Ive tried both and found I had to run the HR at a lower pressure - 30ish instead of the 35ish for the NVG's.

Once lent over the HR gripped, but getting that far over freaked me a bit at first, whereas on the NVG's they felt more progressive.

Both fine though.

@ iainc I've looked at the rampage (it was at #3 on my list) how does it roll?

I have used Nevegals for years and have never had a problem with them. I keep reading about the sidewalls but have never had a issue but then again I ride mostly around the North Downs and the occasional trip to Wales and the Alps. From what I have read and heard there seems to be a difference between OE and aftermarket Nevegals with the latter being better. Then again it might all be nonsense!!

in my experience, nevegals are super grippy but wear down really quickly where as super tacky high rollers are great to, longer lasting and also on special at crc atm for less than £20 so i think the answers are there for your question. also got a mate who's got the new cg tyres and loves them but it depends on your riding. i use 2.35 f/r high rollers for everyday riding and free riding and high rollers 2.5 super tacky for d/h and techy free riding which are great but stick to the floor like glue so if pedaling really get on your tits and make it hard work.

Thanks for all of the input everyone, tho sadly so far I think I'm more confused than ever, haha. I'm thinking maybe I'll keep my slow rolling prowler up front, then try a 2.2 in the rear?? heck idk...this whole tire thing has gotten really complicated..... 🙁

is there a conspirasy with tyres.... wot is it with tyres these days... why do they not last as long '... last year i wore out a few 'nevegals' and 'nobby nic' in next to no time at all... and im only a lite weight rider... its the same with everything you biy today : they dont make anything last ! 😉

high rollers are my tire of choice for all year use.they are best for pushing hard into corners and you can feel the tyres biting in.
the nevegals are a rounder tyre with a decent even grip with a smother feel and a predictable breakaway but the high rollers are much more fun and you can really make them work for you. i use 2.35 60a single ply folding rear a 2.35 super tacky front for extra grip but it does drag more.
also the nevegals are way bigger ,have ridiculously weak side walls.
2 minions dhf are also good and have slightly better straightline grip than the high rollers, but the high roller just beat them on overall feel for me.the minion dhr isnt good though. use 2 fronts.

mr bump do you use "2.35 super tacky front for extra grip" on the front tyre ...(would have thort it mite be better for the rear.... 😉

bikeryder85 - Member
@ iainc I've looked at the rampage (it was at #3 on my list) how does it roll?

It's pretty good - not as sticky as some, I tend to use it all tyr round on my 5, although when it's gloopy I ride the hardtail. I have tried quite a few tyres and for natural, often rooty and rocky stuff they are great. Also definately faster than Nevegals for the likes of Glentress type stuff

Cheers

For 2 yrs I had a UST Nevegal 2.1 and it was fantastic, really grippy on most stuff, not too heavy or overtly slow / draggy and no issues with longevity but maybe being UST it had bertter sidewalls. lasy year i ordered two non UST ones for a new bike and both tyres had staple holes in side walls so not great runtubeless and replacements were the same so i put on a pair of 2.35 NN and they have performed great too but they do have weak side walls I think but riding mainly in the south that is less of an issue. I'd be nervous of them if I rode rough rocks alot and HRs do seem to have fleshier sidewalls..

I have a 2.35 HR on another wheel and its pretty good but not as grippy in Moab as I thought it would be. Somewhat surprisingly it has been really good in mud on various occasions this winter (Salisbury Plain challennge for example). I have a 2.1 HR on the front sometimes and thats not good at all in loose stuff like say Thetford.

I find Shwalbe tyes are best for inflating on Stans rims FWIW.

@ elaine anne
extra traction from a tyre at the front is benificial for a few reasons, the front as less weight distributed to it, so as less traction, a rear end wash out is usually saveable but a front is not,and if you use a softer tyre on the rear it increases the rolling resistance of the bike more than if its on the front.

yeah i understand the rolling increase for the rear but it wont be as grippy surely.. ....
looking to change my rear tyre in the next 2 months...at the moment i have a thick tread kenda tyre for muddy conditions....cant rememeber where i got it from (it just says on the tyre (Kenda)...nothing else... i hd it on my hardtail bike for a while (cant ruddy wear the thing out (lol).... wot mite be best for use around the south pennines grit/peat conditons,,,... i have Kenda blue groove up front at the moment.

anyone seen these b4 or are they new....

http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=59206

the main reason is the front wheel wash out. if your a competent rider rear wheel washout are saveable and rear wheel drifts can be used to square off corner or quick direction changes. climbing grip is never really an issue to me because it all about weight positioning.
high roller are my tyre choice for all terrain,but you have to push them hard to get the most out of them.
if you want a ok grip tyre that isnt going to be used hard the nevegal is ok ,but its not a tyre i would use again.

I quite liked my Nevegals, they felt grippy and confidence inspiring, if a tad draggy. The only issue was the condom thick sidewalls which are a weak spot.

I've also used Panaracer Cinders, High Roller/Minion, Small Block Eights and Ardents, all in 2.25-2.35. The SB8s lack any kind of braking grip whatsoever, the Cinders were draggy, the Minions clogged at the first hint of mud but the surprise of the lot were the Ardents, which make for an excellent rear tyre.

As soon as drier weather arrives, I'll be pairing an Ardent with a Minion or High Roller up front to see how that combination fares.

I hated my Kenda Nevegals, super sketchy at the likes of Whinaller/ae/mabie/keilder etc ie the wet slatey & rooty conditions that you mention ( we dont do dry weather in Cumbria! )

Moved to single ply high rollers. 42 super tacky upfront and a maxxpro 60a on the rear and have honestly never looked back.

@ pjm1974
yeah i had the same problem with small block eights.also true that minions clog more than high rollers.
i was also considering the ardent r ,high roller f combo but ive been told that a ardent 2.25 is larger than a H.R 2.35. not too keen on having a larger rear tyre than front, can anyone confirm sizing and as anyone got this combo.

Yes, the Ardent 2.25" is larger than the HR (or Minion) 2.35". I asked this on here myself a few weeks ago, and apparently the way to tell for Maxxis is that anything 2.25" is the new, larger casing, anything 2.35" is the old, smaller one.

thats a bit strange,it would have been better to make them the same size but give the new ones a true size.at least they would work better in combo with existing maxxis tyres.

Nevegals are available in a "SWS" version: Side Wall Shield. Works well with a Stan's tubeless conversion and has eliminated sidewall cuts for me (had been an issue previously). Haven't tried any other version, but the sidewall protection stops the Stan's fluid leaking. I've not noticed any issues with running 20psi front 30psi rear (2.35 & 2.1 Fr & 2.1Rr) regarding rolling over etc. suspect the tape stiffens them up. Where did I ride them: predominately Chiltern Hills - perpetually soft, so needed something to dig in & Afan trail centre, I'm not into changing tyres, so have to be all round performer. I've always managed to go quite fast enough to keep up/scare myself so haven't been aware of any unwelcome rolling resistance. Would a better roller not be a compromise on bite from the knobs? Which (if you need that bite) is where the fun starts for a an all terain bike. I always seemed to find somewhere that I was glad of the bite, even in the "dry" in the UK. I like to push hard all the time and not mince over fun bits for a bit of extra speed over the easy bits. I like the idea if plenty of knobs to protect the carcass too. Mine always seem to get pretty cut up.