Forum search & shortcuts

Trailraker 1.95 bes...
 

[Closed] Trailraker 1.95 best mud tyre ever???

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 
[#1310178]

I Love them!!! SO Good! do you know of any better? ❓


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 10:49 pm
Posts: 71
Free Member
 

They're nowt special IMO, Mud X thrashes it as an all round winter tyre, whilst the 1.5" Schwalbe Blark Shark is wildly superior in proper mud. TRs lack the side lugs to be any good in anything other than mud, but are too wide and prone to clagging.

Both also weigh less, and work better tubeless!


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 10:55 pm
Posts: 3095
Full Member
 

Maxxis MOFO's?
great on mud, liability cornering on wet tarmac


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 10:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

njee20 - will have to give a 1.5" Schwalbe Blark Shark go sometime, stick one on the back and a half worn trailracker on the front may be a good combo!?!


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Tr's are ok, just seem a bit slow rolling compared to mud x's, they prob have more traction in really sloppy sections but I think on balance they are less accomplished overall


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

off camber, a TR is astounding. i remember when i first got them i was blown away but i think the mud-x feels less sketchy on the wet stone. both are amazing really arent they


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:06 pm
 br
Posts: 18125
Free Member
 

Trailraker last year, Mud X this - TR better for real mud, but Mud X better as a 'winter' tyre.


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:08 pm
Posts: 7872
Free Member
 

I like em for Peak mud and clag. The sidewalls are a bit fragile when it gets rocky but as a real winter tyre for real winter conditions, they are ace. I don't use em in trailcentres or rooty stuff though so they may be crap at that...

In what way are Mud X's better and in what conditions? Sorry that sounds a bit arguementative... just want to know why I should change when my TR sidewalls finally pop... 🙂


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:08 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

I found them brilliant in deep mud but a bit too squirmy on rocks and roots and haven't used them since last winter. Having a go with Kenda Nevegals which seem a decent all-rounder so far.


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:19 pm
Posts: 71
Free Member
 

Mud Xs are much more rounded than TRs, so they work far better on rocks/roots etc where TRs just skip off.

They're also designed to run tubeless, I use mine at 20-25psi a lot of the time, gives tonnes of grip in most conditions.

As I said before though, if you're only going to encounter proper clag (think Mayhem or SiTS) the Black Shark is a better option.


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:23 pm
 Nick
Posts: 3693
Full Member
 

I love my TR 1.95s


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:26 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

You are all wrong , of course .
Conti cross country 1.5s .


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:28 pm
 nonk
Posts: 18
Free Member
 

conti edge are ok as a not totaly mud tyre.


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:32 pm
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

Biggest problem with naming the best mud tyre 'ever' is that they don't make mud the same all over the country 😕


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:32 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

Conti cross country 1.5s was thinking about them for the single speed. they ok on road?


 
Posted : 09/02/2010 11:36 pm
 igm
Posts: 11874
Full Member
 

they don't make mud the same all over the country

Perhaps we need European standard mud? Quick someone ring Brussels...


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 12:13 am
Posts: 7872
Free Member
 

what tyres for riding through brussels and other brassicas?


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 12:14 am
Posts: 8867
Full Member
 

trailrakers are awesome. winter trails can be ridden with summer confidence. mm-mmmmmmm.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 12:15 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

The Maxxis Medusa in 1.8" eXCeption flavour is also better in really sticky mud a la Mayhem/SITS too, and weighs less than the 1.95" TrailRaker too, I think....


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 12:18 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Tootled around today for a few hours on these:
Medusa 2.0 LUST up front
Half worn trailraker 1.95 that I haven't got round to ghettoing on the back.
The mud was mostly either frozen or drained though, but they've been happy in the rest of the winter slop. They roll pretty well too.
I've used Mud-x's as well. They're fantastic as a winter trail centre tyre but only OK in deep loamy mud. Piss weak sidewalls though.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:07 am
Posts: 8766
Full Member
 

Constant riding through gloopy mud then TR's are very good but for more typical winter riding (i.e. patches of mud, some rocks/roots, hard ground etc.) then Mud-X's are far better IME.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 9:02 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Exactly what FuzzyWuzzy said - I replaced my TRs with Mud-Xs a couple of years ago. I ride them through the year now - they even work well enough in the dry.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 9:04 am
Posts: 35125
Full Member
 

I use tr my regular riding mate uses bonty mud x we both seem to manage in the winter ok


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 9:08 am
Posts: 7935
Free Member
 

Another to echo Fuzzy wuzzy's comments here. Trail rakers are just a bit too mud specific, resulting in them being to osketchy on wet rock and roots for me.

The Mud-X is much better for all other winter conditions, except for thick, loamy mud, where it lacks the penetration of the taller tread that the trail raker has.

I mourn the loss of the mighty IRC Mud Mad TBH. That was better than either.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 11:04 am
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

I mourn the loss of the mighty IRC Mud Mad TBH

Curently got a pair [F & R specific] on one of my bikes; great here in the FoD in the wet, non-claggy mud we get. Bit hairy on wet grassy cambers though 😯


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Conti 1.5's or Black Shark muds (although sadly discontinued now) are awesome when its really sticky & roll pretty well too-just not comfortable.
Maxxis Medusa 1.8's for me as a compromise


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:16 pm
Posts: 14707
Free Member
 

TR's ace through proper mud, but by god I wonder if there really worth it as their so draggy everywhere else!
Couldn't imagine using one on the front though, mud-x up front here.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:19 pm
Posts: 299
Full Member
 

Prefer my TR 1.95s to my old Mud Mads. Much more consistent traction.

The Mud Mads were good for making ghetto ice tyres, though. Every knobble had a pre-drilled hole in the top 🙂 Must have been from the moulding or something.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:39 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I've been happy with 2.1 TRs on my H/T for most of the past 12 months, even on the rockier stuff ....BUT.... the sidewall gave up at the weekend on my back tyre "in big style" and I was faced with a walk back from the foot of Dubbs to Ambleside 😳
TR sidewalls in std form certainly would not inspire me with sufficient confidence to go tubeless.

2 off MudX currently on order - will try these as ghetto.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:43 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Conti cross country 1.5s .

HA!

What you want is a 1.3" Hutchinson cross-comp...

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:50 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I would say that 2.2 maxxis wetscreams have ultimate mud grip.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 1:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Once more you are all wrong......the best and ONLY mud tyre is one off these.
( )
dugasts are and tubs are the way forward..nothing compares 20 psi and jobs a good un.
Bruce


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 2:01 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Anyone want a pair of one ride old 2.1 folding Trailrakers? £35 the pair...


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 2:15 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

All you Mud-x lovers - What is the difference between these and ACX's I like running?
When I looked I could barely tell them apart.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 2:19 pm
Posts: 7935
Free Member
 

Spacings are a little wider, sipes are diffrent on the new ACX. On the older AC and ACX, the only difference was the spacing. Still got a set of half decent ACs in the garage actually - they're good too.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 2:26 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

i like the 2.1 tubeless better as i can run them at low pressures with a larger footprint


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 6:12 pm
Posts: 3384
Free Member
 

irc mudmad for the schloompy stuff as opposed to the clouty/claggy stuff.

Shame they don't make them anymore, or appear to have a direct replacement either.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 7:33 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Mudmonster , yea . The conti 1.5s will take a bit of pressure and roll ok . I've used em for a cycloX -ey race I did , ( HTN 1.5 ) , and they were ace.I was on a cannondale Rize BTW . Bonkers combination.
Then ,I used em for a few months hoofing about up Rivi on my HT. Great .
Only on really rocky drops were they a bit too skinny , I thought .

I run em with Latex tubes , which puncture less , apparently .

Oh , I have a nearly new set of IRC Mudmads , too . Bit heavy . DHs.

No


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 8:11 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Just gone from TRs to MudX and have to say that in thick, deep mud, the TR is better, but overall, the Mud X suits mixed conditions and general winter use.


 
Posted : 10/02/2010 8:47 pm