Conti Mountain King II 2.2 v 2.4 – Question from users of either

Home Forum Bike Forum Conti Mountain King II 2.2 v 2.4 – Question from users of either

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Conti Mountain King II 2.2 v 2.4 – Question from users of either
  • bowie278
    Member

    I found the 2.2 small Hora, if I bought them again I’d be going for 2.4.

    hora
    Member

    got it- have you used the older version too? What psi do you run them at?

    I had 2.4 MKII, they were a bit wondery at lower pressures in corners (rims were not particularly wide though ~19mm).
    Punctured all the time too, got rid after a month.

    New bike came with some MKII protection versions. I sold them on but the tyre has a much stronger carcass, should be less wondery i guess, but you want the black chilli compound if any.

    hora
    Member

    What did you replace with?

    2.4 measures about 52-56mm depending on pressure, Bontys XR4s have taken over and I prefer the transition on them on my narrowish rims.

    Been using nobby nics up front and ralph on the back since then, been happy with them on the dry stuff, not so keen with them on damp rocks/roots though.

    I had the first MK in 2.4 for a short while and found them as you describe. Didn’t track at all well, and tended to feel wandery, compared to my old faithful 2.3 Verticals anyway.

    I now have the MK MKII’s in 2.4 on Mavic EN 521’s and really like them. I have just invested / upgraded to the Black Chilli Protection so they stay be on until wear through completely. A friend of mine has the 2.2 on wider rims than me (14 year old Mavic D321’s)and they almost look the same.

    tinybits
    Member

    I’ve got the newer 2.2 black chilli’s, and they are 2.0 wide. So the same size as most manufactures 2.3’s.
    Find them very good.

    Edit – they are tall though, so more ‘cushioning’ allowing reasonably low pressures. Don’t ask me what that pressure is through as I don’t believe my pump!

    hora
    Member

    I had the old still MK 2.4 and at lower pressures found the tyre quite ‘loamy’/wandery’ as the carass was **** huge to the knobbles (small in comparison).

    How does the new MKII size up in real life? I’d rather go with the 2.2 if its a decent 2.2 (I currently run Maxxis 2.2 tyres and they are spot on volumewise).

    giantx4
    Member

    Ive just swapped from my summer combo of race king 2.2 rear & mountain king 2 2.2 front to the 2.2 mountainking on rear & 2.4 mountainking 2 up front!. Both running tubeless altho the balloon 2.4 is only a 2.4 stealbead .. Not tried it yet!.. Tomo night is time to ride & see!?

    hora
    Member

    I’ve got the newer 2.2 black chilli’s, and they are 2.0 wide. So the same size as most manufactures 2.3’s.
    Find them very good.

    Edit – they are tall though, so more ‘cushioning’ allowing reasonably low pressures. Don’t ask me what that pressure is through as I don’t believe my pump!

    The Bikeradar review says 2.2 is too narrow for the front:

    http://www.bikeradar.com/mtb/gear/category/components/tyres/mountain/product/review-continental-mountain-king-ii-22-protection-tyre-13-47236

    🙄

    el_creedo
    Member

    Get the 2.4’s – I have the 2.2 protections and they are great for grip, but not enough cushioning because they are narrow. They also pinch like a mofo (every other ride – obviously less of a problem if you are tubeless), so the wider carcass should help a bit there.
    It won’t be anywhere near the size of the MK1 2.4 – which is indeed, monstrous!

    I had 2.4 front and back and found it squirrelly on the back so now have a Rubber queen 2.4 on the rear find the mk great on the front with no issues and that’s on crossmax st rims which are a little narrow (17mm I think).

    tinybits
    Member

    ignore me – I’ve got rubber queens!

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)

The topic ‘Conti Mountain King II 2.2 v 2.4 – Question from users of either’ is closed to new replies.