Conti Rubber Queens…..
My 2.4 measured up 2.4 inches across, controversially (on a Flow, if memory serves). Tall, though, so a very big volume It’s not so much that they’re massive, it’s more that we’re used to being lied to by tyre companies so accurately sized tyres seem huge.
On the other hand, 2.35 Highroller is titchy- as bigdan says, smaller than a 2.2 Rubber Queen. If you don’t have masses of clearance round a 2.35, then you probably don’t have space for a 2.4 RQ.
I found them a bit underwhelming tbh but some folks rate them. Not very good in the wet, bit unreliable in corners, but brilliant in a straight line.Posted 5 years ago
Cheers chaps – sounds like the 2.2 may be the way to go.
I’ve ditched some Michelin Hots which were a 2.5, bigger than a High Roller but not by that much.
A lot of people seem to rave about them in Black Chilli compound, so figured that I’d get a set from Germany. I’m looking for a do it all tyre for the SX Trail that works when I drag it round a trail centre, but also works when I’m mucking about on the local DH runs.Posted 5 years ago
A lot of people seem to rave about them in Black Chilli compound, so figured that I’d get a set from Germany. I’m looking for a do it all tyre for the SX Trail that works when I drag it round a trail centre, but also works when I’m mucking about on the local DH runs.
That’s why I love mine. Handled trail centres with aplomb, and great on the likes of the FOD DH area.Posted 5 years agogetonyourbikeMember
I’m also not really a fan of the Contis. They suited trail centre stuff perfectly but let go too early in the corners. I’ve moved back to tyres Minion DHF, Maxx Pros, 2.5 front and 2.35 rear and there’s so much more grip and when you do stretch them past their limits it isn’t sudden.
Yeh, I’m not that impressed with RQs, Minions are where it’s at!Posted 5 years ago
I used to rave about Minions when I lived in Sheffield (I preferred them to High Rollers), but fell out of love with them when I moved further south. They just didn’t seem to work as well at Style Cop, and I moved to High Rollers.
Reckon I’ll still give them a shot. If I hate them, I’ll just sell them on and go back to Maxxis (although even they seem crazy expensive these days).Posted 5 years agosailor74Member
2.2 Queens measure up to a similar size as a 2.5 Highroller.
2.4 Queen is more like a 2.7 HR
As already mentioned the Queens do tend to let go early. A Minion/Highroller gives much more cornering grip at the expense of rolling resistance. The Queens roll so much faster and being a much higher profile they roll over stuff better as well.
If the Queen had a more pronounced shoulder it would be great. As it is its just ok.Posted 5 years ago
I’ve decided that I’m going to purchase a set of Rubber Queens and was pretty set on getting the 2.4’s, but a lot of people say they are mahoosive. So, I was just wondering how they size up to say a 2.35 High Roller (I know they are going to be larger, but based on the stated size it shouldn’t be vast).
My Z150’s don’t have masses of clearance so I am starting to think that I may be better off with the 2.2 black chilli version.
Cheers for any help.Posted 5 years agoboxxer7Member
I’m running a pair of 2.4 RQ black chilli and they are very very big think 2.7 maxxis, they are a great tyre very grippy and unbelivable on wet roots and rocks but mine are deforming really badly my front one is nearly at the point of being unrideable now, which for a £50 tyre isn’t on.
It’s a really common problem having searched on google. If you ride alot of jumps and ride pritty hard I wouldn’t recommend them any more great grip but something isn’t right with the casings as they don’t stay straight if any side loading is put through them. I will be looking at Schwable hans dampfs next once they give up all togetherPosted 5 years agoZoolanderMember
MindmapPosted 5 years ago
I have some 2.2 ust rq’s used but plenty of life left going in the for sale forum in a couple of days time, if you fancy some cheap before buying new. They are comIng off a brand new five in favour of something that I’m more used to tyre wise. Email Daniel-power at hotmail.co.uk if you are interested – I can always arrange pics.gingerssMember
I have some 2.2 RQ BC editions and they seem really good. Loads of grip on most surfaces, and very smooth rolling. I’ve not had them on for long so can’t really comment on wear, but suggestions of them deforming does concern me. If it happens to mine they’ll be back for a refund!
I don’t think they’re quite as bad in the mud as people make out. They’re certainly better than the High Rollers but maybe not so good as something like a Fire XC. I’d consider them to not be a mud tyre, but get away-able with for the odd bit of gloop.Posted 5 years agospecialkneesMember
I have them on my 456 (steel original) and love them.
People say some daft things about them letting go. cant see that, its just a tyre, a big fat burly heavy brute of a tyre.
Steel bead ones are made from Rhino skin, impossible to puncture, big volume.
Perfect for Alps.
Love em.Posted 5 years ago
Zoolander – I’ve dropped you an e-mail re the tyres.
Cheers for you help guys…..the 2.2’s are going on at some point. There is also quite a useful weight saving over my current High Rollers which is good (my SX Trail needs to go on a bit of a diet…. bye bye Diabolus cranks and Marz Z150’s).Posted 5 years ago
The topic ‘Conti Rubber Queens…..’ is closed to new replies.