Looking for something pretty enormous to be fair, not quite Surly Endomorph enormous, but big enough anyway… To go on a rigid fork with plenty of clearance. Oh, and it’s got to be light, so no 2.7″ Maxxis Dual Ply’s, Michelin Comp32’s (would be nice, but they’re 1700g each!), or Intense Intruders or the like. We’re talking folding sidewalls here, less than 1kg for certain (lighter if poss), reasonably fast rolling too, and it MUST be able to be used tubeless (so nothing to porous or loose fitting).

So far thoughts are thus…

Conti Rubber Queen 2.4 UST, heard these are big for a 2.4, but how big? And a bit expensive sadly…
Maxxis ADvantage 2.4 Folding. Seen one of these in the flesh and it was easily bigger than a 2.5 High Roller, more like a 2.7 in fact. Currently thinking this might be the way to go.
Maxxis Ardent 2.4 Folding. Same carcass as the Advantage (so I’m told, is this the case?), different tread pattern.
Bontrager Big Earl 2.5 Wet Folding. Had good experience with the wire bead DH version of this tyre before, is the folding one as good? Not the largest, but quite tall (which is the most important bit really).
WTB Dissent Race 2.5… Don’t know anything about it, but it’s £8 on CRC! Worth a pop? How big? Will it seal tubeless?
WTB Prowler Race 2.5… Same reasons as above.
Hutchinson Octopuss 2.5 UST. If I can find one! I remember a mate buying some of these a few years ago when we went to the alps, they were loads lighter than Michelin comp 16’s, and yet for a stated 2.5″ tyre they were more like a 2.8″ in any other make! Anyone able to help out here?
Michelin Wildgrip’r 2.4″ Advanced Tubeless. Don’t know much about this tyre, but recent Michelin offerings come up enormous for their quoted size, and it looks grippy enough yet fast rolling.

Any advances on that? Any input whatsoever?

Before anybody says it too, I’ve seen a couple of 2.4″ Schwalbe tyres, which would be a natural choice in the big/fast/light category, but they just ain’t big enough by some margin I’m afraid!

Maxxis do a 2.6 ardent i believe but it might only be dual ply.

Dual ply only by the looks of things calum, I had thought of that too, but it’s a 1250g tyre sadly!

Rubber Queen is often said to be big. Mine controversially measured 2.4 across for the 2.4 😉 But they’re tall, high volume. The standard one’s hard to seal up tubeless, mine leaked for a month.

My rigid’s got an odd 2.5 Nevegal in it, never seen one like it for sale- 600 grams, genuine 2.5, DTC compound so not that grippy but made up for by being mahooo-hooo-sive. If I knew where you could buy one, I’d recommend it.

Cheers Northwind, 2.5″ Nevegal available from CRC actually in Stick-E compound and folding bead. The problem is threefold though with Nevegals… 1. They’re BLOODY slow. 2. They’re not actually that grippy despite their looks 3. They have sidewalls of paper, last time I sealed one tubeless it looked like I was having a foam party in the kitchen so much leaked through the sidewalls!

How big is the 2.4 Rubber Queen by comparison? I’d probably stump up the cash for the UST version if I go this route…

I’ve been using standard nevegals as tubeless for a couple of years now, never had a problem with the sidewalls, except for the one I dropped a big crowbar on 😳 But yep 2.5 stick-e will be as slow as all hell, the 2.35’s slow enough.

Rubber Queen is a pretty similiar size- never had the 2 together but the RQ is pretty tall, the Nevegal’s slightly wider but not as tall. Probably very similiar volume

Curiosity compels me to ask why you want such a large tyre but worry about weight and rolling resistance?

Anyway, you might want to look at the kenda blue groove. Huge tyre in a 2.5, and they do a folding version which is not overly heavy. I’ve used it and it was surprisingly good. The michelin comp 16s were almost 2 kilos if I recall correctly so maybe not suitable. When I saw the thread title I immediately thought rubber queen 2.4, but frankly I wouldnt waste my time with them as they don’t offer enough puncture protection.

You might want to investigate Maxxis’ new range of enduro tyres. Can’t remember what they call them now (few beers in) but they are supposed to be like a 1.5 ply with extra tough sidewalls. Could be the ticket.

Curiosity compels me to ask why you want such a large tyre but worry about weight and rolling resistance?

Going to give this riding rigid malarkey a go for the first time in 16 years. Had a go on SSStu’s bike fitted with 2 Surly Larry tyres (3.8″ each) and it was quite a laugh, and though they’re massively wide, they’re not massively tall compared to some bigger “normal” 26″ tyres. The comfort comes from the height of course.

Hence thinking of trying a “semi-semi fat” bike 😉

Was looking for a Kenda Blue Groove actually as I know they’re better than the Nevegal, can’t find one in a 2.5″ anywhere except for wire bead DH casing. Though by the sounds of things, the Conti Rubber Queen 2.4″ is taller anyway, as I’m pretty sure the Maxxis Advantage 2.4″ is too. Michelin comp16’s are a no no, I’ve used 2.5’s on a DH bike in the past, grip like shit to a blanket but they’re over 1500g each yeah. The comp32 2.8″ tyre is even worse, though it’s amazing what you can get away with with one of them on the front of your bike!

Stick a Maxxis Highroller on and just ride the bloody bike and have a larf. The obsession with tyres on here is pathetic.

Stick a Maxxis Highroller on and just ride the bloody bike and have a larf. The obsession with tyres on here is pathetic.

LOL

No obsession, I’m just trying to see if there’s something out there that meets my needs/wants/desires. High Rollers, great tyres as they are, are very narrow for their stated width, and only the dual ply come in 2.5 and 2.7″ widths so are way too heavy for what is essentially a lightweight XC bike.

Anyway, is there any harm in experimentation? I’m no serial tyre swapper (I tend to try a few, find something I like, then stick with that til it wears out), but what does it matter if those who are it makes them happy?

coogan – Member

Stick a Maxxis Highroller on and just ride the bloody bike and have a larf. The obsession with tyres on here is pathetic.

For rigid it can make a big difference… Stick on a 2.35 Highroller and you get a much harder ride than you would with even a proper 2.35 never mind something bigger. But if you go heavy on a rigid then you lose a lot of what makes them fun- might as well fit a fork, if you’ve got a kilo of tyre

I’ll suggest bonty xr4 team issue. I had the 2.2s on my fuel ex and had to take them off as the rear was chewing the swing arm. The front didn’t leave much clearance around the brace either. They also do a 2.35 or 2.4, can’t remember which it is off the top of my head – they must be ginormous! They’re light and tubeless ready. I really liked them, shame they’re so big

Bontrager big earls wets are great, roll pretty well, grip well, good volume. I have used mine for both XC and hardtail DH, although I think mine are 2.3.

Once you’ve ridden fat, you can’t go back…

You know you really need a fatbike.

I keep saying this but no-one seems to listen…

Syncros Point’n’Chute 2.5s less than 900g. Very fast rolling, can be used all year round as run at 25-30psi they flex the mud off. A good indicator that they are hard centre compound is after 2 years the centre blocks on my rear still had the sipes on them!
I used them ghetto tubeless with no problems and now have them on No-tubes rims and they snap on the bead with a bang!
In short supply now, only ebay Germany have the 2.5 size.

If I can get hold of a replacement, you can have my almost brand new Specialized Eskar Control 2Bliss 2.3 tyre if you’d like it? It’s huge! my bike came with 2.4 Nobby Nic tyres but this supposedly 2.3 is too wide for the rear (it rubs on the stays) and only just goes under the arch of my Reba forks.
If you can collect if from South Manchester or Peak District area, you can have it for free. Hateful big fat bastard thing!

I think tyres are almost the only thing worth getting excited about.

The differences between brakes and gear systems are small and only really show up when you are say shifting or breaking

With tyres the diffrences is always there and the diffrences can be huged.

Sorry not advice but I’ve decided to come out as in favour of tyres threads

I’ll suggest bonty xr4 team issue. I had the 2.2s on my fuel ex and had to take them off as the rear was chewing the swing arm. The front didn’t leave much clearance around the brace either. They also do a 2.35 or 2.4, can’t remember which it is off the top of my head – they must be ginormous! They’re light and tubeless ready. I really liked them, shame they’re so big

Bought a pair of 2.2’s for my Maverick, and likewise, the rear touched the swingarm so had to take it off. And they do a 2.35″ yes, but really, whilst it’s big, it’s not big enough still! I need MAHOOSIVE!

I keep saying this but no-one seems to listen…

Syncros Point’n’Chute 2.5s less than 900g

Just checking out German ebay now… How big are they for a 2.5? Similar to Maxxis High Roller, bigger, smaller? Really I’m after enormous!

Hmmmmmmmmmm… Just noticed a couple of German shops are advertising a 2.6″ Maxxis Ardent with Folding beads, and sub 900g weight! But no stock just yet…

If I can get hold of a replacement, you can have my almost brand new Specialized Eskar Control 2Bliss 2.3 tyre if you’d like it?

Cheers, if I lived near I’d pop round and have it off you anyway, sadly I’m about 120 miles away… But to be fair, though the Eskar is pretty big, we’re talking in a different league of bigness here is what I’m after! None of the tyres I’ve already listed would even hope to fit under the arch of a Reba fork for instance…

Surly a big mahoosive tyre thats under a kilo will have week sidewalls and not be a great tubeless tyre?
Big earl wets are great in 2.35 but are fairly heavy, doubt the 2.5 would be under 1kg and probably not big enough for you.
I have seen some fairly big spesh tyres but dont recall what they were called, maybe the ones above but again sound too small.

monksie – Member

If I can get hold of a replacement, you can have my almost brand new Specialized Eskar Control 2Bliss 2.3 tyre if you’d like it? It’s huge! my bike came with 2.4 Nobby Nic tyres but this supposedly 2.3 is too wide for the rear

Did you ever measure it? 2.3 Eskars come up just slightly smaller than 2.3. it’s just that we’re so used to inaccurate tyre claims that when a tyre’s almost as big as it’s supposed to be, it seems mentally oversized…

The Racing Ralphs were the widest 2.35″ tyres I’ve measured, next were Rampages.

(29ers)

The Duro is the biggest I’ve seen other than a Larry/Endomorph

The Syncros 2.5 is too big to go through the rear of a 2007 Yeti 575 without the outer blocks being trimmed. That’s an indication of size. I fitted a 2.35 in the end but if my new Mega is wide enough at the rear, a 2.5 is going back on.
They roll fast, the sidewalls have stood up to Peaks riding for a year or more and they go tubeless like they were designed for it. They don’t clog in winter (obviously, clay is going to be trouble for any tyre!) and on snow they float quite well.
I pump them up to 60 for the ride to the trail and then drop to 25-30 for the rough stuff and then reinflate for the ride home. (I don’t have a car).

Did I ever measure it?
Yes. I used the very scientific measurement of taking the nicely fitted with loads of room Nobby Nic off and put The Fat Eskar Tyre Of Too Much Girth on. It did my chain stays no good at all.
I’ve now got it on the front of the same bike where it is still The Fat Eskar Tyre Of Too Much Girth, Weight And Draginess.
I hate the thing and would rather ride round here on 1.5 City Slicks than this hideous thing.
It’s going in the classifieds as a freebie to collect as soon as I get something that does fit.
Mentally oversized? It did my head in when I realised it didn’t fit and I’d wasted £24;00.

Bonty XR4 2.35 Team issue. Ticks ya boxes.

Any ideas if a Syncros Point’n’Chute 2.5 is bigger than a Maxxis Ardent 2.4?