A worn MudX and Jones ACX? Looks like basically the same pattern but bigger volume? Are the knobs lower profile than a new MudX?
Fancy something with a bit more volume/comfort than the MudX’s that are on now but quite like them otherwise.
Anyone notice much difference between them? Easier rolling would be a good answer 🙂

yes mate they are pretty much the same but faster rolling. i think they are made of a different compound as they dont shift mud as good as the mudx but are a very good all year all round tyre

ACX’s are quite a lot harder compound than mudX’s which is a shame. An ACX with the compound of the mudX would be ideal for me I reckon. They do roll quite well, but are wider so on the road that will offset it a bit. In the wet (rocks/concrete)they’re a bit skittish though

Hmmm. skittish in the wet, doesn’t sound too good for a less than competent cyclist. Easier rolling does sound appealing though.

They’re alright in the wet. Just not perfect, but then what is? The compound is a tad hard for my liking. I used them from august to january without major problem. The lack of increased contact area at the edges was more of an issue for me I reckon. Though it was easy to tell and easy to control, they used to slide a bit when really pushing it on trail centre whoopy left-down-right-up type contouring trails

Still a good all round tyre though, for its decent 2.2″ size, in a folding sidewall nothing comes close in weight (unless you go to swalbe money (which I think ACXs may well be now .. , they were £18 ea. when I got them)

big earl 2.2 wet compound, fast rolling, good volume surprisingly grippy in crap. i swap to these when the Mud X come off,.

Had thought about a Big Earl but it “looks funny” if that makes sense, guess it works though, looks less likely to slide sideways (and appearance/confidence it gives is everything 🙂 ) anyone used a, ermm, normal plain Earl?