Knard in Niner fork experiment
I ordered in a couple of Surly Knard 29×3.0 tyres to experiment a little bit. First stage of that was to put one on a Velocity P35 rim and see what it would fit through. Turns out it just makes it in a Niner fork.
The ride is very nice, reminiscent of the fat front experiment of last year but a lot more nimble, agile and less hard work going uphill. Even after a short ride this afternoon I’m pretty excited to get some more miles on this set-up and start doing some drawings for a 29+ front and rear frame.Posted 4 years agocharlie the bikemongerSubscriber
No, not that much.
Tyres in folding 120 tpi are £75
Rabbit hole rims are £139
But you need a 35mm plus width rim, so a cheaper velocity p35 will work, and the tyre is only 1mm narrower on the p35 compared to the rabbit hole.
Meanwhile elsewhere on stw folk are getting wound up about 650b…. These big tyres will be the future for many people.Posted 4 years ago
@Rorshach – no it’s pretty tight as it is and I don’t think it would fit using a rabbit hole rim.
Stu – it’s still a nice big fat tyre, and you may have missed the bit which said this was the first stage! Plus it’s running tubeless on the P35 and the rim is aroung 200g lighter than the 50mm Surly also – so quite a bit lighter.
Eddie etc – no, it doesn’t fit through a (current) Swift fork.
Kaiser – no intention for that at this point in time. More likely possibility is that I could tweak the Swift to make it 29+ compatible.Posted 4 years ago
Yay – my Rabbit Hole has arrived 😀 – looks very well made – weighs in at 695g, so spot on the claimed weight and a handy 150g lighter than the Gordo it replaces, so wider and lighter = win win. I probably won’t be able to get it built up yet as we’re probably going to be snowed in tomorrow 🙁Posted 4 years ago
Yay – my Rabbit Hole has arrived – looks very well made – weighs in at 695g,
hardly 100g more than a P35 .. I’m in. Well, once I can a) get my wallet around that kind of money for a rim and tyre and b) be confident of enough dry weather to need a tyre that big – not had my Ardent 2.4s on since last spring.. what’s your opinion on knards in the damp?Posted 4 years ago
A fat tyre, 3.8 Nate or even more so a Bud 4.8, have so much grip in mud……. And wet roots……… a mud specific Knard would be nice as would have more grip, in , er, mud 😉 without the weight penalty of a fat tyre. If you don’t think you need one, don’t get one , simples 😉Posted 4 years ago
Sure ) Just wondering where the grip / size ratio thing starts working again – I hear Nates grip well based on tread and sheer footprint size, yet average 2.4’s aren’t great even with a tread that’s ok in wet conditions, compared to a slimmer tyre. Pressure is force over area etc. I just can’t imagine an advantage to offset pushing even more slop out of the way or floating on the top, rather than cutting through. But I like bigger tyres in general so interested to know what I’m missing / not considering ..Posted 4 years ago
Well for real sloppy conditions = fat tyre, nothing else will do. But for the merely muddy conditions, but the ground is a bit firmer a Knard will work well, great grip with Cush, and faster acceleration and faster handling. But if conditions are such that your pushing mud aside then a fat tyre is best. It’s great having both options as the two are so totally different, really. Nate will be on tonight for muddy/snowy conditions.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Knard in Niner fork experiment’ is closed to new replies.