You need to go 2.2 on the RK for the fast compound which is tough on the clearance side. Im looking at Thunderburt Superground or Ralph superground (2.1), possibly TB back and Ralph front, thinking the Ralph may provide a little better corning traction. I wonder if anyone has tried that combo for gravel, or if traction difference is negligible and should just run TBs front and rear?
I also wonder what a 1-3% difference on puncture score really means on BRR, which is the difference for RKs, TBs, and Ralph.
BRR uses the same test equipment and method as tire manufacturers themselves. Taking DJās comments at face value would indicate he believes that tire manufacturers do not know how to design tires to be more puncture resistant. Iām not adverse to this idea but his example of Challenge tires and logic were not convincing.
The most recent Bonk Bros episodes have shown his, and the crewās, weakness with respect to the overall BRR testing. So I would take his comments on the puncture test with a grain of salt, as well.
I generally think the BRR test points in the right direction. Punctures are a random event but follow a broad pattern, which can make their applicability at a individual level opaque. This is especially true with MTB or aggressive gravel tires where the knob pattern can effectively double or triple the tread thickness while also reducing the ground contact area.
Itās worth noting that the puncture score is not 0-100, itās based on force + tire thickness and theoretically has no upper bound. Touring tires routinely score over 100, with the highest 163. Iāve ridden quite a few road/gravel/mtb tires long term that have been tested at BRR, in my opinion the best framework for comparing relative puncture risk; is to only consider broad marginal differences.
If multiple MTB tires are all scored around 30 (26,30,27,29) I donāt consider any meaningful difference in puncture risk. Move up or down 10 points and thatās when an actual difference would be considered.
Racing ralph 2.25 superground front+Thunder burt 2.1 superground back
Racing ralph in front = a lot more confidence (might be because of the size), even with cut side knobs for clearance
But feels slower on tarmac and quite a bit heavier
Thunder burt front+back is an awesome setup but they are race tire only in my opinion, they melt on alphalt, get small cuts easily and knobs start to fall apart after a 300-400km
Iāll probably run a super race Rick on the front and super race Burt out back for Rock Cobbler 12 in February. Burt f/r are fast as heck but really not so great for front end confidence.
I remember when I first started cycling after graduating high school in the early nineties (yikes) that having different front and rear mtb tires was the norm. If I recall correctly, I had a dart up front, and I guess it was a smoke in the back. I havenāt donāt even own a mtn bike so I canāt say, but seems like things are coming full circle as far as gravel bikes go.
After doing a recon ride for an upcoming race in my area which is essentially a lot of the same course as BWR SD, I totally wiped out on a flat easy turn. I was riding my 42 mil pathfinder pros at around 35 ish psi and just lost the front end. Needless to say my recon ride proved valuable I just pulled the trigger on a set of knobby WTB Raddlers in a 45.
Anyhow, Iām not running different front/backs but Iām off the pathfinder bandwagon for the current course conditions which is very dry and loose/sandy over hard.
Last time I did Rock Cobbler in 2023, it was variable terrain with plenty of wet sections and hard dry and some sandy sections. I had 40 mm Nanoās and they were great except for getting caked up in mud but pretty much everyone had that issue.
Horrible conditions for Pathfinders, IMEā¦the smooth center section just gives way on sandy over hard conditions. You need some knob to give the sand someplace to go.
Disagree - this was the go to tire for Unbound just a couple years ago, and if you watch LTGP highlights they were still a popular pick at a lot of the events last season.
But for sand, yes, any center slick tire has the chance to dump you.
Yeah, I rode Pathfinders 47ās for Unbound this year and they were a great choice. I have also ridden them a fair amount in Bentonville and also found them to be excellent.
But for the majority of my gravel riding here (hardpack trail with ākitty litterā / sand over the top), they arenāt that great. Currently on Thunderoās and they do a much better job hooking up in turns on our trails.
Pathfinders are great as far as slick/semi-slick tires go, but in general traction/stability isnāt great. If youāre running one set for everything they are a good choice, but there are better choices for courses with chunky, loose, or bumpy terrain.
I hear yaā¦ the pathfinder was even run in a XCC this year. And for what itās worth I run them now and like them. But just because a pro runs it or it is the popular choice doesnāt mean it is the best. My experience aligns more with @Astorask but appreciate and understand others may be different.
Agree. Iāve run them at Unbound in both 42 and 47 variants, and were great. No traction issues but not much in terms of technical cornering. Iāve run Pathfinder Proās at Big Sugar in the past as well and found them fine there too although nowadays if you have the clearance there may be better options.
Ok Iāve read everything but Iām more stuck than ever.
If your bike has 50mm advertised clearance and you wanted the fastest tyre choice with at least medium levels of puncture protection, prescribing to the āwider is fasterā DJ mantra, what is the go-to tyre right now?
If your bike is advertised with 50 clearance, then it likely has some buffer room. I suggest looking to see if a Schwalbe 2.1 (54mm) will work. Only the 2.2 Race Kings are good, but not many bikes will fit a 55/56 tire.
Per ISO standards, a bike tire must have 6mm clearance at the nearest point from tire & frame. So going from 50>52 should leave you with 5mm instead of 6mm.
I have a new bike on the way with 45mm clearance on the rear with 50mm in the fork. I plan to run 47mm pathfinders, but would consider switching to a thunder burt up front if needed.
Iāve bitten the bullet and gone for some thundero 48mm just because I was sick of being indecisive.
I may end up getting some 2.1s too, so I have a full range of widths for different scenarios, but there doesnāt seem to be an obvious winner at 2.1 (unlike 2.2).