Despite the looks, the Aspen ST tests slower than even the Racing Ray. The only department where the Racing Ray/Ralph miss is volume, they could really use a bit more of that
4 Likes
If they came out with a big version, I think for most people looking to go fast on single-track it really would be the perfect tire.
For those wondering, the 2.6 boosters didn’t really get any bigger. Which is fine by me, but they seem to measure the same as the 2.4 from maxxis, maybe 1 or 2mm bigger depending on the source. Casing is 61mm wide, 60mm tall, pretty much round. Tread is a bit wider, but doesnt really matter for volume.
Went a little deep in this experiment of wide tires, also ordered a 2.6 mezcal for the rear. I expect this to be used by me for long days with lots of road, and less for XC racing just to do with the weight. From everything I read, I expect this tire to have quite a bit more volume.
Lastly, ordered a 2.6 set of rekons as “fun tires”. I end up using my XC bike on a lot of enduroish group rides and youth coaching to mix it up a bit, and add some challenge to trails I know well, so these will likely be my everyday tires, might need to set up an extra wheelset now though, ugh.
1 Like
Thanks for the info! What would you choose between Ray/Ralph versus Ray/Rick? Also, does TB feel like an Aspen ST, because I would like to try it, but I really dislike the way the Aspen ST has no grip until you’re leaning the bike right over.
Im obviously not @webdev511 but I did run the ray/ralph combo all season. I can say that the ray/ralph combo is a set of tires you can stick on and forget about it (as in you dont need to change them).
They manage well enough in most conditions that if its dry, tacky, slightly muddy they will just do their thing.
4 Likes
How does Ray on the front do with loose rock over hardpack? More specifically in turns. Thanks
1 Like
The Ray is good under braking and cornering. It is a bit undersized though
2 Likes
Yeah, I like a little more width for the front. I’m mostly doing general trail riding and not looking for the fastest and lightest xc tire. Rekons working pretty well for me, but sometimes I’d like some faster rolling tires.
The Ray’s have plenty of lugs so can grab loose rock fairly well, they also have a fairly aggressive side/corner lug so if you commit to a lean they are rather good in corners.
As mentioned, they do measure a little small, they measure on my combo around 2.30" and settled there.
I was worried about the width, and I admit I like a little more width for riding - but for racing the size is “okay”
That said, I mentioned it in this thread already I will jump to a true 2.4" tire when either a redesigned Schwalbe Ray/Ralph drops or the highly anticipated Conti. Race King.
1 Like
Good deal. Yeah, I’ll probably wait and see if the Contis come out in 2.4 also, but might give the Ray/Ralph combo a try for next year.
The only advice I can give you on that statement is that the Ray/Ralph is tried and true - put through the paces at this point (offer’s good universal traction for conditions, has great rolling resistance, is decent puncture resistance).
The new conti’s coming out will need some vetting time, if you want to be an early adopter and give feedback than thats always welcome - or if you just want to get something that works and wait some time for feedback on the conti’s thats not a bad idea either.
Just my $.02
2 Likes
Anyone here is using Racing Rays front and rear ? In the current slimy conditions my rear Ralph has ok climbing and braking traction, but nearly zero sideways grip. My rear slides into every rut and I get pretty spectacular 180° drifts on corners…
1 Like
I used that setup for numerous races this year and they worked awesome at the wet races!
1 Like
I asked the Thomas race team about their setups, and they seem to switch tires front and rear all the time.
They said when it really gets messy, they race the Dirty Dan on the XC race bikes
1 Like
Another test has landed looking at different tire widths. Tested 2.1, 2.35 and 2.6” Mezcals. The findings from this are in line with conventional thinking - narrower higher pressure faster for climbing. Wider lower pressure better for descending.
1 Like
Do we know if those 3 sizes share the same casing construction ? And I don’t mean what the brand says, but the actual thing.
Pirelli is a good example, they recently finally made the 40mm P Zero Race available, and BRR testing showed that the casing isn’t exactly the same as in the smaller sizes (considerably higher puncture resistance). But then GCN tests them and compares then with smaller sizes of the same tire and assumes the differences are due to the bigger size
Good questions. It’s possible the 2.6 mezcals are not “optimized” for casing thickness/construction vs the 2.1s … dunno
False. Per the internet wider is always better. And didn’t you hear…MTB is even faster on the road! 
1 Like
If I get into Leadville I’m going to ride it on my fat bike. I have the fastest tires - jumbo jims - on that🤣
4 Likes
I have watched it.
Of course the usual dramaturgy of such a test video - not surprising.
Even for GCN/GMBN standards (which I actually thought/found having improved over the last months - but not for every video as this one shows) pretty blatant to not mentioning the slightest hint of just having one run per tire is absolutely inadequate for any conclusion. Let alone for ones just differing in one or a few seconds.
Apart from that - nothing that surprising outcomes at all. Actually the used stretches aren’t that bad if you really have a similar race course and trying for yourself which tire (and pressure) you would like most for that respective race. Of course you would need more runs per setup and the setups would also need to incorporate varying pressures (and even appropriately tuned suspension). As it’s the total system you are effectively trying to optimize now and not just rolling resistance.
I think the best part of the video is, that the concept of casing tension has arrived at GCN/GMBN now and that helps getting the message more out. Of course they’d first have to do a way better job at explaining why their protocol is utter rubbish, too, to not instantly ruin the message again.
2 Likes
Booster Pro 2.4 is loosing its winning position on BRR by just 4 votes…
Come on! 
1 Like