I’m also I believer in the 2.6 tire size for the terrain and the way I ride. I wish there were a selection of fast xc tires in this size. I haven’t tried the rekons either, but I can’t see them being the ticket. I’d love to see the 2.6 Rick with the same casing and rubber compound.
Man, those are some high pressures. I’m running 15/14 psi in my forecasters (also not the fastest tires…but handle well). I’m not very heavy though. Looking for an update myself.
No, just the rapid race vs protection
What do the 2.6 mezcals and boosters measure? I’m a big fan or large tires, but haven’t tried XC ones
I ran the TB 2.35 rear and 2.35 Racing Ray last year and it was perfectly fine but I’m with you…TB on the front might be a little too much excitement for me LOL.
Not sure of the exact size (not mounted up now) but the Booster Pro 2.6 with the TR casing is pretty quick. It’s like a road bike casing thickness though so if you live where there are rocks you might need the SCT casing (sorry no data on that version). I think the 2.6" size is probably the way to go for bigger riders. Not all of us are 140#'s!
Joe
I have a set of 2.6 Ikons on my rigid bike. Which is basically my adventure/bikepacking rig. They are way comfortable and roll quickly enough. Not my first choice to rail singletrack, however, just because I think there are better rolling tires with better side lugs. Hard to beat the reliability of a Maxxis EXO casing though.
I’m just under 100kg, so yeah the volume is nice. That said I run my 2.4 Ricks at 19/21 with Air-Liner XC inserts and am happy with that in the midwest. If I was riding somewhere more square edged rocky, I’d add a few PSI probably.
Toughest course in the Uk today with rock gardens and sharp Rocks - no flats.
Was very muddy and they struggled a bit with the clay like mud.
I just couldn’t face changing them out for barzo’s for one race.
Dubs at tong is a strong choice
That’s the only course I used to swap in Cross Kings. I always felt the A lines felt a little twitchy on 2.2 Race Kings.
I have bontrager carbon wheels and the rims are so tight it’s unbelievable. I couldn’t face the swap.
On the rock A lines the tyres were spot on. But the mud bits in between they clogged and I was skating. But most people were.
Yeah I mean the rock lines aren’t actually that technically hard; they’re all rollable and just a confidence test.
It’s the entry/exits from the gully and some of the tighter off camber stuff that I was slower on the RK.
Dubnital in sharp rocks and mud - just got back from a weekend up in Marquette coaching at Marji Camp and running these through the ringer in RAMBA. Running Race/Grip front and Trail/Rapid rear. I’m 180lbs and was running 17.5F / 18.5R. Yes playing it dangerously with tire pressure, but wanted all the plushness and traction I could get. Smashed these tires around on rocks and through mud all weekend.
Was able to get them to break loose on rock slabs under higher wattage trying to climb slow speed tech on my SS. Outside of that and some loose downhills, I couldn’t be happier with them. Felt more planted and much faster than the TNT Barzo/Mezcal combo I was coming from. I could have just gotten lucky, but the fact the Race casing on the front faired so well at low PSI was particularly impressive. Only a couple weeks in on them, but so far very happy.
Last fall I got bike specced with a Wicked Will/Racing Ralph combo. I’ve been enjoying the ride much better than the Vittorias I had ran before. With dryer weather around the corner (fingers crossed), I’d like to put on a Ray and save the WW while it still has some life for winter/spring.
The WW is in super race/speed grip, but I can only find Ray in super ground/speed grip or super race/speed. How much of difference is there in those two tires? (Be mindful this roadies’ skills are not awesome and damp roots are my bane in the humid east) Are stocks low because Schwalbe is set to release more tires in their new casing like the Rick and I should wait?
New Aspen “AT” being spotted at WC XC races. Usual Aspen pattern but with taller lugs. If they maintain the casing size and offer it in the 170tpi version I might be tempted
Sounds like it comes in a 2.35 vs their 2.4WT, but agreed, very interesting tire!
Yes, in the UK too. Best described as ‘lively’, I’d say. What I expected from a fast hardpack-focused tyre.
Missed the 2.35 part…
Big part of the 2.4 Aspen appeal is the humongous volume, so hope they don’t give up that
I’m just sat waiting for the BRR puncture test to come out to order my new continentals.
I know dubs won the voting but do they usually give timelines for testing?
My tire of the month club shipment from Bikeinn just arrived. Photo dump with weights. Python Race, Dub Race, and a Rick XC to compare.
Didn’t have time for a whole lot of laps…but Thunder Burts ran faster than Dubnitals (P=0.004) yesterday.
It goes date/tire/seconds/power/and heart rate
And I’ve enlisted a buddy to run laps too, he ran race kings vs. dubs, dubs ran faster P=0.026
Planning on running these three tires again next week so we’ll see if we get consistent data. I’m not entirely sure I believe these results because previously I got the same times with race kings vs. thunder burts but yesterday…they look different.
Joe
I strongly disagree that this data shows a valid real world difference in these tires.
The error for your power meter is surely at least +/-1%. That means that even if your data truly averaged 150.0W for every lap you still wouldn’t know if it was 148W one lap and 152W the next. Automatically calibrating power meters or single sided power further complicate things.
More importantly, your time data is too low resolution. You’d need to have data at 0.1 seconds resolution to meaningfully distinguish the results. With one second data you could have two runs that were a 0.1 second difference (351.4 vs 351.5) but it looks like a 1 second difference. You could have another two runs that were a 1.9 second difference (350.5 vs 352.4) that also looks like 1 second difference.
So ignoring all other sources of variation (which we shouldn’t), +/- 0.9 = 1.8 seconds of difference could be hiding between those runs, yet your calculated variance is 1.6 seconds. That’s telling us the statistics aren’t real world true, they’re just math, due to the limitations of the input data.
You can do calls statistical math on the data, but without knowing the full context of the data, it’s not right to blindly follow the math. A low p-value alone is not enough.
Also, do not trust any LLM to do math calculations, especially statistics.
Joe I do appreciate you doing the testing, and I’m not saying the data doesn’t have value. But don’t be misled that this has met some scientific bar for tire A being better than tire B. I would more say it shows the tires are very similar in performance and the user should choose based on other factors that matter to them.
Nice!
I just removed my old faithful Ray/Rick combo and slapped on front and rear 2.4 Dubs. I’ve got back to back races this and next weekend in two different states so this should be a good comparison. At least if I get smoked I will have an excuse 
