Is there something inherently wrong with running larger volume tires like a 2.6? I rode a hardtail last weekend with 2.6 tires on wide rims, and it absolutely rocked with great traction all-around. All my friends say I’m crazy, that if 2.6 tires were fast that we would see big names running them in races. Comments here seem to rely on them “feeling” slow rather than actually being slow (not knocking tire feel at all when choosing, just wondering about the validity of such a claim). It seems like the “normal” for tires keeps getting wider and wider, with a similar parallel in the road cycling world for preferring hard/skinny tires due to “feeling” fast. The weight difference at this point is awfully close in terms of larger vs smaller rims and tires
Just wondering out loud. I see some various articles around the internet that look pretty ambiguous. The current limitation seems mostly due to XC bike rear triangle geometry. I’d love to try 2.6 tires on 35mm rims for some timed laps vs my current 2.35’s.
I think it’s mostly the weight. A very light 2.6 tyre is still quite a bit more than a medium protection 2.35 as far as I’ve seen so far.
I’ve been looking at getting some 2.6 XC tyres for my hardtail, but I very much doubt I could justify the weight on my race bike. I’ve just swapped out wheels and the change in snappiness going lighter in that rim/tyre area is huge.
This is purely opinion/suspicion, but I think the sweet spot is around the 2.35 range due to the traction benefits afforded over 2.25 tyres. I suspect on a drum or whatever a 2.25 tyre still rolls fastest, but the 2.35 tyre gains a lot in traction and float with only a small weight penalty.
Bike brands went down pushing the plus size tyre route, I don’t think they were all that good were they?
Appreciate your perspective, thanks! This pretty much lines up with what I have read from other people’s opinions. TR podcast hosts have made more than a few references to weight considerations being over-emphasized when it comes to bike components and the difference being short of several pounds. But then I see them going with super-low weight components and stating that wider tires are heavier/slower
I’ll probably wait a year or two to change my XC rig to see how this all plays out. It seems like it is still in flux.
My favorite XC tire is the Maxxis Rekon. My 2.4 and 2.6 Exo Rekons weigh exactly the same: 816g. This isn’t as light as say the Aspen 2.4 (731g) but it’s not far off, especially with the added traction. I think going 2.6 could be a viable option for a lot of riders, if maybe not for the national championship level folks.
Edit: I don’t think many other 2.6 tires are that light, though.
I’ve been researching all of these weights as well, which is why I started asking the question…is the actual speed lower with the 2.6’s or is the sensation of speed lower? This sensation vs data dissonance would be consistent with what the road tire width world has been saying - people swearing that skinny tires at high pressures are faster, but it turns out they are likely misinterpreting bumpiness and harshness as speed
Regardless, I think the traction is certainly improved.
It’s just too hard to measure, since results would be so different across different surfaces. What would a drum test tell us about rolling resistance on dirt, with bumps? Not much.
I can say that 2.6 doesn’t really feel slower to me, except on pavement. And of course traction can often be more important anyway, so I’d be surprised if 2.6 wasn’t faster on a wet slimy course (without deep mud), or over a very long day on super difficult terrain, even if the tire itself technically rolls slower.
I have wheelsets with both sizes now so I guess I’ll be doing a lot of experimenting this year. But mostly I’ll keep it simple: 2.6 Rekons (Exo w/ Tannus Tubeless in the rear, Exo+ in the front) for fast trail riding, 2.4 Aspen/Rekon combo (no inserts) for easier faster XC terrain.
I’ve picked up a Racing Ray/Ralph 2.35 SuperRace combo and Pepi R-Evolution insert for the rear.
I’m excited to try the Pepi and see how it compares to the CushCore XC I’m currently running. I’m reasonably confident the tyres will be close enough, though I suspect the SuperRace will be a faster and quicker wearing version of what I have currently got on the bike. I’ll put them on a few weeks before my A-Race in October.
I’d be interested to hear your take on the Ray/Ralph combo once you try them since you say you like the Ikons. I run Ikons currently and am very happy with them but would like to begin to compile a list of other options to try for different conditions and races. Schwalbe always makes me nervous from a durability standpoint, though I’ve been told the new compounds are better. Many folks here in CO still won’t run Schwalbes though because they tend to kill them pretty quickly, so I’m still a little wary.
From speaking to a bike shop owner (and previous national rep cyclist) it sounds like Schwalbe’s are perfect for rooty type terrains. This makes sense as that’s more the terrain I ride these days and have had flawless performance from Schwalbe tyres.
He highly recommended Vittoria Mezcal tyres for the dry and rocky climate of Central Otago, which I imagine to be kind of similar to Colorado etc. Central Otago has a lot of very sharp rocks and loose over very hard for reference.
Yeah, I’ve heard good things about the Mezcal from some folks although a couple of folks on the team I ride for have had flatting issues there too. They’re definitely on my list to try for sure though.
TNT and all trails in MI. Also, my 2.35 measured a true 2.35 on Crankbrothers Synthesis XCT 11 (26.5/24.4mm f/r). Weighs for the tires were 735g and 705g.
Ran a Bontrager XR4/XR3 combo through the winter on 36/29 ID wheels. The 29 2.4 XR3 grips surprisingly well on roots, better than an Agressor that came on the bike. The center tread also does a good job of poking through when it packs in as well. Noticed the side blocks are more rigid than the XR4, I think the casing may be stiffer overall. The XR3 was the slightly heavier tire at 790 grams if I remember correctly, with the XR4 coming in right under. Ran them down to 12psi with an insert to cushion the ride on a hardtail.
Next up are some Wolfpack Race when the new wheels come in, 29x2.25 are 680 grams.
I’ve noticed the newer 2.4" XR3 seems to get bad reviews from people on forums, but overall I really liked running them front and rear last year. However, I didn’t really get a chance to race them too often last year.
I do understand some of the criticism because I’ve had a few and none of them measured 2.4" on a 29mm internal width rim. Also I ruined 2 riding them on trails that I admittedly should not have been riding them on. I switched to the aggressor for that application.
To start this year I am going to try the 2.4" rekon race front/rear, but if I don’t like them I’ll have no problem going back to the xr3 for XC stuff.
Don’t want to start a whole thread but maybe someone can help pick a TRAIL tire. Not racing, looking for a good all rounder mostly for hard pack and loose over hard surfaces, some rocky/rooty stuff but not much. I don’t ride in mud or snow or loose conditions.
Philadelphia area terrain
180lb rider
2021 fuel ex 140/130mm
29x2.4” on a 29mm internal rim
Want something decent rolling and with plenty of cornering bite since that’s my Achilles heel. Running tubeless around 22/25/28psi no inserts
) ST6 and National XCO first, but still.
