Tyre choice

[ysnnim]

Gents...

For general cross country what tyres do you recommend...I am running rocksters on my Epic - 1.95 at back, 2.10 at the front. And they getting a but 'thin' and aren't too clever... colleague swears by (or at) Panaracer Cinders... what do you lot recommend..?

D

[pdV6]

Cinders are great in intermediate conditions (I pair mine with a Fire up front) but pants in thick mud.

This year I've picked up a pair of Kenda ShortTrackers (semi-slicks) for the summer months and they're great. With the variable weather at the moment I'm seriously considering swapping the Panaracers back on.

[RLK500]

The trouble with tyres is that not one suits all. The previous poster, likes Panaracers, I hate them with a passion, to me they are the most god awful tyre going. I have Toga Factory Downhills on my Stumpy FSR Pro, someone will be along in a mo to tell you they are shite, but they work for me. However, I do need something a little less industrial now the summer is (nearly) here. For me I am going to try Kenda's and probably Conti's, both seem to generally get good reviews, but again it is down to personal taste.

[Black5]

ysnnim said:

Gents...

For general cross country what tyres do you recommend...I am running rocksters on my Epic - 1.95 at back, 2.10 at the front. And they getting a but 'thin' and aren't too clever... colleague swears by (or at) Panaracer Cinders... what do you lot recommend..?

D

I'm very interested in the fact you run a wider tyre at the front.

Why is this?

My thoughts would be to fit the wider tyre on the rear. I imagine you get better traction/ drive on the wider tyre and the narrower front would speed up the turning. Also the wider rear would lessen the chance of buckling the rear wheel coming off jumps etc and the narrower front would track better.

[matthew_h]

I have taken a long time to get here but I think I have finally found the tyre for me.

I use the steel bead Conti Verticals in 2.3. Absolutely fantastic tyres. Light enough for XC (unless you're racing of course), strong enough for DH on the whole and they grip really well in most British conditions. And to top it all, they are only about £12 each.

Perfect

[gbbird]

Black5 said:

ysnnim said:

Gents...

For general cross country what tyres do you recommend...I am running rocksters on my Epic - 1.95 at back, 2.10 at the front. And they getting a but 'thin' and aren't too clever... colleague swears by (or at) Panaracer Cinders... what do you lot recommend..?

D

I'm very interested in the fact you run a wider tyre at the front.

Why is this?

My thoughts would be to fit the wider tyre on the rear. I imagine you get better traction/ drive on the wider tyre and the narrower front would speed up the turning. Also the wider rear would lessen the chance of buckling the rear wheel coming off jumps etc and the narrower front would track better.

Wider tyres on the fornt were common in my BMX days. I think it had something to do with deflecting the mud away from the bike more, and also for steering purposes

[ysnnim]

I run the wider tyres on the front in the winter/wet months, to give more traction and control. I would always prefer the back to the front to step out (especially when cornering in mud, or over wet tree roots, rocks etc) hence the set up. Although having gone out yesterday evening, it would have been easier to just jump into the nearest muddy puddle and splash around for an hour or two...

D

[pdV6]

Odd - a narrower tyre should cut through the mud to find traction, so a wide one on the front would possibly have the opposite effect to that which you're aiming for?

[ysnnim]

I think in a straight line through mud, it doesn't matter a great deal..it is on the cornering bit when I want just a little more front tyre.. and also over the rocks, roots etc.

On the back through mud I want the traction, so use the narrower tyre..

But hey, I seem to fall off with such regularity in muddy conditions that it probably doesn't matter!

As to your bike (nice bit of kit) - a colleague who I ride with has the same Trek frame - but he has 14 speed roloff hub gears.. rear wheel + hub gears only cost £800!!!

[neil_bolton]

ysnnim said:

I think in a straight line through mud, it doesn't matter a great deal..it is on the cornering bit when I want just a little more front tyre.. and also over the rocks, roots etc.

On the back through mud I want the traction, so use the narrower tyre..

But hey, I seem to fall off with such regularity in muddy conditions that it probably doesn't matter!

As to your bike (nice bit of kit) - a colleague who I ride with has the same Trek frame - but he has 14 speed roloff hub gears.. rear wheel + hub gears only cost £800!!!

Jesus! They are not light those hubs - why on earth would he have chosen that?

BTW I have a Trek Y22 too

[pdV6]

I suppose you can then loose the triple chainset & rear mech to claw back some of the weight and it ought to be fairly weatherproof?

[neil_bolton]

pdV6 said:

I suppose you can then loose the triple chainset & rear mech to claw back some of the weight and it ought to be fairly weatherproof?

Trouble was, they screwed with the handling, and they were ludicrously expensive to buy and maintain...

You'd still need a chainset - two chainrings and a mech are not enough to claw back that weight...

Its a reason why they never took off - Shimano tried with the Nexus range of internal hub gears, and they just never got going...

[pdV6]

They're common on folding bikes to reduce the number of bits that stop working as soon as you fold the bike up!

[ysnnim]

It did take us by surprise when he actually turned up for a ride with the roloff fitted! He chose it as he kept knackering his derailleur by riding through 'derailleur unfriendly' forest and woods! Is it heavy...probably the same as the stuff he doesn't need now - but all the weight is over the back wheel. He rides a single chainring - and the roloff gearing gives almost the same spread.
Maintenence - too early to tell - he has only had it a couple of months. It 'whirrs' like a sewing machine, until it is properly run in - apparently 1000 miles or so.. And if you put him on a lie detector and asked him if he made the right choice... I wonder

As to his trek, he broke the rear suspension mount - where it joins the frame a couple of weeks back...so all in all not too good!

[pdV6]

ysnnim said:

As to his trek, he broke the rear suspension mount - where it joins the frame a couple of weeks back...so all in all not too good!

Neil did that to his - Trek can re-bond the mount onto the carbon if you ask them nicely.

[neil_bolton]

pdV6 said:

ysnnim said:

As to his trek, he broke the rear suspension mount - where it joins the frame a couple of weeks back...so all in all not too good!

Neil did that to his - Trek can re-bond the mount onto the carbon if you ask them nicely.

Yep, common fault on the earlier Y's - speak nicely to the Warranty dept and they sort it.

Or, if he needs a small - I have a spare front end

[flattotheboards]

panaracers are very good i have the fire xc pro on the front and the fire mud pro on the back these are both 1.8s and are very good in most condition and seem to accelerate quite nicely as well.