27.5x4 VS 26x4.8 tires

PB Forum :: Fat Bikes
27.5x4 VS 26x4.8 tires
  • Previous Page
Author Message
Posted: Jan 12, 2020 at 3:52 Quote
Relatively new to fatbike and I'm looking to buy one. I've been mountain biking for more than 30 years. I'm hesitating between a Salsa Beargrease (27.5x4 tires) or a Trek Farley 9.6 (27.5x4.5). The Salsa dealer tells me that the 27.5x4 tires have a greater contact patch than a 26.5x4.8 and less rolling resistance. The Trek dealer tells me that the 27.5x4.5 is the way to go and that a 27.5x4 tire is to narow for soft conditions. What is your experience about 27.5 tires ?

Have to mention that it is not possible to run 27.5x4.5 tires on a Salsa Beargrease.

Posted: Jan 12, 2020 at 6:05 Quote
Don't own one, myself, but I've ridden the Beargrease and Farley 7.

The Beargrease was efficient and fast - felt almost like a summer bike. The Farley definitely felt like a fatbike, with more bounce and a lot more rolling resistance. A little more flotation and traction, too.

Not convinced 4" would have more contact than 4.8", regardless of rim diameter. The extra width will help in truly soft conditions, but the efficiency will be poor on firm trails.

Many trails have a firm crown and soft edges; the extra width wasn't much help when I slipped off the crown. Soft conditions are annoyingly slow, for my taste, so I preferred the 4" tires, even if it means having to stick to firm trails. The Farley's wider tires were better in conditions I don't enjoy and made the conditions I enjoy less enjoyable. Also, the seatstays were wide enough to cause interference with my calves.

The dropper post was greatly appreciated on the Farley 7.

Posted: Jan 12, 2020 at 6:08 Quote
I ride a Farley 7 with 27.5x4.5 and the biggest thing I like about them is that they can roll over anything but if you get off the single track (snow) a little, the 27.5 seems to float more and let you get back onto track where the 26x4 seems to pull you into the snow and plow more than float if you get off line. I haven’t ridden a 27.5x4 but imagine it to be somewhere between the two for float vs cutting into the snow pack. I prefer the extra tall and wide personally. It’s less work for me.

Posted: Jan 13, 2020 at 11:24 Quote
I have a Spesh FatBoy, Carbon. It came with 26"rims running 4.0 tires. I bought new tires (45 Nrth) 4.8. The new tires are great but very heavy and knobby. They are the 45 Nrth Dunderbeist/Flowbeist combo. In the snow, these tires are awesome! Hook up on soft snow, slushy snow, cold dry snow, powder etc. As mentioned above... once you roll into soft unpacked or ungroomed trails/snow - you are pretty much screwed no matter what tire/rim you have.

The 4.0's I have suck in snow. Not as much traction so I have to let out a lot of air. But then you get rim hits and potential dents. The 4.0's are the Specialized Fast Tracks. OK in summer but that's about it. Useless in snow.

Last year I bought a new wheelset: Stans Hugo 29", 52mm width. Running these with 3.0 tires from Maxxis. So now when there isn't any snow I have a Carbon 29er Plus bike. It is close to being my fav bike! It climbs like a goat, and I have a Manitou Mastodon Pro fork... so it flies through the trails! I even like it on groomed snow trails as it is much lighter and faster than with the 45 Nrth Fatties.

The bottom line: It really depends on the type of riding you will be doing. Do you live in a snowy part of the world? Snow for 4-6 months? Then fat tires (4.6 and up) are the way to go.
Do you plan on riding it in the summer dry months? 4.0 might be the way to lean or even try for a bike that can handle both plus and fat tires. (29+ is awesome!!) so fast.

Just my 2 cents.

Posted: Jan 13, 2020 at 11:37 Quote
K00chd0g,

You raise some good points. My one concern is the impressions of your 4" Fast Tracks: I think that's more an impression of the tread than the width. 4" with tall lugs and spikes is a very different animal from a 4" micro-knob summer tire! A wider tire will be better in soft conditions, of course, but a good 4" works nicely in firm conditions.

Posted: Jan 13, 2020 at 13:18 Quote
R-M-R wrote:
K00chd0g,

You raise some good points. My one concern is the impressions of your 4" Fast Tracks: I think that's more an impression of the tread than the width. 4" with tall lugs and spikes is a very different animal from a 4" micro-knob summer tire! A wider tire will be better in soft conditions, of course, but a good 4" works nicely in firm conditions.

Yes - you are correct. A better suited 4.0 tire with proper tread would be good in snow.
But then again.. if you are trying to achieve a good ride in snow, you might as well go 4.8 for example and reap the rewards.
4.0 with tread or not - you are riding on a lower profile overall when compared to a larger tire.

Posted: Jan 13, 2020 at 13:27 Quote
Maybe it just comes down to me not enjoying soft snow - feels like such a chore. 4.5"+ on the front with 4" on the rear could work to increase front end control and reduce some of the casing shearing from pedaling.

Posted: Jan 13, 2020 at 19:31 Quote
Thank you guys your comments. I will reply all your comments in this post.

I live in the eastern part of Canada. We get annualy 2-3 meters of snow, but for the last couple of years, we get a lot of rain too during winter. I will use this bike ONLY on snow. Probably more often on groomed/snowmobile trails or after rain when the conditions are icy. When we get fresh snow, I prefer to go backcountry skiing!!

I went to the Rocy Mountain shop this afternoon as they advertised a really good deal on a 2019 SuzyQ C90. The rims were Mulfut 65SL with Maxxis FBR/FBF 27.5x3.8. On these 65mm rims, the tires measured 3.51''. They also had a 2020 Specialized Fatboy Carbon mounted on Stout 80mm rims with the same Maxxis 27.5x3.8 tires. In this case, the tires measured 3.78''. Interesting to see the influence of the rim width on the tire profile. I would have bought the SuziQ if it had 80mm rims. I don't think it would be a good idea to sacrifice 0.25'' of tire width on a 27.5x4 fatbike tire setup.

I like fast/hard pack snow conditions . So I guess 27.5x4 would be Ok. I'm intrigued about the 29+ tire setup though. I'd like to try that once.

Witch tire would you chose between a 45 North Dillinger 27.54 VS Cake Eater 27.5x4 ?

Posted: Jan 14, 2020 at 3:28 Quote
That makes sense. The narrow rim could wrap the tread to the extent that the side lugs become useless, since it's not easy to lean a fatbike over, especially when the poorly supported tire flexes as you load it up. As you mentioned, the tires are already on the narrow side for flotation.

29+ would be a good second wheelset to adapt the bike for summer use. For winter use, I like the idea of a not-too-wide 29er tire for efficiency, but the chainstays may have to be long enough to negatively affect handling.

Posted: Jan 15, 2020 at 10:48 Quote
I tried a 27.5 2.8 after a 2.4 and found that pedalling while feels just fine, over time is just more energy zapping. I wonder if the 26" 4.8 will have less rotational inertia while the wider tyres giving more grip, win win. In theory at least.

Posted: Jan 15, 2020 at 10:53 Quote
chickenrunz wrote:
[ ... ] less rotational inertia [ ... ]

Rotational inertia is a small component of the total energy balance while riding. Highly overrated.

Posted: Jan 20, 2020 at 17:25 Quote
I have a Farley with the 26x4.7 Barbegazi tires and a Fat Boy with 26x4.6 Ground Control tires. what I found, while virtually the same size the main difference is in the knobbys. I ride in the sand dunes in Marina Ca and I like the traction from the knobbys on the Ground Control. Also, the GC contact profile when deflated seems to be larger.

Posted: Jan 21, 2020 at 8:16 Quote
Hi, I just recently bought a Giant yukon 2, and it came with maxxis colosus 27.5 x4.5. On a groomed trail or well used snowshoe trail they work great, if I touch the edge or there's more than 2" of fresh snow they don't go anywhere. I suspect it would be similar with 4" tires too, maybe 4.5 float alittle more, but I think the 4" will be slightly faster on firm surfaces. Last thing I think the Trek has studable tires, wich is a big cost saving if you decide to get studs, mine aren't and that will be my next upgrade, (a set of studed tires goes for about 400ish), because it gets icy where I ride! hope this helps.
alex

O+
Posted: Jan 23, 2020 at 16:27 Quote
I have a Farley 7 (2020) with 27.5 gnars studded. Awesome in packed snow and they do well on ice. the 4.5 up front and 3.8 in back seem to be a great combo. I'm going to pick up a set of Maxxis FBF and FBR 3.8 for the warmer/non-snow ice use. I have been riding a full squish 29 er but I am very happy with the performance of the 27.5 fat bike. I love the dropper and the manitou mastodons soak up the rough foot packed snow. I have been mountain biking since '88 and have only recently tried the fat bike scene and I love it!

Posted: Jan 23, 2020 at 16:45 Quote
Mikesfatbike wrote:
4.5 up front and 3.8 in back

I was wondering if that could be more-or-less the best of both sizes. Any downsides you've noticed?

  • Previous Page

 
Your subscriptions
no posts



Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv42 0.015116
Mobile Version of Website