Powered by Outside

Mavic xm 819? anyone tried em?

PB Forum :: Bikes, Parts, and Gear
Mavic xm 819? anyone tried em?
  • Previous Page
 Post Message | Latest Comment
Author Message
flag elfen
Posted: Nov 1, 2009 at 18:56 Quote
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Summary of this thread:

xm 819:
+no need to remove tire if a spoke breaks
-heavier(450grams+50grams for the pre-nipples)
-tire will be more round shaped
-time consuming and unpleasant to build and true
-needs mavic spoke key

ztr flow:
+lighter(470grams+7grams for yellow tape)
+tire will be more "square" shaped
+lower beadlock = better tire profile (larger tire...)
+7$ cheaper
-if a spoke breaks, you need to remove the tire, remove yellow tape...


//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Anyone owns those? I wonder what would happen if I'ld use this rim for the front wheel of my dh bike with a 2,5" or 2,7" tire (kenda nevegal+stans....). mavic says: Recommended tire widths: 1.50 to 2.30...

I know there's the xm823, but it's 657g rather than 450g. At that weight, it feels like i'ld be better to stay with my supra D with ghetto tubeless.

I also saw the stans ztr flow, 470g, but you need to add their yellow tape to make it tubeless. ( maibe I could use this one for the rear wheel?)

have a better idea?

Help me out!
flag mcmbike
Posted: Nov 1, 2009 at 19:07 Quote
819s aren't a bad rim. They're strong and fairly light, but the Flows would probably be better. The Flow is wider, so it could handle a bigger tire and it will also blow up the tire more, giving it more volume. I've ran both rims, and a Maxxis 2.1 tire on the Flow is about the same size as a Maxxis 2.3 on the 819. The yellow rim tape isn't a problem at all and my stans have sealed better than the 819s.
flag elfen
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 8:01 Quote
mcmbike wrote:
819s aren't a bad rim. They're strong and fairly light, but the Flows would probably be better. The Flow is wider, so it could handle a bigger tire and it will also blow up the tire more, giving it more volume. I've ran both rims, and a Maxxis 2.1 tire on the Flow is about the same size as a Maxxis 2.3 on the 819. The yellow rim tape isn't a problem at all and my stans have sealed better than the 819s.

I suppose the ZTR will be a much smarter choice then, let's just forget about the 54 grams added... sniff... !!
flag Hummeroid
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 8:08 Quote
Im 185 lbs, and ride in rock. Im not light on the pedals, nor do I run high tire pressure to prevent rim damage... and I run 819s. Have all this last season, and have downhilled on them too. Blew tires completely apart from hitting them into metal grating, and that flat did NOTHING to the rim. Mavic has their aluminum alloy down, and because of it, their rims last a LOOONG time.

I dont know what this " seals up better than the 819" is about, but solid aluminum center with one hole drilled in it vs tape with tons o holes... seems to me the stans would be far more likely to leak.

I run a Fat Albert 2.4 front (huge 2.4, big as a maxxis 2.5 no problem) and never have an issue with running "too large of a tire".

As for tire width changing, not really. Tire profile does change though- 819 will make the tire round out a bit more, vs the flow making it more square.
flag mcmbike
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 13:16 Quote
Hummeroid wrote:
Im 185 lbs, and ride in rock. Im not light on the pedals, nor do I run high tire pressure to prevent rim damage... and I run 819s. Have all this last season, and have downhilled on them too. Blew tires completely apart from hitting them into metal grating, and that flat did NOTHING to the rim. Mavic has their aluminum alloy down, and because of it, their rims last a LOOONG time.

I dont know what this " seals up better than the 819" is about, but solid aluminum center with one hole drilled in it vs tape with tons o holes... seems to me the stans would be far more likely to leak.

I run a Fat Albert 2.4 front (huge 2.4, big as a maxxis 2.5 no problem) and never have an issue with running "too large of a tire".

As for tire width changing, not really. Tire profile does change though- 819 will make the tire round out a bit more, vs the flow making it more square.

I guess what I meant about 'sealing up better' was that it is a lot easier to get the tire seeded onto the rim with a Stan's rim than any other tubeless rim, especially if you flat out on the trail.
flag hampsteadbandit
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 13:42 Quote
you can use either the Stans ZTR flow rubber strip on the ZTR Flow rim, or use the "yellow tape" method which is lighter, more secure, seals better and makes the tire easier to inflate, the tape does not degrade over time like the rim strip can - last time I switched a rim strip setup to tape, the sealent had gotten past the rim strip edges into the spoke drillings on the rims and gunked things up

the big problem with the XM819 is building the damn things...I hate building them (2 sets of nipples per spoke!) very time consuming and unpleasant to true because of the unique Mavic, super large spoke key


Stan's rims will have a positive effect on tire profile because the beadlock on all of the Stan's rims is much lower than anything else on the market

instead of your tire sidewall being stretched across a tall rimwall which reduces overall tire profile width; the tire bead is firmly locked into the lower Stan's rim causing tire can baloon to give a fatter width profile compared to running the same tire on a Mavic or Sun rim

when I looked at the same tires (Maxxis High Roller 2.35") on my Sun Singletracks and Stans ZTR Flow on my two bikes, the tires were noticeably bigger looking on the Stans rim setup than the Sun


I have used alot of rims in my years of riding, and currently run ZTR flow wheelsets (on Hope Pro IIs) on both my bikes, no problems to report

if you are going for Stan's, my experience is that the yellow tape method is a much better tubeless setup than using the Stan's rubber strip
flag badgermeister
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 13:50 Quote
had a set of 819's on my old xc bike and loved them with a set of 2.1 nobby nics. they were ridden hard with 100kgs on them and they stayed intact for a couple of years of relatively smooth xc riding. would of done more but i live in essex/east sussex so pretty flat Cry
flag lafalot
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 13:55 Quote
elfen wrote:
Anyone owns those? I wonder what would happen if I'ld use this rim for the front wheel of my dh bike with a 2,5" or 2,7" tire (kenda nevegal+stans....). mavic says: Recommended tire widths: 1.50 to 2.30...

I know there's the xm823, but it's 657g rather than 450g. At that weight, it feels like i'ld be better to stay with my supra D with ghetto tubeless.

I also saw the stans ztr flow, 470g, but you need to add their yellow tape to make it tubeless. ( maibe I could use this one for the rear wheel?)

have a better idea?

Help me out!

Add 50g to the claimed weight of 819/823 rims. The 50g comes from the pre-nipples you need to install. Yes they are that heavy Frown I was pretty disappointed when i got mine.
flag elfen
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 17:09 Quote
lafalot wrote:

Add 50g to the claimed weight of 819/823 rims. The 50g comes from the pre-nipples you need to install. Yes they are that heavy Frown I was pretty disappointed when i got mine.

what! I thought the "pre-nipples" were included in the rims weight???(kinda stupid it isn't since you can't run the rim without it????

So, in the end, the stans are lighter, wider, make the tire a bit larger, cost 8$ less, easier to lace..... hum.... xm 819 "might" be stronger thought..?

thanks for all those infos people!
flag lafalot
Posted: Nov 2, 2009 at 17:14 Quote
no, the 819 is definitely stronger. Just that the weights are higher than people think. Its 50g per rim. At least you save weight by not needing rim strips though.
flag hampsteadbandit
Posted: Nov 3, 2009 at 4:20 Quote
At least you save weight by not needing rim strips though.

you don't need rubber rim strips with Stan's either Wink


you run a removable valve core (which the Mavic rim also uses)

and you run a layer of Stan's yellow tape which is no heavier than the nylon rim strip used on a regular wheels

most people running UST end up using Stan's sealent to help sealing and deal with penetration punctures, so there is no weight saving over Stan's rim / sealent in that respect
flag elfen
Posted: Nov 3, 2009 at 10:56 Quote
I summed what was said in this thread in my first post. If you have anything to add, just tell it.

I think I might go for a ZTR upfront (weights less, will take a 2.5" - 2.7" tire with no problem) and a 819 for the rear tire (stronger rim, will use it with a 2.5")

weight savings:
-103 grams (supra D - ZTR=580-477)
-110 grams (supra bh - xm819=610-500)
-1200 grams (2 tubes * 600grams (approx)
+100 grams (stans sealant)
+50 grams (2 valves... don't know the exact weight...)

TOTAL= about 1260 grams!

2.8 pounds! yay!
flag hampsteadbandit
Posted: Nov 3, 2009 at 12:26 Quote
I would be surprised if the 819 was actually any stronger than the ZTR Flow

Stan's rims are lighter because they are minimalist - they don't have a tall rim sidewall which just adds weight, creates a tendency to dent, and allows the tire bead to move under load making the bike handle more unpredictably, and making tubeless inflation more difficult

ZTR Flows have the rim sidewall very low which locks the tire bead in place, reduces weight which means they can add material to the rim cross-section without creating a heavy rim, and the low sidewall is more rigid reducing dents / flat spots by hitting stuff on the trails

they don't use eyelets (eyelets are not actually any stronger, I have seen plenty of rims cracks around the eyelets) or in the case of the 819, a screw-threaded socket on the rim face to allow the special nipples to screw in


there are alot of riders using the ZTR Flow for heavy all-mountain biking and DH racing (as race wheels) and you don't hear of problems on the forums with these rims

I personally have ZTR Flows on both my bikes (short travel freeride, and 6" all-mountain) and have not bent, dented or split them despite some serious abuse
flag elfen
Posted: Nov 3, 2009 at 12:42 Quote
yeah I just removed the strength factor for the first post, can't really compare on that point. Remove this and the ztr gets lots of pros and the xm 819 lots of cons....
I'll just quit the xm 819 idea and save 23 more grams on the rear wheel I guess.

changed my mind.... changed it again.... re-rechanged it.... re-re-rechanged it....
I think the debate is fairly over, unless you got an idea on another tubeless, lightweight rim!?!?!?
flag neex
Posted: Jan 8, 2010 at 22:32 Quote
Hummeroid wrote:
Im 185 lbs, and ride in rock. Im not light on the pedals, nor do I run high tire pressure to prevent rim damage... and I run 819s. Have all this last season, and have downhilled on them too. Blew tires completely apart from hitting them into metal grating, and that flat did NOTHING to the rim. Mavic has their aluminum alloy down, and because of it, their rims last a LOOONG time...

I agree on all counts. I took a bunch of four-six footer landings into a rock garden with these with absolutely no issues. If you're hucking bridges and crazy road gaps these likely wouldn't be your first choice although I bet they would hold up under some of these conditions also. I rode the same kind of terrain Hummeroid rides with the same results. I agree about the learning curve and time needed to build them but I'm glad I did. I build mine on Hope Pro2s and have never been happier. I run a 2.4 front and back without any issue and I prefer the precise handling feel of having the tire profile rounded out a bit as opposed to being squared off. I think many of you would be surprised as to how strong these rims are when built up properly. I tensioned mine within 5%+/- max tension as I recall.

Thanks again for the recommendation Hummeroid! I love these rims.

update: I've never trued these rims in two seasons and I've beat on them pretty hard a pile of times. I'm buying another set.

Andrew.
  • Previous Page

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2026. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv65 0.012098
Mobile Version of Website