Pinkbike Poll: Time to Geek Out - What's Your Ideal Tire and Rim Width?
As mountain bikers, many of us have the ability to dive into long-winded discussions about topics that non-cyclists would find incredibly inane. Gear ratios, head angles, tire pressure, chainstay length – to a bike nerd, those are all perfectly acceptable topics for debate, but to someone who hasn't touched a bike since their grade school days you may as well be speaking in tongues.
For this week's poll we're going to tackle one of those seemingly geeky topics - the minutiae of rim and tire width, the little details that can make a noticeable difference out on the trail. But first, let's take a quick look back at the wheel-related technological changes that have happened over the past few years.
![Sea OTter 2015]()
![2016 Trek Fuel EX review]()
Wider Rims
There's also been a shift towards wider rims, and although some companies have been quicker to jump on the bandwagon than others, there are more and more options with an internal width of 26mm or more. There isn't a clear consensus on what the ideal internal width is, largely due to the fact that going too wide can make certain tires behave oddly, but so far it seems like the sweet spot for most 2.3" tires is somewhere between 25 and 30mm.
The Future
My crystal ball is a little hazy at the moment, but if I had to make an educated guess I'd say that we're going to see tire widths increase slightly from the 2.3" that's currently the norm for non-Plus size trail bikes. There's not one underlying factor that's driving this - it's more of a combination of the factors mentioned above, along with the fact that more and more riders are riding their all-mountain bikes like DH bikes. Maxxis' recent debut of their WT line of tires, which measure in at 2.5" and 2.4" and were designed to be used with wider rims is likely a sign of things to come, and I'm sure that other manufacturers will soon follow suit.
Modern mountain bikes and components have reached a point where building up a 160mm all-mountain rig that weighs less than 30 pounds doesn't require any scarily lightweight parts, which means the extra grams added by wider tires and rims are easier to accept. Riders who used to run 3.0" Nokian Gazzaloddis back in the day may find themselves experiencing deja vu, but don't forget that those tires weighed almost 4 pounds apiece - we're entering an era when tires can be wide and relatively light.
That brings us to this week's poll questions. Imagine for a moment that you were building up your dream bike. You can purchase your favorite rim and your favorite tire in any width you want - what do you choose?
For this week's poll we're going to tackle one of those seemingly geeky topics - the minutiae of rim and tire width, the little details that can make a noticeable difference out on the trail. But first, let's take a quick look back at the wheel-related technological changes that have happened over the past few years.
Plus
2015 saw numerous companies introduce Plus bikes, bikes with tires that aren't quite fat bike width, but also noticeably wider than what's usually found on a 'regular' mountain bike, typically measuring between 2.6” - 3.0” and mounted to rims that measure 35mm or greater. The bulk of these new bikes are based around 27.5" wheels, but there are also 26" and 29" Plus bikes, although they aren't as prevalent.
I don't foresee Plus bikes completely taking over the market, but I do see them as a way to make hardtails more appealing, and as a way for beginner and intermediate riders to feel more confident in rough terrain due to the extra stability that the wide tires provide.
2015 saw numerous companies introduce Plus bikes, bikes with tires that aren't quite fat bike width, but also noticeably wider than what's usually found on a 'regular' mountain bike, typically measuring between 2.6” - 3.0” and mounted to rims that measure 35mm or greater. The bulk of these new bikes are based around 27.5" wheels, but there are also 26" and 29" Plus bikes, although they aren't as prevalent.
I don't foresee Plus bikes completely taking over the market, but I do see them as a way to make hardtails more appealing, and as a way for beginner and intermediate riders to feel more confident in rough terrain due to the extra stability that the wide tires provide.
Schwalbe's Nobby Nic Plus tire is available in a 27.5 x 2.8" or 3.0" width.
Boost
Mentioning Boost causes as much chaos as shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater, but the emerging standard does bear mentioning, simply for the reason that the wider spacing creates room to run big tires without worrying about frame and fork clearance. (For those that missed it, Boost refers to 12x148mm rear spacing and 15x110mm in the front.)
The extra room is especially noticeable when you look at a Boost 110mm fork, where a 2.5” tire fits with room to spare. The same goes for 29ers - balancing chainstay length and tire clearance has always been a tricky proposition for the big wheelers, but Boost helps give designers a little more room to play with.
Mentioning Boost causes as much chaos as shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater, but the emerging standard does bear mentioning, simply for the reason that the wider spacing creates room to run big tires without worrying about frame and fork clearance. (For those that missed it, Boost refers to 12x148mm rear spacing and 15x110mm in the front.)
The extra room is especially noticeable when you look at a Boost 110mm fork, where a 2.5” tire fits with room to spare. The same goes for 29ers - balancing chainstay length and tire clearance has always been a tricky proposition for the big wheelers, but Boost helps give designers a little more room to play with.
Fox's Float 34 with Boost 110 spacing has plenty of clearance for the 2.35" tire shown.
Wider Rims
There's also been a shift towards wider rims, and although some companies have been quicker to jump on the bandwagon than others, there are more and more options with an internal width of 26mm or more. There isn't a clear consensus on what the ideal internal width is, largely due to the fact that going too wide can make certain tires behave oddly, but so far it seems like the sweet spot for most 2.3" tires is somewhere between 25 and 30mm.
The Future
My crystal ball is a little hazy at the moment, but if I had to make an educated guess I'd say that we're going to see tire widths increase slightly from the 2.3" that's currently the norm for non-Plus size trail bikes. There's not one underlying factor that's driving this - it's more of a combination of the factors mentioned above, along with the fact that more and more riders are riding their all-mountain bikes like DH bikes. Maxxis' recent debut of their WT line of tires, which measure in at 2.5" and 2.4" and were designed to be used with wider rims is likely a sign of things to come, and I'm sure that other manufacturers will soon follow suit.
Modern mountain bikes and components have reached a point where building up a 160mm all-mountain rig that weighs less than 30 pounds doesn't require any scarily lightweight parts, which means the extra grams added by wider tires and rims are easier to accept. Riders who used to run 3.0" Nokian Gazzaloddis back in the day may find themselves experiencing deja vu, but don't forget that those tires weighed almost 4 pounds apiece - we're entering an era when tires can be wide and relatively light.
That brings us to this week's poll questions. Imagine for a moment that you were building up your dream bike. You can purchase your favorite rim and your favorite tire in any width you want - what do you choose?
Author Info:
Member since Feb 1, 2009
Must Read This Week
[UPDATED] Final Elite XC Results & Overall Standings from the Mairiporã XC World Cup 2024
42000 views
42000 views
Sign Up for the Pinkbike Newsletter - All the Biggest, Most Interesting Stories in your Inbox
PB Newsletter Signup
@orastreet1 good point, but i'm sure everyone has different riding conditions so there's never going to be a consensus.
www.pinkbike.com/photo/12998391
Had to get that off my chest. Also...
Thanks for adding it. Realistically, tire choice would be centered to the type of ride one would be engaging. I wouldn't have a 2.3" on back during a casual XC ride, nor would I want a 2.1/2.2 on back when going around the mountain(AM) where there is tough terrain. Going between XC and AM, there are different things to take in mind with rim width and terrain type. I'm not going to have a 2.3" mounted to a 25mm internal width for easy riding, but for me, it's an ideal setup when facing roots and rocks at speed. A 30mm internal width with a 2.35"/2.4" is a good setup for gnarly conditions; something like this on a smooth trail would probably feel like riding a fatbike, IMO.
The reality; to each, their own!
@mikekazimer a better poll would be... "You only have one bike for all types of riding and have to pick a rim / tyre combo"
ONE BIKE TO RULE THEM ALL...
or you could just be a bit poor like me and my empty wallet and buy whatever CRC has on sale when you need new rubber, f*ck £60 for a tyre when I can get one for £25 in the sale that is as comparable (don't think I have ever paid full price for rubber yet)
Sales man reckons (i was bike meching at the time) it's the manufacturing that is the biggest cost not raw materials. Its the molding process that costs similar.
Not tried the Ibex, but did take a look at them but with the Citius being on sale they were an obvious choice for the dust out in a dry Alps!
The Citius were amazing in the dry over there, but I would pack something for just in case it rains as well, it got very sloppy quickly with a bit of water in Chatel.
My 2.35 Larsen is also 2.11, go figure.
I guess when most DH pros ride Maxxis and most of them win on Maxxis, they do it on a 2.3 tire in all fairness. So true 2.5=fat n slow, and actually 2.3=fast ?
There's also the issue that an ideal tyre/rim width will depend on the bike they're attached to. I like 2.5 tyres on my enduro bike but definitely not on my 4x bike.
The new (wt) tires from Maxxis are wider, but not hugely so. The primary benefit to me is the shape of the tire on my wide rims.
Boostify a 2.35" tire and get a 2.6" tire that is lighter and more durable than a 2.8", while offering almost as much traction as 150mm hub.
Wait what
BOOST = Bunch Of Obvious Sales Tactics
BOOST = Brainchild Of Our Sales Team
BOOST is literally an improvement from the lack of standards we have today. You don't have to want or like it: Your dealer will be able to get you non-boost hubs and frames for the next millennium. There is absolutely nobody forcing anyone to switch to boost, if your shop cannot (or will not) order you a hub you should find another shop. BOOST does fix numerous problems there would have been with using 150 for plus bikes. It's here to stay.
The engineering team would like you to stop giving the sales team credit for their good ideas.
Boost is 90% about 29er/fat/squishy29er tire clearance than it is about wheel improvements. I can get you calculations on how minuscule the wheel stiffness increase is if you don't believe me.
If the improvements aren't enough for you then there is no reason to buy one. You'll be fine running whatever bike you have right now until the end of time and I assure you that parts availability will never be an issue.
If you're a new rider buying your first bike, you get boost (a "minuscule" improvement in stiffness) for free, and you'll never know the difference or feel hard done by that you cannot use your crazy expensive wheels. Plus bikes (the main beneficiary of BOOST) do need the additional stiffness. And as the industry is (rightly) pushing beginners towards plus bike hard tails there was some space for needed innovation or improvement on those bikes.
If you happen to own crazy expensive wheels: You can most likely afford to have the wheels built around a boost hub, or you can stick with a brand that is offering a compatible hub spacing. In addition, wider rims (which are highly touted and do make a huge difference) will force you to get a new build done anyway, which means that labour is a moot point.
And if you're so far out of touch with how products are engineered, there will be no point in telling you that even if a salesman had an idea it is the engineers position to improve it to its optimum point.
There are very few sales reps running around spitting out bike hubs that the engineering team is simply checking for integrity...
matter at a given distance? If there is any standard that contributed to shortening CS and giving tyre more spacing it is BB92, because it allows to draw chainstays to the BB in a wider manner. FatBikes don't get tyre clearance from super wide hub but from super wide BB Which in all cases is done to match the chainline for the wide hub, a byproduct of the need to triangulate a wider nipple placement on the wide rim. Other example of giving more room to a tyre is using a thin chainstay element around BB. Look at Ragley's wishbone bridge design. Suspension design is of a great significance here. Designs of i.e. Kona, Commencal, Trek, Spec and all single pivots make it super easy to make lots of tyre clearance at short CS lengths. Don't expect any short CS on 275+ bikes on Giants or Santa Cruz bikes since bearings and bracing of monocoque swingarm are in the way of things.
Like written above, and as @RichardCunningham Pointed out once, Boost is nothing more but a half arsed attempt at a good intention. It is sentenced to prevail for a few years and will be proven by history as a solution where Public Relations took over the rationale. If they did 160, the Q-Factor mob would eat them. Long time ago a huge bunch of industry pussies claimed that you can't make a long travel 29" trail bike because there is no way to mount a front mech to it without making CS super long. And then Enduro 29 came and made idiots out of them. It was inevitable.
@allix2456 I only intended to state that BOOST marketing "improved wheel stiffness" is basically a lie. That's simply it!
The industry went with larger diameter wheels, but the traction is really determined by contact patch / pressure more than diameter. You want the lowest rotational weight which means that you want the lightest tire/tube combo and you want the weight close to the hub if possible. All of the advances in tubeless ready tires and now fat bike tires have made tires very light and puncture resistant. So, 26 has the smallest diameter of all the wheel sizes and therefore will have the lowest rotational weight and lowest overall weight (smallest plus size rubber). In plus size (26) will still have high volume and a large contact patch. All these bike companies went to 27.5 frame / forks, and conveniently the outer diameter of 26+ will be very similar to 27.5. And I presume (although I really don't know) that the grip of 26+ is likely 98% of 650b+ or 29+. So, not a lot of disadvantage there.
BAM, what's old is new again. 26 inch rim, 30mm wide, 3.0 in tire FTW!!!
Tire Diameter: +/-28"
Tire Width: 2.5-3.0 depending on terrain at 10-15psi with procore type system
Travel: 5-6"
Front rim: 650b with 35-40mm outside width
Rear rim: 650b with 40-45mm outside width
Stem: 10-20mm
Reach: Longer
Seat Tube Angle: Steeper
Saddle: adjustable up/down, forward/rearward, & angle without tools
HA: 62-65 degrees
Forks: RELIABLE 100mm travel reduction
Dampers: custom valved (it's really not that expensive!)
Bars: 760-800mm, but higher for taller people (if you're 6ft+ don't be afraid of a 2" riser bar)
Material: Carbon if you're rich, fat, or racing. Aluminum for the rest of us.
I just don't buy the "it's a marketing ploy to get you to buy more bikes". Don't get me wrong, Specialized and Trek make good money, but if their core motivation was profit, there are plenty of easier ways to make a buck than slinging new wide hubs and fat tires.
The fast enduro guys all seem to be putting 2.4-2.5 on their 27.5 bikes.
I ride an enduro 29er, it is very hard to find tyres larger than 2.3, basically you can go for Schwalbes in 2.35 which are quite wide and nice. Recently saw that maxxis have some not too heavy 2.5s. I think if more 2.5 tyres came out for 29ers, the 27.5+ fad would die out even faster...
To each their own.
Maxxis seems to be on the ball making minions and others in a "WT" wider tread format. I'm yet to try one though.
Wider rims are good "+" tyres can't die quick enough though.
So does every other 100mm spacing fork.
Would have liked to see 2.35 for the rear as that's my go to, but rather go slimmer than wider there, maybe I'd get away with 2.3 or .25 with the newer suspensions rigs. Can't afford to try and fail given tire prices now.
there is a huge difference between DH tyres/rims and enduro tyres/rims for example....
Questionable poll
The perfect tyre width is: the tyre you have.
Just ride your damn bike.
Step two make something different the "standard"
Step three profit
it all depends from situation
for street\dirt semi slicks 2.1-2.3
for dh 2.5 soft tires
for dry trails 2.0-2.3 semi slicks