Pinkbike Poll: Time to Geek Out - What's Your Ideal Tire and Rim Width?

Dec 14, 2015 at 13:06
by Mike Kazimer  
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.



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.
Sea OTter 2015
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.
2016 Trek Fuel EX review
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?

What's your ideal front tire width?



What's your ideal rear tire width?



What's your ideal internal rim width?




192 Comments

  • 249 30
 Mike forgot to add the option under each choice: "Honestly? - I don't really know". Where were we? Ahhh, Pinkbike is forcing us to answer those questions so that they can make money by selling results to companies that don't listen to us anyways and take our money by introducing new standards all the time. Whoever wins, we lose and we get no booze
  • 126 3
 That's a good point, Waki (the part about the adding the 'not sure' option). I went ahead and added it in.
  • 36 2
 Good work Waki & Mike! My option would NFG! Couldn't care less, whatever is on the bike - go have fun!!! With rim widths if 1mm makes so much difference, I've gotta tell the mrs!!!!
  • 16 9
 another big data analysis run by sram
  • 16 1
 For what ride style too! My 4X is set up different to my trail bike different to my DH.......
  • 7 4
 For those who really want those milliseconds on strava... tyre width and size is hella importento!!
  • 27 1
 I would geek out and say that my tires are true 60-584 front and 58-584 rear for trail bike.... 62-559 front and 60-559 rear on DH bike ... 559 aint dead
  • 6 2
 Go Waki!
  • 2 0
 Also riding conditions / seasons make a big difference... there are too many variables to make an informed decision
  • 33 0
 just make sure the rim is lubed up and then width will be less of an issue Wink
  • 3 0
 Well if you are riding a bike, you have made a choice at some point. No one is stopping anyone to riding 26"
  • 3 10
flag simooo (Dec 18, 2015 at 5:31) (Below Threshold)
 No idea what mine are, 29' High Roller II, what's that? 2.6?
  • 1 0
 @iffy and even better when it gets sloppy

@orastreet1 good point, but i'm sure everyone has different riding conditions so there's never going to be a consensus.
  • 13 1
 Aw shit i agree with Waki, damnit.
  • 23 0
 Can you add a "Whatever width Waki tells me" option?
  • 6 0
 The forcing us to answer part explains this hovering pistol beside my head - now I know how to make it disappear!
  • 3 0
 i find @WAKIdesigns width more than acceptable...
  • 18 1
 I wanted to pick either 420 or 69 but they weren't options on the poll.
  • 2 1
 As you can see, the "I'm not sure" option is pretty invalid considering it's low numbers. It seems most people actually do know...
  • 1 0
 Sweet, I've got the dream bike. Just built a 5010 w/ a 2.4 front, 2.3 rear, and 30mm LB rims. Wheelset is light and strong as f*ck. It has a boost rear which was pretty annoying when finding a hub, but oh well.
  • 9 1
 27.5 killed the dirt jumper/4x frame market
  • 3 0
 Really?
  • 7 0
 If someone makes a 27.5 Dj I may have to take them to the place we don't speak of.
  • 2 0
 Honestly it may be the perfect opportunity to go 24 for dj
  • 6 13
flag burnadette (Dec 18, 2015 at 12:49) (Below Threshold)
 I want 3.0 tires on my 26". I also want to run them hard as f*ck. 40+psi. I also want them to be light as hell and have a low knob height. I also want a ton of damn knobs. Knobs for f*ckin days. Like a cross between a small block 8 and a micro knobber. Also with hella side lugs. I also want 29" wheels to die off. I also think 27.5 is bullshit. And I also didn't think there was anything wrong with 26...

Had to get that off my chest. Also...
  • 3 1
 Really good point waki!!! 26" inch is not dead and flats 4ever!!! ahahah
  • 1 0
 I honestly I couldn't tell what width the rims are on my current bike without checking. Apart from the rims on some bikes being easier to mount some tyres I really don't mind if they arn't crazy heavy and don't break
  • 3 0
 24 in the back 26 in the front w/ a monster T up front. That's the ideal hucking set up
  • 3 0
 Does this mean that my 10 year old 33mm wide Mavic 321 rims are en vogue again?
  • 1 0
 Yes! You just need them to be 200g lighter! I have 729s for my HT
  • 3 0
 @mikekazimer

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!
  • 1 0
 @tremeer023 take a drill to them (like Surly Rabbit Holes) and you're good to roll...
  • 3 0
 @XCMark I'm sure I said this before as well.

@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...
  • 6 1
 Minions DHF Exo on EX471/Flow EX and you can conquer all lands of middle earth
  • 1 0
 Flow / Minion combo gets my vote
  • 2 0
 I have plenty of booze so losing hurts slightly less.... or.... we can buy last months sub-standard parts at a discount and go rip.
  • 1 0
 So who's making 26's wider than 2.5 these days?(2.6-3.0) Thx
  • 80 3
 All this arguing over tyre size seems irrelevant when the tyre manufacturers can't even agree on what 2.4 inches actually is!! Fairly certain my Onza 2.4's are wider than my Maxxis 2.4 and the 2.3 conti mud tyres are about half the bloody width.....

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)
  • 12 3
 True dat! I get them second hand from mates when they decide they don't like them, or change them from their new bikes for a fraction of the cost! My car tyres cost the same as my MTB tyres - which is utterly retarded considering the amount of safety ratings a car one must pass & sheer material weights involved...
  • 5 3
 go on bike-discount.de instead you get them for £30 all the time :b
  • 4 2
 Thanks @NielsLA thats one store I always forget to check and it really ought to be the top of list and my first go to!
  • 1 0
 I wondered about this when looking into why tyres (20' 26') cost similar despite having less material
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.
  • 1 0
 @desman75 what Onza's are you running? I have just got some Ibex 2.4s. So far so good in the Surrey slop.
  • 1 0
 I bought some Citius DH specific from Evan's Cycles (still available at half price £26) for Chatel and a dry Antur Stiniog, and absolutely loved them! Yes they wore quickly but that is to be expected with 55a/45a dual ply soft stickiness!

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!
  • 1 0
 the Ibex are really quite light - about 200g lighter than the light minions and cheaper. I've got them on my 29 hardtail for winter. Will have a look at the Citrus - they maybe the go for summer.
  • 1 0
 The Citius are downhill specific heavy sticky tyres, I certainly wouldn't want to put them on anything other than a 6inch plus park/DH rig to be fair. If you plan on pedalling anywhere the Citius aren't really appropriate.
  • 1 0
 Noted. Wind in the right direction I maybe off to the alps on my big rig this year.
  • 1 0
 I'll cross my fingers for you.... I am hoping for my second visit next year on the cheap if I can. Was ill for 2 of the 6 days riding last year and there was a thunderstorm the final day so only managed half of them out on my bike Frown
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.
  • 1 0
 I've ridden Porte du Soliel 5 times now and had rain most times we were there. Hopefully were off to Les 2 Alpes / Alpe D Huez which we did back in 2010 (pre children).
  • 1 0
 Les 2 Alpes is a place I'd like to ride, but at the moment we have friends in Chatel and if I am going that far I'd like to go visit them! Helps that they have minibuses and a bike trailer and can take us over to Pila on day (which was one of the days riding I missed this year due to illness)..... would like to get fit enough to have a blast at the Mega in D'Huez one year.
  • 1 1
 Tires are one of the few parts that are a bad idea to buy used
  • 6 0
 Rubbers are one of the few parts that are a bad idea to buy second-hand from mates
  • 1 0
 @desman75 Les 2 Alpes is awesome. Lots of vert - we rode 1600m but you can do 2400m if the glacier is open. We ended doing 10000+m one day. Venosc is an awesome track -800m drop and 120+ corners (I counted one run) and its open 8am til 8pm. Alpe d Huez is good too. You can ride the Mega track even when the race isn't on.
  • 51 2
 Pick a tyre width and be a dick about it.
  • 19 2
 2.5" dick? The ladies won't be impressed with that.
  • 7 1
 We could have a lot of fun with this sentence structure. For example: "pick a rim material and be a dick about it," "pick a suspension company and be a dick about it", "pick a place to live and be a dick about it" (many who live in Colorado are really good at this). Go ahead, try one for yourself!
  • 9 1
 Ha! My tyres are actually 2.5 dick, German dick that is. Big Grin
  • 15 1
 I'm not interested in stories about German dicks
  • 6 0
 How is german dick different from dutch dick? not that i care XD
  • 2 0
 @bigtim they will if you are talking girth
  • 13 0
 @Mattin PINKBIKE - Pick anything and be a DICK about it..... (they should make a t-shirt with that on)
  • 4 0
 Well in German dick means fat, is that the same in dutch? Big Grin
  • 2 2
 Ah, I thought your tyres had the same width as 2,5 German dicks
  • 5 0
 Lol..your a dick... Your right this is fun..
  • 5 2
 pick a dick on tinder and go pinkbike on it. 26 for life!
  • 2 1
 Schwalbe Nobby Dick in 29x2.25 ftw!!!
  • 2 0
 free shipping at CRC
  • 1 0
 If my minnion dick says 2.5 but is actually 2.3, am I trying to convince people of something I'm not?
  • 1 0
 I guess it means that Maxxis are overcompensating for their size Big Grin
My 2.35 Larsen is also 2.11, go figure.
  • 1 0
 Yeah many companies do that sadly. The reason is so they can say their 2.5" tyre is lighter than the competitions 2.5" tyre.
  • 1 0
 But then you do not have a 2.5" but something along the lines of 2.3 tops.
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 ?
  • 2 0
 True, but you won't find out until you bought it and gave them your money
  • 1 0
 True, true.
  • 27 1
 Still riding 26" 721's on maxxis 2.5 minions. It's not the combo slowing me down. I'm pretty sure any dh World Cup riding can make them go faster. A lot faster. So I'm still ok with that.
  • 1 0
 Don't worry if you upgrade your thingy mabob cartridge and go boost you'll be a gwinner
  • 1 0
 Ya, I run 321s and 2.3 to 2.7 inch tires depending on where/what I'm riding.
  • 16 0
 The problem is a 2.5 Maxxis tyre isn't as big as a 2.35 Schwalbe tyre, so which option do I choose. Also I think the rim width would be better in groups e.g. 19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34,35-39, >40. I highly doubt most Pinkbike readers can give a informed opinion about why they prefer a 28mm rim over a 27mm one.
  • 1 1
 I run Derby's (34mm internal) with a Minion DHF 2.5(wt) up front. It is visibly wider than my friend's Schwalbe on the same rim.
  • 1 0
 I haven't seen the new WT tyres, all I know is my 2.35 Hans Dampf is wider than my 2.5 Minion DHF (both on 21mm internal width rims).

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.
  • 2 0
 My schwalbe hans dampf actually measure 2.5 on a 28 mm internal width rim. They are huge and do not quite fit properly in my fork.
  • 1 0
 My Maxxis Holy 2.4 is 2.3 wide on an MTX39, the Larsen 2.35 is 2.09 on the same rim. Quite weird. All my Schqalbes measure to what it says on them.
  • 1 0
 Maxxis measurements are all over the place. Prior to this setup, I had High Rollers II - front 2.4 and rear 2.3 with 25 psi in both. The 2.3 was wider than the 2.4. Bizarre.

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.
  • 1 0
 I think my 2.4 Ardent is wider than my 2.5 Minion, I've not measured them but they certainly look that way
  • 16 1
 I still think 2.8" is too wide. The 650b of tire widths have yet to come!

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
  • 57 3
 "Wait, what!?" is exactly what comes to mind when talking about boost.

BOOST = Bunch Of Obvious Sales Tactics

BOOST = Brainchild Of Our Sales Team
  • 8 0
 Riding a rigid 29x3" I would love for my trailbike to also get some beafier rubber. If Schwalbe would make a Hans Dampf 2.6 (instead of a skimpy 2.35) I would run to the store.(Just don't have me get new hubs or any other Boost crap....)
  • 5 3
 Broadened Offensive On Standard Termination Bad Onanism On Sketchy Trek Bringing On Oral Sex Trauma
  • 1 0
 @suravida nice Stache. You enjoying it? I was running 29x3 on my Krampus over summer... tons of fun
  • 4 1
 @aoneal @WAKIdesigns
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.
  • 3 1
 Boost is half-assed. If the eng team was really involved, they would enforce taller driveside flanges on rear hubs and/or asymmetric rim profiles to increase the brace angle from the driveside (rear) or disc side (front).

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.
  • 2 3
 @theminsta
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...
  • 8 3
 I happened to have drawn several chainstays and Boost fixes nothing in tyre clearance or CS length department. NOTHING. How can hub/ flange spacing have anything to do with surrounding tyre with
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.
  • 5 1
 I don't cry for boost coming in, I just won't buy any bullshyte on how it improves things for riders because it doesn't. It adds another acronym to 275 and 29 designs and slightly improves triangulation of symetric wide rims with offseted nipple holes. It is a fact and I won't spend time drawing it for you in CAD - believe what you want. They may as well tell you that God loves you more if you run Boost - it is as valuable ad this bit about CS length and tyre clearance. You need ignorance and faith to make it work
  • 1 0
 Hey Waki, got links to the drawings? I would love to see it, as I was a bit skeptical on how they could improve tire clearance by having a wider rear hub... I assumed tire clearance was more from a clever design rather than a hub/crank/etc width

@allix2456 I only intended to state that BOOST marketing "improved wheel stiffness" is basically a lie. That's simply it!
  • 1 0
 Totaly agree minsta, Average spoke length for 29" wheel is around 295mm. So let's imagine this improvement that 3mm give on such length... And about standards: I just found a crack in my Blur TRc. I will be getting a warranty replacement: 5010cc. How awesome - I need to buy new wheels and a new fork. But I will enjoy all the benefits of 650B contact patch and roll over with BB drop staying as it was. FUN!
  • 1 0
 It's hilariously sad how so many people just believe in everything they read nowadays. Critical thinking has gone out the window and down a few dozens of floors. f*cking political correctness is a multi-faceted disease as I accredit PC for many mentally deleterious societal/cultural phenomenons. But congrats on the upgrade! No doubt the Solo is going to be a tiny bit lighter than the Blur with updated geometry Smile
  • 1 0
 I will roll so much faster! Tiny improvements make a huge difference, remember that hahaha Big Grin
  • 1 0
 *Incremental™ improvements brother! Big Grin
  • 2 0
 Incremental™ is the leading product management consultancy in MTB industry.
  • 1 0
 @fartymarty: Stache is not mine, was a testride with Trek. I have a rigid Krampus with Knards back and front. And I actually prefer my humble Krampus to the Stache 9. Fork of the Stache makes the front too heavy, losing some of the playfulness.
  • 10 1
 It is funny. Back in the day none of this mattered. The only thing was that you didnt taco and die. also the choices were simple, pick a tire pick a tube and pedal. now we have less tire choice and more rims. Well i guess im still old school because a 2.3 got you into trouble and out . Happy holidays all, and just remember at the end of the day its about the ride not about the numbers.
  • 12 1
 "Time to Geek Out" article, so the "keep it simple" comments are quite irrelevant here :p
  • 8 1
 I'm really starting to think that 26+ would make a lot of sense. Not trying to be OG and new at the same time. But hear me out.

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!!!
  • 1 0
 Agree! It will only take a couple legit rims and tires and we can try for ourselves.
  • 5 0
 So does anyone actually do the math? The increased tire width in a flexible pressure-vessel = more overall tire diameter? So a 26x2.7 is the same diameter overall as a 650b x 2.35. And with large volume for flat protection and a big-ass patch of rubber on the ground. Maybe that's why they became hard to find a few years back. Some things are just to good to keep around. 2.7 for life. (if I can just find the damn things...)
  • 2 1
 With all of the 27.5 bikes sold in the last few years I'd rather see more 26+ options than 27.5 plus. If more companies than just surly would make rims and tires I'd consider getting a pair of 26x40mm x 2.75/3.0 wheels. might be cool...
  • 1 2
 They disappeared because they suck. Squirmy feeling when cornering, heavier, and more rolling resistance. Nobody felt any benefits and they went to the garbage bin.
  • 1 0
 Tire manufactures still haven't figured out optimal height to width ratios for plus tires. This is responsible for some of that squirm.
  • 5 0
 I think surveying people of all ability levels in the same survey is flawed. Draft one of these up where you ask the people to classify themselves, and they can only fill out one set of 3 surveys, beg, int, exp. And then see the results. Every KOM owning shredders I know, still ride 2.3-2.2 on a i23-25 rim. And nobody is touching their KOMs on fat tires or rims....maybe just my area, but it seems this open survey of all people of all knowledge and skill levels, doesn't make sense for any real insight.
  • 3 0
 +1. Also its not selected on the riding style. XC riders use different tyre and rims widths as DH riders.
  • 6 0
 I will try and build a full suspension 26+ within the next year. even not plus sized my dh and my fr rig i am running 2.7 upfront on mavic 729s.
  • 5 1
 Seriously I usually don't comment of things but this one I'm gonna chime in on. For me the "plus size" should be geared toward retrofitting our current enduro bike with better gripping tires instead of making shit for 29era. Im currently on a 27.5 150mm "enduro bike" and fitted it with a 26 wheelset with some big 2.75 tires. I then matched them up with my 27.5 wheel with schwalbe Hans dampf 2.5 dh casing and the axle between the two was almost identical. I'm sure I'm not the first nor the last to do this. Works awsome now just need the industry to see the advantages then we have fun playfull bikes with loads of traction.
  • 4 1
 I’m glad I’ve got a great bike (2014 26” Stumpy Carbon Evo) with great wheels (2014 Easton Haven Carbon) that I got SMOKING deals on because they’re ‘obsolete’ and that I’m a couple years from having to worry about all these options before upgrading. Good night there are a lot of options!
  • 2 0
 I've been running a 2.5 High Roller rear & 3.0 Nobby Nic up front for a while now. The 3.0 fits snug in my 27.5 Fox Float, and my handling improved big time in the berms and I lose les speed over roots and baby heads. I'm running 27.5 wheels on my Transition Covert CF. on another note: I'm building a 26" wheel set with the same width tires, to see how well it'll handle in the woods. Point is: I've never rolled on tires thinner than 2.5"....
  • 2 0
 Instead of bigger rubber, I'd like to see existing 2.4s that are designed to run on 30-35mm internal. Rims are typically lighter than tires, so if you can get the width from the rim without increasing the amount of rubber, you'll have a lighter set up that is way more stable at lower pressures. My brief experience on some Chronicle 3.0s has be thinking there's just too much wheel, especially on the front, when all I'd really like is a bigger tire footprint.
  • 1 0
 +1 here too. I'm thinking thin Kevlar side protection might get there, but may not be affordable for the masses.
  • 1 0
 Think it would be way more than a top end Schwalbe? If the tread can last more than a season I'd drop some decent dollars on a tire I loved that was light and stable. Dampfs and Nics are a pretty nice combo, I think, just push the treads out a bit so they have nice profile on a 35mm rims and you'd be hard pressed to need more grip in most applications.
  • 1 0
 I may switch back to Dampfs and Nics after running the DHF/DHR2 (now SS) combo, as they just don't roll as nice. I'd bet Schwalbe will be the one who get's it right...eventually.
  • 1 0
 Yep, they do seem to be leading the way in terms of innovation. Specialized just might surprise us too.
  • 6 4
 Future of all-purpose mountain bike (from an engineer's perspective)

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.
  • 2 0
 Wow lots on negativity on this thread! I generally respect companies that go directly to their consumers for feedback, and new standards are not the result of marketing departments, but rather geeky bike engineers trying to marginally increase stiffness, compliance, versatility, etc. We can all complain about not having the latest and greatest, but it's this feedback and these innovations that brought us where we are!
  • 2 1
 Depends on the wheel size surely? For sure I would put a 2.5-2.6 tyre on a 26", and basically have a 650B and be laughing all the way to the bank.

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...
  • 2 1
 big tyres less injury as fat bast*rd. wide rims lower pressure more grip more fun. playful bikes can ride bigger tyres coz they are still fun. small tyres fast very! down big small up blah blah discipline you ride blah tubless rocks! blah 650b blah 26 tight n'twisty blah go f**king ride (message to self)
  • 1 0
 Why should there be shame for enjoying the design and technology of a sport?
To each their own.
  • 3 0
 To be honest, I picked 2.3 because that's what came on the bike and I stuck with it. I have no idea how wide the rim is. It works for my abilities.
  • 1 0
 My trail bike is a 29r. I have Velocity Blunt's 35mm with 30 mm internal. I use DHF minions 2.5. I run a tubeless set up. For me, being 188cm tall and 100kg it is having the ability to ride at 20psi without dinging the rim. My set up is about traction not speed.
  • 3 2
 Consumers aren't engineers and "what consumers ask for" rarely translates into "what consumers are begging to buy"... the best product focused companies have a vision of what is "right" and they drive towards it, and in the process hope that consumers agree, Specialized loves a low bb and short rear end, Fox likes adjustability, Rock Shox wishes no-one ever had to tune anything and Niner obviously hearts 29s. These companies chase their ideal bike year after year, incrementally improving. But, when they hit a technical constraint that limits their forward progress, that's where ideas like wide rims and boost hubs come from.

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.
  • 1 0
 I want wider tread or smaller stiffer side knobs on 2.3 or 2.4 tyres that suit my 30mm internal rims. So the tyres aren't square tread shape but I get the benefits of the wider run making my side walls stiffer, my tyre stiffer with less burping and stiffer cornering knobs as they're a touch shorter.
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.
  • 3 0
 " Fox's Float 34 with Boost 110 spacing has plenty of clearance for the 2.35" tire shown."

So does every other 100mm spacing fork.
  • 1 0
 Nobody else bothered that the wider the rim gets, the less distance there is between the tyre and the rim, making the rim more vulnerable to dings and making the suspension work harder? may sound a bit old school but seeing the majority of folk choose 30mm as their preffered rim width seems a bit wild to me.
  • 1 0
 The bike industry could get to be a lot more interesting but also confusing come these next few years! Boost this, wider that, lighter this, traction that, blah blah blah it's all marketing tactics of how they can suck more money out of us all! If you wanted the nicest and newest items you need to keep up to the new standards or else you bike just falls into the dinosaur age!
  • 1 0
 I bought a bike equipped with 30mm internal width rim this year and for the first time in my riding life I can lower my tire pressure and even run tubless. Before 30mm rims it was always a compromise between traction and getting flat tires, or rolling the bead off. Now I can throw caution to the wind and ride like hell, with no flat tires except for when I tear up the pinner sidwalls that come on cheap bike tires.
  • 2 0
 My comment from yesterday was erased for some reason.. Where are my 4" 29r tires? And why is nobody experimenting with a dual sus. 29+? If they are, I would love to do some R & D testing! Seriously, bike industry...
  • 1 0
 Good to see that my aging choices are the top votes, and that this money machine bs the industry is pushing has nothing to do with what riders want. ..in general, and sparing the slightly wider rims. (burp and roll protection for me, the thinner rims are very dated).

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.
  • 2 0
 questions should be categorized by disciples..such as DH | Enduro | etc
there is a huge difference between DH tyres/rims and enduro tyres/rims for example....
  • 1 0
 A 2.35" Hans Dampf on my Ibis 741 wheels measures 2.4-2.5" depending on how much air I leave in it over night. The 2.35" Michelin I mounted Tuesday measures 2.31", and the Maxxis 2.35" Minion is usually 2.2".
  • 1 1
 here's my story: I ride XC and i had 33mm rims with 2.1" tires and it was amazing. I could have 1.0/1.8 bar in the tires, tons of grip and high stability when cornering. But i thought that 2.5kg wheelset doesn't suit me and changed to lightweight one with 23mm rims and 2.2" tires. I kind of hate it. It's unstable with low pressure, tubeless keeps burping and seal around beads gets broken. I even had once rear tire jumping out of bead and putting tubeless back on with a mini pump on the trail was pain in the ass.
  • 4 0
 Us XC guys sure seem to be the outliers on this poll.
  • 2 0
 Yup, 22mm rims with 2.2/1.95's currently and I'm not the narrowest combo of my riding buddies by a long shot. 2nd widest rims out of the dozen or so guys I ride with actually...
  • 2 1
 Considering that Pinkbike is more of an AM/DH site, that is to be expected.
  • 1 0
 My old beater bike runs on Kenda K898 26x1.95 front and back and they're surprisingly capable tires in all sorts of terrain. Wider tires definitely help when encountering soft sand and loose gravel.
  • 1 0
 I haven't tried that many tires out, I've been running 2.4 continental trail kings front and back for a couple years now. I've thought about trying a majic marry of dhf but they cost a lot more, what am I missing?
  • 1 0
 The right rim width depends on the tire and whether its front or rear. My 30mm rims are great with a 2.3 to 2.4 on the front. The same size tire rides slow on the rear, making me think a 25-27 mm wide rim would be better.
  • 2 0
 Why do we refer to rim width, BB, stem length, crank length, travel and diameters in metric yet tire size is still in inches?
  • 1 1
 So I'm one of just over 200 people who still rides 19-21mm rims, is totally fine with it, and just doesn't give a f@ck!!! Im still faster than any of the other locals down the hill so until rim width makes you faster, I'm staying put! Think I'm too old for this website now!
  • 3 0
 Plus is really just old school freeride.
  • 2 0
 so knowing my rim diameter, will it make telling people doing my rim job easier? Wink
  • 5 1
 26 that is all.
  • 1 0
 I just plugged in numbers that I ride. I'm sure rim width is hard to experiment with...how many different tires can you buy in a season?
Questionable poll
  • 4 0
 How about a 26" rim!
  • 1 1
 i found myself running tyre measures and stuff from my favourite dh wc racers so, what they use influence somehow my bike's components and the way they are set up ,but i will not run 27.5" or 29" wheels 26" 4 life LOL :B
  • 1 0
 I'm not buying any new tires until they come out with the ultra-fat bikes in 2017. 8 inch wide 36 inch diameter tires is where its going to be at people!
  • 1 0
 Am / Trail Hardtail, 27.5Plus size, Boost, 40-45mm rims, 2.7-3.00 Tire width, low tire pressure is the best application for Plus size tires. I like it a lot.
  • 2 0
 2.4 DHR2 on 25mm internal rims. And I see very little reason to try anything else. Other then minion ss rear next summer.
  • 1 2
 Starting to get annoyed by how most websites claim Plus bikes are only good for beginners. I absolutely LOVE my Derby AM 40mm rims, which put most high volume casing tires close to Plus territory. It has made riding my local trails in slip-slidey SoCal so much more predictable and enjoyable. Grip for dayyyyyyyyz. And no, I'm not a newb, I'm just able to appreciate something that vastly improves traction when I've got exposure everywhere I ride.
  • 2 0
 I run 29" 50mm wide rims with a 2.35 tyre and it is amazing ... Where is this option
  • 2 0
 How have they not made 21mm an option!?!
  • 1 1
 It depends on the time of year-conditions-soil. Currently have a 2.7 front mobster and 2.5 high roller rear for the non stop wet muddy fun
  • 2 0
 I just like the trail noise wide rims/tyres make, its mega, weeeeeeeee.
  • 2 0
 30mm rims + maxxis minions 2.3 = boss
  • 2 1
 Step one figure out what mountain bikers like

Step two make something different the "standard"

Step three profit
  • 1 0
 I am running MTX39 with a holy back 2.4, larsen front 2.35 and its osamm ????
  • 2 0
 Why are tyres measured in imperial and rims in metric?
  • 3 0
 Why are bikes weighed in pounds but parts in grams? Because bike industry.
  • 2 1
 The perfect rim width is: the rim you have.

The perfect tyre width is: the tyre you have.

Just ride your damn bike.
  • 1 0
 somebody should submit one of these poll threads to the Guinness Book of World Records for The Largest Circle J3rk ...
  • 4 2
 275+ is where its at.
  • 2 0
 700c.. sorted. ;-)
  • 1 0
 i have a bighit here that will fit 3" tyres...but i run 2.3 barons
  • 2 1
 See that's just it. 3.0 tires have already ran their course years ago. That fad died because they performed worse, not better. 2.3 to 2.5 is the sweet spot for gravity.
  • 2 1
 SPANK STIFFY 40 the last hoop you will ever have to buy. Whiptastic!
  • 1 0
 I heard that if you put lube on your rotors it makes your tires wider
  • 1 0
 I have some 35mm rims with some 2.35 icons and its huge!
  • 1 1
 I'm never buying an E bike so stop pushing "+" tyres on me. That's obviously why they're being marketed isn't it?
  • 1 1
 Its an internal width not external. 30mm is too wide for internal bad for climbing.
  • 1 0
 I'm not saying you're wrong, but why?
  • 2 1
 Don't answer. No free marketing info for the suits.
  • 1 0
 Do my 2.6 Vee Rubber Ninja's Count? Wink
  • 1 0
 Sooo... 1700 people answered a poll though they have no opinion. okay.
  • 1 0
 23mm roady tires for all conditions, yo!
  • 1 0
 Why is no one mentioning the tensions on spokes?
  • 2 4
 stupid pool
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
  • 3 1
 This is ENDURO!
  • 3 5
 Ummmmm I use different width on front and rear so can't do the survey.. So you my logic fish doesn't want to play scrabble with your bike-a-ometter
  • 1 0
 No just your spinchter mate
  • 1 0
 Nope but I'm happy to try yours out xx Wink
  • 1 0
 Not sure that I would be up for that .but happy xmas anyway mate Lol
  • 1 0
 Rim width? Well........
  • 1 0
 Just want some 29 2.5
  • 1 2
 Fatty love! 4"+ and 80mm

Post a Comment



You must login to Pinkbike.
Don't have an account? Sign up

Join Pinkbike  Login
Copyright © 2000 - 2019. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.060389
Mobile Version of Website