Maxxis High Roller XC any good?

CrazySmudge

Hi All

Saw a review in What mountain bike recently about the High Roller XC and wondered if anybody has checked them out? Have the DH version and they are great for downhill and cornering but naff going up hill though they gave my thighs a great work out!! In the review they say they are half the weight of the DH version and no good in the mud - but the sun is out or was.... so not sure if that is a concern so thought I might try them.

Al

hucking_fell

I've got a pair in 2.35 supertacky. They grip fine but obvious rolling resistance. Still not as light as some others. They look wider than other companies 2.35ish tyres. My Conti 2.4s are narrower. Not that bad going downhill in the mud.

Anonymous

th xc tyre (2.1) is ace, i rode a set on an older stumpy and they were ace, very light, very grippy, very quick rolling (although lots of folk might dissagree with it rolling well) i even had a bit of success converting them to be run tubeless.

ratty2k

I run 'em in Winter as they clear pretty well and with a Super tacky up front and 60A rear grip real well. Slow rolling tho, now its dried out some I'm on Minions 42A Supertacky front and 60A rear- roll much better. Back end slides more but only adds to the fun!

passout

I've used them - found them good all rounders, nice and grippy.

stevebrock

ratty2k wrote:

I run 'em in Winter as they clear pretty well and with a Super tacky up front and 60A rear grip real well. Slow rolling tho, now its dried out some I'm on Minions 42A Supertacky front and 60A rear- roll much better. Back end slides more but only adds to the fun!

Which version DH or XC???

stevebrock

ratty2k wrote:

I run 'em in Winter as they clear pretty well and with a Super tacky up front and 60A rear grip real well. Slow rolling tho, now its dried out some I'm on Minions 42A Supertacky front and 60A rear- roll much better. Back end slides more but only adds to the fun!

Which version DH or XC???

nik young

im running at the moment on the rear a highroller folding 62a -grip seems good in the dry and in the wet but it looks very narrow for a 2.1 and i converted it to tubeless with no hassle

Father Faff

I had High Roller 2.1 XCs on my Meta 5 from new and they were excellently grippy and seemed good in wet conditions and rocky conditions but they definitely aren't the fastest rollers. I've recently been trying Mountain King 2.2 Protections which are faster rolling and lighter but aren't so confidence inspiring when it's wet. I also think the High Rollers feel a bit sturdier on rough rocky trails but that might be my imagination.

passout

I agree with the above, they aren't that fast but do everything well.

Airienteer

I run the 2.35 on my Meta. Only on the front though as it provudes decent grip but wouldn't want the lot as rolling resistance would just be a bit too much.

CrazySmudge

I have a pair of Panaracer Fire XC Pro Kevlars - how does the maxxis compare - looking for something maybe more sticky and good for uphills and around corners

nik young

i was running fire xc pros before i fitted the high roller and a maxxis igniter 2.1on the front and its much which better combo than the pros

ratty2k

stevebrock wrote:

ratty2k wrote:

I run 'em in Winter as they clear pretty well and with a Super tacky up front and 60A rear grip real well. Slow rolling tho, now its dried out some I'm on Minions 42A Supertacky front and 60A rear- roll much better. Back end slides more but only adds to the fun!

Which version DH or XC???

DH on both types, single ply tho'

Suss

I have been using the High Roller 2.1 exception at the rear and Medusa 2.1 execption up front all winter and it has made a big difference.

The High Roller grips well and rolls fine up hill and down, the Medusa make for sure footed grip through wet and muddy condtions, which my local ride mainly is.

They cope quite well at the trail centres too, the High Roller is great over the rocky ground. i initiallly thought the Medusa may be skittish (not sure thats a real word) over the the groomed gravel and rocky trail, but they haven't let me down yet.

the combination is fine over roots as long as you dont brake hard! but i guess thats the norm for most tyres.

thinking of using High Roller up front and back when/if the weather/conditions improve!

ads4

My 2.1 LUST 62a Highroller XCs have done me fine over the winter, though yes I could have done with a better rear tyre some times. I will be sticking my Crossmark back on the rear again soon though...

ilovedirt

I'm running them on my XC/AM bike. They grip ok and roll ok, middle of the road as far as i can tell. I changed the front tyre to tioga factory DH 2.1 for extra grip in the corners and the sloppy mud. I'll change back though when the weather improves a bit.

Northwind

The 2.1 is skinny, and suffers for it IMO. 2.35 is good for these, since the claimed sizes are just randomly made up bull****. I prefer my Nevegals but the highrollers are really good "one tyre fits all" tyres.

ilovedirt

Suss wrote:

I have been using the High Roller 2.1 exception at the rear and Medusa 2.1 execption up front all winter and it has made a big difference.

The High Roller grips well and rolls fine up hill and down, the Medusa make for sure footed grip through wet and muddy condtions, which my local ride mainly is.

They cope quite well at the trail centres too, the High Roller is great over the rocky ground. i initiallly thought the Medusa may be skittish (not sure thats a real word) over the the groomed gravel and rocky trail, but they haven't let me down yet.

the combination is fine over roots as long as you dont brake hard! but i guess thats the norm for most tyres.

thinking of using High Roller up front and back when/if the weather/conditions improve!

"XC" stands for "cross country", not "exception"! Sorry, that just made me laugh!

Suss

I'm glad i can entertain i quite enjoyed writing eXCeption, it's not often used in conversation.

Still good tyres :P

bomberesque

I have the 2.1s on my SS and 2.35s on my HT and would echo the above. They're a good allrounder, grip well, roll well, corner well. straightline traction is especially impressive, I've found although the cornering worries me a bit as it rails very hard and doesn't warn you when it's about to let go (although it's not often that you get it that far) I went for Nobby Nic on the front for a bit less bite and a bit more communication. On the back though, HR is king for me.

the kevlar beaded 2.35 can be tough to get hold of but is loads lighter than the steel one and easier to ghetto IME

Personally I'd stay away from the supertacky, just too slow rolling, the 60a does fine for me. My back tyre of choice.

peter413

Also my back tyre of choice in 2.35 60a form. The only other tyre I use on the rear is a holy roller for on the street or dry trails.

BTW they work much better when about half worn IME

kona_matt

i've had a set of 62a 2.35 XC high rollers on this winter and have been pretty pleased, especially good on the rocks at Cwm Carn and Afan. A good all rounder though i'd like to give a set of minions a try. As the weather improves i'm thinking of running something faster rolling on the back, maybe one of the 2.1 ignitors i've already got in the shed or a kenda small block when the trails get dusty (they will get dusty at some point this year won't they?! please!).

as far as a can tell the high roller is a massively popular tyre and that can't be a bad thing. just check out the amount of high roller tracks you seen in the mud when you're out and about.

peter413

kona_matt wrote:

i've had a set of 62a 2.35 XC high rollers on this winter and have been pretty pleased, especially good on the rocks at Cwm Carn and Afan. A good all rounder though i'd like to give a set of minions a try. .

I use a minion on the front with the high roller or holy roller on the back and its the best I've ever tried!!!

You should definatly give them a shot, much grippier in the mud and just as fast rolling as the high roller

joshtp

great tyres, gripy and fast, come up small though, esp 2.1, for that reason i only use 2.35 or 2.5, i think 2.35 is a great all rounder, and 2.5 for ht's on the back and for aggressive use, in maxxpro or super taki,

one day when i custom build a custom framed HT with Boxxers and a 61 deg HA i will have 2.7 slow reezay HR's, and it will be perfection. i will also have a 800mm bar, 35mm stem, and sint evrything.

it will be a DH HT on a whole new level.

bomberesque

joshtp/mbukman wrote:

great tyres, gripy and fast, come up small though, esp 2.1, for that reason i only use 2.35 or 2.5, i think 2.35 is a great all rounder, and 2.5 for ht's on the back and for aggressive use, in maxxpro or super taki,

one day when i custom build a custom framed HT with Boxxers and a 61 deg HA i will have 2.7 slow reezay HR's, and it will be perfection. i will also have a 800mm bar, 35mm stem, and sint evrything.

it will be a DH HT on a whole new level.

/strokes chin and looks at the Evil

how does the 2.5 HR roll? not the supertacky (I know what they're like) but the maxxpro (60a...?) are they workable for trail riding or do you really need to be gravity fed not to be eaten alive by the rolling resist?

joshtp

bomberesque wrote:

joshtp/mbukman wrote:

great tyres, gripy and fast, come up small though, esp 2.1, for that reason i only use 2.35 or 2.5, i think 2.35 is a great all rounder, and 2.5 for ht's on the back and for aggressive use, in maxxpro or super taki,

one day when i custom build a custom framed HT with Boxxers and a 61 deg HA i will have 2.7 slow reezay HR's, and it will be perfection. i will also have a 800mm bar, 35mm stem, and sint evrything.

it will be a DH HT on a whole new level.

/strokes chin and looks at the Evil

how does the 2.5 HR roll? not the supertacky (I know what they're like) but the maxxpro (60a...?) are they workable for trail riding or do you really need to be gravity fed not to be eaten alive by the rolling resist?

its actually pretty good, no slower than, say, a 2.35, or even my old ignitors. I have the singleply, or at least i think it is, its only 780g. i think its very good, nice big volume, and awsomegrip. For me the slight weight penalty over the 2.35 is worth every gram for the extra grip, stability and comfort, esp on a HT. For me, no trail HT should ever have a small rear tyre, for aggressive use the added squish, puncture proofing, and grip is just the best thing since sliced bread. 2.5 is the min for back tyres on a aggressive HT, room is the only reason to go smaller.
do it, i love it, and its got to be worth a go, even if you decide you dont like it....

BigAirNig

Well I just put these back on after using Rocket Ron/Racing Ralph through the spring & summer (tubeless).

I love those tyres due to their low rolling resistance, grip and looks!

Having initially struggled to get my High Rollers to go on the rim to seal for tubeless fit, I used an inner tube for 20 mins or so, then upon removing it, the tubeless fit worked fine

These tyres sealed after 1 cycle of 'shaking' the sealant around - as per the Stans No Tubes video - so showing they are rather less porous than the Schwalbe ones I used before, which took ages to seal fully.

Using the 2.1 exception tyres at 35 psi - I went out on the Surrey Hills (Dorking) yesterday for 2 hours.

I found they gripped well, given the wet & mud - not slipping out except on a section with wet leaf cover. They ploughed through muddy puddles and held their line on off-camber sections. Over all - they were very confidence inspiring.

They have a little more drag than my Schwalbe ones - but not desperately so - at least in this weather when mud adds drag anyway!!

They do come up a bit narrower for a 2.1 though, but not really a problem.