Rocket Ron vs Racing Ralph

hard-rider

I currently have Rons on my bike but the rear tyre is almost bald now so need to replace it. I've heard good things about the Ralphs but wondered how well they wear as they seem to have a slightly smaller block pattern and am concerned they'll wear out even quicker than the Rons. What is the difference between the Ron and Ralph performance wise?

Also, should I put the Ron from the front (still almost like new) on the rear and have the Ralph at the front or put the Ralph on the rear?

If anyone has any other suggestions for suitable tires, I want something light like the Rons / Raplhs, fast rolling and tubeless ready.
EDIT. I ride mostly hard rocky trails, hard dirt paths and dirt fire roads and some loose stoney tracks.

.blitz

Ralphs are longer lasting than Rons, which have a lifetime measured in minutes.

Rons are based on the same low-profile paper-thin carcass as Freds, whereas Ralphs use the same carcass as Nobby Nics. A Nic on the front goes well with a Ralph on the back, or a Ron on the front with a Fred on the back.

guity

Out of the 2 definately keep the Ron on the front for extra grip in braking and cornering. I can't help you with wear rates as I haven't spent long on a ralph on the back but I think the Ron might have slightly more drag but better traction. For rocky stuff I would say the Ralph should be perfect on the back because you don't need the extra knob height for biting into soft ground.
In my experience they both go tubeless very easily too.

felix.london

No probs with wear with my Ralph on the rear. Sidewalls are a bit thin for where I'm riding but a good rear tyre for dry & loose stuff. Not sure how it would handle the wetter UK conditions although saying that, had it out in the spring mud, slush & snow last week and it performed better that expected tbh

hard-rider

Thanks for the replies. I think I'll give the Raplh a try on the rear and keep the Ron up front for the moment and see ho0w I get on.