tyre width, 2.2 or 2.4

pondyyfz

buying some mountain king ii ust but not sure on what size, bike is a cotic hemlock, using them for commute to work, mix of on and off road, off road is nothing special, bridle paths, fire roads and some forest with is fast and hard packed in summer and a complete bog in the winter. I have 2.2 wire bead mk now and they come up slightly small, but is a 2.4 overkill for what I need? I google this and it seems all conti tyres come up smaller than spec?

97th choice

Complete overkill. I take it you want to go tubeless?

pondyyfz

yep tubeless, using flow rims. been getting a lot of flats due to thorns etc

lbalony

If its a commuter just get some 2.1's or something. No need for trail tyres on a commute. Inused to use Panaracer fire xc pro, good all rounders.

pondyyfz

the bike will be used for local trail centres but mainly used for the type of riding in my first post

97th choice

Loads of choices out there, what's your budget? Only thing is that something, light, fast rolling, and good for roads and hard packed trail centres won't be much use in a complete bog.

pondyyfz

I'm set on the mountain king, im using the cheap wire bead one at the moment and its good for, two faults I have is the size, says 2.2 but its acually 2", looks really skinny. Heard the 2.4 come up small to. The second is getting a flat with tubes, the sidewall cracks around the wire after it goes flat so go tubeless with ust version.

thelonegroover

I put some 2.4" MK 2's on my wifes bike, she finds them much more comfortable than her old 2.2 MQ 1's. She made no comment about grip or speed.

97th choice

That doesn't make them the right tyre for his use, IIRC they are an All mountain tyre weighing over 800g?

OP needs something lightweight and fast rolling in my opinion.

thelonegroover

Quite right, I was merely giving my direct feedback. Note, the none black chili versions should be OK, they are quite fast running, even for the tread pattern.

YeehaaMcgee

Worth bearing in mind that with Mountain King 2 tyres, any tyre size over 2.2" has a different, softer compound. 2.2" and less are intended for XC and prioritise rolling resistance, the larger ones for more "buggering about" kind of riding and prioritise grip.

rockmonkeysc

The 2.4 is huge. 2.2 is plenty for normal trail riding.

YeehaaMcgee

For the kind of riding though, something like a Small block 8 would be better.

thelonegroover

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Worth bearing in mind that with Mountain King 2 tyres, any tyre size over 2.2" has a different, softer compound. 2.2" and less are intended for XC and prioritise rolling resistance, the larger ones for more "buggering about" kind of riding and prioritise grip.

Can you give details of the softer compound of MK2 2.4 tyres, I understood it's only the pro tection and race sport that are black chili.

YeehaaMcgee

Black chilli is in several tyres, and doesn't actually mean "soft" or "Hard" or a given durometer rating like other tyre manufacturers use.
You can have a hard black chilli, or a soft black chilli.
Conti don't really offer various compound choices on their high end tyre, they instead have a tyre intended for XC, and a tyre intended for freeriding, a tyre meant for wet, a tyre meant for dry, and so on. They pre-select the right tyre compound for the job, so a narrower XC-ish tyre is harder than a big fat grippy freeride tyre.

thelonegroover

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Black chilli is in several tyres, and doesn't actually mean "soft" or "Hard" or a given durometer rating like other tyre manufacturers use.
You can have a hard black chilli, or a soft black chilli.
Conti don't really offer various compound choices on their high end tyre, they instead have a tyre intended for XC, and a tyre intended for freeriding, a tyre meant for wet, a tyre meant for dry, and so on. They pre-select the right tyre compound for the job, so a narrower XC-ish tyre is harder than a big fat grippy freeride tyre.

So a standard 2.4 Mountain King 2 will be softer than a standard 2.2 Mountain King 2, neither being race sport or pro-tection (black chili).

YeehaaMcgee

I have no idea about the more budget oriented tyres, I'm afraid, but it's true of the Black chilli 2.2" and 2.4" yes.
For what it's worth, I don't really rate Conti's budget tyres, but I do like their high end range, although they're overpriced.

thelonegroover

cheers.

rockmonkeysc

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

I have no idea about the more budget oriented tyres, I'm afraid, but it's true of the Black chilli 2.2" and 2.4" yes.
For what it's worth, I don't really rate Conti's budget tyres, but I do like their high end range, although they're overpriced.

They are quite reasonable on Bikediscount.de at the moment. I just got a pair of 2.2" Black Chilli Rubber Queens for £28 each. I certainly wouldn't buy them at full price.

coulddobetter

I got totally fed up with the basic mountain king 2.2 wire bead, no grip and pretty hairy at times. Just fitted 2.2 bontrager xr4 team issue. Not measured but look wider than the conti , best thing though is I was able to climb better, brake better, and steer accurately. I rate them highly as do bikeradar and other sites.

YeehaaMcgee

Well, yeah, you're comparing a budget cheapo continental, with a "team issue" bontrager tyre.

Kowalski675

coulddobetter wrote:

I got totally fed up with the basic mountain king 2.2 wire bead, no grip and pretty hairy at times. Just fitted 2.2 bontrager xr4 team issue. Not measured but look wider than the conti , best thing though is I was able to climb better, brake better, and steer accurately. I rate them highly as do bikeradar and other sites.

My new bike came with the OE wire bead Mountain King 2.2s - after reading and hearing so many bad reports about them I took 'em straight off (those wire beads put up a fight) and replaced 'em with Team Issue XR3 2.2s (for £20 each) - liking them so far, although I did debate going for the 2.35 for the front. My 2.2s measure pretty much the same as the Conti 2.2s, give or take a couple of mm.

YeehaaMcgee

Did you even ride them?

Kowalski675

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Did you even ride them?

Is that asking whether I rode on the OE Contis? If so, no I didn't - figured I'd rather take them off unused and maybe get £20 for the pair, rather than use them for a bit then take them off and bin them after the first time they saw a wet trail and scared me, like everyone else seems to.

YeehaaMcgee

Surely the mere fact that someone wanted to buy them suggests they're not as useless as you make out. A lot of people talk down a lot of stuff in the MTB world, and most of the time they not only have no idea what they're talking about, but they've never even seen the thing they're dissing.
Best to form your own conclusions on something.

97th choice

To be fair people often buy them because they see the name and know nothing about the compound, they'll buy, say, a 'performance' nobby nic for 13 quid over the evolution trail star compound for 40 quid and think they are getting the same tyre.

paul.skibum

I admit tyres do make a big difference but I always assume for every two complaints about a tyre there is at least one hamfisted rider with poor technique - my front tyre doesnt grip with these! Try applying some weight to the front tyre. My rear is squirrelly on roots! Dont use the rear brake so much.

Kowalski675

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

Surely the mere fact that someone wanted to buy them suggests they're not as useless as you make out.

I don't know if anyone does want to buy them - haven't tried selling them yet, they're leant against my half stripped poorly Speed Triple currently (but people will buy any old shite if it's cheap enough). I had thought I might keep them and put them back on if/when I sell the bike, but I don't fancy wrestling with those wire beads again. I do form my own conclusions, and I'd concluded from the fact that nobody has a good word to say about the OE wired Mountain Kings that I was better replacing them with something better that I knew I liked, especially when they were barely more than half RRP. My old motorcycling partner in crime has the same bike, which came on the same Contis, and one wet ride was enough to have him binning his - they were "scarily bad". Compared to the cost of the whole bike, £40 for some rubber that I have confidence in isn't much to pay (especially when you're used to a pair of tyres costing £200).

YeehaaMcgee

So...

Kowalski675 wrote:

I form my own opinions through second hand experiences.

Kowalski675

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

So...

Kowalski675 wrote:

I form my own opinions through second hand experiences.

No, that's not what I said at all (but as usual you just see what you want to see, and in your world any viewpoint that differs from yours is automatically wrong anyway).

cooldad

YeehaaMcgee wrote:

So...

Kowalski675 wrote:

I form my own opinions through second hand experiences.

That sounds like my sex life.