Forum home Commuter cycling forum Commuting chat

Road tyres for MTB?

Ian.BIan.B Posts: 732
edited November 2014 in Commuting chat
Anyone got any recommendations? I need to replace the massively chunky and disintegrating original tyres with something slimmer lighter and more suitable for on-road use. It's used only as a run-around for short urban journeys but including frosty winter mornings, so don't want to spend too much.

Please don't send me over to some other part of the forum!

Posts

  • OuijaOuija Posts: 1,386
    Continental Sport Contacts (1.6) or Schwalbe Kojaks....

    ExoticChimney.jpg
  • gingamangingaman Posts: 576
    I was running conti travel contacts for about a year, pretty good for a semi-slick.
  • DrLexDrLex Posts: 2,142
    Ouija wrote:
    Continental Sport Contacts (1.6) or Schwalbe Kojaks

    Agreed; just swapped Kojaks for Sports on my Pompetamine, as I couldn't find Kojaks at a reasonable price. Ordered Marathon Plus as the next set.
    Location: ciderspace
  • My wife uses Conti Travel Contacts on her MTB that gets used mainly as general purpose around town, transporting the youngest in the rear seat, etc. Includes road, canal paths and good forest tracks.

    She rates them highly.
  • Been inpressed by Rapid Rob's they are old and thus cheaper versions of Racing Ralphs, being a proper MTB tyre, they are sure footed on wet greasy corners but being a old cross country racer, they are fast.

    I had one on the rear for most of this year, good tyre, I have replaced it with a Racing Ralph which at double the price has softer compounds etc.

    If you do a lot of miles, soft MTB tyres don't last long on the rear, maybe 2000 miles? Touring/commuting tyres such as travel contacts with much harder compounds will last much longer the trade off being grip.
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    Scwalbe City Jet is the go to budget tyre at circa £11 each, above that the Sport Contacts are good.
  • CitizenLeeCitizenLee Posts: 2,227
    I have Schwalbe Road Cruisers on my hybrid and find them to be decent.
    Current:
    NukeProof Mega FR 2012
    Cube NuRoad 2018
    Previous:
    2015 Genesis CdF 10, 2014 Cube Hyde Race, 2012 NS Traffic, 2007 Specialized SX Trail, 2005 Specialized Demo 8
  • Ian.BIan.B Posts: 732
    Thanks to you all for the suggestions and advice!

    The democratic consensus seems to favour the Contis despite a late showing for the City Jets, so a pair of Sport Contacts has been duly purchased from Cycle Surgery :)
  • My partner has the city jets and thinks they're not very good. She's had too many punctures and thinks it didn't ride well on them.
  • jds_1981jds_1981 Posts: 1,858
    Ian.B wrote:
    Thanks to you all for the suggestions and advice!

    The democratic consensus seems to favour the Contis despite a late showing for the City Jets, so a pair of Sport Contacts has been duly purchased from Cycle Surgery :)

    Ah, I was going to comment earlier today, but signing in on my mobile doesn't work any more. Stupid site.
    I was going to give another vote for the city jets. Not really anything to compare them to (apart from fatboys years ago,) but they do tow path duties admirably (where towpath involves riding down stairs, over some fairly significant stone anti bike speed ridges and https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5235435,-0.0077587,3a,75y,170.3h,74.71t/data=!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sx_LM9k6t-ayyh5AeW22PhA!2e0!3e5 this bridge (despite the sign)).
    FCN 9 || FCN 5
  • Manc33Manc33 Posts: 2,157
    I ended up with City Jets when doing this.

    Next step was a road bike lol, thats really what you want OP isn't it? :P
  • Ian.BIan.B Posts: 732
    Manc33 wrote:
    I ended up with City Jets when doing this.

    Next step was a road bike lol, thats really what you want OP isn't it? :P

    I have three already :)
  • Kieran_BurnsKieran_Burns Posts: 10,052
    Ian.B wrote:
    Manc33 wrote:
    I ended up with City Jets when doing this.

    Next step was a road bike lol, thats really what you want OP isn't it? :P

    I have three already :)

    No one here understands why that is relevant 8)
    Chunky Cyclists need your love too! :-)
    2009 Specialized Tricross Sport
    2011 Trek Madone 4.5
    2012 Felt F65X
    Proud CX Pervert and quiet roadie. 12 mile commuter
  • debelidebeli Posts: 582
    Ian.B wrote:
    Anyone got any recommendations? I need to replace the massively chunky and disintegrating original tyres with something slimmer lighter and more suitable for on-road use. It's used only as a run-around for short urban journeys but including frosty winter mornings, so don't want to spend too much.

    Please don't send me over to some other part of the forum!

    I agree absolutely with the recommendations for Conti Sport Contacts. I have found them nothing but fabulous for many years.

    Advice: Lock that front suspension to get sharper steering on tarmac. Nothing ruins an MTB on tarmac like the wallow of a sprung fork.

    Caveat: Do get you Contis up to 80psi, but do not be tempted (as I was once) to take them up to 90. For some reason, they started to puncture every 10 miles or so. Once I dropped them back to 80 psi (the max on the sidewall) they were fine again.
  • Debeli wrote:
    Ian.B wrote:
    Anyone got any recommendations? I need to replace the massively chunky and disintegrating original tyres with something slimmer lighter and more suitable for on-road use. It's used only as a run-around for short urban journeys but including frosty winter mornings, so don't want to spend too much.

    Please don't send me over to some other part of the forum!

    I agree absolutely with the recommendations for Conti Sport Contacts. I have found them nothing but fabulous for many years.

    Advice: Lock that front suspension to get sharper steering on tarmac. Nothing ruins an MTB on tarmac like the wallow of a sprung fork.

    Caveat: Do get you Contis up to 80psi, but do not be tempted (as I was once) to take them up to 90. For some reason, they started to puncture every 10 miles or so. Once I dropped them back to 80 psi (the max on the sidewall) they were fine again.

    unless there is something dreadfully wrong with the fork it shouldn't wallow, in the slightest, I suspect its subjective and there is something about the zing of a stiff bike on high pressure tyres.

    if your going to lock the fork out might as well get a rigid, though at that point might be worth just getting a hybrid/road bike.
  • zx6manzx6man Posts: 1,092
    Used city jets, but then to schwalbe land cruisers as the jets for me were too slippy when hitting any slight trails/paths.
  • debelidebeli Posts: 582
    unless there is something dreadfully wrong with the fork it shouldn't wallow, in the slightest, I suspect its subjective and there is something about the zing of a stiff bike on high pressure tyres.

    if your going to lock the fork out might as well get a rigid, though at that point might be worth just getting a hybrid/road bike.

    Yebbut, nobbut....

    Wallow was the wrong word. I write as an ardent (but unskilled) rider both on and off road. In the days of rigid MTBs, a good MTB made a devastating urban commuter. With front suspension, some of the steering sharpness (perceived or otherwise) was lost on tarmac.

    As a true lover of proper bicycles, I have always realised that rear suspension was just a socially acceptable alternative to other treatments for piles. When I speak of suspension, I refer only to sprung forks. Rear springs are just a bit odd and try-hard. God knows this to be the truth and is working on an 11th Commandment to cover the topic.

    But back to suspension... Many years ago, I adapted an hardtail MTB for urban commutes. Some changes were blind alleys. Others were significant.

    Wastes of my time:
    1. A tighter, higher-geared cassette, as I didn't need the big spread for tarmac. In truth, I barely noticed the difference.
    2. Cutting the bars down to get me between buses and PO vans. It worked, but it left the bike unrideable off-road if I wanted a quick change back to mud.

    Excellent changes:
    1. Locking out the forks. On good, fair and poor forks alike, the absence of brake dive made the steering sharper and more predictable on tarmac. With the bonus of slick tyres on a spare set of rims, the difference was even sharper.

    You can put this down to the quality of the fork, but the loss of that initial compression (and resultant change in geometry) when braking and the settling (however slight) when slowing or moving weight to the front makes tarmac much more fun (and through the increased confidence it makes it faster too).

    Changing to a rigid fork is a faff and makes it harder to flip the bike back to off-road use. Just twiddling the lock-out and then untwiddling it to go mucky again takes less than a second and makes a HUUUUGE difference.

    Having said that, I respect your right to hold differing views whilst hoping that you understand just how terribly wrong you are on this and all other matters.
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    Decently damped forks with a floodgate function don't need a lockout, there are also many low end forks with lockout where its the best feature on them as it prevents the thing pogoing out of control when trying to pretend to be suspension. I suspect you view is tainted by old and or cheap forks without a proper damper.
  • debelidebeli Posts: 582
    The Rookie wrote:
    Decently damped forks with a floodgate function don't need a lockout, there are also many low end forks with lockout where its the best feature on them as it prevents the thing pogoing out of control when trying to pretend to be suspension. I suspect you view is tainted by old and or cheap forks without a proper damper.

    The reason floodgate-fitted forks have no lockout largely because the function is replaced by correct use of the floodgate. My view is certainly tainted and some of my equipment is old and cheap... but some is not. I even still ride a rigid MTB when I'm feeling brave...

    The issue is not one of damping (I've been fooling with car and motorcycle suspension since the late '70s, so I'm familiar with the concept). Damping is just damping. Compression can be damped; the absence of movement cannot.

    The reason to use a lockout (or max the floodgate and compression on posher forks) is to stop the geometry of the bike changing under braking or weight transfer.

    I still buy a road-tax disc for my car, even though it isn't a road tax and there's no longer a disc. I still call the V5C a logbook, even though it isn't a book. I still call the top tube a crossbar and when I adjust bicycle suspension to lock it and prevent compression, I still call that lockout.

    Now I must get my Dyson out and hoover.
  • The RookieThe Rookie Posts: 27,748
    But a bike with Hydraulc lockout isn't fully locked out anyway, it's just LOTS of compression damping, so you need to be careful that what you call lockout is lockout, if you want them totally rigid you need cheap and nasty forks, which are so cheap and nasty you may as well have rigids.
Sign In or Register to comment.