Best Size road tires for Mountain Bike?



M

maxo

Guest
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 05:09:12 +0000, JJ wrote:

> I ran the same Performance 1.25 slicks for about a year with no complaints
> and no flats (I weigh 225 lbs.). Performance tires are supposedly made by
> Panaracer.


That explains the decent quality--I've never been disappointed even by
basic Panaracers--that's actually what was on the bike before it got the
Performance rubber. Really supple casings and wonderful cornering. I just
have them on the beer run bike so no mileage really, can't comment on the
durability--but at a tenner each--who cares. :p
 
M

maxo

Guest
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 19:08:13 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:

> my favorite Panaracer Pasela - 1.25" 280g


What's the beef with the Paselas? Now I've always liked Panaracer rubber,
but folks rave about Paselas--especially the Rivendell set. I've always
been wary of them, not liking tires that have a center "ridge".
 
P

Peter Cole

Guest
maxo wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 19:08:13 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:
>
>
>>my favorite Panaracer Pasela - 1.25" 280g

>
>
> What's the beef with the Paselas? Now I've always liked Panaracer rubber,
> but folks rave about Paselas--especially the Rivendell set. I've always
> been wary of them, not liking tires that have a center "ridge".


While I'm hardly a member of the "Rivendell set", I'm a fan of Paselas.
They're cheap, very well made, durable and reasonably light. I don't
think they have a "ridge", perhaps the rubber is a little thicker in the
center, which may account for some of their durability. I don't detect
any cornering problems, and I tend to take corners faster than most in
the group I ride with -- and most of them use tires costing 2-4x more
than the Paselas.
 
M

Mark Hickey

Guest
maxo <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 19:08:13 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:
>
>> my favorite Panaracer Pasela - 1.25" 280g

>
>What's the beef with the Paselas? Now I've always liked Panaracer rubber,
>but folks rave about Paselas--especially the Rivendell set. I've always
>been wary of them, not liking tires that have a center "ridge".


Actually, your snipping put "my favorite" with the wrong tire - my
favorite tire is actually the Panaracer T-Serv. It doesn't have a
center ridge. I've found that they're the equal (or more) to any
flat-resistant tire, are light, ride great, have plenty of traction
and wear like iron. They're also a lot cheaper than the similar but
inferior (due to the sidewalls) Continental Gatorskin, IMHO.

I run T-Servs on my 'cross bike, my "urban MTB", my tandem and
sometimes my road bike, in widths from 25mm to 35mm.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
 
J

Just zis Guy, you know?

Guest
On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 22:34:07 GMT, SMS <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Look at the Panaracer Pasela Kevlar Bead Tourguard, either in 1.5" or
>1.75". But 1.5" is pushing it, if you have wide rims.


The Schwalbe Marathon is a better tyre in my experience. I have run
both on both solos and tandems.


Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

"Let’s have a moment of silence for all those Americans who are stuck
in traffic on their way to the gym to ride the stationary bicycle."
- Earl Blumenauer
 
M

maxo

Guest
On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 07:39:24 -0400, Peter Cole wrote:

> I don't think
> they have a "ridge", perhaps the rubber is a little thicker in the center,


Looked them up on Nashbar (on sale for 13 bucks, btw) and you're right. I
swear the last time I looked at them they had that awful ridge like a lot
of 27x1 1/4 tires had in the 80s. In fact, the profile and "tread pattern"
look a lot like the cheapie Hutchinson Flashes I'm rather fond of (700x28
on sale for 5 bucks atm). Nice and round. I'm still working on a set of
Flash rubber (mounted in October, one flat, two cuts), but the
Paselas could be an option if I get a hankerin' for an old-fashioned tan
sidewall.
:p
 
M

Michael K

Guest
Bill Henry <[email protected]> wrote:

>Hey everyone.
>
>I've decided to add some skinnier tires to my Gary Fisher Marlin
>mountain bike for riding around town. But how thin should I go?
>
>The wheels are 26" and I've found tires online as small as 1" wide. I'm
>tempted by these because I love going fast and want to get the best bang
>for my buck. Still, I'm worried these might be a little too thin and be
>prone to flats. I probably couldn't do much curb jumping, either. ;)
>


I did pretty much the same thing over the last year or so. While I
wanted thinner than the 2.25s that came on the bike, I was mainly
after less tread but not so thin as you seem to be after. Mainly the
asphalt trails were wearing down the knobby tread FAST.

I tried Hutchinson Rock and Road ($15, Nashbar), a low profile tread
(2.0") but with some knobs on the side. Nice tire, gained me about
1.5MPH on long hauls.

One of them was ruined in a blow out and I changed to Kenda K-RAD
(2.0" and $15). A checkerboard pattern with no side knobs. The lack
of side knobs made cornering even smoother and easier and gained a bit
more avg MPH. Hard to get traction in loose dirt or rocks, but I
avoid that anyway.

Somewhere along the way I did have a Bontrager 1.95 or 1.75 that was
similar to the Kenda; it seemed ok but I never could find a another to
match the one I bought after the blowout.

Pure slicks never appealed to me, but I learned that the way I ride, I
dont need no stinking side knobs. I MIGHT be open to trying a set of
1.75s, but not less than that because of the cushion effect wider
tired provide.

YMMV
 

Similar threads