Quantcast

early impressions of Panaracer Cinder

jacksonpt

Turbo Monkey
Jul 22, 2002
6,764
0
Vestal, NY
Me: 185lbs (with gear), aggressive trail rider
Bike: Yeti 575
Terrain: Upstate NY - hardpack with LOTS of roots, some off cambur. Unusually dry right now.
New Tires: Panaracer Cinder 2.25 kevlar @ 40psi
Old Tires: Conti Vertical 2.3 wire bead @ 30psi

Had my new Cinders out for their first real ride last night. I had been running Conti Verticals, so all my comments about the Cinders are compared to my experiences with the Verticals (which have always been very good).

Before you even ride the tire, you can tell that it's heavier and beefier than the Contis. I would assume that they will be more durable, but only time will tell. Rationalize the extra weight (about 100g each) as a training aid.

Grip in the Dirt
Both sets of tires hook up very well in hardpack and semi-loose dirt. They track very well, hold in corners and dig in on climbs. The Cinders may have a slight advantage in traction when hammering out of the saddle... but I'm not ready to give them the nod just yet. Advantage: tie

Grip on Roots and Rocks
Both tires handled rocks and roots well, but the Cinders had a slight though clear advantage. The larger beefier lugs held better, especially in off cambur situations when the Conti's knobs tended to fold over. Part of this may have to do with the different PSIs, but regardless, the Cinders are clearly better. The Contis tended to be an all-or-nothing type tire... either they had grip and held or they completely washed out. The Cinders hold better, and slip or skid, rather than completely losing traction. It's a feeling I'm not used to, but after about 20 minutes, it wasn't an issue, and the Cinders felt very confident. Advantage: Cinders

Handling the Fast/Hard Stuff
Both tires did well when pushed, but this is where the Cinders really shined over the Contis. The heavier/beefier tread never flinched when ripped through rock gardens or nasty rooty sections. Again, PSI probably played a role, but most of it is the rubber. These tires don't back down for a second when being abused. Advantage: Cinders

I haven't had the cinders in any type of damp/wet conditions yet, so the jury is still out in regards to wet/mud performance. The best way I can think to describe the Cinders is "confident" - it took me some time to get used to them, as they do feel different than the Contis, but once I started trusting them, they just kept gripping. If they are even descent in the mud, they will replace the contis as my standby all-around tire.
 

jacksonpt

Turbo Monkey
Jul 22, 2002
6,764
0
Vestal, NY
MMcG said:
I think the Panaracers use their own type of stick E compound though don't they?
Everyone uses proprietary compounds, but I've never heard of Panaracer's being softer/stickier than other companies' standard compounds.
 

MMcG

Ride till you puke!
Dec 10, 2002
15,459
4
Burlington, Connecticut
Not sure if it is softer and stickier than Stick E rubber, but I think it is a type of grippy compound unlike what is offered on the Fire XC Pros.

Where did you buy the Cinders Jackson?
 

jacksonpt

Turbo Monkey
Jul 22, 2002
6,764
0
Vestal, NY
MMcG said:
Not sure if it is softer and stickier than Stick E rubber, but I think it is a type of grippy compound unlike what is offered on the Fire XC Pros.

Where did you buy the Cinders Jackson?
Speedgoat. It is some special compound, but since it's not marketed like Stick-E, I assumed there wasn't anything all that special about it. Even Maxxis markets their super tacky compoud as a tackier rubber.
 

jacksonpt

Turbo Monkey
Jul 22, 2002
6,764
0
Vestal, NY
pixelninja said:
I'd love to see a non-biased head-to-head comparision between the Cinders and the Fire XCs.
FWIW... a buddy that I rode with this weekend has been running the Cinders for about 400 miles now. He used to run the Fire XCs, so I asked him about how they compared. He said the Fire XCs seem to hold up a bit better (he has ripped off 3 lugs on the Cinders and had a couple of flats here and there), but that the traction on the Cinders was waaaay better - no comparison better.
 

Westy

the teste
Nov 22, 2002
36,909
3,728
Sleazattle
Rode a Cinder 2.25 as a rear tire this weekend at 7 springs. Pinch flatted my Hutchinson the first lap. I forgot to bring spare tires and realised the ones I brought would not last. I managed to get a Cinder from the Dirt Rag booth, $17 for a subscription and got a free Cinder. The tires was heavy for an XC race but looked burly as hell, which is what I needed to survive the rocks. It mounted easily with a Stans tubeless set up but the tire wobbled big time on the rim and caused the tire to rub the chainstay. I could not get the wobble to stop so I just trimmed someof the side knobs down.

The tire had great traction and felt indestructable, I bombed through rocks with reckless abondon and the tire never complained. It did feel slower on the climbs but for that terrain it was a good balance.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
9,890
4
Hypernormality
I rode Fires for a long time and loved em. Still rate them as a great tyre despite their age. Cinder looks nice too. I assume it comes in Kevlar...