[rideit]

Not really. Coming from a dhf 2.6, it wasn't really much different. A tad heavier on the climb (barely noticeable) with a bit more SMASH HULK on a fairly technical descent. I'll run it for a while to get further impressions, but I couldn't really find reasons to hate it...

(3400 feet climb/descent in 2.5 hours!)

 

[SuboptimusPrime]

Please, please tell me you were also on an e-bike 29r with carbon rims, press-fit bottom bracket, and a fork with long offset. Forum has been pretty dead--we need this.

 

[StiHacka]

 

[Gary]

(3400 feet climb/descent in 2.5 hours!)

Well.. you're obviously doing that wrong. Get an E bike and do it in an hour while eating burritos. You've already bought a tyre for it.

 

[rideit]

Well, I did have tacos after the ride.
Close enough.

 

[William42]

Please, please tell me you were also on an e-bike 29r with carbon rims, press-fit bottom bracket, and a fork with long offset. Forum has been pretty dead--we need this.

Did it have road bike bars?

 

[rideit]

Can you get a proper taco in Scotland?

For the record...tire was free.

 

[Gary]

You can never have too many road bike bars

 

[SkaredShtles]

Great. Now I want tacos...

 

[Jm_]

You ran it in the rear?

 

[Westy]

Great. Now I want tacos...

I never not want tacos

 

[Bike078]

Not really. Coming from a dhf 2.6, it wasn't really much different. A tad heavier on the climb (barely noticeable) with a bit more SMASH HULK on a fairly technical descent. I'll run it for a while to get further impressions, but I couldn't really find reasons to hate it...

(3400 feet climb/descent in 2.5 hours!)

Were you on a hardtail? I've been wondering what those would feel like on my HT. Currently have 2.4 front and 2.3 back. Haven't gone wider than a 2.5 dhf.

 

[rideit]

2.8 front on a Rocky Altitude (150/160).
2.4 on the rear.

 

[Bikael Molton]

Oh yeah

 

[KenW449]

I never not want tacos

 

[Jm_]

Doesn't count if you aren't running it on the rear. I find front rolling resistance to be damn near insignificant. You can get away with a pretty big front without taking a huge hit IMO. Running a 2.6 right now and it's not that slow. What is slow? The freaking 2.3 DHF I'm running in the rear. The weight on the thing coupled with the sipes and tread compound just makes it roll like riding through mashed potatoes. In the front, same tire, I notice no such issues.

I really feel for dedicated park rental fleets, they need to have the 2.7-ish reinforced DH tires up front and 2.5 in the rear. Sure, not the fastest, but I've gone to some parks where they have some dinky 2.3 that pops on every run because they put tubes in it and the sharp rocks are just too jagged/speeds too high, or you have to run some stupid-high pressure that makes your traction absolute crap.

 

[rideit]

Yeah, I would be more inclined to go with a minion SS or something like that before putting my extra 2.6 on the rear unless I was doing lift served or shuttling all the time.

That said, back inna day, I ran one bike with a Michelin 2.8 DH tire up front and a gazzalodi 3.0. 24" in the rear...

 

[Wuffles]

You can never have too many road bike bars

I was ready to mock the shit outta those bars, until I rode them. Comfy as fuck. Kinda want to get a pair (right term? I mean there are two of them, but we use bars for single bars too...) for my commuter now.

 

[rockofullr]

dhf 2.6

Just did a demo where they had that tire on all the bikes. It was garbage. Too much space between nobs created a weird lack of traction for a DHF and it had balloon tire characteristics at low pressure. Also at speed the bike was very resistant to leaning into corners. I assume due to the increase in rotating weight.

I guess it carried speed through the flat sections well..... but who fucking cares about that

I've gone to some parks where they have some dinky 2.3 that pops on every run because they put tubes in it and the sharp rocks are just too jagged/speeds too high

Bigger tires do not equal stronger tires.

 

[jonKranked]

maybe you did die and didn't even know it.