[Freeridin']

I've been running the 909(f)/Invader(r) combo on the big bike for a few seasons now. They are CHEAP and work well enough.

Now I need some tires for a new AM/XC build. Iron Horse MKIII frame with a U-Turn Lyrik. I ride in Colorado, mostly the front range...dry, rocks...I want to be able to rip the descents but pedaling is also very important.

I'm torn between the lighter Intense System Series 5 in front and a 4 in back (both 2.25) or the single ply all mountain 909/ Invader combo (2.35).

I'm concerned that option two might be more than I need. Anyone have some time on the System 4 or 5 tires?

 

[Beast]

Yes, I've used both the 4 and the 5.

The 5 has some very aggressive corner knobs, and they bend over pretty easily. A few friends were ripping corner knobs off after just a few runs. Honestly, I wasn't that impressed with the tire on anything other than grass slalom tracks.

I used the 4 on my trail bike pretty extensively. It loosely resembles a small block 8 and was a great all-around tire. Of the two, this is the tire I recommend. It will work well in Colorado.

 

[Freeridin']

How does the overall strength of the System tires (specifically the sidewalls) compare to the AM single ply tires? The AMs weight around 300 more. I'm not an overly heavy rider nor do I plow rock gardens to fields, but I hate flats.

 

[Beast]

How does the overall strength of the System tires (specifically the sidewalls) compare to the AM single ply tires? The AMs weight around 300 more. I'm not an overly heavy rider nor do I plow rock gardens to fields, but I hate flats.

I can't make a direct comparison between the two because I never used a 2.35 invader. However, I will say that my 2.5 invaders were MUCH more prone to flats than my 2.25 system 4's, but one was on a DH bike and one was on a trail bike... Comparable pressures, too.

 

[FCLinder]

I run the 2.35 invader both front and rear on my ALL Mt Bike. They are not all that bad. Understand I come from Michelins. Lots of grip, but do find the side walls giving some time from time when I am hard in the corners. Over all I am impressed with them and would recommend them for an All Mt set up. Now as for weight, they are not the lightest All Mt Tire out there, but they are doing the job!!!!

Good luck,
Cecil

 

[quickneonrt]

I have run the System 2 and system 4, the sidewalls are plenty strong, they run tubeless just as well as a ust specific tire.

 

[Transcend]

I ran the system 4 on my Five for almost an entire season. Good traction in loam and on dry rock. Terrible traction in anything wet that wasn't loam. Roots, rocks etc were scary when wet.

I ran them tubeless with stans on stans rims - and they aren't a tubeless tire, so that was a plus.

 

[jonKranked]

i've been running this:

http://www.cambriabike.com/shopexd.asp?Item=048387002603

on the front of my xc/am bike, and have been very happy with it.

 

[ballr]

I run Invader am 2.35 front and system 4 2.25 rear on the Front Range and really like the performance. Haven't had any issues w/ flats and I'm a 215# hack.

Clip the outer half of the transition knob on the Invader for a little more feel on when she breaks loose. Really helps w/ cornering feel IMO.

Wear is pretty good as long as you're not bombing down Mt. Falcon at mach speeds, scattering hikers everywhere.

 

[armada]

My question isnt realy realted but still, could someone tell me how wide the intense spike tyres are in comparison with a maxxis weatscream, 2.5 vs 2.5? CRC has a swet deal on them but i would like to get some imput from someone who owns them