Quantcast

Procore kills the Plus (size)?

Wuffles

Monkey
Feb 24, 2016
157
98
So since this is a new account I can't post a direct link, but if you were to go to, say, Empty Beer at: http://reviews[dot]mtbr[dot]com/ibis-mojo-3-first-ride-review you can find a nice little write-up of the new Mojo 3. Peanut Butter also has a review at http://www[dot]pinkbike[dot]com/news/ibis-mojo-3-review[dot]html

Geometry, suspension, ride report aside, there are some very interesting little gems from Ibis:
From Empty Beer:

"Ibis believes there is a sweet spot with plus size tires, and 2.8” width is it. They found that beyond this size, plus tires tend to get bouncy and heavy, or as Ibis engineer Colin Hughes puts it, “Plus size tires are really fun…until they’re not.”"

From Peanut Butter:

"The Mojo 3 is pictured here with 2.8'' wide tires from Schwalbe, and that's also the configuration that I spent most of my time on, but Ibis' Scot Nicol does stress that the new bike is far from being a plus-only machine. ''We’ve found that the [width] numbers printed on tire sidewalls mean very little when it comes to their height,'' Nicol explained after experimenting with just how much of a difference there is in diameter between plus and standard 27.5'' tires. ''The Schwalbe and Maxxis 2.8s are only 0.15” taller in section height than a 2.3'' tire, whereas 3.0'' tires are 0.4” taller. "

Okay, so basically we have Ibis, who certain bikes aside, generally knows what they're doing flat out saying taller sidewalls suck, and the biggest plus size tire you should be running is a 2.8". Which makes sense from an engineering standpoint.

But here's the rub- in every single one of the (many, ad naseum) plus size reviews that are trying to shove new crappy bikes down our throats, someone always mentions traction and stability as the biggest benefits. The traction comes from the ~13-17 psi you run in a plus size tire, which gives you a huge contact patch. The stability comes from a wide rim that can support the sidewall of the tire better. Okay, to a point I will agree with that.

The downside of this traction and stability is weak, tall side walls that will fold under hard cornering and provide a terrible, spikey suspension input that is almost impossible to damp out. Basically if you're going to hit a rock garden at race speed on a plus bike, your health coverage better be good.

But here's the thing- we already have existing, normal, non-obese components that can do this. Take the WTB i35 rim with a Minion DHRII WT casing set up with Procore. Now you have a nice, wide rim (and a tire designed for it!), with actually beefy as hell cornering nobs, and you have the ability to drop the pressure to the same level you run plus tires at. Since you're running the same pressure, you have the same contact patch and the same traction. Actually, you have better traction because you don't have to half-ass the nobs in the name of saving weight. Also, you have a nice, stable, supported sidewall that has the extra help of procore keeping it in place. Finally, when shit gets gnarly, you will actually be getting better performance out of your tires (procore was designed for WC DH remember), and your suspension will be operating better as well. And the best part is you can do all of this on the bike you already own.

So, what am I missing? Is there some inherent advantage to wider tires that isn't lower pressures or supported sidewalls? Because we can do that already. Now we just need tire makers to go the "normal tires for wide rims" route that Maxxis started for trail and XC-ish tires, not just beefier AM and DH casings- the weight difference between a 2.35 Nobby Nic 650b and the 2.8 Nobby Nic 650b+ just so happens to be almost exactly the weight of a procore insert. So why not get rid of this plus size nonsense and just run better regular tire systems?
 

rockofullr

confused
Jun 11, 2009
7,342
924
East Bay, Cali
So since this is a new account I can't post a direct link, but if you were to go to, say, Empty Beer at: http://reviews[dot]mtbr[dot]com/ibis-mojo-3-first-ride-review you can find a nice little write-up of the new Mojo 3. Peanut Butter also has a review at http://www[dot]pinkbike[dot]com/news/ibis-mojo-3-review[dot]html

Geometry, suspension, ride report aside, there are some very interesting little gems from Ibis:
From Empty Beer:

"Ibis believes there is a sweet spot with plus size tires, and 2.8” width is it. They found that beyond this size, plus tires tend to get bouncy and heavy, or as Ibis engineer Colin Hughes puts it, “Plus size tires are really fun…until they’re not.”"

From Peanut Butter:

"The Mojo 3 is pictured here with 2.8'' wide tires from Schwalbe, and that's also the configuration that I spent most of my time on, but Ibis' Scot Nicol does stress that the new bike is far from being a plus-only machine. ''We’ve found that the [width] numbers printed on tire sidewalls mean very little when it comes to their height,'' Nicol explained after experimenting with just how much of a difference there is in diameter between plus and standard 27.5'' tires. ''The Schwalbe and Maxxis 2.8s are only 0.15” taller in section height than a 2.3'' tire, whereas 3.0'' tires are 0.4” taller. "

Okay, so basically we have Ibis, who certain bikes aside, generally knows what they're doing flat out saying taller sidewalls suck, and the biggest plus size tire you should be running is a 2.8". Which makes sense from an engineering standpoint.

But here's the rub- in every single one of the (many, ad naseum) plus size reviews that are trying to shove new crappy bikes down our throats, someone always mentions traction and stability as the biggest benefits. The traction comes from the ~13-17 psi you run in a plus size tire, which gives you a huge contact patch. The stability comes from a wide rim that can support the sidewall of the tire better. Okay, to a point I will agree with that.

The downside of this traction and stability is weak, tall side walls that will fold under hard cornering and provide a terrible, spikey suspension input that is almost impossible to damp out. Basically if you're going to hit a rock garden at race speed on a plus bike, your health coverage better be good.

But here's the thing- we already have existing, normal, non-obese components that can do this. Take the WTB i35 rim with a Minion DHRII WT casing set up with Procore. Now you have a nice, wide rim (and a tire designed for it!), with actually beefy as hell cornering nobs, and you have the ability to drop the pressure to the same level you run plus tires at. Since you're running the same pressure, you have the same contact patch and the same traction. Actually, you have better traction because you don't have to half-ass the nobs in the name of saving weight. Also, you have a nice, stable, supported sidewall that has the extra help of procore keeping it in place. Finally, when shit gets gnarly, you will actually be getting better performance out of your tires (procore was designed for WC DH remember), and your suspension will be operating better as well. And the best part is you can do all of this on the bike you already own.

So, what am I missing? Is there some inherent advantage to wider tires that isn't lower pressures or supported sidewalls? Because we can do that already. Now we just need tire makers to go the "normal tires for wide rims" route that Maxxis started for trail and XC-ish tires, not just beefier AM and DH casings- the weight difference between a 2.35 Nobby Nic 650b and the 2.8 Nobby Nic 650b+ just so happens to be almost exactly the weight of a procore insert. So why not get rid of this plus size nonsense and just run better regular tire systems?
You're missing the fact that now there are thousands of dentists who feel like the carbon 29er they bought two years ago is outdated and needs to be replaced.
 

Carraig042

me 1st
Apr 5, 2011
732
353
East Tennessee
You're missing the fact that now there are thousands of dentists who feel like the carbon 29er they bought two years ago is outdated and needs to be replaced.
"You're missing the fact that now there are thousands of dentists who feel like the carbon 29er they bought a year ago is outdated and needs to be replaced."

Edited for correctness.

-Brett
 

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,010
1,145
El Lay
which dentists specifically can out-corner their Maxxis DHFs?

I know I can't outride quality tires... but I'm not a dentist.
 

manhattanprjkt83

Rusty Trombone
Jul 10, 2003
9,644
1,214
Nilbog
I know Scot fairly well, he is very well thought out and typically does a good job of not jumping on trends for the hell of it, I like what they did with this bike...I've been testing a bunch of bikes over the past year...fat, plus, and standard...I do think that we will see this plus thing level out and shrink down to a 2.6- 2.8 ish flavor, that will be acceptable to all of us and will become commonplace.

I live in a climate where having a fat bike kind of makes sense, I keep hearing folks saying they will get a + to replace a fatbike for the 'one bike' solution. Fat bikes are a totally different conversation and I could even see them going wider, for certain terrain/conditions the + just isn't a substitute.
 
Last edited:

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,010
1,145
El Lay
This all sounds great. Can I get a 29"+ size Gazza3.0 with Procore? Throw a Rohloff and Doublewides on there too, I guess.
 

Bikael Molton

goofy for life
Jun 9, 2003
4,010
1,145
El Lay
Have you ever spun out up a climb? This is one area plus bikes excel. Maybe the only one, but they do solve a problem
Of course, but the scenario is more rare out West, without those East Coast Roots.

I also feel like when I spin out on a tech piece of climb, it's more about my lack of leg strength than the tire (i.e. If I'd hit it twice as fast, I'd have made it.).

I don't really see how that minimal benefit outweighs (lol) the weight and resistance negatives of the plus tire for the other 99.99% of the riding time.

So are XC pros who care about winning on the climbs running Plus bikes this year?
 
Last edited:

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,648
3,089
Have you ever spun out up a climb? This is one area plus bikes excel. Maybe the only one, but they do solve a problem
Fun fact: in the recent slop I managed to ride up a really muddy climb on the cross bike that I use to spin out with the 2.35 tire on the trail bike. Maybe 29Minus(TM) tires are the way to go?
 

Gallain

Monkey
Dec 28, 2001
183
43
Sweden
Fun fact: in the recent slop I managed to ride up a really muddy climb on the cross bike that I use to spin out with the 2.35 tire on the trail bike. Maybe 29Minus(TM) tires are the way to go?
It's almost as if wrc rally cars that run narrow tires in snow and muddy conditions know what they are doing...
 

Wuffles

Monkey
Feb 24, 2016
157
98
Wait which are the ones you can take seriously?
I literally set all their bikes aside in any serious discussion of performance.
Eh, I think the Mojo's are pretty decent. Maybe the new Ripley LS. And the Tranny 29er.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Back to your question, the one thing that no one seems to talk about with this plus sized mess is that firm-ish solid feeling tires are something that provides precision. The soft sidewalls compromise that but just having a big balloon shaped (usually shit tread) more compliant tire that people get with 2.8+ just aren't precise. Not with bike placement, and most importantly not with digging into dirt. I don't want to completely float on sand, I want to dig into it and redirect.......hard. I can lean a bike, it's not a dune buggy.

Like gallain mentioned, you want to dig into most soft dirt some and have material around your tire to pride mass to redirect the wheel. This is isn't 2 feet of powder, floating hurts your precision. Most people don't figure out how to use those softer surfaces to an advantage so having a balloon for a tire doesn't seem like they're losing anything.

I think it's fine that someone at ibis realizes there's a limit but it's nothing revolutionary and i still think their fatass rims they make are a sign that they still don't really get it (or realistically they're just riding a market but then again, they helped start it). The builds those guys put out on the hd3s are a joke because of them (I see them all the time, a buddy of mine is an Ibis dealer). Yeah they're cushy, and yeah I'd say their sometimes better in really rounded out, supported turns.....just don't turn too hard because then you start folding tires. But when it gets raw, digging into crap dirt a little with your tires is a good thing. Just like 650b wheels, be very wary of anything that comes strictly from the trail bike segment first and not dh bikes. Because most dhers already know we went through this and we're settled on the 2.4ish width for a very good reason. You can get traction from good treads, and you can maintain precision by not going too much bigger.

And I live in shitty dirt most of the summer.......that kendall weed video was shot here. I just ride trails though, not play bouncy bouncy house next to them.

I get making rims a little wider.....hell it's why I rode heavy ass mavic 729s for so long. But like almost everything happening with trail bikes right now, it's getting taken too far by people who haven't really learned the lessons of the past.
 

Sandwich

Pig my fish!
Staff member
May 23, 2002
21,031
5,920
borcester rhymes
wait, cornering precision? Next thing you're going to tell me is having a huge volume of undamped air in your tire is not as efficient as a functional damper in your fork or suspension system. that's insanity- WTB told me so.
 

kidwoo

Artisanal Tweet Curator
Who knows.....could be the inside or outside they're calling 30. It's too tough for them to actually specify I guess.
Are they 30mm wide or 23?
https://www.sram.com/sram/mountain/technologies/wide-angle


Here's a fun fact that no one ever seems to admit (or just don't know): without changing material thickness (and hence weight) wider rims ding and flatspot easier (or in carbon's case crack). The further you get those walls from each other, the more instances occur of them being hit independently providing less support.
 

slyfink

Turbo Monkey
Sep 16, 2008
9,288
5,028
Ottawa, Canada
Who knows.....could be the inside or outside they're calling 30. It's too tough for them to actually specify I guess.
Are they 30mm wide or 23?
https://www.sram.com/sram/mountain/technologies/wide-angle


Here's a fun fact that no one ever seems to admit (or just don't know): without changing material thickness (and hence weight) wider rims ding and flatspot easier (or in carbon's case crack). The further you get those walls from each other, the more instances occur of them being hit independently providing less support.
inside width.

source. (it's in the specification section)