[JJHACK]

Have any of you had these three tires?

WTB Weirwolf 2.5"
Panaracer Fire FR 2.4"
Michilin Hot S 2.5"

I currently run Weirwolf tires and have 1400 miles on them. They are getting worn now so I need to get something new. These are marked 2.5 but are no bigger then the 2.3 Tioga's that I originally had. The size they show has little to do with the actual size it seems.

I don't want smaller then the WTB weirwolves and I don't want over 900g per tire. The Panaracer and the Michilin are both 850g but if they are smaller then the WTB's then I'll just get another set of the WTB's.

I have heard good things about the new panaracer 2.4's so I'm really interested in them if they are at least as big as the WTB's are. Somebody must know this someplace!

 

[speedbump]

I haven't used any of the tires you ask about, but I may have some help for you. In addition to the "2.5", "2.4", etc. sizes on tires, there is a size marking called an ISO marking. It is on most tires and for mountain bike tires will be something like "51-559" or "46-559" for example. The two digit number is the width of the tire in millimeters and the three digit number is the bead diameter. All 26" mountain bike tires will have "559" as their bead diameter. The width obviously will vary. The ISO markings are also provided by the manufacturer, but in my experience they have been far more accurate that the "inch" markings.

With that said, (according to the Quality Bicycle Products catalog) the ISO widths for the tires you mention are as follows:

WTB Weirwolf 2.5": 55mm
Panaracer Fire 2.4": 60mm
Michelin Hot S 2.5": 58mm
Tioga Factory DH 2.3": 56mm


As you can see from these markings, the Weirwolf would be 1mm skinnier than the Tiogas you had, which seems to be your experience. The other two should be fatter, with the Panaracer being the widest.

I hope this long winded explanation helps!

 

[JJHACK]

That's the perfect explanation and I'm glad you took the time to sort it out for me. This site is filled with great info. Thanks for the help!

 

[JJHACK]

Just put the 2.4 panaracers on the stinky delux. The width is not much bigger then the Wierwolfs but you can see they are a bit bigger without measuring them. The height seems much bigger though. The knobs on the panaracer are like dirtbike tires. I think what is amazing is that they are only 850g. Looking at them on the bike they look so much heavier with those big thick huge knobs. They look like 3" wide down hill tires!

I put 1500 miles on the WTB wierwolf tires without a single flat. That is for me a record amount of miles without a falt tire. That's also the most miles I have ever gotten out of a set of Mountain bike tires.

I hope these Panaracer 2.4" tires will give me 1000 flat free miles because at this size and weight they are the biggest and lightest tires going for multi purpose XC/trail/ Free ride use that I have found.

Oh by the way they still leave plenty of room on the Stinky frame for mud clearance and more important snow in a couple months!

 

[Big_Papa1080]

nrsracer had the michelens and he liked them. says they do pretty good in the mud and still have the low rolling resistance.

 

[NRSracer]

Originally posted by Big_Papa1080
nrsracer had the michelens and he liked them. says they do pretty good in the mud and still have the low rolling resistance.

nah, it kinda sucked actually. i did like it for the low weight and lower rolling resistance, but it would not have been my first choice because the traction really sucks. BTW, i think we're talking 2 different tires here i think hot s was the one mentioned, but i had the comp s tubeless.

Pat

PS, as a front tire, the comp s blows.