I rode thoes for a year straight around here and I loved them on my hardtail. They make them in different sizes now correct?pixelninja said:To reiterate what I wrote in the thread BikeGeek posted: Panaracer Fire XC Pro 2.1's
Yeah I did, I was looking for more specific info however I just read thru that thread and it game me some ideas.McGRP01 said:Do a search n00b...
what type of riding were you doing?Acadian said:I just mounted some Kenda Nevegals:
Front: 2.35 Sticky-E
Rear: 2.1 Sticky-E dual compound
Rode on them yesterday and they hooked up pretty damn good Before that I had a 2.35 ST Maxxis High Roller on the front with a 2.0 Hutch Python Lite on the back and the rear would always wash on dry surfaces...font did hook up tho!!
I was impressed with my first ride on the Kenda's. They roll a bit slow, but boy to they hook up. Time will tell...the sidewalls on the Kenda's worry me a bit...they are paper thin.
you're typical trail ride....This is on my 5-spot.stosh said:what type of riding were you doing?
Just 1.8 and 2.1.stosh said:I rode thoes for a year straight around here and I loved them on my hardtail. They make them in different sizes now correct?
You run the BG in front?McGRP01 said:ok...in all seriousness, I have 2.35 Kenda BG/Nev Stick-E combo on my Kona, and they hook up on everything. I just ordered another set in 2.1 to see if I can get a little less rolling resistance. Other than that, they're awesome!
What is the advantage of the Cinder?pixelninja said:Just 1.8 and 2.1.
Panaracer is now making one called the Cinder that looks similar to the Fire XC, but is made of a different compound and comes in 1.9, 2.1 and 2.25. The 2.25 is almost 200g more than the 2.1 Fire XC.
http://www.panaracer.com/eng/products/mtb/xc.html
Yeah, even though it/they are not fr/rr specific tires, most people run them this way. I have run a BG front and rear and it was good in dry conditions, but not as good in the slop. And, on my DH bike I run Nev's front and rear.stosh said:You run the BG in front?
Beats me. The Panaracer site basically just says the new compound makes it a better tire than the Fire. If it weighs the same as the Fire, I may try a pair when my Fire's wear out.stosh said:What is the advantage of the Cinder?
I agree to an extent. Although, in muddy situations, I can see how having a compound that sheds mud easier would be a good thing. Less mud packing up your tread = more traction.stosh said:I still don't agree with this whole sticky compound crazy. I'm not sure how when tires are covered in dust or mud the sticky'ness of the compound matters at all?
My Kendas hook up to everything, wet or dry. Roots, rocks... I'll never go back.stosh said:I still don't agree with this whole sticky compound that companies are coming out with. I'm not sure how when tires are covered in dust or mud the sticky'ness of the compound matters at all?
They're really using a "sticky" compound? I always thought "sticky" was just a buzzword used to simplify the hardness/softness characteristics.pixelninja said:In dry conditions, I would think that the hardness or softness of the rubber would make a bigger difference than the "stickiness" of the compound.
Maybe I'll have to pick a set up. I hate paying full price after seeing the Kenda guy at selling them so cheap at Mountain Bike Weekend.McGRP01 said:My Kendas hook up to everything, wet or dry. Roots, rocks... I'll never go back.
You may be right but when has the word Sticky refered to a hardness or softness of something.BikeGeek said:They're really using a "sticky" compound? I always thought "sticky" was just a buzzword used to simplify the hardness/softness characteristics.
That's why I thought it was a buzzword. Softer tires tend to grip better, hence, they're "stickier." Maybe I'm the only one that thought that way.stosh said:You may be right but when has the word Sticky refered to a hardness or softness of something.
My money would go to the company that can combine the stickiness with durability while maintaining low rolling resistance. Usually one happens at the expense of the others.stosh said:... Slow rebounding rubber compound for the ultimate in traction control. The slow rebound ratio of the rubber, acts as a suspension, allowing the tread to conform to the trail surface rather than bouncing off of it. Stick-E rubber is used in two applications. One is over the entire tread surface (Freeride/Downhill) the other is on the outside knobs used on cross country applications for outstanding traction in the corners.
The Panaracer site says nothing about "stickiness". It just talks about some special compound that makes the Cinder a better tire than the Fire XC. Here's what it says, take from it what you will:BikeGeek said:They're really using a "sticky" compound? I always thought "sticky" was just a buzzword used to simplify the hardness/softness characteristics.
That said, there are some rubber compounds that are more sticky than others. Take for instance the rubber used in climbing shoes. Definitely more sticky than the rubber used in everyday athletic shoes.The heir apparent to the XC Fire, the Cinder incorporates our newest compound technology ZSG Ultima. This compound performs unlike any other that we've ever developed. Hot or cold, wet or dry, ZSG-Ultima is up to the task. Add to this our progressive multi-height knob configuration and the Cinder just rolls away from the Fire XC in terms of overall performance. ASB keeps away the pinchies and "gAbsolute F&R" design makes it work well on the front or rear.
BikeGeek said:My money would go to the company that can combine the stickiness with durability while maintaining low rolling resistance. Usually one happens at the expense of the others.
Michelin 2.1 Comp S used to be my tire of choice. Then the Comp S dropped to a 1.9 and they introduced the Comp S lite in 2.1. The lite never performed the same as the regular S. I haven't looked at Michelin in a while, maybe I'll check out their lineup again.SuspectDevice said:Then your money should go to Michelin. Their new dual compound XCR and AM tires are my favourite tires ever.
The cinders seem expensive where I've seen them sold.pixelninja said:The Panaracer site says nothing about "stickiness". It just talks about some special compound that makes the Cinder a better tire than the Fire XC. Here's what it says, take from it what you will:
That said, there are some rubber compounds that are more sticky than others. Take for instance the rubber used in climbing shoes. Definitely more sticky than the rubber used in everyday athletic shoes.
I don't think Rip would agree with you about Michelin...SuspectDevice said:Then your money should go to Michelin.
Are they the 60 or 120tpi version? Doesn't really matter, I guess, for that price.MMcG said:some wicked cheap specialized enduro 2.0 tires at www.chucksbikes.com - $4.50 each!
Just for the hell of it I picked up two. Nine bucks for two 2.0 tires from a solid company like the Big S - figured I couldn't lose.
Hey Stosh,stosh said:I rode thoes for a year straight around here and I loved them on my hardtail. They make them in different sizes now correct?
Whoops! Check out Performance, I got mine for $20, kevlar bead. Wise buy.stosh said:The cinders seem expensive where I've seen them sold.
Performance is selling another of my favorites tires for a good price: IRC Mythos 2.1 for $12.95 each. I found these tires hook up well in dry rocky conditions. And they're light too, 565g each. Note that these come in front and rear specific versions.Meat Foot said:Whoops! Check out Performance, I got mine for $20, kevlar bead. Wise buy.
Killer buy, how do they do in the gravelly, rocky, rooty, hardpack, rollers, you get the idea about all arounder. I have heard good things on the semi-slicks for the dry hardpack. I have never owned a semi slick though. Mixed bag.pixelninja said:Performance is selling another of my favorites tires for a good price: IRC Mythos 2.1 for $12.95 each. I found these tires hook up well in dry rocky conditions. And they're light too, 565g each. Note that these come in front and rear specific versions.
http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=12463#
The only condition that I haven't used the Mythos in is mud. Other than that, I found them to be a great all-around tire. They were my last set and I now run the Fire XC Pros. I'd say that both are good all-around tires.Meat Foot said:Killer buy, how do they do in the gravelly, rocky, rooty, hardpack, rollers, you get the idea about all arounder. I have heard good things on the semi-slicks for the dry hardpack. I have never owned a semi slick though. Mixed bag.