1.8 versus 2.0 tires

[rubicon]

I'm curious if reducing the size of my tires from 2.0 to 1.8 will greatly affect my ride. I usually stay at home if the trails are wet, and hence only ride on hardpack, rock/gravel, and leaf cover (rolling cross country). Specifically, would a 1.8 panaracer trailblaster "grip" as well under these conditions as a 2.0 michelin wildgripper comp? or rather, is the loss of 260 grams a worthwhile trade for a (potentially severe) loss of grip?

thanks for the suggestions....

[DirtRagArt]

Theoretically, a 1.8 with the same basic tread as a 2.0 would offer less rolling resistance and less suspension. Maybe try the 1.8 on the rear only.

[RichardJDaley]

i would say go for the 1.8. Not only does the 2.0 add extra weight but it also adds quite a bit more rolling resistance. With the 2.0's companies assume you want extra tread with the width, and therefor the tires ride consiberaly heavier. Unless you a digging constantly through wet mud i would go with the 1.8's. They offer better handling, agility, and make your bike feel lighter when you ride them.

[Mauriceman]

A fatty tire will always stick to the ground better than a skinny one. But it will always be heavier and slower. And the skinny one will pinch flat easier. You gotta test for yourself to see just how thin and light a tire you can get away with.

[Andy in Wi]

1.8's are pretty fast. The pinch flat thing means that you might have to throw an extra 10 psi in the tire.
Keep in mind that skinny tires can actually be ideal for some really muddy situations. a skinny tire can skate through thin mud, whereas a 2.1 might float a bit, but on the same token, a skinny tire also helps on fast track with a packed surface. Pick and choose, mix and match, and figure out what kind of handling you like.
-Andy

[Dr.Spoke]

I must be getting old and fat...er, uncompetetitive (?). I rarely, offroad, ride anything under a 2.1.
Personally, I would need to ask questions like: what do you weigh;if you have suspension - what is it /how much travel; what conditions do you usually ride in?
Or even more controversial, what's your BMI or percentage body fat. Is 260g actually going to help, or should you stick an extra hour a week in interval training...go faster and need the extra traction any way! Ooops... did I say controversial, well at least I admitted I'm past this!
Technically, the 1.8 is faster in nearly all "ideal" conditions: but, as Continental proved, what looks good on paper and in theory - doesn't always work out in practise. ( One of their "treaded" tires had measurably lower rolling resistance than nearly all the competitions "semi-slicks"). If you are really fighting for 260g., lash the cash on the 1.8s and test them, occaisionally they may be faster.

[JerseyDevil]

Also consider your bike's geometry and your riding style.
If you're the type of rider that "floats" through corners, a 2.1 will help you get the traction you need to save your butt. If you rail corners by putting pressure on the outside pedal and leaning your bike into the turn, a 1.8 will carve like a knife and hold a nice line.
Look at the tread profile of the tire. Some tires have a round tread profile that follows the radius of the tire casing. On such a tire, there will not be much tread on the ground at any time. If the tread profile is more square, meaning that the outside of the tread hits the ground as well as the center, you'll have a lot of the tread making contact with the ground at all times. By profile, I mean to look at the tire as a cross-section. A 2.1 tire with a round profile might have the same contact patch as a 1.8 tire with a sqaure profile.
Are you riding a hardtail or FS? Bigger tires offer a little added suspension.
If you're over 200 pounds, consider a wire-bead tire. Some kevlar bead tires have very flexy sidewalls that can make your bike feel squirrely at speed and under heavy sideways loads. Also, stay away from smaller knobs if you are heavy because they can flex too, or even rip off!
If you have a bike with a high bottom bracket, a tire that slides a little might help your cornering. Better to be in a controlled slide than get a good bite and high-side it over the bars.
Make sure your rims are compatible with thinner tires. A wide rim with a skinny tire makes for a weird tire profile.
As for Wildgrippers, I had them on a full-suspension bike and hated them. I weigh 165 and they felt like wet noodles on my rims. They might have been the worst tires I ever rode. I have tried the 2.1 Trailblasters and love them. I have them on all my bikes in the summer. My Spring, Winter, and Fall tire (wet seasons) is a FireProXC. Trailblasters are perfect on hardpack and roll fast for a full-tread tire.
If the 1.8s handle anywhere near as good as the 2.1s, Trailblasters might be right up your alley.

[Andy in Wi]

As for wire beads, they weigh more and yet kevlar works. I weigh 220 and all tires I use have either kevlar or armid (panaracer) beads.
Wildgrippers feeling like wet noodles? I've never had that problem with any of the wildgrippers (cross, xc, cross again, semi-slick xc, yet more cross) tires. Actually, the wildgripper comp S and the panaracer perform about the same, but when the stuff sticks, the pythons work wonders. Otherwise, toss up between the michilens (that green goes with anything I swear!), panaracers (and similar treads like the tioga 1.8 red phoenix), or whatever I threw on the rig in some drunker fury.
-WiBA

[JerseyDevil]

Wildgripper Lites- the knobs were small but tall, and they flexed in all directions. They also had a very thin casing that was nice and supple for traction, but made the bike feel too loose when turning directions. I haven't ridden any other Michs. After riding those, I'll never buy another Michelin tire.
My friend who is 225 pounds bought a Klein and kept getting pinch flats. After examining the rims, tubes, and tires, he decided to get new tires because he was at the end of the rope. He bought some cheap wire Darts for the heck of it. No more flats, and tire size and pressure was the same. He said the bike also handled 100% better. The original tires were kevlar IRCs.
Then he got a new Trek with kevlar Bontragers. Pinch flats again. He changed the tires to wire bead Continentals, no more flats and he said the bike felt snappier in handling.
A kevlar/aramid bead is soft and flexible. It does not hold shape very well compared to a wire. When a tire bead moves, the sidewall folds. Wire is heavier, but it is laterally and vertically stronger. When you hold a kevlar tire in your hand, it just flops. When you hold a wire bead tire, it holds its shape.
Andy, you might have very good riding skills that make it easy on your equipment. Some people do not have that finesse. I was merely presenting information I have from experiences. I do not talk out of my ass just to have something to write.

[Andy in Wi]

Ah yes, what I lacked in finesse I made up for by running higher pressure.
Having a conti flex is weird. Those tires fit really tight to the rim and the brown sidewalls have a really dense casing.
I haven't tried the lites yet, but when the weight is reduced on a tire, often times the casing thickness / weave density is decreased, so that could be clued in on the wet noodle thing.
Klien... Bontragers as well? Not the worst tire, but not best
Well sorry if I sounded challenging, I just never have had problems you described with my tires.
-WiBA

[EBasil]

Let me just weigh in in favor of the 2.1 or 2.2's for XC riding. Oh, sure, my 110lb wife runs 1.9's on her race bike, but not being a spindly-legged roadie wannabe...:cool: , I need more traction and floatation than a skinny mtb tire can give me and my 24lb HT.

Re: Kevlar beads and saving grams, I'm all for it. I think a kevlar tire is a lot easier to change on the trail, and I find favorite tires that are light compared to similar tread patterns ( a Mosquito is always going to be lighther than a Fire...one just has more knobs, but a Fire is lighter than a Mythos...if you really care). I've been between 205 and 235 for a long time, and haven't had any problems with kevlars squirming off the rim or feeling like they have a soft sidewall. I can tell the difference between tires with different sidewall threadcounts...the more supple tires can feel softer.

As a heavier rider, I also agree with the point about tread lugs. Narrow lugs will tear off or squirm with a heavy load, and this is made worse with a narrow tire (ie a lighter rider can get squirm out of a tire I can't even ride well).

[JerseyDevil]

Good point about the thread count. Unfortunately, info like that isn't imprinted on tire sidewalls and figures like that often fall by the wayside.

[Andy in Wi]

yeah, but certain companies print that information on boxed tires, and if your shop has a consumer (priceless) QBP catalog, oftentimes the casing tpi is listed with the tire. Most wire bead tires have a low TPI (around 60 or so), whereas some kevlars can have a 130 tpi casing. Of course, anything "light" has definately sacraficed to make the lightest tire possible (hutchison air-lites are all under 400 grams per tire).
As for pinchflats, I've noticed that certain tubes seem to hold up better. It might just be my imagination, so don't go putting down the standard bulk kenda 2.1 presta.
Well, beer awaits.
-WiBA

[853steel rides]

:cool: This is all so very interesting,
I read thru the whole thread and find that everybody has brought up some very good points .

I have been running some Vredestein Campo 32c Cross tires on my Cross bike and have experienced all the joys that a skinny tire can provide. In the mud these tires are simply fantastic.I believe that this would hold true for many other skinny tires as well.

Consider this also.
Don't buy these tires and expect them to be your main tire, the multi purpose do everything tire save your ass have a nice day answer to all your riding ills deal.

Like a good mechanic, a good rider must have tools for every job. Oftentimes it will seem as though one has many duplicates of the same tire/tool.Upon closer examination one will see that their arre subtle differences. A 1.8 will be unsurpassed on smooth hardpack trails of midsummer. I have found that the bike is much quicker side to side in the twisty stuff. If you can find them, the Geax Blades are an awesome tire in the 1.8 size.I will sell my cat to get another pair of Blades for my Cross bike.

:eek: :eek: :eek: DANGER DANGER!!!
Do not use 1.8s on gravel Forest Service roads. They are simply too small to handle the three inches of gravel that they always seem to spread on them. I got a nasty scar to prove that, real nasty.

I have always had good luck with Panaracer products.
The square versus round profile is a good point also.I have found that if you lean the bike into turns then the square tire profile will hook up real well until you run outta tire. Be careful how far you go over. Case in point, road tires.How many square profile road tires have we seen?

I have found a round profile to be much more useful for me.
Ex Roadie current Cross racer.

GUY

[scotteagan]

I used to run 1.9's then when I went to 2.1's I experienced less jarring, better grip, and fewer pinch flats, now I ride 2.3's and absolutely love them.

If you rode in the mud then definately run smaller tires, but if you tend to ride on gravel and rough stuff stay with something larger than 2.

[853steel rides]

Yeh ,
Scott is right. You will feel more jarring and a generally rougher ride with the smaller tires.
I noticed a lot of skipping around on gravel with the smaller tires also.

Has anyone ever ridden out at Tsali Recreation area in North Carolina??
If you have, then you will know the meaning of schmooth hardpack.
Mile after mile of it. A narrow 1.8 type tire simply sings out there.

If anyone has anything like that in their area you owe it to yourself to try the thin tires.
It is the best of road riding with the thrill of MTB ing we all love.

Put the fun back in dysFUNctional.

gUy