[Closed] Wider on the Front??

I tend to run a smaller mud tyre on the back in winter (1.95) no issues ever mate! remember I'm only 100kg plus though! 8)

I usually run a 2.4 front and 2.25 rear, because 2.4 Nobby Nics are so expensive I can't afford 2. I'm running 2.4s f+r on one bike, 2.1s on the other at the minute and feel it's better matched.

Kona's used to come with a larger front tyre, waaaaaaaay back in the day (early 90s). The idea was that the larger volume offered more cushioning and therefore more control.

If one is to have a bigger tyre it should be on the front for better grip and less rolling resistance on the back <cue Schwalbe fanbois quoting their website fatter is faster nonsense>.
Personally I think if you've got a Vert Pro UST on the front then it only a matter of time before you'll get to know the first name of a casualty nurse!

It comes from BMX where normaly it'd be 2.1 upfront and 1.9 on the back.

reasoning bein the front has to cope with turning and it needs grip, the back just needs enough to propell you forewards.

I run a knobbly tire up front and slick out back for the same effect withu loosing the cussioning.

contary to others i've got a 2.35 Highroller on front and 'fatter' 2.4 Advantage on the back.

i think it depends on what you ride. or how.

conti's on the front isn't a good idea, IME.

why though alpin?

can't think of any good reason, other than trials.

Yep, I run fatter up front all the time. The front does more of the steering, braking and bump absorbing, so a bigger tyre makes sense.

Most of my bikes have the same size tyres front and back, the front one always has larger knobs though.

I currently have a 2.4 Fire FR on the front and a 2.1 Fire XC on the rear.

I love the skinny tyre on the rear for acceleration, but after denting my new Traversee wheels have lost a bit of confidence. I'm thinking of going 2.3 on the rear and dropping the mahoosive 2.4 on the front for a 2.3 also, as it's dragging stones through the low arch on my E150SL forks and is a bit heavy.

TheArtistFormerlyKnownAsSTR, I have a Rubber Queen 2.4 on my E150. No real trouble with stones or mud. Different profile, maybe?

I have Cont vert Pro 2.3-the older skinnier type-front and rear.

Twas on the bike when i bought it, no problems yet.......but

........sounds like i'm trouble! 😯 😉 😛

Wowa that's more info than I had planned for! Shite, then I should ditch the conti vert pro totally and buy a completely new set or would folks on here consider it an ok rear tyre at 2.3 - just when I thought I was getting this ust thing. 🙂

Thanks for all the tips peeps.

i'v e got a HR on the front which i find dead reliable in the corners and general duties. the fork (160mm) can take care of the bump absorbtion.
2.4 on the back for a bit of bump absorbtion/pinch protection and find it's grip on wet rocks/roots impressive. it rolls well, enough at lowish pressure (35psi). front runs a bit more (40-ish psi?)

riding a DB Alpine. wouldn't say i was a heavy rider but often experience "Durchschlag" or "through hit on the rim" when translated from german. no pinch flats other than that on the weekend when riding conti "mountain kings" - whether you'd get down a mountain on them in one piece i'd not like to say.

Flasheart - the Fire FR's are huge and the underside of the arch is pretty battered after a month

Oh blooomin heck, now I'm utterly lost....

Got a pal that loves Vert Pros on the rear _because_ they break away. I pinch punctured the PoS and it was beyond repair. If you must use one keep it on the back and make sure it's hard if on rocky ground, soft if you want grip in any other conditions. Personally I'd get rid. Without wanting to sound like a Maxxis groupie I've tried Ignitors, Swampthings, HR and Larsen TTs since binning my Verts. They are all better in UST. Even my Fire XC Pros are better. The only worse tyre I can remember is Spesh Enduro Pro 2.25s

Do you remember the old days on here when conti vert pros were the ONLY tyre to use.. how times have changed 🙂