Maxxis Minion riders-2.7 vs 2.5
- Thread starter Kntr
- Start date
should make a poll
2.5 front & rear
didnt find the need to run any bigger up the front
intially started with a 2.7 up front but found that 2.5
has more than enough grip
2.5 front & rear
didnt find the need to run any bigger up the front
intially started with a 2.7 up front but found that 2.5
has more than enough grip
2.5. no bigger. the 2.7 is ok for super extra loose kitty litter type riding, but other than that, its slows you down to much. Currently I have 2.5 front 2.3 rear.
The 2,7 grips a lot up front, i rode one yesterday in dry, sandy terrain and the grip really amazed me.
Anyway the size factor depends of the rim width as you know.
Like... maybe with narrow rims like ex721´s 2,7 front and 2,5 rear will be the best
and with something wide like ex729´s 2.5 front and 2.35 rear.
my 0.2 cents
Anyway the size factor depends of the rim width as you know.
Like... maybe with narrow rims like ex721´s 2,7 front and 2,5 rear will be the best
and with something wide like ex729´s 2.5 front and 2.35 rear.
my 0.2 cents
Last edited:
Exactly my experience. Used a 2.7 for a while (I'm usually a fan of big tires) and then switched to a 2.5. It rolled faster, weighed less and was a bit more precise sometimes. Yeah, it didn't ride as soft, but it wasn't that much of a difference.
2.5/2.5 2.7/2.5 for bootleg 
2.7F, 2.5R 2.7 Minion is slightly narrower than 2.5 Nevegal.
Nobody fast uses a 2.7 Maxxis.
2.5 on both ends.
I used to run the big tires, the 3.0 Nokians with a 2.8 Michie in the back.
Switching to 2.5 is the only way.
I used to run the big tires, the 3.0 Nokians with a 2.8 Michie in the back.
Switching to 2.5 is the only way.
2.5 Fr & Rr. Like Hucktastic says...
F & R 2.5 works fine so far
LBJ
LBJ
Is that a challange? I use 2.7 F&R.
Used to run the 2.7f but have switched over to a 2.5 in the front and I can't see any drawbacks so far.
I run the 2.7's on super rough, rocky tracks (Angel Fire, Telluride, sometimes Keystone) but usually only up front. I find the large size tends to "deaden" the feel of the trail. But you can also run a bit lower pressure with the larger meat. Its all personal preference.
America's latest hope, Aaron Gwin has admitted to using 2.7's up front.
I like bigger tires, simply dew to the fact that I seem flat less with them. As SylentK said they "deaden" the feel of small trail junk. I find that to be helpful. Some times they tend to float more on loamy, muddy stuff. I can't run that low of psi, as things get squirmy. I run 25-27 front, 30ish rear, being 150lbs. 2.5s are fine to me, for most any riding. Any smaller and the bike starts to feel like a ping pong ball.
2.5 f&r
2.5 is the way to go, any bigger is overkill
2.5 & 2.35, dual ply. I wish they would still make 2.35 dual plys..
2.7 for rocky courses with lots of square edges.
2.5 Front and Rear Always
2.5 F and R
Since 90% of my racing goes down at Diablo I prefer a 2.7 DHF front and a 2.5 rear (now known as a 2.6 and 2.4 respectively by Maxxis to give a more accurate tire sizing).
Rolling resistance with a 2.7 IS noticably higher than with a 2.5 up front. Thing is - if you just moved up to "Hack" from racing "Semi-Suck" last year then, this is necessary on rocky, squar-edged terrain. :biggrin: ...OR if you are pro and just looking to go wide-open over the nasty stuff. I'm pretty sure Jurgen Beneke changed to 2.8 Michi's F and R for his race run because of the new course re-route before the rock garden near the top.
Aside from a wider tread, the benefit of running a larger tire is an overall increase in size of tire carcass. For example a 2.7 DHF has a taller sectional height (fancy lingo meaning that the sidewalls are taller) than a 2.5. What is nice about this is that it translates into putting more distance between your rim and the ground. It may only be 5mm - but in a race every little bit counts.
On super rocky terrain with square-edged and even knife-edged surfaces a 2.7 up front allows you to take some more risks and hang it out a bit more over the rough stuff while providing more grip and a slightly smaller chance of pinch-flatting. It does deaden the "feel" of the terrain - but this is the natural damping property of the tire/tube helping your suspension along. I found that for me -(170lbs. with armor and helmet - maybe 175) a 2.5 on this kind of terrain was a bit to skinny and didn't really inspire confidence over the rough stuff. I could make mistakes with a 2.7 front while cornering over gnarly rocks and still keep my line but with a 2.5, I was banging the sh!t out of everything and worrying about a pinchflat. On flat ground, the 2.5 cornered about on par with a 2.7 but the 2.5 rolled MUCH faster.
Rolling resistance with a 2.7 IS noticably higher than with a 2.5 up front. Thing is - if you just moved up to "Hack" from racing "Semi-Suck" last year then, this is necessary on rocky, squar-edged terrain. :biggrin: ...OR if you are pro and just looking to go wide-open over the nasty stuff. I'm pretty sure Jurgen Beneke changed to 2.8 Michi's F and R for his race run because of the new course re-route before the rock garden near the top.
Aside from a wider tread, the benefit of running a larger tire is an overall increase in size of tire carcass. For example a 2.7 DHF has a taller sectional height (fancy lingo meaning that the sidewalls are taller) than a 2.5. What is nice about this is that it translates into putting more distance between your rim and the ground. It may only be 5mm - but in a race every little bit counts.
On super rocky terrain with square-edged and even knife-edged surfaces a 2.7 up front allows you to take some more risks and hang it out a bit more over the rough stuff while providing more grip and a slightly smaller chance of pinch-flatting. It does deaden the "feel" of the terrain - but this is the natural damping property of the tire/tube helping your suspension along. I found that for me -(170lbs. with armor and helmet - maybe 175) a 2.5 on this kind of terrain was a bit to skinny and didn't really inspire confidence over the rough stuff. I could make mistakes with a 2.7 front while cornering over gnarly rocks and still keep my line but with a 2.5, I was banging the sh!t out of everything and worrying about a pinchflat. On flat ground, the 2.5 cornered about on par with a 2.7 but the 2.5 rolled MUCH faster.
in relation to a Michelin 2.5...how big is the Maxxis 2.7 amd 2.5?
i'm switching to Maxxis from Michelin next year, and trying to figure out if i should be going 2.7 or 2.5 in front. i ran DH24 2.5 front and rear this year.
SKC - your reply pretty me convinced me im switching, just now wondering how big the difference the Maxxis is to the Michelin
i'm switching to Maxxis from Michelin next year, and trying to figure out if i should be going 2.7 or 2.5 in front. i ran DH24 2.5 front and rear this year.
SKC - your reply pretty me convinced me im switching, just now wondering how big the difference the Maxxis is to the Michelin
2.5 UST Minions F and R on 823s. I rotate the front to rear cause I'm tight, otherwise I'd try a 2.35 rear.
Fatter sometimes feels better, but isn't faster.
Fatter sometimes feels better, but isn't faster.
A Michi 2.5 is a bit smaller than a Maxxis 2.7 BUT - here's where the details come into play: a lot of riders find that Maxxis rubber compounds are super grippy and with the advent of the new 3C triple rubber compound (40a center / 42a side lugs with a 70a base to keep the knobs/lugs in better shape - less prone to folding, getting squishy, etc. The 3C also wears much better than say a pure 40a SRY "Slow-REezay" compound) more than adequate. SO because Maxxis rubber compounds work so well for a lot of riders, running a 2.7 race compound (42a, 40a, 3C) is a bit of overkill for certain tracks. A 2.5 can grip just as well as a 2.7 on the flats - but don't forget the advantages of a 2.7 as I mentioned above. It depends on the individual really. If you are smooth, or don't weight much - then get a 2.5 for the rocky stuff... if not try a 2.7.
Michi never lists their rubber compound durometer (hardness such as 42a, 40a, 50, 60a - etc) BUT from just doing a "fondle test" on a friends Comp 32 (DH32) and Comp 24 - I would say that Michi race rubber is pretty close to a 42a - but feels more like a 50a compound to me...
REMEMBER: -Maxxis tires run on the small side- So a 2.5 is really a 2.4 and a 2.7 is really a 2.6... word around the campfire last year was - Maxxis would re-label all their rubber for 08' but so far the only tires coming with the new sizing designations (2.6 / 2.4) are the new "Ardent" and some other FR tires... everything else is still using the old sizing system (2.7 / 2.5) Confused? Good. This is what Maxxis intended. :biggrin:
If you are coming off Michi 2.5's front and rear - try a Maxxis 2.7 Front and 2.5 rear for starters. Run a DH tube in the 2.5 to start out. If you are pinch-flatting like a mofo on your first few runs then go to a 2.7 rear. Eventually you will get used to the tire size and then be able to go down to a 2.5.
I should mention that for racing I usually run somewhere between 28 and 33psi.
EDIT: inner rim width has a lot to do with tire profile and sidewall angle. A Mavic 721 with an inner width of 21mm and having a low rim sidewall height, gives a Maxxis 2.5 a spectacular tread profile AND a fairly large volume - not as much as say a 2.7 - but rim selection has a lot to do with tire performance. Bryceland and Reid run a wider rim in the rear (DT 6.1 - inner width 25mm) and a narrower rim in the front (DT 5.1 inner width 21mm) to help facilitate rear end drifts. Rim sidewall height also has a huge effect on tire profile.
Last edited:
I run a 2.7 Minion DHF upfront and Minion 2.5 DHF in the back. For me, who cares about being fast. I ride because I like it. If I'm fast (for my age) great and if not I don't care. I'm older (37) and I just like to ride my bike. The older I get, the less I care how fast I am and the less I care about racing. For me, Injuries have become numerous over the years (30+yrs of riding & racing).
I just don't need any more of them + my corporate job just hates it when I hobble around the office for weeks on end. Oh yeah, and don't forget the wife and kids. They get irritated too.
I just don't need any more of them + my corporate job just hates it when I hobble around the office for weeks on end. Oh yeah, and don't forget the wife and kids. They get irritated too.
Well I checked MBA: june 2005 and there is a Sam Hill Bike check.
And he was runing a 2.7 up front with the EX721 mavic rims.
Maybe he was not fast at that year....
maybe not as fast as you are...
Last edited:
2.5 but tubeless
I run 2.7 Minions on the front and rear. But i'm a heavier rider than some of the "petite" guys out there. I don't even know how some of them roll with downhill tires when they only weigh around 150. I'm 215 without any of my gear on. Probably close to 225 with everything on. So for me, rolling downhill fast on 2.7's isn't my biggest concern. Traction is my biggest issue. When my back tire is about done, i just put the front on the back and get a new Minion DHF.
I don't race much though. I'm not really concerned with being the fastest guy on the mountain. I know that's really not a possibility for me. I'm not slow, but i'm not a pro either. I just ride for fun.
I also like how the bigger tires "deaden" the trail a bit. The first part of your suspension is your tires.
I don't race much though. I'm not really concerned with being the fastest guy on the mountain. I know that's really not a possibility for me. I'm not slow, but i'm not a pro either. I just ride for fun.
I also like how the bigger tires "deaden" the trail a bit. The first part of your suspension is your tires.