Slick Size

Right then, I've decided to get some slicks for the MTB for use on the road for training etc..

Now, what width do you recommend - 1.125 or 1.5?

With the latter I'll only need to change the tyre and not the inner tube as well, but will the reduced rolling resistance of narrower tyres make the extra tubes worth it?

All advice welcome.


Steve Austin

The Marmalade Kid
1.25 makes a big difference in riding ime. You'll need new tubes though, but its a much better ride than 1.5.
1.5 are a bit balloon like and don't grip as well, just feels like riding on big wobbly gripless tyres and not nice

Keith Oates

Penarth, Wales
I have to follow the trend and agree that the narrower tyres are faster, but the fatter ones may be a better work out if that's what you're looking for as well!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Legendary Member
NE England
I've Kenda Qwest (excuse spelling it's in the shed and I'm idle) 1.5" on my MTB. It's far faster on them than 2" knobblies. More important it will still cope with a bit of off road. I found any thinner tyre digs into soft surfaces far too easily. As my off road route is 10 miles from home I've never refitted the knobblies, while I'm a touch slower on the off road I'm way faster getting there and back.
1.25 reckon although Geax make a nice 1.3. Depends on your weight

1 inch Contis are superfast if thats what you're after but they are harsh and sketchy at pressues high enough to prevent rim damage on crap roads.


I think I'm on 1.3, recall the LBS wouldn't let me have narrower, said it wouldn;t be safe for me in the wet and stuff

I was 17 st back then


New Member
1.25 Panaracers

They rock
Top Bottom