What width of tyre for mtb on tarmac?

[beanzontoast]

I'm looking to change the knobblies on my 26" wheeled Trek 3700 so that I can use it more generally on tarmac. (Not the ideal bike for this - I know the fact that the fork can't be locked out is a drawback, but not talking about huge distances here: nothing over about 10 miles.)

M+ is the chosen replacement, but I'm not sure about what size to go for. They seem to go from 26x1.35 all the way to 26x2.0. What size would people recommend?

 

[Landslide]

If you're purely after a road tyre, and aren't caryng heavy loads, I'd say go for the narrowest. That you're changing the tyres at all suggests you want the most efficiency.

 

[e-rider]

The narrower the tyre the faster it will be (generally; quality also counts), and the more respnsive the steering. However, 2 points to note about narrow road tyres on mtb rims:

1. they will make your bike look crap and will lower your BB height so remember that when cornering
2. your 26" mtb rims are not made for high pressure narrow tyres and although they will fit (26x1.0 or 26x1.3), many people have trouble with the rims splitting around the eyelets.

My advice would be to use 26x1.6 to 26x2.0 road slicks instead of knobblies and keep the pressure to below 80psi

 

[Davidc]

1 1/2 inch is common. I have them on the mtb I use for round town trips and have never had any problems even on the canal towpath or with 20+kg of shopping on the bike.

 

[Crackle]

1.5" here, big difference to knobblies. I was thinking of getting narrower ones but now I've read Tundragumski's post, I don't think I'll bother.

 

[Norm]

1. they will make your bike look crap and will lower your BB height so remember that when cornering

Whilst I agree with almost everything, especially the aesthetics (this is my Talon on 26x1.5 tyres - ignore the lights and saddle position, I was playing with some other stuff at the time), I'm not sure that the height difference will be too much of an issue. The reduced height is, after all, less than the front suspension can squash and less than the difference, with me on my bike, between having the forks locked and the static sag with my arse on board.

I'd recommend the 26x1.5 option, though.

 

[Debian]

I'm too much of a poseur I'm afraid.

I just swapped my knobblies for Big Apples - I went for the 26 x 2.15.

IMHO anything less than 1.75 just looks silly on an MTB, but that's just my opinion.

 

[Steve Austin]

I've used 1.3's on my MTB commuter for years. It looks great!

 

[Norm]

Well, to add to the aesthetic discussion, I took the 26x1.5 tyres from one MTB, because they looked frankly silly. I put them onto another MTB and the suit the thing just fine.

YMMV.

 

[MacB]

oh yeah, get advice on aesthetics from the sorriest, ugliest, mismatched bunch of rejects ever to stumble across the invention know as the wheel.

Alternatively if it looks ok to you, and is mechanically sound, do it.

 

[tyred]

I use 1.5s.

Looks would depend on the frame, I would've thought. My MTB is quite an early one and the original tyres were 26 x 1.75". I doubt I would have the width between the forks to fit the modern, wide MTB tyre so 1.5 on my bike looks perfectly normal.

 

[e-rider]

and to some extent, frame size. If you're lanky and ride a 21" frame, slicks will look all the more stupid. I had some big apple 2.35 and they looked cool but were painfully slow.

I then went for conti sport contact 1.3s which were great (looked shoot though) but after 1000 miles my rear Mavic rim had 6 big cracks in it. After some research it appears that this is fairly common with narrow tyres at high pressure on mtb rims - that's why I mentioned it earlier.

 

[e-rider]

one more point - try continental top contact 26x1.9 - great road tyres and look good too.

 

[elevensees]

MTB slicks

Another vote for Big Apples here. I've got 2.35's on a Kona Smoke and they are excellent, I don't find them slow at all. In fact, I'd say they were faster at 35psi than 1.5 Nimbus at 80psi and they are sooooo comfy. They are a bit more expensive, but worth it. I made the mistake of trying to pump them up quite hard when I first got them and the DH inner tubes I use seem to have stretched them to the point of cracking within the tread a bit. But since I've dropped the pressure I've had no trouble. The punkcher fairy doesn't visit very often (especially if she doesn't recognise the spelling of her name!!) and they are getting old now, they've lasted two bikes and four maybe five winters, I forget!
They just look right in my opinion, but keep 'em soft, I ride everyday and regularly with heavy loads and I've got 30psi in the front and 35 in the back and they are perfect.
Oh and the other bike they were on was a Spesh Rockhopper '98 which had pretty tight clearance in the back, but they fitted OK, if you can get a 2.0+ knobbly in there, the Big Apples will probably squeeze in, but they do a 2.0 if not.
Balloon bikes rule!

 

[Bman]

I swap my 2.35 knobblies for 1.75 Kenda Semi Slicks for the summer. In fact, I only use the knobblies for serious off roading or snow.

Unlocking my bike one day I was asked "How could you ruin that beautiful off-road machine with those tyres!"

I want more speed, and less rolling resistance on roads!