You are hereForums / By Discipline / Mountain (off road) / MTB Gear / Schwalbe Direction advice
Schwalbe Direction advice
Hope you all had a great XMAS and are looking forward to 2010 (i just can't wait to see the end of 2009).
Anyhoo, Santa agreed that I need to go down the Tubeless path and kindly left some new UST Schwalbes in my stocking. I'm going to run a Nobby Nic 2.25 on the front with a Racing Ralph 2.25 on the rear, but I'm a little confused about the direction to run them. Does the arrow that says FRONT mean, "Tyre should travel in this direction if using on front wheel", or "tyre pattern should face towards the front of the bike"? With the Nobby Nic, I'm happy with the FRONT arrow facing forwards, but by using the Racing Ralph on the rear do I need to have the REAR arrow facing forwards? I would have assumed that the ramped centre tread would be better utilised by having the FRONT arrow facing forwards and reducing rolling resistance, but would I gain greater climbing traction br flippiing it around?
Would greatly appreciate any feedback from riders who have used these tyres.
BWOAR!
- Login to post comments
- Bookmark & share
The arrow should point in the direction that the wheel rotates in.
like the other guy said but if you are a newb like me it makes more sense when the forward and reverse arrows are at the top of the wheel
Yes I am aware of the regular directional arrow which means "tyre should travel in this direction", but these tyres have 2 arrows - something I have not encountered before.
Does anyone who has used a Racing Ralph before have any wisdom to impart? Does FRONT mean "this direction forward on the front only" or "this direction forward always?" Vice Versa, does REAR mean "this direction forward on the rear only" or "this direction pointing to the rear (opposite to travel) always?" ie, does Schwalbe recommend that you flip the Ralph around when using on the rear wheel?
You got it UBB
They recommend you run it for minimum rolling resistance on the front but reverse it on the back to get better go forward traction
Here's an easy way to work this sort of thing out.
Most tyre makers put all the branding labels on just one side of the tyre and that will always be the drive side. So, install the tyres with those labels on the drive side, line the valve up with a midpoint on a name ( be it Shwalbe or Nobby Nic or what have you ) and your bike will have a classy look with correctly mounted tyres...
mine (michelin xc2 dry) has two arrows also ... when i went into the bike store they showed me arrows on top to clear confusion but since i have discovered what delicious said ... the brand on drive side and arrows on left ...
Its logical.
Forget the arrows.
Rear tyre: tread ramps facing forward on the dirt, thus the square edge gives you climbing grip
Front tyre: tread ramps facing rear on the dirt, thus the square edge gives you braking grip.
Let the debate continue
Pikey
self confessed mtb know nothing (very little anyhow) ...
thanks for the explanation ... next time i'm friggen around with a flat i'll have a closer look ...
chances are i've ballzed it up ... que cera cera and happy new year ...
cheers
b.
Pikey, interesting views. Which way should the ramps run on a Larsen according to your theory? Reason I ask is that your approach would see them installed the opposite to how they've been fitted to every bike I've ever seen them mounted on as a rear tyre.
Personally, unless I had a very specific reason to do otherwise based on experience with a given tyre or conditions (eg, wet), I'd run the rear the way Pikey says to run the front to minimise rolling resistance as a general principle. (This is usually the way the arrow indicates you should mount them in any case.) Especially in the case of the Larsen. It's a good climbing tyre installed in the standard direction in the dry. If it got wet, rather than reverse it I'd run a different rear tyre altogether - like say the Ignitor, or a maybe a Monorail (haven't tried one yet) - as the Larsen sucks when it's damp.
The rear tyre carries most of your weight, which is why a tyre change to minimise rolling resistance seems to have most impact if implemented on the back. The front still has some impact on RR but not as marked. And since it's the control tyre (as in, it is essential for control of your bike) a lot of guys opt for bigger knobs and more grip at that end and are prepared to pay a little RR increase to get it. The quicker guys with excellent bike control get away with semi-slicks or low RR tyres on both ends, but I'm not that confident in my skills. Maybe if it was clean hardpack...
Hawkeye, I believe they are only discussing tyres that are designed to be fitted in different rolling direction - based on them being on the front or rear of the bike. Larsens (should) only run one way.
If you are relying on the tyre knobs for braking aren't you skidding and thus out of control?
let the debate continue
Which raises the question - "are you more likely to skid with the rear tyre on the right way or the wrong way round? Or nearly bald vs brand new? Does either make a difference - assuming track conditions and application of the brakes is identical??"
which is bull571t on par with the explanation that you are doing no work during an arms in front and parallel to the ground static hold of a heavy weight ... more food for thought anyhow ... [*chuckle & smiles*] ... happy new year everyone ...
LOL
Happy new year folks!
Hope you don't need too many berocca's tomorrow morning, Byron.
Thanks for the advice team. I'm still umming and ahhing as to which way to put them- do I go for less resistance or more uphill push? I think I'll toss a coin, but having used Crossmarks and similarly ramped tyres in the past, I'm probably leaning towards the less resistance direction.
I should have been more specific, I set my tires up for climbing steep sandstone steps and roll ups and steepslow desents down said rocks so belive in my original posted tire set up theory.
As I have the high speed cornering skills of a semi trailer driver it wouldn't matter what I ran on the front I would still run off into the bush
I am about to run crossmarks on the front and rear of my new XC bike but have already been advised this is not a good option and to put something else on the front?????? one way to find out!!! bring on the DIrtworks.
Pikey
Write the book, that is.
Agree with the comments on the crossmarks both ends. Would probably be OK on a buffed hardpack race circuit but personally I'd be nervous on a point-to-point enduro that my skills would not be up to staying upright on a semi-slick front tyre like the Crossmark. That's why I run an Ignitor on the front most of the time.
Not sure why crossmarks get a bad wrap. I love em and reckon the hook up awesomely. I think riding style has more to do with it and as with anything you need to adjust your riding to suit what and where you are riding
... hence my comments about my (lack of) skills.
My bike came with a 2.35 crossmark at both ends.... quickly changed to a Nevegal on the front after one or two front end wash outs.
But the crossmark on the rear will be there for a long time...