Schwalbe radial tyres

[irie]

Look interesting, any information other than what's on the Schwalbe Web site?

MTB radial tires | Schwalbe

More grip, more damping, more safety. Discover the latest innovation from Schwalbe now!

www.schwalbe.com

 

[Mcharza]

Here's the test New Schwalbe Albert MTB Tire on test – New Benchmark Casing?

 

[irie]

Here's the test New Schwalbe Albert MTB Tire on test – New Benchmark Casing?

Thanks for the above test review ... which is rather underwhelming (imo).

 

[jetskier973]

I'm interested in the new Schwalbe radial tires, but finding a dealer is challenging me. Can anyone point me to a dealer?
Thank you!

 

[Hanzzzie]

Curious about the rolling resistance as they'll have more contact surface

 

[steve_sordy]

Curious about the rolling resistance as they'll have more contact surface

I can't speak about the Schwalbe tyres, or even whether they do have more tyre in contact with the ground. Tyre pressure x contact area for both tyres equals the weight of rider and bike.
But I do know that tyres are part of your suspension. A few years ago (pre emtb), my mate and I were similar weight and skills on similar bikes. He preferred higher pressures than I did. We were rolling down a slight slope, lots of bends, lots of roots. He commented that he had to pedal to keep up with me. I had front 20, rear 24. He had 5-7 psi more than I did.

I believe that my tyres were conforming to the roots more than his. His wheels were bouncing off the roots and slowing him down, I was flowing over them.

Therefore, contact area on a flat surface is not the only contributor to rolling resistance over rougher surfaces.

 

[Ark]

Curious about the rolling resistance as they'll have more contact surface

same won't it just drain battery life by not being as efficient

 

[Mikerb]

Not convinced personally. "Radial" construction on cars are a completely different story......far more weight on the tyre and much greater centrifugal force. Invariably also much lower profile and ratio of sidewall to tyre width. I see no crossover benefit to mtb tyres. Tyre pressure is far more variable with mtb tyres and needs to be with so many variations in trail conditions.

 

[Bndit]

Not convinced personally. "Radial" construction on cars are a completely different story......far more weight on the tyre and much greater centrifugal force. Invariably also much lower profile and ratio of sidewall to tyre width. I see no crossover benefit to mtb tyres. Tyre pressure is far more variable with mtb tyres and needs to be with so many variations in trail conditions.

Everyone who has ridden these tires says otherwise

 

[Mikerb]

From what I read they said the tyre was more comfortable but had greater drag, and all the riding condition seemed to be dry/ hardback. That does not sound like much of a revelation to me.......sounds just like what happens with non radial tyres at lower pressures.

 

[digitale]

I got some seat time on Albert 27 x 2.5 soft gravity casing in the rear and 29 x 2.5 ultra soft trail casing up front. It is definitely a noticeable difference when coming off my Maxxis tires (exo assegai and dhr2). They have a different sound to them when hitting bumps, and have a softer feel to them. Rolling resistance doesn't seem much different, they recommend you run the pressure a few psi higher than your standard pressures (I was running about 30psi/33psi vs 27/30psi what I normally run). If you've ever added cushcore it feels very similar to that without the weight penalty. YMMV, but I thought it was worthwhile upgrade for me (I had planned on getting rid of the oem exo maxxis tires at some point).

 

[irie]

We now have Maxxis Maxxgrip High Roller 3's on our Rails (29 DD front, 29 DH rear), cannot fault them. In South Downs mud even DHR2's quickly turn into slicks whereas the HR3's don't.

Would be interesting to compare them with Schwalbe Albert/Shredda.

 

[digitale]

We now have Maxxis Maxxgrip High Roller 3's on our Rails (29 DD front, 29 DH rear), cannot fault them. In South Downs mud even DHR2's quickly turn into slicks whereas the HR3's don't.

Would be interesting to compare them with Schwalbe Albert/Shredda.

I got a Magic Mary coming for the front, I like something a little bit more aggressive for the front.

 

[irie]

I got a Magic Mary coming for the front, I like something a little bit more aggressive for the front.

Post in thread 'Pic of the Day' Pic of the Day

 

[digitale]

Post in thread 'Pic of the Day' Pic of the Day

Interesting, I wonder how much the radial construction changes the Magic Mary.

 

[Hanzzzie]

Interesting, I wonder how much the radial construction changes the Magic Mary.

About 45 degrees i reckon

 

[mustclime]

I saw some this weekend, they were 2.6’s but they looked more like a 2.4. Not a fan of skinny tires.

 

[James_MTB]

I’ve had seven rides (80 miles) on the Magic Mary tires, and I can’t imagine going back to regular tires.

I like the damping and how they mold around trail obstacles. There's more grip, though I’m not entirely convinced it’s the 30% that Schwalbe claims. They’re not a cure-all for slick, wet roots; you still need to unweight.

It took me some time to figure out the right psi for the rear tire. The front needed 1.5 psi more than usual, while the rear required 2-2.5 psi extra.

I plan to get the Shredda front tire for the harshest winter conditions and likely some Alberts for summer. I mainly ride on loamy trails.

We'll all be riding radial tires, it's hard to believe it’s taken this long.

 

[Bndit]

I saw some this weekend, they were 2.6’s but they looked more like a 2.4. Not a fan of skinny tires.

I saw 2.5's Magic Mary's on Vala and they defenately didn't look like 2,4....

 

[Mikerb]

I got some seat time on Albert 27 x 2.5 soft gravity casing in the rear and 29 x 2.5 ultra soft trail casing up front. It is definitely a noticeable difference when coming off my Maxxis tires (exo assegai and dhr2). They have a different sound to them when hitting bumps, and have a softer feel to them. Rolling resistance doesn't seem much different, they recommend you run the pressure a few psi higher than your standard pressures (I was running about 30psi/33psi vs 27/30psi what I normally run). If you've ever added cushcore it feels very similar to that without the weight penalty. YMMV, but I thought it was worthwhile upgrade for me (I had planned on getting rid of the oem exo maxxis tires at some point).

not sure what trails you are running but no way I would use EXO on my trails. Always DD on the back, maybe EXO plus on the front. Max grip on the front, max terra on the back..............and the maximum tyre pressure I run is 22 rear 20 front.

 

[digitale]

not sure what trails you are running but no way I would use EXO on my trails. Always DD on the back, maybe EXO plus on the front. Max grip on the front, max terra on the back..............and the maximum tyre pressure I run is 22 rear 20 front.

Like I said, I had planned to swap them out anyways. They came stock on my bike.

 

[James_MTB]

I’ve tested hundreds of mountain bike tyres, and the Schwalbe Albert Radial Gravity Pro has the most planted and supremely-damped ride quality I’ve encountered​

 

[irie]

I’ve tested hundreds of mountain bike tyres, and the Schwalbe Albert Radial Gravity Pro has the most planted and supremely-damped ride quality I’ve encountered​

If you increase the size of your typeface you will make your post more credible.

 

[Chicane]

Here's a 34 pg. thread with real world thoughts and sizing. The 2.5 MM measures at 2.4" and the 2.5 Albert measures slightly under 2.4".

I'm going to try a MM Gravity SS front and Albert 2.6 gravity soft rear. I figured that the Albert 2.6 will hopefully measure closer to a real 2.5.

https://www.mtbr.com/threads/schwalbe-albert-pro-shredda-tires.1233100/page-34?post_id=16349854#post-16349854

 

[Suns_PSD]

I've ran them and like some things, and dislike others.

The MM 2.5 measures a solid 2.47" and works very well as a front aggressive tire.
The 29 x 2.5 Albert measures about 2.32". It's working well now as a front trail bike tire on another bike, but it was inadequate for the front of my Relay e-bike.
I have a 27.5 x 2.5 Albert and it measures a real world 2.41" and works really well as a rear tire, that said next time I'll be using the 2.6 version which is supposedly about 2.5" width.

 

[irie]

I've ran them and like some things, and dislike others.

The MM 2.5 measures a solid 2.47" and works very well as a front aggressive tire.
The 29 x 2.5 Albert measures about 2.32". It's working well now as a front trail bike tire on another bike, but it was inadequate for the front of my Relay e-bike.
I have a 27.5 x 2.5 Albert and it measures a real world 2.41" and works really well as a rear tire, that said next time I'll be using the 2.6 version which is supposedly about 2.5" width.

What was inadequate?

 

[Suns_PSD]

What was inadequate?

The traction was mediocre, at best.

 

[Mikerb]

For racers every tiny advantage counts but most of us would struggle to justify higher cost for marginal differences.....especially when set up and riding skill levels probably dominate apparent tyre performance.
It has taken time but I know which tyres deliver reliable performance for me on the trails I ride......winter and summer and can usually find good discounts on them. I will stick to what I know!!

 

[Durrti]

The traction was mediocre, at best.

Curious I’ve been running Assegai’s for years and thought that was the best front tire ever.
I’m running the Albert now and have so much more traction than I ever did with the Assegai. Albert on the rear is ok not my favorite.
SoCal rider here.

 

[Suns_PSD]

I find the new MM Radial and Assagai to perform nearly similar in most conditions, although straight up hard pack I'd choose the Assagai.

I tried the 2.5 Albert up front on my Relay and that bike is only used on the steepest, loosest trails. It did not perform well. although in the rear the Albert is great.

I now have the Albert 2.5 up front on my trail bike, that sees a lot flatter hard pack riding and very much like it for that application.