Mid-fat. 27.5+ on the shore?

maybe, but the thought of those weakass sidewalls on the ensuing descent makes Todd on a + sad

Totally.

Someone will make a tire soon though. Sure it'll weigh a fair bit but will the rest of the bike need to be as burly as a 160mm AM? I can still see the total weight being reasonable and with the right rider and geo it might be pretty effective.

You're going to hate this but….

Think of most situations where you loose grip and slide out, are they suspension or tire related? I have my suspicions that the unsprung mass differential of a bike/rider is too similar and suspension can't react fast enough no matter how low friction it is. With a tire that squirms and smears all those little nano moments where the tire contact pressure is insufficient (weighting for the suspension to react) it might ultimately be faster. Sure if you're talking chunder slamming trails travel will always win but I can see a Plus 130mm with AM geo and the imaginary sidewall tires being fucking fast on the majority of Flank trails.

Possibly.

^yeah. may be something in a shorter travel, appropriately aggressive geo trail slayer with a proper 2.8 tire.

Good article, thanks. Some interesting points in there re: tire construction, tread type, and size. Reminds me a lot of the development of niner wheels and tires, which isn't surprising.

TERRIBLE formatting.

http://www.pinoymtbiker.org/what-does-27-5-and-29-bikes-means-your-guide-to-the-fattening/

Re: Flip and JCL's comments:

When I start thinking about plus tires, Whistler trails (not the hill) are exactly what come to mind - both for their advantages and their limitations.

The guy I ride with that rides the downhills the hardest doesn't like plus tires (too floppy in corners) but they led him to size up to 2.5" w/wide rims and "low" pressures and loves it. Trail bike on a wide variety of trails, ex DH pro, not exactly svelte.

I totally agree regarding the hype but it's all relative. Todd on a + would definitely climb shit he's never done before.

Todd already climbs like a damn billy goat, do we really need a more capable climbing Todd?

Will all this crazy traction we'll all want to climb up the green/blue descents.

Personally I'd like to see a 2.5/2.6 with some good sidewalls. Tires like the 2.3 Butcher are good, but some more volume would be nice without going all the way to 3.0 and flimsy sidewalls.

Re: Flip and JCL's comments:

When I start thinking about plus tires, Whistler trails (not the hill) are exactly what come to mind - both for their advantages and their limitations.

The guy I ride with that rides the downhills the hardest doesn't like plus tires (too floppy in corners) but they led him to size up to 2.5" w/wide rims and "low" pressures and loves it. Trail bike on a wide variety of trails, ex DH pro, not exactly svelte.

no offense, I ride these trails all the time, and haven't noticed limitations with my 2.35-5 am/dh casing tire setups, other than a few very specific places in very specific conditions (steep climb, loose, super dry/babyheads), that I'm not sure even a +tire could help…I dunno, at this point I still feel like it's a marginal solution searching for a rare problem.

No offence taken. I've ridden a bunch of the Whistler trails and haven't felt limited either. I'd characterize them as rough, and with a lot of roots and sharp rocks.

This is about better though. I understand that big volume tires give more traction over the rough = better. More susceptible to sidewall damage (sharp rocks) = worse.

Todd already climbs like a damn billy goat, do we really need a more capable climbing Todd?

Will all this crazy traction we'll all want to climb up the green/blue descents.

Personally I'd like to see a 2.5/2.6 with some good sidewalls. Tires like the 2.3 Butcher are good, but some more volume would be nice without going all the way to 3.0 and flimsy sidewalls.

I've been running 2.4 Continental Mountain Kings on my 29er for a few years now. I upgraded to them when I got tired of cutting sidewalls on the limestone in southern Utah. They are heavy-ish, but the stiff sidewall and wide profile provide a ton of traction. Definitely made a big difference in my riding style when I got them. Takes a bit of work to dial in optimal tire pressure, but worth the effort.

I'm not sold on the + trend, but haven't really given them a chance. Mostly I have no desire for a heavier tire than I am currently running and I dislike the idea of going back to a lesser sidewall.

Anyway, the Mountain King gets my vote for big rubber without officially being +'ed.

Todd already climbs like a damn billy goat, do we really need a more capable climbing Todd?

HA! billygoat is my spirit animal I've been told!

+ tires sure are not going to work well when you ride in soft conditions… the big tires are going to float instead of dig.

+ tires sure are not going to work well when you ride in soft conditions… the big tires are going to float instead of dig.

interesting… the way you phrased that… it almost sounds like you have no experience on which to base your claim :|

interesting… the way you phrased that… it almost sounds like you have no experience on which to base your claim :|

physics…

+ tires sure are not going to work well when you ride in soft conditions… the big tires are going to float instead of dig.

Sometimes floating is a good thing:

It's probably also reasonable to note that if you're the only guy on a Plus bike and your group is busting out a big ride you are definitely going to hurt notably more on the non-tech climbs?

You bet, but the difference isn't as huge as you think. The wheels keep rolling over stuff and you use less energy working the bike but of course expend more to keep spinning along.

The key for plus wheels is weight. With bigger volume you don't need heavy rims or tires. There are inexpensive 500g ish rims out there that work great. For a 2.8 tire, 1000g is very reasonable to roll around on and provides plenty of support and protection. These are regular weights for a 27.5 wheel.

A good example of a ride that was made better with bigger tires was 7 Summits. 2 years ago I got 7 flats on my 2.3 tires. First 2 were cuts to the casing the after that it was 5 more with a tube and I was being cautious. The over-inflated 2.3 wasn't deflecting properly on sharp rocks and kept getting cut. Under-inflated and I get getting pinched tubes.

Conversely, last year I got 1 flat due to a cut casing and nothing more. The trail is full of sharp rocks and square edges that will destroy tires and rims. With the bigger volume setup, it was a blast to ride. Oh and it shredded the Dewdney DH as well as a meaty 2.5 setup.

For beginners/intermediate riders who just want to have fun they're another world IMO. They'll be able to ride more trails, clear more climbs, and spend a lot more time on the bike than on their face.

Exactly. I'd go so far so say that better riders can benefit. The main issue is tire support but that's adjustable with pressure up to a certain point.

+ tires sure are not going to work well when you ride in soft conditions… the big tires are going to float instead of dig.

True. That's why it's key to still have a real tire like the Rekon+ or the Nic. No issues with grip. A 3.0 Nic makes light work of your favorite trails and you'd be hard pressed to tell that I came through because the footprint is much less noticeable. Upsides…