Comments on: WTB ‘08 29″er Tires: Vulpine Update

By: mg

mg — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:36:52 +0000

Enlightening review, Brother… I think the Monkey is onto something with his Ignitor front/Vulpine rear setup, though I might try to keep it in the WTB family and go with something like a Prowler front/Vulpine rear combo… or something like that. But I found your comparison of your tubed experience to your tubeless experience to be an interesting one, mainly because it is so similar to the results of my own tubed vs. tubeless testing. So many people doubt me when I tell them it makes that much difference, but you’re one of the few who have actually tried it for themselves and let your experience do the talking.

I love it when I completely forget to install tubes!

Lookin’ forward to riding with you at the Death Ride, my friend. I just spoke with Jason B. and he’s in too!! Woohoo!

By: The Monkey

The Monkey — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 13:50:32 +0000

I am running the Vulpine on the rear, with an Ignitor on the front. It has been a very good combo, but this is definitely a dry set up.
I was so excited to try them out, I completely forgot to instal tubes…:)

By: adam

adam — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:55:33 +0000

What bike is that?Looks sweet.Im currently running the vulpine on the front of my raliegh ss so far so good.

By: Desert9r

Desert9r — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 15:48:54 +0000

How about a comparo to the Nano?

By: Cloxxki

Cloxxki — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:26:52 +0000

Thanks GT, sounds like it won’t really be an upgrade over my RR’s, especially as our trails are mostly sand-based. Perhaps except for moist tacky trails where knobs digs in/sucks and a semi-slick floats/cuts. Ritchey Speedmax’s were real flyers on the right surface.

Really, narrower than a Nano? Mine were always around 50mm I think. Did Nano’s “grow” over the past years? My only 2 pair of folding Nano’s litterally broke within the first few rides, I never got the recent ones. My steel Nano’s were pretty pointy and tall though, which made them comfortable.

By: Guitar Ted

Guitar Ted — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:11:55 +0000

Cloxxki: Actually, I ran the Racing Ralph on the same bike at the same time for an update that will be coming on the Racing Ralphs. I hesitate to directly compare the two tires due to the fact that the Ralph was tubed.

However, the Ralph cornered very well. I thought it definitely had more “float” in sand. It worked better on rocks and gravel, and had similar rolling resistance characteristics to the much narrower Vulpine. Also worth noting is that the Vulpines volume/height is quite noticeably less than the Racing Ralph (which was the 2.4″er, by the way).

Oddly enough, the tires weigh in the same category.

Lastly, the Vulpine is more of a 2″er. Nothing more. It is noticeably narrower than a Nano, for instance.

As for the Crow, I have not ever had the pleasure of rolling one.

By: Cloxxki

Cloxxki — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 05:56:58 +0000

Thanks for the review GT.

Could you perhaps compare the Vulpine’s speed and grip, being a race tire, to for instance the NoTubes Crow and Schwalbe Racing Ralph? Those, I soppose, are respectably the lightest/fastest and the grippiest of dry-oriented race tires around in our preferred size?

As one would expect, this 2.1 also seems to be right between the sizes of above mentioned 2.0 an 2.25 tires.

I would be interested to know whether this Vulpine might have any speed on the RR without sacrificing cornering and comfort.

Thanks,
J