1995-1996 ROCKSHOX JUDY SL (Yellow) = Tire Clearance 26"

[Cloverleaf]

The other issue with modern tyres vs old ones is the volume. Casings now are generally the widest part of the tyre whereas on older tyres the widest point was usually the tread which stuck out quite a bit beyond the casing. Therefore a modern tyre is for example 2" wide and 2" tall, whereas an old tyre would be 1.6" wide at the casing, 2" wide at the outside of the tread but, crucially for clearance on old forks, only 1.6" tall. A 2" tyre these days is the equivalent of an old 2.2" tyre in height, or maybe even worse. It's one of the reasons modern gravel bikes are so much more stable than old 90's MTB's even though they're outwardly similar. Bigger volume tyres equal lower pressures and more grip. Old stuff is usually as much if not more constrained by height as much as width when it comes to clearance.

 

[wudangsatellite]

You gotta ride like its '95

If you set up 2.1/2.2 tubeless
(or even aerothan thermoplastic tubes)
you could drop the tyre pressure to 25psi and get the grip like 2.4 s

Thanks for the tip bikeworkshop.

 

[wudangsatellite]

The other issue with modern tyres vs old ones is the volume. Casings now are generally the widest part of the tyre whereas on older tyres the widest point was usually the tread which stuck out quite a bit beyond the casing. Therefore a modern tyre is for example 2" wide and 2" tall, whereas an old tyre would be 1.6" wide at the casing, 2" wide at the outside of the tread but, crucially for clearance on old forks, only 1.6" tall. A 2" tyre these days is the equivalent of an old 2.2" tyre in height, or maybe even worse. It's one of the reasons modern gravel bikes are so much more stable than old 90's MTB's even though they're outwardly similar. Bigger volume tyres equal lower pressures and more grip. Old stuff is usually as much if not more constrained by height as much as width when it comes to clearance.

Thanks for the valuable input Cloverleaf. Very good.

 

[rentedmule]

I was also surprised the 2.4 fit so well. I pulled it off a Marzocchi Z1 with a bolt-on arch where the fit looked pretty snug.

I forgot to add that both of those tires were on fairly wide rims - the 2.4 is mounted on a Crossmax Enduro and the 2.25 is on a Ringle Black Flag. A wider rim may pull the center of the tread down a bit further.

 

[wudangsatellite]

Thank you to everyone for your valuable input here. I finally remove the 26" Maxxis DHF 2.3 & swap in a 26" Maxxis Ardent Race (EXO 3C TR) 2.2. Now there is very good clearance around the Fork brace/arch. For the rear I just stick to the DHR II 2.3.

 

[wudangsatellite]

By the way this is my youtube channel.

Thank you everyone for your help.
I wish everyone enjoy their bicycle riding each time you hop on the bike.
& ride safe.

: )

 

[d8mok]

Thanks bikeworkshop. Yeah you are right back then in the 90's we don't have such bigger tires like to today....2.3, 2.4, 2.5, 2.6....they were non-existence. 1.95, 2.0, 2.1 was what we had. Seem like 2.2 is the biggest to fit with the JUDY SL 1995-96.

Because I also had tried the 26" 2.3 Maxxis DHR II (Rear) + DHF 2.3 (Front). They work...but the clearance is too risky at only 4-5mm and I did experienced some tire rubbing the arch wall at a consistent spot while riding.

Looks like the choices are very little left. Maxxis 26" 2.2 Ardent Race & Maxxis 26" 2.2 Ikon.

I was running a kujo 3.0 front tyre in 1999. Big tyres existed if you had the forks / frames / wheels to accommodate.

 

[Cloverleaf]

I was running a kujo 3.0 front tyre in 1999. Big tyres existed if you had the forks / frames / wheels to accommodate.

They were very niche though. Wasn't the Kujo a 24" tyre ? I thought the 2.65" was the largest they did in 26". Very few bikes had clearance for that sort of stuff, it certainly wasn't the norm even in DH at the time. The Michelin Comp 32 was 2.8" but only just squeezed inside the brace of a Boxxer because that was the design constraint, and left you with very little mud clearance, not that it was that sort of tyre so it got away with it.

Most bikes really didn't have much clearance, even downhill ones. That's why some bikes had such a following, because they actually had designs which took such things into better account, like the M1 for instance. When the Michelin Comp 16 and 24 became available to the public in 2000 they were a pretty narrow 2.2", and they were still the World Cup tyre of choice. The 2.5" casing when it appeared in 2001 is still barely the equivalent of a 2.3" tyre today. Yes there were outliers but tyres were, by and large, narrow and lower profile than what we have today and thus bikes just weren't designed to deal with anything else.

 

[d8mok]

Yes 24 inch kujo.

But also had Gazzaldo (sp) and another Nokia that were 2.6 and 3.0