Does anyone have any experience of running 2.3 inch tyres - namely Continental Verticals, on a Giant XTC4. I am worried about clearence both before and after I hit the mud.

What tyre do you have in there at the minute?

Conti's tend to be small compared with most other brands so if you have a 2.1 in there now a 2.3 conti should go in.

I had a vertical in the back of my NRS but the frame flex meant it rubbed on the stays under power, so I now run a 2.1 escape. On a hardtail flx won't be an issue really.

At the moment I have a Hutchinson Scorpion 2.0.

Do they still make the Vertical in 2.1 cause that is what I'd go for.

Vert 2.3's fit no problem, namely because they are small for a 2.3. I know because I had the exact combination for a few months before I bought the Inbred Frame.

and was it a good combo?

Go for the Vapor, still a Excellent Tyre, not quite so good in Mud, but quicker rolling, and available in 2.1's.

Theoretically Vapor could make a better rear tyre, always run a Verti on the front if your worried still.

Verti's are small though, sure it'll be fine, don't even try a Tiogra!!!

Yeah it worked well. I ran them from October last year to March this year when I upgraded the frame. I like the Giant frame, angles and handling wise, but thought the back end beat me up a bit. So I bought the 2.3 verts for some cushioning and a Post Moderne Bracer suspension seat post and it was good. No problem with mud clearance and just took the edge of bigger hits at the rear.

Now it's drier and I've more tyre clearance I've got Schwalbe 2.35 King Jim's and they are a great dry condition tyre. The tread is a bit low profile for mud though.

I'd go with the Conti Verts if I were you, they ride great and are one of the best all round tyres I've used.

PS, I didn't need the sus post on the Inbred so you can have it cheap if you're interested. Drop me a mail.

Just put 2.3 Conti Verts on my Kona, they look smaller than the 1.95 Tioga Terrafirma's it came with, tons of clearance.

Tiogra's 1.95 are 2.1 maybe 2.15, and Conti 2.3's are 2.1's really.

Bike enough and quick enough though, for my likings.

I'm going to get the verts then. I don't really get it though - surely it is easy enough to measure the tyre??? Why aren't they the actual measurement they say they are?

There is no standard thats all, at the moment anyway, don't worry about it :)

Got some Tiogra 2.3 DH Factorys here off my bike, if you want them they are Huge compared to Conti's and sadly on the front offer no ability to turn, arrgghhhh dangerous heaps of shit!!!

Most manufacturers measure carcass width. Conti measure to the edge of the tread, so for a given size, Conti's will always be smaller. Plus manufacturing tolerances and rim width/type can affect the overall diameter of the inflated tyre.

What do Tiogra Measure then??

Not sure. The 2.3 are less than 2.3 and the 1.95 are nearer to a 2.1. I don't think they give a shit personally.

The Tiogra 2.3's DH ones, are more 2.6 I thought!!

does that mean that my 26x1.75-2.1 inner tubes will still fit the vert???

My tubes are marked up to 2.2 and are still ok, not that this statement in any way answers your question!