Tyre choice - Continental Rubber Queen / Nobby Nic?

[texanburger]

Hi all,

I currently run Kenda Nevegals 2.35 on my Meta 6. They  come up chunky which i like as it gives me confidence and they are pretty good all rounders. They will need replaced soon, and i was thinking of the Rubber Queens 2.2 as all in I can save just under a pound by changing these and the tubes. Same with the Nobby Nics. Most riding is done at GT, with Inners XC and DH, so I need one tyre does all.
Does anyone have the Rubber Queens or Nobby Nics? How do they come up compared to others? Are the 2.2's 2.2's or come up bigger/narrower?
With regard to the weight issue, i would like to knock off a few pounds in total from the bike and the rolling weight of the wheels and tyres would be a good start. Also thinking of changing to SDG I Beam post and saddle. Anyone had experience of these? How are they?
Cheers guys.

[domino0]

Rubber queens FTW, dad has them:
 
They roll really fast for the grip they have
Come up very large (in the 2.4 at least, they are more like a maxxis 2.7)
Generally excellent in most conditions

Im getting a Nobby Nic for the front of my Yeti:

Roll pretty well with decent grip
Average in size i believe
favourite trail tyre for many, but wouldnt advice for DH



Fat Alberts are supposidley better all round than Nics and are just about as fast, so id say them over the Nics but overall id say Rubber Queens!

Ibeams are stiffer so wont me quite as comfy because thers no flex, but they are FAR lighter

[derbyrich]

I have 2.2 Rubber Queens on my 08 552 and they're great for trail riding. Good balance between rolling resistance and grip and come up same size as HR 2.35.  In fact i replaced HR 2.35 F and R with Rubber Queens and was happy to trade some grip for rolling speed! As domino0 says the 2.4 are absolutely massive !! 

[iain1775]

Run Nobby Nics year round on the hardtail
Very light, seem strong - only had one punture in Peaks
Good in all conditions, roll fast and quiet in the dry, seem to find just enough grip in the wet (in thick mud they struggle but any non mud tyre would)
Good trail centre tyre I would say
Heard stories about the tread not lasting but mine are still okay after over 12 months
They come up a little bit on the small side compared to other brands I think, I would go for a 2.35 if you want bigger

Have I Beam seat and post - have used an older Bel Air was comfy enough, now have a Formula FX and love it, is a racier shape and suits my bony ass but I dont really notice it being any less flexiable - the newer models have a different beam design that does have a small degree of flex (I run a carbon post though so that may affect it too)
It is mega light even though it is a 400mm post - prob weighs not much more for saddle and post than a normal run of mill average weight saddle on its own

There is currently an uber trick white Commencal Superteam Formula FX saddle and IBeam post on ebay brand new for £85 - thats not a bad price considering RRP on the normal saddle is £90

[Mark W]

FWIW my mate has just switched to 2.2 Rubber Queens on his Ransom and rates them massively- for how he rides he says he doesn't notice the relative lack of grip, but does notice the improved rolling resistance. I put our bikes nose-to-nose and the 2.2 RQ was only a gnat's whisker narrower than my 2.35 HR.

[Russalf]

I really like my rubber queens, heres some pics i took of them ages ago compared to my old 2.35 rampages. Personally think the 2.4 is overkill and when it wears out ill replace it with a 2.2, i just wasnt expecting the 2.4 to be that big!

2.35 Panaracer Rampage SC on the front

2.4 Conti Rubber Queen

Rampage

Queen



2.35 Panaracer Rampage on the rear

2.2 Conti Rubber Queen

Rampage

Quenn

[texanburger]

Okay, cheers for the comments guys, £80 for two tyres, f**k me, wiat til the wife hears that! I'll order the Rubber Queens 2.2 chilli soon!