I'm just about to pull the trigger on a pair of 29er wheels as an alternative wheelset for my fat bike and am pondering potential tyre choices. As ever budget is a consideration and I've been looking at Maxxis Ardent 2.4s and WTB Ranger 2.6s which are both available pretty cheaply just now. My intended usage is for all round trail riding when I don't want the extra drag and traction that my fat wheels give but they may potentially see some use for bikepacking too. I have a dedicated 29er hardtail for bikepacking that has Conti X-Kings on and if either of the choices above offered similar or better grip to them I'd be happy, fast rolling would be a bonus but isn't as important. Any thoughts on the two choices above from the BB hive mind? Thanks.

Ardent are rubbish IIRC... I also got em cheaply many years ago and was glad when I finally got rid of em
.

Not tried 2.6 Rangers but do like them in other sizes. (no help).

redefined_cycles wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:05 am Ardent are rubbish IIRC... I also gotem cheaply many years ago and was glad when I finally got ride lf e...

Good to know, thanks.

I've used Ardents on a couple of bikes with no problems.

On a All Mountain bike they're fine as a rear if paired up with something like a HR on the front.

My bikepacking 29er tyres are Ardent front, Crossmark rear. I'll only use those when there's a reasonable amount of road riding in the mix, otherwise I stick to the 3" Nobby Nics. Of course, when there's even more road and less trail, it's more likely to be the #gradventourer with 650x47 tyres.

Bearbonesnorm wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:11 am Not tried 2.6 Rangers but do like them in other sizes. (no help).

No, it is a help thanks. The Rangers are actually cheaper and the extra volume might be nice to have (assuming they are actually bigger than the Ardents). FWIW I do like the Maxxis tyres I have on my Orbea but it might be nice to try the WTBs for a change.

ScotRoutes wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:18 am I've used Ardents on a couple of bikes with no problems.

On a All Mountain bike they're fine as a rear if paired up with something like a HR on the front.

My bikepacking 29er tyres are Ardent front, Crossmark rear. I'll only use those when there's a reasonable amount of road riding in the mix, otherwise I stick to the 3" Nobby Nics. Of course, when there's even more road and less trail, it's more likely to be the #gradventourer with 650x47 tyres.

Thanks, it's always a balance between grip and rolling resistance eh? I'm not sure how this fatty/29er experiment is going to play out tbh. I like my bike packing bike and it's very good for that task but with it's steeper angles it's not as much fun for pushing on as my fat bike (which is more trail oriented). If the fat29er is a success though it might end up replacing the bikepacking bike as well.

Jurassic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:37 am I'm just about to pull the trigger on a pair of 29er wheels as an alternative wheelset for my fat bike and am pondering potential tyre choices. As ever budget is a consideration and I've been looking at Maxxis Ardent 2.4s and WTB Ranger 2.6s which are both available pretty cheaply just now. My intended usage is for all round trail riding when I don't want the extra drag and traction that my fat wheels give but they may potentially see some use for bikepacking too. I have a dedicated 29er hardtail for bikepacking that has Conti X-Kings on and if either of the choices above offered similar or better grip to them I'd be happy, fast rolling would be a bonus but isn't as important. Any thoughts on the two choices above from the BB hive mind? Thanks.

Front or rear?
Have found that rolling resistance is limited to the rear, so put a grippy tyre on the front.

Just about to take the Ardent off the front of the Swift. Its fast rolling, but never found it inspiring in muddy conditions. Probably the same as X-Kings in terms of grip and rolling resistance.

I have a 3.0 Ranger on the front of the Stooge, and its ok. May try something different once it wears out.

Id be interested to see if the 2.6 ranger is bigger than the 2.4 ardent , and if it would fit in the back of my ramin plus with a 29er 45mm wheel

Quite like Ardents as a rear tyre, prefer something bigger and toothier up front.

In the current slop Maxxis Beavers.

I have the Rangers in 2.8, good tyre low rolling resistance, grip is average and they last well.
I have just swapped to Vittoria Mezcal 2.6 which I have had before but in 2.35on my hardtail, rolling resistance is a lot lower so good for long days out, they are very long lasting and tough and I would say grip is a bit better but in slop we have now here unless you go full knobbly everything is slippy.

Jurassic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:15 am

redefined_cycles wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:05 am Ardent are rubbish IIRC... I also gotem cheaply many years ago and was glad when I finally got ride lf e...

Good to know, thanks.

Ardent 2.4 EXOs have been my go-to dry/loose/summer bikepacker tyre for a decade : ) Just for balance like. Good volume, tough but not OTT, roll OK and grip well - not good in the wet or mud though.

Rangers are good, I have the 2.2 and 2.4s. Prefer the 2.4s. Fast wear rate though.

Vittoria Mezcal 2.4 or 2.6 look good for dry/fast use.

firestarter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:55 am Id be interested to see if the 2.6 ranger is bigger than the 2.4 ardent , and if it would fit in the back of my ramin plus with a 29er 45mm wheel

FWIW the 2.4 Ranger is a smaller casing than the 2.4 Ardent.

firestarter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:55 am Id be interested to see if the 2.6 ranger is bigger than the 2.4 ardent , and if it would fit in the back of my ramin plus with a 29er 45mm wheel

If I go for the Rangers I'll be able to estimate this for you as my bikepacking bike is a Ramin 1 (29er and no EBB but overall pretty similar iirc, Jameso will be able to confirm).
Great info everyone, keep it coming. I've been looking at alternative fronts to run with an Ardent rear, the obvious one is Scotroute's suggestion of a High Roller bit they only seem to be available in 2.3 in 29er and I don't think my OCD could cope with running a 2.3 front, 2.4 rear combo (the other way round would be okay).

Jurassic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:22 pm I don't think my OCD could cope with running a 2.3 front, 2.4 rear combo (the other way round would be okay).

It could be worse. It could be two different brands

ScotRoutes wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:24 pm

Jurassic wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 4:22 pm I don't think my OCD could cope with running a 2.3 front, 2.4 rear combo (the other way round would be okay).

It could be worse. It could be two different brands

Right, I think I may have come to a conclusion based on my own pondering and the advice here.
My reasoning is this, if it's very slippery, muddy etc I'm probably going to be using my fat wheels anyway and Edna and Nate should have my back. Based on that I don't really need a mud biased option so either the Ardent or Ranger would probably be fine however given that the bike is a fat bike with big clearance the 2.6 Ranger may look a bit better than the 2.4 Ardent (I've seen a Henderson on 2.6 Mezcals and it looks fine). I don't want to go full 29plus as it'd be too similar to the fat wheels but 2.6 may be the best of both worlds (or the worst depending how you look at it! ) Finally the Ranger is slightly cheaper to buy so I think I'm going to give them a go. If they're rubbish at least I've not spent too much but I think they'll be fine.
Thanks for all the input, I'll update here once I have the wheels/tyres and have some miles on them in case anyone else is pondering the same question in future.
'

I had 2.8" Rangers on my Broken Road. Not a bad tyre, but l found them a bit draggy on road, so I changed to Schwalbe G-One allround. I intended to change back to Rangers for winter, but I love the G-One so much I have left them on. If conditions are really bad, I take my fatbike with Bud and Lou tyres on.

ssnowman wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 7:47 pm I had 2.8" Rangers on my Broken Road. Not a bad tyre, but l found them a bit draggy on road, so I changed to Schwalbe G-One allround. I intended to change back to Rangers for winter, but I love the G-One so much I have left them on. If conditions are really bad, I take my fatbike with Bud and Lou tyres on.

Hmm, I fitted 3" rangers to the Jones in March and was amazed how well they rolled on hard surfaces, even better than the Chupacabras / XR2's they replaced..... hey ho. Overall I really liked the Rangers and the somewhat weedy sidewalls survived the Cairngorms loop and its extreme granite.... Defo a wee bit more grip than the chupas in the dirt but like them, they lost it a bit in the real glop. They do wear quite quickly though

Thanks jameso btw what sort of 29er clearance does the ramin plus have I cant remember ta

I look forward to the results jurassic then I'll know if it will likely fit my bike :)

firestarter wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 8:46 pm Thanks jameso btw what sort of 29er clearance does the ramin plus have I cant remember ta

Neither can I : ) big 2.4s like an Ardent, maybe a 2.5? Bit more up front?

I have one now so I can check if needed - let me know

If you dont mind thanks ive a rear arc45 rim so want the biggest tyre i can safely fit in there ideally to sit on the rim the best thanks

firestarter wrote: ↑Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:37 am If you dont mind thanks ive a rear arc45 rim so want the biggest tyre i can safely fit in there ideally to sit on the rim the best thanks

Based on it being a 27+ bike, anything that really suits a 622/29" x 45 rim will be a tight fit, you're into 2.6 and above and the clearance with a 2.4 on a 30mm rim was around 10mm. Min clearance should be 5-6mm.

If you knew the width at the tyre shoulder and the diameter of that point or radius from axle I could check the tech drawing. The CS have 80mm clearance at 350mm from the axle - a 29+ tyre shoulder will be further out than that but we used that point to reference across a few bikes. At 370mm I estimate it's down to 60-65mm?

Thanks for the info , I dont have any measurements im afraid though

I have run previously that wheel in the back of a jones with a 2.4 ardent on it as per Jeff's suggestion and although it wasn't ideal due to the way it exposed the sidewall it worked , id just have liked it to fit a little better so a 2.5 or 2.6 would have been nice, I guess I could buy one to try and possibly run it up front instead of my knard and an ardent on the back if it didn't work in the back, I may hang fire until jurassic gets his lol
Thanks again