Schwalbe Thunder Burt

Discuss light weight issues concerning mountain bikes & parts.

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: USA

by dwaharvey

Dan, I think he must have meant the tread knobs are bigger on the Onza. Regardless, while a nice looking (and probably riding) tire, the Onza has a claimed weight of 700g... so almost twice the Thunder Burt. Probably a lot more durable and puncture resistant, but they're not in the same league weight-wise.

Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

The Canis XC 120TPI 2.00 is claimed 420g and mine came 425-445g. I was just putting this out there as an alternative option if people couldn't stand the funky name from Schwalbe on their bikes :D

The only real disadvantage to the Canis over the Thunder Burt is some extra weight (more like a Racing Ralph) and a lack of higher volume options since anything bigger than the 2.00 and the tread starts to get more Racing Ralph depth than Thunder Burt depth.

I was very close to pressing the button on R2 Bike for a Thunder Burt but though a little more rationally about how often I might use a Semi-Slick with Winter approaching :D

User avatar
Posts: 493
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: USA

by dwaharvey

Isn't that 420g for the Canis 26" x 2.0" tire, not the 29" tire? The Onza site says 700g for the 29"x2.25". The Thunder Burt is 420g for a 29er isn't it?

Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

I am strictly 26 so wouldn't know about the 29 situation :)

26 x 2.00 Onza Canis = ~425g
26 x 2.10 Schwalbe Thunder Burt = ~370g

29 x.2.25 Canis = ~590g
29 x 2.10 Thunder Burt =~400g

It would appear there is a more noticeable advantage of the Schwalbe with 29 inch wheels, however there is not a 29x2.1 Canis available (2.25 is the smallest) for direct comparison to the 2.1 Schwalbe

Does anyone know the casing details for the Thunder Burt? Is this, the Dirty Dan and Furious Fred a lighter casing than the Racing Ralph and Nobby Nic? Although it wouldn't appear so from the Schwalbe website I do remember reading something along these lines in the past...

Posts: 69
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:30 am

by Nicholas68

What's the verdict on these tires for people who have been riding them?

User avatar
Posts: 384
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 7:13 pm
Location: Finland

by N.T

My experience so far:
high variation in weight 407g-437g
when you find the correct preasure the feel nice and soft
and have really good grip.
cornering grip similar to racing ralph
these roll fast and I mean really fast
Fuelled by kofein

Posts: 709
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 4:50 am

by Colin

Yesterday evening I got to demo a mountain bike (~7ish miles) that had the Thunder Burt's on them. I have to say, they were a fantastic tire! They rolled like a road tire on pavement, but still had plenty of grip in the corners. Even hit a bit of mud (100 yards or so of winding trail) and didn't have a problem with them! Definitely my next tire!

Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

Just received a pair of these (26x2.1). Some initial impressions before riding:

+ Veeeery light :D 356g and 364g (listed on the box as approx 395g)
+ Tread looks and feels it will ride ridiculously fast- Makes a Ralph look positively aggressive and slow
+ Side knobs are nice and pronounced- Not too much difference here to a Ralph
+ Nice curved tyre profile- no square edge at the side for grip to suddenly drop off without warning
+ Beads were very, very tight to get on a Podium MMX rim. Seems the same as most Schwalbe tyres which have great rim/ bead sealing tubeless but quite porous sidewalls with lots of pin holes
~ Unsure on straight line grip as knobs are very low and compact but should be more than fine with the right pressure I'd imagine. Shall see once ridden!
- Rubber compound feels quite hard and plastic. Schwalbe I've had in the past seem to be the same but soften up with a bit of riding
- Looks to be much lower volume than a 2.1 Ralph

I am just waiting for new wheel bearings then will probably use these for road and tamer trails throughout Winter and stick to muds for steeper, more tech British Winter riding. Then in the Summer I imagine I'll go for a Ralph front and Burt rear for trouble free grip in most conditions. Maybe they'll surprise me and I'll go Burt front and rear in the drier weather who knows :D

Posts: 2292
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2011 8:08 am
Location: Pedal Square

by HillRPete

grover wrote:If you're interested in these and need prior to availabile consider the Hutchinson Black Mamba.

Oooh looks like the perfect tyre for my 650b converted flatbar CX. Somewhat clearance limited setup.

Posts: 1082
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2007 4:23 am
Location: Poland/Toronto

by krzysiekmz


where did you get them from if you don't mind me asking?

Orbea Oiz - xxxx
MSC Koncept Carbon Di2 - 6955g
Leichtkraft Team Carbon - 6868g.

Posts: 1037
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 5:39 pm
Location: Here, there and everywhere

by DanW

R2-Bike. I asked for light tyres and they arrived with the weights marked on the box. Excellent service for Weightweenies!

Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2010 10:20 am
Location: Warsaw, POLAND

by dukezpol

hey, anyone knows if and when 29x2,25 will be realised?
Which weight would you estimate for this size?

Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2014 4:21 pm
Location: Estonia

by silver

If it is not a typo, then Scott 2015 calalog gives a hint for 2.25. I would assume they present it during Eurobike.

User avatar
Posts: 1022
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 5:23 pm
Location: Denmark

by the_marsbar

On which bike did you see that? 2.1s are listed for Scale and Spark 900 SL as far as I can see.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post