so is there any difference other than tread design ? im gonna use them for my urban single speed 29 mountain bike im trying to build and i like the franks tread better but will they hold up and take a beating as well?
fat franks vs big apples ?
- Thread starter tacklebox
- Start date
Help Support Rat Rod Bikes Bicycle Forum:
tacklebox said:
I am not sure, but I beleive that Big Apples are built tougher. My main ride is a Dahon Jetstream with 20" Big Apples and they will take any cobblestone or pothole or curb I can throw at them.
But Fat Franks look cooler!!
ok so i think im gonna go with the big apples only because you cant get the franks in 29 x 2.35 so does anyone know a website that sells them cheap? the lowest i can find is $32 a tire at tree fort bikes
From what I have read they are both the same unless your buy the Big Apples with the Liteskin sidewalls.
I really like the Big Apples. On my Xtracycle, I run the 26x2.35 and also run the 26x2 on various bikes. They roll nicely and absorb all the bumps.
That price from Tree Fort is good and they provide great service.
I really like the Big Apples. On my Xtracycle, I run the 26x2.35 and also run the 26x2 on various bikes. They roll nicely and absorb all the bumps.
That price from Tree Fort is good and they provide great service.
thanks cman
I have both these tires on various bikes. The Big Apples and the Fat Franks are technically similar. Franks are just as robust going over obstacles and sharp objects. They have the same puncture protection...EXCEPT the Big apples with the liteskins have a kevlar bead which makes them foldable tires. The kevlar gives the sidewalls tear resistance.
The BA's are available in a wider variety with the 28" (states 29" but..) available in size up to 2.35" with of course the FF's only going up to 2.0" and with a wire bead. Both are superb tires, smooth rolling, quiet, great grip, lots of cush, long wearing and tolerant of very harsh treatment on horrible road surfaces.
I have not been able to find BA 28x2.35" for ages which is why I gave the FF a try last year. Very glad I did, got the Creme's and now my humble looking bike is now classy. A hanky in the breast pocket.
Generally if you are looking for cheap tires, Schwalbe's are the wrong brand to try and find bargains, they are a premium brand. You might get lucky with some vendors but it's not common.
The BA's are available in a wider variety with the 28" (states 29" but..) available in size up to 2.35" with of course the FF's only going up to 2.0" and with a wire bead. Both are superb tires, smooth rolling, quiet, great grip, lots of cush, long wearing and tolerant of very harsh treatment on horrible road surfaces.
I have not been able to find BA 28x2.35" for ages which is why I gave the FF a try last year. Very glad I did, got the Creme's and now my humble looking bike is now classy. A hanky in the breast pocket.
Generally if you are looking for cheap tires, Schwalbe's are the wrong brand to try and find bargains, they are a premium brand. You might get lucky with some vendors but it's not common.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
- Messages
- 106
- Reaction score
- 0
OOOOOH MAN I LOVE THE APPLE"S. I have a set on my schwinn stingray and it crusies like glass. I also put a pair on my sisters MTB. There awesome in the city. FatFranks are nice to, but I like the more modern treeeed..
Skrufryder said:
I have 20" Big Apples on my Jetstream. I would love to see a pic of BA's on a StingRay. Let's see it !!!!!!
