Schwalbe Marathon Plus

[John Saxby]

IMO, still good value for money from a lightweight tyre used hard for a mixture of utility cycling, cycle camping on road, with some off-road use on rocky and sandy tracks. 

Martin's observation & experience mirrors my own:  I used the 26 x 1.6 Supremes on my Raven from 2014 to 2022, and continue using the 650B x 1.6 on my Mercury Mk 3 since May '22.  Versatile, reasonably priced, reliable, reasonably fast, and comfortable.

As a point of comparison:  In 2017, I tried a pair of Compass (now René Herse) 26 x 1.75s on my Raven, for day rides in and around Ottawa.  I was a gear faster than on the Supremes, but found the Compass tires to be fast-but-fragile:  after 3 punctures (2 front/1 rear) in 400 kms, I decided the time saved while riding was a false economy, and the lovely feeling wasn't worth the bother... 

[RonS]

 I managed to get 6000 km on my compass tires (26X2.3) before they became debris magnets, and, as with John, I grew tired of a puncture every ride. I had already given away my Marathon Supremes (26X2) to a friend so I decided to try out a set of Continental top contact IIs. I found them to be somewhere between the compass tires and the Supremes in both rolling resistance and comfort. They are now at 9000 km. When I head to Japan in five weeks, I will leave them on as they have never punctured and show little signs of wear.
 They are worth a consideration to replace your Marathons as I think the Supremes are no longer available in 26in

[martinf]

I decided to try out a set of Continental top contact IIs. I found them to be somewhere between the compass tires and the Supremes in both rolling resistance and comfort.

These look to be an excellent replacement for Supremes, especially if their rolling resistance in real use is actually lower.

This isn't the case according to the tests in this link, but they are laboratory tests and don't use the 26" x 50 mm size, so they may not reflect conditions in real use:

https://www.bicyclerollingresistance.com/tour-reviews

In the 26" x 50 mm size, Continental top contact II is a bit heavier than the Continental Contact Urban Wire Bead at 735g rather than 559g. More expensive as well, but judging by the specifications probably tougher and more puncture resistant.

They are worth a consideration to replace your Marathons as I think the Supremes are no longer available in 26in

Not seen Supremes available recently, even as old stock.

[PH]

They are worth a consideration to replace your Marathons as I think the Supremes are no longer available in 26in

Discontinued in all sizes, replaced by the Efficiency, though that's available in a smaller range of sizes and no 26".

[PH]

Marathon Plus are great for the intended purpose of avoiding as many punctures as it's possible, for anything else I prefer other options.  IMO much better options for only a slightly increased risk of punctures.  However, I regularly ride with someone who considers Plus's the ideal tyre for most uses.  The only answer is to experiment and form your own opinion.

[Andyb1]

Hi PH,
What would you recommend in 26 x 1.75 as an option to Marathon Plus?

[PH]

Hi PH,
What would you recommend in 26 x 1.75 as an option to Marathon Plus?

It's nearly fifteen years since I last had a 26" wheel bike, so my choices might be out of date.  It also depends what you use the bike for.  Thorn's choice for road touring was for years the Pannaracer Pasela, I used a couple of sets in 26" and 700c, maybe not as puncture resistant as some modern tyres and not that long lasting, otherwise I couldn't fault them.  For more general use, the standard Marathon HS420 is worthy of consideration, though I preferred the pre greenguard version.  For something a bit more off-road without going full blown MTB, the Continental Double Fighter might be my choice if you have a bit more space to take a 1.9".  I have them in 650B and have been impressed.

[Andyb1]

Thanks for the reply, not heard of the Paselas.

[dsim]

Hi PH,
What would you recommend in 26 x 1.75 as an option to Marathon Plus?

I recently got some Marathon Mondial 26 x 2.0 inch tyres in large part to this thread as I realised my GT365s were way too heavy.

I really like the Mondials. They are the Evo version so better protection than the cheaper non-Evo version.

I've got another tourer with 700 x 40mm Marathon Mondials already so can attest to them having a very good mixed road and off-road tread

[martinf]

I recently got some Marathon Mondial 26 x 2.0 inch tyres in large part to this thread as I realised my GT365s were way too heavy.

I really like the Mondials. They are the Evo version so better protection than the cheaper non-Evo version.

I've got another tourer with 700 x 40mm Marathon Mondials already so can attest to them having a very good mixed road and off-road tread

Last Wednesday I had the opportunity to indirectly compare the performance of two bikes with 26 x 2.0 inch tyres on a short trip using tarmac, followed by a section of rocky track with some muddy ruts.

The large visitor bike I was riding has Marathon Plus on the back and Dureme (long discontinued, but a very nice tyre) on the front. My colleague from the nature reserve was riding a largely similar bike (MTB style, 8-speed Nexus Premium, sprung saddle) but with Marathon Mondial 26 x 2.0 inch tyres (EVO version) on both wheels.

On the tarmac, the bikes seemed about equal. This tallies with my own experience that Mondial is slower on tarmac than Dureme/Supreme and Marathon Plus is a tad slower than Mondial.

But on the off-road stretch the Mondials seemed much better. With the Marathon Plus/Dureme combination. I had to be more careful picking the easiest way through the muddy parts, and my rear tyre slipped about more on the rocky bits.

[PH]

I recently got some Marathon Mondial

I haven't used those, or the Marathon XR they replaced.  They have a huge reputation for longevity, but I've always wondered at what cost.  Is it just weight?  Or have they sacrificed anything else in order to be so hard wearing?

[WorldTourer]

I recently got some Marathon Mondial

I haven't used those, or the Marathon XR they replaced.  They have a huge reputation for longevity, but I've always wondered at what cost.  Is it just weight?  Or have they sacrificed anything else in order to be so hard wearing?

A large part of it is weight. I ran Mondials for several tens of thousands of km, and when I got a pair of Schwalbe Almotion tires, they felt light as a feather and frankly flimsy compared to what I was used to.

[martinf]

I haven't used those, or the Marathon XR they replaced.  They have a huge reputation for longevity, but I've always wondered at what cost.  Is it just weight?  Or have they sacrificed anything else in order to be so hard wearing?

Apart from the weight, which to me, excluding lightweight tyres like the Supreme, doesn't seem particularly high, the cost is rolling resistance on tarmac. At least in the Marathon Mondial EVO version that I know.

As with some other long-lasting tyres there might also be a penalty in wet grip, but I have not noticed any problems with that and there is a lot of rain in winter here in South Brittany. Perhaps I am just more cautious than riders who have problems with tyre grip.

In the 2024 downloadable catalogue Schwalbe rate the characteristics of Marathon Plus (MP) and Mondial Evo version (M), both in the 50x559 size, as follows, for all the figures (except weight!), high is better:

Puncture resistance          MP = 7, M = 6
Rolling resistance              MP = 3.5, M = 4
Road grip                          MP = 4, M = 5
Off road grip                     MP = 2.5, M = 4
Durability                          MP = 6, M = 6
Weight                             MP = 1100g, M = 740g

The results are a bit different according to the independant bicyclerollingresistance.com site. For the Marathon Mondial EVO version they tested (37-622 Evo), puncture resistance is a bit less than Marathon Plus in the same size (108 as compared to 129), rolling resistance slightly higher (26.7 as compared to 25.5), weight much less (570g as compared to 900).

Subjectively, I reckon the Marathon Mondial EVO in the 55-559 size I have used most rolls slightly better than the 50-559 Marathon Plus that I have also used fairly extensively. But this might be psychological due to the better acceleration with a significantly lighter tyre. They also seem more comfortable, but that might be due to me using the 55 mm width rather than 50 mm, although due to the thickness of the puncture protection layer there is less air (cushioning) in a Marathon Plus even in the same size.

Marathon Plus always feel a bit "dead" to me, although this feels less pronounced in a wide 50x559 size. I had Marathon Plus 28x622 on a pair of visitor bikes and in that size the tyres felt really awful.

IMO Marathon Mondial scores over Marathon Plus for a mix of tarmac and moderate off-road use, while remaining not as good as a dedicated MTB tyre for 100% off-road use.

For use predominantly on tarmac, I prefer a lightweight tyre like the discontinued Marathon Supreme (there are similar tyres still available in 26" in the Continental range).

If puncture protection is the absolute priority, in the 26" size on tarmac I reckon Marathon Plus is the way to go, at the expensive of mediocre rolling resistance and more weight than something like the Supreme or even the ordinary Marathon.