Image: manufacturer · Source
Maxxis
Tested
Mid-field
32.4 W · rank 2 of 4 comparable Trail tires
4.2 W behind the best value in the same test series. Fewer watts is better – every watt saved stays in the drivetrain.
Schneller Trail-Reifen mit flachen Mittelstollen und ausgeprägten Seitenkanten.
Width, casing, compound and pressure – every value on this page follows your pick.
Width, casing and compound decide how a tire really rides. We only show what was actually measured – and label estimates honestly.
Reference: documented test pressure of the source (24.7 psi (1.70 bar)).
More pressure: less rolling resistance, less grip, less comfort. Tougher casing: more protection, more weight. Softer compound: more grip, more rolling resistance.
Modelled values are assumptions based on the stated measurement points – not a lab test.
Editorial assessment on a 1–10 scale. Grip index: 7.7
These grades describe the tire model, not one specific width or compound – no reliable per-version grades exist.
Scores from 1 to 10: higher is better.
Basis of these scores: Redaktionelle Einschätzung auf Basis von Herstellerangaben und veröffentlichten Praxistests
Every variant the manufacturer lists, with its own claimed data. Missing values stay blank.
| 27.5" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO(Trail) | Dual | 878 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO(Trail) | 3C MaxxTerra | 889 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO+(Enduro) | 3C MaxxTerra | 951 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.4" · 61 mm | DoubleDown(Enduro) | 3C MaxxGrip | 1094 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.4" · 61 mm | Downhill(Downhill) | 3C MaxxGrip | 1100 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO(Trail) | Dual | 984 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO(Trail) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1047 g | ||
| 27.5" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO+(Enduro) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1115 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO(Trail) | Dual | 949 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO(Trail) | 3C MaxxTerra | 956 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | EXO+(Enduro) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1022 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | DoubleDown(Enduro) | 3C MaxxGrip | 1167 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | DoubleDown(Enduro) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1172 g | ||
| 29" | 2.4" · 61 mm | Downhill(Downhill) | 3C MaxxGrip | 1172 g | ||
| 29" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO(Trail) | Dual | 1036 g | ||
| 29" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO(Trail) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1121 g | ||
| 29" | 2.6" · 66 mm | EXO+(Enduro) | 3C MaxxTerra | 1195 g |
The value in brackets is our brand-neutral casing class (Light, Trail, Enduro, Downhill) – not a manufacturer statement.
Real test-rig values – not an estimate. Tested variant: Dissector Gen. 1 3C MaxxTerra DoubleDown 29 x 2.40 WT.
Watts measured on the test rig: lower is better. The 1-10 ratings on this page: higher is better.
No lab of our own: measurements come from the third-party test named above – the source is linked directly.
Rank 2 of 4 · lower is better
Rank 4 of 5 · higher is better
Rank 2 of 3 · higher is better
Rank 2 of 5 · lower is better
Test series: ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine – Labortest 64 Reifen
Measured values per compound and casing from the same laboratory test. Empty cells mean no reliable value was published.
| Dissector Gen. 1 3C MaxxTerra DoubleDown | 29 x 2.40 WT | 32.4 W | 41.33 % | 1139 g | 84.9 € |
| Dissector Gen. 2 3C MaxxTerra DoubleDown | 29 x 2.40 WT | 30.6 W | 41.08 % | 1190 g | 84.9 € |
lower is better
higher is better
Up to three versions at once: the curve is modelled rolling resistance across pressure, the dot is the real lab measurement. Click the legend to show or hide a version.
Without a lab test pressure we anchor the measured watt value at the recommended pressure. The curve shape is a physics model, not a measurement. Labs do not measure grip across pressure – we do not invent that curve. Wet grip is a lab value per tire model, not per version.
Hardness steps are our classification based on manufacturer information. All numbers come from lab tests; sources are linked on the tire pages. All information without warranty.
Tested: Calculated from the stored measurements – compared only within the same test series and category (Trail).
Mid-field
32.4 W · rank 2 of 4 comparable Trail tires
4.2 W behind the best value in the same test series. Fewer watts is better – every watt saved stays in the drivetrain.
Weaker in comparison
41.3 % · rank 4 of 5 comparable Trail tires
34.8 % behind the best value in the same test series. A higher percentage is better – the tire cushions hard edges for longer.
Mid-field
499.9 N · rank 2 of 3 comparable Trail tires
43.3 N behind the best value in the same test series. More newtons is better – the casing withstands sharp rocks for longer.
Mid-field
1,139 g · rank 2 of 5 comparable Trail tires
97 g behind the best value in the same test series. Fewer grams is better, but usually costs casing stability.
The familiar pattern: the easy roll is paid for with less impact protection.
Measurements from different test rigs are not directly comparable – Sources & method.
Our own summaries – the full test is available at the source.
ENDURO Mountainbike Magazine – Labortest
January 2023ENDURO's lab test measures 64 MTB tires under standardised conditions (20 km/h, 1.5 bar, 50 kg wheel load) for rolling resistance, pinch-flat protection and puncture resistance. Key takeaway: weight and pinch-flat protection are closely linked, while rolling resistance depends mainly on the rubber compound. Summarised in our own words; details and measured values at the original.
To the sourceBIKE Magazin
September 2025BIKE tested the updated version of the well-regarded trail and enduro tire Maxxis Dissector and confirms improvements in several areas compared to the previous version.
To the sourceMTB-News.de
August 2025The editorial team put the second generation of the Maxxis Dissector through a first test, revealing improvements over the popular predecessor. The tire remains a fast choice for the rear wheel on firm, dry trails.
To the source
Specialized
Schwalbe
Vittoria