Hands On: 32″ Maxxis Aspen Tires are Available Now, and Lighter than You’d Think

Written by Zach Overholt Jan 21, 2026 10:55 a.m. ET

Support us! Bikerumor may earn a small commission from affiliate links in this article. Learn More

Well, this is a first. We just got a new set of tires in for review… and we don’t actually have a bike or wheels in the right size to mount them. In a way, that paints a perfect picture of the current 32″ wheel situation. The standard exists. Sort of.

There are a handful of bikes already out there with 32″ wheels, from factory prototypes to custom hand-built creations to production hard tails and full suspension models. But the options for forks, wheels, and tires are still very limited. Not to mention, no one seems to have settled on any standards for axle width, fork offset, etc.

But if you are among those very early adopters, you’ll be happy to know that the Maxxis Aspen 32″ tires, which seemed to really kick off the 32″ frenzy at the Taipei Show last year, are now officially available for sale.

Maxxis Aspen 32 inch MTB tire vs 29 inch tread pattern

Maxxis Aspen 32 inch MTB tire vs 29 inch

For all appearances, these tires seem to be an oversized version of the 29 x 2.4″ Maxxis Aspens with an identical tread. Both the 29 x 2.4″ and 32 x 2.4″ tires have a tread that is 66mm wide, measured at the widest point. From a circumference perspective, there is a decent size difference between the two, but it’s not like you can put the 29″ tire inside the 32″ tire.

Maxxis Aspen 29 inch MTB tire review actual weight

Maxxis Aspen 32 inch MTB tire review actual weight

You’d expect there to be a weight difference between the two tires – which I was expecting to be greater than the actual difference. The 29 x 2.4″ Aspen in a 120 TPI casing weighs in at 756g, claimed, and a used one weighs in at 753g on our scale. Note that the claimed weight for the 120 TPI MaxxSpeed 29 x 2.4″ version has a claimed weight of 768g.

That’s important to consider when comparing to our 32 x 2.4″ Aspen with the 120 TPI MaxxSpeed compound which weighed in at 812g. Maxxis does not list the claimed weight for the 32″ version yet, but if the claimed version for the 29″ tire is correct, that makes for just a 44g difference between 29 and 32″ version of the same tire.

As mentioned, you can currently buy the 32 x 2.4″ Aspen tire directly from Maxxis for $96 per tire – the same price as a 29 x 2.4″ tire. It’s currently offered only in the MaxxSpeed/EXO/TR 120 TPI foldable version, and is ready to mount on whatever 32″ wheels you can find.

Which begs the question: who will be the first brand to send us some 32″ wheels to mount these things to?

shop.maxxis.com

Zach Overholt

Editor in Chief

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

23 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

Atganirider

2 months ago

Looks like 32” are unstoppable!

Remember when you replaced your video tapes with dvd’s, then moved to streaming?

Or replaced your vinyl with cd’s and, similarly, moved to streaming?
(& have now gone back to vinyl ‍♂️)

The industry needs to constantly tell you that what you are using now, in response to it being the new best thing, has to be replaced with the newer, bester thing…

Last edited 2 months ago by Atganirider

CHARLIE

2 months ago

Reply to Atganirider

For the giants amongst us this could be great. For average sized humans like me, I’ll pass.
No doubt the entire bike industry will go nuts for this.
Our whole sport/hobby reduced to aero/watts/go faster/lighter
No soul no passion just figures and buzzwords.

Matthew Pierce

2 months ago

Reply to CHARLIE

Thanks charlie

Chunk

2 months ago

Reply to CHARLIE

My bikes are all ‘what’s the largest frame ya got,’ so these might make sense for me, but… well, hell, my 1991 Giant ATX was the largest frame they made and it had 26″ wheels.

Still, my XL Timberjack as a 32/29 mullet is a somewhat intriguing idea.

Veganpotter

2 months ago

Reply to Atganirider

Yet every pundit is questioning the purpose and none are terribly confident that 32″ are the next 29er

Tom

2 months ago

Part of what makes this sport fun is that it is inherently a gear-intensive hobby. There will certainly be a few negative comments on this article but let’s all think back to when the 29″ wheel first came out. People said it wasn’t necessary. Many said it wouldn’t work. Over time, it became the standard. Will the same happen here? Maybe. Maybe not. But if innovation and forward progress didn’t actually matter to consumers, we’d all still be riding 26″ wheeled bikes with cantilever brakes. Let’s see where this one goes, it might surprise all of us.

john v

2 months ago

Reply to Tom

It became the standard because that’s all you could suddenly buy. And this whole thing makes little sense. If it’s faster on a 32″, then everyone will ride the same thing, and now no one has an advantage. This is to make everyone’s 29″ bikes obsolete, and as fast as possible this time. They need some reason to sell new bikes, and this is it. And everyone saying they’ll take a pass, is kidding themselves. In a few years when you need a new bike, you will have no choice. Might take 3 years, might take 5.

-3

Veganpotter

2 months ago

Reply to john v

You can still buy 26″ tires today. Nobody is stopping you. And the market is loaded with inexpensive, used 26″ mountain bikes begging to be in your collection

Tim

2 months ago

Reply to Tom

The sport being inherently gear-intensive is one of the things that makes it cool as you noted- but when I go for a trail run instead of biking, I also appreciate the near absence of gear!

Tom

2 months ago

Reply to Tim

As a fan of both sports, I agree there is something freeing about doing my best Anton Krupicka impression out on the trail with just a pair of shoes, my shorts and a sun burn 🙂

Veganpotter

2 months ago

Reply to Tim

While cheaper, running shoes are also getting flooded with tech. Its just less obvious

WhateverBikes

2 months ago

Reply to Tom

I am exclusively riding 26″ bikes ever since 1991, and it’s all that I need or want.
V-brakes instead of cantilevers, but full rigid. Loads of fun!
Honestly, what would be the problem if we all still rode 26″ wheeled bikes with rim brakes?

Jaap

2 months ago

I’m all for the new wheel size, finally a bigger option.

Yet I’m confused… These tyres are 32 x 2.4 inch, so what’s actually 32 inch on these? Or 2.4 inch?

Tim

2 months ago

Reply to Jaap

32″ is the wheel diameter, 2.4″ is the width of the tire.

Jaap

2 months ago

Reply to Tim

So, where is it actually 32 inch? Cause the rim’s bead seat diameter is 686mm, that’s 27 inch. And according to this article the tyre is 66mm wide, that’s 2.6 inch…

Polk

2 months ago

Reply to Jaap

I am going to guess that the 66mm measurement is the width of the tread with the tire laid flat. Since they had no wheel mount up the tire, they had no way to measure the mounted width.

Veganpotter

2 months ago

Reply to Tim

29ers don’t actually have a 29″ wheel diameter. That’s the rough diameter of early 29er tires on a 700c rim. The wheel is about 27.5″. Are the rims on these 32″ or is that the tire diameter?

Tim

2 months ago

Reply to Jaap

There has been a bigger option for a while, albeit with limited selection of tires: 29+. The real diameter of my 29x3s is 30.5 inches, while a 29×3.25 measures 31 inches. I nonetheless welcome 32- another option is good.

nooner

2 months ago

We need Tyler out of retirement to be the dedicated 32″ wheel tester!

David

2 months ago

Zach, do you need the DirtySixer tires too? Cause they’ve been available way before the Maxxis…

-1

Greg

2 months ago

Reply to David

Nobody needs those tires

Veganpotter

2 months ago

Reply to Greg

Nobody “needs” a mountain bike at all

Greg

2 months ago

Reply to Veganpotter

Oh come on, you know what I meant. The Dirty Sixer tires were around because nobody else was making 32″ tires. There are now tires available (or soon to be available) that are superior in every way. Hence, nobody needs the Dirty Sixer tires