Compromise between HR2 and Aggressor yet better than both?
Climbing grip, rolling speed, and traction (even in the wet).
Doesn't have the raw speed of the aggressor
Doesn't have the raw traction of the HR2
Doesn't have the raw braking traction of the DHR2
I can't believe the reviews for this tire are so few and far between. I have the 2.4 EXO Maxxterra (27.5) that I put on the rear in November of 2019 and having ridden many tires from the Maxxis lineup (which is my basis for comparison) including DHF, DHR2, HR2, and Aggressor, I will compare this to their other rear tires. I feel like it has better climbing grip but slightly slower rolling speed than the aggressor (2.3, dc exo) but the braking, traction, and cornering characteristics closer to a HR2. You can punch into corners or drift into them similar to a HR2. In dry undulating terrain where you aren't braking much I would go with the aggressor (not a good tire for wet conditions especially clay). If you are just riding downhill I would choose either the HR2 or DHR2 (bike park, shuttling, etc). This is a good tire for something like dupont or pisgah in NC where you are trying to put in lots of miles, have fast downhills, and dry or wet conditions. Think long climbs followed by long descents. I wouldn't use an aggressor if it was wet, and I wouldn't use a HR2 or DHR2 because they roll noticeably slower. This is kind of a niche tire I feel like, and it depends on where and what you ride. Traction on wet rocks and roots is also stellar even though it's a dry tire. After a recent trip to Pisgah (avery, buckwheat, bennett, upper/middle black, spencer gap/fletcher creek) and Dupont in NC (cedar, big rock, burnt mountain, hooker creek/ridgeline) this somehow became my favorite rear maxxis tire for aggressive trail riding, I just wish it came in a DD maxxterra for the rear.