other than a few quid in price, what is the difference between them ??

Ones lite ones not simple.

For X-11 info click HERE

For X-Light info click HERE

For lessons on how to type 'Michelin' into Google click HERE

On a less cheeky and personally opinioned note; I've ridden with both and can't tell the difference (my skill level = crap but entertaining). I'm going to stick to the X-11 on the basis of why pay 6% more to get 6% less?

GJ

Some people reckon the walls are softer on the lites.....

I've seen quite a few sidewall punctures on the x-lite.

X lite sidewall is softer but puncture too easy, stick to x11 as long as they are available

After 4 X lites and 4 sidewall punctures, we are back on X11

Grip is fantastic on the X-lite, well worth the money.

X lites are brillant and really grip well but they do punture very easy on big trials (As I've had 2 or 3 times already). I now carry the dog turds and a pump everywhere with me.

I really don't like using X11's but will be using one at White rose.

Tried an X-Lite, liked it a lot but also disliked it a lot...

Pro's :

Very light (I'd guess possibly 1/3 the weight but according to Michelin its 6%) and definitely the quickest, easiest and cheapest way to save some serious weight

Grips very well in wet and dry - I'd say better than standard X11

Cons :

Puncture VERY easily as you've already heard

Cost a bit more

I would like to think that Michelin have been made very aware of this by the factory teams and riders and are hopefully looking at resolving it and making them more durable. However more durable would almost certainly mean more weight....

Until then I'm sticking with an IRC.

If you dont get on with IRC's or live in an area where they are not as brilliant - rocks apparently (although I've never noticed) then I would say unless you have to save the weight, stick with the standard X11

Edited September 6, 201114 yr by beatabeta