Conti TKC70 and TKC70 Rocks in direct comparison

Of course, either tyre would have handled the tour in question, all the routes from Wiener Neustadt to Barcelona, as well as the days spent in the hinterland there, without any trouble. But it wasn't by chance that the kilometer-eating stretch down to Spain was tackled largely on the TKC70, while the unpaved tracks there were mostly ridden on the TKC70 Rocks. Rather, each was chosen according to its respective strengths. The differences are already visible when you look at the pattern, and they're noticeable once you're riding, especially off the asphalt. There, thanks to its open pattern that stays evenly deep right out to the edge of the tyre, the Rocks offers far better grip and, above all, better self-cleaning. The standard TKC70 is limited in this respect by its closed tread, or rather its continuous center rib, but in return it runs more stably through corners on the road thanks to the tread depth decreasing towards the outer edge. Although you really have to be riding very sportily to exploit that advantage of the TKC70 over the TKC70 Rocks, which itself also delivers top performance on asphalt.

Since you can't choose the weather on a motorcycle trip, wet-weather performance is of course always an important decision criterion. And both are solid in that regard, starting with the identical front tyre and continuing at the rear: slight grip advantages of the TKC70 over the Rocks here are negligible, or only noticeable if you're already leaned over and starting to accelerate out of a corner - something you should avoid doing in the rain anyway. Much the same applies on dry roads, where the front tyre's precise turn-in helps the agility of both combinations, and the grip level is high across the board. It's only at very sporty lean angles that the stability advantages of the standard TKC70, which Conti positions as a 70/30 tyre, become noticeable.

As soon as you leave the road, though, the Rocks - positioned by Conti as a 60/40 on/off-road tyre - moves clearly ahead, more so than it has to give up on asphalt. Especially when things get steeper or muddier, it offers far more grip. As always, you can boost this on either model by letting some air out to generate a bigger "footprint," but even so the Rocks remains the clearly better choice off-road. If you're looking for something to criticize, its performance is only somewhat limited by the front tyre - after all, there's still some room between the standard TKC70 and a TKC80, and a bit more lateral grip and tracking stability would make the tyre even more off-road capable. Though that would probably come at the expense of its great on-road performance - there's always a trade-off somewhere, and tyres, especially on adventure bikes, are always a compromise.

So the decision-making basis between the two TKC70 rear tyre options will mainly come down to this: if the focus is on off-road riding or unpaved tracks, the Rocks is the better choice, as its solid on-road performance overall makes it a bit better at handling the eternal on/off-road compromise. But if mileage is your primary concern, you'll reach for the equally versatile TKC70, which is clearly ahead here and was therefore ideal for the long approach with its longer highway stretches. Of course, figures here should always be taken with a grain of salt, but depending on the bike, throttle hand, and riding style, this can genuinely reach well into five-digit kilometer territory. These are assessments I've made not only on this tour, covering 2000 kilometers on the TKC70 and 200 afterward on the TKC70 Rocks, but as mentioned, also on various other trips with both models before. Depending on your particular preferences, they cover pretty well what most people want from an adventure bike.