“The 2.2 is roughly the size of a high roller”
The 2.25″ overall (volume + tread) is almost identical to a 2.5″ high roller (high roller has taller tread, slightly smaller volume I reckon)
The 2.35″ High Roller is slightly bigger than a 2.1″ Advantage, again HR tread is taller. So maybe the volume is about the same, I’ve not looked that hard
(As with all tyres, rim profiles will make a difference. Between Mavic XM719’s and DT EX5.1Ds 2.35″ HRs look like completely different sizes. The mavics seem to hold more tyre as bead reducing sidewall available to make up the volume, though the (wider internally) DT’s seem harder to put the tyres on?)
I like the big cushioning volume of my 2.25″ advanatges, though they can’t dig into mud all too well
The weight is pretty good for the size, though the sidewalls can wear (I’ve tried patching one), standard tubes just won’t work , not (just?) because of the thin sidewalls but because it takes ~20psi to stretch the tube to the size of the tyre. The tube is then very thin and I needed 50-60psi to resist pinch flats. (~300g) 1.2mm maxxis freeride tubes are the(/were my) answer
The rounded profile gained by using seemingly the same size side tread to middle tread (I reckon would be awesome if they used the HR/Minion side tread), meant I hated them up front above about 35psi as they didn’t seem to want to corner, less than around 30psi although they seem to be deforming to the trail and seemed to corner well enough they did loose stability/rigidity being a bit wobbly and constantly worrying about pinchflatting them in really rocky stuff
I reckon 2.35″ HRs (60a. fold.) ride better almost everywhere (inc. mud, and I reckon roll faster, esp. road), just they’re around the same weight but a fair bit smaller (and much less ‘cushy’ to ride)