Looking at either of the above in exception 2.1 width for general xc use. What are your opinions? I'd like something quick rolling, for use most of the year round. Anything else to consider?

2.1" advantage are about the same size as a 2.35" highroller.

When you say General XC?

Advantage shed mud better than high rollers, I think highrollers are grippier on roots & rocks though.

Advantage exceptions in 2.1" flavour come in at 550g's

Highroller Maxxpro Kevlar 2.35" come in at 695g's

I'ev had both tyres but keep returning to High ROllers, especially on the FS

I run Advantages all year round. Don't ride much mud and in Winter am in Lakes/Dales where the water drains quite well so no quagmires. They are good enough for my limited riding skills!!! Run 2.1 front and rear.

High Roller front – ADvantage rear

I pretty much agree with Steve on this. I've been running 2.1 Advantages on my bike but have now gone back to a 2.35 High Roller on the front. The advantages are good tyres, roll pretty fast and shed mud better but i just don't find them as grippy especially on loose stuff and when corning hard. It depends a lot on how you ride but if you like to throw the bike around i'd go for the High Rollers, otherwise the Advantages will be fine.

I prefer Kenda Nevegals for 'general XC' in 2.1" DTC(Dual Tread Compound) folding as they're pretty much the same volume as 2.35" HRs, are about 85g lighter and I prefer them to HRs on harder ground
Advantages don't roll as well as nevegals (I don't reckon)
2.1" HRs are tiny

Nevegals don't go as well as HRs in slop though, so I run HRs (swap between them and 2" Bontrager mudXs) through winter

Advantage exceptions 2.1 front and rear on a SC Heckler, use to have minions but tooooooo heavy, come up large for a 2.1 and light !!

I ran 2.1 advantage rear and 2.35 hr front for ages, its was ace

At the moment I have been trying a 2.25 ardent on the front instead and thats ace too but not quite as ultimately grippy as an HR, probably put the hr back on when its gets muddier

I tried a 2.1 advantage on the front and hated it

And yeah a 2.1 advantage is about the same size as a 2.35 hr

2.1 ADvantages here – they're great front and rear

HR 2.35 is grippier up front, but I found it a bit much work pedalling for XC.

Advantages are looking good at the mo. I like the fact they come up larger than the 2.1 HR and are still light.

If I was to run a 2.35 HR on the front, what would I be looking at? the kevlar SPC version? Whats maxxpro?

2.35" High rollers (to my knowledge) in a single ply Kevlar version only come in a Maxxpro compound which is 60a. slightly sticker than the exception advantage which is 62a.

But they don't have the fancy dan silkworn sidewall protection, but the maxxpro's are damm tough tyres, not had a side wall rip or even mark a bit after carious bounces off rocks and being used as a rear tyre on my pitch inc a few pinch flats.

Didn't like the Advantage on the font when things got "slimey". Also my exceptions were nowhere near that weight, one was 700g the other was 680g

bugger dam and blast

Are HR's slow rolling? The fact that the Advantages are supposed to be fast rolling are one of the things that attracted me to them. I'm replacing Bonty ACX's.

Kenda Nevagals would be a good compramise between the Advantages and High Rollers,The 60a Compound High Rollers seem the Popular choice on the Keswick Night rides though.(Mainly Rock) 😉