I'm trying to find out which Maxxis Crossmark will be closest in width to a 2.1" Kenda Nevegal. Maxxis do a 2.1" and 2.25" Crossmark, but I gather some Maxxis tyres come up a bit narrow compared to other brands(?).

Can anyone advise please.
Ta.

The 2.1 Crossmark seems to come up in accordance with Maxxis newer sizing method. Eg, it's far bigger than a 2.1 High Roller. I can't comment on Kenda width though so I can't compare them, sorry!

I've got some 2.25 Maxxis and have previously used 2.1 Nevegals. The Maxxis are a bit fatter, but not a lot.

If i were you Fattatlasses I would find bikes with the tyres on them and get at calipers out.

A different size than you want, but my Nevegal 2.35 on the front of my bike is exactly (within a couple of mil) the same width as the Maxxis High Roller on the back and it's marked 2.5 !

Whats really bizarre is that moulded onto the side of a Maxxis tyre is a fairly accurate width in mm.

I have no Crossmarks but perhaps some one elese could look

Failing that get someone to measure a tyre for you bead to bead and compare with your nevegal

I assume you are interested here in Carcass width. I'm sure a 2.1 Crossmark will look smaller as it has less tread

I got caught out last week swapping 2.35 high rollers onto my bike as I thought they had a bigger chambre than 2.2 Xr Bonty's. They don't they just have more bits sticking out….

Crossmarks (along with advantages and ardents) fall into Maxxis' newer* tyre sizes which are on the big size for a stated size, as are Kenda

So a 2.1" Crossmark is pretty close to a 2.1" Nevegal. I reckon the actual volume on a crossmark is a touch bigger, but a nevegal has taller tread making it slightly bigger overall I reckon

If you were thinking about Larsen TTs as an alternative to crossmarks then you'd be needing the 2.35" size (which I think because of the low(ish) tread would come up smaller than the 2.1" Nevegal – I've 2.35" HRs and they're ever so slightly bigger than 2.1" Nevs) because Larsen TTs (along with high rollers, minions, ignitors, etc) are old** tyre sizes

*The give away being they come in the newer 2.1", 2.25", 2.4" or 2.6" sizes and being newer designs
**The give away being they come in 2.1", 2.35", 2.5" or 2.7" sizes and being older designs

Have a look on Flickr. There is a guy who has photos of loads of different tyres on a few different rims measured with calipers. It came in handy when I last picked up some Kendas.

People say "Kenda come up big", actually they don't, it's just that most manufactuers come up small because tyre size seems to be more about marketing than measurement, whereas Kenda are actually pretty honest.

Maxxis seem to be sorting themselves out now but it just makes it more confusing in the meantime because the new designs size up differently to the old ones.

If it's any help, my 2.1 High Roller is much narrower than my 2.1 Nevegal. The HR is more like a 1.9.

Great stuff fellas – thanks for the info. Looks like I'll be OK with a 2.25" Crossmark (allowing for the additional width/height 'knobliness' of the Nevegal). Cheers all.