Says it in the title. I know tyre sizes are always vague but is a 2.2 tyre 2.2″ wide so around 56mm?

Yes, MTB tyre sizes are given in inches, road bike in mm.

They’re not always accurate though.

Nominal width from shoulder to shoulder. Varies greatly, a 2.2 Continental won’t be the same width as a 2.2 Schwalbe. Probably.

It can also be the measurement across the carcass rather than the shoulders, just to confuse matters further.

I think some manufacturers use metric inches and others imperial which doesn’t help, either. 😉

Oh for god sake is this not an international standard that needs to be agreed!!!!!

Thanks guys

It’s the height of the tyre in inches when inflated on a rim. Sometimes just the carcass and sometimes also the centre knobs. The accounts for the weird variation you find.

2.2 somethings- it’s clear from observation that it can’t possibly be inches. In fact, it’s got to be something variable, perhaps based on a roll of the dice, or the ever fluctuating girth of Andy Cairns.

Otherwise, how can a 2.35 and 2.5 Swampthing be almost exactly the same size, and a 2.4 Advantage be bigger than a 2.35 Highroller (or, a 2.5 highroller actually measure 2.35, while a 2.7 highroller measures 2.5)?

I hear Alan Turing’s last great cryptoanalytic work was to calculate the relationship between bike tyre claimed sizes and reality, but Continental had him killed with a poisoned Mountain King. (or, some say, just a non-poisoned OEM spec Mountain King, and a slightly damp corner)

Pardon?

What are metric inches and imperial inches?

What are metric inches and imperial inches?

A metric inch is 25mm rather than 25.4.

Ok Does anyone know the width of a Continental Mountain King. Need to make sure I have enough room between my chain stays for the frame i’m building tomorrow and tyres are in the post.

the quoted sizes are often at variance with reality. eg my charge splashbacks quoted 1.8 are wider than my 2.1 nobby nics

I’m sorry, that is not a real thing. Can you please cite one valid source for that?

Yes, MTB tyre sizes are given in inches, road bike in mm.

MTB also have mm sizes as well

is referred to as ETRTO, moulded on the side of the tyre (not printed) and is a more accurate tyre section width imo

I can’t believe the confusion, honestly you’re all simpletons.

2.2 inches = 763 Glimbarts. 1023 Glimbarts = 4096 Nanoteks. 4.786 Nanoteks = 1000 Glimbarts, except on Tuesdays, Fridays or any day when there’s a Liberal in the Cabinet when 1 Nanotek = 1.0196876 inches. But only if the tyre was moulded on a Wednesday, with a specific humidity above 32%.

I’m amazed that you all struggle with this.

they are measured in the same way that some people measure other things….

It will also look different depending on the rim, profile, style of the tyre and pressure and tube/tubeless 🙂

5thElefant – Member
What are metric inches and imperial inches?

A metric inch is 25mm rather than 25.4.

I like that one, I’ll have to remember it for next time I cock-up a measurement

or the ever fluctuating girth of Andy Cairns

😀

is referred to as ETRTO, moulded on the side of the tyre (not printed) and is a more accurate tyre section width imo

It’s what we should be using; would rid us of the 27.5″/650B bollocks, for one thing (as it’s 584mm).

Pardon?

What are metric inches and imperial inches? 😆 I take it you didn’t notice the ‘ 😉 ‘ at the end of my comment.

Never thought people would actually believe me.

Apparently, Metric inches were proposed (I think in the USA). But they never happened 🙂

Yes I thought it was a joke but to be sure…

You know we have the Scottish Inch, right? Yes, it is longer. And meaner.

@Blind Melon, thought that one might be about 10 years too late 😆