Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    2,738

    Lateral move going to Crossmark from Neo Moto 2.1?

    Currently run a Neo Moto 2.1 on a FS and with the trails becoming more hardpack was looking for lighter and faster rolling. Did a search and found the Crossmark at Artscyclery for a good price, but on this forum the sidewalls are thin according to users. I don't ride a lot of rocks.

    Is the NM 2.1 pretty close to the Crossmark in 60 and 120 tpi when it comes to rolling speed all things equal?

    I've used a 26er Crossmark in the back. Loved it. Now running tubeless 650b (Pacenti TL28 rims) and also concerned the Crossmark sidewalls will be a pain to set up tubeless.

    I'd like to lose about 100 grams in rotating weight but can't seem to find anything not costing an arm and a leg (WCS TLR) or unreliable with poor traction for my trails (RaRa 650b).

  2. #2
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    8,741
    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    Currently run a Neo Moto 2.1 on a FS and with the trails becoming more hardpack was looking for lighter and faster rolling. Did a search and found the Crossmark at Artscyclery for a good price, but on this forum the sidewalls are thin according to users. I don't ride a lot of rocks.

    Is the NM 2.1 pretty close to the Crossmark in 60 and 120 tpi when it comes to rolling speed all things equal?

    I've used a 26er Crossmark in the back. Loved it. Now running tubeless 650b (Pacenti TL28 rims) and also concerned the Crossmark sidewalls will be a pain to set up tubeless.

    I'd like to lose about 100 grams in rotating weight but can't seem to find anything not costing an arm and a leg (WCS TLR) or unreliable with poor traction for my trails (RaRa 650b).
    Interesting as I just switched up my 2.1 Neo to Cross Mark and that's where I picked mine up from. I just moved my 60tpi Xmk/tubed from my SS ht over to my fs, setup on a rim already wrapped with Stan's tape. Yes they are real weepy at first set up, with oooze from around bead seat(non-tubeless rim), and porous spots around the sidewall. But no more than my Specialized "2Bliss ready" tires I have set up before. Rolled/flipped it around a few times and spun it around the block near home after first doing, but then in morning down to about 5#. Pumped it up and did ~15 mi ride seem to be good during/after. Have to check when I get home tho. The 120's may be abit better on that. I have a ride buddy who changed from the tubeless model (Maxxis LUST?) to the regular/setup on tubeless rims on his fs 29r. Working out great. Plenty of chunky rocks mixed in our trail composition to challenge sidewalls.

    As far as roll comparison, definitely felt a little quicker than the Neo on the fs(140mm), maybe a combination due to better hookup transfer from suspension vs spinout at times from stiff rear end of the hardtail. Definitely like it.
    Wait,who did he tell you that?....

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    108

    Lateral move going to Crossmark from Neo Moto 2.1?

    I too was riding crossmarks(tubeless version) on 26" wheels and moved to neomoto 650b. My wifes bike has the standard non tubelesss crossmarks on it and the sidewalls are pretty thin. I wouldnt even attempt it tubeless in the rocks i ride, but if your not on rocks and dont have problems with sidewall tears i would go for it. Buy one and ride it for awhile and see how it goes. In my experiance the neomotos dont have drasticly more rolling resistance than the crossmarks, but it is definately more. I notice it alot on long rides( greater than 20 miles) on short rides i prefer the neomotos because of the extra traction for sure, but on long rides i run out of gas with the neomotos.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: reformed roadie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by westin View Post
    ...or unreliable with poor traction for my trails (RaRa 650b).
    Where are your trails? I have all 3 and IMHO, the RaRa is superior in every way except sidewall durability. The Crossmark I have is a LUST 26", which is heavy, but the traction is not as good as the RaRa, both 26" and 650b...for me anyway.

  5. #5
    NedwannaB
    Reputation: JMac47's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    8,741
    Quote Originally Posted by reformed roadie View Post
    Where are your trails? I have all 3 and IMHO, the RaRa is superior in every way except sidewall durability. The Crossmark I have is a LUST 26", which is heavy, but the traction is not as good as the RaRa, both 26" and 650b...for me anyway.
    Have to agree. That's why the change from the LUST 29 (OEM's on AnthemX 29?) to the other.
    Not having tried a RR yet (too $$), the tread pattern does appear to be the grippyest . I started out with both the the Quasi and Neo Pacenti's, which are showing their miles, ventured over to the less expensive models Wolv/Nev's/now Cmrk to prolong their wear life.

    I'm going to see how the XMk's do in the meantime now that the better traction conditions are settling in. We'll soon see.
    But in all honesty I could run Quasi's f/r on all of the NorCal trail conditions I ride my HT on and be good to go.
    Wait,who did he tell you that?....

Similar Threads

  1. Lateral Flex on my 5.7c
    By jrk07 in forum Pivot Cycles
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-05-2013, 08:14 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-09-2012, 08:41 AM
  3. Pacenti Quasi Moto 2.0 versus Neo Moto 2.1
    By misterdangerpants in forum 27.5 - 650b
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 11-02-2012, 06:58 PM
  4. Unwanted Lateral Play
    By Spykr in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-16-2011, 10:10 PM
  5. Lateral stiffness '10 MV...meh
    By socalscott in forum Marin
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-23-2011, 01:59 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •