Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 48
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    363

    Any plans for a 29er Maxxis Crossmark in 2.25?

    The 2.1 tire is great, but I really would like some more width and volume in the tire I use for most of my riding (marathons, trails, gravel, road and more). Bigger is better!

    Anyone knows of any plans to beef it up? A tubeless version too, maybe?

  2. #2
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by simenf
    The 2.1 tire is great, but I really would like some more width and volume in the tire I use for most of my riding (marathons, trails, gravel, road and more). Bigger is better!

    Anyone knows of any plans to beef it up? A tubeless version too, maybe?
    Contact Maxxis and let them know your desire for a wider version of the Crossmark.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    363
    I have done, and they just refer me to my local importer (which obviously has very little impact with Maxxis).

    Therefore, hoping that more people will show interest and someone from Maxxis will read this and do something about it...

    Come on - show yourselves :-)

  4. #4
    11 is one louder than 10
    Reputation: Green Giant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,347
    would love one... with a tubeless bead (like the bonty TR's)
    "The thing is, Bob, it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care."

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: blooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    430
    I would also like to see a 2.2 or larger. Sometime Maxxis tires are not as wide as stated on the tire.
    Ride it like you stole it!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Davidcopperfield's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,709
    Real 60mm Crossmark +1

  7. #7
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    47,719
    Quote Originally Posted by blooper
    Sometime Maxxis tires are not as wide as stated on the tire.
    All the new models are pretty much as stated especially if you look at the (modified) ISO size.

    ie Ardent 29x2.25, 54/56 - 622 (casing/tread-bead seat diameter). Actual width: Casing, 54.5mm / 2.15"; Tread, 56.8mm / 2.24".
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  8. #8
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,061
    I'd be all over that. I love the Crossmark for anything but slick trails but find the volume on the small side for sure. I think mine measures in under 2" wide.
    SC Tallboy C : Giant TCX SLR : Giant Propel Adv SL DA9070

  9. #9
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,916
    Quote Originally Posted by simenf
    I have done, and they just refer me to my local importer (which obviously has very little impact with Maxxis).

    Therefore, hoping that more people will show interest and someone from Maxxis will read this and do something about it...

    Come on - show yourselves :-)
    I think they will certainly listen.

    I would think if enough riders believe that a Crossmark in a wider version would be an improvement and result in increased performance (and of course sales), they would entertain the concept. Again, I haven't ridden the Crossmark so cannot say.

    BB
    Last edited by BruceBrown; 08-10-2009 at 02:19 PM.

  10. #10
    Expert Crasher
    Reputation: GreenLightGo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,354
    Quote Originally Posted by simenf
    The 2.1 tire is great, but I really would like some more width and volume in the tire I use for most of my riding (marathons, trails, gravel, road and more). Bigger is better!

    Anyone knows of any plans to beef it up? A tubeless version too, maybe?
    Try the Maxxis Ardent - it rolls surprisingly well. Having used both, I'd say you won't be disappointed.
    Happiness depends more on the inward disposition of mind than on outward circumstances. Benjamin Franklin

  11. #11
    veldrijder
    Reputation: jmoote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    1,083
    The Ardent has the volume, and rolls faster than it looks but it still rolls nowhere near as fast as a Crossmark, and more importantly the handling traits are entirely different as the Ardent really wants to be thrown into a corner rather than carving through the apex. I can appreciate the Ardent for what it is, but it didn't stay on my bike for more than a couple rides... I just can't get a feel for it in the corners.

  12. #12
    bog
    bog is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,061

    I currently run an Ardent up front & a Xmark out back

    I love that combo because I can really jam the front end into corners and let the back end come around with it. When the trails get some more moisture I'll try an Ardent on the back but I'd love a bigger Xmark to provide a bit more balance front to rear when weighting the front end through corners. As it is right now I have to weight the back end a touch more than I'd like. I just really love how well the Xmark rolls AND hooks up so a bigger one would be great.

    Quote Originally Posted by GreenLightGo
    Try the Maxxis Ardent - it rolls surprisingly well. Having used both, I'd say you won't be disappointed.
    SC Tallboy C : Giant TCX SLR : Giant Propel Adv SL DA9070

  13. #13
    what a joke
    Reputation: ozlongboarder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,278
    I just put the 2.25 crossmarks on my 26er....its like a new bike, Roll fast and grip is phenomenal. Would love some 2.25s for my karate monkey.

    Is there a specific email address we should be sending the request to?
    blah blah blah

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    363

    How to contact Maxxis

    I had the same experience going up one size - it made the bike so much better.

    Cannot find an email address, but the contact form works.

    Everybody who wants a bigger Crossmark (2.25), please write to Maxxis! Together we can do it!

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    70
    I have yet to take off my 2.25s racing ralphs with the snake skin sides. I weigh in a hefty 190lbs run tubeless at 20 or below front and back and grip everything up or down. That would be my thought on that.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,027
    I will take a 2.25 Crossmark and Larsen TT please!

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: simenf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    363
    Reply from Maxxis today:

    "Simen, Have you checked out the Ardent 29 x 2.25 yet? It's a great, fast rolling tire and so far those that have ridden it have given us great feedback. I realize it's not the Crossmark but it's the best we got for now. We'll see what we can do about the 29er version. It can't hurt to hear that people are looking for it though! Best Regards, Maxxis-USA"

  18. #18
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    The Ardent 2.25's are wicked fast rollers- as fast as Crossmarks but the more open side tread offers even more traction on dirt.

    I was running the Ardent 2.25 front / Crossmark 2.1 rear combo for a while...
    Former New Yorker, now in Fort Collins
    http://www.nycmtb.com

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by jbogner
    The Ardent 2.25's are wicked fast rollers- as fast as Crossmarks but the more open side tread offers even more traction on dirt.

    I was running the Ardent 2.25 front / Crossmark 2.1 rear combo for a while...
    Sorry but I can't agree to the Ardent being anywhere near as fast as the Crossmarks. Here is why: The crossmark has less volume which requires I run more air pressure... hence less RR. The Ardent has much more volume and is pressure sensitive if you try to get max performance. (Grip and ride quality) For me the magic pressure for the Ardent is 28-30 whereas I run the crossmark @ 36-38 lbs. From my driveway and trail tests there is no comparison between the RR of the 2 tires. With that being said I like both tires but each has it's own character with the Ardent edging out the crossmark for everything except RR.

    I would love to see a 2.25 Crossmark!

  20. #20
    What's "social pace?"
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    934
    Quote Originally Posted by flyag1
    The crossmark has less volume which requires I run more air pressure... hence less RR.
    Higher pressure doesn't mean less RR in off-road conditions.

  21. #21
    Recovering
    Reputation: jbogner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    1,483
    Quote Originally Posted by flyag1
    Sorry but I can't agree to the Ardent being anywhere near as fast as the Crossmarks. Here is why: The crossmark has less volume which requires I run more air pressure... hence less RR.
    And a 2.25 Crossmark would have more volume and require lower pressure just like the 2.25 Ardent. That's the whole point in running a larger tire. Why would you want a larger volume tire only to run it rock hard?
    Former New Yorker, now in Fort Collins
    http://www.nycmtb.com

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueMountain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    893
    Let's not simply get a bigger LUST Crossmark. I used both 26er sizes. The small one was not that good and the 2.25 is better but not that good for loose conditions. Still, it is a fast roller that isn't a Racing Ralph fast but a bit tougher. The 2.25 is heavy for a XC tire with such a shallow tread depth.

    Keep it TLR and maybe offer it in two 29er sizes- 2.0 and 2.2. Keep the weight of the 2.0 around 700 and the 2.2 around 800 if possible.

  23. #23
    Map Maker
    Reputation: cbchess's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by simenf
    The 2.1 tire is great, but I really would like some more width and volume in the tire I use for most of my riding (marathons, trails, gravel, road and more). Bigger is better!

    Anyone knows of any plans to beef it up? A tubeless version too, maybe?

    +1 count me in!
    bigger Crossmark please!
    Richmond, VA
    Ra-MORE mtb club

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    746
    Quote Originally Posted by jbogner
    And a 2.25 Crossmark would have more volume and require lower pressure just like the 2.25 Ardent. That's the whole point in running a larger tire. Why would you want a larger volume tire only to run it rock hard?
    I think we can all agree that tread pattern has less impact on trail bite when we drop pressure. (e.i. low pressure = increased tire patch = increases traction) So a 2.25 crossmark should have enough volume to allow for lower pressure which will result in better traction and ride comfort.

    Therefore the extra rubber (weight) of the Ardent tread pattern over the crossmark is not necessary and only serves to increase weight and RR. Maybe we would give up some traction or trail bite, but I don't think the extra traction is proportionate to the additional weight. Look at the nbr of peeps rolling slick 29er tires and read their reviews.

    At 200 plus lbs there is just not enough volume in the 2.1 crossmarks to protect my rims unless I run higher pressure... whereas a true 2.25 would allow low pressure.

    Maybe the Aspens are my fix, but where are they?

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    10
    meh on the crossmark
    now a 2.25 monorail would be sweet

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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