HARDTRAILZ
Certified
That works! We all learn as it goes whether on 30's or 44's, but no sense in knocking one size or the other.
I think you should just use what works for what you do, and screw what others think
Bingo...and not jump on soapboxes
31" Tires
- Thread starter outofrshell
- Start date
Bingo...and not jump on soapboxes
Who was jumping on the soapbox?
DaveInDenver
Middle Income Semi-Redneck
That's the crux, isn't it? The right size is the one that gets you out on the trail. I reckon that the reality is orders more miles of dirt have actually passed under stock sized BFG A/Ts over the years than any 37", too.I think you should just use what works for what you do, and screw what others think
HARDTRAILZ
Certified
gwittman
Adventurer
My current truck came with 31" AT tires. That is what I ran on all my off-road vehicles since 1977. They got me everywhere I wanted to go and a few places I was told I shouldn't go. The worst damage I ever got was a flattened tail pipe. Once I bought my last ruck, I decided to try 32" MT tires to get a little more lift and off-road traction. That just invited me to try a little more difficult stuff. After denting the heat shield on the catalytic converter on the crossover pipe I decided I wanted a little more ground clearance. When the 32" tires wore out, I went to 33 x 10.5" MT tires knowing I would have to re-gear the differentials.
.
I am very happy I went to the 33" tires. I also have Torsen differentials front and rear. The vehicle is a much more capable and I can be a lot easier on the vehicle when taking difficult trails. I prefer not to lift vehicle and I used the tires to get more ground clearance. I still use 31" tires when I am not going off-road.
.
I am very happy I went to the 33" tires. I also have Torsen differentials front and rear. The vehicle is a much more capable and I can be a lot easier on the vehicle when taking difficult trails. I prefer not to lift vehicle and I used the tires to get more ground clearance. I still use 31" tires when I am not going off-road.
SilicaRich
Wandering Inverted
To this day I say that if I had gotten my TJ Rubicon stock, I would have stayed with the stock tire size (31" tires), instead I started with 33s and I'm now on 32s.
Nothing wrong with running 31" tires. A good line and little tires can get you a lot of places without compromising for fuel economy or the expense of a regear.
Nothing wrong with running 31" tires. A good line and little tires can get you a lot of places without compromising for fuel economy or the expense of a regear.
arctic04trd
Member
My 285/75/16 duratracs come in at ~32" @28psi on my 4500lb tacoma........
outofrshell
Adventurer
Really folks you need to lighten up, this post was REALLY!! brought by on by someone who has hinted that maybe my rig wasn't capable on 31s and my driving experience (only 68 years of off road travel) wouldn't be enough for a planned trip. But by the time I saw the humor in it I had already posted the first post so I posted another stating firmly that I intended not to offend anyone or imply that my way was the only way. I like 31s and I do think some people could benefit from a smaller tire but that is entirely up to the owner. And besides, this is my first post that got more than 1 or 2 replies before it died in cyber space. I might even sit down and try to think of something else that might stir the pot. Thanks folk for the replies. Dave BTW if some one could tell me how to insert smiley faces maybe it wouldn't seem so serious.
Happy Joe
Apprentice Geezer
Personally I was not offended; I have long since realized that the vehicle is best prepped to the type of wheeling the owner/driver wants. I remember when 32 and 33s were EXTREME tires, power lock limited slips were something to search for and nearly everyone was having trouble making obstacles with 27s or 29 inch tires.
This is an expedition/overland forum (as opposed t a 4WD forum) which seems to have a large slant toward roadside camping in/on (rooftop tents) trailers near stock and tow vehicles; I'm guessing, many folks here are likely either very experienced older off roaders or are more interested in touring and not all that interested in traveling the more difficult unmaintained roads/trails.
Enjoy!
This is an expedition/overland forum (as opposed t a 4WD forum) which seems to have a large slant toward roadside camping in/on (rooftop tents) trailers near stock and tow vehicles; I'm guessing, many folks here are likely either very experienced older off roaders or are more interested in touring and not all that interested in traveling the more difficult unmaintained roads/trails.
Enjoy!
Last edited:
outofrshell
Adventurer
I set on a blurry line between long distance overloading and serious wheeling thus the reason for the 31s although the Trooper is built with about 60 more HP than stock and has 4.56 final drive it still struggles a bit on the highway, the reason is it weighs 5400 Lb when loaded for trips. With 32s (235 x 85 x 16) it just could not pull hills so 31s are a compromise. Ah a turbo and 35s LOL. Dave
Happy Joe
Apprentice Geezer
Yep! its all about a balanced vehicle setup, IMO.
I find the 4.56s and 35s, in the jeep with around 200 hp and 200 ft lbs. are about right for street/highway/(loaded)interstate speeds in overdrive (still have to downshift for very steep hills); while still allowing me to do moderate to difficult trails (the extra low transfer case gears are rarely used in first or second gear, I typically wheel in 3rd or 4th gear in low range).
For the explorer, with the anemic sohc 4.0 v-6 and slushhbox automatic (I am learning to detest automatics); the projected 4.10 gears (couldn't get 4.27 or 4.30 gears for both axles)with 32 inch tires ought to give near stock(barely acceptable) on road performance; the IFS really limits the potential for this vehicle's off road performance because of its limited travel and its anemic 33" tire, max rating...so without major rework its never going to be more than a light duty off road camping vehicle.
Enjoy!
I find the 4.56s and 35s, in the jeep with around 200 hp and 200 ft lbs. are about right for street/highway/(loaded)interstate speeds in overdrive (still have to downshift for very steep hills); while still allowing me to do moderate to difficult trails (the extra low transfer case gears are rarely used in first or second gear, I typically wheel in 3rd or 4th gear in low range).
For the explorer, with the anemic sohc 4.0 v-6 and slushhbox automatic (I am learning to detest automatics); the projected 4.10 gears (couldn't get 4.27 or 4.30 gears for both axles)with 32 inch tires ought to give near stock(barely acceptable) on road performance; the IFS really limits the potential for this vehicle's off road performance because of its limited travel and its anemic 33" tire, max rating...so without major rework its never going to be more than a light duty off road camping vehicle.
Enjoy!
outofrshell
Adventurer
Ha I see I miss spelled over landing but it may be more correct as overloading!!!
p nut
butter
For my truck usage, 33's are unnecessary. I do regret getting them instead of the stock 32" size. Next go around, I'll move back down to 32's. Mine's a full-size truck that doesn't see any hardcore wheeling. Just basic forest road or rough backcountry trails. If it gets any tougher, I'll break out my bike or ATV.