Utah KJ
Free State of Florida
Since 235/85R16 are dually tires, they don't bother.
"Skinny" Tires...
- Thread starter JSimmons
- Start date
Since 235/85R16 are dually tires, they don't bother.
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
Yep, dually tires now, but for many years it was the heavy-duty pickup tire size for the big three, including SRW trucks.
JSimmons
Casual Observer
Hmmm...lots of good points out there. I'm tempted to look for some cheapo 16" take-offs on craigslist. Seems like a much greater selection available, which probably means those respective tire sizes may be more readily available in more locations. If I decide to stick with the 17" wheels, I think I will look for some 255/75/17 tires. Lastly, since those 17" wheels are 7.5" wide, what cross section is going to be too skinny for them? 235? 245?
Again, thank you for all the great input.
Again, thank you for all the great input.
JSimmons
Casual Observer
Redline - I like your roadtraveler.net website. Good stuff.
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
x2. Mr. Downhill is exactly right.
I've run 235/85R16 on 7" wheels on my heavy F350 (the stock wheels), aired down, rock crawling in Moab (years ago). A 7" wheel is listed as the maximum width allowable for the LT235/85R16 size by most manufacturers. Maximum, but it works well, remember that when reading below.
I typically advocate for more sidewall and less wheel when it's practical, which you may have read on my blog (http://roadtraveler.net/wheels-tires-and-sidewalls), and I agree that 16" wheels are great. However, let me make an argument for the 17" wheels you already have.
Though I've long been a 16" tire/wheel guy I've had to study and learn a little about the larger wheel sizes because my Tundra won't take sixteens. Seventeen inch equivalents to most of the common 16" sizes are readily available, and don't seem to cost tons more. There is something important about the 17" wheels you have, they are 7.5-inches wide. There is a 17" equivalent to the 235/85R16, the 235/80R17. The maximum rim width for this size is 7.5", not 7". So you can run a very narrow, tall tire with your 17" wheels. But wait there is more...
A 7.5-inch wide wheel is the minimum width that also works for the wider 285 tires (in both 17" & 16"). They are also great for 265s should you want them in the future (though 7s would work too), the 265 is a great size. You may be thinking that you will never run a wider tire like a 285, maybe so. There are few more fervent, decades long advocates for the 255/85R16 size than this here Tire Meister, but even I have become a 285 guy for tread choice and necessity. Your 7.5" wheels are very versatile.
Because of this, I'm actually shopping for a set of 6-spoke, 4th Gen. 4Runner Sport 17" wheels for my 4Runner. These 17x7.5" wheels will allow me to take tires from my Tundra and put them on the 4Runner.
James
Last edited:
Redline,
You make a good case for the 17's. I also usually favor narrow wheels to keep the rims tucked back. However, I think there is a good argument for the wider extreme when using very narrow tires. I initially went looking 6" or 6.5" wheels. Where did they all go? I found nothing to fit my Taco! After having run the 7" now for almost 2 years and visiting Moab as well as seeing tons of mud, I'm not sure that 7 isn't the best choice. On the very narrow tires you don't have the same stability side to side that would on say a 285. It feels to me like the wider wheel stabilizes the narrow tire better, especially when aired down. Below are two pics. The aluminim tube is 1" and you can see that the sidewall bulge is just 5/8". On this tire anyway you sure wouldn't want less than that, but this combination has been amazing both on and off the road.
You make a good case for the 17's. I also usually favor narrow wheels to keep the rims tucked back. However, I think there is a good argument for the wider extreme when using very narrow tires. I initially went looking 6" or 6.5" wheels. Where did they all go? I found nothing to fit my Taco! After having run the 7" now for almost 2 years and visiting Moab as well as seeing tons of mud, I'm not sure that 7 isn't the best choice. On the very narrow tires you don't have the same stability side to side that would on say a 285. It feels to me like the wider wheel stabilizes the narrow tire better, especially when aired down. Below are two pics. The aluminim tube is 1" and you can see that the sidewall bulge is just 5/8". On this tire anyway you sure wouldn't want less than that, but this combination has been amazing both on and off the road.
Desert Dan
Explorer
scrubber3
Not really here
FWIW, I have a 2nd Gen Montero. They came with 15x 6 to 7 standard. These fit toyotas as far as the center and bolt pattern go(not sure about brake clearance). Don't know if a 15 inch rim will work for you, but it is more rubber to have greater side wall flex therefore increasing traction. You can fit skinnys on these pretty darned easy. I know you can find these as cheap as dirt too. With some black wheel paint they look great. Might be worth looking into, especially if you are on a budget.
I tend to roam around the toyota threads to get ideas for my rig. Lots of interchangeable parts.
I tend to roam around the toyota threads to get ideas for my rig. Lots of interchangeable parts.
JSimmons
Casual Observer
x2. Mr. Downhill is exactly right.
I've run 235/85R16 on 7" wheels on my heavy F350 (the stock wheels), aired down, rock crawling in Moab (years ago). A 7" wheel is listed as the maximum width allowable for the LT235/85R16 size by most manufacturers. Maximum, but it works well, remember that when reading below.
I typically advocate for more sidewall and less wheel when it's practical, which you may have read on my blog (http://roadtraveler.net/wheels-tires-and-sidewalls), and I agree that 16" wheels are great. However, let me make an argument for the 17" wheels you already have.
Though I've long been a 16" tire/wheel guy I've had to study and learn a little about the larger wheel sizes because my Tundra won't take sixteens. Seventeen inch equivalents to most of the common 16" sizes are readily available, and don't seem to cost tons more. There is something important about the 17" wheels you have, they are 7.5-inches wide. There is a 17" equivalent to the 235/85R16, the 235/80R17. The maximum rim width for this size is 7.5", not 7". So you can run a very narrow, tall tire with your 17" wheels. But wait there is more...
A 7.5-inch wide wheel is the minimum width that also works for the wider 285 tires (in both 17" & 16"). They are also great for 265s should you want them in the future (though 7s would work too), the 265 is a great size. You may be thinking that you will never run a wider tire like a 285, maybe so. There are few more fervent, decades long advocates for the 255/85R16 size than this here Tire Meister, but even I have become a 285 guy for tread choice and necessity. Your 7.5" wheels are very versatile.
Because of this, I'm actually shopping for a set of 6-spoke, 4th Gen. 4Runner Sport 17" wheels for my 4Runner. These 17x7.5" wheels will allow me to take tires from my Tundra and put them on the 4Runner.
James
James - Thanks for the enlightening explanation on my 17" wheels. I think I did find a few 235/80R17 tires out there but I was unsure if those would actually fit on the 7.5" width wheel, or if they were just too narrow for the street. I think I would much prefer to just keep the wheels I already have to prevent even more car parts from cluttering up my garage. I like to try and work with what I already have as much as possible.
Now, another question is this: does it matter what type of tread pattern you run on those skinny tires? Looking at a lot of the photos that some folks posted, it appears that mud-terrains are very popular. I'm partial to all-terrains because the majority of my time is spent on pavement. Any reason why I should not shy away from the mud-terrains?
Thanks for the tip. What other parts have you discovered that are interchangeable?
Last edited by a moderator:
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
Glad you like it!
I'm just getting off my duff and trying to post regularly, and I can always use more readers to make it worth my time
I've been flip flopping about the 265/70/16 vs 235/85/16 as well. Luckily I have some time to think about it. Here are a couple other discussions on skinny vs wide tires:
http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/61-2nd-generation-2005/270374-235-85-16-vs-265-75-16-a.html
www.toyotanation.com/forum/61-2nd-g...ing-pizza-cutter-cooper-sts-tire-weights.html
http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html
http://www.toyotanation.com/forum/61-2nd-generation-2005/270374-235-85-16-vs-265-75-16-a.html
www.toyotanation.com/forum/61-2nd-g...ing-pizza-cutter-cooper-sts-tire-weights.html
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
Wheel width & tires.
Yes, I think we agree on most or all points. I'll share some more experiences.
Narrower wheels do have the theoretical advantage of keeping the bead seated tightly on the rim, however if we let a bit too much air out, peeling a bead will still occur, I've done it with wider 255s on a nice, narrow 7" wheel. I also like the wheel tucked back as you say to keep the wheel a little protected from damage, though I seemed to scuff all my 7.5" 4Runner wheels over the past few years on the rocks, even with 'wide' 285s providing some protection. I've run 285s on 0.5" too narrow 7" wheels, and I don't care for it. 285s are much better on the 7.5" minimum or 8" wheels.
I see that you are running the Dean SXT Mud-Terrain, I think in 235/85R16? I ran a set of those Deans and a set of Cooper S/T (a close relative) both in 255/85R16. Despite having a section width close to that of a typical 255/85, these tires have very narrow tread width, very close to many 235s, and they drive like that too.
I ran the Dean SXTs on 8" wide Jeep wheels and the Cooper S/T on 7.5" Toyota wheels. One can argue that the ideal semi-narrow wheel width for a 255/85 is a 7" rim, however I've run 255/85s on 7, 7.5, and 8" wheels with no apparent consequences, including lots of low pressures. All depends on the tire, wheel, and truck (and driver).
The Cooper S/T (NOT the new S/T MAXX) & Dean SXT MT are flexible and soft, and don't offer much lateral sidewall support as you mentioned. I agree part of this is from the narrow width, and part of it comes from the softer construction. For example, the super stiff sidewalls on the Toyo MT in a 255/85 don't feel they same. They are not flexible, and have more lateral support from the very stiff sidewall construction, even though they are a relatively narrow 255/85 size...I ran a set briefly.
In addition to possible sidewall lean, a narrow tire like a 235 doesn't offer much later support/stability because of its narrow track. But track width and support is increased with a wider wheel, and I think that's what we are aware of. In the case of the Original Poster, if he runs a 235mm tire on a 7.5" wheel instead of a 7" wheel, then the truck would have a 0.5" wider overall track width, not taking into account any differences in wheel offset/backspacing. Overall width would only be 0.5", but the overall wheel footprint width would be 1.0" (0.5" x 2 from a wheel on each side of the car), I'm pretty sure that is something we can feel and affects handling and vehicle dynamics (like all changes do).
Yes, I think we agree on most or all points. I'll share some more experiences.
Narrower wheels do have the theoretical advantage of keeping the bead seated tightly on the rim, however if we let a bit too much air out, peeling a bead will still occur, I've done it with wider 255s on a nice, narrow 7" wheel. I also like the wheel tucked back as you say to keep the wheel a little protected from damage, though I seemed to scuff all my 7.5" 4Runner wheels over the past few years on the rocks, even with 'wide' 285s providing some protection. I've run 285s on 0.5" too narrow 7" wheels, and I don't care for it. 285s are much better on the 7.5" minimum or 8" wheels.
I see that you are running the Dean SXT Mud-Terrain, I think in 235/85R16? I ran a set of those Deans and a set of Cooper S/T (a close relative) both in 255/85R16. Despite having a section width close to that of a typical 255/85, these tires have very narrow tread width, very close to many 235s, and they drive like that too.
I ran the Dean SXTs on 8" wide Jeep wheels and the Cooper S/T on 7.5" Toyota wheels. One can argue that the ideal semi-narrow wheel width for a 255/85 is a 7" rim, however I've run 255/85s on 7, 7.5, and 8" wheels with no apparent consequences, including lots of low pressures. All depends on the tire, wheel, and truck (and driver).
The Cooper S/T (NOT the new S/T MAXX) & Dean SXT MT are flexible and soft, and don't offer much lateral sidewall support as you mentioned. I agree part of this is from the narrow width, and part of it comes from the softer construction. For example, the super stiff sidewalls on the Toyo MT in a 255/85 don't feel they same. They are not flexible, and have more lateral support from the very stiff sidewall construction, even though they are a relatively narrow 255/85 size...I ran a set briefly.
In addition to possible sidewall lean, a narrow tire like a 235 doesn't offer much later support/stability because of its narrow track. But track width and support is increased with a wider wheel, and I think that's what we are aware of. In the case of the Original Poster, if he runs a 235mm tire on a 7.5" wheel instead of a 7" wheel, then the truck would have a 0.5" wider overall track width, not taking into account any differences in wheel offset/backspacing. Overall width would only be 0.5", but the overall wheel footprint width would be 1.0" (0.5" x 2 from a wheel on each side of the car), I'm pretty sure that is something we can feel and affects handling and vehicle dynamics (like all changes do).