Tire dilemma!

ohanacrusader

Adventurer
Not the duratracs, I had them on my tundra (miles lasted in 2013 60k) and they performed great but then put a new set on my 4runner (miles lasted 2015/16 35K) they started to wear very bad at 30k. I also think with the lighter 4runner they don't have as good traction. I going with the cooper st maxx in a week or two. Just my two cents
 

Rando

Explorer
I have the older BFG AT's in 235/85R16 on my 1st gen Tacoma and they have lasted extremely well (40K+ on them at the moment and plenty of tread left). I have the new KO2s on my 3rd Gen Tacoma, and hope they will perform and last as well. I am not at all a fan of the new side wall design with more 'bling' though.
 

Kmrtnsn

Explorer
Those falkens are interesting to me. Do you have some? Whats your opinion of them? Thanks

I haven't got them yet. I had a long talk to the nice people at Barlow Jeep in Sedona, who are running them on several of their Jeeps and the feedback was very positive when I asked. I'll be throwing a set on the Jeep in October when the rains come as the Hankook MTs that I am running have about had it since running the Rubicon last month. I only wish that there were an LT295/70R17 available but for those who dig that tall and skinny, there is an LT285/75R17. As for now, I'll probably stick with LT285/70R17Es, which my tire guys I can get five for less than a grand.
 

MCObray

Explorer
Parking lot poser.
Photo%20Aug%2016%206%2021%2029%20PM_zps6hujr0to.jpg

Photo%20Aug%2016%206%2021%2039%20PM_zps7cdomdou.jpg
 

p nut

butter
I love your avatar btw! Cracks me up everytime I see it.
I probably shouldn't have said "force", because honestly no one is forced to do anything another forum member suggests. That was silly on my part.

235's have worked well for me in myriad of different situations and experiences. Not a single time on any of the trails in any condition did I ever once say, "Man, I wish I had wider tires in this situation."
On the other hand, I have said "Man, I wish I had a lift and taller (not wider) tires, and a lot more skid protection." That though is another argument all in its own.

If BFG were to make a KO2 34x10.50 Load E or the metric equivalent, I will be buying those tires after my lift.

So to the OP or any lurker out there, depending on how you use your rig will ultimately depend on what you should buy, for me and everything from Moab to Interstate travel and everything in between, I would say take the 235's.

:D

I think that's the key. I purchased 235/85/16's (BFG KO) for my old Tacoma after drinking a bit too much of the Expo "skinny tire mantra" koolaid. They were cheap. They were supposedly more gas efficient and just as capable off road. While cost was definitely a benefit (at the time, it was $550 out the door for all 4!), crappy on-road performance was immediately noted, specifically the lateral grip. I'm no race car driver. But even at mildly aggressive turns (for a pick up), tires were screaming and overall felt very unstable. Lots of understeer going into the corner. Now, this is coming from the crappy stock Rugged Trails (Ragged Fails?), so that says something. Same was noted off-road, where on any off-camber stuff, I felt it slide a lot more than before. The final kicker was the MPG. Skinny tires = less mass and more aero = better MPG. Nope. Dropped ~2MPG like I noticed with 265/75/16's on my other rigs in the past. (this was tested on my then 100 mile highway commute with consistent 65-70MPH speeds). So they got kicked to the curb and got the wider tires.
_
I think for 32-33" tires, 265 - 285mm is the optimal width for general overlanding and daily use. But again, back to the bolded words up above, that's what works for me as I travel mostly dirt roads in southern Utah.
 

camodog

Adventurer
I am glad we can have a friendly discussion without it turning into something its not. :smiley_drive:

I wish my 235 = less rotational mass, but being load E makes them heavier than most wider load c tires. If you live in FL or never encounter a rocky trail the wider load c or LT may be the perfect fit. I had to balance my need for load E and the need to keep weight to a min.

My KO2's do not suffer from your lateral grip or on-road performance failures that you experienced with the Rugged Trails. They do quite well traveling 75+ mph on curvy mountain CO interstate passes in a really heavy 5th gen 4runner with all of my gear and camping supplies and 100+lbs on the roofrack (which honestly should exacerbate the lack of grip being as top heavy as I am). They have also done above average on the off camber trails as well, maybe that is due to me deflating the tires when necessary and to the design of the sidewalls of the KO2?
 

camodog

Adventurer
To OP:

Go get them new tires dirty and report back the type of trails and what psi you are running and let us know how the tires work for you. You did get the load E 235's, correct?
 

MCObray

Explorer
To OP:

Go get them new tires dirty and report back the type of trails and what psi you are running and let us know how the tires work for you. You did get the load E 235's, correct?

I've got a tripped plan to Central Oregon labor day weekend, so they will definitely see some use at a minimum there.

The shocker for me today was, I honestly couldn't tell the difference driving into work today (60 MPH - 65 MPH) on the highway for 12 miles. These BFGs feel exactly like my previous P-rated Michelins... now I know the more I drove on them the more I may see the differences (MPG drop) but so far the upgrade is a win-win.

The sizing of the tire looks like how it should have came stock with it being, IMO, proportional and feeling out the wheel wells quite nice!
 

sumnrfam

Active member
265/75/16 cooper at3 load C. Good for commuting and have great offroad reviews for mild use. I got a set for under $500 when discount tire ebay had a $100 off sale that my local discount matched. I did 6,000 miles this summer mostly highway with some forest service roads and they did great.

This ^^ Cooper AT3,, great tire,, great service in 2 Tacomas now,, ;-)
 

p nut

butter
I am glad we can have a friendly discussion without it turning into something its not. :smiley_drive:

I wish my 235 = less rotational mass, but being load E makes them heavier than most wider load c tires. If you live in FL or never encounter a rocky trail the wider load c or LT may be the perfect fit. I had to balance my need for load E and the need to keep weight to a min.

My KO2's do not suffer from your lateral grip or on-road performance failures that you experienced with the Rugged Trails. They do quite well traveling 75+ mph on curvy mountain CO interstate passes in a really heavy 5th gen 4runner with all of my gear and camping supplies and 100+lbs on the roofrack (which honestly should exacerbate the lack of grip being as top heavy as I am). They have also done above average on the off camber trails as well, maybe that is due to me deflating the tires when necessary and to the design of the sidewalls of the KO2?

Maybe the weight actually helped with the lateral traction? Tacoma's are already lighter than 4Runners. With you extra cargo, perhaps it resulted in better traction. Kind of like putting sand bags in a truck bed. Glad they're working for you and maybe it was I got a dud set, but I wasn't willing to risk more $ vs. getting tried and true 265/75's. Just a few more $$ out of my pocket, but not bad. MPG stayed the same, power was the same, and admittedly, looked better as well. :D Now I'm rolling on 275/70/18 in a full-sized truck, which is also a great size as well.
_
But the only complaint is the lack of LR D tires. All of these truck tires seem to be going to LR E only. My current half ton, much less the 4Runners and Tacoma's, don't need LR E. I used to buy BFG KO's in LR D, which were great tires. Rode better, weighed less, and all else was on par. They've done away with them now (for the sizes I need anyway).
 

Forum statistics

Threads
188,173
Messages
2,903,176
Members
229,665
Latest member
SANelson
Top