I Can't Stop Loving You (My Toyo MTs)
I've been meaning to reply to this thread since it started. I planned to dig out all my data from mounting and balancing for the two prior sets I've owned, but have yet to get around to it. Therefore, just some off the top of my head observations & opinions...
I have owned two sets of 5 Toyo MT tires, first a set of 265/75R16E and then 285/75R16E. They were both purchased and owned simultaneously for my then newer LJ Rubicon in 2005-2006. Prior to the Toyo MT 265s the LJ was shod with Les Schwab Wild Country TXR traction tires in 255/85R16. The step down to 265/75 on this mildly lifted (3-in) LJ was not desirable. The Jeep didn’t look as good and it lost mensurable clearance with the shorter tires. The load-range-E 265s were also a bit too firm for my preference as I really like a softer street riding 4x4.
The 265s didn't get much use on the LJ but stayed in the fleet for a couple years. They were on and off my F350 until the tires were sold recently to a friend with only a few thousandths worn off their considerable original tread depth.
The 285s looked great on the LJ but were heavy/wide enough with the stock 4.10:1 gearing and the choked and slowly dying (of old age/emissions) inline-6 that acceleration was worse compared to either the shorter Toyo MT 265s or the narrower 255/85 TXRs. For a while I had both the 285s & 265s mounted on two sets of stock Moab wheels, swapping them back and forth as I wished. The Toyo MT 285s also saw brief testing on my old F350. The five 285s were sold (for an extra 1k) with the LJ about 1.5-years ago. The 285/75R16s were similar in size to the 285/75R17 treads you are considering, except about 1-inch shorter.
I can't say that I have extensive experience with the Toyo MTs off-highway, though they were certainly used and tested enough for me to get a good feel for them and establish an overall opinion. I didn't run them long enough to evaluate long-term wear, but in a traction tire I'm generally much more interested in traction than longevity unless wear is extreme. I had these two sets of Toyo MTs siped, though my new set is not, not for now.
On-Road
I continue to be impressed with the overall smooth riding (round), low noise of this traction tire. They are not the most aggressive MT out there, possibly one of their secrets, but for an aggressive tire the noise and ride is generally very good.
Because of the tough casings and 7-ply treads the tires do ride firmer than other tires. The 265 with their shorter sidewalls rode firmer than the 285s with the same PSI in them on the LJ. Both firmer than I preferred on that car.
Balancing
Though these tires are very stout and weigh a lot for their size, they usually balance well with a minimal to moderate amount of weight. Even the tires that need a little extra, once balanced ride well. They certainly are not perfect and some need more weight and don’t balance or ride as well as others, just like all tires. Because the tires are heavy, I would suggest finding a shop that is willing to spin the tire on the wheel for a better inherent balance should you get a tire/wheel combination that takes more total weight than you prefer. I like to keep the wheel weight down to 5-6 ounces or less for my 33-in sizes if possible. I remember a couple of the 265 that only needed a couple ounces to balance to zero, very impressive to see that.
Off-Highway
The stiff, beefy sidewalls make the Toyo MTs less flexible, no two ways about it. At a given pressure they don't deform as much as other tires on the same truck. They also don't ride as soft off-road on the same 4x4 with the same PSI as another tire (experienced on both the LJ and F350). But I’m biased toward a soft, conforming ride on and off highway. Unless my speeds are going to be higher than my normal trail-riding or rock crawling speeds, I like to let lots of air out to my tires. In the past this has meant about 15-psi with 255/85s on both the LJ and 4Runner. The F350 usually gets a bit more in front because of its weight. At 15-psi the Toyo MTs were still too firm for my liking on dirt roads with rocks, and they didn't deform and conform as much as other tires. 9-10-PSI seemed to get them radically deforming and much softer riding as I prefer. At 9-10 PSI the tire does some nice crazy things, and because of the construction of the sidewall and bead, I was no more concerned about losing the bead on the wheel than I was with the softer 255s at 15-PSI (never lost a bead during testing). Obviously losing ground clearance with aggressive airing down is a negative and should be monitored.
The sidewall lugs (I consider them more lugs than tread) are very thick. When the tire is aggressively aired down they lay over on the ground helping protect the vulnerable sidewall more than most other designs. They also make the tire a bit wider than another tread designs, adding width where the tire tucks up into a fender. If your clearance is tight, like it was/is on the LJ & 4Runner, be aware. The lugs also look pretty cool, making the tires distinctly different than other designs in my opinion. I think the new BFG KM2 comes closest to this 'look', but don't know if the same 'beef' is there (we shall see).
I did a static loaded radius test (already posted here on ExPo?) pitting the Toyo MT 265s against a set of 255/85 to see if the stiffer sidewalls of the 265s would make the tires taller at a given PSI compared to the taller 255s that were softer. My memory is that under 'static' garage conditions the 255s remained taller and the sidewall stiffness was not enough to make up for the difference in height until about 5-PSI (I was trying to justify running the smaller tire if off-highway clearance was the same when aired down).
R - E - S - P - E - C - T
Any tire that can be pulled from a dealer's shelf and raced in Baja has my respect. How many other companies are happy with racing standard production tires on race trucks? I don't know the answer... maybe a few? The ruggedness of the tire has a decided advantage in the expedition area where failures might be less tolerable than in 'normal' off-highway use and replacements harder to come by in other countries.
The Way You Do The Things You Do
In another recent thread here on ExPo I photographed and compared a new size Toyo MT, LT255/85R16E, to other 255s and other Toyo MT sizes. I always thought the chip resistant compound on the Toyo MT made the tread a little harder, possibly giving it less grip. But I was surprised how soft the tread felt (fingernail durometer) compared to the grippy Maxxis Bighorns at warehouse temperatures, both tires new. I already know I like my Bighorns in the rocks (though they are siped).
I never thought Toyo would make the MT in a 255/85, thinking this size was slowing dying and too small a niche for them to bother. Even with the known negatives/compromises of the Toyo MT design, I used to joke that if Toyo ever made the Toyo MT in a 255/85 I would buy two sets, I like the tire that much. I would have preferred the 255/85 MTs to be the standard load-range-D, but Toyo likes their tires to be super tough and fit the heavy duty pickups hauling big weight and being abused (miners, loggers, etc.) and it's understandable they made their 255/85 Toyo MT in a load range E.
One of my favorite tires is now available in my size, so I bought a set. Very few road miles on them over the past two weeks so nothing new to share. They are still firmer than other 255s (D vs. E range and construction) tough possibly less so because of the 4Runner compliant suspension and taller sidewalls. They balanced well and I had forgotten how quiet they are. Very close to the Cooper STs I took off and almost certainly quieter than the Maxxis Bighorns. It will be a few more weeks before I have the time to get off highway and dump the pressure and make theses 255/85 Toyo MTs work, but no later than late June they will see their first camping trip pulling the Chaser and some dirt/rocks.
