Wide versus narrow tire for off road use. What says you?

[scrubber3]

1 inch can make a huge difference. At least that's what my fiance' tells me.

 

[off-roader]

But again, the basis of the discussion and Scott Brady's white paper listed by the OP is regarding overland traveling. The majority of which you will not find door deep rocks. Meaning the majority of the time you do not need such wide tires cruising across a continent. But lets face it each person's vehicle is built for their driving, riding, and cosmetic preferences.

Scott's absolutely correct. As I mentioned earlier it really depends on the kind of wheeling you'll be doing. For me, rock crawling WILL BE part of this rig's diet so wide tires it is.

Off-Roader suggests an 8" wide rim with neutral offset (4" backspace) which he says should work. But would the extra 1 inch make that big of difference in the tire's handling, especially since Goodyear recommends an 8.5"-11" wheel? I'm also concerned of the inevitable uneven wear of the tire due to the narrow rim. I've tried to compensate by using 2 or 3lbs lower PSI than I'd like to run. Thoughts on this?

It's only a 1/2" and if it does, it's not noticeable in the seat of my pants even going from 8 to 10" wide tires. You do notice the extra rubbing though.
As for wear it hasn't been a real issue. In fact I end up wearing the sides down more than the middle due to taking curves quickly especially on/off ramps. With the 35's I'm currently running 35psi and haven't seen any wear issues.

HTH.

 

[Monterorider]

I like my 285/75R16 on 8" rim, 0 offset. Kinda middle of the road. There is no universal solution.As it's been said before it all depends on type of driving you do.

 

[LaOutbackTrail]

I'm thinking the 285 might be a perfect tire for the monty. Higher load rating, plentiful anywhere, good height per the width. But they are relatively more expensive ($55 more) and are almost 10 lbs heavier than my 33x12.50 (reflected in the heavier carcass of the load rating). That's comparing a 33x12.50 R15 Duratrac to the 285/75 R16 Duratrac as an example. The 285 measures to be more of a true 33 however.

A good compromise.

 

[Monterorider]

True on tire size. When I blew my tire in 2009 during Nevada Trophy I was able to find cheap used spare in small Nevada town on Saturday morning and get back into race.

 

[LaOutbackTrail]

That is my biggest qualm with the 33x10.50... its a rare tire. Only 2 or 3 manufacturers produce that size! 33x12.50, there are tons. 285/75 R16, tons. 265 75 and 31x10.50, tons!

The basis of my opinion and decision on my tire size is for the inevitable need to buy one on in some podunk town in Oklahoma or Mexico, or anywhere for that matter. And yes, the fact that the monty carries the spare on the back door was a positive consideration as well. Most vehicles that carry the spare under the cargo area rarely have room for any tire larger than the factory spare.

 

[teotwaki]

reviving an old thread. Will throw oout some links that have come out in the various discussions as this is a topic of much interest

http://performancesimulations.com/fact-or-fiction-tires-1.htm

http://www.engr.colostate.edu/pts/Job/Understanding Parameters Influencing Tire Modeling.pdf

http://www.wranglerforum.com/f33/wide-tires-or-narrow-tires-which-are-better-off-road-110105.html

http://www.f1technical.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=12762

As a reference, Scott Brady's white paper: http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html



When reading some of this I saw lots of fascinating points. For instance, tire design is filled with variables that impact contact patch. At low tire pressures some brands will bulge inward on the tire centerline thus lessening the size of the contact patch.

 

[4D55 Performance]

Tire choice should be dependent on the types of terrain, but most consumers purchase them for looks. For my need which is daily driving on paved roads, mountain and desert expeditions, I like tall and skinny tires. My favorite size is 235/85/16's.

 

[teotwaki]

I went with Duratrac 265/75/R16 tires that are a bit taller than stock. They fit on the stock rims, no rubbing and are far superior to all-season tires for off-road traction.

 

[off-roader]

I've always gone with wider tires for the flotation on sand and added protection for my rims when driving in the rocks. For most overlanding in N. America I think any basic good quality AT tire will probably be sufficient.

 

[Cruisn]

I run 33x10.5 all terrains as I encounter sand for about 90% of my exploring duties.

they are narrow so i dont have to push a ton of sand out of the way, but when aired down give me a massive contact patch for flotation. I run about 14psi on most sands unless its hard pack.
I also save on the highway, being lighter.

 

[teotwaki]

In some of the articles that I've read they spoke to wider tires having a negative impact to MPG due to their frontal area increasing the coefficient of drag (CD) of the car. If the tire is wider and yet very low profile the lower stance of the car can improve its overall CD. But that is not the type of tire that we run for offroading.

 

[off-roader]

In some of the articles that I've read they spoke to wider tires having a negative impact to MPG due to their frontal area increasing the coefficient of drag (CD) of the car. If the tire is wider and yet very low profile the lower stance of the car can improve its overall CD. But that is not the type of tire that we run for offroading.

For our rigs, I would think it's more likely the added friction of a bigger contact patch plus the added rotational weight which is harder to get into motion and stop.

 

[JIMBO]

:sombrero: I'm pretty well stuck with wider tires because of the snow/sand/rocks I drive on where my Jeep lives (NorNv) and

With my auto tranny and diff gears I rarely airdown and I still get good mileage for a big jeep, even towing, especially off-road-

:costumed-smiley-007:wings: JIMBO