My tires upgrade decision on Big Bend

[AZshot]

A lot of good info from Pressurized. I'm right with you BB that I plan to upgrade. I will probably go with the 255 80 x 17 Falken or Toyo AT's. I will end up with Load Range E, and run 35ish pounds. They may ride somewhat rougher but my experience with E's is they are pretty indestructible off road and VERY puncture resistant. If there was a 265 75 x 17 I might do that, although owners manual states only 255 width are chainable which is important to me

I did have an old BF Goodrich on my 4runner get punctured one time rolling down a steep incline, and hitting a pyramid shaped rock. I was surprised, but that was decades ago. Since then, I've never punctured a tire, on my F150 in similar terrain. Tires are much better now. I'm sure a C rated will be fine for me.
I'm an engineer, so I think logically I'll be driving the Bronco on roads almost every day. Having a rough ride in several of my vehicles (sports cars, old bikes) I do NOT want that every day. The off chance of being off road 4 hours every month or two....not worth the daily jarring over the horrible roads here (lots of bumps, potholes poorly covered with 2" rise...etc).

Sponsored

 

[Pressurized]

A lot of good info from Pressurized. I'm right with you BB that I plan to upgrade. I will probably go with the 255 80 x 17 Falken or Toyo AT's. I will end up with Load Range E, and run 35ish pounds. They may ride somewhat rougher but my experience with E's is they are pretty indestructible off road and VERY puncture resistant. If there was a 265 75 x 17 I might do that, although owners manual states only 255 width are chainable which is important to me

The trick with E's on a lighter vehicle is to find the PSI that gets you the best ride without causing unusual tire wear. Even at a much lower PSI, you will always exceed the load capacity. I run 25PSI on my C2 35's on the lighter LJ and 30PSI on the D2's on my JKU.

This is after 3 years with proper rotations... Not a feather or odd wear in sight.

 

[Lakelife36]

Well I finally have a build date so I needed to get smart on tires. I wanted to get something slightly bigger for my BB, as soon as it comes. No lift, no giant tires that would hurt the allegedly great miles per gallon on the BB with a manual. I will be mostly on road, with occasional camping trips in pretty rough Arizona country. But no mud, seldom snow, sometimes some sand that I've handled well enough in a 2WD F-150 with street tires for years.

Deciding on size first and load rating, I settled on 255/80/R17s. I figured the same width and slightly higher would give me a little more clearance, but still get good MPGs and be quiet, yet do fine off road. I wanted C load rating for a better ride too.

So next I went to the BF Goodrich site for the K02s. Guess what? They don't make that size. So my second choice was Toyo Open Country ATIIIs. Guess what? They make that size, but not in a C rating, only E. And the Toyos are supposed to be louder slightly. Now I have a quandry! Taller, but harder, or OEM size.

I saw a BB with stock tires, flares, and mud flaps IRL the other day and was disappointed with how short and narrow the 255s looked. I've seen multiple BDs with the stock 265s and they looked fine, even though there's only half an inch width difference between them and the BD tires are actually shorter than the BBs. Perhaps it's the overly-wide mud flaps that make them look too skinny? Photos attached.

 

[DonM]

This here was the mental exercise I went through when I was trying to decide on which Bronco to order. I ended up with a Base 4DR SAS with the 2.3. My other choice was a BB 4DR 2.3 with 4.27 locker.

Going in I know I'll never use the SAS package to its full potential, I just want the better running gear. I didn't really want the 315s, not really interested in wide tire.

After seeing a BB and BD IRL, but have the visuals and the BD really reminds me of a 4Runner in its stance. The BB looks fine and a change to factory sized AT's would give the visuals that I anticipate for a Bronco. Also a BB with the locker and better AT tires would handle any stuff that I'd throw at it.

But, in the end, I decided to spend the $5K on equipment and not a jump in trim level.

 

[AZshot]

I saw a BB with stock tires, flares, and mud flaps IRL the other day and was disappointed with how short and narrow the 255s looked. I've seen multiple BDs with the stock 265s and they looked fine, even though there's only half an inch width difference between them and the BD tires are actually shorter than the BBs. Perhaps it's the overly-wide mud flaps that make them look too skinny? Photos attached.

Thanks, I may consider those too. They both look very close in size/width:

But to me, looks are the lowest priority on tires. I don't care what they look like on the vehicle, don't care about and barely understand all the talk about "stance". Instead, my needs are:
1. A little taller for a little more ground clearance.
2. The best MPG I can get with a good all terrain tire.
3. Something that will handle mostly rocks and light sand, very seldom some snow or mud.

There will very little difference in those three factors, but I'm thinking a thinner tire may get a bit better MPG. And a taller tire (only .5 " dia diff) won't be that much more clearance at all. But I'm old school, and hate the looks of fat tires on a truck. To me, looks out of place, like a drag racer.

 

[Comadivine11]

I like the new BFG KM3 better than the KM2, also like the Baja Boss M/T and the Falken Wildpeak M/T. Of note, the Nitto Trail Grappler is a staple in AZ offroad circles, and the Goodyear MT/R also, but I'm not a fan. I am running Patagonia MT's on all of my Jeeps and have had GREAT luck with them, but they get mixed reviews, so I always say do your research on those. The Falken M/T is what we always put on if someone doesn't like a tire they got. Mike likes to use the Radar R/T and I'm warming up to them, but they are almost all E rated. I don't usually promote the off brand tires unless someone asks specifically about them or tells Mike to put on what he likes...

I've been pretty set on getting the Patagonia M/Ts (285/70r17). I love the price and the fact they are supposedly very quiet for a M/T. My only issue is I don't love the look, particularly the sidewall. My other considerations are the Wildpeak MTs, KM3s, MT/Rs, or even the Geolandar MT. I know looks are subjective, but can you offer any further insights on these tires as far as to which you feel provide the best balance of aesthetics (looks, ride quality, noise) and performance?

Thanks.

I also live in an area that gets snow. I know MTs aren't the best in snow but do you know if any of these tires are particularly better than the others for snow?

 

[dgorsett]

Well I finally have a build date so I needed to get smart on tires. I wanted to get something slightly bigger for my BB, as soon as it comes. No lift, no giant tires that would hurt the allegedly great miles per gallon on the BB with a manual. I will be mostly on road, with occasional camping trips in pretty rough Arizona country. But no mud, seldom snow, sometimes some sand that I've handled well enough in a 2WD F-150 with street tires for years.

Deciding on size first and load rating, I settled on 255/80/R17s. I figured the same width and slightly higher would give me a little more clearance, but still get good MPGs and be quiet, yet do fine off road. I wanted C load rating for a better ride too.

So next I went to the BF Goodrich site for the K02s. Guess what? They don't make that size. So my second choice was Toyo Open Country ATIIIs. Guess what? They make that size, but not in a C rating, only E. And the Toyos are supposed to be louder slightly. Now I have a quandry! Taller, but harder, or OEM size.

I'm with you on size, i think 255/80/16 is ideal. I've driven my BB about a thousand miles mixed Hwy/town/ off road and here are my thoughts as I responded to another thread about the Duelers:

I would call them adequate. Almost good enough. Good highway (i think they'll be good on road snow), good dry moderate off road. I like a 255 or 265 width, for chains off road. A little more aggressive for wet off road and taller and tougher for rocks would be better. I'll go with 255 80 17 toyo or Falken ats at some point.

BTW I've gotten 24 mpg average with the 2.3 auto mixed driving at 4000 to 12000 feet in Colorado. Also don't shy away from load range E, I plan to go with Toyo or Falken AT3's in load range E when I can't stand the Duelers any more, properly aired they'll ride fine. I've never had a tire ruining event with a load range E, can't say the same about C's

 

[Pressurized]

I've been pretty set on getting the Patagonia M/Ts (285/70r17). I love the price and the fact they are supposedly very quiet for a M/T. My only issue is I don't love the look, particularly the sidewall. My other considerations are the Wildpeak MTs, KM3s, MT/Rs, or even the Geolandar MT. I know looks are subjective, but can you offer any further insights on these tires as far as to which you feel provide the best balance of aesthetics (looks, ride quality, noise) and performance?

Thanks.

I also live in an area that gets snow. I know MTs aren't the best in snow but do you know if any of these tires are particularly better than the others for snow?

For snow, you want the tire to have as much siping as possible. I would rate the Falken very highly in this area, the Patagonia also has decent siping and worked well for me in fresh snow. The others, not so much...

If I knew I was going to do quite a bit of snow, I would probably look for an aggressive R/T like the Kenda Klever KR601 R/T. Ironically, it looks a lot like the Goodyear that comes on the Bronco. They are economical and have the siping that would be good in the snow. They also have a decent look. The 285/70r17 is very popular and they have a unique 35x10.5r17 that nobody else has.

I just screenshotted a post from another forum I'm on that I think is helpful...

 

[AZshot]

UPDATE 6 months later. I've driven on some pretty aggressive 4WD trails, including some advanced rock and snow on the Alpine trail in Colorado a month ago. The Duelers have not caused a problem with their grip or durability. They work fine, last a long time.... But I could use an extra inch or two clearance. The Mineral Creek Trail in particular was pretty hairy on 32.7" tires. So I'm hoping to wear these Duelers out fast, and get some more with more height. Not width.

 

[dgorsett]

UPDATE 6 months later. I've driven on some pretty aggressive 4WD trails, including some advanced rock and snow on the Alpine trail in Colorado a month ago. The Duelers have not caused a problem with their grip or durability. They work fine, last a long time.... But I could use an extra inch or two clearance. The Mineral Creek Trail in particular was pretty hairy on 32.7" tires. So I'm hoping to wear these Duelers out fast, and get some more with more height. Not width.

Similar to my experiences in the 7 months I've had mine. I don't know if I can wait for the Duelers to wear out, they've done everything I wanted, but a little taller mor aggressive would be good.

Side note on the BB, I did add factory skids under the engine (actually protects the EPAS more than anything) and transfer case, makes me not worry about being in the rocks as much. I have purchased, but not installed a 1" spacer lift, front and rear and do plan on those 255/80x17's some day.

 

[Heart2]

Well I finally have a build date so I needed to get smart on tires. I wanted to get something slightly bigger for my BB, as soon as it comes. No lift, no giant tires that would hurt the allegedly great miles per gallon on the BB with a manual. I will be mostly on road, with occasional camping trips in pretty rough Arizona country. But no mud, seldom snow, sometimes some sand that I've handled well enough in a 2WD F-150 with street tires for years.

Deciding on size first and load rating, I settled on 255/80/R17s. I figured the same width and slightly higher would give me a little more clearance, but still get good MPGs and be quiet, yet do fine off road. I wanted C load rating for a better ride too.

So next I went to the BF Goodrich site for the K02s. Guess what? They don't make that size. So my second choice was Toyo Open Country ATIIIs. Guess what? They make that size, but not in a C rating, only E. And the Toyos are supposed to be louder slightly. Now I have a quandry! Taller, but harder, or OEM size.

I went with 275/70/17 Wildpeaks on BL rims. I still wanted 32s, just wider with an A/T tread. Essentially same diameter as the 255/75/17s. Good luck with your choice!

 

[Lttle Sasquatch]

I put BFG ko2s' on only because it was the only proven AT that came in the size I wanted. So, I took a Big Bend 7 speed with nothing but leather steering wheel and I am doing a father son project called Little Sasquatch. I purchased wheels with virtually no miles on Ebay and added 305/65/17 tires that work quite well with 1/2 gallon loss in mpg. No lift and crash bars still on. Added mud flaps, running boards, catch can, under hood panel and cover, hood shocks. Planning on upgrading grille to raptor style and stereo system with trailer hitch, wiring and roof rails to complete it.......for now.

I do have some very slight twitch in the ride so I am going to recheck balance and do a wheel alignment just in case.

Sponsored