Printable View
Keep in mind that the 3PMSF rating only requires a modest improvement over a normal M+S tire (10% in straight-line stopping distance, not sure on other tests); most dedicated winter tires crush the minimum standard, but an AT tire may have the symbol and just meet that standard. Unfortunately, there's very little good, independent data out there on LT tires for winter use.
Sent from my SM-G892A using TGR Forums mobile app
Here’s a question that’s mostly unanswerable. I’m finally getting around to ordering tires. I’m running OEM size on a 99 land cruiser (265/75r16). Talking to discount tire, there is not a lot in stock right now in that size, but there are many options in 235/85r16. I’m fine with running skinnies, my only hesitation is the spare, which I’m not planning to change. My spare are a half worn studded tire at 265/75r16. My concern is about a how the cruiser’s open diff will “handle” the size difference if I need to run the spare. The overall “goal” of that spare is to get me out of where I am that resulted in destroying the tire on the truck. So I’d likely never need to use the spare when running the winter tires.
Thoughts and feelings?
235-85 16 are going to dig like mad on a heavy cruiser in anything soft. 235/85 vs 265/75 are pretty much the same height, probably fine in that regard.
I would try and get a 265/75 or think about bumping up to a 275/70r18 or similar. You can run rims from a 2008+ tundra or sequoia, often can find tundra rims for cheap from the bro-dozer crowd.
Thanks for the response and suggestions. That’s a good point about the skinnies.
I’d been trying to avoid getting 18” wheels for simplicity sake, but suddenly this is no longer simple. I’d been holding off buying the tires in the fall due to credit card payment cycles....
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier
If the cost difference is nominal and tires are more readily available; get the bigger size. I did that many years ago on my '01 LC. It was great.Quote:
Originally Posted by bodywhomper
thanks for that info. it seems that there are not a lot of tires available at the moment. good times sorting this out. i think this has been beat to death before, but 123 load rating versus 114 or 116 on an SUV? we've been cruising with 116-rated tires the past 3 years. tirerack.com sales rep did not recommend the 123-rated tires for a land cruiser because of poor ride quality.
tirerack sales rep was recommending firestone winterforce, which are 114 load rated.
more thoughts and feelings?
Do you tow heavy? If not...
Sent from my moto e6 using TGR Forums mobile app
Heavy towing is not regular, generally short distances, and not during the winter....Quote:
Originally Posted by The Artist Formerly Known as Leavenworth Skier
I’m just going to throw it out there... I’ve been running 255/85 16 Cooper discover maxx st’s on my taco for 4 years now and love them. I had 235/85 grabber at2’s before and these blew them away. I never noticed any digging or sinking with either size, but I’m also in a much lighter vehicle than you are.
The coopers handle snow, dirt, mud, and ice super well. I’ve had them in some pretty deep snow and they never flinched
I hate buying tires... Best of luck in your journey. Keep us posted.
tire shopping/educating seems to be a big time suck for me every few years (damn internet!). when our AT tires (Cooper AT-W) wear out, i may look at MTs or those hybrid tires. it depends on future planned uses of our LC. lately, it's almost exclusively been used for dragging a utility trailer, driving in snowland, accessing trailheads and waterbodies on FS roads/trails, and camping trips (uhhhh, i mean 'overlanding' :P).
i ended up going with the used 18" tundra wheel route for the winter tires. fiddling around with the tire size conversion site, i found that 265/75r16 (current tires/wheel size) is the same size as 265/65r18
a useful thing learned: w/ 265/65r18, many tire makers build that size outside of the ~120 load rating (E rate) .
Following up, that ^^ statement is not correct. 265/65r18 are bigger tires (taller) than 265/75r16. At least 1-2” bigger. I haven’t measured. I have used tiresize.com to figure this shit out for years. This is the first time I’ve experienced a definite incorrect calculation. Or cooper or firestone are wrong in their sizing, which seems unlikely. Luckily, no rubbing.Quote:
Originally Posted by bodywhomper
Just bought the wife a 2019 Suburban which has lousy 18” all-seasons on it now (it was a CPO lease return). I’ve used Toyo Open Country A/T on my 4Runner for years, but I think the wife would benefit from dedicated snow tires. Recommendations for a non-Studded snow for Western WA?
Huh?Quote:
Originally Posted by bodywhomper
265/65 r18 is actually pretty darn close but ever so slightly smaller than a 265/75 r16
As always with tires, actual dimension may not match stated sidewall dimension but 1-2" off is unlikely.
How you doing your math?
I’ll measure full diameter of the tires when I get a chance. Visually, it’s a noticeable difference.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcpnz
You may want to take a look at the Vredestein Quatrac 5. Not a true dedicated winter tire. But a very solid choice for mixed conditions that you will encounter on Western WA road.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandit Man
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireS...inLoadRating=S
Or if you are dead set on a winter tire, the General Altimax Arctic is a good value for performance winter tire.
Basically read through this entire thread and narrowed it down to a few choices. TIA as I hope to leverage the deep knowledge base here.
1st gen tundra v8, 1" lift, live in Maine 70% commuting 30% shitty roads. Primary goal is to increase MPG while still having slightly aggressive tires and can tow a 2k boat trailer. I am currently on Grabbers with the E rating which I suspect has something to do with my shitty 12 MPG. Not expecting to increase a significant amount but anything helps.
I've got it down to the following.
-BFG Ko2s
-Cooper AT3
-Grabber ATx
Local discount tire has priced these out and all within $40, so what should I do? TIA!
(I saw dynapros on a taco this morning, might have those priced out as well.)
What year Tacoma?Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueBison
I've got a 2012 and I bought it with 245/75/16 Nokians, guessing the second set as it has 50k on the odometer.
The 255/85/16's are retail $250/tire while the 245/75/16's are $200.
You think the bigger size is contributing positively to the traction and handling?
Btw, anyone tried the Falken Wildpeak AT/3W - seems to get good reviews and I can get them at either Wal Mart or Discount Tire at $150 per mounted with the limited 55k warranty.
Nope... Tundra's just get shitty mileage. If I drove the way I wanted, I routinely got 12mph with BFG Ko2s. Granted, they were an inch wider than stock tires but also 20-30lbs heavier per tire. Fine tire, and one of the two best for all season use with the snowflake symbol (the other being Duratracs, which are noticeably absent from your short-list), but absolutely not in the same league as a dedicated winter tire.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian.bee
I would run them again, but I would drive 10mph slower on snow/ice.
I would never in a million years run something without the snowflake and I really don't care if anyone's personal experience dictates otherwise or if there's supposedly only some 10% difference in tread compound. Off-camber, decreasing radius corners on icy/snowy mountain passes in a big truck means i don't ever want to even find out where the traction limit is on any given day. With the Ko2s, I found it several times, which is why I ended up slowing down. Never found it with Hakkapeliittas. Added margin of safety is worth much more to me than the price of an extra set of tires or the inconvenience of swapping out every year. Granted, I could drive the all-season tires and just go slower, and I've thought about that, but i want every advantage I can get for emergency braking.
I've been running them for a couple of years. Excellent in anything loose, snow, mud, sand, very marginal on ice especially as they wear more.Quote:
Originally Posted by lowsparkco
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk
Better fuel economy can only be achieved through lower rolling resistance and lighter weight.
Put another way, mileage is at the expense of traction, and/or load capacity.
I've heard the Tundra with the 350 gets shitty milage but with the 4.6 not so bad, a customer told me he never got less than 15 MPG with the smaller engineQuote:
Originally Posted by mattig
Ya slow down, in summer I would drive 10 km over the limit but on snow/ice in winter 10km under the limit, I don't use the cruise control in winter and I've been on Haks only for the last 19 yars
buy extra rims and they will pay for themselves in 2-3 years of tire swaps
Can confirm - but just posted to tell you to speak Canadian - it’s a 5.7!Quote:
Originally Posted by XXX-er
...350? Jeeze!
I forgot eh, I should get you to do my will while i can still remember who I am
and just to clarify it was an american fisherman who told me 15mpg so he was talking about them sissy fucking American gallons not the royal gallons we got up here
Fair enough. Again, not trying to go to 18mpg by changing all terrains. Definitely will consider having a dedicated set of winters as I have the stock starfish wheels sitting around, just cant pull it off this year.Quote:
Originally Posted by mattig
I'm leaning towards the BFGs, just seems like the best all around bet for a similar cost of competitors.
275/70r18 Hakkapeliitta LT3 on my Tundra. Ultimate winter driving confidence. Never going back to a snowflake-rated AT tire again.
you may have different results. i put in a generic aftermarket high flow muffler in my 100-series land cruiser and am getting 2mpg improvement. maybe the exhaust in the tundra is tuned better than the LC.Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian.bee
still happy with falken at3w. i cross or crest snoqualmie pass every weekend this time of year and have seen 2ft to ice to packed ice to slush. i’m in a top heavy 4runner so i take most things slow, but don’t feel i’ve given up much to the blizzaks on my smaller car (though it has shitty awd). mostly compensate speed when grading is off which is smart for me anyway.
We just bought a Sierra 1500 and I did the same, plus talked with some OCD friends and read a bunch of the comparisons on Tire Rack. This one got to what I wanted:Quote:
Originally Posted by adrian.bee
https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests...y.jsp?ttid=249
FWIW I went with the Yokos.
That’s the plan for next winter. I’ve been OK with snowflake-rated tires on low clearance AWD vehicles, but not willing to do that with a truck.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackattack
looking at this test: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests...y.jsp?ttid=249
makes me curious how load index versus "LT" and "P-metric" versus tire wear versus ride quality. that test used LT-rated BFG's with a lower load index than all the other tires (which were p metric).
just scanned both discount tire & tire rack...not seeing those (it might be my locale...i do see them on nokian's site)Quote:
Originally Posted by jackattack
how did you source them?
Ordered them in January through my local DT. I'm sure they'll become available again in the fall.
Agreed. Nokian Hak LT-3's are the best. Have them on my Taco. Two previous sets were LT-2's till they got discontinued and replaced by the LT-3.Quote:
Originally Posted by jackattack
Thanks for that link. My F150 is going to need tires in the fall so I've been browsing this thread and elsewhere. Those Yokos look great, though I'm also considering the Goodyear Wrangler UltraTerrain AT: https://www.discounttire.com/buy-tir...ltraterrain-atQuote:
Originally Posted by evasive_MT
gotcha, thxQuote:
Originally Posted by jackattack
Have had these on our F150 - went through one set and replaced with same. Surprisingly good winter performance. Very good pavement performance as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dantheman
https://www.michelinman.com/tires/ltx/ltx-a-t-2.html
how did you find them for retaining the studs, IME I always lose them eventualyQuote:
Originally Posted by Fred Pabst
the last set of haks on my Ranger had square studs these LT3's on the tacoma have triangular SS studs
Not a 3PMSF tire as far as I can tell. Solid-looking tire, but the Yokos and Goodyears are 3PMSF-rated and a little less expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by skaredshtles
I ended up with LT BFG KO2 on my tundra after suffering a blowout at65mph of a P rated Bridgestone. The ko2 is a far superior tire albeit noisy and I think also contributes to a slight mpg hit. But I’m no longer worried of destroying the tire on the highway or the desert and I can run them longer in the fall since they’ve got the snowflake.
I do run blizzak on the truck in the winter but they see way less miles during snow season as I roll the Subaru up and down the canyons. I think I’m on my 4th winter w these blizzak and they are at 9/32.
The snow tires grip FAR better on snow, ice than the ko2, not even close.
I have the NOKIAN HAKKAPELIITTA R2 SUV on my Sequoia last three season and really like them . Not quite as good pure slick performance as the super squishy studless I've used in past, but the tread wear has been really good and I think they grip snow/slick great. Got them locally at Tualatin Tire Pros Automotive Repair. As a Nokian dealer they could likely source the LT3s for youQuote:
Originally Posted by ::: :::