Check Out Our Shop
Page 10 of 14 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 LastLast
Results 226 to 250 of 348

Thread: Truck snow tires

  1. #226
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    23,136
    Quote Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong View Post
    The benefits of lightweight wheels on bikes is oversold.
    Depends are you trying to eek out fractions of a second from aero losses on a time trial course on a bike? Or are you trying to have a better bike ride with less unsprung weight and more responsive pedalling?

    That generalizes poorly to a motor vehicle, except Unsprung weight is totally a thing for suspension performance.

    That being said, lots of stop and go will definitely affect your mpg with a heavy wheel more than highway driving which probably doesn't care about wheel wheight but does care about the other factors you listed in your other post.
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  2. #227
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    23,136
    My studs saved me from sliding into an intersection on an unexpected non-obvious ice patch today. This disproves the argument that "you only need studs for ice road truck driving." No, my tires need to have the maximum safety factor and the most dangerous moment that I can expect to certainly encounter, even if irregular!

    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    Ok, so the two tire sizes are:

    BFG 275/60/20
    Blizzak 275/55/20

    So the BFG is slightly larger, would that make such a noticeable difference? Or is that just one contributing factor, along with weight and tread and whatever.
    Assuming both tires are equally worn, and that the actual tire size matches the dimension, which they often don't, the size difference accounts for a 3.4% mpg difference in favor of the Blizzak because of differences in the indicated mile traveled vs true.

    The BFGs are 5# heavier per tire than the Blizzaks (assuming a DMV2). That would have minimal effect I think. Wheels can easily 10# different between alloy wheels... and steel vs a lightweight alloy even bigger difference.

    You gave 14 vs 16 mpg, a 13% difference... now I think probably you need to re-measure that and calculate to 3 significant digits. Because 14.4 vs 15.5 (largely explained by size and weight) is way different than 13.5 vs 16.4 (explained by the factors Jong listed)!
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  3. #228
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Not in the PRB
    Posts
    34,582
    Quote Originally Posted by El Chupacabra View Post
    It's just one factor.

    Are you basing your observed MPG on a dashboard readout of MPG? Or based on hand calculated driven miles + actual fuel consumed?
    I hand calculate almost every tank.

    Quote Originally Posted by summit View Post
    Assuming both tires are equally worn, and that the actual tire size matches the dimension, which they often don't, the size difference accounts for a 3.4% mpg difference in favor of the Blizzak because of differences in the indicated mile traveled vs true.

    The BFGs are 5# heavier per tire than the Blizzaks (assuming a DMV2). That would have minimal effect I think. Wheels can easily 10# different between alloy wheels... and steel vs a lightweight alloy even bigger difference.

    You gave 14 vs 16 mpg, a 13% difference... now I think probably you need to re-measure that and calculate to 3 significant digits. Because 14.4 vs 15.5 (largely explained by size and weight) is way different than 13.5 vs 16.4 (explained by the factors Jong listed)!
    Thanks for the info. I think the wheels are the same, the BFGs came with the car and I believe were just OEM wheels, and the second set was purchased from a guy with a similar Sequoia, so also OEM.

    The BFGs are more worn, about 50% tread while the Blizzaks are close to new. But that difference would make the MPG difference less not more (ie the BFGs are now closer in size to the Blizzaks).

    It's not easy to more precisely calculate for a couple of reasons. One, every tank is different, with a different mix of miles and driving conditions. And two, I didn't notice this until I put the Blizzaks on, so I did not have the opportunity to try and create a "control tank". There is no question a noticeable difference, way more than 3%, but beyond that it is hard to be precise. Maybe in April, before I switch back, I will try to drive a specific route that I repeat often with fillups on both ends, and then do the same after I switch.

    In any event, if the MPG difference is real or partially real, I may be looking at a non-AT tire for my next summer choice.
    "fuck off you asshat gaper shit for brains fucktard wanker." - Jesus Christ
    "She was tossing her bean salad with the vigor of a Drunken Pop princess so I walked out of the corner and said.... "need a hand?"" - Odin
    "everybody's got their hooks into you, fuck em....forge on motherfuckers, drag all those bitches across the goal line with you." - (not so) ill-advised strategy

  4. #229
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    23,136
    Quote Originally Posted by Danno View Post
    I hand calculate almost every tank.



    Thanks for the info. I think the wheels are the same, the BFGs came with the car and I believe were just OEM wheels, and the second set was purchased from a guy with a similar Sequoia, so also OEM.

    The BFGs are more worn, about 50% tread while the Blizzaks are close to new. But that difference would make the MPG difference less not more (ie the BFGs are now closer in size to the Blizzaks).

    It's not easy to more precisely calculate for a couple of reasons. One, every tank is different, with a different mix of miles and driving conditions. And two, I didn't notice this until I put the Blizzaks on, so I did not have the opportunity to try and create a "control tank". There is no question a noticeable difference, way more than 3%, but beyond that it is hard to be precise. Maybe in April, before I switch back, I will try to drive a specific route that I repeat often with fillups on both ends, and then do the same after I switch.

    In any event, if the MPG difference is real or partially real, I may be looking at a non-AT tire for my next summer choice.
    BFGs (33") half worn (~32.8") vs new Blizzaks (31.9"), the 3.4% difference falls to 2.8-2.9%
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  5. #230
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    10,500
    19.95 for a tire rotation in Taos. All 4 for 20$. Was blown away. I've been in the Bozeman bubble.

    My cooper snowclaws are lightly studded. Yrs ago I had heavily studded nokiens. Horrible resonance..

  6. #231
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    LV-426
    Posts
    21,739
    Quote Originally Posted by byates1 View Post
    19.95 for a tire rotation in Taos. All 4 for 20$. Was blown away. I've been in the Bozeman bubble.
    It's probably worth paying that extra $0.05 so they rotate all four tires, and not just one tire.
    Quote Originally Posted by powder11 View Post
    if you have to resort to taking advice from the nitwits on this forum, then you're doomed.

  7. #232
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    33,933
    Quote Originally Posted by summit View Post
    My studs saved me from sliding into an intersection on an unexpected non-obvious ice patch today. This disproves the argument that "you only need studs for ice road truck driving." No, my tires need to have the maximum safety factor and the most dangerous moment that I can expect to certainly encounter, even if irregular!
    )!
    I figured you folks down there had figured out how to somehow miss the driving on ice part of winter

    around here even a silly girl in a 20 yr sold sunfire will have studded snows

    I didn't think 18 wheelers ran studs but they definalty carry chains and have to chain up
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  8. #233
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    10,500
    Quote Originally Posted by El Chupacabra View Post
    It's probably worth paying that extra $0.05 so they rotate all four tires, and not just one tire.
    I feel like one tire at a time is more cost effective

  9. #234
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Truckee
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by J. Barron DeJong View Post
    Yeah, I’m aware. My previous career was race car engineering.
    Cool! I was merely a driver.

  10. #235
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lake Wallenpaupack, PA
    Posts
    2,317

    Truck snow tires

    Twenty-One’ Tundra Trail Edition tire time….Here’s my wishlist for an All Terrain that is rated for snow?

    -Cooper Discoverer Rugged Trek
    -BFG All Terrain T/A KO Three
    -BFG All Terrain T/A KO Two

    Am I missing any obvious contenders? Ordering ASAP……

    (The number emoji thing going on….is ridiculous)

  11. #236
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    PNW
    Posts
    825

  12. #237
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    9,300ft
    Posts
    23,136
    Quote Originally Posted by BC. View Post
    Twenty-One’ Tundra Trail Edition tire time….Here’s my wishlist for an All Terrain that is rated for snow?

    -Cooper Discoverer Rugged Trek
    -BFG All Terrain T/A KO Three
    -BFG All Terrain T/A KO Two

    Am I missing any obvious contenders? Ordering ASAP……

    (The number emoji thing going on….is ridiculous)
    Not the KO2

    Also look at Nokian Outpost nAT, that's what is going on my Tundra for a 3 season tire
    Quote Originally Posted by blurred
    skiing is hiking all day so that you can ski on shitty gear for 5 minutes.

  13. #238
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Location
    Lake Wallenpaupack, PA
    Posts
    2,317

    Truck snow tires

    Sweet/ thx guys…will adjust my search. The Nokian has a nice look/ also sounds like what I am searching for.

  14. #239
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Truckee
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by BC. View Post
    Sweet/ thx guys…will adjust my search. The Nokian has a nice look/ also sounds like what I am searching for.
    Not a lot of real world on the K03 yet. They're on my truck, but only for the last 500 miles. They've seen a few slick spots and so far, so good.

    I'm curious about those Nokians. I've just recently been opened up to sell Nokian. I'll get them on a few vehicles.

    I liked the K02 in LT applications except that they didn't hold balance well or last long (25k tops). If you put a LT on a light truck like a Tundra I was regularly seeing 50k out of them. From all personal accounts they were good in snow/ice. The tire is no longer supported which makes me leary of installing them these days.

    I'm curious about the Cooper Endeavor, but they're currently only in LT sizes.

  15. #240
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    22,532
    Ko3 is interesting

    Kill all the telemarkers
    But they’ll put us in jail if we kill all the telemarkers
    Telemarketers! Kill the telemarketers!
    Oh we can do that. We don’t even need a reason

  16. #241
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Truckee
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Core Shot View Post
    Ko3 is interesting

    They have a 50k mile treadwear warranty. I feel like I'll be getting some of my money back with that one. I'll be amazed if I'm wrong. Besides, by the time they get to that point traction will be shit. The only tire that survived two winters on my old truck was the Falken AT3W. Performance was only mildly diminished. IMO, they should have left that tire alone and not replaced it. If the K03 can match that performance and lifespan, it'll be my new go-to, especially for HD trucks and Sprinters. Time will tell.

    The new Duratrac RT looks interesting, too. I'm waiting to learn more about tread compound. The original Duratrac was first class when it was intro'd (more than a decade ago).

  17. #242
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Access to Granlibakken
    Posts
    11,922
    The Nokian Outpost nAT was my research eventually settled on last year but they were transferring factories & it wasn’t available. So based on this thread I went for the Open Country AT lll and I’m pretty stoked on them.

    My 6900 lb (fully loaded) van gets a lot of PNW miles and occasional ID and UT miles; Oregon cascades seem to be the shitfuckiest IME & these were pretty impressive on some days near Flachelor when vehicles were sliding out everywhere.

  18. #243
    Join Date
    Jul 2024
    Posts
    2
    Sounds like you made a great choice with the Open Country AT III! They’re solid for heavy loads and PNW conditions, especially in tough spots like the Oregon Cascades.

  19. #244
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    9,712
    With yall running different sized winter tires compared to your summer tires, what are you doing about your spare?


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

  20. #245
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,782
    OG checkin da spare

  21. #246
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    19,777
    A plug kit and a compressor takes up a lot less room than a spare. Less weight too.
    Is it radix panax notoginseng? - splat
    This is like hanging yourself but the rope breaks. - DTM
    Dude Listen to mtm. He's a marriage counselor at burning man. - subtle plague

  22. #247
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Yonder
    Posts
    22,532
    ^^^^^ had a car salesman call it a bottle of Jesus juice. You pray that it works.

    Not all flats are repairable. Having both options is best.

    As for size differences? Depends how big. And whether it’s on the drive wheels.
    Kill all the telemarkers
    But they’ll put us in jail if we kill all the telemarkers
    Telemarketers! Kill the telemarketers!
    Oh we can do that. We don’t even need a reason

  23. #248
    Join Date
    Nov 2024
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by SnowMachine View Post
    Tire size (rolling diameter and width), weight and tread design. My truck lost almost 2MPG going from 34" tall highway tires at 80psi to 35" tall AT's at 65psi.
    Whoa, I’ve never even gotten close to those psi’s on my truck.

  24. #249
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Truckee
    Posts
    1,366
    Quote Originally Posted by ma8103 View Post
    Whoa, I’ve never even gotten close to those psi’s on my truck.
    Is your truck a 3/4 or 1 ton? The tire psi threshold for warning in my 2500 is 65psi. Max load psi is 80.

    I carry a plug kit and compressor in all of my vehicles, but what I've found is that the tpms indicator comes on and tells you that you're low (assuming you arent driving a Flinstone mobile). Most leaks are slow and give you time to get the tire pulled and patched. In my experience plugs are temporary, though my Jeep still has a plug from running over a pair of pliers. It has beadlocks and I'm too lazy to remove the +/- 30 bolts to repair the tire properly.

  25. #250
    Join Date
    Nov 2024
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by SnowMachine View Post
    Is your truck a 3/4 or 1 ton? The tire psi threshold for warning in my 2500 is 65psi. Max load psi is 80.

    I carry a plug kit and compressor in all of my vehicles, but what I've found is that the tpms indicator comes on and tells you that you're low (assuming you arent driving a Flinstone mobile). Most leaks are slow and give you time to get the tire pulled and patched. In my experience plugs are temporary, though my Jeep still has a plug from running over a pair of pliers. It has beadlocks and I'm too lazy to remove the +/- 30 bolts to repair the tire properly.
    Ha, nope. I’m in a little old 1999 Tacoma. Running over pliers?! That’s gnarly!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •