Below Nav Bar Ad Module

Collapse

Tyre dilemma

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • gemster
    Valued Member
    • Aug 2012
    • 698
    • Gold Coast

    #16
    Just got myself a new set of BFG KO2 today.... Worth their weight in Gold... $306 ea.. 265/70/16

    Gemster...
    YES. ITS A MITZY . 97 NL 3.5 GLS AUTO (Formally owned by geopaj)__ Snorkel ,2 Uniden Uhfs , Roof Console, 2"lift, TT Suspension, Dual bat, Redarc System, BFG KO2's All Terrains, 55L sub tank, Pioneer sound, Milford cargo barrier, Extractors, SS exhaust, Rear camp light, Free Wheel Hubs, Improved Rear Storage unit, Alarm, Led interior lamps...
    And a 1999 NL LWB... Called 'Project Covid".. Stock Standard.
    ..Both with No Airbags. We die like real Men

    Comment

    • bmurray2250
      Member
      • Jan 2011
      • 96
      • Brisbane

      #17
      I went the Hankook Dyna-Pro 264/70 16 LT. The road noises is no difference to the standard tyres

      At $235 each it is worth looking at. I have had the BFG KO and KO2 on other $bys and I rate the Hankooks as good

      Comment

      • greig
        Valued Member
        • Aug 2010
        • 1280
        • kanwal

        #18
        Originally posted by bmurray2250 View Post
        I went the Hankook Dyna-Pro 264/70 16 LT. The road noises is no difference to the standard tyres

        At $235 each it is worth looking at. I have had the BFG KO and KO2 on other $bys and I rate the Hankooks as good

        Have these on my 200 series ( on when I bought it ) and after 64,000K's they still have approx 8mm tread left and even though they are as aggressive in the tread as the BFG's they are very quiet on road.
        Looking at the service book, the previous owner bought them in 2011 and he paid $384 each...285/70/17......I think they saw him coming ??

        Comment

        • Apollo
          Member
          • Dec 2016
          • 118
          • Cooloola Coast QLD

          #19
          I run 245/75/16 Hankook LT tyres on my ute. Second set I have had of them with 85000km seen from the first set. Never had one go flat with a mix of 30% dirt, 30% towing, 30% road and 10% 4wd. When they first went on I noticed a jump in fuel economy, but playing around with pressure saw that come back to near the previous tyres. Grip has been good and noise not an issue. The last set were around $1000 for the four F&B.

          Comment

          • littleriver
            Valued Member
            • Jan 2013
            • 3339
            • Queensland

            #20
            Originally posted by Apollo View Post
            I run 245/75/16 Hankook LT tyres on my ute. Second set I have had of them with 85000km seen from the first set. Never had one go flat with a mix of 30% dirt, 30% towing, 30% road and 10% 4wd. When they first went on I noticed a jump in fuel economy, but playing around with pressure saw that come back to near the previous tyres. Grip has been good and noise not an issue. The last set were around $1000 for the four F&B.
            what pressure you running on the highway ? ...



            ...
            2012 PB Challenger LS (Manual) Safari Snorkel, OZtec shocks front & rear with King Springs (lift 2 inch) , 22 inch light bar on ECB Nudge bar, roof racks & basket, Bridgestone Duelers 697 LT A/T (116S), Uniden Dash cam, Oricom 2 way radio 80 channel, Ipod connected via glove box usb, Waeco cf50, Garmin gps (with topo), Opticoat + paint protection, Nilrust proofing, Roosystems Ecu Remap

            Comment

            • bmurray2250
              Member
              • Jan 2011
              • 96
              • Brisbane

              #21
              When purchasing the Challenger the sales person pushed for the model with 17" rims. I asked, what was cost of a the 17" AT tyres and choices. Saw the guy think for way to long. Then I asked, how about purchasing tyre for the 16" rim and costs? He agreed there is so much more choice for the 16" rims and better costs. Talking to country mechanics, 16" are easy to come across in the common sizes that are used on the locals vehicles but the 17" tyre are slowly making an impact. The people that buy big tyres that are uncommon for farm vehicles are stuffed when out away from the cities

              Originally posted by greig View Post
              Have these on my 200 series ( on when I bought it ) and after 64,000K's they still have approx 8mm tread left and even though they are as aggressive in the tread as the BFG's they are very quiet on road.
              Looking at the service book, the previous owner bought them in 2011 and he paid $384 each...285/70/17......I think they saw him coming ??

              Comment

              • greig
                Valued Member
                • Aug 2010
                • 1280
                • kanwal

                #22
                Originally posted by bmurray2250 View Post
                The people that buy big tyres that are uncommon for farm vehicles are stuffed when out away from the cities
                I thought that's where farms are ??

                17's are pretty common now. The 200 series has been out since 2008 and they always came with 17's.

                Comment

                • Ent
                  Valued Member
                  • Apr 2014
                  • 1589
                  • Tasmania

                  #23
                  My understanding is a bigger rim is great for bigger brakes but not as good off-road. Had XR6 Turbo running 45 profile tyres. Dead easy to buckle rims. The XR8 ran 35 profile and according to the rim straighting place they have help put his kids through private school.

                  You could argue that the three tonne twin turbocharged V8 Toyota lorry needs all the disc brake volume it can get, but frankly 18" wheels on a PS Challenger. I remember back when going from 15" to 16" rims was considered a bad move by "serious" off-road drivers.

                  Michelin for a long time maintained that there is no great reason to go below 70 profile for a road car.

                  The classic Defender runs 235x85x16 so I run the same. The 76 runs 265x75x16. These must be the two most common off-road tyres around. One thing I have found they are the cheapest ones to buy as someone nearly always has these sizes on special.

                  For me the poverty pack PC Challenger had the right wheels. 17" models did not come with bigger brakes. Just wish the PS had only gone to 17" as yes the PC could do with more brakes.
                  2014 PC Challenger, manual, factory tow-bar, factory front diff protector, TJM inter-cooler plate, Bushskinz manual transmission protection plate, ProRack S16 roof racks, front elocker, Drummond Motor Sport front struts, custom 16mm King rear springs with Bilstein Dampeners, Buzz Rack Runner 3 bike platform, Eclipse Nav head unit, GME TX3800BW UHF, 16x8 CSA Raptor rims, 265/75R16 Maxxis MT-762, orToyo AT/2 265/70R16 Triton rims, BFGoodrich 235/85/R16 Triton rims, or Factory tyres and rims.

                  Comment

                  • whereswes
                    Senior Member
                    • Feb 2015
                    • 393
                    • Melbourne, Australia

                    #24
                    Originally posted by bmurray2250 View Post
                    When purchasing the Challenger the sales person pushed for the model with 17" rims. I asked, what was cost of a the 17" AT tyres and choices. Saw the guy think for way to long. Then I asked, how about purchasing tyre for the 16" rim and costs? He agreed there is so much more choice for the 16" rims and better costs. Talking to country mechanics, 16" are easy to come across in the common sizes that are used on the locals vehicles but the 17" tyre are slowly making an impact. The people that buy big tyres that are uncommon for farm vehicles are stuffed when out away from the cities
                    Sparks an interesting question.

                    Brakes aside, if you were running, for example, 32"tires at low PSI off road, would you be better off with a 16", 17"or 18"rim?

                    I've no idea. Maybe extra side wall flex helps with traction and shock absorption, maybe gives slightly larger foot print but maybe it also hangs out further to be staked.

                    or maybe I just think about crap too much

                    Cheers
                    Wes
                    2014 Auto PC Challenger, TJM Bar with Centre/Side LED Bars & 12,000lb Winch, Uniden UHF, ARB Rack with single row LED Bar & Awning, Safari Snorkel, Boos Bash Plates, 265-75R16 BFG KM2s, 100AH AGM Battery and Redarc DC-DC to power Waeco, Custom rear interior, HR Towbar, Combo suspension (Lovells front/ARB rear), Brown Davis LR tank, Diff Breathers, 2 1/2" S/S cat back, ScangaugeII, Munji EGR controller, Bushskinz side steps, DPChip, LM8,

                    Comment

                    • old Jack
                      Regular
                      • Jun 2011
                      • 11499
                      • Adelaide, South Australia.

                      #25
                      Originally posted by whereswes View Post
                      Sparks an interesting question.

                      Brakes aside, if you were running, for example, 32"tires at low PSI off road, would you be better off with a 16", 17"or 18"rim?

                      I've no idea. Maybe extra side wall flex helps with traction and shock absorption, maybe gives slightly larger foot print but maybe it also hangs out further to be staked.

                      or maybe I just think about crap too much

                      Cheers
                      Wes
                      Hi Wes,

                      Always better to run the smallest diameter rim possible off road as this gives you the tallest sidewall for any given diameter tyre. Tall sidewalls protect the rim from damage and enable you to run lower pressures without damaging the tyre or the rim and this translates into improved traction off road.
                      Most competition rock crawlers still run 15" rims with beadlocks to get maximum sidewall heights problem is most 15" tyres are not LT rated so they can not carry the loads that a recreational touring 4wd needs, which LT tyres can carry. 16" followed by 17" are preferable as 18" LT rubber has a limited selection and come at a premium price compared to 16" or 17" LT's.

                      OJ.
                      Last edited by old Jack; 01-06-17, 02:48 PM. Reason: Spelling correction
                      2011 PB Base White Auto, Smartbar, Cooper STMaxx LT235/85R-16,TPMS, HR TB, 3 x Bushskinz, front +40mm Dobinson , rear +50mm EHDVR Lovells, Dobinson MT struts and shockers, Peddars 5899 cone springs, Windcheater rack, GME UHF, Custom alloy drawer system inc. 30lt Engel & 2 x 30 AH LiFePo batteries + elec controls, Tailgate hi-lift/long struts, Phillips +100 LB & HB, Lightforce 20" single row driving beam LED lightbar, Scanguage II.
                      MM4x4 Auto Mate, Serial No 1 .

                      Comment

                      • whereswes
                        Senior Member
                        • Feb 2015
                        • 393
                        • Melbourne, Australia

                        #26
                        Originally posted by old Jack View Post
                        Hi Wes,

                        Always better to run the smallest diameter rim possible off road as this gives you the tallest sidewall for any given diameter tyre. Tall sidewalls protect the rim from damage and enable you to run lower pressures without damaging the tyre or the rim and this translates into improved traction off road.
                        Most competition rock crawlers still run 15" rims with deadlocks to get maximum sidewall heights problem is most 15" tyres are not LT rated so they can not carry the loads that a recreational touring 4wd needs, which LT tyres can carry. 16" followed by 17" are preferable as 18" LT rubber has a limited selection and come at a premium price compared to 16" or 17" LT's.

                        OJ.
                        Thanks OJ. That makes sense.
                        2014 Auto PC Challenger, TJM Bar with Centre/Side LED Bars & 12,000lb Winch, Uniden UHF, ARB Rack with single row LED Bar & Awning, Safari Snorkel, Boos Bash Plates, 265-75R16 BFG KM2s, 100AH AGM Battery and Redarc DC-DC to power Waeco, Custom rear interior, HR Towbar, Combo suspension (Lovells front/ARB rear), Brown Davis LR tank, Diff Breathers, 2 1/2" S/S cat back, ScangaugeII, Munji EGR controller, Bushskinz side steps, DPChip, LM8,

                        Comment

                        • pajeromack
                          Valued Member
                          • Jun 2014
                          • 561
                          • NSW

                          #27
                          Originally posted by Ent View Post
                          My understanding is a bigger rim is great for bigger brakes but not as good off-road. Had XR6 Turbo running 45 profile tyres. Dead easy to buckle rims. The XR8 ran 35 profile and according to the rim straighting place they have help put his kids through private school.

                          The classic Defender runs 235x85x16 so I run the same. The 76 runs 265x75x16. These must be the two most common off-road tyres around. One thing I have found they are the cheapest ones to buy as someone nearly always has these sizes on special.

                          For me the poverty pack PC Challenger had the right wheels. 17" models did not come with bigger brakes. Just wish the PS had only gone to 17" as yes the PC could do with more brakes.
                          Agree with the above. 16" rims are a fantastic size for off-road use. Tyres are significantly cheaper than 17" rims. The high sidewall makes the wheels near impossible to buckle and well protected from gutter rash. 265x75x16 is a good tyre size for a Challenger and very easy to find. Lots of sidewall to flex. Cheaper than 265x70x16 tyres too!

                          Bear in mind that the torque conveyer may not respond well to larger tyres when towing.

                          It is frustrating that Mitsubishi jumped up to 18" on the PS.

                          Comment

                          • Peebee
                            Member
                            • Jan 2011
                            • 165
                            • South Fremantle

                            #28
                            I'm still looking at the possible options for replacing the OEM Bridgestones on my 2012 XLS. At just over 50,000kms they're starting to feel a little bit "squirmy" on the rear. I think I've narrowed the choices to either Toyo Open Country or Kumhos. I'm worried the MT 51s will be too noisy for every day use, although the idea that you could throw them at just about anything is appealing. Has anyone looked closely at the Kumho AT51s. They have a 245 x70 and a 235x80 in LT specs in 17 in. No 265x65 but the narrower tyres would be OK, I think, for more touring use. I was just more interested in hearing opinions about the toughness of construction.

                            Comment

                            • BMN
                              Valued Member
                              • Aug 2010
                              • 549
                              • Perth WA

                              #29
                              Originally posted by Peebee View Post
                              I'm still looking at the possible options for replacing the OEM Bridgestones on my 2012 XLS. At just over 50,000kms they're starting to feel a little bit "squirmy" on the rear. I think I've narrowed the choices to either Toyo Open Country or Kumhos. I'm worried the MT 51s will be too noisy for every day use, although the idea that you could throw them at just about anything is appealing. Has anyone looked closely at the Kumho AT51s. They have a 245 x70 and a 235x80 in LT specs in 17 in. No 265x65 but the narrower tyres would be OK, I think, for more touring use. I was just more interested in hearing opinions about the toughness of construction.
                              My bus is basically 100% work use and sees a true 50/50 offroad/blackstuff and was pretty happy with the OEM bridges, but decided on the Toyos at around 120k and now have 170k on the clock.
                              Toyos are good, but have got noiser with age which while not annoying is noticeable and i do prefer the bridges on sand. Have had a couple of hard hits the sidewalls on the Toyos which did not cause any issue so I'm confident they handle a fair bit of abuse.......but i reckon if i had the bridges on would of taken different lines and gone a bit easier, so would probably stick with the HT OEM next time as they didn't let me down and noise was a non issue. FWIW neighbour just got back from a 3week gib river road trip in his new BT50 with OEM HT and no issues.

                              Toyos do look better though
                              2010 PB LS Auto, 7seat, silver with lots of pinstripes, Dual batts, Toyo AT2, ARB roof rack, Rear storage/fridge, Bilstien/Kings

                              Comment

                              • old Jack
                                Regular
                                • Jun 2011
                                • 11499
                                • Adelaide, South Australia.

                                #30
                                Hi PeePee,

                                There is a huge difference between HT 840 and LT Toyo AT2 and then an even bigger jump to LT Kumho 51, with each step you are gaining off road traction and an increased toughness but this comes at a cost in fuel consumption and noise. If you think worn 840's a noisy then the alternative tyres will be noisier, especially when worn. If the HT are doing the job reliably for your use then why change. If you are happy with all aspects of the Bridgestones.

                                Sizes, in order of diameters;
                                245/70R-17 is a standard diameter at 775mm if in LT construction then the tread width will be very similar to the factory HT 265.
                                275/65R-17 this has a diameter of 789mm and in 10mm wider than standard. It is a very uncommon size so range will be limited and the price higher.
                                265/70R-17 has a diameter of 802mm and is a common fitment to Challengers but it will take the edge of the performance and increase fuel consumption.
                                235/80R-17 is 808 mm in diameter so both performance and fuel economy will deteriate. Also this is another uncommon size so range will be limited and prices will be higher.
                                If you have a manual trans and tow then the Challenger that is already over geared will require more clutch slipping if over diameter tyres are selected.
                                If you have an auto trans and fit over diameter tyres then the torque convertor will spend more time unlocked which is not good if you are towing.

                                Ultimately moving away from factory rubber comes at a price and are you prepared for these?

                                OJ.
                                Last edited by old Jack; 05-07-17, 04:16 PM. Reason: spelling correction
                                2011 PB Base White Auto, Smartbar, Cooper STMaxx LT235/85R-16,TPMS, HR TB, 3 x Bushskinz, front +40mm Dobinson , rear +50mm EHDVR Lovells, Dobinson MT struts and shockers, Peddars 5899 cone springs, Windcheater rack, GME UHF, Custom alloy drawer system inc. 30lt Engel & 2 x 30 AH LiFePo batteries + elec controls, Tailgate hi-lift/long struts, Phillips +100 LB & HB, Lightforce 20" single row driving beam LED lightbar, Scanguage II.
                                MM4x4 Auto Mate, Serial No 1 .

                                Comment

                                Matched content

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X