255x85r16 (2 Viewers)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

Greg B

Greg B

Joined
Jan 13, 2005
Threads
36
Messages
1,112
Location
Louisville, KY
I know a few people have asked/wondered what a 255x85r16 would look like on a 100. The answer is: not very good. It is very skinny, but if you like the NATO look, you may like it more than I do.

I had a 255x85 mounted to my spare wheel a couple months ago. I did this to add some additional clearance to the rear area where the spare hangs as the 255x85 is ¾ inch narrower than the stock tire and 1 ½ inches narrower than the 295x75 BFG AT’s I am currently running. The 255x85 spare is exactly the same size diameter as the 297x75.

Here are some pics of the 100 with the 255x85 fitted to one of the front wheels. The difference in width is very noticeable between the 255 and the 295. Also, because the 255 is an MT tire, the tread pattern makes it look even narrower.

I drove it around yesterday for a bit with one 255 and one 295. The handling was surprisingly not that bad. I wouldn’t drive it like this across the country or anything, but overall it didn’t feel that much different. It was louder, but that was just the MT humming along.
255 front 1.webp
255 front 2.webp
255 front 3.webp
 
Greg,

Thanks for sharing/reminding me about it. This is one thing that has been bothering me, but I haven't done nothing about it. Stock size as the spare and running 35s" (31575R16 BF All Terrain) on all four corners.
What kind (brand) of MT is that? From what I recall BF does not make that tire size.
 
The 255's do look a little skinny, but are probably a little easier on the truck..
 
CTapia said:
Greg,

Thanks for sharing/reminding me about it. This is one thing that has been bothering me, but I haven't done nothing about it. Stock size as the spare and running 35s" (31575R16 BF All Terrain) on all four corners.
What kind (brand) of MT is that? From what I recall BF does not make that tire size.
Click to expand...
CTapia, those are BFG MT's. 255/85-16 is equivalent to a 33.4" tire.
 
CTapia said:
Greg,

Thanks for sharing/reminding me about it. This is one thing that has been bothering me, but I haven't done nothing about it. Stock size as the spare and running 35s" (31575R16 BF All Terrain) on all four corners.
What kind (brand) of MT is that? From what I recall BF does not make that tire size.
Click to expand...

Yes, as Hoser said, it is a BFG MT.

You will have a tough time fitting a 315 in there. With the tow hitch removed it may fit. Currently, my 255 is touching the center of the tow hitch and 1/8" off from the panhard bar on the back of the axle. With the hitch removed, I think you would still have to figure out a way to reposition the tire winch further back towards the rear of the 100 or it would let the tire hang down into the Panhard bar.
 
Is my maths incorrect?

255 * .85 / 25.4 = sidewall height ~= 8.5335"

Which makes theoretically a ~= 33.0669" tire height. I know this varies by manufacturer, but I keep hearing people say 33.4, where does that # come from?
 
Actually, I don't think it looks bad at all! Plus it's (see other post) theoretically about a 1/4 inch taller than a 285 tire.

The only thing I'd wish is that I could find a factory 7" wide rim to fit a 255/85. Are the factory steelies that we've been talking about 7" wide, right?
 
3fj40 said:
Is my maths incorrect?

255 * .85 / 25.4 = sidewall height ~= 8.5335"

Which makes theoretically a ~= 33.0669" tire height. I know this varies by manufacturer, but I keep hearing people say 33.4, where does that # come from?
Click to expand...

I don't do math! :D BFG's website says its 33.3 and the 295x75 is 33.2
 
Last edited:
I know, I'm of the rare few who think tall & skinnies are good stuff. It's not the height that bothers me, but the ridiculous width. Perfect tire size for the 100? 285/85r16. It ain't manufactured, but sure would be cool.

Pefect tire size for an 80? 305/85r16 Again, not made but would be nice if some trends moved AWAY from wide tires into 85+ series...

Scott over at Expeditions West sums it up pretty well here: http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html
 
I don't think the 255/85 looks too bad at all, I think if you had a vehicle with the same looking rims and original OEM supplied tyres next to one with the 255/85's you would say the 255's look better, due to their size. Interesting info from expedition west, I new the details of the longer tyre contact previously but the write up was interesting to read.
 
100 TD said:
I don't think the 255/85 looks too bad at all, I think if you had a vehicle with the same looking rims and original OEM supplied tyres next to one with the 255/85's you would say the 255's look better, due to their size. Interesting info from expedition west, I new the details of the longer tyre contact previously but the write up was interesting to read.
Click to expand...

Sorry I should of have been more clear on my initial post about why I don't like the look of the 255 on my 100. I don't think it is necessarily that they are skinnier that I don't like them. I think what I really don't like is how far in from the edge of the fender they sit. With a different wheel that moved the tire farther out (wider track width) I think I would like it better.

I ran this exact tire size on my LR Disco 2 and loved it. But, the wheel wells on the 100 are so much bigger, they can handle a wider tire like the 295 without rubbing and consequently look better, in my opinion.

I'm not a big fan of big wide tires either. I don't want anything sticking out past the fenders or anything. I just like the wheel well to look full. Here's a pic that illustrates what I'm talking about:
255 rear 3.webp
 
I also like this tire size, but BFG only makes a M/T. It has a 33.3" diameter and can be mounted to a rim from 6.5" to 8" (and Toyota steel rims for LC100 come as 6.5" and 8"; there are also 6.5" for LC105, that stick too fare out on the LC100).
The downside is ofcourse that this tire is so much taller than stock, that it surely affects the gearing, but I would give it a try if they would be making an A/T. This is also probbaby the tallest tire that will fit the factory spare storage area.
I don't mind the NATO look as long as it works ;). All 105's I've seen in Africa come with 235/85R16.
As I will have only one spare on my car (no space for the other), I intend to use 256/75R16 BFG A/T tires for expedition purposes. For local wheeling I don't intend to use a LC100 - it's just too big ;). Really - most cars arround here are small and trails are made for them.

Regards

Samo
 
Last edited:
i am seriously considering the 255/85 in the dunlop radial rover rvxt . any feedback + or - on this tire for mostly hwy driving? at $134ea the price is definitely right.

never had a use for spacers & know nothing about them....would they help widen the stance and fill up the wheel well a little more. can you put spacers on the rear wheels?
 
I've also considered this. Tirerack has mixed reviews on the RVXTs, but it's worth a try, I've always loved what Dunlop has put out in the past.

You can run spacers in the rear. I think I'm going to try the 255's without though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom