200 Series Tire and Wheel Size Database (21 Viewers)

Joined
Aug 7, 2020
Messages
32
Location
Houston, TX
I just installed Michelin Defender in 275/65r18. Regarding that size: the measured tread width on the 275 Defender is the same as the 285 Dunlops per Tire Rack and per others who have measured. ...the tread width on the Defender seems slightly wider versus the total width compared with some other tires. Lots of 265 spec 10-10.4” wide tires on Tundra, Suburban etc, the 10.8” width of 275/65/18 will not be an issue with braking or other performance. I was concerned I would notice the narrower width but I don’t at all, 275/65r18 looks good on the truck, and the slightly taller (by 0.6”) sidewall looks better than stock to my eyes, although I might be the only one who would notice.
Have you got any pics of the 275/65/18 Defenders on your 200? Also, I assume you're on stock suspension?
 

TeCKis300

SILVER Star
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Messages
4,671
Location
San Diego
 
^Legit. That's probably the lift that majority of owners really need. Preserving ride quality, long term durability, with added load flexibility. Good stuff.
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
41
Location
On the road to Perdition
I just installed Michelin Defender in 275/65r18. Regarding that size: the measured tread width on the 275 Defender is the same as the 285 Dunlops per Tire Rack and per others who have measured. ...the tread width on the Defender seems slightly wider versus the total width compared with some other tires. Lots of 265 spec 10-10.4” wide tires on Tundra, Suburban etc, the 10.8” width of 275/65/18 will not be an issue with braking or other performance. I was concerned I would notice the narrower width but I don’t at all, 275/65r18 looks good on the truck, and the slightly taller (by 0.6”) sidewall looks better than stock to my eyes, although I might be the only one who would notice.

Based on many reports here, 285/65r18 will fit on stock wheels without significant rubbing, as will 275/70r18. But these sizes are almost all LT-E rated which will affect ride comfort, acceleration and braking...so if you don’t need the sidewall toughness of an LT-E tire, the increased size may not be worth it.

There is one tire available in a standard load (non LT) in 275/70r18: the General Grabber APT. At least one MUD member owns this tire and is happy with it, if you really want a taller tire without the ride and mileage penalty of LT-E. All available 285/65r18 tires are LT-E rated at this time.

Based on lots of reviews and research, I think the Defender is a better tire than the Michelin AT2 for most uses (although the AT2 is a fine, long lasting tire). I have no insight into the Goodyears.

Thanks for that, really helpful. Especially about the difference in width of the LT/E rated tires for the Defender as I had not focused on that bit.

285/60R18 120H XL - width 8.9" load 3,086 lbs
275/65R18 116T SL - width 9" load 2,756 lbs
LT275/65R18 123/120R E - width 8.6" load 3,415 lbs

Given that I am not towing or rock crawling the Defender might a good choice because the LTX A/T spec for the P275/65R18 is 114T SL which is below the recommended minimum 116 load. Which oddly I notice is the load index on my spare. I plan to buy 5 tires and rotate accordingly.
 

afgman786

SILVER Star
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
2,436
Location
Gainesville, VA
 
Given that I am not towing or rock crawling the Defender might a good choice because the LTX A/T spec for the P275/65R18 is 114T SL which is below the recommended minimum 116 load. Which oddly I notice is the load index on my spare. I plan to buy 5 tires and rotate accordingly.
Since that is P-metric I believe it is okay for a 200. @gaijin am I correct with that statement?
 

gaijin

GOLD Star
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
3,091
 
Given that I am not towing or rock crawling the Defender might a good choice because the LTX A/T spec for the P275/65R18 is 114T SL which is below the recommended minimum 116 load. Which oddly I notice is the load index on my spare. I plan to buy 5 tires and rotate accordingly.
Since that is P-metric I believe it is okay for a 200. @gaijin am I correct with that statement?
The RCTIP for the P275/65R18 tires on a LC200 is 33psi F/R.

While technically OK for use on a LC200, it is operating very near its maximum Load Limit. Even though the tire is rated for a max 51psi pressure, its maximum Load Limit is reached at 35psi - just 2psi above the RCTIP of 33psi. That's not a lot of safety margin.

Given the many other excellent tires to choose from, while OK, I would not choose this tire.

HTH
 

afgman786

SILVER Star
Joined
Feb 19, 2013
Messages
2,436
Location
Gainesville, VA
 
The RCTIP for the P275/65R18 tires on a LC200 is 33psi F/R.

While technically OK for use on a LC200, it is operating very near its maximum Load Limit. Even though the tire is rated for a max 51psi pressure, its maximum Load Limit is reached at 35psi - just 2psi above the RCTIP of 33psi. That's not a lot of safety margin.

Given the many other excellent tires to choose from, while OK, I would not choose this tire.

HTH
Ah! So the load index doesn't matter for calculating RCTIP on a P-metric or LT. But it does matter to make sure that the load rating for the RCTIP is below the max threshold of the load index for the given tire correct?
Hopefully that wording makes sense..
 

gaijin

GOLD Star
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
3,091
 
Ah! So the load index doesn't matter for calculating RCTIP on a P-metric or LT. But it does matter to make sure that the load rating for the RCTIP is below the max threshold of the load index for the given tire correct?
Hopefully that wording makes sense..
Sort of...

There is no such term as "load rating" and the Load Index has no "threshold" or any intrinsic value beyond itself. The Load Index - outside of ISO-Metric tires - can only be generally used to compare the load carrying capacity of different tires. Broadly speaking, it is an indicator of more capacity or less capacity when compared to a reference. Usually this reference is the OEM stock tires, which in the case of the LC200 is usually 116. So a tire with a Load Index of 114 can generally be said to be able to carry less load than the stock tire. But as I have shown in my post, even with a Load Index of 114, which is less than the stock tire's 116, the particular tire in question with a 114 Load Index has "enough" load carrying capacity, but just not as much as the stock tire. Whether this reduced load carrying capacity is an acceptable risk is up to the purchaser.

So...

If we substitute terms in your second sentence as follows, it makes a little more sense:

But it does matter to make sure that the load rating for Load Limit @ the RCTIP is below the max threshold value indicated by the load index for the given tire correct?

In this case, the Load Index of 114 has a value of 2,601 pounds which corresponds to the Maximum Load specified for the tire in question. Where your statement doesn't make complete sense is the Load Limit @ the RCTIP can never be more than the Load Index. If it is possible to calculate a RCTIP, then it will be less than the Max Load for that tire and therefore must be less than the value indicated by the Load Index.

Clear as mud, right?

HTH
 
Joined
Aug 9, 2020
Messages
41
Location
On the road to Perdition
@gaijin - Thanks for these details. I think I am starting to understand the various factors. Let me ask this question. For the Michelin Defender 275/65R18 116T SL. For this tire the RCTIP is 33 psi. But the max load and index of 2756 is at 36 psi. Only 3 psi. Not too much better than the P-metric which I was able duplicate your 2psi.

As such, what would you consider to be a reasonable safety margin?

Also I was reading the following in the Toyo guide:

When a P-metric or metric tire is installed on a light truck (SUV, pickup, minivan), the load capacity of the tire is reduced by a factor of 1.101 as prescribed by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).

So with the max load capacity of 2601 becomes 2364. Should that also come into play?
 
Last edited:

gaijin

GOLD Star
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
3,091
 
@gaijin - Thanks for these details. I think I am starting to understand the various factors. Let me ask this question. For the Michelin Defender 275/65R18 116T SL. For this tire the RCTIP is 33 psi. But the max load and index of 2756 is at 36 psi. Only 3 psi. Not too much better than the P-metric which I was able duplicate your 2psi.

As such, what would you consider to be a reasonable safety margin?
The easiest way to say for sure what is reasonable and what is not is to compare the Load Index of the OEM stock tire to the proposed replacement. In the case of the LC200, the stock tire has a Load Index of 116. If the proposed replacement tire has a Load Index of 116 or higher, then it can safely be judged to have a reasonable safety margin - i.e. at least as much as the stock tire. The P-Metric tire in question has a Load Index of 114 which is less than the stock Load Index of 116. It can not be said for sure that this tire has a reasonable safety margin. As I said above, " Whether this reduced load carrying capacity is an acceptable risk is up to the purchaser." Caveat emptor.

Also I was reading the following in the Toyo guide:

When a P-metric or metric tire is installed on a light truck (SUV, pickup, minivan), the load capacity of the tire is reduced by a factor of 1.101 as prescribed by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).

So with the max load capacity of 2601 becomes 2364. Should that also come into play?
In our case, i.e. the LC200, this comes into play when determining the correct RCTIP for an LT-Metric tire when installed on a vehicle originally equipped with a P-Metric tire.

When initially calculating the required Load Limit for the LC200, we refer to the tables and find that the stock P285/60R18 tire has a RCTIP of 33psi - this yields a Load Limit of approximately 2513 lbs. To find the corresponding required Load Limit for an LT-Metric tire, we must reduce this Load Limit by a factor of 1.1 which yields an LT-Metric required Load Limit of approximately 2285 lbs. So, when calculating the RCTIP for a proposed LT-Metric tire replacement, we must use the reduced required Load Limit of 2285 lbs, not the P-Metric required Load Limit of 2513 pounds.

The reduced load capacity you reference does not come into play at all when comparing two P-Metric or Metric tires.

HTH
 
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
147
Location
NC
Gaijin, if you don't mind responding sir I wanted to confirm an answer to a couple questions.

In the 'Tire Pressure Recommendation' thread posts 149-154, you and Markuson are having a conversation about how the modifications he has made to his LC200 and added constant weight inherent to those modifications could, in a way, be compared to the added weight that may be subjected to a stock LC200 that is carrying say all 8 passengers that the truck is designed to carry. You conclude in this dialogue that for a stock LC200 you have roughly 1,295 pounds to safely "work with" if you are running stock tires that are inflated to the RCTIP of 33 PSI.

I have removed the DS third row seat and in its place I run the interior spare tire-carrier introduced by FlightMedic178. I also removed the stock front bumper and skid plates and replaced with the Rhino 4x4 bumper and 'bash' plate that was provided. I run the Cooper AT3 4S 275/65/18 116T SL tires which you have recommended have a RCTIP of 33PSI. For a while I have been wondering if I should increase my PSI to accommodate the trivial increase in weight from these modifications when carrying a couple passenger and our hunting gear. This question is what drove me to go back and dig through the threads as I could remember you getting down to the nitty gritty and explaining how the stock 7385lb GVWR and Load Carrying Capacity and RCTIP all come together.

So based on the 1,295lb 'work with' statement, I have concluded that it is not necessary that I increase my PSI to accommodate my modifications plus a couple passengers and gear. Is this correct, sir?

In addition, if I have interpreted the massive amounts of information you have provided throughout these threads correctly, one does not simply account for an increase in weight to the vehicle by increasing PSI, without considering other factors, such as your specific tires Load Index and Load Range?
 

gaijin

GOLD Star
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
3,091
 
Gaijin, if you don't mind responding sir I wanted to confirm an answer to a couple questions.

In the 'Tire Pressure Recommendation' thread posts 149-154, you and Markuson are having a conversation about how the modifications he has made to his LC200 and added constant weight inherent to those modifications could, in a way, be compared to the added weight that may be subjected to a stock LC200 that is carrying say all 8 passengers that the truck is designed to carry. You conclude in this dialogue that for a stock LC200 you have roughly 1,295 pounds to safely "work with" if you are running stock tires that are inflated to the RCTIP of 33 PSI.

I have removed the DS third row seat and in its place I run the interior spare tire-carrier introduced by FlightMedic178. I also removed the stock front bumper and skid plates and replaced with the Rhino 4x4 bumper and 'bash' plate that was provided. I run the Cooper AT3 4S 275/65/18 116T SL tires which you have recommended have a RCTIP of 33PSI. For a while I have been wondering if I should increase my PSI to accommodate the trivial increase in weight from these modifications when carrying a couple passenger and our hunting gear. This question is what drove me to go back and dig through the threads as I could remember you getting down to the nitty gritty and explaining how the stock 7385lb GVWR and Load Carrying Capacity and RCTIP all come together.

So based on the 1,295lb 'work with' statement, I have concluded that it is not necessary that I increase my PSI to accommodate my modifications plus a couple passengers and gear. Is this correct, sir?

In addition, if I have interpreted the massive amounts of information you have provided throughout these threads correctly, one does not simply account for an increase in weight to the vehicle by increasing PSI, without considering other factors, such as your specific tires Load Index and Load Range?
There's a lot to unpack here, but first let's confirm that we are talking about a LC200 and not an LX570, right?

You are correct that the RCTIP for the Cooper Discoverer AT34S 275/65R18 116T SL tire on your LC200 is 33psi F/R.

That RCTIP covers all use cases up to the Front and Rear GAWR's and the overall GVWR.

No adjustment to the RCTIP is required to compensate for weight changes, up or down, as long as the maxima do not exceed the vehicle GAWR's and GVWR established by Toyota. So yes, you are correct, it is not necessary for you to increase your tire pressure to accommodate your modifications plus a couple of passengers and gear - as long as you stay within the GAWR's and the GVWR.

As to your final question, the best answer I have is that a vehicle's GVWR is set by the manufacturer. The GVWR does not change no matter the modifications performed by the owner. The RCTIP covers all use cases when the vehicle is operated within manufacturer established GAWR's and GVWR. Operation beyond these weight ratings are done at the owner's own risk and can not be compensated for simply by increasing tire pressure.

HTH
 
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
147
Location
NC
There's a lot to unpack here, but first let's confirm that we are talking about a LC200 and not an LX570, right?

You are correct that the RCTIP for the Cooper Discoverer AT34S 275/65R18 116T SL tire on your LC200 is 33psi F/R.

That RCTIP covers all use cases up to the Front and Rear GAWR's and the overall GVWR.

No adjustment to the RCTIP is required to compensate for weight changes, up or down, as long as the maxima do not exceed the vehicle GAWR's and GVWR established by Toyota. So yes, you are correct, it is not necessary for you to increase your tire pressure to accommodate your modifications plus a couple of passengers and gear - as long as you stay within the GAWR's and the GVWR.

As to your final question, the best answer I have is that a vehicle's GVWR is set by the manufacturer. The GVWR does not change no matter the modifications performed by the owner. The RCTIP covers all use cases when the vehicle is operated within manufacturer established GAWR's and GVWR. Operation beyond these weight ratings are done at the owner's own risk and can not be compensated for simply by increasing tire pressure.

HTH
Yes we are indeed talking about a LC200. I appreciate your feedback. Really just trying to get an understanding of how all this comes together. In my case, the weights and changes are arguably nil, and even with said changes I don't believe i'm coming close to reaching the maxima when loaded for my purposes. So the GAWR/GVWR are the foundation, you either choose to work inside those parameters knowing you have some room to work with or choose to go above these set limitations knowing that you are pushing the limits. Does pushing the limits lead to catastrophe, probably not, until a situation where it does.

Thanks again
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
9
Location
New England
Hi y'all. New 2020 LC200 HE owner here. I looked at the database and trying to figure out an answer, but haven't quite figured it precisely. We do a fair amount of winter driving up north from RI to Canada and I'm looking to put together a set of proper winters like Blizzaks or Xice, which I've been happy with on DD cars/SUV's before.

Question is will the following rub?

There are some new 18 inch x 8.5 OZ Rally Raid with 30mm offsets that look nice if a little heavy. Was hoping to use a 285/65/18 to get just a bit more sidewall. Stock supension for now of course. Unlikely to do any more than fireroads for now. But parking this pig here and there will always require some full steering. Unsure how that offset will affect rub. It'll also increase the scrub to be a bit more positive, but not too much- I think that'll be okay.

The closest entry in the database was some Nitto's of the same size, but with 35mm offset which mentioned very slight rub. The blizzaks or x-ice don't see to have such pronounced lugs, but the less offset gets me wondering. I'm working on finding the exact circumference differences.

I'll probably run the stocks for summer until I get a lift someday.

Background is from VW golf and MB forums. Golf forums were great, MB ones a little slow. While I've had 4 Toyota's over 200K this'll be my first LC. Looking forward to making some contributions here as I enjoy getting into my rides pretty deep, treating them well, and using them hard.

First "mods" will be Xpel and OptiCoat next week, then on my own some cosmoline for the underbelly in the right spots. Any recommendations there welcome too.
 
Joined
Jun 7, 2019
Messages
592
Location
Odessa (Tampa), FL
Hi y'all. New 2020 LC200 HE owner here. I looked at the database and trying to figure out an answer, but haven't quite figured it precisely. We do a fair amount of winter driving up north from RI to Canada and I'm looking to put together a set of proper winters like Blizzaks or Xice, which I've been happy with on DD cars/SUV's before.

Question is will the following rub?

There are some new 18 inch x 8.5 OZ Rally Raid with 30mm offsets that look nice if a little heavy. Was hoping to use a 285/65/18 to get just a bit more sidewall. Stock supension for now of course. Unlikely to do any more than fireroads for now. But parking this pig here and there will always require some full steering. Unsure how that offset will affect rub. It'll also increase the scrub to be a bit more positive, but not too much- I think that'll be okay.

The closest entry in the database was some Nitto's of the same size, but with 35mm offset which mentioned very slight rub. The blizzaks or x-ice don't see to have such pronounced lugs, but the less offset gets me wondering. I'm working on finding the exact circumference differences.

I'll probably run the stocks for summer until I get a lift someday.

Background is from VW golf and MB forums. Golf forums were great, MB ones a little slow. While I've had 4 Toyota's over 200K this'll be my first LC. Looking forward to making some contributions here as I enjoy getting into my rides pretty deep, treating them well, and using them hard.

First "mods" will be Xpel and OptiCoat next week, then on my own some cosmoline for the underbelly in the right spots. Any recommendations there welcome too.
I'll be interested in the input on the Raids, as that's a wheel I'm considering.

Depending on your vehicle detailing routine, you might forego the OptiCoat (or any other ceramic coating) and save the $$. I've had two vehicles coated with OptiCoat Pro Plus, and while it does what it's intended to do, today's detailing products eliminate the need for a pro ceramic job (IMHO). I decided not to coat my LC. . .I wash it every two weeks and follow each wash with a sealant or ceramic detailer. Since I add protection every two weeks, I saw no need for an expensive coating. Just my $.02.
 
Joined
Oct 28, 2020
Messages
9
Location
New England
Thanks for the reply.

You're right about depends on the routine. While I'm pretty good with the detailing when the weather's good, sometimes up here in New England it can be a while between good days, and I live in the woods with tree sap and birds. I'll flush the carriage off, but just can't be out in the cold as often as I like and figure the OptiCoat as extra insurance. I've had three cars with OptiCoat Pro now, only ever handwashed by me, and very pleased with every one. Through plenty of discussions with other folks, I am convinced it's the best out there for protection (as apposed to just outright shine). Makes it more fun to wash too because it's so easy. Since the idea with the LC is to keep it forever I figured I'd bite the cost. The dealer clearly ran it thru the wash once already, so a professional correction sealed in early is worth it to me. I'm not so much into polishing and such myself, just a good self wash and shine.

Florida weather would change my thoughts.

It's actually the Xpel I wonder a bit more about the value. I have not done that on a car yet, and wonder about it super long term. Haven't really had many chips on my cars. I'm somewhat careful )more just aware I'd say) of not shawdowing trucks and such, but maybe just lucky. 7-10 years in a couple tiny chips won't bother me on a LC much, peeling or discoloration would. And I can't imagine it protects against the bigger stuff anyway.
 
Joined
Jun 7, 2019
Messages
592
Location
Odessa (Tampa), FL
Thanks for the reply.

You're right about depends on the routine. While I'm pretty good with the detailing when the weather's good, sometimes up here in New England it can be a while between good days, and I live in the woods with tree sap and birds. I'll flush the carriage off, but just can't be out in the cold as often as I like and figure the OptiCoat as extra insurance. I've had three cars with OptiCoat Pro now, only ever handwashed by me, and very pleased with every one. Through plenty of discussions with other folks, I am convinced it's the best out there for protection (as apposed to just outright shine). Makes it more fun to wash too because it's so easy. Since the idea with the LC is to keep it forever I figured I'd bite the cost. The dealer clearly ran it thru the wash once already, so a professional correction sealed in early is worth it to me. I'm not so much into polishing and such myself, just a good self wash and shine.

Florida weather would change my thoughts.

It's actually the Xpel I wonder a bit more about the value. I have not done that on a car yet, and wonder about it super long term. Haven't really had many chips on my cars. I'm somewhat careful )more just aware I'd say) of not shawdowing trucks and such, but maybe just lucky. 7-10 years in a couple tiny chips won't bother me on a LC much, peeling or discoloration would. And I can't imagine it protects against the bigger stuff anyway.
You can actually purchase the XPEL pre-cut and install it yourself: Paint Protection Film Pre-Cut Kits
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 12, Guests: 9)

Top Bottom