265/70/17 on an LX570 (1 Viewer)

[silver tuna]

I know they’re small but does anyone run these in a 200 LC or LX and maybe have a pic? A search in the database thread didn’t pick up this size.

I’m still leaning toward 285/70/17 but I somehow like the idea of staying with the stock dia because hate to part with power and I don’t do serious off-roading.

Either size would be ko2 LR c

Thanks.

 

[TeCKis300]

It would be sacrificing cornering, handling, and braking performance. Some would interpret that as sacrificing safety. Combine that with a AT tire tread and compounds that further gives up on-road traction and you might see where this is going.

Another way to look at this is mounting 4Runner sized tires, and asking it to handle a 6000lb+ rhino.

 

[cryan]

I'm not sure "safety" would be the first concern. Lots of vehicles heavier than the LC run 265 or narrower tires. Tundra being one. My 9k lbs sprinter being another.

 

[TeCKis300]

I'm not sure "safety" would be the first concern. Lots of vehicles heavier than the LC run 265 or narrower tires. Tundra being one. My 9k lbs sprinter being another.

That doesn't change the fact that performance would be compromised. Whether that meets an individuals expectations is another question.

The Tundra can be 500-1k lbs lighter in curb weight than the typical LX. Sprinter...well, that's always been a bit of a misnomer.

Can 265s work? Sure. Just pointing out a trade and to each their own.

 

[BVE]

Go 285

 

[MTExplorer]

I know they’re small but does anyone run these in a 200 LC or LX and maybe have a pic? A search in the database thread didn’t pick up this size.

I’m still leaning toward 285/70/17 but I somehow like the idea of staying with the stock dia because hate to part with power and I don’t do serious off-roading.

Either size would be ko2 LR c

Thanks.

Not sure I have a picture available (I’ll look later), but I run an LT265/70r17 studded tire in winter.

It was the only reasonable size available when I bought them, plus I figured the slight downsizing would provide a bit more clearance for running chains if need be.

I did a decent number of off pavement drives and multi-state road trips (Western US states) with them last winter, and I’m happy with them for my needs.

So, yes, that size works on the 200 platform, specifically for me, the LX variant.

I will note, I don’t run that size the rest of the year. Plus, with anything tire related you’re likely to get a million different views all with some validity.

For me personally, based on my level of tire knowledge (minimal, there are many far more knowledgeable people on this forum), and what you’ve posted, 285 seems a better way to go for things like on pavement performance and plushness of ride.

 

[grinchy]

I’ve run 275 in a couple profiles. No issues. 265 wouldn’t give me pause either.
But I like skinnies. I think they do real well in a variety of Offroad and on road conditions.
In reality though a 265, and 10.5 inches wide, isn’t all that skinny.
Im also looking hard at the Mickey Thompson m/t in a 255.

 

[MTExplorer]

I’ve run 275 in a couple profiles. No issues. 265 wouldn’t give me pause either.
But I like skinnies. I think they do real well in a variety of Offroad and on road conditions.
In reality though a 265, and 10.5 inches wide, isn’t all that skinny.
Im also looking hard at the Mickey Thompson m/t in a 255.

I’ve considered going skinnier and taller when the time comes for the next set of non-winter tires. Definitely think skinny would be great off-road, but I’m hesitant in terms of on-pavement purposes.

So, I am definitely interested to hear your experiences if you go with the 255 Mickey Thompson.