265/70/18 on a 2020 LC? (2 Viewers)

[W4632018]

Hey guys, new here. I am hoping for a tall and skinny tire, and I am deciding between 265/70/18 or 275/70/18. I’m choosing between the Nokian Outpost nAT or the falken Wildpeak AT4W. Both seem to offer stronger side walls for an SL tire.

Would the slightly narrower width cause issues with handling? Will the OD be okay with stock suspension?

Hoping to get a comment from the illustrious Gaijin with recommend tire pressures

 

[gaijin]

Hey guys, new here. I am hoping for a tall and skinny tire, and I am deciding between 265/70/18 or 275/70/18. I’m choosing between the Nokian Outpost nAT or the falken Wildpeak AT4W. Both seem to offer stronger side walls for an SL tire.

Would the slightly narrower width cause issues with handling? Will the OD be okay with stock suspension?

Hoping to get a comment from the illustrious Gaijin with recommend tire pressures

Well...

The Falken Wildpeak AT4W would have the following RCTIP on your LC200:

265/70R18 SL 116T / Overall Diameter 32.6" / 33psi F/R
LT275/70R18 [Size only available in LT-Metric] / Overall Diameter 33.4" / 41psi F/R

The Nokian Outpost nAT would have the following RCTIP on your LC200:

265/70R18 SL 116S / Overall Diameter unknown / 33psi F/R
LT275/70R18 [Size only available in LT-Metric] / Overall Diameter unknown / 41psi F/R

I was unable to find OD specs for the Nokian tires.

As far as whether they will fit without modifications, I can only guess that when using stock wheels, the 265/70R18 tires would probably fit without having to do any modifications; but you would have to confirm this for yourself. The LT275/70R18 tires at 33.4" OD would probably not fit without extensive modifications.

HTH

 

[W4632018]

Well...

The Falken Wildpeak AT4W would have the following RCTIP on your LC200:

265/70R18 SL 116T / Overall Diameter 32.6" / 33psi F/R
LT275/70R18 [Size only available in LT-Metric] / Overall Diameter 33.4" / 41psi F/R

The Nokian Outpost nAT would have the following RCTIP on your LC200:

265/70R18 SL 116S / Overall Diameter unknown / 33psi F/R
LT275/70R18 [Size only available in LT-Metric] / Overall Diameter unknown / 41psi F/R

I was unable to find OD specs for the Nokian tires.

As far as whether they will fit without modifications, I can only guess that when using stock wheels, the 265/70R18 tires would probably fit without having to do any modifications; but you would have to confirm this for yourself. The LT275/70R18 tires at 33.4" OD would probably not fit without extensive modifications.

HTH

Thank you my friend! Have you heard of people using this size?

 

[04UZJ100]

Thank you my friend! Have you heard of people using this size?

No. It comes stock with 285s for a reason.

 

[Madtiger]

Hey guys, new here. I am hoping for a tall and skinny tire, and I am deciding between 265/70/18 or 275/70/18. I’m choosing between the Nokian Outpost nAT or the falken Wildpeak AT4W. Both seem to offer stronger side walls for an SL tire.

Would the slightly narrower width cause issues with handling? Will the OD be okay with stock suspension?

Hoping to get a comment from the illustrious Gaijin with recommend tire pressures

If you want strong sidewall for P metric, Falken is not one of them.

I would trust Yokohama Geolander AT G015 or Michelin Defender LTX over the above if you're looking for sidewall strength in a P-metric.

In addition, look at the Michelin LTX TRAIL in that 265/70/18 size. This is the size that comes on the new Sequoia/Tundra/Land Cruiser 250. Good looking but apparently wears fast!

New Michelin AT tire?

Michelin LTX TRAIL. There is only one size on TireRack…and i cannot find any info on it on Michelin USA site. BUT, on other country sites, you have this: MICHELIN LTX Trail | Summer On and Off-road Tire - https://www.michelin.com.au/auto/tyres/michelin-ltx-trail?tyreSize=18 And yes, it does...

forum.ih8mud.com

 

[Sandroad]

Thank you my friend! Have you heard of people using this size?

Just type a tire size (like 265/70-18) into the search box and you’ll get lots of posts.

 

[gaijin]

Thank you my friend! Have you heard of people using this size?

No, but that doesn't necessarily mean that nobody is.

 

[TeCKis300]

I wouldn't recommend it. The 200-series is a heavy full size SUV that needs all the tire cross section it was fitted with, for safe handling and braking performance.

265s are the domain of mid-size SUVs IMO. An example of what you'll be giving up

The new LX600 rides on 265s, vs 200-series that is fitted wider 275/285 cross section tires. The 300-series generation is more weight and efficiency focused. On paper, it should have significant power and handling advantages with with less weight, modern design, significant better mid-range torque and straight line speed, and in a sport focused F-Sport trim. Yet it is the 200-series that posts better handling and braking numbers because of stronger overall traction from the larger contact patch. There's several flavors of 200-series - and it generally follows that the larger contact patch vs weight, provides better dynamic traction, leading to objectively stronger and safer braking and handling characteristics. The MT Figure Eight test is particularly telling.

It's also important to note that we often fit taller A/T tires and add more weight. All things that further compromise handling grip which is important to safety. My preference is to increase width to offset those other factors to keep a well balanced vehicle.

	LC200 HE	'15 LX570	'17 LX570	LX600
Tire Size	285/65R18	285/55R20	275/50R21	265/55R22
Curb weight	5,774 lbs	6109 lbs	6,230 lbs	5,899 lbs
HP	381 hp	383 hp	383 hp	409 hp
0-60	6.8 sec	7.0 sec	7.3 sec	6.7 sec
Quarter Mile	15.2 sec @ 91.2 mph	15.4 sec @ 90.8	15.6 sec @ 89.9 mph	15.0 sec @ 93.7mph
Braking 60-0	121 ft	125 ft	118 ft	128 ft
Lateral Acceleration	0.75 g	0.78 g	0.76 g	0.75 g
MT Figure Eight	27.8 sec @ 0.61 g	27.9 sec @ 0.66 g	28.2 sec @ 0.61 g	28.5 sec @ 0.59 g

 

[W4632018]

I wouldn't recommend it. The 200-series is a heavy full size SUV that needs all the tire cross section it was fitted with, for safe handling and braking performance.

265s are the domain of mid-size SUVs IMO. An example of what you'll be giving up

The new LX600 rides on 265s, vs 200-series that is fitted wider 275/285 cross section tires. The 300-series generation is more weight and efficiency focused. On paper, it should have significant power and handling advantages with with less weight, modern design, significant better mid-range torque and straight line speed, and in a sport focused F-Sport trim. Yet it is the 200-series that posts better handling and braking numbers because of stronger overall traction from the larger contact patch. There's several flavors of 200-series - and it generally follows that the larger contact patch vs weight, provides better dynamic traction, leading to objectively stronger and safer braking and handling characteristics. The MT Figure Eight test is particularly telling.

It's also important to note that we often fit taller A/T tires and add more weight. All things that further compromise handling grip which is important to safety. My preference is to increase width to offset those other factors to keep a well balanced vehicle.

	LC200 HE	'15 LX570	'17 LX570	LX600
Tire Size	285/65R18	285/55R20	275/50R21	265/55R22
Curb weight	5,774 lbs	6109 lbs	6,230 lbs	5,899 lbs
HP	381 hp	383 hp	383 hp	409 hp
0-60	6.8 sec	7.0 sec	7.3 sec	6.7 sec
Quarter Mile	15.2 sec @ 91.2 mph	15.4 sec @ 90.8	15.6 sec @ 89.9 mph	15.0 sec @ 93.7mph
Braking 60-0	121 ft	125 ft	118 ft	128 ft
Lateral Acceleration	0.75 g	0.78 g	0.76 g	0.75 g
MT Figure Eight	27.8 sec @ 0.61 g	27.9 sec @ 0.66 g	28.2 sec @ 0.61 g	28.5 sec @ 0.59 g

Thank you for such a wonderful write up, what in your opinion is the largest tire size you would recommend on stock suspension? Or do you think stock size is best?

 

[LvCruiserNewb]

Thank you for such a wonderful write up, what in your opinion is the largest tire size you would recommend on stock suspension? Or do you think stock size is best?

There's a couple dedicated threads to that exact question on here. Here's a link to just one. I have 275/70/R18 Yokohama Geolander AT G015 with zero rubbing on stock setup personally. But others on same size have had rubbing on wheel well plastic as noted in other threads.

Largest tire on stock 200 wheels

What is the largest tire one can run on the factory 18's without rubbing or adding any lift? Should be picking up a new 2019 soon and I'd like to replace the stock rubber with KO2's or Toyo RT's on the factory wheels for the time being. Thanks for any help.

forum.ih8mud.com

 

[Madtiger]

Thank you for such a wonderful write up, what in your opinion is the largest tire size you would recommend on stock suspension? Or do you think stock size is best?

After researching a lot, I went with Michelin Defender in stock size: 285/60/18. Why? It is lightweight yet tough due to XL rating. Great on highway. Decent off-road for what I need.

I thought about skinny but like above, Toyota engineers felt 285-series is best for LC200…so I hate to go against that.

Stock size…bc I did not want to lose power in the mountains of CO nor put stress on drivetrain.

 

[TeCKis300]

Thank you for such a wonderful write up, what in your opinion is the largest tire size you would recommend on stock suspension? Or do you think stock size is best?

I tend to like larger and wider tires than most. For a stockish OEM+ setup, I would go up one aspect ratio, a 285/65R18 and call it a day. The 275/70R18 is probably an okay option, but IMO that starts getting too tall/narrow without compensating for lost handling traction. Everyone has a different driving styles and I acknowledge that's just my priorities speaking.

 

[W4632018]

If you want strong sidewall for P metric, Falken is not one of them.

I would trust Yokohama Geolander AT G015 or Michelin Defender LTX over the above if you're looking for sidewall strength in a P-metric.

In addition, look at the Michelin LTX TRAIL in that 265/70/18 size. This is the size that comes on the new Sequoia/Tundra/Land Cruiser 250. Good looking but apparently wears fast!

New Michelin AT tire?

Michelin LTX TRAIL. There is only one size on TireRack…and i cannot find any info on it on Michelin USA site. BUT, on other country sites, you have this: MICHELIN LTX Trail | Summer On and Off-road Tire - https://www.michelin.com.au/auto/tyres/michelin-ltx-trail?tyreSize=18 And yes, it does...

forum.ih8mud.com

Hey Madtiger, why did you recommend those two tires for side wall strength? I couldn’t see anything specific about their side walls being stronger than others. The Nokian outpost has aramid shield, which is just their brand name for Kevlar in the side wall.

 

[Madtiger]

Hey Madtiger, why did you recommend those two tires for side wall strength? I couldn’t see anything specific about their side walls being stronger than others. The Nokian outpost has aramid shield, which is just their brand name for Kevlar in the side wall.

Yokohama. This is an old test but it shows that the previous generation of the current AT G015 had pretty strong sidewall strength.

https://www.4x4community.co.za/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=449956&d=1497265431

As for Michelin, the compound that Michelin uses on the Defender is strong. Even though it only has two plies, the Evertread compound is excellent. I have asked Michelin rep and definitely the XL and LT Defenders are tough as nails.

Nokias with aramid is good too. On a Tacoma forum, a guy did manage to shred the sidewalls but he was doing crazy things.

 

[coleAK]

Thank you my friend! Have you heard of people using this size?

I run 265/65-18 in the winter. A lot of people up here (Alaska) run 265’s. Narrower is better in the snow.

For my rig I would go down to 255’s if Nokian made them in the Hakkapeleta.

In terms of width. Many 1/2 ton trucks come OEM with 255’s a lot more come OEM with 265’s. 3/4 and 1 ton’s come with 245/255/265. Most common I can find is 255 These trucks GVWR are a lot more then a 200 series.

 

[TeCKis300]

I run 265/65-18 in the winter. A lot of people up here (Alaska) run 265’s. Narrower is better in the snow.

For my rig I would go down to 255’s if Nokian made them in the Hakkapeleta.

In terms of width. Many 1/2 ton trucks come OEM with 255’s a lot more come OEM with 265’s. 3/4 and 1 ton’s come with 245/255/265. Most common I can find is 255 These trucks GVWR are a lot more then a 200 series.

Agreed niche snow and possibly heavy rain regions are two area where narrows make sense. Cutting through snow and water, with added tire ground pressure for traction. Opposite qualities of floatation which can matter for a mixed off-roader on loose surfaces.

1/2 ton trucks are generally way lighter than the 200-series. Many start in the low 4000lbs and top out at 5,700 lbs. If we're talking performance trucks like a Raptor, at 5,740 lbs, those get fitted with 315s.

I'm not sure we should be comparing with HD trucks. Those are for work. Their solid axle front and leaf springs rears are well a limitation before tires.

 

[coleAK]

Agreed niche snow and possibly heavy rain regions are two area where narrows make sense. Cutting through snow and water, with added tire ground pressure for traction. Opposite qualities of floatation which can matter for a mixed off-roader on loose surfaces.

1/2 ton trucks are generally way lighter than the 200-series. Many start in the low 4000lbs and top out at 5,700 lbs. If we're talking performance trucks like a Raptor, at 5,740 lbs, those get fitted with 315s.

I'm not sure we should be comparing with HD trucks. Those are for work. Their solid axle front and leaf springs rears are well a limitation before tires.

You were mentioning the weight of our rigs “built” rigs and the need for wider tires. 3/4 and 1 ton have a much higher GVWR on skinnier tires. Heck a unimog weights almost as much as two 200’s (~11k lbs) is one of the best off roaders on the planet and most commonly run 335’s.

Only reason I can see to run wider tires is if you drive in loose sand often.

 

[TeCKis300]

Only reason I can see to run wider tires is if you drive in loose sand often.

Make that any loose surface including loose deep snow. Floatation on these surfaces is a halmark of a good all terrain off-roader and overlander.

That's a secondary point though. With as much time as we spend on roads, traction for safe handling is probably a good thing.

 

[JohnPW]

There is nothing wrong with 265/70r18 on a 200 Land Cruiser. It is stock size on the 300 Land Cruiser and the Sequoia, and up to one ton trucks as mentioned. There is not a huge weight difference between a 200 and 300LC. Braking distance and handling will be far worse in LT275/70r18 than SL265/70r18, because of the unsprung weight and higher air pressure of the LT rated tires. And 275/70r18 are pretty much only available in LT-E rating. If your off-road uses require the extra strength of an LT tire then great, but there isn’t an on road reason to go with a wider LT tire versus a thinner SL tire except for looks.

 

[TeCKis300]

I'll preface that everyone is entitled to how they want to setup their rig and there are good reasons for narrows.

This is all academic and for the sake of discussion...

Braking distance and handling will be far worse in LT275/70r18 than SL265/70r18, because of the unsprung weight and higher air pressure of the LT rated tires.

Applying logic - if taller tires are going to be far worse for handling, further impacted by unsprung weight, higher air pressure, and LT (all which I agree with) - then further fitting narrows is giving up the farm on handling traction.

At least for me, I drive a 200-series because it is well rounded, has some handling competency, while still having great off-road capability. Can't say that about many trucks.