285/75/16 BFG KO2 vs 255/85/16 BFG KM2

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

B

billygoats

10 Year
Joined
Nov 21, 2015
Threads
8
Messages
113
Location
Los Angeles, CA
I just removed the 285/75/16 KO2 from my 100 and installed 255/85/16 KM2.

The 285 KO2 is an excellent tire. Great all around and very quiet on the highway. I've had the KM2 on my previous montero, and it was a great tire for the SoCal Big Bear trails that involve rocks. I remember they were a bit loud in the highway.

I'm giving the KM2 another shot with the LC and experimenting with the "tall skinny" size.

The 255s seems to be marginally taller than the 285s.

I haven't taken the KM2 out on the road or trails yet, but I will update with impressions and photos.

I weighed each setup (wheel & tire, no centercap). Wheels are both factory 1999 5 spoke 16" Land Cruiser wheels.

285/75/16 KO2 = 83 lbs.
255/85/16 KM2 = 74.8 lbs.
 
I'd be interested to hear your thoughts. I think the 255/85 might be just a bit too skinny for the super heavy 100s.

I have them on my BJ74 and like them quite a bit, but it weighs half as much.
 
Please please get some pics up of your rig with the 255s!

I'm a tall skinny fan and have my first LC...

I would live to have a reason to give 255s a go.

Can you take a pic also that has the whole vehicle in the frame as well? I inky say that as most pics I can find are close ups of the tires.

Thanks and I hope they prove well for you!


I'm coming from the world of Tacomas where lift is needed to run said 255, and a re-gear is needed. I am stoked to maybe run these with no mods at all. Would be sweet!
 
Last edited:
I went from a 285 to the 255 as well on. My new to me 100 series. I prefer tall skinny tires. I went from a knock off nitto that was on it when I bought it to cooper st maxx. I've always run the 255's on previous cruisers, they are a little too skinny for the 100 in my opinion. They are definitely taller than the 285 and I really like them off-road and on gravel (they perform great and being skinny the whole tire is inside the wheel well) I ran them with and without wheel spacers. I notice more body roll without the spacers obviously but I liked the stance a little better but didn't like the vibration so I left them off(probably due to s***ty spacers).
Last night I picked up a set of the factory 20's off a 2014/15? Tundra that my friend gave me and threw them on for fun. They drive better and handle better with a wider tire(can't remember size) but the smal amount of tire beats you going down the road.

Here you go greenbean. thats 2" lift 255's and 2" spacers. I'll see if I can find some others.
 
Last edited:
Interesting,

I too have a new to me 2000 LC now and will need tires soon. Should be able to get through winter as it's usually not bad in Asheville, lol... Sometimes we see snow but I'm not worried.

So I'm wondering if your body roll was actually sidewall flex or just in the suspension? I guess if you had 255s with say an OME 2" lift they would look more odd, but if the suspension would help.

Doesn't OME make a spring for the rear that's better but not necessarily a lift. Pair that up with their TBs and I might have an option. I'm not looking to lift my rig anytime soon as I need a few months to "base line" it. A neat term I heard someone else use in testing and driving a new rig to really see what it's going to really need.
 
I think its a combination sidewall flex and suspension. I added the OME rear springs and they sold me on going with the "medium" springs. I wish I had gotten the heavy. Also got the TB's and SPC upper control arms. It drives better than my 97 but not as good as the wifes stock 05. I will post more pictures in a few minutes.

Im interested to hear the OP's opinion
 
I have 255 KM2's (on 17" rims). I love these tires on-road and off. Silly to think the 100 Series is "too heavy" - they are E rated tires with great traction characteristics. As long as you have the proper pressure in them they are more than adequate for the weight.

1617368_10102936014350603_402896584167626105_o.jpg


Shown below in maximum traction mode - 12 PSI.
13693018_10104142714888053_5003776124337060641_o.jpg
 
BlueWeim said:
Here you go greenbean. thats 2" lift 255's and 2" spacers. I'll see if I can find some others.
Click to expand...

Looks fantastic!

I love the fact it seems you painted your stock front and rear bumpers black and the strip in the body side molding that gets all decrepit looking!

So if I don't lift I don't need to look into spacers right?
 
Bit of a thread revival here, but I'm about to drop the hammer on tires for my '99. I've had 305s, now have 285 KOs, and am thinking Toyo MT or Cooper ST Maxx in 255/85-16. Any follow up from those that are running 255s?

Blue Weim your 100 looks amazing. The black bumpers are a nice touch. I assume you have a Weimaraner? I have a 6 year old male. Best dog ever!
 
I have stock 265/75/16s on my 2000 LX470 that will need replacing in a year. I was thinking of going with the 255/85/16 KM2s also. Please keep us posted on how you like them!
 
BlueWeim said:
I went from a 285 to the 255 as well on. My new to me 100 series. I prefer tall skinny tires. I went from a knock off nitto that was on it when I bought it to cooper st maxx. I've always run the 255's on previous cruisers, they are a little too skinny for the 100 in my opinion. They are definitely taller than the 285 and I really like them off-road and on gravel (they perform great and being skinny the whole tire is inside the wheel well) I ran them with and without wheel spacers. I notice more body roll without the spacers obviously but I liked the stance a little better but didn't like the vibration so I left them off(probably due to s***ty spacers).
Last night I picked up a set of the factory 20's off a 2014/15? Tundra that my friend gave me and threw them on for fun. They drive better and handle better with a wider tire(can't remember size) but the smal amount of tire beats you going down the road.

Here you go greenbean. thats 2" lift 255's and 2" spacers. I'll see if I can find some others.
Click to expand...


Can we get a shot from the front and rear?

I like the tall and skinny look too. I got 265/65r18 KO2s, wanted taller but got a good deal on some take-offs at half price.

I'm thinking 1.25" spacers, but don't know if it stresses the components considering I drive 20k miles plus per year?
 
I posted this elsewhere where i stated the following when asked how they compare.

I like them quite a bit. The steering is considerably less heavy and the throttle response seems better and confirmed by wife. I had 285/75 so i'm shrinking the foot print by an inch + on each tire, according to online tire specs, but it's easy to eyeball the difference.

You get a bit of true clearance but it's probably negligible, however getting in and out it seems higher enough to notice. Also I do not think they look goofy as some folks do.

The spare really tucks up there as well.




ycdVwPl.jpg

ywDTFOv.jpg

20qgDTj.jpg
 
Hi Blatant. Any chance you could post a couple of straight on pics so we can see the width with the whole front as reference? And one straight down the side to show how tucked they are?

From a driving perspective are the 255s any less stable in corners than the 285s? What pressure are you running? It looks like they are showing very little sidewall bulge on the stock wheels. Is that the case or is it just camera angle?
 
Here are some pics from my end for reference: 265/65R18 no spacers. Pretty much stock height maybe an extra half-inch. Not looking to lose Mpgs on the highway as I drive a lot for my job.

First one is normal height. Second one is on High setting. 30 is just a shot from the front on normal height

image.webp


image.webp


image.webp
 
I'm not sure what the 265/65-18s have to do with either 255/85 or 285/75-16s?
 
Well, I got crazy today and ordered up a set of the ST Maxx in 255/85-16. I've run them on my diesel in both
295/75-18 and now 305/75-18 and they've been phenomenal. I thought about the 285s again, but the lighter weight, possibility of no rub (285s rub a tiny bit) and a possible decrease in rolling resistance and minuscule increase in mpgs made me go 255. Time will tell if any of the above are actual pluses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom