295 75r16 vs. 285 75r16

[spressomon]

Adequate ground clearance

NMuzj100: Your rig looks really good...JFMOI: Do you have enough ground clearance for general off-road travel? My '99 100 should be here in a week or so...I would like to keep the COG as low as possible while having adequate clearance for general 4x4/off-road travel.

 

[NMuzj100]

Most of the serious Off-roaders on this board go with the lift. But if you only plan on running the 285s I'm not sure it would be a huge advantage. It does allow you to run 35" tires and helps the truck to hold heavier bumper loads caused by steel bumpers/winches/spares/ect...

The best first step might be to replace the bumpers to improve the approach and departure angles. The mall cruiser cladding is probably the biggest weakness of the stock 100 and the only thing I've really dragged on the trails.

I think I'll stay with the stock suspension until I start dragging things or I get into the more serious trails. I consider the importance of a lower COG for onroad safety with my family pretty important. A major reason I got the Cruiser was for winter driving in the mountains of New Mexico/Colorado mostly on roads of one type or another. I think stock the UZJ100 will easily handle ungraded/unmaintained roads and mild 4x4 trails. For this kind of terrain traction in all conditions and good on-road performance were my main concern. I think the 285s on a stock suspension are a good compromise.

Of course when I have the money who knows what could happen to the LC.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Most of the serious Off-roaders on this board go with the lift. But if you only plan on running the 285s I'm not sure it would be a huge advantage. It does allow you to run 35" tires and helps the truck to hold heavier bumper loads caused by steel bumpers/winches/spares/ect...

The best first step might be to replace the bumpers to improve the approach and departure angles. The mall cruiser cladding is probably the biggest weakness of the stock 100 and the only thing I've really dragged on the trails.

I think I'll stay with the stock suspension until I start dragging things or I get into the more serious trails. I consider the importance of a lower COG for onroad safety with my family pretty important. A major reason I got the Cruiser was for winter driving in the mountains of New Mexico/Colorado mostly on roads of one type or another. I think stock the UZJ100 will easily handle ungraded/unmaintained roads and mild 4x4 trails. For this kind of terrain traction in all conditions and good on-road performance were my main concern. I think the 285s on a stock suspension are a good compromise.

Of course when I have the money who knows what could happen to the LC.

Good advice, though one thought from my experience:

I survived with the stock rear bumper and spare tire underneath for over 3 years (though I've been lifted all that time) with endless difficult trips. The front bumper however had to go ASAP even with the lift. I'd recommend this order:

1. LIFT, LIFT, LIFT (Your ride even on-road is improved tremendously)
2. TIRES (285 or 295)
3. FRONT BUMPER
4. BIGGER TIRES (315)
5. REAR BUMPER
6. LOCKERS
7. SOLID AXLE SWAP (kidding)

 

[calamaridog]

I agree 100% with Shotts regarding the suspension. My Tacoma handled immensely better when I did a high quality suspension lift, both on road and off.

 

[spressomon]

Handling

How does raising the effective COG (with the OEM 2" lift + taller tires) result in better on-road handling? Is it because the OEM 2" kit contains stiffer and longer travel springs? Or, with this set-up, have you widened the LC stance with the 1" wheel backspacers I read about on another thread that result in additional stability offsetting the higher COG? Just trying to understand how this works...to make sure I get it right the first time.

Thanks,

 

[calamaridog]

In theory, a high quality suspension will handle better, even though you have raised the COG. This is due to the better handling characteristics of the new components as well as the fitament of wider tires.

There will be a point where this is no longer true, depending upon several factors I can just begin to grasp.

For example, on my Tacoma, I replaced the stock coils and springs with 2.5" adjustable King coilovers, custom valved for my Tacoma. The rear leaf pack was beefed up and the rear shock were replaced with 5100 Bilsteins. This was a 2" suspension lift when I was done.

The ride quality was firmer, the vehicle handled much better around corners, it was able to absorb impacts off road which would have destroyed the stock suspension.

The downside is that the ride quality was "harsher" in certain circumstances, such as small bumps in the road.

With the new suspension and tires, the vehicle was much more fun to drive and safer in my opinion. This is subjective in regards to what type of characteristics you prize the most. Do you want to float down the highway or do you want to have more control?

I've never owned a vehicle I didn't change the stock suspension to suit my preferences. This is just fun for me.

I look forward to making some changes to the 100! I can hardly wait, but I may have to for a while

And you shouldn't need wheelspacers???

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

In theory, a high quality suspension will handle better, even though you have raised the COG. This is due to the better handling characteristics of the new components as well as the fitament of wider tires.

There will be a point where this is no longer true, depending upon several factors I can just begin to grasp.

For example, on my Tacoma, I replaced the stock coils and springs with 2.5" adjustable King coilovers, custom valved for my Tacoma. The rear leaf pack was beefed up and the rear shock were replaced with 5100 Bilsteins. This was a 2" suspension lift when I was done.

The ride quality was firmer, the vehicle handled much better around corners, it was able to absorb impacts off road which would have destroyed the stock suspension.

The downside is that the ride quality was "harsher" in certain circumstances, such as small bumps in the road.

With the new suspension and tires, the vehicle was much more fun to drive and safer in my opinion. This is subjective in regards to what type of characteristics you prize the most. Do you want to float down the highway or do you want to have more control?

I've never owned a vehicle I didn't change the stock suspension to suit my preferences. This is just fun for me.

I look forward to making some changes to the 100! I can hardly wait, but I may have to for a while

And you shouldn't need wheelspacers???

Right on. Perfectly said IMO. The only thing I have to add regarding the 100 is that your ride quality will not be reduced. It is amazingly cushy yet so much more controlled with OME 100 shocks and springs. If you go to 863 80 springs for more lift then the cushness-factor drops. Felt no raise in COG and even with my added height (2.75 front and 3.5 rear) COD is a non-issue. I scream around corners.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

One last thing to add: Stock suspensions do have a danger factor. On avoidance manuevers the 100 tipped on 2 wheels because the suspension was too soft. That's why Consumer Reports couldn't recommend the 100 until year 2000 when Toyota added ASC/TRAC and eliminated the tipping. The OME lift is stiffer and I bet a 98 or 99 wouldn't even get tippy on that same test.

 

[spressomon]

Great information guys...I will put this to good use when I finally get to start upgrading. Thanks again...I really appreciate your advice!

 

[ColoradoCarlisle]

Does anyone know why the pictures of NMuzj100 with the larger tires does not work?

Also if someone else has pics of a 100 with no lift and 285's or 295's PLEASE POST Them

Thanks
I have done searches and cannot find a 100 pic with 285 or 295s anywhere

 

[Drinkin40s]

285's

Toyo M/T - no lift

 

[ColoradoCarlisle]

Drinking 40's thats awesome Im getting those for sure thanks a ton!!!!!!

 

[kitkraft]

Sorry, Gentlemen, I tried a search for the answer to my question but I'm not particularly bright and am not certain I found it. So, if you please:
1998; stock suspension; 295/75/16: Will they fit with sufficient clearance......mild mud, sand and rocks....?
Thanks.............

 

[BMWSTOY]

One thing I have not read or heard is if anyone out there has 285's or 295's with just new shocks. There is no question that Billies without a lift will greatly improve both off-road and on-road - otherwise they would be out of business.

Of course, I don't think I can drive mine too long without the entire kit - those OME torsion bars have to help with cornering too.

Kitkraft: There are plenty of threads saying that 295's will fit, but if you wheel hard, you might rub - and likely if those stock shocks are getting soft.

 

[kitkraft]

Thanks for the info. I think I will install Bilsteins and give the 295 BFG ATs a try...........

 

[uzj100]

Coopers

Discoverer STT MTs

The coopers are sweet and have siped treads.

285/75 R 16. They were about $175 each installed.

No Lift.

 

[Abe Nitro]

1. LIFT, LIFT, LIFT (Your ride even on-road is improved tremendously)
2. TIRES (285 or 295)
3. FRONT BUMPER
4. BIGGER TIRES (315)
5. REAR BUMPER
6. LOCKERS
7. SOLID AXLE SWAP (kidding)

Killer advice! I will follow this order exactly, oh except for the insertion or sliders between 1 and 2.

Running BFG ATs at 15psi on The Dusy, Fordyce, and other various tough rocky trails in CA, I have never had a failure. That was not in my new LC though, it was in a Lifted Locked Jeep Cherokee. They are excellent, long wearing tires with very predictable behavior on and off road.

Maybe the reason some folks have seen them shredded is becasue so many people run them. Gotta run em to truly test em.... I have never had a problem.

Anyone taken a serious look at the new Good Year Wrangler Silent Armor tire? MTs are gonna be too much for my LC. I want to maintain the luxury factor.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Killer advice! I will follow this order exactly, oh except for the insertion or sliders between 1 and 2.

Running BFG ATs at 15psi on The Dusy, Fordyce, and other various tough rocky trails in CA, I have never had a failure. That was not in my new LC though, it was in a Lifted Locked Jeep Cherokee. They are excellent, long wearing tires with very predictable behavior on and off road.

Maybe the reason some folks have seen them shredded is becasue so many people run them. Gotta run em to truly test em.... I have never had a problem.

Anyone taken a serious look at the new Good Year Wrangler Silent Armor tire? MTs are gonna be too much for my LC. I want to maintain the luxury factor.

Dang. How'd I miss sliders in there? That was bad advice!

 

[dclee]

On the CoG issue, if the concern is better handling and there is no need for 35's, then a new, firmer suspension with little or no lift would be the best. I really like the low/no lift kit that OME offers for the 80 Series, especially for a daily-driven vehicle. I wonder if you could use those rear coils (862s if I remember) in conjunction with the standard OME t-bars and Bilsteins to get a low/no lift replacement suspension? Also, that would allow you to buy off-the-shelf Billies for the truck. And the suspension would retain the balanced suspension travel that Toyota designed into it.

Ah well, food for thought...

 

[johncarron]

ColoradoCarlisle (or anyone else who drives in the mountains a lot), I'm considering going to 285s from stock size, but am concerned about degraded performance in the mountains. can anyone comment on how much performance will be affected by going from 265 to 285? Will i still be able to power over the Divide or will i notice the changed gear/tire ratio?

thx.