33/10.5/15 Versus 33/12.5/15 BFG M/T Tires

[OLDNSLO]

This is a 4" lift with 33x12.5 BFG's on 15x8 rims

 

[Flash1034]

Can someone post a pic of a 40 with 33x10.5x15 sized tires for comparison please?

Thanks,

Flash

 

[bsmith123]

33 x 10.5

These are 33s x 10.5 with a 4 inch lift

I had to post this instead of "Ugly Betty" cause the rig with the 12.5s looked so good.


I think 9.5s also look good


I think some rigs look good with the 12.5s but not my favorite I prefer the classic look of the tall skinnies

Traction for wheeling is always debatable but I know most reports of 10.5s aired down still do okay on sand


I think you could probably go anywhere from 9.5 to 12.5 based on what look you prefer and not see too much diff in performance

 

[singletrackjunkie]

I like the look of the 33 x 10.5. will they still fit with a 2.5" lift?

 

[Fast Eddy]

I like the look of the 33 x 10.5. will they still fit with a 2.5" lift?

Different brands are different sizes by 1" in height and up to 3" in width. TSL Radials are 33"x7.5". BFG A/Ts are 32"x10.5" in the same size. The wider size will rub on the drag link no matter what lift with stock rims. I think the TSLs would have a better chance with a 2.5" lift.

 

[mikedickbek]

I think 12.5's look fine on OLDSNLO's cruiser. That's what I run too. '3doghouse', I don't know what the hell you're talking about with spinners and coffee can exhaust. You're an idiot.

 

[3doghouse]

Mike, sorry if I touched a nerve.

I'm not sure if I'm an idiot because I don't think you're tires look good, or because you don't understand what I'm talking about, but I'll try to be more careful not to hurt your feelings in future posts.

Thanks for the insult!

 

[mikedickbek]

If you simply said you didn't like how it looked, or gave some good reason's as to why 10.5 is better, that would be one thing. But to talk trash for absolutely no reason makes you an idiot. No need to put others down because you don't like how something looks.

 

[3doghouse]

If you simply said you didn't like how it looked, or gave some good reason's as to why 10.5 is better, that would be one thing. But to talk trash for absolutely no reason makes you an idiot. No need to put others down because you don't like how something looks.

Mike,

I've never been to Hawaii, but around here people don't like being called idiots. You should tone that down.

The fact that you THINK something looks good, and I don't doesn't make me an idot.

On the other hand, many people do associate poor reading comprehension with idots.

Maybe you should re-read my post before you start "gunslinggin" the insults.

I did state reasons why I THINK 10.5's PERFORM better.

Furthermore, I base my OPINION on seven sets of BFG mud terrains. This is approximately 75% on-road with the off-road covering everything from Cooter Lake Swamp to Tellico, and guess what... five of those were 33 X 12.5's.

I've run 12.5's but, as I matured, I came to think the 10.5's look better, and, more importantly, I think they perform better.

For the record, I agree that OLDSNLO's truck looks great - but if it were mine, I would run different tires.

I'm sure the 12.5's perform adequately for your extreme use in Honolulu, and if you like the way they look, keep buying them.

Let's agree to disagree, and drop the name calling.

 

[Brian in Oregon]

x
33x12.50x15 witrh 2.5" lift springs, stock front shackle, 3" over stock rear shackle (remember this gives another 1.5" at the axle, giving a 4" lift total in the rear). It sits with a slight rake. This is the minimum lift to stop the tread from rubbing on the uncut wheel wells during typical articulation on the trail. If I did rock crawling, the wheel wells would probably need to be cut.
x

 

[tmarx]

Brian, are you on OME 2.5" springs ? I have just bought a set but without any shackles etc and in ZA we don't get 33x10.5(unless if you do an import at mega $$$) but only get 33x12.5. Do you perhaps have a side-on pic showing your rear shackles ? From that other thread https://forum.ih8mud.com/40-55-seri...-than-stock-length-will-ruin-ome-springs.html it seems longer shackles should not be mixed with OME springs

 

[Brian in Oregon]

I have no clue about what OME springs require.

My springs are 2.5" lift Ranchos, P/N RS43033 front and RS43133 rear.

I have a small block Chevy conversion. This weighs less than the stock six. So the front sat up a little higher than the back. The back needed to come up about a half inch to make it ride level, which would have needed a 1" over stock shackle. I went ahead and put in a 3" over stock shackle (1.5" lift at the axle). This gives me a bit of wiggle room for when it's loaded down with people, cargo, trailers, etc. If you're running the stock six, I doubt the front will be higher than the rear.

Here's a side view. It looks like a lot of rake, but if I parked the other direction it would look like it has a lot less rake.

 

[tmarx]

Thanks Brian.

One more Q: Are those rear shackles Rancho or what ?

Thanks in advance

 

[lukebz]

my rig

will get you some pics soon, but i have a 68 with a 4in and 15x8 34x10.5 LTBS SSs. I believe the Rock Crawlers I bought were the 2.75 backspacing.