33x9.5 or 32x10.5 AT other than BFG (1 Viewer)

[Marc311]

I keep going back and forth on new tires. I have a feeling I will get 31s and later regret it. Ideally, I would love a 32x10.5 and think I would also like 33x9.5. The problem is, the only AT I can really find in 33x9.5 is BFG and 32s are generally 32x11.5. I really don't want that fat of a tire. I like the Revos and would even try the Firestone Destination ATs, but they don't have any sizes I am looking for.

Does anybody know a good source or have ideas where to find a selection of 32s and 33 ATs? I know people love their BFG ATs, but I want to go another direction, (and am more concerned about rain and snow).

 

[loeky]

you can get a 32" Wrangler MTR. i liked them in general, but they wear funny if your not religious about rotating them and get LOUD. they start of with an ok hum though.

i went to a 33" BFG and have been happy so far through 2500 mile trip to baja and back. haven't worn them in the snow yet though, so no opinion there.

 

[cabron]

have been more than happy in the rain in my bfg's. My rig pics are in the sticky at the top of the page

 

[phishincruisin]

I love my bfg's in the snow, i'm about to buy another set of them as mine wore out. I had the 31x10.50 in the snow and they were great. a lot of people run these tires here(in VT) and at school (MT) particularly because they are so good in the snow. my $.02

 

[RockDoc]

I have stock size BFG AT's, and have had no issues rain or snow with them, including at River Shiver (mind you I also had chains on the back). Plenty of siping and depth. Would like to jump up to the 33 x 9.5s though.

 

[peterdouglas]

I love my bfg's in the snow

x2 This was my first winter with my Land Cruiser and the BF Goodrich All Terrain T/A KO's and they were nothing short of AWESOME in the snow, even in 2wd. I rarely needed 4wd. My size is 30x9.5R15. Almost bought Bridgestone Revos, great tire from what I hear, but they're more expensive and wear down quickly. Not sure if the Kumho Road Venture KL78 comes in the size you're looking for, but my father got the LT235/75R15 for his Sonoma and they're great. He got the LT rated, not P rated though. Kumhos are usually well priced. And as for BFG AT, lots of people in all areas use them. Good all around tire.

 

[gpx433]

I run in the Montana snow pretty regularly with my fj40. Only advice I have is to go with narrower tire like 9.5 and have as much sipping as possible. Wider tires like to "float around more (like for the ditch) and sippings a must on ice!

My $ .02

Josh

 

[lovetoski]

Ditto the others on BFG AT's as a great all-around all-weather tire. Especially so if siped.

Not many options in 33X9.50 besides BFG. Big O tires, also Les Schwab. Not sure if these chains are in the East though. Call some local tire shops and ask...

 

[justin85-60]

I know that scwaab only has one option for a 33 1050, not sure about 950. But IMO go with BFG rather than those. TSL Radial swampers are an option, don't know a lot about them, but 33 or 32 1050

 

[Marc311]

Thanks for the info guys. I imagine I will likely end up with 33x9.5 BFGs. I definitely do not want to go with an off brand and want an A/T.

I am toying with the idea of getting 16" rims to open up other possibilities. I really like the look of black rockcrawlers and the look of slightly bigger rims. I just don't know if I want to pay several hundred bucks for rims when the stock look is good too.

I was also toying with various tire size calculators, but couldn't find any comparable metric sizes that were available. i.e. 255/85/15

 

[High Desert]

BFG AT comes with a factory sipe..that is why it is "traction tire" rated...aftermarket siping is over kill if not detrimental to the factory set tread.

 

[bosljeff]

Ditto the others on BFG AT's as a great all-around all-weather tire. Especially so if siped.

Not many options in 33X9.50 besides BFG. Big O tires, also Les Schwab. Not sure if these chains are in the East though. Call some local tire shops and ask...

I used to work at Schwabs (long ago) and their wildcat is almost very similar to bfg and they came in some unique sizes if I remember right. Maybe you can find a middle ground...?

 

[Marc311]

As of this moment (and things may change a dozen times) my choices will vary depending upon the size I end up with. But it will likely be one of the following:

31x10.5 Revos
32x11.5 Yoko Geolander AT/S
33x9.5 BFG AT

I am leaning toward the the 32 Geolanders, although 11.5 seems really wide to me and added rotating weight. It is the ideal height, however, since I plan on adding a mild lift thereafter (1-2"). I'm sure 31s would get me anywhere I would want to go, but they just seem to look a bit small. I don't want to re-gear so I am a little concerned about the 33s, but I would think the thinner 33s would be less of a problem than a heavier 33x10.5 or 12.5

I am probably overthinking the whole thing since I really don't think I could go wrong with any of the above.

 

[DirtyLittleSecret]

I used to work at Schwabies as well...wouldnt buy a tyre there to save my life. Alot of junk, and biased marketing.

Anyhow, I have never had any issues over 12 years of running BFG MT's siped. 6 trips to Rimrock, 3 trips to Moab, and numerous other runs with not an issue. Worked ski patrol for 7 years and rarely ever used 4wd.
Got em on 5 rigs (3 mine, and 2 other family members)...

You cant go wrong with BFG's. Most others are simply "making do".

 

[bosljeff]

I used to work at Schwabies as well...wouldnt buy a tyre there to save my life. Alot of junk, and biased marketing.

Anyhow, I have never had any issues over 12 years of running BFG MT's siped. 6 trips to Rimrock, 3 trips to Moab, and numerous other runs with not an issue. Worked ski patrol for 7 years and rarely ever used 4wd.
Got em on 5 rigs (3 mine, and 2 other family members)...

You cant go wrong with BFG's. Most others are simply "making do".

I agree completely. The only reason I bought stuff from them was cuz I worked there. I ordered BFGs, springs, shocks, etc. and used their stuff and equipment to play with my cruiser after hours.

 

[chris777]

I agree with your choice of a 9.5 inch tire. I thinkg the narrower tire gives you better traction in almost all condtions except deep sand and mud. So that leaves a lot of conditions in which it excells: boulders, snow, shallow mud, shallow sand, rain soaked pavment, ice, rock slabs. why is that the case? more pounds per square inch on the tire means more traction. A side benefit is that they get better gas mileage on the highway.

 

[DirtyLittleSecret]

More lbs per sq inch is basically they why. I used to have a really good article on it, but alas my hard rive died since then...

What I want are some 10"x35's or 36's. Hence my desire for some Boggers...

 

[Happy Trails]

Go with the BFG 33" AT's!!

 

[phishincruisin]

I agree with your choice of a 9.5 inch tire. I thinkg the narrower tire gives you better traction in almost all condtions except deep sand and mud. So that leaves a lot of conditions in which it excells: boulders, snow, shallow mud, shallow sand, rain soaked pavment, ice, rock slabs. why is that the case? more pounds per square inch on the tire means more traction. A side benefit is that they get better gas mileage on the highway.

I disagree with this in a few aspects. Lets start off with drag racers. They have really wide tires on them to get more traction. Traction really has to do with the mechanics of how the tire interacts with the surface it is on, not just the weight on the tire. In rain, you want a tire that will force the water away from the contact point with the road. On rocks you want as much contact with the rocks as possible, hence airing down and getting a wider footprint(not the only reason to air down). Skinnier tires are better for on road deep snow driving because they will sink through the snow and give you the possibility of getting traction on the road.
More pounds per square inch on the tire does not mean more traction. In physics you learn frictional forces are not related to the footprint of the object but rather the normal force applied to the surface and a coefficient of friction. But as I said earlier, traction is more than just the weight on the tire.

 

[lovetoski]

I am not a tire expert. But I'm pretty sure that "all things equal" a skinny tire is better in the rain.

Assume a 4000 lb truck. Each tire supports 1000 lbs (ignore weight distribution for now). Regardless of the size of the tire, it must support 1000 lbs.

Assume equal tire pressure. (say 35psi). To support 1000 lbs at 35psi, the tire will deform until it has a contact area of ~28 sq inches. (1000/35).

The contact patch on a skinny tire will be longer (front to back) than the contact patch on a wider tire.

In the rain, to get good traction, as posted above, it is necessary to remove water from between the tire and the road. With a skinny tire, because of the length of the contact patch, there is more "dry" contact than with a wider tire. The front of the contact patch does more of the water-removal, and the rear of the contact patch sees a dryer road surface. This improves wet traction.

On ice, I think the two key variables are rubber compound and siping. Soft rubber plus lots of sipes = better ice traction.

On compact snow, it's more like ice, so siping is super important.

HTH