Anyone run 35" mud tires without a lot of suspension changes?
Do most run 33's?
Do most run 33's?
35's? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LandCruisers4Life
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Anyone run 35" mud tires without a lot of suspension changes?
Do most run 33's?
From past posts, 35" will work, but most that have had them put on the 2" lift, as well as bump stops and/or small body lifts, to prevent rubbing. Also, most have agreed it is not recommended without regearing to 4.88.
Upsizing to 35's is an easy and inexpensive mod. I see no reason for needing 4.88 gears. They'd a be nice addition though far from necessary unless you use your 100 for another application (like towing) in which case you'll not want 35's any how.
Changes needed to be made are here. Go to post number 8 and 9.
https://forum.ih8mud.com/az-arizona...tion-differences-evaluations-john-shotts.html
Changes needed to be made are here. Go to post number 8 and 9.
https://forum.ih8mud.com/az-arizona...tion-differences-evaluations-john-shotts.html
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
John, just qualify what 35's you are talking about. Remember you run BFG AT's in 315 that is not close to a true 35" tire but closer to a 34" tire measured. There are some 35" tires out there that are true 35" measured. This will play a big role in tire fitment and power loss due to incorrect gearing.
#1: You are at or near sea level. At our 4,500' and up 33" were dogs and 35" would be worse in regard to auto tranny shift points, most efficient use of the powerband.
#2: Your rig is relatively lightweight without additional weight of heavier bumpers, winch, drawer units, trailer, etc. Additional vehicle weight only exacerbates the under-geared rig.
#3: I found, for my uses in the mountains, the higher effective low range 1st gear to be a compromise for descending steep terrain where you want the engine/drivetrain to provide some if not most of the braking.
I ran the 33" (285R75 16 GY MT/R's) for over a year. I really thought and wanted to stop there regarding tire size. However I found myself: Dragging the trailer hitch on my Slee rear bumper, getting hung up more than I wanted and hated the doggy acceleration due to the higher overall gearing and altered tranny shift points.
Since installing the 315R75 16 MT/R's 1 1/2 years ago along with 4.88's I absolutely love the power efficiency and overall near stock gearing. Additionally the fuel efficiency is back up about 10% too. I needed, rather than limiting the uptravel of the front suspension since I run 1" wheel spacers up front, the 12mm body lift per Darren's/ats4x4dotcom recommendation (he actually recommended 10mm) to keep from stuffing the larger tires into the bottom side of the front fenders and eliminating even the slight rubbing I had in the rear.
Now with the Fox shocks I have actually gained total front suspension travel (increased droop...exactly where it was needed most) while keeping the lift at about 3" front and a bit more in the rear.
So for me, how I have my rig set-up, where I drive it: I am 100% pleased with the outcome.
Now if I can just get that aux tank!
BFGoodrich Tires | All-Terrain T/A® KO | Tire Sizes & Specs
315's are 34.6 (far the most popular selected size on the 80 and 100-series)
A 35x12.50 is 34.7
One tenth will not be humanly noticable in the power arena.
NEEDING 4.88 gears is a personal choice in my opinion. I have run 35's for 80K miles and am satisfied with the power despite my really heavy rig. Uphill I can run with stock Escalades and other SUV's. That's enough leftover power for ME. For others? Maybe not.
With any mod, one must prioritize. If the person wants to wheel very difficult trails then the 35-incher is a must while 4.88's are not (on the 100). Will 4.88's help? Sure....but it may not be worth the expense to the builder. (OR it may. They can figure that out next.)
Making a statement that in order to run 35's on a 100 you must regear to 4.88 is misleading and in my case (and other cases) untrue.
Now, if this reader wants the wider 35x12.50 tires they might want to check with somebody else about fitment as I've not ran these.
- Thread starter
- #8
A true mouthfull to chew up and think about. I had actually thought about the re-gearing already to the 4.88 gears.... Gears, and ARBs would be first. Second would be lift and tires. Can I get mud tires for my 18" wheels, or am I gonna have to ditch those and add the further expense of buying a new set of 16's?
Thanks for all the feedback. Great info!
Thanks for all the feedback. Great info!
Which mud tires are you considering? FYI: The Toyo Open Country M/T is available in 18" (LT285/75/R18 or 35x12.50R18LT). I think hoser is running one of the OC MT 18" sizes...the 285 sounds interesting to me!
You'll need to run 1" (or 3/4" or 7/8" if available) wheel spacers on the fronts, especially with the 12.5 OC M/T's due to their increased total tread width and/or with GY MT/R's if you want to be able to have clearance for recovery tire chains as I do.
The lift is relatively inexpensive compared to the 4.88 ARB conversion plus you will need to have the lift to adequately clear the 35" tires. Or to get by in the interim you can crank the OEM t-bars (assuming you do not have a winch installed up front) and swap just the rear springs to gain the clearance for 35".
And unless you limit the up travel of the front wheels and are OK with the rears rubbing the inner fender wall at comressed you will want to install the body lift...which is cheap and relatively easy to install.
hoser
SILVER Star
In the case of the Toyo MT in 35's, the 35/12.50-18 is actually $70 more per tire than the 315/75-16. So it would be cost effective to go with 16's and sell the 18's or just keep them as a spare set.
Those 285/75-18's must be a new size. They sound good to me.
LT285/75R18 129P E/10 35.1" diameter 11.6" section width on 8" rim
They are 10lbs lighter per tire and maybe wouldn't require a wheelspacer/adapter for the fronts as they are over an 1" narrower. I would have gotten those if they were available back then.
New springs are not needed yet. In the interim you can adjust front bars for 2.75" lift. Then, you can add 30mm of trim packs atop the rear springs. 20mm is usually the max. For now, you can duct tape 3ea 10mm packs together per side to the stock springs. This will match the front in lift. When you swap suspension you can swap the stock spring w'trim packs for a new taller spring with less trim packs or a new even taller spring without trims.
Re-read my post from 11:29AM and re-think about this. You're not getting it.
"Sure....but it may not be worth the expense to the builder. (OR it may. They can figure that out next."
Adding tires is one step.
Adding 4.88's is another.
One does not HAVE TO add 4.88's on the 100 to run 35's.
Had YOU taken this advice of mine...you would have been unhappy with the power AND THEREFORE went to the next step of adding 4.88s. That's exactly what I said......some will be OK without 4.88 and some (YOU) will not.
Follow me (or is this another word twisting attack of yours?)
Hey, i'm a big fan of tape, tape of all kinds, heck, my wife even makes fun of me for fixing everything with tape.. but taping trim packs on the top of a spring.... doesn't seem like a safe way to go.
I could be wrong though
What is unsafe about that?
The spring does not come loose or unseat itself because of the length and travel of the shock. There's all kinds of folks out there with 20mm of packs. Adding a third is fine. My '93 had 2 10mm and 1 5mm per spring for 3 years. (That's 3 packs) You only need the tape so you can insert the spring without them falling off. Once in they do not move.
A spring-alone is best though not needed.
Whatcha think is not safe about this?
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
The fact that the packers can move and be "spit out" when you least expect it. Do you check them regularly? Stacking three packers on one another is more likely to promote sideways movement of the packers, especially the middle one.
Will you roll the truck when this happens, probably not, however I would still not advise people to do that.
Why spend 6 x $12.50 for packers when you can do it right with springs. There are so many spring options of the rear that one should always be able to get the correct one. Also advising on spring packers without knowing how the truck is set up and what accessories are on it just doesn't make sense.
Have you measured your BFG's on the wheel?
As for gearing, I have never met a person that have regeared after installing larger tires and was not happier with the outcome. Is it technically needed no, but it is the right thing to do.
LandCruisers4Life: What year LC do you have? If later (2006+??) I don't think you can run the 16" wheels due to the larger brake rotors/calipers? hoser?
hoser
SILVER Star
One person has said the 16's don't fit 2006+ but I have yet to confirm it. I know the rotor size is the same throughout 98-07 with only changes in calipers and pads.
- Thread starter
- #19
The trim packs are taped together. They will not separate.
Can you explain how one can get "spit out" if the shock will not allow the spring to unseat (come loose) from the top?
Are you saying one can "roll the truck" if a 10 or 20mm packer slips out of the top of the spring? How is that possible?
As I said, the spring is the way to go. On a temp basis, in case someone wants tires FIRST, what's wrong with a $100 investment so one can run 35's for some time before they actually select their lift? It's another option for them.....that's all. What if someone wants a factory ride, no suspension change but run 315's? This solution will work for them too (will it not?)
No on measuring. I trust BFG's specs. I'm not interested in running a 35x12.50.
I'm sure I too would be happy with the outcome of 4.88 gearing on my truck. Never said the contrary. Is it worth it to me? No way. To others? Some. To say it's pretty-much required? I think that is misleading.
