Best on road ride AT tires (9 Viewers)

[crawfs00]

Love my Michelin AT 2's

I put them on at 126k, I am now at 180.5k. So roughly 54k on them and they still look almost new. I did purchase 5 and have rotated all 5 of them every 5k. I don't do any hard core wheeling but I have given the atrac a workout numerous times and my bumpers front and back are scratched to heck. They always seem to surprise me off-road, as for winter, they are awesome. On a recent snowmobile trip with two of my Tahoe driving friends they could not believe how well they did. On road I feel they are probably one of the more comfortable AT tires you could own. I have no doubt I will get 100k out of this set.

 

[phsycle]

Seems that nobody on here is quite sure. I've emailed BF Goodrich to see if they have an answer. Hopefully they don't give us some goofy nonsense answer.

Here is the response from Tirerack:

"Thank you for the inquiry. The only difference is the original is not severe snow rated. The version 2 has the snowflake on the mountain symbol. The compound is the same and the tread pattern has not changed. The tire must have the symbol on the tire for Winter use in Europe. This may be why they produced the new part number."

This makes no sense to me at all.

 

[gaijin]

Here is the response from Tirerack:

"Thank you for the inquiry. The only difference is the original is not severe snow rated. The version 2 has the snowflake on the mountain symbol. The compound is the same and the tread pattern has not changed. The tire must have the symbol on the tire for Winter use in Europe. This may be why they produced the new part number."

This makes no sense to me at all.

What was your question?????????

 

[phsycle]

Here is the response from Tirerack:

"Thank you for the inquiry. The only difference is the original is not severe snow rated. The version 2 has the snowflake on the mountain symbol. The compound is the same and the tread pattern has not changed. The tire must have the symbol on the tire for Winter use in Europe. This may be why they produced the new part number."

This makes no sense to me at all.

Here is BFG's response. Equally useless

Some sizes of the All-Terrain T/A KO were developed for OE fitments. The OE manufacturers requested an adjustment to the construction of the tire to handle a specific way on a particular vehicle. The adjustment could have been in the tread depths or tread compound. Over time, some sizes may not be currently OE but the design is still available in the replacement market.

 

[dclee]

I'd like to see a real picture, though. That could be a mock up. But if that's the case, then the only other explanation is different compounds.

That's my feeling as well. Or tread depth, sidewall height/thickness/flexibility, etc. There are a number of parameters that might contribute.

I have the Silent Armors with the snowflake and the factory siping (yes, it _is_ siping, it's not a water channel anything else; unlike most siping, I think it is molded into the tread, not cut after the fact).

 

[dclee]

OK, you're wrong.

Siping is a much finer cut in the tread block.

For the sake of discussion, however, let's say that those large grooves between tread block elements are the "siping." Then, ALL BFG AT T/A KO tires have "siping," irrespective of size or Load Range - they all have the same tread design.

The siping is not the large grooves between the tread blocks (in green below). Instead, it's what I circled in red.

 

[patrickfinley]

Ok, sorta useless, but here's my take:

Some of these tires needed to be made more sturdy for a particular class of heavy vehicle. The snow rating, perhaps siping, tread depth or compound, contributed to a mushier ride for these bigger vehicles. So the tires where changed to make them sturdier under load.

It would be nice to figure out what was changed, what the exact differences are. Also which particular heavy vehicle needs these changes. I'm imagining something like the F-350 super duty class?

Here is BFG's response. Equally useless

Some sizes of the All-Terrain T/A KO were developed for OE fitments. The OE manufacturers requested an adjustment to the construction of the tire to handle a specific way on a particular vehicle. The adjustment could have been in the tread depths or tread compound. Over time, some sizes may not be currently OE but the design is still available in the replacement market.

 

[gaijin]

The siping is not the large grooves between the tread blocks (in green below). Instead, it's what I circled in red.

Yes. I have already conceded that point.

But since ALL BFG AT T/A tires have the exact same siping, and only some of them carry the Mountain/Snowflake symbol, what's your point?

 

[dclee]

Yes. I have already conceded that point.

But since ALL BFG AT T/A tires have the exact same siping, and only some of them carry the Mountain/Snowflake symbol, what's your point?

I had no point other than to correct your incorrect statement earlier, which I did not see conceded.

edit: see other comments about differences in tread compounds, sidewall construction, tread depth, etc. that most likely account for the inconsistency in applying the snowflake.

 

[Bismarck]

Could it be the cost of certification alone?

 

[patrickfinley]

Here's another response from BF Goodrich. Nothing specific, but it's starting to make sense now.


"Some sizes of the All-Terrain T/A KO were developed for original equipment applications. Vehicle manufacturer's sometimes request minor changes to the tires so they will marry well with their vehicle's suspension. The changes may be in the form of a different tread rubber compound or a different tread depth, etc. Unfortunately, these changes affect the tire's winter capability and do not meet the RMA's (Rubber Manufacturer's Association) requirements for severe snow conditions.

These sizes are often kept in the replacement market even though they may no longer be supplied as original equipment."

 

[Sverige]

I have had BFG AT KOs on my last 3 trucks with no complaints. Great on road and off. I don't rock crawl or mud bog though. My primary use is daily driving in cities and long-distance overland trips on dirt/mud/gravel (rarely tarmac) roads. They hold up really well.

 

[Bloomer]

^^That's been my experience as well. We have a lot of mesquite and huisache brush on our place in South Texas and the 3 ply side wall of BFGs AT KOs have held up well. I run them all my vehicles I use in the ranch.

 

[patrickfinley]

It's certainly a great tire, but it seems you need to pick your size carefully if it's going to be used in snow.

I have had BFG AT KOs on my last 3 trucks with no complaints. Great on road and off. I don't rock crawl or mud bog though. My primary use is daily driving in cities and long-distance overland trips on dirt/mud/gravel (rarely tarmac) roads. They hold up really well.

 

[KIRUXA]

I got a set of duratracs 33". Love them. I'm in Edmonton Alberta where weather goes from +30 to - 40 sometimes. Great overall tire. Although I did notice at 80km on loose gravel roads the truck starts to slide a little side to side. I just slow down and take it easy there.