I can speak to limited tires I've driven on this rig (five?), these RT are soft. Both to hand and feel from wheel. They're new too, so could change over time with use. We'll see if they chunk. Can't speak for other models/brands.
Do-it-all 33" Tires for LC/LX - Data Analysis Version
- Thread starter Itsky
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
That puncture video is very interesting.
Oddly enough, it appears the 295 70 r17 cooper st Maxx’s with the armor for punctures only weighs 51 lbs.
So it’s a half inch taller and half inch wider than the classic 285 70 r17 k02 load c tire even though it’s the same weight.
Looks like a Goldilocks 33” tire to me.
Pair it with the 17” mr705 with a 35 offset and the “bead grip” technology at 25 lbs and you’ve got a 33.3” tire you can probably air down to that 14 psi and weigh in at 77 lbs…which is oem weight for an lx570 tire and wheel.
- Thread starter
- #43
Just checked and it looks like the 295/70/17 Cooper ST MAXX (load e) is 64 lbs.
Dang looks like I made an error. Should have known, too good to be true.
I was looking at cooper discoverer s/t maxx which claim on tire rack to be 51 lbs.
Any idea what the discrepancy is?
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #45
I found this article written by @WesSiler to be very helpful in regards to the Toyo ATIII, particularly the details around P-rated, LT-C and LT-E.
I think the Toyo ATIII is currently at the top of my list.
I think the Toyo ATIII is currently at the top of my list.
I recently did some research on the cooper adventurer at3 4s. It’s almost as good as the Michelin defenders by most metrics…and better Offroad (using tire racks comparison system).
When, at 275 60 r20, they are affixed to the standard 36 lb lx570 20” wheels, they’re 80 lbs…which is pretty close to oem.
When, at 275 60 r20, they are affixed to the standard 36 lb lx570 20” wheels, they’re 80 lbs…which is pretty close to oem.
If you are going offroad on the list of places you mentioned, the one thing I would look for is good sidewall protection.
Without it I've popped tires on the sharp quartz rocks, Deep gashes on the sidewalls. Especially climbing up hills with loose football sized quartz rocks.
I was concerned too. But having driven Toyo ATIIIs many miles in areas filled with granite rocks and sharp edged quartz rocks around mines, they've proven durable and quite chip resistant. Perhaps a bit moreso than Falken AT3Ws in the same areas. My buddies with running KO2s also do great in environment.
Long story short, I have no qualms of ATIIIs holding their own against sharp rocks. Buddy running P-metric ATIIIs also did just fine.
Where I stopped here was probably the smoothest section of rocks in a wash near a mine, but you can see all the tire marks of rocks constantly working against the sidewall.
Those AT's have good side wall protection. What are you aired down to there?
AT's a good and they are better than MT's on ice for sure.
I meant when you get into the mountain trails.. and they look more like this.
Some AT's have good sidewall protection and some do not.
AT's a good and they are better than MT's on ice for sure.
I meant when you get into the mountain trails.. and they look more like this.
Some AT's have good sidewall protection and some do not.
This seems like our annual apples, oranges, bananas tire convo that has a dozen threads already. If you drive on old mining/logging roads blasted out of bedrock, sidewall and rock clearing are critical. All the 0.25 mpg in the world doesn't matter when you are stuck on your second flat. If you drive on groomed forest trails, (and TeCK's beautifully rolled gravel driveway ; ), and sand/slickrock that doesn't really matter and go for mpg.
I run the 21" AT contis in *exactly* the same conditions as the OP (since we are neighbors who apparently take similar trips), and I only wish I had different tires are on wet ice, and mud. I got a second set of Ridge Grapplers in 17" for summer in Nevada and Utah so I can get out and back without stress over any conditions.
I run the 21" AT contis in *exactly* the same conditions as the OP (since we are neighbors who apparently take similar trips), and I only wish I had different tires are on wet ice, and mud. I got a second set of Ridge Grapplers in 17" for summer in Nevada and Utah so I can get out and back without stress over any conditions.
Shockingly, we lost another tire this weekend in the group. Part of it was driver error, but then again, we haven't lost any tires except for KO2s. 4 lost tires in two weekends. Pinched sidewall on the rim of a Ford Raptor. Will post a pic later when I get it.
^I didn't get a picture of the really sharp mining roads we were on as we were too busy navigating. Rather was trying to show how all the loose rock wants to get at the sidewall.
@Fisher23 , my go to is ~18PSI unless running deep sand dunes which I'll go down to ~13PSI.
^I didn't get a picture of the really sharp mining roads we were on as we were too busy navigating. Rather was trying to show how all the loose rock wants to get at the sidewall.
@Fisher23 , my go to is ~18PSI unless running deep sand dunes which I'll go down to ~13PSI.
The tires you're considering to get slightly better fuel economy come at the cost of running a very mild tread pattern and side wall and a rather ugly/bland looking tire overall that does nothing for the aesthetics of an adventure vehicle nor will they perform as well off-road as the KO2 you're currently running. In no way is that trade-off worth it, if better fuel economy is needed then drive something else and save the Cruiser/LX for the weekend and off-road adventures. I'd go back with another set of KO2's or give the Toyo AT3's a whirl and maybe consider installing a LRA to get that extra range.
bloc
SILVER Star
......because it's not an adventure unless your tires help your instagram follower count.
I had P-metric AT2s before my current LT AT3s. They were good tires, did everything I asked of them, and I'd say I averaged 2mpg better at freeway speeds, all else being equal. A primary reason I went that route with RWs was to keep the tire/wheel weight close to stock, to not overwhelm the stock shocks. They did great. With Kings came the ability to handle heavier, higher pressure tires. The deeper, more open tread of these AT3s makes them better in very heavy rain, and deep snow, in my experience. Also my AT2s were starting to dry rot and chip after only 2 years. This seemed premature... might have something to do with the compound differences.
IMO p-metrics do have something to offer certain "adventure" travelers, but the reasons *most* cruiser owners have these specific vehicles make them the less-ideal option. I consider them great for one of these van builds people are doing. It isn't cheap but a 12-gallon aux tank will get you a lot more range and won't bring the compromises of a p-metric tire.. and you won't be forced to move your spare.
Since you specifically cited data.. I'd love to see a comparison test of sidewall tear resistance, but I understand how that is hard to do scientifically. That is one place I believe there will be a substantial difference between the construction types.
I had P-metric AT2s before my current LT AT3s. They were good tires, did everything I asked of them, and I'd say I averaged 2mpg better at freeway speeds, all else being equal. A primary reason I went that route with RWs was to keep the tire/wheel weight close to stock, to not overwhelm the stock shocks. They did great. With Kings came the ability to handle heavier, higher pressure tires. The deeper, more open tread of these AT3s makes them better in very heavy rain, and deep snow, in my experience. Also my AT2s were starting to dry rot and chip after only 2 years. This seemed premature... might have something to do with the compound differences.
IMO p-metrics do have something to offer certain "adventure" travelers, but the reasons *most* cruiser owners have these specific vehicles make them the less-ideal option. I consider them great for one of these van builds people are doing. It isn't cheap but a 12-gallon aux tank will get you a lot more range and won't bring the compromises of a p-metric tire.. and you won't be forced to move your spare.
Since you specifically cited data.. I'd love to see a comparison test of sidewall tear resistance, but I understand how that is hard to do scientifically. That is one place I believe there will be a substantial difference between the construction types.
Which at3’s do you have? Did you base what you expected their heavy rain performance would be on “logic” of having deep wide tread…or on some 3rd party testing?
I’m interested in tires that excel in heavy rain-that’s mostly when I drive my lx570. I’d also like something that doesn’t over tax the suspension.
Don't be ridiculous.
If you go to the Tire Rack site and select performance ratings for a tire type, you can sort the ratings for each parameter. For example, here are the AT tires sorted for wet performance according to Tire Rack customers.
According to TireRack Editor’s review, AT3 LT E may not have the best rain traction: https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=275
Toyo Open Country A/T III (On-/Off-Road All-Terrain, LT265/70R17 E 121/118S)
- What We Liked: The steering feels natural and it's quite good in the snow.
- What We'd Improve: It's loud on the road and needs a substantial increase in wet traction.
- Conclusion: A good option that could use some on-road refinement.
IMO, tread depth is not really a plus in terms of rain performance. Otherwise, ATs & MTs would outperform all highway tires in wet weather because all of them have greater tread depth than highway tires. This is obviously not true. Michelin Defenders have shallow tread depth yet perform admirably in rain, probably better than any AT.
Bomar
SILVER Star
I am about to change out my LT285/60R20 Nitto Ridge to Nokian Outpost AT LT275/60R20.
I want to ditch the spacers and get a little less aggressive tire on the LX570.
www.nokiantires.com
I want to ditch the spacers and get a little less aggressive tire on the LX570.
Nokian Tyres Outpost AT - Extend your adventures / Nokian Tires
The Nokian Tyres Outpost AT offers supreme traction in all conditions, extreme durability and puncture resistance, and increased service life so drivers can extend their terrain, toughness and travel.
www.nokiantires.com
Zjohnsonua
SILVER Star
You're asking for 10-20% increase in mpg. This is unreasonable even if you mounted up the hardest of HT tires. 380 miles on 20gals is 19mpg...200s just don't get that economy reliably. The most direct way to get more range is to add a jerry can. A single one will bump your range over your requested 380mi.
Drag force is a function of velocity squared. Sound like you discovered this sorta kinda.
We waited on several capable trucks this weekend whose owners had similar ideas. No gadgetry works when the tire can't get grip or the chassis is hitting the obstacle. After we advised the owners of these newer SUVs with slicked over ATs/HTs that they should not attempt the trail we had just descended, one smartly and smugly commented "I'll be fine, I've got traction control." Their trail leader turned them around.
Agreed. Folks should buy solutions to their problems, not stuff for the sake of stuff.
Regarding MTs, this is wholly inaccurate and there are decades of empirical data out there to prove it. As the OP's first post shows, there are plenty of good ATs out there already making compromises between street and off-road service...I don't understand why RTs are needed in the market.
Watch a vehicle with MTs make a tight turn and look at the black marks they leave on the road surface. This is rubber being left behind due to the softer compounds generally used.
