New BFGoodrich Trail Terrain tires

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

It's not a matter of driving over 100 mph, it's a matter of safety margin when travelling at legal highway speeds under adverse conditions (like summer heat in the desert). As ambient temp rises, tires have a harder time dissipating heat. This leads to heat buildup and potential tire failure. One of the criteria used to meet any given Speed Rating is a tire's ability to dissipate heat. A tire with a 130 mph Speed rating will be able to dissipate heat better than a tire with a Q or R Speed Rating.

Thus why I said I would be "more comfortable" on the highway with a tire that has a higher Speed Rating.

Doesn't necessarily have to be desert heat conditions, either. Suppose, for whatever reason, one of your tires is running a little low on pressure. A tire with a higher Speed Rating would be more forgiving of the heat buildup caused by the low pressure than a tire with a lower Speed Rating.

Given the choice, I'm all for more safety margin.

But hey, this is the internet, feel free to make fun of this as well.

HTH
Thanks for explaining that. I don't know as much about these details and always learn a lot when I read your well thought out explanations.
 
For sure everyone has a different preference for what they feel is the best tire for the job balanced against how they plan to use the vehicle. Occasional sand and some forest roads with a lot of pavement is what this LC will be doing.
 
~ 7psi more tire pressure (harshness), reduced mileage, increased weight..
Not sure about the rest of what you mentioned but for the life of me, my LC refuses to get better than 15.5 mpg on the highway with my KO2 (stock size, load range D). :( I swear that I could before. Maybe my tires with 35k miles has more rolling resistance?
 
For sure everyone has a different preference for what they feel is the best tire for the job balanced against how they plan to use the vehicle. Occasional sand and some forest roads with a lot of pavement is what this LC will be doing.
Like 99.999% of the ones on here, Mall Cruiser Wanna Be Rock Crawlers.
 
Like 99.999% of the ones on here, Mall Cruiser Wanna Be Rock Crawlers.

I’m not sure where it was that I said this was intended to be a Rock Crawler?
 
These seem to fit what I need too. I love the KO2 (on my second set now) but I will never rock crawl. I am 99% on road but hate the look of stock tires. My extent of off road is beach sand, some skiing, and lovely Long Island snow. If the reviews are good, this my be my next set. Please keep us posted.
 
It's not a matter of driving over 100 mph, it's a matter of safety margin when travelling at legal highway speeds under adverse conditions (like summer heat in the desert). As ambient temp rises, tires have a harder time dissipating heat. This leads to heat buildup and potential tire failure. One of the criteria used to meet any given Speed Rating is a tire's ability to dissipate heat. A tire with a 130 mph Speed rating will be able to dissipate heat better than a tire with a Q or R Speed Rating.

Thus why I said I would be "more comfortable" on the highway with a tire that has a higher Speed Rating.

Doesn't necessarily have to be desert heat conditions, either. Suppose, for whatever reason, one of your tires is running a little low on pressure. A tire with a higher Speed Rating would be more forgiving of the heat buildup caused by the low pressure than a tire with a lower Speed Rating.

Given the choice, I'm all for more safety margin.

But hey, this is the internet, feel free to make fun of this as well.

HTH

Sure, if someone is going to use the higher speed capacity, than this is good. But if using within rated spec, I don't agree there's any need for an end user to believe they need additional margin.

When a tire or design is rated to whatever speed, it's going to have built in margin above and beyond. Likely even for severe off-nominal use because end users will do what end users do. For a big company like BFG, they're not going to jeopardize their brand and barely meet specs. They're going to go above and beyond, and validate that its products will do what they spec it to do.
 
You didn't, if the shoe don't fit don't wear it. ;)

Still confused at what you are trying to say. If you’re saying you consider these to be rock crawling tires and I shouldn’t run them, then I’d say you have a thing or two to learn about rock crawling.
 
Still confused at what you are trying to say. If you’re saying you consider these to be rock crawling tires and I shouldn’t run them, then I’d say you have a thing or two to learn about rock crawling.
Holy truck, everyone on here gets their trucking panties in a bunch over trucking everything.
I'm saying most of the trucktards on here never leave the pavement but criticize others for their choice, meaning your choice of these tires, I think these tires would be more than enough for 99.99999999% of the sensitive mother truckers on here.
CALM THE TRUCK DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Holy truck, everyone on here gets their trucking panties in a bunch over trucking everything.
I'm saying most of the trucktards on here never leave the pavement but criticize others for their choice, meaning your choice of these tires, I think these tires would be more than enough for 99.99999999% of the sensitive mother truckers on here.
CALM THE TRUCK DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You don’t know sh*t rook :flipoff2:
 
CALM THE TRUCK DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I just went outside and checked, the truck is in Park, I don’t see how it can get any more calm than it is.
 
Not sure about the rest of what you mentioned but for the life of me, my LC refuses to get better than 15.5 mpg on the highway with my KO2 (stock size, load range D). :( I swear that I could before. Maybe my tires with 35k miles has more rolling resistance?
I’d agree. Looking over my records, i could constently get 17-18 highway on stock tires. With the K02s i am lucky to get 15, usually 14. On the highway they suck gas.
 
Sure, if someone is going to use the higher speed capacity, than this is good. But if using within rated spec, I don't agree there's any need for an end user to believe they need additional margin.

When a tire or design is rated to whatever speed, it's going to have built in margin above and beyond. Likely even for severe off-nominal use because end users will do what end users do. For a big company like BFG, they're not going to jeopardize their brand and barely meet specs. They're going to go above and beyond, and validate that its products will do what they spec it to do.

As @gaijin mentioned it’s about margin. Things like an under inflated tire are less of a concern with more margin. Exactly how much? I challenge anyone to figure out.. but more margin is generally better when safety is involved.

I’d agree. Looking over my records, i could constently get 17-18 highway on stock tires. With the K02s i am lucky to get 15, usually 14. On the highway they suck gas.

Beyond the more aggressive tread being less aerodynamic, and more noisy going down the road literally being more wasted fuel, a big factor is the same reason LT tires need more pressure for a given load to avoid getting too hot and failing. The more robust construction creates more friction within the tread of the tire. Higher inflation pressure reduces this, but still, there is more friction, and thus less efficiency.
 
I’d agree. Looking over my records, i could constently get 17-18 highway on stock tires. With the K02s i am lucky to get 15, usually 14. On the highway they suck gas.
This is why I am looking real hard at the Michelin Defender XL next time around.
 
I think these are a good choice between the tires mentioned, say a guy with about 50K on my Defenders. I am a Michelin fan, cars and motorcycles, the brand exceeds my exceptions on every tire choice back decades. BUT there are times I wish I had more capability in light off-road situations in the wet....GA wet. The new BS could get me what I need?

15 pounds per tire more for a KO2 making the beast more heavy and sluggish isn't for me and I'd never use the capability they offer. Just too much off-road/snow tire for 800 mile roadtrips if just for the extra road noise alone. And I need a tire warranty with the price of tires today, which is what originally drove me to the Defender. One unrepeatable issue $300 down the drain. I've probably got another 10K or less than a year, so will go check these out at my next discount tire rotation.
 
Looks like a great option for an lx with 20’s to keep unsprung weight near stock even with taller tires.

Stock lx tire and wheel weight for a 2011 is supposedly 79 lbs.

With stock lx turbine 20” wheel and 275 60 r20 (33”) in this new trail terrain t/a, total weight appears to be around 80 lbs.

This will probably be my next tire.
 
I think these are a good choice between the tires mentioned, say a guy with about 50K on my Defenders. I am a Michelin fan, cars and motorcycles, the brand exceeds my exceptions on every tire choice back decades. BUT there are times I wish I had more capability in light off-road situations in the wet....GA wet. The new BS could get me what I need?

15 pounds per tire more for a KO2 making the beast more heavy and sluggish isn't for me and I'd never use the capability they offer. Just too much off-road/snow tire for 800 mile roadtrips if just for the extra road noise alone. And I need a tire warranty with the price of tires today, which is what originally drove me to the Defender. One unrepeatable issue $300 down the drain. I've probably got another 10K or less than a year, so will go check these out at my next discount tire rotation.
Did the Defender do bad in light off road?

What is the $300 unrepeatable issue?

To be honest the only issue I have with my KO2 stock size is bad fuel economy. Ride, noise, off-road have been fine for 35k miles.
 
Just had a set of BFG Trail Terrain tires mounted to the Land Cruiser yesterday. This is a new model tire for BFG that gives you a KO2 inspired tread in a more road friendly design in P metric. I went with the stock size and they appear a little wider than the stock Dunlops. Time will tell how they ride, but so far so good. Just as quiet as the Dunlop’s.

View attachment 2853754View attachment 2853753
They do not look they will shed water well on a wet road. Something I believe the ATs used to have a problem with before a design change.
 
They look like they will be excellent on snow and ice.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom