New Boots : BFG M/T KM2 (1 Viewer)

ScottsHZJ80

SILVER Star
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
186
Location
Victoria, Australia
 
 
At the risk of being flamed for starting yet another tire thread, I just wanted to post some pics so here goes.

After waiting months for them to become available in Australia in LT 285/75R16 I have finally picked up a new set of BFG MT KM2 for my truck.

I have had BFGs in the past in the old design and have always found them great off road but not exactly brilliant on road. So far the KM2s are a huge improvement over the old ones, quiet(ish) & grippy, at least for a Muddie, but I have not had them off the road yet. I guess it could also be that I'm just not used to unworn, properly round tires! I'll post back once I have had a chance to play in the mud.

They say the KM2s are also a softer compound? It will be interesting to compare wear rates with the old MTs. I must admit I would quite happily trade a little bit of longevity for more road holding, but seeing as these are my play tires, I really didn't buy them for their road manners.
NewBoots.JPG
NewBoots1.JPG
 
Joined
Apr 9, 2007
Messages
689
Location
Marietta, GA
 
 
Do please give a report once you get them off the beaten path. I have been searching for my next tire for a while now and believe them to be the KM2.
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
2,105
Location
Gilbert, AZ
 
Congrats! I too was worried about their longevity since the older Mud T/A's didn't wear well when driven on pavement. I have about 10K miles on mine so far. Three have worn off 1/32" of tread, one has worn 2/32". Much better than I expected.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
6
Location
Sunny Arizona
I have been happy with mine, six months now and a couple thousand miles later, no complaints. My wear seems to be in line with other mudders. The tires continue to impress. I bought the 285/75 16s as well. I like that they are "E" load rated as well as a 30% stronger side wall (according to the manufacurer) than the BFG Mud Terrain KMs. Funny thing: mine had the number "55" stamped in white on the side wall too when I got them. I will attest to the softer compound of the rubber as I used a pressure washer to remove the white stamp and in doing so abraded the rubber similar to what a curb or boulder would do. No big deal but I guess that the rubber was just fresh; yet the date stamp put the manufacture date in June of 2008. I assume that the tires must all be made in the United States?
 

ScottsHZJ80

SILVER Star
Joined
Feb 13, 2007
Messages
186
Location
Victoria, Australia
 
 
six months now and a couple thousand miles later, no complaints
Sounding promising given the feed back I've seen and heard!

Funny thing: mine had the number "55" stamped in white on the side wall too when I got them.
One of mine has 65 on it. The others, nothing. Does anyone have any idea what this stamp signifies? The only one of mine with a figure stamped on it needed a heap of weight on it to balance. Coincidence perhaps?

I assume that the tires must all be made in the United States?
Yep "Made in USA" stamped on the 'inside' which I have mounted outside. ie White writing inside, BFG didn't do me good enough deal to advertise for them as well:hillbilly:

Nice meats down under. How's things in Aussieland?
Things in my bit of Aussieland will be a whole lot better when I get a chance to get some wheeling time and try out the new meats!! Much too long stuck in surburbia for mine.:doh:

I have about 10K miles on mine so far. Three have worn off 1/32" of tread, one has worn 2/32". Much better than I expected.
It wouldn't happen to be the near side front that has worn the most would it?

I find if I don't pay attention to rotation the PS front wears a whole lot quicker than the others. Just curious as to others experiencees.

:beer::beer:
 
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
2,105
Location
Gilbert, AZ
 
It wouldn't happen to be the near side front that has worn the most would it?

I find if I don't pay attention to rotation the PS front wears a whole lot quicker than the others. Just curious as to others experiencees.
No, it was the left rear.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top Bottom