Nitto TG vs. Bridgestone Revo

[pint]

I hate to start another tire thread, but here we go!..
I've been running 295/75R16 Nitto Terra Grapplers for 38,000 miles. I'm going to need to get a new set in a month or two as these are beginning to wear and I am taking a new job where I'll be putting 20-25,000 miles per year on the truck all over Colorado. My first thought is buy another set of Nitto's since they've served me well. I need a tire to handle expedition type offroading, nothing extreme, just dirt, gravel and a few rocks. They also need to handle well on the road and be relatively quiet. Being in Colorado, they need to do well in snow. I also like the aggressive look of the Nitto's. I've heard good thing about the Bridgestone Revo's, but have no experience with them. The largest size they come in is a 285, but it is only 1/4" shorter and narrower. Any thoughts? Any other tires to consider?

 

[4x4Ratty]

the nitto's would probablyy be a good choice. their tread design does great in snow and ice. i live in the mountains and theyre a great winter tire. so you have a tire that does well in a dry and wet. my roommate however said the revos did well in rain but when it came to snow or ice, they were all over the place. that could just have been one instance but ive had no problems with the nittos in wintery conditions.

 

[mooker82]

I love my Revos but I have them on an 80 series. I know they are very good in the rain but since I am in SC I have no experience on snow with them. They have done well offroad as well. I think they clear out mud better than the BFG AT's on my other truck. They should also wear very well. I only have about 6,000 miles on mine since I rarely drive the truck very far, but my dad had them on his Suburban for 48,000 and they still had a fair amount of usable tread when he got another set. With that many miles a year have you ever thought about having 2 sets? Maybe stock Michelins for the road and another set or MT's or aggressive tires for offroad?

 

[gearguywb]

I have had the Nitto's on the FJC and an 80 series and am currently running the Revos on the 100. For on and off road, where the off roading is of the exedition variety, either tire is a great choice.

 

[pint]

I have had the Nitto's on the FJC and an 80 series and am currently running the Revos on the 100. For on and off road, where the off roading is of the exedition variety, either tire is a great choice.

Which one would you say is quieter on the road?

 

[cary]

FWIW, there is a ton of information about the Revo's on the 80s forum. All the comments are very positive concerning it's snow performance.

 

[zmw100]

I can the nitto's on my 4R for about 15k miles and was only moderately happy with them, i switched to the pirelli scorpion AT which was quieter on the road, had superior offroad traction, and absolutely embarassed the nitto in the rain and snow...

now with that being said, I can tell you that they are probably NOT available in your size.... I think the closest would be a 275/70/16 or a 265/75 - I can tell you one of the things I miss about the 4R over the LC is those tires.... the size range is limited though.

-Z

 

[calamaridog]

I just put Yokohama Geolander AT-S on my mom's 4runner. They are sweet and the price is right.

 

[anthonycds]

I've been running my Revos for almost a year now. Here in IL., I'm exposed to rain, snow, ice, gravel, dirt, and occasional mud. They are quiet too. The tires have served me well and continue to do so.

For your needs, you can't go wrong choosing the Revos.

 

[cary]

I just put Yokohama Geolander AT-S on my mom's 4runner. They are sweet and the price is right.

Yoko AT-S is horrible in the snow, see the tire rack reviews.

 

[calamaridog]

Yoko AT-S is horrible in the snow, see the tire rack reviews.

And you have tried them before? The rating for ice is lower than some other AT tires I've seen, but overall they look pretty good, including snow.

My brother used them on his Tundra last winter in Park City UT and was impressed with them.

Using the word horrible is irresponsible I think.

 

[cary]

And you have tried them before? The rating for ice is lower than some other AT tires I've seen, but overall they look pretty good, including snow.

My brother used them on his Tundra last winter in Park City UT and was impressed with them.

Using the word horrible is irresponsible I think.

The tires have very little siping and big block treads, two features that do not lend themselves to snow and ice use, their reviews have many negative comments about snow and ice performance, and the survey shows bellow average performance in both. The Yoko AT-S was designed for desert use, look at how Yoko has used it and promoted it, and the testing that was done, it was all around Baja type use. If you want a durable tire that does well in that enviroment, that the Yoko would be a great choice.



Sorry if you don't like the use of word horrible, but they are clearly not what the original poster asked for, since he specifically mentioned good snow performance.

 

[calamaridog]

The tires have very little siping and big block treads, two features that do not lend themselves to snow and ice use, their reviews have many negative comments about snow and ice performance, and the survey shows bellow average performance in both. The Yoko AT-S was designed for desert use, look at how Yoko has used it and promoted it, and the testing that was done, it was all around Baja type use. If you want a durable tire that does well in that enviroment, that the Yoko would be a great choice.

You continue to talk about the tire rack survey results, however the results are actually as follows for the tire you claim is "bellow average".

light snow - excellent
deep snow - excellent
wet - superior
ice - good

So basically, I fail to understand what the heck you are talking about with all this "below average" and "horrible" stuff.

Sorry if you don't like the use of word horrible, but they are clearly not what the original poster asked for, since he specifically mentioned good snow performance.

I apoligize to the original poster for taking his tire thread off track. I've owned both the NTG and the Bridgestone REVO AT. I am running the REVO on my Jeep right now and they are great tires. Expensive, but great.

Forget I said anything about those other tires.

 

[gearguywb]

Which one would you say is quieter on the road?

Between the two the Revo is quiter....the Nitto's are not bad however.

 

[pint]

I'm still leaning towards the Nitto's because I've been happy with them, I have an unused matching spare, and however stupid it is, I like the looks better. I just wanted to at least look at other options.

 

[1loudLX]

everyones a frickin expert...

 

[cary]

You continue to talk about the tire rack survey results, however the results are actually as follows for the tire you claim is "bellow average".

light snow - excellent
deep snow - excellent
wet - superior
ice - good

So basically, I fail to understand what the heck you are talking about with all this "below average" and "horrible" stuff.



I apoligize to the original poster for taking his tire thread off track. I've owned both the NTG and the Bridgestone REVO AT. I am running the REVO on my Jeep right now and they are great tires. Expensive, but great.

Forget I said anything about those other tires.

The tires have few miles reported compared to many others, yet are rated lower. It has been my experience over the years that as a new tire gets more reports, it's rating always goes down, not up. The AT-S is at best a midpack tire now, and has many comments about poor snow performance, such as:

My last set of tires were Bridgestone Revos and they were great tires except for tire wear. The A/T-S are good in all respects except for packed snow. They are horrible in packed snow. My truck has a topper and an 80 lbs. dog box and 50 lbs. of other stuff in the bed so its not a question of weight over the rear axle. 4wd is a must with these tires in snow (they drive great with 4wd). The tires ride a little rough, too, but are more quiet than the Revos.

--Review submitted: 2006-12-02

After purchasing these tires in March of this year I have traveled under 20K and will be purchasing new tires this weekend. I am pursuing a refund.

--Review submitted: 2006-09-24


This tire has good raod manners and is fairly quiet...when new. Ive had them rebalanced a couples times to keep down on vibration as my vehicle is very sensative to tire balancing. Wet and dry traction is very good with these tires. Ive driven a lot of tires in New England winters and the snow traction with these tires is not the greatest. With a dusting to couple inches on the road these tires were very greasy and unstable. I did manage to drive in 12" plus of snow once they were spining and cleaning the tread. The greatest drawback to these tires is treadwear. I rotated these tires at every oil change and with about 20,000mi on them they are ready for replacement. The truck is a 2006 Tacoma with 34,000 mi so neither excessive vehicle weight nor front end problems were the issue. I wont be buying these tires again, but they were bargain priced and performed decently other than treadwear.

--Review submitted: 2007-05-29

Any ice on the road these tires are not stopping. Sad to say my wifes grand cherokee gets around better than mine and she has stock Goodyears. I got stuck in front of my house on ice I had get ice melt to go to work and its level ground. But I like them as a summer tire, they go down the road nice and quiet. I did go with a 255/70-16 which is not recommened on a Grand Cherokee but since its on the road 95% of its life they dont rub and it fills the wheel wells up nice. Just so everyone knows my jeep is four wheel drive and has 100lbs extra weight in the back.

--Review submitted: 2007-01-14

After 50,000 miles on the OEM Wrangler AT/S tires, I switched to the Yokohamas a few months ago. During a few light snowfalls this spring, the traction and braking of the Geolanders is poor compared to the Goodyears resulting in using 4WD more often to get moving in traffic. The ABS also engaged more often with the Yokohamas. Now that the snow is gone, I am very pleased with the Geolanders. Wet and dry performance is excellent, the ride is smooth and quiet. Treadwear appears to be okay. Handing while towing a 6000 lb. RV was good as well. I was hoping that the Geolanders will be better in the snow once they have more wear on them. I came across another Avalanche with the same tires and asked the owner how they were in the snow. His experience was the same as mine - poor! It appears a set of winter tires will be needed this fall.

--Review submitted: 2007-06-08

 

[1loudLX]

for every bad report theres more then likely 10-15 happy customers. People these days only go out of their way to make something sound bad, but never give postive reinforcement towards things they like. Cary, tire rack reviews arent the end all say all on every tire and if you believe that, your mis-informed.

 

[Jim_Chow]

Yoko AT-S is horrible in the snow, see the tire rack reviews.

The rating numbers on the geolander AT/S on the Tirerack website are statistically insignificant. There are a total of 10 reviews. Of those, 1 said they sucked on the snow/ice, 2 said they were awesome in snow/ice. I wouldn't call those definitive numbers. On the Discount tire website, there are 49 reviews, with the average overall rating being 4.5/5 stars.

What might make more of a difference if you plan an offroad expedition and carry a heavy load are the number of plys. Both the revos and geolanders are 2-ply. BFG AT's are 3 ply. I think someone said the Toyo MT's are something like 6-ply. I know a guy Down Under w/ a '06 HDJ100 who crossed the desert this year (Melborne to Darwin) towing a trailer. He had 2 spare (all tires were bridgestone AT's). Both tires flatted on sharp rocks. He made it to the next town w/ 0 spares, tire shop guy recommended the BFG AT's due to the 3 plys. He replaced all tires w/ the BFG's, crossed the desert again, this time w/ 0 flats.

 

[calamaridog]

Cary,

I don't mean to impinge upon your contribution to this thread. The tirerack feedback is certainly useful in making a decision. My only exception is the language you choose to report their results does not correspond to the language tirerack uses themselves.

The first review on the discount tire site raves about the snow performance of the AT-S:

"2003 FORD EXPRORER SPORT TRAC 4WD. I ALMOST ALWAYS BUY MICHELIN BUT THIS TIME I DIDNT HAVE THE BUDGET FOR THEM. THE AT-S'S I GOT INSTEAD ARE BETTER FOR ME @ A BETTER PRICE!!! W/ MULT TRIPS TO CANADA AND TO ALMOST EVERY SKI AREA IN WA THESE TIRES HAVE BROUGHT ME THERE IN COMFORT AND SAFETY. WITH THESE TIRES, I FEEL THAT I WASTED MY MONEY ON THE SNOW TIRE THAT I BOUGHT."

So who knows?

I will report back on the performance of the AT-S when I drive my mom's 4runner in snow and ice type conditions this winter. I will have the benefit of using the ATII's, BFG ATKO's, and REVOS under similar conditions. Hopefully the feedback will be useful. So I can't say from personal experience these tires are good in snow/ice conditions. My brother liked them, but I haven't tried them myself.