SL, C, or E rated tires for mild overland build? LX570 (3 Viewers)

[ryanCA]

Yeah I am an old guy too and have never given much thought about car or truck tires since I am new to overlanding. I have given motorcycle tires a lot of thought over the year, but with $1500 for a set of 5 tires, I certainly don't want to buy the wrong thing. You happy with the SL rated?

I am a motorcycle and sports car guy. Spent too much money on weight savings, sticky tires, over there.

VERY VERY happy with the SL....wish I did it 10 years sooner.

 

[ryanCA]

Agree, but I reiterate that I'd avoid the Toyo in SL from personal experience. Decent ride and mileage, but poor tread wear and traction was so-so. Havent tried the ATX, but had some old SL Grabbers on my 4th gen 4runner and they were amazing and lasted a long time.

Never owned a Toyo off roader tire. Only had Toyo R888 on sports cars.

The ATX I bought from recommendations on this forum. @TLC2013 was integral on building my ride the right way and am very grateful to him.

 

[W4632018]

IMO Get SL. Haven’t had any issues with toughness of my AT3W SL tire, my wheels have some damage so I know the sidewall has held up.

 

[Heritage 2020]

(insert old man voice).

I have been driving LC long than many people on the 200 forum has been alive. That said, used to do SL tire back in the day in the 60 series. Then E became all the rage, and I have done k02 for longer than I care to admit on all my trucks. Really liked everything it does, except the noisiness when its starts wearing and "roar roar" on the highway. I used to think that was normal.

This go around, when I was building my poverty spec 200, I went with lighter wheels, narrower tires, and per @bloc and many others advice, I actually listened to their advice, instead of ordering K03 and for the first time in my life went away from E rated to a SL.

My use case is the same as @nickwisconsin probably with higher offroad here in the SW, Utah, Colorado, NM.

I have been over the moon with the performance of my General Grabber ATX. It has done all I asked. I think the capability off road could be slightly better, but given the amazing highway manners, and low noise, SL is what I really need.

Good luck.

@ryanCA

(Insert laughing and spitting beer voice)

Poverty spec my ass, lol! Love it sir.

You raise a key point that is common in tire threads:

Choosing tires is so very subjective as none of us have exactly the same goals, use patterns, butt tolerance for stiffness, nor hearing sensitivity for tire roar.

“Looks” of course play a major role in tire choices which has kept me away from Michelins even if they ride better.

That’s why there are a plethora of SL, C, D, E, and Heaven forbid—F load tires.

Matter of fact 99% of the stuff we debate about is subjective due to lack of empiric data.

Note to self: Must remember the term “poverty spec” for future use,…

 

[bloc]

@ryanCA

(Insert laughing and spitting beer voice)

Poverty spec my ass, lol! Love it sir.

You raise a key point that is common in tire threads:

Choosing tires is so very subjective as none of us have exactly the same goals, use patterns, butt tolerance for stiffness, nor hearing sensitivity for tire roar.

That’s why there are a plethora of SL, C, D, E, and Heaven forbid—F load tires.

Matter of fact 99% of the stuff we debate about is subjective due to lack of empiric data.

Note to self: Must remember the term “poverty spec” for future use,…

Poverty spec is actually something of a category of build. "Poverty pack" cruisers were sold new in a few generations that had no tint, less features, maybe no sunroof, cloth seats.. and many people desire these models for their simplicity.

 

[Heritage 2020]

Poverty spec is actually something of a category of build. "Poverty pack" cruisers were sold new in a few generations that had no tint, less features, maybe no sunroof, cloth seats.. and many people desire these models for their simplicity.

@bloc I’m just joking with Ryan as we’ve exchanged good PM messages and I’m busting his balls a bit. Humor.

 

[thammer62]

New Defender Ltx ms2s in LT form might change your mind about Es like it did for me. 6k miles or so in & highly recommend.

 

[ryanCA]

@bloc I’m just joking with Ryan as we’ve exchanged good PM messages and I’m busting his balls a bit. Humor.

Heritage owners always busting my balls

at this age, my friend, neither my truck, nor my tires, or my balls would make for a good instragram model

All about function these days ….

 

[AnyMal]

Why don't you do a search for a similar question and get back to me with the links? My guess is THIS thread will come up. Any tire threads go off the rails on tire sizes, what tires to get, which tires won't rub. If there is info like what I am asking, it is pretty buried. I do appreciate your advice, and the suggestion is well taken despite the sarcasm that came along with it.

No but for real though ive written pages and pages with detail. Search using google if you cant find things its way better than the built in.

The gist of it is i think the 2 ply SL is too soft to run at normal pressure range.

I ran both SL and C AT3 in 285/70r17 on my lx 570. So take that for what its worth.

 

[bloc]

If running SL the owner would absolutely want to run more pressure than the sub-30 RCTIP for that tire. Closer to stock pressure worked great in mine with that size non-LT.

 

[nickwisconsin]

No but for real though ive written pages and pages with detail. Search using google if you cant find things its way better than the built in.

The gist of it is i think the 2 ply SL is too soft to run at normal pressure range.

I ran both SL and C AT3 in 285/70r17 on my lx 570. So take that for what its worth.

I have a set of Toyo AT3s in the same size, C load rating on order. Hopefully be here by Monday. Thanks for the advice!

 

[TeCKis300]

If running SL the owner would absolutely want to run more pressure than the sub-30 RCTIP for that tire. Closer to stock pressure worked great in mine with that size non-LT.

Man, this bugs me that this is still a thing. This is not directed at you but its something that's been unfortunately perpetuated.

Sub-factory RCTIPs is wrong and dangerous no matter the tire. It's fundamentally is a misunderstanding of what inflation pressure is all about - air pressure is what supports the car. Not the tire or tire sidewall. Anyone can check this fact themselves on the interwebs.

Sometimes we need to inflate higher, to protect said tires because of increased mass that generates heat, which commonly happens with LT tires. There's also other reasons to increase pressure for tire stability because of geometry. But to inflate lower than the door jam PSI spec never makes sense because again, it's not about protecting the tire in that case, but to make sure the necessary air pressure is there to support the car as designed by the manufacturer.

RCTIP is so flawed because it myopically only considers load ratings.

 

[bloc]

RCTIP is so flawed because it myopically only considers load ratings.

I totally get your point but it’s also what the tire industry itself says is appropriate to calculate pressures. So it’s gonna remain a thing until the trade group puts better information out there, and I don’t see them doing that in a world as lawyered up as ours.

 

[TeCKis300]

I totally get your point but it’s also what the tire industry itself says is appropriate to calculate pressures. So it’s gonna remain a thing until the trade group puts better information out there, and I don’t see them doing that in a world as lawyered up as ours.

There's enough of a brain trust and evidence at this point that we can and should do better. I'll restate it here for others just joining this conversation because safety matters.

On one side RCTIP tends to over-inflate. So be it, as generally it's not as much a safety issue rather than comfort, even as tires can get better traction at lower pressures.

Sometime, RCTIP gets things just right.

On the dangerous side, inflating lower than the door placard... The tire carcass will be fine, because load ratings. But the loss of stability and rollover is real and worth my time to restate because we don't need a Ford Explorer / Firestone rollover situation.

 

[bloc]

There's enough of a brain trust and evidence at this point that we can and should do better. I'll restate it here for others just joining this conversation because safety matters.

On one side RCTIP tends to over-inflate. So be it, as generally it's not as much a safety issue rather than comfort, even as tires can get better traction at lower pressures.

Sometime, RCTIP gets things just right.

On the dangerous side, inflating lower than the door placard... The tire carcass will be fine, because load ratings. But the loss of stability and rollover is real and worth my time to restate because we don't need a Ford Explorer / Firestone rollover situation.

Well put.

 

[Moby]

FWIW I would have gone SL if I could have found one in a 285/65R18. I ended up in Defenders E range. It's all personal but I don't notice a harshness difference at 40PSI and the truck handles better. Even my wife noticed the handling improvement, and she never notices any changes I make

 

[bloc]

FWIW I would have gone SL if I could have found one in a 285/65R18. I ended up in Defenders E range. It's all personal but I don't notice a harshness difference at 40PSI and the truck handles better. Even my wife noticed the handling improvement, and she never notices any changes I make

I think they’ve since started making the defender in 285/65r18 non-LT. Should be a great option for a lot of people.

 

[CactusHopper]

The Defender MS2 285/65R18 XL ride very comfortable and quiet on the highway. Noticeably more than the Geolandar LT (both compared brand new - see my previous posts). Geolandars weren't "bad" but wife and kids agree the Defenders are a noticeable improvement. Not a big deal for a 2-hour drive but for a multi-week trip with 5+ hour highway drives, I think the comfort will add up.

 

[rscoleman]

I like to stay as close to vehicle load rating as possible with any tire choice these days. The overall ride quality for 90% of what you will do is worth it. When I was younger I would run higher load ratings and thought nothing of it. The noise and harsh ride just a trade off for the better off road capabilities. After 20+ years of this kind of logic I went back to an appropriate load rating tire and my ass, back, neck and ears appreciate it. More so in the 27 year old T100 but also in LC when going from factory tires to All Terrain in 118 vs factory 116 load rating. Good luck with what ever you pick.

 

[coleAK]

if you do not regularly tow a heavy camper p metric all the way.

I run C load tires as my summer tires as most of my non off road miles are pulling a 7k lb camper, with the LX loaded up as well. I run heavy.

In the winter I run p metric studded hakka’s. We are considering selling the camper trailer and doing a sprinter van. If so I’ll run p metric AT tires on my LX in the summer.