Tall skinny tires (3 Viewers)

[HemiAlex]

The truck looks like it skipped leg day with this wheel and tire combo, but I really like it.

Initial impressions are great. No low speed rumble, the E sidewall feels like a C for some reason and I can’t hear them at all. Most importantly the pull is completely gone.

I’ll measure them shortly to see how true to size or not they are. Edit: 32.6” y’all at 35 psi. Rated at 33.1”. Not bad, BFG is finally making true to size tires.

 

[groundeater]

The truck looks like it skipped leg day with this wheel and tire combo, but I really like it.

Initial impressions are great. No low speed rumble, the E sidewall feels like a C for some reason and I can’t hear them at all. Most importantly the pull is completely gone.

I’ll measure them shortly to see how true to size or not they are.

View attachment 2419686

View attachment 2419687

View attachment 2419688

View attachment 2419689

Skipped leg day.... now that’s funny !!! You hit the nail on the head !! Must’ve been the angle the pic was taken.

 

[robmobile73]

I think you will enjoy the BFGoodrich tires. They are supposed to be quiet for a mud tire.
I went to uwharrie today and crushed it with my 32" tirecappers extra grip recaps. I have lockers front and rear and I aired down to 15 psi. I crawled over everything with almost zero wheel spin. The sharp narrow tread on the air down tire really digs and grips in the woods and on the rocks. It also works great on slick roads. A lot of rigs out there with bigger engines open diff and 33 to 35 x 12.50 spinning and fighting to get through in places..... I did not take the one trail rated is extremely difficult, but went through every other trail. I'll do the extreme trail once I get a skid plate for my transfer case. To be fair those higher hp rigs with bigger tires could certainly blast through deep mud better.

 

[HemiAlex]

I think there’s a reason why all the true expedition rigs use 235/85 or 255/85-16. It’s forgiving and easy to find in odd places. I think the 235/85-16 is the probably the most versatile tire out there.

 

[robmobile73]

I did daniel trail 390 in uwharrie today. Unlike the guys in this video:

My 32" tirecapper extra grips aired down to 15PSI bit into and climbed over everything with almost zero wheelspin............I chose these tires after watching a bunch of vintage jeeps on NDT tires going over obstacles while modern jeeps with 33X12.5's were spinning on.

Smaller narrow tires are so counter to everything popular for 4wd's and off roading, but anything other than slinging mud they are awesome.

 

[HemiAlex]

I’m waiting for my BFG sponsorship.

 

[MES]

255/85R16 Toyo M-55. Factory Suspension. No Lift. Skinny tires just look right on old Land Cruisers.

 

[robmobile73]

*The comments here are not meant to bash jeeps or anyones equipment choice in any way. Getting tall skinny or small skinny tires is so counter to what most people believe about "bigger is better" when it comes to tires off road that I think it needs a little analysis and explanation.........Also I just enjoy analysys..Especially when it enables me to outperform rigs that cost so much more and "look like they would do better".

Further validated the tall skinny tire choice and my 32X8 "extra grip" recaps today. Also validated the choice of lockers front and rear(spartan lockers, lunchbox type, cheapest available).

It rained all last night and all day today so I decided to ride out to Uwharrie and run the trails while they were wet. The "easy" trails that you can normally run with a stock 4X4 have alot of red clay hills. On a day like today some of those hills become slick as grease. There is no bottomless goo mud, but superslick clay over a hard bottom. I intentionally did not air down, but ran my tires at normal road pressure (30PSI)to try to make the trails more challenging.

On the first trail I fell in behind 3 late model jeeps. 1 short 2 door jeep and 2 longer 4 door models. 2 were on 35X12.50 or wider aggresive AT, or mild mud tread tires. 1 jeep was on 37" AT's that were also 12.5 or wider. All of these jeeps had lockers front and rear and they talked of "having them engaged" so I assume them to be the full locking air locker or Elocker type. Watching them in the mud they definately did have lockers front and rear and not some type of limited slip.

All of these guys stuggled on the rutted slick hills, and slick uneven terrain mixed with big rocks that you had to thread your way between trees. The jeep with the 37 AT's had to winch up the first slick hill. Second jeep on 35's eventually got up eventually with quite a bit of back and forward hitting it with alot of momentum, often pushing sideways into unfavorable lines due to front end pushing/sliding. Jeeps also had problems steering/keeping a good line around obstacles in the slick stuff.

In comparison my BJ73 walked right up and through all these obstacles with very little trouble. The smaller narrow tires with more weight on the smaller contact patch with sharp "extra grip tread pattern" cut through and dug into the semi solid ground underneath the slick clay on the surface. They did not load up and spin/float on the surface. All evening I only had one spot that I had to use momentum to get over/through. It was a extreme example of what everyone has said narrow mud tires do.

The narrower tires provided much better directional control for the front end than the jeeps wider tires that were slipping/pushing........The spartan lockers will not let the inside wheel spin slower in a turn, but they let the outside tire ratchet/freewheel ahead. In effect they do act as a differential and are absolutely not a problem steering them with the LC's factory power steering and the 32X8 tire size. The jeeps with air lockers or electric lockers as far as I know solidly lock and do not differentiate in any way so it's like having spools front and rear when they are engaged(if I am wrong, please correct me.) Between the wide tires and this type of locker the jeeps had significant trouble with directional control/steering to the best line on the slick between obstacles. Sometimes it seems they were guided more by the ruts than the steering wheel.

Some more analysis: Lets assume that the engineers that designed the WWII jeep were brilliant and knew what they were doing when it comes to tires. They knew jeeps would go cross country, but GI's would find a way to drive around bottomless holes when going from pt. A to Pt. B. MB tire: 6-16 NDT 28" diameter X 5.3" tread width. vehicle weight 2500lb......................so now comes the math: vehicle weight/ (tire D X tread W X4).......For the WWII jeep 2500/(28 X 5.3 X4)= 4.2 . After this eyeball the tread pattern and compare it to a rounded NDT tread to get a idea of how much your tires dig in vs. float on top compared to a WWII jeep..........If you do the math on your vehicle weight and tire size if you come up with a smaller number you have more flotation than the original jeep. If you have a higher number you have less flotation. With my BJ73 I figure 4300 curb weight/ 32X8X4 it puts my right at 4.2 or the same as a WWII jeep. As far as "paddle effect" on soft terrain you could do curb weight/(tread width X tread depth X Diameter X4) then do an "eyeball evaluation" of how agressive you believe the tread to be.

 

[grinchy]

Great real life example. Enjoy the read. I also believe that skinny is better for a lot of situations.
However I'm not following all the way down the rabbit hole to 1935 engineer brilliance. Tire technology 85 years ago was very basic. All those tires were tube based, for example. Those tires were simply what was available. My dad had a willys (I think it was 1950 or there abouts build year). It's the truck I learned to drive in when I was 12. He put in in low range and I drove in circles around a couple acres. Even in 3rd it wasn't going very fast, and if you can shift that clutch, and start it (required 3 feet to start), then you could drive anything. Anyhow, what I'm saying is that although I do think increased contact pressure is a key to good traction (and many many agree, including such 'luminaries' are AStPW), I don't think it was planned by circa 1935 Willy's engineers.

 

[wapitimud]

I wouldn't hang my hat on a ww2 jeep tire either. I don't think this new tire really needs designing.

I use Yokohama 7.50 x 16 Y742S on a Landrover 90, it looks and works good. I used to have old Michelin XZL in the same size before they cracked.

I passed up some new Dunlop Sandgrip tires in the same size, only good for the dunes.

The BFG KM3 is orderable in 7.50 x 16 new now too. This size seems to be better proportional to a smaller wheelbase vehicle, like an FJ45, a smaller Land Rover 90 or 110, maybe some old pickups too. Really old Dodge Power Wagon might suit this well too.

It seems to come out of proportion on a larger LC at that tire size; might need bigger tires there.

The tall skinny tires are superior for something like west european forest mud. They'll continue to dig in and find something while a wider tire will just spin mud.

For rock climbing or something, they won't work very well.

 

[robmobile73]

Great real life example. Enjoy the read. I also believe that skinny is better for a lot of situations.
However I'm not following all the way down the rabbit hole to 1935 engineer brilliance. Tire technology 85 years ago was very basic. All those tires were tube based, for example. Those tires were simply what was available. My dad had a willys (I think it was 1950 or there abouts build year). It's the truck I learned to drive in when I was 12. He put in in low range and I drove in circles around a couple acres. Even in 3rd it wasn't going very fast, and if you can shift that clutch, and start it (required 3 feet to start), then you could drive anything. Anyhow, what I'm saying is that although I do think increased contact pressure is a key to good traction (and many many agree, including such 'luminaries' are AStPW), I don't think it was planned by circa 1935 Willy's engineers.

Low range round and round a cow pasture is a great way to learn to drive stick. I was a ride along with one of my best friends doing that at 14-15 in his dad's fJ40 in the early 80's. Up the hill down the hill cross the field and through the mudhole round and round over and over for hours.

I pretty much agree with you in that early jeep tires were chosen mostly because that is what they had and was common size. I do however enjoy looking back at history before moving forward. New and different is not always better, just different. I do think there is some value in basic math formulas to predict tire performance in comparison to a common example. It'd be nice to see some sort of industry standard test number on tires for "paddle effect" in soft terrain, as well as a decibal level for road noise. Contact patch pressure is relatively easy to compare with basic math.

I wouldn't hang my hat on a ww2 jeep tire either. I don't think this new tire really needs designing.

I use Yokohama 7.50 x 16 Y742S on a Landrover 90, it looks and works good. I used to have old Michelin XZL in the same size before they cracked.

I passed up some new Dunlop Sandgrip tires in the same size, only good for the dunes.

The BFG KM3 is orderable in 7.50 x 16 new now too. This size seems to be better proportional to a smaller wheelbase vehicle, like an FJ45, a smaller Land Rover 90 or 110, maybe some old pickups too. Really old Dodge Power Wagon might suit this well too.

It seems to come out of proportion on a larger LC at that tire size; might need bigger tires there.

The tall skinny tires are superior for something like west european forest mud. They'll continue to dig in and find something while a wider tire will just spin mud.

For rock climbing or something, they won't work very well.

Skinny tires do work on rocks. The BJ73 on 32X8 extra grips deflated to 15PSI has more traction/climbs rocks better than late model jeeps on 33X12.50' or 35's. The narrow tread smaller tire deforms more around the edges of the rock and grips the edges well with a longer contact patch. The bigger tires don't deform as much and have a wider less lengthy contact patch that doesn't seem to grab the rock edges or stick to the rock as well, they tend to bounce and spin more.

Only downfalls I can find to the tall skinny tire are: Wet pavement traction, less flotation to not sink and paddle through mud deeper than your axles. In really deep soft terrain a wider tire can grip it and continue to push forward even though your axles are pushing mud.

 

[Rankle40]

Been a year since I've installed my tires but never done much wheeling at all until today. Tested the brakes and the oem power steering system. Literally my 40's first drive. The very first roll on it's new shoes, 235/85 R16 Yokohama Geolandar G003 MT.

Don't have anything to say much for the moment as it only rolled for 200 meters. Apart from being heartbroken as the new 255/85 R16 was released a month after I bought my set of tires. Still looks proper and right on a 40, the only giveaway for 235/85 R16 being the 50mm OME lift made it look smaller.

 

[TWILLY]

The truck looks like it skipped leg day with this wheel and tire combo, but I really like it.

Initial impressions are great. No low speed rumble, the E sidewall feels like a C for some reason and I can’t hear them at all. Most importantly the pull is completely gone.

I’ll measure them shortly to see how true to size or not they are. Edit: 32.6” y’all at 35 psi. Rated at 33.1”. Not bad, BFG is finally making true to size tires.

View attachment 2419686

View attachment 2419687

View attachment 2419688

View attachment 2419689

What size are these? They look perfect.

 

[HemiAlex]

What size are these? They look perfect.

255/85r16

 

[TWILLY]

255/85r16

Thank you.

 

[robmobile73]

I'm running old school tread style tirecappers extra grip recaps on radial cores. They are noisy on the highway. Noise on the highway is my only real tiring complaint with the 70'. It's a mix of tires and gear whine. I'm wondering how a set of more expensive radial mud tires like BF good rich mud terrains or similar would be/if they are much quieter?

 

[HemiAlex]

I'm running old school tread style tirecappers extra grip recaps on radial cores. They are noisy on the highway. Noise on the highway is my only real tiring complaint with the 70'. It's a mix of tires and gear whine. I'm wondering how a set of more expensive radial mud tires like BF good rich mud terrains or similar would be/if they are much quieter?

These km3 are only slightly more loud than my k02. They honestly are not audible over the sound of the ac on medium.

 

[svsisu]

I'm running old school tread style tirecappers extra grip recaps on radial cores. They are noisy on the highway. Noise on the highway is my only real tiring complaint with the 70'. It's a mix of tires and gear whine. I'm wondering how a set of more expensive radial mud tires like BF good rich mud terrains or similar would be/if they are much quieter?

I just swapped out my 35x12.5 R15 BFG mud terrains for the Kenda 35x10.5 R17 on my Troopy. The BFGs were a mix older K02 on front new KM3 on back. The noise reduction on the Hwy was incredible, it was like driving a new truck. I could hear the radio and have a conversation with out shouting at 65-70 mph. I have the 4.1 reduction gears in the tcase and often wondered why people complained about gear box whine- I couldn't really hear it before, but I can now.

I know you are after a more aggressive tire than the Kendas, but I don't think the BFG MT are a "quieter" solution to what you have base on my experience with them. I still have the BFGs if you are interested or just want to try them out. The tires are in Western NC and I'm at the coast so logistics may be difficult but PM me if you are keen.

 

[robmobile73]

I just swapped out my 35x12.5 R15 BFG mud terrains for the Kenda 35x10.5 R17 on my Troopy. The BFGs were a mix older K02 on front new KM3 on back. The noise reduction on the Hwy was incredible, it was like driving a new truck. I could hear the radio and have a conversation with out shouting at 65-70 mph. I have the 4.1 reduction gears in the tcase and often wondered why people complained about gear box whine- I couldn't really hear it before, but I can now.

I know you are after a more aggressive tire than the Kendas, but I don't think the BFG MT are a "quieter" solution to what you have base on my experience with them. I still have the BFGs if you are interested or just want to try them out. The tires are in Western NC and I'm at the coast so logistics may be difficult but PM me if you are keen.

I appreciate the offer on the tires, but my 3B wouldn't like 35's. I'm not swapping tires anytime soon, but at some point I might. Which kenda do you have? I do need to put some sound deadening on the fenderwells in the back, that would help.

 

[svsisu]

I appreciate the offer on the tires, but my 3B wouldn't like 35's. I'm not swapping tires anytime soon, but at some point I might. Which kenda do you have? I do need to put some sound deadening on the fenderwells in the back, that would help.

Understood. I have the Kenda Klever RT 35x10.5 R 17 (P/N 601015). They make a 33x10.5 R 17. I used 4Runner 17x7 spare rims and got the tires from walmart back in March (?) when they were on sale for $130 ea. Too good a price not to try them. Mostly the price bounces from 175-200. I just put them on the troopy 2 weeks ago and I like the tire so far- I have spent about 14 hours driving on I40 with them and it is a complete game changer from the MTs on the highway. No off road use yet but they get pretty good reviews from the Taco crew. Definitely, no where near aggressive as your tires, but seem to be a good all around one.

Here's their complete "rough terrain" line.

Automotive Tires, Passenger Car Tires, Light Truck Tires, UHP Tires | Automotive | Kenda Tires | Klever R/T

automotive.kendatire.com