Plenty of deep sand around me. I definitely don't have to seek it out. Lots of the areas I am exploring or hunting have deep sand.
The funnest is getting buried in sand with snow on top!!!!
Thinking switching from 315/75/R16 to 255/85/R16 - Good for desert sand? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter canman
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Plenty of deep sand around me. I definitely don't have to seek it out. Lots of the areas I am exploring or hunting have deep sand.
The funnest is getting buried in sand with snow on top!!!!
- Thread starter
- #22
Another thing to remember, the Toyo 255s are listed at 33.5”.
I really like Andrew SPW. I think he has and lot of experience and does a good job of relating his vast knowledge. He often talks about the contact patch of a tire getting longer (front to rear) when aired down, not so much side to side spread. I don't know how this translates to deep sand, but the Aussie's and the South African's seem to do well with tall skinny tires.
I have been wanting to try the 255s. I don't see much sand here in Colorado, mostly rocky hard pack trails, and snow/ice in winter.
*Edit - I guess the Aussie's also go the wide tire route too.
I have been wanting to try the 255s. I don't see much sand here in Colorado, mostly rocky hard pack trails, and snow/ice in winter.
*Edit - I guess the Aussie's also go the wide tire route too.
All desert spec land cruiser come with narrow sand tires on split 16" rims. I'm referring to the 70 series..
This is the factory choice.
In sand, you need the length of the tread more than the width. So when you deflate, you get better floatation. No doubt the width does help but it doesn't affect as much as tread length (tire height).
Vehicle weight and tire load range along with tire pressure are the first thing to impact performance. deflating a light truck to 20 PSI will return less affect than deflating the same car with lighter load rating on the tires and at the same tire pressures.
Narrow tires will have less rolling resistance and less wear and tare. Also less fuel consumption. There is really no debate with narrow vs wide.
In terms of height. 33s would be the max size I'd run on any light load vehicle. In Saudi, they run 750R16s all day long because its the best compromise between clearance and performance.
On my general purpose cars, I prefer 255/85s. In my 20+ years of experience, they have been the best all around tire for a little bit of everything use.
This is the factory choice.
In sand, you need the length of the tread more than the width. So when you deflate, you get better floatation. No doubt the width does help but it doesn't affect as much as tread length (tire height).
Vehicle weight and tire load range along with tire pressure are the first thing to impact performance. deflating a light truck to 20 PSI will return less affect than deflating the same car with lighter load rating on the tires and at the same tire pressures.
Narrow tires will have less rolling resistance and less wear and tare. Also less fuel consumption. There is really no debate with narrow vs wide.
In terms of height. 33s would be the max size I'd run on any light load vehicle. In Saudi, they run 750R16s all day long because its the best compromise between clearance and performance.
On my general purpose cars, I prefer 255/85s. In my 20+ years of experience, they have been the best all around tire for a little bit of everything use.
Though it's a couple years old, this thread is very useful, thanks all! I'm curious if a 255 in load range C would be ok on an 80? I really like the Wildpeak AT4w but they only come in 255 85 R16 load range C. What are the thoughts from the group?
I run the Cooper ST Maxx 255/85 with 1/4" steel front and rear bumpers and tire carrier/fuel, 2" 1/4" box tubing for sliders, 12k winch and a roof rack. I run this quite loaded with no problems.
94 80 Series with floating rears
94 80 Series with floating rears
Aren't the Coopers Load range E though?
Yes that's true
The load range is what I was worried about.
If you tires aren’t rubbing then they’re not big enough
Less worried about rubbing, more worried about the load on the motorIf you tires aren’t rubbing then they’re not big enough
That’s what gears are forLess worried about rubbing, more worried about the load on the motor
Right now I’m still trying to get all the maintenance & baselining done on a Cruiser that sat for 10 years. I’m a long way from worrying about re-gearing.That’s what gears are for
Last edited:
Don’t you guys have government imposed, tire size restrictions ?
The OP asked if the smaller tires were good for desert sand.
I think everyone should use what suits them best.
But in over 45 years of Wheeling almost exclusively in the west, and in lots of sand, bigger has always been better.
If that’s not enough, just Google Glamis and see what people are running.
Big fat, wide tires that’s what floats well in sand.
I have also found that airing down to 20 PSI is not enough for deep sand 8 to 12 PSI depending on load.
You should compare the load range and speed index of the falken at4 in load range C to what was on the truck when it rolled off the assembly line. I believe most 80s came with P275/70R16.
If your truck is completely built out and weighs 7,000 pounds, then you may want to run a tire with a higher load rating.
But if your truck is still close to the stock weight you can feel confident about running a tire that is more closely rated to the factory tire numbers.
I certainly would like to try a 285/75r16 in load range C, but no one makes them.
alia176
SILVER Star
Great points! I've running Load range D for most of my 80 ownership. My 80 checks in at 7400#. I'm curious about a skinny 35s or 34.5s.
I’ve looked for skinny 35’s but the only tires I saw are extreme mudders. I need an AT.
alia176
SILVER Star
Yeah, that's what I've been finding as well.
