Tire Opinions Wanted (18"--32 vs 33) (1 Viewer)

[ebod]

I've read a bunch of tire-related threads (but only a small % of the many threads out there) and I have a couple of questions re my specific application. I have a 2004 that I use 99% street/highway and 1% light offroad (fire roads). My current tires are Bridgestone Revo 2s in 275/65/18. I've been happy with them, but I am considering going to 275/70/18s, mainly for looks.

If I stick with my current size, I can get the Revo 3s in a lighter duty version, which are lighter and come with road hazard protection.

If I move up to 275/70s, the tire is heavier (8 lbs/tire if I stick with Revos and 15+lbs/tire if I go to BFG KOs), no road hazard protection, and effectively taller gearing. BUT, looks way better.

How noticeable will the extra weight and the effective gearing change be if I move up (I'd probably stick with the Revos for a bit less weight)? Is it harder to align with bigger tires? I don't want to drastically change how my car drives, but I can make some compromises.

Thanks in advance for any opinions on what I know is a tired (no pun intended) topic.

 

[blatant]

Bridgestone Dueler Revo's of past and present are a fine tire. I've been on smoother forest roads, than I have "paved" roads in many areas. I think you answered your own questions. 1%. However, you gotta look good, go big. The E rated tire should* be able to stand up to much more abuse, and the 100 isn't exactly light. It is though, a more stiff, HD design the E.

Bridgestone isn't cheap, there are less expensive options out there, that also come in E or often D which may suit you better.

 

[ebod]

Thanks for the reply. I think you nailed the issue. That is, for a truck that is used mainly on-road, are bigger LT E tires worth the driveability drawbacks compared to P tires. I'm leaning towards the bigger 33s, but I'd like to hear thoughts pro or con on this choice.

Thanks again.

 

[neoworm]

I had 33's on my truck for a few months and hated them. Low end torque suffered dramatically IMO. Unless you are going to regear I wouldn't do the 33's. Just my opinion. Thats what you asked for though lol.

 

[Tareq]

If u have 5 speed 33s are perfect fit. I just upgraded to 35s and it drives good, no complaints!

 

[GTV]

If u have 5 speed 33s are perfect fit. I just upgraded to 35s and it drives good, no complaints!

This is totally subjective. I put 1” taller tires on my 1st gen Tundra and while I didn’t hate it, I certainly didn’t like it. I found that it tended to downshift more on the highway and I found that very annoying. Some bolt on performance mods “fixed” my problem.

 

[Tareq]

This is totally subjective. I put 1” taller tires on my 1st gen Tundra and while I didn’t hate it, I certainly didn’t like it. I found that it tended to downshift more on the highway and I found that very annoying. Some bolt on performance mods “fixed” my problem.

You are right, it is subjective.
I did a 33s vs 35s writeup here based on my experience

My 2nd 100, this one from Japan!

Hey Tareq, thanks for answering some of my q's on insta last night. Would you mind posting hub-center to fender lip measurements when you get a chance? I really love the way this is sitting. Such a beautiful truck all around. Fron passenger side just under 44cm, driver side, just over 44cm...

forum.ih8mud.com

 

[ebod]

Thank you for the replies. I needed to order quickly. The insides of my tires were completely bald almost to the cords (I will get an alignment from the tire installer) and my kids will drive the LC over the summer. I'm doing an alignment when I install the new tires.

I went with the 32s (i.e., smaller ones). My reasoning was that, for my use, the main benefit of bigger is looks, while the drawbacks (heavier, slower, worse MPG, probably more wear and tear on suspension, harsh ride) are actual performance. Also, I didn't hate how my prior 32s looked on my LC--still noticeably beefier than stock.

I'm sure I'll regret it in a month which is kind of a bummer because my last tires lasted 7+ years (55k mi). Thus, I'll be second guessing my decision for 83 months.

 

[suprarx7nut]

I vote 33s in the KO2. That's what I drive in summer and while not as fluffy as my winter tires (stock diameter 16") it's still plenty comfy. I don't notice any performance changes, but the 100 series is a dog anyways. I drive like a grandma in that car and I enjoy every minute of it.

 

[MongooseGA]

I had 33s on my 5-speed LX when I bought it. It drove exactly the same as my 4-speed LX and LC with stock tires and 33" tires.

34s on my LX have become kind of annoying. Drives just fine, but down shifts quite a bit more to maintain speed on varying elevation. Initially I didn't think it would need to be re-geared but lately I've been considering it more. If I were putting tires on a mainly on-road truck, E rated tires wouldn't be the move, IMO. On mine, they're really the only thing keeping me from a cushy, factory AHC ride quality. If I wasn't running trails as often as I can and filling the truck up with gear, I'd swap to a lighter load tire for comfort.

 

[vman07]

There's no way a 33" Ko2, be it a standard or metric 33, is actually 33" tall. BFG's always run short.

 

[Pucker5]

I had 33s on my 5-speed LX when I bought it. It drove exactly the same as my 4-speed LX and LC with stock tires and 33" tires.

34s on my LX have become kind of annoying. Drives just fine, but down shifts quite a bit more to maintain speed on varying elevation. Initially I didn't think it would need to be re-geared but lately I've been considering it more. If I were putting tires on a mainly on-road truck, E rated tires wouldn't be the move, IMO. On mine, they're really the only thing keeping me from a cushy, factory AHC ride quality. If I wasn't running trails as often as I can and filling the truck up with gear, I'd swap to a lighter load tire for comfort.

Which 34’s you got

 

[DDabs]

There's no way a 33" Ko2, be it a standard or metric 33, is actually 33" tall. BFG's always run short.

32.8", splitting hairs eh?

 

[Alibaster]

32.8", splitting hairs eh?

This is the guy that sues subway because the footlong is only 11.5”. And I approve whole heartedly.

 

[vman07]

32.8"?

On a good day.

 

[CLEcruiser]

I have been having the same internal debate for about a month. I want 275/70 ko2 because they look great, but im afraid i will regret the ride quality, especially being in Cleveland where potholes are everywhere. I'm leaning towards 265/70/18 falken wildpeak at3w. They are much cheaper, they look pretty good still and come in P load rating. 32.6 diameter

 

[GTV]

How about 285/65, 32.6”?

 

[MongooseGA]

Which 34’s you got

285/75/17 (33.8") Coopers

 

[C6H12O6]

I thought the ride quality was better with 275/70-18 KO2s, not worse. My previous tires were 255/60-18 Michelins and they rode great, but not what I wanted. The KO2 is definitely a sturdier tire, but I love them. Better on washboard dirt roads, better with a load of gear and towing my boat, and overall just a better feel. I did notice a little bit of an acceleration and braking hit right at first, but I got used to it really quickly.

And, they look great.

 

[geanes]

There's no way a 33" Ko2, be it a standard or metric 33, is actually 33" tall. BFG's always run short.

Mine measure at 32.4" But, I'm nearly 7800lbs and run 46psi in the rear.