Want to see pics of 265/75/16 with 2.5" OME lift (1 Viewer)

[boma23]

Hi All,

Per above! My 100 came with some Grabber X3 33"*12.5" R18s on Pro Comps which weigh over 105 lbs per corner unworn!! To be fair the pro conps are 28lbs which i think is light for an 18 of that build quality.

But that's simply 'weigh' too much for a mostly tarmac and occasional light trail machine.... I have a KZN130 Hilux Surf on 33" MTs which is the machine that gets abused and hammered off road, so I want to get some road manners and performance back on the LC with a lighter tyre on the OEM rims which came with, but still retain sone offroad ability and not ruin the looks with the 2.5" lift.

I've had great success with 'off brand' tyres in the past, and am looking at the Thunderer Ranger ATR in the 265, which still has an agrressive tread, a wide carcass at 32" and weighs 50lbs per tyre. Coupled with the OEM rim I should drop up to 28lbs per corner of rotational weight! (I weighed the spare new X3 and it came in at 76 lbs!!!).

I'm still a little wary they may look small with the lift kit though... Does anyone have good profile pics of some aggressive 265/75/16 on a 2.5" lift?

I've seen plenty at standard height, but not lifted.

 

[boma23]

Here's some picture whoring of the current 33x12.5R18 Grabber X3, for anyone interested.

I'm actually scared to flex at minute, as not entirely sure whether too wide to clear the arches....

Looks great, but might be a case of form over function, in what is an otherwise great build from the former owner.

 

[boma23]

Thread revival.

I've still not bought tyres for the OEM wheels yet, and still not managed to find pics of 275/75/16 on this 2.5" of lift (countless pics of 33s). OEM wheels would be even better.

I do want to lower the gearing and reduce weight for daily use, but don't want it to look like a roller skate.

Does anyone have any pics at all?

 

[GTV]

265/75’s are only about half inch taller than the factory 275/70’s so it’s highly doubtful that anyone would waste their time putting those tires on a rig that they’ve spent the money on a 2.5” lift.

 

[boma23]

265/75’s are only about half inch taller than the factory 275/70’s so it’s highly doubtful that anyone would waste their time putting those tires on a rig that they’ve spent the money on a 2.5” lift.

That makes sense, but not out of relams of the possible. There must be a couple out there who run smaller less aggressive set of wheels for daily, and save their big MTs for wheeling?

Found a really nice rig on expedition portal here but no side shots:

Featured Vehicle: Toyota Landcruiser UZJ100 - Expedition Portal

Andrew Moore's Land Cruiser has just the right amount of modification, not too much, nor too little.

expeditionportal.com

 

[C Rusty]

It took me a bit to find a picture, but here’s mine with a little over 1” of lift with 265s

 

[MountaineerLC]

Have you considered 255/85r16? You'll be getting a 33" tire, but it's over an inch narrower than the 285/75r16 many of us run. That difference could save you sole weight.

Another options, if you've got 18's already is. 275/70r18 that is C rated instead of E rated.

JMO, but a 31.5" or 32" tire is going to look too small on a lifted 100. These trucks have cavernous wheel wheels.

 

[OwnerCS]

My wheel tire combo weighs in at 72.4 lbs. I think the original wheel and tire weight was ~72 lbs. I'm running 286/75R16 Cooper (now Evolution) Mud Tires that are E Rated. They do ride well for that type of tire. I think people are becoming more rotational weight conscious these days.

I wouldn't worry about gears until after you drive with a wheel and tire combination that is close to 72lbs. You might be surprised at how well it drives.

I think Cooper has an Evolution model with a less aggressive tread than the mud tire. The SCS F5 rims weigh 18.6 lbs in the picture.

Factory wheels with Nitto Terra Grapplers weighed 75.2 lbs

 

[GTV]

Have you considered 255/85r16? You'll be getting a 33" tire, but it's over an inch narrower than the 285/75r16 many of us run. That difference could save you sole weight.

Another options, if you've got 18's already is. 275/70r18 that is C rated instead of E rated.

JMO, but a 31.5" or 32" tire is going to look too small on a lifted 100. These trucks have cavernous wheel wheels.

100% agree. @boma23 could even consider 275/70's in standard load as seen here that would save a ton of weight over those 12.5" wide mudders.

My wheel tire combo weighs in at 72.4 lbs. I think the original wheel and tire weight was ~72 lbs. I'm running 286/75R16 Cooper (now Evolution) Mud Tires that are E Rated. They do ride well for that type of tire. I think people are becoming more rotational weight conscious these days.

I wouldn't worry about gears until after you drive with a wheel and tire combination that is close to 72lbs. You might be surprised at how well it drives.

I think Cooper has an Evolution model with a less aggressive tread than the mud tire. The SCS F5 rims weigh 18.6 lbs in the picture.

View attachment 2993344

Factory wheels with Nitto Terra Grapplers weighed 75.2 lbs

View attachment 2993345

I like the F5's a lot but IMO the offset is terrible and the tire options for 16" wheels leave a lot to be desired.

 

[87warrior]

Have you considered 255/85r16? You'll be getting a 33" tire, but it's over an inch narrower than the 285/75r16 many of us run. That difference could save you sole weight.

The issue is all of the 255/85R16's available have an aggressive tread pattern with a high load range (heavy), which is not what the OP is after. I ran the Cooper ST Maxx, which is the least MT tire available in 255/85R16, for 40k miles. Great tire and size, but it had the typical MT trade-offs.

I also ran a 265/75R16, which is essentially a stock replacement size, but it was not lifted at the time.

 

[mpackard]

Here’s a few pictures of my 99 Land Cruiser with 265/75R 16 tires on stock wheels. I put these on when I had stock suspension height but now it has an Iron Man medium lift, about 2 inches of lift. These tires look small to me with the lift. And they didn’t do anything for the highway ride or fuel economy compared to the previous 285/75R16’s that I had on there before.
I’ll be going back to 285/75R16 tires or 255/85R16‘s for the next set.

 

[boma23]

Thanks for the additional pics. Definitely leaning toward the 265/75/16 just being a bit too small with the lift.

Appreciate the suggestions on the pizza cutters and C-rated tires. In fact I had looked hard and thought I'd discovered the perfect (an one of the only) C-Rated MT in 33s / 285/75, the Pirelli Scorpion MT, which had an exceptionally low weight, aggressive MT, but still had a good block to void ratio on the tread so knowing Pirelli probably still good on the road. Looks like a fantastic tire but can't find them for love nor money now in right sizes in US, and Pirelli don't seem to list anymore and won't confirm if being made again.

I wouldnt want to run a pizza cutter MT - not enough block on the tarmac for my highway driving.

So looking like I might be coming back to 285/75/16 that might run lighter and smaller than commonly found. Cooper do another lighter ST I've found, but still means only saving 15 lbs per wheel compared to 25 lbs per wheel going to OEM 16s with the 265/17 and not regaining gearing, which is also a big issue where I live.

Ideally I'd re-gear the T case for the 33s, but that's a cost too far, and no one reliable to do the work locally.

Living in Caribbean you have to add about 50-70% to any US costs to factor shipping and import duties. Sucks balls. But that's the trade off for living in paradise!

 

[boma23]

Actually, the one 285/75/16 I do like look & budget of is the Ranger ATR. I have a set of their Thunderer MT on my Surf (4runner) and really rate them, but still fairly fresh. I'm wondering how the less tall ATR tread holds up over time.