Which 255/85/16 is best for Expedition?

[MidLife]

Josh, Not only that most all-terrains are quieter, last (wear) longer, are less expensive, and probobly help maintain a more fuel efficient vehicle.....and more sand friendly...I think.

The BFGs look very attractive on a truck and come in every size imaginable.

 

[MidLife]

Now for the dark side of all-terrains... More likely to get a flat in adverse conditions.

 

[MidLife]

Can anybody inform me where I can get wheel spacers so when I buy my 255/85/16s I can keep a wider stance... Any recomendations?

 

[joshoisasleep]

Now for the dark side of all-terrains... More likely to get a flat in adverse conditions.

Compared with a mud terrain? I guess MT's do have those thick lugs all over them. Makes sense.

Still, one thing I've heard time and again from experienced adventurers. I don't know if some will disagree, but I've always been told by guys that they just keep their tires at 80 psi (I assume they had tires rated for that pressure), and no lower, and they almost never, or never got a flat.
I practice this at the 50psi rating of my AT's, and they don't have so much as a mild leak. They have plenty of tread, but they're old and worn looking... I avoid sharp rocks and such when I can, but these babies have been through some serious **** in their life with me alone (they came with my 81 bj60 donor truck).

I'm pretty sure they're BFG's. And yeah, they can handle the mud when necessary. I've driven almost as much thick deep mud in the last few days on washed-out local highways as I did in highschool playing in mudpits... they've done great.

 

[wesintl]

I believe i'm going with the 255/85/16 truxus

 

[hks3sgte]

HKS,

What size tire spacers are you using with your truck? I think it looks good that way. By the way, where did you get them?

I like the way your truck looks

Thanks for the comments.

As far as spacers, I don't believe in them, hence I don't run them. Proper wheel size is key.

 

[Texas bj-42]

255/85r16

I went with this tire after wearing out my 8.25R16 Michelin XZLs. After a lot of sulking because I have not been able to replace the Michelin's, I decided to go with the BFG M/T in 255/85R16.

I use my little diesel BJ-42 like a tractor on the ranch (uprooting small trees on the fence lines, dragging whatever needs it, etc) but I also drive it to work 83 miles a day (round trip).

I am completely sold on the BFGs. They are quiet (relative), wear very well on-road and dig well off-road.

Justin Wehring

 

[fernandol]

I love the 255/85/16 BFG mud terrains I had them in my Nissan Patrol when I lived in Spain and used them in snow and lots of fairly high speed road driving +/- 100mph is pretty common in Spain, they ware evenly and are not very loud.
I am running them on my 4runner now and still love them. Plus you can get them fairly cheap at tire rack.

 

[sandcruiser]

I'd be curious to hear more opinions on flats in MT's vs. AT's....

Every flat I've gotten in an MT has been the result of a thorn (or nail, or screw) that catches the tire between lugs, where there isn't much rubber

I would think that ATs would reduce that chance as the void space is smaller

but I don't have much experience to back that up as I've only been driven a few months w/ ATs, and not heavily loaded, and not much serious offroad

 

[Bogo]

I deal with thorns all the time. My experience is they go into any tire regardless of lug pattern. Best to have a good set of steel belts. Thorns don't go through them as easily. For patching, anything in the center 7/8ths of the treads can be patched via a rope type plug from the outside while anywhere else requires dismounting and an interior patch.

 

[joshoisasleep]

here's a quote from two british guys who really put these tires to the test. They were in a very heavily loaded landrover defender 110 and drove around South America.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Tyres - the Michelin XZL 750x16 tyres were great and never had a puncture but only lasted 40,000kms before they became dangerous on wet roads. The BFGoodrich Mud Terrains 285/85 we have now lasted better (50,000 kms and still plenty of tread) but have had a whopping 18 punctures. Two punctures where pieces of metal penetrated, one a stone went straight through, and the rest from dirt getting inside and wearing through the inner tube. Tubeless rims next time! Only carrying one spare was never a problem, we were lucky not to have two punctures close together. We carried a punture kit and tyre levers (very useful for adjusting fan belt tension and hitting things with!) but never used it.
[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

quote from www.ihana.com
[/FONT]

 

[hks3sgte]

XZLs would be perfect for off-road-use-only. But there is a difference in the way an XZL is built and the BFG MT is built. BFG MT= more street-oriented.

 

[nastav]

I have 285/75/16 BFG AT on my FJ60.
They are pretty quiet on the highway, and they have been fine so far off-road.
I went to S-N-T for the first time this year, and the tires (aired down...but not THAT aired down) were fine.
I'd say that while the BFG AT is not as hardcore looking/wheeling as some of the Mud tires, they will probably be better suited to your needs right now.
If you build the truck up more, or begin to do some more difficult trails, maybe an upgrade will be justified.
I believe they measured out to 33" x 10.2" or something, which was a bit smaller than the Goodyear MTR of the same size i picked up on Craigslist for $80 never mounted.
I personally like the tall skinny look, and would consider the 285/75 as wide as I'd like to go.
Search the various tires on this board and others, as you will find that certain brands have reputation for being very difficult to balance, and some Jeep magazine reviews have said that certain brands will not balance; something to think about on a long road trip.
Get a spare the same size as your tires, even if it is a used tire......you want the same size spare (or close), the stock spare will seem like a donut spare after you go up in size.
BTW: You will have a blast at S-N-T.

 

[TundraSkyline]

I recently went from 265/75 Bridgestone Revos to 255/85 BGF MTs and love them.

In snow they worked extremely well engaging the abs way-way less when forcing it to engage.

On the freeway with the windows up they hum a little more than bald tires do (compared to a new tire). Window down alongside the k-wall, that makes you want to change lanes. Not loud, just unpleasant.

I'm sure they work well in mud so I'll take their word, but driving Berdoo, Pinkham, Old Dale, and misc. in JTNP I had not a single issue at norml pressure...except for removing small stones before getting back on the 10.

 

[Sherpa 60]

Those boys at Peterson publications have run off-road comparison tests over the years on Mud Terrains vs. All Terrains.

Basically both tires performed much the same with the MT having the advantage in mud and a slight advantage on rocks with the AT having the advantage in sand and snow. Not radical differences, but perhaps enough to steer you in one direction given the type of off-road conditions you typically expect to see.

I personally run All Terrains because I feel they perform better on the road with little sacrifice off-road to the MTs for the conditions I experience. Quiter, better traction wet or dry, better in sand (which I see a lot more of than mud) and as a bonus less expensive. I often have to travel long distances to get to the trail head. With a fully loaded vehicle and often sub-par roads I want a good stable road tire that will perform wet or dry. The ATs have worked well for me in that regard.

As to the comment about ATs not being good off-road tires? Don't forget ATs are the go to tire in the Baja 1000. Granted a specific focus, but certainly not to be doscounted.

And...why 255s??? I get the English look thing, but 10"?. As long as you get the right load rating and sidewall stiffess not qiute sure why a slightly wider tire wouldn't be a better choice.

 

[hks3sgte]

And...why 255s??? I get the English look thing, but 10"?. As long as you get the right load rating and sidewall stiffess not qiute sure why a slightly wider tire wouldn't be a better choice.

Many reasons.

For me, it comes down to this: as tall and as wide as it needs to be, not any more!

I'm not a fan of wide tires. Skinny tires have gotten me through averything, so I keep them.

 

[MidLife]

Sherpa,

I just bought the BFG M/T in 255/85/16 and I can say so far it looks like its a good thing. I can't say for sure because I have only driven them about 10 minutes at FWY speed and about 10 min city driving.

They are much more quiet than I expected. They make a little more road noise than my worn out Michelin LTX M/Ss, but not a much.

Wind nose and Freeway noise is much more prevalent. I only drove about 65 mph. They might make more at a faster speed. I am very happy with this choice.

I did notice that my braking felt diminished with this size over the 275/70/16 I had. I checked the pads on the driver side rear wheel and its very, very worn.

Good thing its not my dd. Looks like I need new brakes.

 

[Sherpa 60]

Unfortuanately that is the delima with seting up a truck for the trail and then having to drive it on freeways etc. The are compromises and the trick is to find the appropriate balance...which is often a very individual thing.

Unless you are trailering the rig, if you travel long distances on-road get to your destination I personally want a tire that minimally compromises my ability to stop, corner, deal with wet weather, and perhaps most importantly evasive manuvers.

I am also not a fan of "wide" tires. I have 33X10.5s on my truck. That selection was partially driven by my retaining the stock rims (and although others have gone to 12.5s I feel these are too wide for the rim). I considered going to a 8X16" rim which offers tires with much higher load capacities, but I would have jumped to a 285mm wide tire, again defaulting to to a little better on-road performance (and with no impact to off-road performance). And we are not talking radical difference from a 255 to a 285, say 1.2"?


To each his own!

 

[TundraSkyline]

Oh another cool thing I forgot to mention about the BFG M/Ts is as your crawling to a stop on pavement you get a brief sensation like full metal-to-metal contact in your brakes from the big lug tread rolling- took a few minutes to get used to.

 

[The Adam Blaster]

Some thoughts on the new BFG KM2 that is sort-of out, will be coming out in more sizes later...
They are more aggressive than the previous model KM. The tread pattern is a slight blend between the KM and the Krawler tire that is/was meant for offroad only purposes.
To be honest, i used to run 31" BFG KM's on my Cherokee, i liked them a lot and didn't mind the slight vibration/road noise that they made. But, i also liked to hit some harder trails from time to time.
I WOULD NOT recommend the KM2's as a dail driver or expedition tire. They are likely not going to last as long as the previous KM, will be louder, worse on fuel economy, and I would consider them to be an 80% offroad , 20% onroad tire.
Take my opinion for what it is worth, but i work on the order desk of a tire distributor here in Canada.

For the longer distances that an expedition vehicle is going to see, and the fact you're likely to stay on paved and lighter gravel roads most of the time, i'd stick with an A/T tire.