Yokohama Geolandar MT (1 Viewer)

[Cañonero]

So, looking for light alloy wheels, it makes sense to look for the lightest M/T tires and the ones I found in 285/75/16 are the Yokohama Geolandar M/T.

It looks like a super agressive tire for me, but it seems from offroaders reviews that they are not that bad on the road.

Reviews - Yokohama Geolandar MT Mud Terrain Tire Reviews by Offroaders.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Review Engine Powered by ReviewPost

What are your opinions on them?

By the way there are two versions, the MT and the MT+, I don't know if both are available.

 

[Boone]

Never had any experience with them but i've read a few threads on here where people have talked about them and if i recall correctly i think they like them pretty well. A search might turn something up if no one with first hand info chimes in soon.

 

[Isaacjohnstar]

Got them in the 33x12.5 They do well on road and really good off road if you air them down. They are directional and they don't grip as well in reverse. On road they don't make much noise and they seem to hold up very well.
Mine actually measure to 32" tall. They are on 15 inch alloy wheels and on my FJ 40

I'm actually thinking of going to the tall skinny look. But the tires are great, 4.5 out of 5 stars

 

[BenB]

I have them in 285/7516 and so far I'm a big fan. They are surprisingly quiet on the road and I like the look of a directional. Snow traction is great (though I'm guessing that's not much of a factor for you.) I'd recommend them.

 

[gotmud]

They must have improved the tread design recently. I had a set on a 4Runner and they seemed to be pretty loud, even when new. Did well off road though.

 

[UncleJesse]

A friend of mine had those tires on his 94 yota truck and he loved them. I remember him saying how suprised he was that they did as good on the road as off. As others have already mentioned, it is a directional tire and with that comes good and bad. The one thing I never understood about a directional tire is what to do about a spare. It will be setup for only one side of the truck. In a pinch on the trail who cares I guess. It will get you out and then you deal with it.

All in all, I think its a great tire and plan on trying a set someday.

 

[AMMO]

I had these in 315's years back, they were a good tire and served me well. I do remember they "had" a soft compound tho. So if lots of road travel in in your plans may not be the best choice. Then again this was 5 maybe 6 yrs ago they could have a diff formula by now.

-Ammo

 

[djsherif]

I originally wanted to go with the BFG KM2s for cost reasons but I may have a hookup to get these in the 35x12.5x15 size through a friend so I will report back when I get them how they perform on and off road.

I think the only model available now is the M/T+

From everything I've read they seem to be great and they look bad a$$....

 

[Cañonero]

Thank you all for the responses.

I've read in the Yokohama website they state they have a new "long lasting compound", so they may went to a harder compound.

In my case I'd prefere something softer as I don't cover many KM's with the 80 and I they will most likely be cristalyzed before the tread is worn.

I wonder if the new MT+ are still softer than BF Goodrich KM2.

 

[Cañonero]

I have them in 285/7516 and so far I'm a big fan. They are surprisingly quiet on the road and I like the look of a directional. Snow traction is great (though I'm guessing that's not much of a factor for you.) I'd recommend them.

It's really one of the most important factors in my case. I live in the north in a quite high area, this winter We got plenty of snow and freezing temperatures up to -15ºC.

How do they do on the ice?

 

[BenB]

I live in in northern Canada, and as far as a mud tire goes, I think they're quite decent on ice. But you'd have to check re: whether the new compound is harder, as I am sure mine are a few years old. With the full time 4x4 and weight of my cruiser I am often going 110 km/h on the highway when everyone else is having are hard time staying on the road at 80km/h. Winter tires are definitely better, but if you're used to driving all seasons in the winter (as I always have) I think the MT's will be as good as any.

 

[sandcruiser]

Geolander MT's are softer than Hankook MTs, in my experience.
I have a new set on and feel like they have already shown some wear after less than 5,000 km.

but they have decent manners on road and they do great in mud and even ok on sand, so far.

 

[Cañonero]

What about sidewall strenght?

Since they are a 2 ply sidewall they are in theory weaker than let's say BF Goodrich, but I also heard that the number of ply is not always a good way to measure sidewall strenght.

They are also quite light if that means something (7 lbs lighter than the BF Goodrich KM2 in the same size).

Punctures?

 

[Tennessee80]

I had the yoko MT on my truck when I bought it, and they were great, albeit loud as they aged. I think they have only a 2 ply sidewall. I thought they were great offroad, and as another has posted, when aired down, really did well. Good luck with your decision!

 

[Cañonero]

I had the yoko MT on my truck when I bought it, and they were great, albeit loud as they aged. I think they have only a 2 ply sidewall. I thought they were great offroad, and as another has posted, when aired down, really did well. Good luck with your decision!

Yes, that is my main worry, the 2 ply sidewall, I don't know if that means it's weaker than a BF Goodrich M/T anyway.

As I'm going to drive it in long african expeditions, I need something tough.

 

[sandcruiser]

the yoko's don't have a very high weight rating either. I don't recall the exact number, but for the 33x12.50 it seemed low to me

also they have a 35psi max inflation limit. Something about that make me think that they are less suited to long/hot expedition travel