Best Off Road tires for better FE, trucks need love too :)

[chillsworld]

Originally Posted by redneck

.

The leaf springs on those original cars are the only reason those wheels didn't shatter when they hit those ruts in the road. And they go through the mud because of the extreme lbs/inch on the thin tire makes it slice through the mud to the harder surface under it where it applies force and gains traction. We can also look at the type of axles, the torque to weight ratios, and the sheer ground clearance. Not to mention the fact that those vehicles usually weighed 1200lbs and up to 2300lbs for a 4 door like in the video. Can you imagine having a modern 2300lb mid size sedan? Camry 3150lbs, Taurus 3300lbs, Accord 3100lbs, etc etc. But those cars aren't comparable, the closest thing to those "cars" would really be trucks and truck based SUV's... Most of which weigh around 4000lbs.

Lets compare apples to apples folks.


~C

[chillsworld]

Actually, those tires are completely in line with the modern Truck/SUV wheels/tires I was posting about... They were 30" by 4" for a 2000lb vehicle. Double the weight of the vehicle, so adjust the tire for weight and you could have a 8-10" wide and 2-3" (33") in height tire.... The modern 275/285 off road tires that the original article talks about. Of course the added rubber for the side wall is to allow for the vehicle to do things that NONE of those original cars dreamed of doing.

Tires were pneumatic clincher type, 30 in (76 cm) in diameter, 3.5 in (8.9 cm) wide in the rear, 3 in (7.5 cm) wide in the front. Clinchers needed much higher pressure than today's tires, typically 60 psi (410 kPa), to prevent them from leaving the rim at speed. Horseshoe nails on the roads, together with the high pressure, made flat tires a common problem.

Balloon tires became available in 1925. They were 21 in × 4.5 in (53 cm × 11 cm) all around. Balloon tires were closer in design to today's tires, with steel wires reinforcing the tire bead, making lower pressure possible – typically 35 psi (240 kPa) – giving a softer ride. The old nomenclature for tire size changed from measuring the outer diameter to measuring the rim diameter so 21 in (530 mm) (rim diameter) × 4.5 in (110 mm) (tire width) wheels has about the same outer diameter as 30 in (76 cm) clincher tires. All tires in this time period used an inner tube to hold the pressurized air; "tubeless" tires were not generally in use until much later.

(Ford Model T - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)



~C

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by chillsworld

The goal is to have a taller sidewall, decreasing the sidewall defeats the purpose of going with the taller skinnier tire. The large sidewall is what allows for airing down...

I think we're talking about two different things here. 'Airing down' just isn't going to happen.

Two tracks on sand, same size tire, one at 32psi a one at 10psi. Do you see the difference? One sinks and one floats.

When did we start discussing dune buggies? Thought we were talking about driving trucks on rough dirt roads, where ability to go over rocks, potholes, and the like is what's important.

My statement about sidewalls folding over was a disclaimer regarding on road driving habits/techniques. If you drive your truck like a sports car, hitting twisty roads, death turns, etc, then you should get a lower aspect ration side wall and anticipate a reduced ability to air down on the trail (or so I would assume).

You pretty well have to drive your vehicle on pavement in order to get to where the dirt road starts, and the distance on pavement will likely be several times that on dirt. It's also likely (hereabouts, anyway) that a good part of the pavement portion will be twisty. So yes, I would appreciate the ability to go around curves at a reasonable speed.

Then again, if you are an ecomodder... You shouldn't be driving like a bat out of hell anyway

Whyever not? My goal is to be able to drive like a bat out of hell go through curves at a reasonable speed while using little fuel.

[chillsworld]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

I think we're talking about two different things here. 'Airing down' just isn't going to happen.

I think you failed to read the article, my original post, and the title of the thread... 'Airing down' is a basic and necessary part of "off roading", the reason I posted this is because many 4x4 owners who run trails, choose wider and bulkier tires which aren't FE friendly... I was providing examples/data of how one can go with a more FE friendly tire/wheel combo without sacrificing their ability to use their truck wherever and however they want to.

When did we start discussing dune buggies? Thought we were talking about driving trucks on rough dirt roads, where ability to go over rocks, potholes, and the like is what's important.

Well since those tires were on a TRUCK, we haven't started discussing dune buggies. And last time I checked, sand is "off road" isn't it???? The images CLEARLY display how the contact patch of the tire changes when airing down. A truck has more grip and can climb rocks, tackle steep hills, float over sand/snow/mud.... I tire which is aired down conforms to the objects in it's path, where as a fully inflated tire has a smaller contact patch and substantially less traction. And on a final note "rough dirt roads" isn't off-roading... There is that key word "road" in the description. If all we care about are dirt/gravel roads then yes, airing down doesn't matter and going with less sidewall would be a good move if you were worried about on pavement handling.

You pretty well have to drive your vehicle on pavement in order to get to where the dirt road starts, and the distance on pavement will likely be several times that on dirt. It's also likely (hereabouts, anyway) that a good part of the pavement portion will be twisty. So yes, I would appreciate the ability to go around curves at a reasonable speed.

You do have to drive on them to get there... That's why it's called airing down, when you get there you let air out of your tires for off-road use. Then you put air back in when you leave the trails and go back to pavement. And "reasonable speed" on curves is a pretty relative and non-objective description which lacks any and all context. Any DOT approved (America) off-road tire should be able to handle a turn at the designated speed limit in optimal conditions (no rain or ice for example). But lots of people don't drive the speed limit, and lots of people take turns far faster than they should... I myself am guilt of this, but I am also incredibly familiar with my vehicle and it's tires capabilities.

Whyever not? My goal is to be able to drive like a bat out of hell go through curves at a reasonable speed while using little fuel.

Bat out of hell, and reasonable speed aren't the same thing in my book.... But as I said before, the term "reasonable" is far from objective when used as a measurement.


-C

[adam728]

Tall skinny fan here as well. I've used

33 x 9.50 BFG MT's (before they dropped that size, 85 Toyota)
34x10.50 Swamper LTB's (89 Toyota)
33x10.50 BFG AT's (01 Jeep TJ)
235/85/16 Toyo Open Country AT's (92 C2500)

Cornering is hardly an issue. Run proper pressure and drive reasonable and it's just fine. Only the 85 with the ubber skinny BFG MT's ever felt like the tire was "folding" over, and that was when being a complete moron and doing donuts on dry pavement.

The 89 on LTB's was more than solid enough, 16" rims so the tires were load range D (3195 lbs per tire at 60 psi, more than the whole truck weighed). Street pressure was high teens, I wheeled it at 4-6 psi.

I love the 235's on my 3/4 ton. They are excellent in the snow, I was amazed. This year it becomes a plow truck, and I am confident that with enough weight it will work well despite being 2wd.


The thing I love most about skinny tires? You can fit them so much easier! My 89 Toyota wasn't even lifted, just trimmed and massaged. The Jeep spent it's first weekend with 33's with no lift, then got a 2", but eventually ended up down around 1.25" of lift and tons and tons of rock crawling with swaybar disconnects. Everything tucked nicely inside the fenders, so you can get away with less lift.

The 85, 33x9.50 BFG MT's


The 89, 34x10.50 Interco LTB's


The Jeep, 33x10.50 BFG AT's


Dad's Jeep, 33x10.50 BFG AT's (now same size by MT's)

[chillsworld]

Awesome, thanks for the addition to the thread and the pics for visual aide! Totally agree about "skinnier" tires being easy to tuck into unmodified or lightly modified vehicles! I have been on the look out for 9.5" or 10" tires for a while now, seems everyone has dropped the size in favor of 10.5" wide tires... That's what I have now, and going taller in that width is going to need better shocks and a body lift Really wish they made the AT's or even MT's in the skinnier 33/35" sizes!

~C

[adam728]

Originally Posted by chillsworld

Awesome, thanks for the addition to the thread and the pics for visual aide! Totally agree about "skinnier" tires being easy to tuck into unmodified or lightly modified vehicles! I have been on the look out for 9.5" or 10" tires for a while now, seems everyone has dropped the size in favor of 10.5" wide tires... That's what I have now, and going taller in that width is going to need better shocks and a body lift Really wish they made the AT's or even MT's in the skinnier 33/35" sizes!

~C

A 33x10.50 is pretty narrow.

There's still a good number of companies offering narrower than "standard" tires in the 33-35" range. Interco makes a TON of them, everything from 34x9.00 to 38.5x11.00. Irocs, M16, SSR, LTB, Truxxus, Bogger, TSL, you name it.

BFG and General are two offering 33x10.50 mud terrians. I believe Buckshots are still sold in that size, as well as High Tech retreads (I think the name changed now though).

If going metric there are a TON of 235/85 and 285/85 offerings, from highway all seasons to mud terrains.

[chillsworld]

Yeah, I just want to stay away from super swampers and the like...

I'll be looking into getting 16" wheels and going with 255/85 R16 (close to an actual 33.5 tall) for my mounty... Would prefer a true 10" wide but they come out to be around 10.25-10.5" actual. Read a lot of good stuff about the KM2's, and people who run them down to 10psi without issue. Figure I'll need about 2" suspension, trimming, and maybe a small bodylift... But I would like to avoid the BL, might end up going shorter than the 255/85.

~C

[adam728]

Another great thing about skinny tires.

Graded the road yesterday and dug out a small ditch at the end and reshaped some drainage from the one drive. Wanted to pack things in place before the rains today, and thr International is only a bit over 2k. So out came the truck, 5200 lbs, 235/85's, and still at about 65 psi from hauling 2200 lbs in the back the other week. Packed in good.