Just about every other manufacturer has copied their sidewall lugs, and in a much more cartoonish fashion if you ask me.

These can be seen on a Sierra HD AT4 prototype. Pics are floating around the web.

Sorry to break it to you, but the sidewalls look pretty much the same. The tread pattern, however, has changed.

Ran 285/70R17 BFG KO2’s for 100,000 miles (2sets) on an F-150, never had an issue with rain, snow, sleet, any weather you can imagine. This was all across the upper Midwest, drove 55,000 miles a year for work. Also owned them after moving to the rainiest city in the US, in terms of inches per year. Even in a 400 horsepower pickup the back end behaved unless I didn’t want it to. I realize I’m new here, but my guess is a lot of people bought a 4Runner after owning a front wheel drive or all wheel drive vehicle and don’t understand the physics of rear wheel drive perhaps? Just my interpretation…

255/75’s here in Florida. No issues thus far, but as I approach 50-60k miles I’ll report back.

How many other brands of AT tires did you run on the same roads, under the same conditions?

Most of the testimonials I've read saying they are fine in the wet, seem to lack experience with other tires on the same roads, under the same conditions.

FWIW, most of my vehicles have been RWD, 4wd, or AWD. Only 1 FWD over the years. Of course there's the Motorcycles, but they're irrelevant to the discussion.

I have run KO2’s on a number of vehicles and have never had an issue in the wet. They work really well for me in the snow. I do live in SoCal so we don’t get a ton of rain but when we do the roads are typically slick due to oil on the pavement.

My Jeep came stock with BFG Mud Terrain tires and those were awful in wet conditions. Slick in the rain and they tended to wander in the snow. There is no siping on those tires.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you gonna trigger some people with that kind of logic.

I don't want to go off topic, so I'll add my ridiculous statement of the day: "i walked over a leaf and it was super sketchy, these new adidas need to be redesigned!!!!

Ran many other brands on the same roads. Goodyear, Kumho, Cooper, Falken, Yokohama, Uniroyal, Generic store brand, and other BFG (rugged trail). All behaved very similarly. My point wasn't to insult anyone, just offering an explanation. FWIW I've driven probably 500k miles or more since I was 16, and the tires in question were what I purchased with my own money when the time came for new pickup tires. The other brands mostly were what came on the trucks, with a few exceptions being the Falken, Cooper, and Yokohama. And probably the generic store brand ones when I was young and broke.

The KO2s do not have silica, right?

My Mickey Thompsons ATZ P3 do. And they are also much better tires off road than the KO2.

I will give BFG three big pluses when it comes to the KO2:
1/ They actually produce a proper C-load version that is significantly lighter than competitors, who rarely offer C anyway.
2/ They do offer a 3rd sidewall ply on D/E loads which I need.
3/ They do offer stronger rolling surface than most competitors, which I absolutely need, and this is true of the C load as well.

These are real advantages but they are also very specific and totally out of the eyesight of 99+% of the people who buy them.

The KO2 is a fine tire here in the desert though my Micky Thompsons are no worse here and much better overall.

The KO2 has mediocre rock traction and no mud ability to speak of. Of course neither of those are an issue when moving at speed in the desert.

It really is a Southwest/Baja style tire. Elsewhere, it is just for looks (which I am not a fan of but that is totally subjective).

I had KO2s on my f150 and had no issues. Each set had over 100,000 miles on them when i replaced them.