I've done some research on this forum, but would like some confirmation from those with more knowledge to avoid making a costly mistake. So thanks in advance.

I have a stock 2018 TRD Offroad that needs new tires. From my research, the stock wheels on my model are 17x7.5" wide and the stock tire size is P265/70R17.

My truck is my daily driver and is primarily used on-road. I do occasionally tow a 19' ski boat, but not very often and not very far. Since I need new tires anyway, I'd like to go for a slightly more aggressive (i.e. off road) look, while balancing fuel economy & road noise.

Because I'm concerned about fuel economy (and because I think they're adequate to meet my use case), I'd like to stay with lighter P-rated (SL Load Range) options. And, because I'd like a more aggressive look, I'd like to go a little bigger.

From my research on this forum, I *think* I can fit up to 285/70/17s without significant mods (and possibly no mods).

I like the looks of the Falken Rubitrek A/T and Wildpeak AT3W tires, and both are available in P285/70/17. The differences seem minimal. Weight difference is a wash (Wildpeaks are less than a pound heavier). From Falken's description, the Rubitrek should be slightly better for on-road use, so I'm leaning that way. (I'm in Missouri with a Tire Plaza local, so I should be able to get them.)

My questions...

Will the 285/70/17s fit on my stock truck with minimal (or possibly no) mods? What are the likely mods necessary?

Thoughts on going with P285/70/17s for my described use? (Both of these tires are also available in the stock size.)

Thoughts on Rubitrek A/T vs Wildpeak AT3W?

Up to you if the "look" of increased diameter tires is worth it. I picked up a 2023 TRD Offroad last week. I've been doing my own research, and similar to you, fuel economy and ride comfort are also priorities for me, while balancing regular offroad use. Going up in diameter does a lot to fuel economy, FWIW. In your case, I would definitely stay P-metric. Of note, just about any P-metric A/T I've come across in stock size has a higher load rating than the factory all-seasons, so I guess that's nice for extra buffer in that category. My factory all seasons are 113 load, the AT3W's in factory size are 115 load. LT KO2s in Load Range C are actually rated LOWER load than the factory P-metric all seasons, at 112.

In my case, I'm going stock size 265/70R17 Falken Wildpeak AT3W's, in P-metric SL load.

I got the BFG KO2 and am very happy with them. Some people have reported they are difficult to balance, but I've never an balance issue with them (balanced at Discount Tires).

Depending on how rigorous your off road event are, they are available up to load range E which suits me for the sharp, granite, rocks I do in Colorado. If all you do is rounded sandstone, then load range C is adequate.

MT Baja Pro X, or Bias Trepador stickies

Michelin Defenders or LTX AT2

I agree. A Toyo or Wildpeak AT3 with a 3 peak rating in P-metric. I run 285/70-17 Wildpeaks in a Standard Load and they have performed great on and off road.

Fuel economy will suffer with 285s, even in SL load. Especially if you’re towing, you’ll notice the additional rotational mass. I’d stick with 265.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Defender LTX M&S ... on my 2nd set, great longevity, I really like the ride on my 2012 TE. Stock size. YMMV.

BFG ko2 if you want a good all around AT tire.

quiet, durable, and lightweight.

Severe weather rated.

There are alot of good AT tires out there.

Stick to stock size and stay with lighter P-rated. The extra size and weight would not work out well for mpg (no ko2's, no Baja)

I would also drop the "look" preference. It will have you going down the wrong path.

I love my Duratracs in C load, but in your case I probably wouldn't reamend them ether. Michelin makes some good tires, but there side walls are known to be terrible, so keep that in mind depending on your off roading.

I think the Falken Wildpeak AT3W's, in P-metric SL load would be your best bet? But I have never owned them... And though everyone hates the OEM Bridgestone DUELER H/T's they will give best MPG. I used to get 21+ mpg with them. Hated them though.... Much happier with my Duratracs and ~18mpg.

As someone who went to only a P-metric 285 and tows, I'd stick to a 265. There is a noticeable difference in towing in the hills and MPG dropped. If I weren't going to lift my truck and go offroad, I wouldn't go bigger. You'll rub too. Even an aggressive AT with some nice sidewalls looks much bigger than the stock 265 Bridgestone. Find a P metric AT and you'll be happy. Either Falken you mentioned is good. I had KO2s and they were great, but they are a C load.

I'd check the new Mickey Thompson Baja Boss A/T in the 265/70R17 size (XL load rated). They're apparently 31.89" which is about as close to a true 32" tire as you can get and should give a more aggressive look while also being severe snow rated and pretty good all around. I'm thinking I'm going to replace my Yokohamas with them later this year since as much as I like the durability advantage of an E-rated tire, I'm just not doing enough four wheeling these days to justify the MPG hit.

Agree with other posters to avoid going to 33". Yes, they look good, but you're going to need to at minimum cut your bumper and probably pull your front mud flaps, and may even have issues with the body mount (unlikely though with stock offset).

I would think a 275/70/17 would have less chance for having to mod anything. My 15 TE I went 1.75/1 and had minor rub as full wheel lock, but went away after a few thousand miles.

My new 22 TRD ORP just going .85 in front with 1/2 conrnfed in rear and stock tire size for MPG reasons also. Just filled up 3.999 gallon.

Thanks, guys. After weighing the options, I think sticking to the stock 265/70s is the smart choice. If there were better option in 275/70 there were lighter, I'd be tempted, but...

Thanks for pointing out those Mickeys. They look great and are pretty light for the size. Off to read some reviews...

Yeah, if a 275/70R17 existed out there that wasn't E-load (I think maybe the Falken is a C-load, but it's a heavy AF tire nonetheless), it could be a good option to have less worry about rubbing and other issues.

My only pause with the Mickeys in XL is that since they are only 45 pounds, I know they will definitely NOT be as strong on trails out here in the southwest. That being said, I've probably done a few hundred miles of trail driving out of my last 30K and do a TON of long distance highway. After running two E-load tires I'm probably going to step back to an XL or a C-load and see if I regret the decision.

The only flat I've ever gotten from a trail was actually on a C-load first generation KM mud tire on my 2012 Wrangler for what it's worth (non repairable sidewall tear slow leak).