275 vs 285 overall performance sanity check
 

Hello,

I have a stock 2011 T4R TE.

My plan is to keep it as stock as I can but also make it capable for Colorado/Utah mountains/conditions.

Current plan: RSG DOM Sliders, RCI full skid (Steel), Bilstein 6112/5120 lift. 2.5 front 1.5 rear if I go with 275.

Now onto the tires. My main priority is performance. I know with the added weight + lift Im going to take a MPG hit. Thats fine, but with the 285's it will rob performance off the line and I imagine uphill because of the wider tire.

I also plan on getting the FX pro wheels which are 8lb per wheel lighter than stock. Both BFG's in 275/285 load E weigh the same. So weight savings there.

Is there any reason to go with the 285 over the 275 considering my plans with this car, both for current or future plans, and for the terrain I will be on?

Thanks in advance

If you are doing all that, may as well get up to 285 tires too. Get a little extra width.

Off the line performance should not matter in a 4Runner, it's too heavy for that type of driving.

For off road, 4 Low will take care of power loss due to larger diameter tires and give you good off road performance.

What do you mean its too heavy for that? The 4runner or the tires?

Im more concerned about a power loss going up mountains or preventing my current power band access in stock form.

I wouldn't be overly concerned with the power loss, either way on-road in the mountains you will spend most of your time in S-mode in 4th and dropping down into 3rd on the steeper grades, from my experience.

are you going with Ko2?

If so, get em in 285 in load range C.

I run them in E and my buddy runs them in C. His tires perform just as well as mine, and he gets much better gas mileage than I do.

IMHO, 285's is the perfect all around tire size. Big enough to do most trails, small enough not to break things or need a regear.

I recently replaced my worn out 275/70/17 KO2 load range E tires with stock size 265/70/17 KO2 load range c tires. I will never go back to a heavier taller tire without a gear change or more power. It runs just enough better with the smaller tire to make it enjoyable again without the lugged down less responsive bigger tires. Most people will not agree with this and I agree the bigger tires look better but that was the only benefit to me.

285's
 

Don't know about the 275's, but with the 285's you'll need to do some mods to make them fit. I have 285 KM3s with Method wheels and an Icon stage 7 2" lift kit. If you just mount the larger wheels and tires they will rub on tight turns.

The fender liners had to be removed, the frame modified with a body chop kit (simple plates that are welded on when the frame is cut back, and the front fender liner moved forward (DIY, videos on how to do it). After that there was no more rubbing. Mine was done by Keith's Garage in Grand Junction. Kieth is a great guy and a Toyota specialist.

You are right. Most people here will not agree with this, but I do.

I have a 17 SR5.
2½" lift, 285's on aftermarket wheels (don't know backspace).
Front tires touched the plastic liners ever so slightly. Probably didn't need to, but I did the trim mod (10 minutes with scissors and drill).
Power-wise, I've had no issues not having less power than traction.
"Off the line", it's an SUV. Turn off traction control and smoke the tires. Not getting a hole shot with 2½ tons.
But with enough money, anything's possible.
I live in sharp rock rural Arizona desert, so heavy, thick, tough sidewalls are my friend. 4 low works, though I've never really "needed" it.
Enjoy your 4runner for what it is.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

the issue is from the wheels. 285/70-17's fit fine with stock offset/width wheels. moving some plastic and the front mudflaps is all it takes.

Yeah I would keep it at 265 but with the off roading in CO mountains I could use ground clearance.

The shop installing my lift will do all necessary cuts and adjustments to fit 285's if I go that route.

E load is overkill. I’ve yet to have a puncture or flat on my 265 SLs here in CO and UT. C load is the most you’ll need and will help save some weight.

I believe the FN six shooters are even lighter than the Pros.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Upgraded to 285 from 265. On 7" stock rim. I never noticed a power loss. Perfect size for my terrain in northern Arkansas forests usually in 4-lo. No regear required. I run 2" wheel spacers not sure but I think there's not much trimming involved without spacers.

I went with a 275. For tire height, you're only talking about a .5 inch difference, maybe less. I had to do zero mods, no rubbing in any configuration.

Let's not forget, Toyota took two bone stock 4Runners, back in 2010, and only added an A/T tire in the stock size, and some rock sliders. They took the 5th Gen's to the freaking Rubicon, and conquered it without any issues.

For a tire, I'd recommend Discoverer AT3's. I have a set on my Ram 1500 and recently added a set to the 4Runner. They are a quiet and fantastic tire in all weather conditions. We would go hiking up in the mountains in Idaho, in the dead of winter, in about 8 inches of snow...the tire did not miss a beat. Also handled excellent in the rain and slush. On the highway, even at 80MPH, the tire was fairly quiet. I've heard that a lot of owners of KO2's lose wet traction after 15K+ miles. The BFG's are also louder and weigh more. Not sure how they became so popular...

Hope this helps. Good luck with your decision.

I've never really seen the point to 275s with much better options in 285. BFG and Falken both make 285/70s that weigh 7-8lbs less than their 275 options. Both are going to slow you down a little bit, so I'd go with the lighter option that happens to be a little taller anyway. Both Falken and BFG 285s are around 51lbs each, so with your lighter wheels you're actually right at OEM tire/rim weight.