265/65R17 vs 265/70R17

[2002psm]

I'm trying to decide between the two. Is there any specific advantage between the two sizes? I still have a bnew stock spare (265/65).

From my research on the forum:

Pros:
- Price - 265/70 is cheaper

Cons (going for 265/70):
- less mpg
- ~3% off in speedo reading
- cost of spare replacement (can opt for a used/cheap one)

Thanks for any info.

 

[Jed]

In addition to the points you already made, the 70-series tires obviously have a taller sidewall, so you may get a bit more ride comfort while sacrificing a little bit of handling. But both should be relatively minor differences, depending upon the actual tire you choose.

In my opinion, the nose of the 4th gen is too low to put 70s on it. Sure, they may fit and may not rub, but it will look kinda funny because the low front wheel wells will look even lower if you install a taller tire. So unless you have at least a small spacer lift up front, I'd recommend that you stick with the 65 series tires.

 

[CJ3Flyr]

Jed's points are all good. I beg to differ on the aesthetics aspect. I think the wells on a stock 4Runner look a bit empty, especially on the rear. I would definitely go for the 70's.

This is an extreme example but have a look at Paraordance's ride, he has 255/75's which are even taller.

There's several pics of stock rigs with 265/70's floating around. Here's a few:
Scroll down to black Runner
http://www.toyota-4runner.org/perfo...e/60723-new-member-new-tires-thanks-guys.html
http://www.toyota-4runner.org/general-discussions/48794-pictures-bridgestone-dueler-t-revo.html
http://www.toyota-4runner.org/perfo...rgers-more/54810-new-yokohomas-put-today.html

 

[Jed]

Jed's points are all good. I beg to differ on the aesthetics aspect. I think the wells on a stock 4Runner look a bit empty, especially on the rear. I would definitely go for the 70's.

[/url]
[/COLOR]

Yes, that may be true, but what I'm saying is that the a stock 4th gen already has a big imbalance between the looks of the front and rear wheel wells. The back looks like it has plenty of room and the front looks like it is much tighter. So by putting 70's on a stock 4th gen, the front end will look really stuff with tire, while the rear will look just fine. Of course this is subjective and other people may see it differently. But most pics I see of guys with stock suspensions and 70's make me think they need a front spacer lift badly!

 

[CJ3Flyr]

Yes, that may be true, but what I'm saying is that the a stock 4th gen already has a big imbalance between the looks of the front and rear wheel wells. The back looks like it has plenty of room and the front looks like it is much tighter. So by putting 70's on a stock 4th gen, the front end will look really stuff with tire, while the rear will look just fine. Of course this is subjective and other people may see it differently. But most pics I see of guys with stock suspensions and 70's make me think they need a front spacer lift badly!

I guess... It's like looking at the hot girl, Ginger or Maryanne, which is hotter:lmaooes she look better walking towards you or walking away?

:iagree: 100% on 4th gens needing a slight lift in the front no matter what the intended use.
:cheers:

 

[Border411]

Just an FYI, when I switched to 265/70's my speedo became more accurate. I have access to police Lidar units and with my 265/70 michelin ltx's I am off by 1mph at 60mph. The larger tire also looks better in the wheel wells. By the way, I only replaced the 4 main tires, not the spare.

 

[chaz]

:iagree: with border411, also with cj3flyer, 265/70s are not even really that much bigger than 265/65s. take into account that not all 65s are the exact same size, & not all 70s are either, im willing to bet if you had 265/65 mich ltx, & changed to 265/70 mich ltx,(same tire) you wouldnt even notice it unless some told you . now switching from a street only tire to an aggressive AT, it may look like a bigger difference. but i say that no matter what size, the 4th gen needs a front lift anyway. you'll be fine with the 265/70s, but do think about raising the front an inch, it will look much better. i just have to throw this link in, 275/7os with no lift! http://www.toyota-4runner.org/perfo...72-275-70r17-gyw-sa-pictures-sorry-delay.html

 

[Jed]

This picture illustrates exactly what I was trying to explain....look at how stuffed the front wheel well looks! To me, this looks more like the stance I'd see on a BMW M3 than the stance that I'd like to see on a 4x4. There is very little clearance in the fender well for that tire. Boy, talk about needed a front lift!

 

[chaz]

yea, but its a picture of 275/70s not 265/70 theres a bigger difference, the point is that it can fit. i totally agree though, i think it needs a lift, but on the same token, it doesnt look bad either. some guys treat the 4r like a car not a 4x4, so not everybody likes a large gap.

 

[Jed]

yea, but its a picture of 275/70s not 265/70 theres a bigger difference, the point is that it can fit. i totally agree though, i think it needs a lift, but on the same token, it doesnt look bad either. some guys treat the 4r like a car not a 4x4, so not everybody likes a large gap.

The 275/70 is only about 1/2" taller than a 265/70, so it would look just about the same.

In comparison, a 265/65 and a 265/70 side differs by a full inch in height, so it would be more noticeable.

I agree that it doesn't look that bad, but I do like to see a nice gap on both the front and rear wheel wells above the tires on a 4wd vehicle like the 4Runner. If you've ever seen a 1st or 2nd generation Pathfinder, they have a really tight clearance of the fenders above the tires, especially the second generation Pathfinders. I always thought that made it look more like a station wagon than a proper 4x4.

 

[chaz]

those 275/70s pictured are over 32 inches,(32.2) like you said, that is larger than the 265/70s, so that being the case, are you saying that 265/70 would look even larger compared to 265/65 than the 275/70 would, or even the same? some 265/70 are only 31.4, even if they came in at 31.9 its still not over 32, & in general, a 265/65 is under but can go up to 31, with all do respect, check the numbers. besides, ill say it again , not all stated sizes are exactly the same, it depends on brand & tread, street tire, at or mt.example:a stated size 31 in brand x may measure 30.5, 31 in brand y, 31.4, & 31 in brand z, 31.9, ive had tons of different brand & tread of 31s, & none were ever exactly the same size.but im not sure this is what the OP expected, it seems like you just want to debate with people that dont agree with you, & i dont believe his thread should be turned into this. you stated your opinion, the others said they'res, i, mine, lets leave it alone & move on already, stating our own opinions is one thing, but debating them amongst ourselves doesnt help the OP.

 

[Gromulus]

I'm trying to decide between the two. Is there any specific advantage between the two sizes? I still have a bnew stock spare (265/65).

From my research on the forum:

Pros:
- Price - 265/70 is cheaper

Cons (going for 265/70):
- less mpg
- ~3% off in speedo reading
- cost of spare replacement (can opt for a used/cheap one)

Thanks for any info.

You pretty much nailed it, although the larger 265/70 will give you a 1/2" lift as is. Not a lot but I noticed the difference/improvement )when going out winter backwoods off-roading a few weeks back.

I installed 265/70 tires 2000 miles ago and am sorry I did not do it sooner. Of course I went from lame Michelin Cross-Terrains (never again!) to a REVO 2 so the change to an A/T tire was also a noticeable difference and benefit. The ride quality and noise level are equivalent although my MPG did decrease approximately 15%. But having driven in the conditions we have had so far this winter I am very pleased with my decision.

 

[Jed]

those 275/70s pictured are over 32 inches,(32.2) like you said, that is larger than the 265/70s, so that being the case, are you saying that 265/70 would look even larger compared to 265/65 than the 275/70 would, or even the same? some 265/70 are only 31.4, even if they came in at 31.9 its still not over 32, & in general, a 265/65 is under but can go up to 31, with all do respect, check the numbers. besides, ill say it again , not all stated sizes are exactly the same, it depends on brand & tread, street tire, at or mt.example:a stated size 31 in brand x may measure 30.5, 31 in brand y, 31.4, & 31 in brand z, 31.9, ive had tons of different brand & tread of 31s, & none were ever exactly the same size.but im not sure this is what the OP expected, it seems like you just want to debate with people that dont agree with you, & i dont believe his thread should be turned into this. you stated your opinion, the others said they'res, i, mine, lets leave it alone & move on already, stating our own opinions is one thing, but debating them amongst ourselves doesnt help the OP.

I'm just giving the numbers...of course they will vary from tire to tire. But you have to start somewhere, so the numbers are a good place to start. I still think going with a taller tire makes the front end seem to stuffed on a stock suspension 4th gen. Of course you can disagree as this is all subjective like I stated earlier. No debate necessary, as the OP can read all the relevant information and form his own opinions. I happen to have a small spacer lift on my 4Runner, yet I kept the stock tire size. In my opinion, that looks best for my particular 4Runner. Now if I went with a 2/1 spacer lift, I think that a taller tire is needed because stock tires would look undersized. But like I said, it's all subjective and others may or may not agree. This is all good info and will help the OP make the best decision for him. No need to turn anything into a debate on a purely speculative discussion.

 

[killthrash]

I recently upsized from 265/65/17 to 265/70/17 about 2000 miles ago. Although these are just snow tires, I won't be going back to 65's. The ride seems better with the larger tire - less bouncy and more of a planted feel. I also noticed about a 3% speedo error and was able to confirm this on my Eclipse AVN726E unit. Does anyone know how to fix this? Thanks!


Here's the thread of the tires, installed:

http://www.toyota-4runner.org/perfo...ercraft-courser-msr-snow-tires-installed.html

 

[CJ3Flyr]

I also noticed about a 3% speedo error and was able to confirm this on my Eclipse AVN726E unit. Does anyone know how to fix this? Thanks!

Speedometer correction - Toyota 120 Platforms Forum

 

[killthrash]

Speedometer correction - Toyota 120 Platforms Forum

Thanks for the info! After attempting the VSC mod and having my actuator fried, I've decided not to cut any electrical wires ever again. I don't want to turn anyone else away from this - I just don't feel my knowledge and skills are adequate for attempting this mod.

Do you guys know if a dealer can perform the speedo correction? I'd much rather pay a dealer like $150 than buying a $100 mod and attempting this myself. And believe me, I'm usually a Do-it-yourselfer.

 

[Gromulus]

Minutia

Thanks for the info! After attempting the VSC mod and having my actuator fried, I've decided not to cut any electrical wires ever again. I don't want to turn anyone else away from this - I just don't feel my knowledge and skills are adequate for attempting this mod.

Do you guys know if a dealer can perform the speedo correction? I'd much rather pay a dealer like $150 than buying a $100 mod and attempting this myself. And believe me, I'm usually a Do-it-yourselfer.

For a 3% difference? Why even bother?

 

[chaz]

:iagree:i wouldnt worry if i was really going 67 when the speedo said 65, but maybe he wants it to be insinc with his nav.

 

[killthrash]

:iagree:i wouldnt worry if i was really going 67 when the speedo said 65, but maybe he wants it to be insinc with his nav.

It's about 5mph off. I'd like to have accurate speed readings on the instrument cluster, and also would like to get accurate readings on Range, MPG, etc. on the climate control panel.

 

[Gromulus]

3.4% Speedometer Difference

The speedometer difference between these two tire sizes is 3.4%. For example, with the new larger tires when the speedometer reads 60 MPH you are actually going 62 MPH. At a 100 MPH reading you would actually be going 104 MPH. In order to obtain a 5 MPH difference your speedo would have to read 142 MPH.

Tire size calculator