275/70/17 vs stock 265/70/17

[fourrunnerbill]

Hello,

I reviewed the sticky:Going Bigger - 5th Gen Tire Fitment Guide and would like some guidance. As a beginner 4x4 enthusiast I don't want to go any tire size larger that requires a lift or any other mods. I also don't want to raise the center of gravity so my option is to stay with the stock 265/70/17 size. But I noticed you can get a 275/70/17 which is in the chart as a "no rub" choice. I don't mind the -1.7 speed diff so this seems like a no brainer to me. Is there anything I should consider that I might be missing with this choice? I plan on getting BFG K02's. Of course I'm assuming the 275 gives slightly more grip than a 265. I don't plan on doing any crazy rock climbing, just dirt roads but some may be a little hilly etc.

Thanks

 

[strictlys]

It seems like you made your mind. The 2757017 just doesn't have too many options in tires compare to 265-70-17. Also, your spare is a 265-70-17.

 

[strictlys]

Also, I forgot to note that most 275-70-17 comes in an E load range. Weight and stiffness would bother me. My 4runner is my wife's ride, but I have a 16 Tacoma. I use to have General X3 Mudders 265-70-17 in an E load. Wow... the car was so stiff and heavy. I now have 285-70-17 ATKO 2 in a C load range and it was significantly lighter as well. It drives much better.

Things to consider.

 

[mo_mo]

Hello,

I reviewed the sticky:Going Bigger - 5th Gen Tire Fitment Guide and would like some guidance. As a beginner 4x4 enthusiast I don't want to go any tire size larger that requires a lift or any other mods. I also don't want to raise the center of gravity so my option is to stay with the stock 265/70/17 size. But I noticed you can get a 275/70/17 which is in the chart as a "no rub" choice. I don't mind the -1.7 speed diff so this seems like a no brainer to me. Is there anything I should consider that I might be missing with this choice? I plan on getting BFG K02's. Of course I'm assuming the 275 gives slightly more grip than a 265. I don't plan on doing any crazy rock climbing, just dirt roads but some may be a little hilly etc.

Thanks

275 vs 265 may or may not yield more 'grip' depending upon the terrain and traction available.
TIRES. FAT OR SKINNY for Overland Touring? AndrewSPW Land Cruiser build-7 - YouTube
Regardless, it's going to be almost immeasurable. It will raise the vehicle CG slightly, but again it will be very small. Same with gas mileage. Once you take into account that your odometer is under reporting by the same amount, and if you reduce your speed to match, you won't see a measurable difference in mileage/range due to the tire size change you're looking at. Tread pattern, weight of the tire, P vs LT, tire pressure etc. will play a much larger roll in off road and on road manners and mileage.

A larger diameter tire may smooth the ride out over bumpy terrain, but we're talking small values here. A skinny tire will comply (deform) more readily at the same tire pressures to yield more grip... the answer to your question is do whatever makes you happy.

 

[fourrunnerbill]

Thanks for the great input. Going with stock size it is...

 

[Smitty19TRD]

I have the 275 BFG KO2's on my rig with no other mods. They do perform well for all of my wheeling; however, I will be going to 255/75r17 when I change them. Same height as the 275, less weight, and load range C. I did notice the weight and stiffness with the 275's. It's not bad enough to make me swap now but, after 9k miles, I've decided I don't want E rated tires next time.

 

[Gouranga]

Hello,

I reviewed the sticky:Going Bigger - 5th Gen Tire Fitment Guide and would like some guidance. As a beginner 4x4 enthusiast I don't want to go any tire size larger that requires a lift or any other mods. I also don't want to raise the center of gravity so my option is to stay with the stock 265/70/17 size. But I noticed you can get a 275/70/17 which is in the chart as a "no rub" choice. I don't mind the -1.7 speed diff so this seems like a no brainer to me. Is there anything I should consider that I might be missing with this choice? I plan on getting BFG K02's. Of course I'm assuming the 275 gives slightly more grip than a 265. I don't plan on doing any crazy rock climbing, just dirt roads but some may be a little hilly etc.

Thanks

just so you know the k02s in 275s only come in E which is heavy AF 55lb
vs 39lb from stock tires this is 16lb......

 

[Cymon]

Thanks for the great input. Going with stock size it is...

This is a sound decision. I moved up to 275's when the Cooper AT3's were available in a LTC in that size. I loved those tires (too bad they don't make the current Cooper AT3 XLT in that size anymore), but unless you are heavily off-roading its better to save the weight and get a good 265 all-terrain in P-Metric/SL. "C" load would be the heaviest I would go unless you really need it. FWIW my SL (standard load) 265 Falken Wildpeaks held up for a week out in Moab and I've been happy with them.

 

[rightyouareken]

Thanks for the great input. Going with stock size it is...

Good choice. It's quite likely that whatever A/T you go with will already look a lot beefier than the stock tires even in the same size.

For example, here's my rig with stock tires:

And here's my rig with stock size (P265/70-17) Falken Wildpeaks. These are a LOT more "square" at the edges of the tire so look a lot wider/chunkier than the stockers:

 

[dew299]

Here's K02s in 265. Hasn't been too long, but I like how they have performed so far.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

 

[Pedro367]

Stock size KO2s look 1000% better than the original HT's, are taller, and will get you anywhere the E load/really heavy 275s will. Really no point in the 275s, IMO. I went with the 265s and love them. Aside from a minimal MPG hit, they are amazing. Love them so far.

 

[Gouranga]

Good choice. It's quite likely that whatever A/T you go with will already look a lot beefier than the stock tires even in the same size.

For example, here's my rig with stock tires:
here's my rig with stock size (P265/70-17) Falken Wildpeaks. These are a LOT more "square" at the edges of the tire so look a lot wider/chunkier than the stockers:

jesus the 265's falkens are 53lb... you may as well get the 275s KO2s same weight at the 265s

but the real question how noticeable was the acceleration loss as 39lb vs 53lb is a 14lb difference for same size tire

 

[rightyouareken]

jesus the 265's falkens are 53lb... you may as well get the 275s KO2s same weight at the 265s

but the real question how noticeable was the acceleration loss as 39lb vs 53lb is a 14lb difference for same size tire

The P265/70-17 I have are 46lbs (and some people think that's higher than they actually weigh). The E Load LT265/70-17 are 53lbs.

I noticed a slight decrease in "peppyness" and maybe ~1mpg drop in fuel economy, but nothing earth shaking. If I didn't know the tires had been changed I probably wouldn't have even noticed any difference. And I'm pretty anal about vehicle "feel".

Frankly the KO2s weren't even strongly considered. I've had them before and didn't find they did very well in the rain as they aged, and I've read enough other similar thoughts on them that I was looking for something different.

 

[Gouranga]

Stock size KO2s look 1000% better than the original HT's, are taller, and will get you anywhere the E load/really heavy 275s will. Really no point in the 275s, IMO. I went with the 265s and love them. Aside from a minimal MPG hit, they are amazing. Love them so far.

how are the k02 taller? its 31.6" while the stock duller tires dueler are 31.7''

 

[Gouranga]

The P265/70-17 I have are 46lbs (and some people think that's higher than they actually weigh). The E Load LT265/70-17 are 53lbs.

I noticed a slight decrease in "peppyness" and maybe ~1mpg drop in fuel economy, but nothing earth shaking. If I didn't know the tires had been changed I probably wouldn't have even noticed any difference. And I'm pretty anal about vehicle "feel".

Frankly the KO2s weren't even strongly considered. I've had them before and didn't find they did very well in the rain as they aged, and I've read enough other similar thoughts on them that I was looking for something different.

oh sorry didnt realize you got em in SL ..... only a lil heavier than the k02s in C in 265 44lb vs your 46lb... fair match
but you still goofed because the SL in 46 only have 14/32 of tread depth while the E has 18/32

 

[rightyouareken]

oh sorry didnt realize you got em in SL ..... only a lil heavier than the k02s in C in 265 44lb vs your 46lb... fair match
but you still goofed because the SL in 46 only have 14/32 of tread depth while the E has 18/32

I didn't goof. You goofed thinking I care about having maximum tread depth.

 

[Gouranga]

I didn't goof. You goofed thinking I care about having maximum tread depth.

then why you get the tires just to be missing the aggressive tread lol

ok then

 

[rightyouareken]

then why you get the tires just to be missing the aggressive tread lol

ok then

I drive my 4Runner mostly on the road, with an off-roading trip maybe once a month. I want good onroad manners as well as good off-road performance, which the p-metric wildpeaks deliver.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pull4adv]

275 vs 265 may or may not yield more 'grip' depending upon the terrain and traction available.
TIRES. FAT OR SKINNY for Overland Touring? AndrewSPW Land Cruiser build-7 - YouTube
Regardless, it's going to be almost immeasurable. It will raise the vehicle CG slightly, but again it will be very small. Same with gas mileage. Once you take into account that your odometer is under reporting by the same amount, and if you reduce your speed to match, you won't see a measurable difference in mileage/range due to the tire size change you're looking at. Tread pattern, weight of the tire, P vs LT, tire pressure etc. will play a much larger roll in off road and on road manners and mileage.

A larger diameter tire may smooth the ride out over bumpy terrain, but we're talking small values here. A skinny tire will comply (deform) more readily at the same tire pressures to yield more grip... the answer to your question is do whatever makes you happy.

Thank you for this! I think i've made up my mind as well. Going with the 265s

 

[aldi99]

how are the k02 taller? its 31.6" while the stock duller tires dueler are 31.7''

That’s non load bearing size. They are essentially the same with load, per the 657 revs per mile number. Also, those size numbers you mention could be rounded up or down, depending on source.