Are 35s really the answer for off-road driving?

[TRD PANTHER]

Yes.

285/70 fit without a bmc. As did my street tires that were 275/60/20. They were wider than either 285/70/17 or 285/75/17s despite the narrower nominal size. But only 33.0 height.

With my 285/70’s I had no mods to do at all. As I stated in my response to mrblah. How did you like the 285/75’s and did you have to regear?

 

[bigdaddy2021]

With my 285/70’s I had no mods to do at all. As I stated in my response to mrblah. How did you like the 285/75’s and did you have to regear?

Same here. Our well-tested Dobinson’s suspension accommodated them just fine.

We’ll probably re-gear to 4.56’s mostly because we want a better crawl ratio.

 

[Jetboy]

With my 285/70’s I had no mods to do at all. As I stated in my response to mrblah. How did you like the 285/75’s and did you have to regear?

I liked them for most things. It's kind of an incremental change. It certainly helped at the limit on the trickier stuff. But for most of what I did it was probably about the same as 285/70.

I did regear. And then swapped back to stock. I found that for my mix that had a lot of highway miles the stock gearing was better for me. I looked into having circle k cut some 4.10 gears for me. But I never ended up doing it. I think that ratio would have been best for me.

 

[Xtremluck]

Taking about 1" out of the fender and flare is about perfect for 315's, after all the inner fender massaging. Somewhere in by build, I have some info on it.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

Thanks glad to see you are still around. I remember reading about your build and Slickrock attempts. You'll be happy to know that I plan on heading back to Slickrock to do the entire trail South to North (Including the new section) in 2 weeks. We had to turn around 75% in last year after my buddy tore apart his rear drive shaft on a rock ledge. Doing that entire trail in reverse with a 2WD truck was a long day/night. I don't think a 5th gen has completed this trail successfully yet.

 

[Xtremluck]

Guess it depends on what your version of off-roading is. 35s are minimum requirements for a lot of trails, but also overkill for 99% of what most people do.

I just 'downsized' to 35" KO2s (34.5) from 35" MTRs (closer to 35", when new), and while the KO2s are real nice on road (feel like passenger car tires), they leave a whole lot to be desired off road. I'd pick a smaller size MTR - 305 or 285 over the 35" KO2 when in rocks or anything challenging, hands down.

I am definitely on trails that are 35s / lockers recommended but I usually just drag and winch my way through on 33s. I agree on the KO2s having less off road traction than desired and I already noticed it on my first trip on dirt (Noted in my original post). I'm ok with the tradeoff for now since in reality even though this is a dedicated off road vehicle most of the miles are still spent on pavement driving to trails. 95% of the time we are also wheeling in dry conditions as well. So as long as they perform well over baby head rocks and slickrock which they have on my past sets of KO2s I'm a happy camper.

 

[Xtremluck]

.


Another thing to consider is who you run with. If your crew only run's 33's and only run easier trails, then whats the point of having a over-capable vehicle that compromises reliability (drivetrain and steering components). While my friends don't mind, I don't want to be that guy that breaks down on the trails because dealing with nagging spouses and kids, can really suck more than the actual breakdown. Fyi, my friends are important to me, they are the ones that got me into this game, and if I am going to wheel the rubicon one day, i want them to be there with me. So if they ain't going, there is a good chance, I ain't going either. This is just me, and I can't change me.

Good call out here. I unfortunately usually hang with a group of Jeep JKs and JLs that are on 35s and 37s so they are a bad influence and also taunt me constantly Most of my 5th gen crew like to stick to USFS roads which can be fun too but I like more of a challenge most of the time.

 

[Xtremluck]

I know some people hate the idea of a body lift but it can prevent you from cutting into the fender and has some other benefits.

Sure you can trim the front fenders but can you really trim the back fenders and make it look good with the door in the way?

Sliders and armor can be raised higher if sliders are welded to the frame or if bumpers can be modified.

Center of gravity isn't impacted as much as lifting the entire vehicle the same amount to regain lost uptravel from larger tires.

More room for clocking a t-case or accessing that upper rear shock nut.

I've thought of that but I would have to source front and rear bumper covers and recut them with the extra gap (I have aftermarket bumpers).

I'm ok cutting up my fenders because they are already trashed from my snorkel getting wedged up against a tree and a rogue branch jamming into my driver side fender.

 

[Xtremluck]

I liked them for most things. It's kind of an incremental change. It certainly helped at the limit on the trickier stuff. But for most of what I did it was probably about the same as 285/70.

I did regear. And then swapped back to stock. I found that for my mix that had a lot of highway miles the stock gearing was better for me. I looked into having circle k cut some 4.10 gears for me. But I never ended up doing it. I think that ratio would have been best for me.

Same here....at least for now. I need to spend 3 hrs on pavement to get to our nearest mountains. With all that highway cruising Ill take better fuel economy and live with the decreased crawling performance. 4.10 would be an interesting option though, crunching the #s on Final Gear Ratio, Crawl Ratio, Tire Size Calculators it would appear it would get you near stock performance with a 35" tire and better than stock performance with 34s

 

[rochmpr]

Thanks glad to see you are still around. I remember reading about your build and Slickrock attempts. You'll be happy to know that I plan on heading back to Slickrock to do the entire trail South to North (Including the new section) in 2 weeks. We had to turn around 75% in last year after my buddy tore apart his rear drive shaft on a rock ledge. Doing that entire trail in reverse with a 2WD truck was a long day/night. I don't think a 5th gen has completed this trail successfully yet.

I made it twice running Alpine to Utica. First time solo through the new section with no issues. Second time, broke the CV coming down the gauntlet of the new section.

This is how i roll now...

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Xtremluck]

I made it twice running Alpine to Utica. First time solo through the new section with no issues. Second time, broke the CV coming down the gauntlet of the new section.

This is how i roll now...

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Ah you beat me to it. Well maybe I’ll be the first doing it heading north up the Gauntlet. A great reminder to bring a spare CV.

Love the new Tundra and Sami!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rochmpr]

Ah you beat me to it. Well maybe I’ll be the first doing it heading north up the Gauntlet. A great reminder to bring a spare CV.

Love the new Tundra and Sami!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When ate you heading up there?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Grug556]

Guys I had some more questions on the 35s in say 315

Are they really worth it over say a 17 incher with 285s? I get some manufacturers measure at slightly different points so a 285 on comparable rims can in fact be close to some other manufacturers with 315s. Do you really gain enough in larger width to justify the larger weight and slight effect on gearing with changing the over all OD? This sounds stupid but on my BFG K02s for example in 265-17-70 i had a ton of rub on drivers side front only. Took alot of heat gun use and work to fix it. Odd as my STT Pros dont rub at all and have plenty of clearance even though the Cooper tires are same width and size as the BFG tires. Rims are comparable in width and offset to.

Where do you guys see most improvement on bigger widths? Is it just airing down for more tread flex? Or is it the bigger diameter makes going over bigger stuff easier? Ive got about 2 inch and change lift so far and may go up a tiny bit more wiht some UCAs added/

Anyhow just wondering for those who did it, was it worth it? Or were slightly narrower slightly smaller OD 285s close enough?

I think I recall Toyota years ago with the 5th gen using 255 Goodyear MTRs in 17 for their drive across the rubicon which they did successfully.

I was always under impression that cross section width wasnt as important as the contact patch of the vehicle is dictated by down pressure vehicle weight and the contact pressure patch doesnt change unless you change weight of vehicle or weight carrying capability of tire by airing down.

So what you guys think? Worth it? Not worth it?

 

[Inv4drZm]

Guys I had some more questions on the 35s in say 315

Are they really worth it over say a 17 incher with 285s? I get some manufacturers measure at slightly different points so a 285 on comparable rims can in fact be close to some other manufacturers with 315s. Do you really gain enough in larger width to justify the larger weight and slight effect on gearing with changing the over all OD? This sounds stupid but on my BFG K02s for example in 265-17-70 i had a ton of rub on drivers side front only. Took alot of heat gun use and work to fix it. Odd as my STT Pros dont rub at all and have plenty of clearance even though the Cooper tires are same width and size as the BFG tires. Rims are comparable in width and offset to.

Where do you guys see most improvement on bigger widths? Is it just airing down for more tread flex? Or is it the bigger diameter makes going over bigger stuff easier? Ive got about 2 inch and change lift so far and may go up a tiny bit more wiht some UCAs added/

Anyhow just wondering for those who did it, was it worth it? Or were slightly narrower slightly smaller OD 285s close enough?

I think I recall Toyota years ago with the 5th gen using 255 Goodyear MTRs in 17 for their drive across the rubicon which they did successfully.

I was always under impression that cross section width wasnt as important as the contact patch of the vehicle is dictated by down pressure vehicle weight and the contact pressure patch doesnt change unless you change weight of vehicle or weight carrying capability of tire by airing down.

So what you guys think? Worth it? Not worth it?

If they made a 35 or 37 with a 285 width I'm sure most 4Runner guys would prefer those. But 315/70/17 (12.5") is the narrowest width 35" tire. In short I don't care about the added width while driving, I simply care about the added height. The width is what it is.

Just because Toyota did the Rubicon on 255s doesn't mean it was done quickly, comfortably, or without damage. Bigger tires if fitted properly give you more room for error on harder trails and probably more cushion.

 

[tls3601]

I liked them for most things. It's kind of an incremental change. It certainly helped at the limit on the trickier stuff. But for most of what I did it was probably about the same as 285/70.

I did regear. And then swapped back to stock. I found that for my mix that had a lot of highway miles the stock gearing was better for me. I looked into having circle k cut some 4.10 gears for me. But I never ended up doing it. I think that ratio would have been best for me.

I agree, 4.10:1 would be damn near perfect on our 5th Gens. Anyone look into a group buy? Wondering what Circle K would charge for grant and rear?

 

[tls3601]

Spoke with Circle Gear, said if they did it it would be a one-off and spendy to make a 4.10:1 gearset for our 5th gens. So just how are 4.56:1 on a 33 tire, I know it will be an improvement off road but will I hate it on the highway? Mileage, etc

 

[mrblah]

Spoke with Circle Gear, said if they did it it would be a one-off and spendy to make a 4.10:1 gearset for our 5th gens. So just how are 4.56:1 on a 33 tire, I know it will be an improvement off road but will I hate it on the highway? Mileage, etc

Depends on your commute and how much armor u have and if you tow. I think 4.56 is fine for 33 and 34s.

I run 4.88 on a 34 and it’s fine. I also ran 4.88 with 33 and it was fun as hell on the surface streets but u do run out of gear on the freeway, as in past 70 mph was um…..not ideal.

 

[Xtremluck]

When ate you heading up there?

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

I'll DM you on IG.

We are going to do a whole weekend over there linking up with Deer Valley trail after we finish Slickrock

 

[Jetboy]

I agree, 4.10:1 would be damn near perfect on our 5th Gens. Anyone look into a group buy? Wondering what Circle K would charge for grant and rear?

We had a few back and forth discussions. The Cliff's notes are as follows - I only asked about doing 4:10 for the rear. There are OEM front 410 differentials from some years of Tacoma. So what we really need to make this happen is just the 8.2. what I initially asked about is whether you could use the 4.56 ring gear blank because that would be a thick forged blank and cut that to be the 410 ring gear along with whether the pinion from the 3.73 could also be cut down and those could be combined to work. And they said that they took a look at it and they did have a combination of blanks so they wouldn't have to make new tooling for that.

It has been a few years so I assume costs have gone up since then. However, with an order of 200 sets the cost would be around $100 per matched ring and pinion set for a rear 8.2 in 4.10 ratio. The cost is really reasonable. It was just the minimum order quantity that I didn't want to deal with. A group buy of 10 is easy. Managing 200 was more of a pain with tracking and packaging them and shipping etc. Plus then how do I handle warranty if some of them are bad or someone breaks one in 3 years - is want to make sure there's at least a minimum supply of replacement parts available for 10 years. Pretty soon it's a big undertaking to do in a responsible way. That's why I don't follow up. The $20k for the order was something I would have maybe covered up front, but I don't want to deal with the rest of it.

If they would make me a sample set for $500, id have ordered them.


If I had jumped up to 35 or 37s, id really want 4.56 or lower. On my FJ I run 5.29s. I'm all for lower gears. I think it just wasn't quite right for my daily driver that sees a ton of highway miles to have 4.56. and in my case I was often empty with no extra weight and no racks or other stuff to increase drag. And I usually had the street tire set on so the 34s weren't on for most of my highway miles. So my use might be different. Ultimately I sold the 4R and bought a Tundra for my current needs.

I do still have the 4.56 diffs in storage setup for a future build of maybe a GX that will be not a daily driver but more of a all around family camp vehicle.

What I struggle most with is if I'm going past the moderate build it starts to make sense to find a land cruiser for the bigger running gear and engine. That's why I think 35s seem to be kinda the limit of what makes sense before looking at other platforms. It's a discontinuity because of tire fitment issues. Going to 35s and beyond jumps from a really good reasonably priced adventure mobile to spending a ton of $ that might be better spent on another platform - even just older Toyota options.

 

[T4R_Canuck]

I ran a few trails a couple of weekends ago with a guy running 40's on his 4Runner. I'm on 33's and we ran the same trails, albeit, he could take whatever line he wanted and get away with it, while I had to pick lines very carefully. Talking with him, he says they are overkill for 99% of what we do, but he did it because he could and it's fun. If i remember correctly, he's running 5.26 gearing.

Up until I met him I was convinced I needed 35's, 4.56 gears, a front locker and a lot of little mods to run some of the trails he wants to do. I realize now that with some solid armor, and the setup I have, I'll be fine on 80% of the stuff i was worried about. Long term goal is still 35's and gears, but I've been incredibly impressed at how well my 4Runner has done with it's current setup.

 

[TRDHULK]

35s are amazing but certainly aren't required to do adequate offroading. My 34" MTS were amazing off road, and required WAY less modifications than my current 315/70s.

Part of the reason for the upgrade was the look for me. Cant beat a 4Runner on some beefy 315s...

I think it was worth all of the trouble....I think.

I still rub a little when I jump higher than a foot and certain situations off road