Best all seasons for an '02 (living in MN)

[2000t4rAKS]

Nicely put DavidAlexander :bigok:

I guess I am a little bias towards the Revos because I have always had Bridgestone and since my rig is a pavement queen the Revos would work better for me. However, in the winter time, I go up Tahoe alot and my Bridgestones have never let me down.
As I mentioned earlier, I do not personally own a set of REVOs but a buddy of mine with a 98 does and it is really quiet on the road. I have heard from a couple of people that the BFGs are quiet also but not as quiet.
Almost every winter, I go to steamboat, CO and I drive through NV and UT so my rig has seen it all snow, ice, black ice, and mud and my Alenzas did amazing. That is why I figure that when I do buy a new set of tires, I will be going with the REVOs. although it was a tough decision because I do like the aggressive look of the BFGs.

Thats my .02

 

[osiris3mc]

Hey everyone,

Just called a Discount Tire, and they are quoting me $760 for a set of 265/75r16s. Does that seem right? One of you mentioned getting a set for $532 in North Dakota. I don't mind paying, if it's a fair price.

About the same price for the BFGs, fyi.

 

[DavidAlexander]

It looks like there are 3 models in that size in the Revos. $144, $165 and $191. They range in load rating and treadwear rating. You'll have to look into the three on their website and make sure you are getting the correct one you need. That price range would be $576-$764 so your qoute is not bad if it is for the most expensive model.

The BFG's come in a blackwall that isn't snow rated for $177/ $708 a set or the white lettering that is snow rated for $173/ $692 a set.

These are just prices I looked up and can vary of course.

 

[CO_FlyFisher]

My point for him is that when you are driving in a blizzard or an ice storm, I feel the BFG's would provide the better traction to get home safely or out of a ditch. Or to help your wife or family who is stuck out in a blizzard. Or to get medical help in a blizzard when ambulances can't travel. Or drive to his girlfriend in a nighttime snowstorm. That was my point about the aggressive tread.
When I worked at Snowbird I was often one of the last cars up the canyon before it was shut down for the night and drove through "valance high snow uphill" with no problem many times. I can not say the REVOs wouldn't do that. I just KNOW the BFG's will.
That is my point to him. A tire that will outperform all other highway worthy year round tires when the conditions are that worst 1-2%.
I should add it is a safe assumption to say that because the BFG's are "Severe Snow Service" rated some will be used on all those municipal trucks plowing and spreading salt all over during the snow this winter. Not to mention private snowplows who have to use rated tires to travel under snow emergencies. I wonder how many snow/ice specific vehicles will have REVOs or other non-snow service rated tires on this winter? Probably not many.

This really cuts to the heart of the debate. In the worst winter conditions, the BFGs will outperform the Revos hands down. In fact, it might be the difference in getting to where you want to go or not.

I don't think I would have made it out of the driveway in the pics below with the Revos, but the BFGs did great!!! (note the snow drifts over the TOP of some of the other cars)

 

[p nut]

This really cuts to the heart of the debate. In the worst winter conditions, the BFGs will outperform the Revos hands down. In fact, it might be the difference in getting to where you want to go or not.

I don't think I would have made it out of the driveway in the pics below with the Revos, but the BFGs did great!!! (note the snow drifts over the TOP of some of the other cars)

No disrespect intended, but unless you had a set of REVO's right next to you test out, I don't think you can say that. It dumps here in Salt Lake and I never got stuck with the REVO's.

And I did just pick up a set of new BFG KO's this past weekend for the Tacoma, so I'm not biased towards REVO's.

 

[CO_FlyFisher]

You're right, I can't be 100% sure of it without a side-by-side comparison.

However, I would think that if the Revos could keep up with the BFGs in the snow, they would also have the "Severe Snow Service" rating. They just don't hand out the snowflake in a mountain to anyone...

That, combined with the fact that I know the BFGs do so dang well in DEEP snow, makes me think the statement I made to be at least 99% true.

I tell you what - since you have both tires now, YOU tell us what you think after you're first good snow of the year, OK. :

 

[p nut]

You're right, I can't be 100% sure of it without a side-by-side comparison.

However, I would think that if the Revos could keep up with the BFGs in the snow, they would also have the "Severe Snow Service" rating. They just don't hand out the snowflake in a mountain to anyone...

They don't just hand it out to anyone, you're right. RMA (Rubber Manuf. Assoc.) established the severe winter rating in 1999. I am wondering what goes into that process? Anyone know? It says that the tires needed to meet a traction index greater than 110 on PACKED snow, but I don't know what that means. I'd be interested to know how other A/T tires faired. Most of the tires on the list are snow tires (Blizzak's, Nokians, etc.)

Also, not all tires approved for severe winter rating has the symbol on it. But I don't think REVO's were ever approved (did they even try to?).

That, combined with the fact that I know the BFGs do so dang well in DEEP snow, makes me think the statement I made to be at least 99% true.

I tell you what - since you have both tires now, YOU tell us what you think after you're first good snow of the year, OK. :

I don't know about deep snow. How deep are you talking? Once it starts going over the wheels, I can't see any A/T tire doing well. Even guys with M/T's and chains have a hard time.

And I'll see plenty of snow this year, so I will report back.
:bigok:

 

[CO_FlyFisher]

Look forward to hearing your report. I don't know if Bridgestone tried for the rating or not. As big a company as they are, I don't know why they wouldn't have, but who knows.

The BFGs do well in light unpacked snow as high as my hood!

However, in packed snow, if you get high centered, there's not much any tire will do for you at that point. And yes, I have done that - got stuck in a rut previously made by someone with much higher clearance and larger tires than myself (it's hard to see a snow rut buried under more snow). That's what the compact shovel I keep in the back all winter is for though.

 

[p nut]

Look forward to hearing your report. I don't know if Bridgestone tried for the rating or not. As big a company as they are, I don't know why they wouldn't have, but who knows.

The BFGs do well in light unpacked snow as high as my hood!

However, in packed snow, if you get high centered, there's not much any tire will do for you at that point. And yes, I have done that - got stuck in a rut previously made by someone with much higher clearance and larger tires than myself (it's hard to see a snow rut buried under more snow). That's what the compact shovel I keep in the back all winter is for though.

I think where we both live, the snow is so dry, you can blow it off of your truck. I can see being able to drive in deeper snow in that sense. But not calling you a liar, but snow as high as your hood?! That's a bit hard to believe for me. Maybe you had snow coming over your hood? :awais: Still pretty deep.

I wish it would start pounding snow right now, so I can get my skis back out.

 

[Clemsonfan15]

That snow looks so fun. I wouldn't want to live there though. That would be a lot to put up with.

 

[Thai]

They don't just hand it out to anyone, you're right. RMA (Rubber Manuf. Assoc.) established the severe winter rating in 1999. I am wondering what goes into that process? Anyone know? It says that the tires needed to meet a traction index greater than 110 on PACKED snow, but I don't know what that means. I'd be interested to know how other A/T tires faired. Most of the tires on the list are snow tires (Blizzak's, Nokians, etc.)

Also, not all tires approved for severe winter rating has the symbol on it. But I don't think REVO's were ever approved (did they even try to?).

Most tires on the snowflake list are indeed snow tires, which only makes BFG KO AT that much more credible in the white stuff.

How do other AT tires fair?? Well, they did not get the designation for some reason...thus, does it really matter?? Does it really matter how much a tire failed during the RMA test?? For me, i only care which tire PASSED the test.

Most (if not all) tires on the market nowadays that meet the RMA snowflake criteria indeed have the snowflake symbol on the tire sidewall. Remember, there are OLDER design Bridgestone snow tires that have the snowflake symbol...so, REVOs should have the symbol IF it did pass the RMA test.

 

[Thai]

More info from Bridgestones regarding the snowflake symbol...so, BFS (Bridgestone Firestone) respects the symbol too.

Link: http://www.moderntiredealer.com/t_print.cfm?action=art_det&storyID=1372

All-season vs. winter

What is the difference between a snow tire and a winter tire? William

 

[CO_FlyFisher]

I think where we both live, the snow is so dry, you can blow it off of your truck. I can see being able to drive in deeper snow in that sense. But not calling you a liar, but snow as high as your hood?! That's a bit hard to believe for me. Maybe you had snow coming over your hood?

Yes, as HIGH as my hood. Up in Steamboat, the snow can be REALLY dry (Champagne powder anyone?), and pile up like nobody's business. 3-4 feet of this stuff packs down to something like 12". Fun stuff. You can walk through it almost like it's not there. The dogs really like burrowing through it.

Maybe not a fair test due to the light/dry quality I suppose. Anything heavy (especially if it is packed) and as soon as you're in much over you're axle, you can get pretty stuck pretty quick.

 

[Thai]

You gotta be kidding. The tread pattern is definitely not superior to the REVO's for on-road driving. Big blocks with no water channels? How does that equal "superior to just about any highway worthy tire"? For off-road, that's awesome. On pavement? Not so much.

From another thread about snowflake symbol:

I also feel there is some truth to what you are sayng, rated or not, KO's do not have an ideal tread pattern and are insufficiently siped for consistent winter duty.

As stated earlier by another member, the RMA designation seemingly has more to do with rubber compound and relative stickiness in winter driving conditions. (more on that below)

If you look at the BFG AT KO tread, then you will see that it has plenty of tread siping...on par with other good AT tires. If you were to sipe it more, then where would you do it?? I don't see any tread block where there is no siping. Compare the amount of siping to the Goodyear Wrangler SilentArmor and you will see that the BFG actually has MORE siping on it's tread block than GY.

I agree with you that the tread pattern may not be ideal...although, i have no data to back up this suspicion. RonM has argued in the past about BFG's poor rain performance due to lack of "aqua channels" (as GY used to promote). GY is a big advertiser/promoter of these channels that they claim direct water away from the center of the tread when a tire goes across a puddle. However, if you look at a lot of the tires today not named Goodyear, then you will see that many good rain tires do NOT have "aqua channels." For example, Michelin Cross Terrain tires are excellent for all-weather use...we all can agree on that, right? Yet, it's tread pattern has no design resembling these Goodyear aqua channels. Or take your average car tire. You just don't see these channels nowadays on tires not named Goodyear. (Michelin also has a tripletred lookalike for it's car tire lineup, but i don't think that it has gotten good reviews for it's rain performance.)

So, what does this have to do with snow performance?? Absolutely nothing. My point is that none of us are tire experts and you canNOT rely on your eyes to determine how good of a tire it is in certain conditions. We don't know enough to make a full evaluation...at least, i don't.

As i mentioned above, the new General Grabber AT 2 is a new tire on the market and is snowflake-certified (for most of it's sizes). If you notice, then you will see that it's tread pattern is nearly identical to BFG AT KO. Why is that?? Marketing?? Is there a benefit to that tread pattern of BFG that we do not know about?? Why would General spend $$$$ designing a tread pattern just like BFG?? They had a lot of choices to pick from i am sure. Yeah, you can argue that General is copying BFG to make it more legit in the market for off-roaders. I don't know. It is a brand new design, yet it's tread blocks are very similar to BFG AT KO. Why would they RISK it if the tread pattern of BFG was so flawed in adverse conditions???? And yet, the tread pattern or materials got the snowflake certification. Coincidence??

(Note: we all know that BFG AT KO tread pattern is NOT solely for off-roading purposes because its tread design itself is a hindrance in mud and the blocks themselves are not seemingly aligned/spaced for proper rock crawling either.)

This brings up another problem in my statement above. IF RMA certification was based solely on rubber compound, then why is it that only certain sizes of General Grabber AT 2 (and seemingly BFG AT KO) are certified with the snowflake?? If RMA only tests the rubber compound in it's evaluation, then shouldn't ALL sizes pass the test?? I don't know the answer.

This goes back to my earlier point...because none of us know enough about tires, the snowflake symbol becomes an important factor in choosing a tire for those of us who live in the snow states (including Denver : ). The snowflake gives an unbias statement that a certified-tire has passed testing protocol that is the minimum requirement for a true winter tire.

My opinion.

 

[p nut]

Most tires on the snowflake list are indeed snow tires, which only makes BFG KO AT that much more credible in the white stuff.

How do other AT tires fair?? Well, they did not get the designation for some reason...thus, does it really matter?? Does it really matter how much a tire failed during the RMA test?? For me, i only care which tire PASSED the test.

Most (if not all) tires on the market nowadays that meet the RMA snowflake criteria indeed have the snowflake symbol on the tire sidewall. Remember, there are OLDER design Bridgestone snow tires that have the snowflake symbol...so, REVOs should have the symbol IF it did pass the RMA test.

Few questions arise here. First, are all manufacturers REQUIRED to be tested with RMA's severe winter certification? I am very much a novice to the tire world, so this question is in sincerity. I don't even know what role RMA plays in tire manufactering regulations. Are they a government-backed organization? What authority do they have? Are they a subsidiary of DOT?

I wish they would publish what specific tests they perform with the "severe winter service rating". It would really help me to take that snowflake symbol with more respect.

Also, as far as other A/T tire test results, I really would like to know. I believe it will be relevant. The cut off is 110 on the packed snow test. Obviously, the BFG KO was above that. But by how much? If the REVO's failed, by how much? Are we talking 150 to 80, or 111 to 109?

 

[Thai]

Few questions arise here. First, are all manufacturers REQUIRED to be tested with RMA's severe winter certification? I am very much a novice to the tire world, so this question is in sincerity. I don't even know what role RMA plays in tire manufactering regulations. Are they a government-backed organization? What authority do they have? Are they a subsidiary of DOT?

I wish they would publish what specific tests they perform with the "severe winter service rating". It would really help me to take that snowflake symbol with more respect.

Also, as far as other A/T tire test results, I really would like to know. I believe it will be relevant. The cut off is 110 on the packed snow test. Obviously, the BFG KO was above that. But by how much? If the REVO's failed, by how much? Are we talking 150 to 80, or 111 to 109?

RMA snowflake testing is voluntary. About RMA: http://www.rma.org/about_rma/

 

[p nut]

If you look at the BFG AT KO tread, then you will see that it has plenty of tread siping...on par with other good AT tires. If you were to sipe it more, then where would you do it?? I don't see any tread block where there is no siping. Compare the amount of siping to the Goodyear Wrangler SilentArmor and you will see that the BFG actually has MORE siping on it's tread block than GY.

What I said in the quote that you posted, was for wet traction only. I understand the benefits of siping, but that doesn't do anything when you hit a puddle of water.

I agree with you that the tread pattern may not be ideal...although, i have no data to back up this suspicion. RonM has argued in the past about BFG's poor rain performance due to lack of "aqua channels" (as GY used to promote). GY is a big advertiser/promoter of these channels that they claim direct water away from the center of the tread when a tire goes across a puddle. However, if you look at a lot of the tires today not named Goodyear, then you will see that many good rain tires do NOT have "aqua channels." For example, Michelin Cross Terrain tires are excellent for all-weather use...we all can agree on that, right? Yet, it's tread pattern has no design resembling these Goodyear aqua channels. Or take your average car tire. You just don't see these channels nowadays on tires not named Goodyear. (Michelin also has a tripletred lookalike for it's car tire lineup, but i don't think that it has gotten good reviews for it's rain performance.)

I have never used Michelin Cross Terrain's or Good Year's, so I cannot comment on those tires. However, we just had a rain storm here in Utah (one of very few). In terms of wet traction, I definitely felt more stable with the REVO's. I am not being biased, because I have had both tires and like both. The KO's just felt a little more squirrely hitting the puddles, whereas the REVO's just stomped through. I believe this has to do with the tread pattern and the tire's ability to channel water away. BTW, I think the whole aqua tread thing was a marketing hype than anything else. Remember the commercial with the guy water skiing behind the car? Give me a break.

Anyway, here is what Tirerack has to say about tire treads on wet performance:

Directional tread designs (sometimes called Unidirectional tread designs) are frequently used on tires intended to better resist hydroplaning. Their multiple tread grooves are aligned in a repeating "V" shape to increase the tire

 

[Thai]

If the OP is still going to be on-road 99% of the time, get the REVO's. If he is going to wheel, then go BFG's.

These are based on my personal experiences. YMMV.

Very true.

 

[p nut]

RMA snowflake testing is voluntary. About RMA: http://www.rma.org/about_rma/

I just sent off an email asking about a list of tires that have been tested that did NOT pass. I don't know if they will release that or not. Also asked about the test procedure. I'm not holding my breath for an answer, but hopefully they will respond.

 

[CO_FlyFisher]

That would be good info to know. I hope they reply to you.

I did some looking, and it appears that some believe the snowflake/mountain symbol is being over used (a lot like the M+S designation has been).

They say it's intended purpose was for winter-ONLY tires, and some don't think that ANY all-terrain tire should bear the designation.

The Canadian version of RMA has actually removed ALL the all-terrain tires from their list.



On another note, the only gripe I DO have about the BFG all-terrain TA KO is that they don't cope well with puddles on the road at speeds of more than about 45 mph. They seem to do OK on generally wet roads, but deeper puddles do give them trouble at speed.

Otherwise, I love them! I put them on the truck 10/06 at about 128k miles. I just turned 150k miles, and recent measured tread is still about 75% of original. Nice!!!