BF Goodrich vs Revo
- Thread starter yabedude
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
bulldog-yota
New member
Go to tirerack.com and check out the ratings for the tires. I got the Revos as I didn't want to affect on road noise and handling. They are slightly noisier than the stock DUnlops, but feels really nice. Still need to test them off road, but so far from what I read they get great reviews. You might want to search on Yotatech as well, as there has been numerous discussions over the past 3 months on this topic.
yabedude
New member
"Supposedly" BFG has 100000km/60000Mile warranty, which of course, is prorated based on thread wear. That's from one of the local dealers.
My buddy has ~48000km on his Tundra with the exact same tires as is on my T4R -- Dunlop AT20 Grandtrek P265/65R17 -- and he already needs new tires!
I would expect much more from BFG and, as I said earlier, folks around here swear by them.
My buddy has ~48000km on his Tundra with the exact same tires as is on my T4R -- Dunlop AT20 Grandtrek P265/65R17 -- and he already needs new tires!
I would expect much more from BFG and, as I said earlier, folks around here swear by them.
mam4994
New member
I only have 928 miles (1,494.3241843 kilometer) on my 4Runner, and I have heard the tires that come in stock, Dunlop AT20 Grandtrek P265/65R17, are POS. So, I thought I would start looking......
I know where I am from it is pretty hard to find a 2nd or 3rd gen or most trucks that doesn't have the BFG, and I figured that I would just follow suit.
I know where I am from it is pretty hard to find a 2nd or 3rd gen or most trucks that doesn't have the BFG, and I figured that I would just follow suit.
mikes4runner
New member
I got BFG's 31X10.5 and they are great.
I only got 20K on them and show little signs of wear.
Oh yea they have yet to be rotated too. they wear perfect.
A little road noise but work great off-road and in the snow.
And they look good too.
BFG has my vote!
I only got 20K on them and show little signs of wear.
Oh yea they have yet to be rotated too. they wear perfect.
A little road noise but work great off-road and in the snow.
And they look good too.
BFG has my vote!
vandert
New member
Personal opinion
Ran 31x 10.50 bfg at's befor the Killer Offroad/KO got applied to them on my T100. Basically the only difference was a slight pattern change and a rim protector added to stop tree limbs and such from getting the edge of your rim. I got 58000 miles out of mine with no problems. I was sold on the tires from the first day, will sing to you a little and worked great in the snow and rocks, didn't have problems in water and did suprizingly well in the corners. Thats my personal bias on AT's though, I am going to run MT's when I have to replace my stock Duelers.
Trevor
Ran 31x 10.50 bfg at's befor the Killer Offroad/KO got applied to them on my T100. Basically the only difference was a slight pattern change and a rim protector added to stop tree limbs and such from getting the edge of your rim. I got 58000 miles out of mine with no problems. I was sold on the tires from the first day, will sing to you a little and worked great in the snow and rocks, didn't have problems in water and did suprizingly well in the corners. Thats my personal bias on AT's though, I am going to run MT's when I have to replace my stock Duelers.
Trevor
bulldog-yota
New member
SOme guys have put the 265/70/17 Revos on the 4th Gen unlifted and reported no rubbing problems, so you should be fine.
I have the BGF AllTerain T/A KO's on my 96, they have been on their for abut 2 years and no sign of wear. We do alot of driving up to the mountains and to the coast. We have gone back to Texas on the tires and that is 1700 miles from here one way. The handle great in snow and wet roads. I have 30x9.5 15's and my spare is the original steel rim and it fits fine on it also.
bulldog-yota said:
These 275/70/17's would give you less than 1/2" height advantage and a smaller tread foot print and worse handling. You have to remember that all of these 17" tires are "P" rated. They are not "LT" rated. They have passenger car tire side walls. I'm glad I was able to get the Michelin Cross Terrains on my 4runner. I figure in the 50K miles it will take to wear them out more of a selection will be available. I hope!!!
linhsy
New member
Pitbull, what size is your Michelin Cross Terrains tires...is it 275/65/17?...how much did you buy and where?...I checked at tirerack.com as follow: 265/65SR17 Michelin Cross Terrain SUV
Raised Black Letters In Stock $123.00 each before tax & shipping cost. Is that a good deal?
linhsy said:
Mine are 265/65/17 that $123.00 sounds like a good deal. They get great reviews on tire rack. Mine were OEM, I had them trade tires when I bought my 4runner. I think it is weird that Toyota puts Dunlop, Brigstone and Michelin as OEM tires on the 4runners. The Michelins are rated much higher and cost 2X's as much in the after market. That's why I had them trade the tires before I closed the deal.
bulldog-yota
New member
Pitbull said:
275/70/17? I was refering to the 265/70/17 Bridgestone Dueler Revos. Yes it is only slightly heigher, but why will it have a smaller footprint? COmpared to what? I have not experienced any worse traction on raod than with the DUnlop street tires.
True they may only be P rated, but I'm willing to bet their sidewalls are still stronger than highway tires.
Depends on what you want from a tire. I found and lots of other people have found the Dueler Revo a very good compromise between on and off road. They are slightly noisier than than highway tires. If you only want to do on road, the michelins are probably the best bet. But off road a number of people have not rated them highly.
My 2c.
TEX-4runna
New member
i just bought new BFG all terrains and im very happy with them. im takin them mudding tomorrow and ill tell u how they do off-road.
bulldog-yota said:
The REVO's are very highly rated and get good reviews on tirerack. I ment 265/70/17 not 275/70/17, sorry. Your 265/70's would be a little taller than the OEM 265/65's but the tread would be narrower. It's based on the aspect ratio. Sounds like you have a good tire that works for your driving style. I figure I have about 3 years of driving until I need a new set and I am hoping we have a lot of choices by then in the 265/65/17 size, if not I might give the REVO's a try depending on how I like the Cross Terrains.
Last edited:
MAC4Runner
New member
TEX-4runna said:
I'm leaning towards the BFG ATs myself. Do you have a 4th gen 4R? What size are your running? I'm planning on running 265/70-17. Be sure to post your impressions after you get a few miles under your belt.
TIA
TEX-4runna
New member
i have a 2000 4runner and the largest tires i could fit without rubbing were the 265/70-16. They might not be as big as i wanted but there still badass.
RapidRunner
New member
Pitbull said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the width in either of the two is the same -- 265 millimeters (10.4 inches). That's what the 265 means.
The 70's are taller, having a taller sidewall, because yes, the aspect ratio is different. The 70's have a sidewall of 265 mm x .70 or 186 mm (7.3 inches), whereas the 65's have a sidewall height of 265 mm x .65 or 172 mm (6.8 inches). So yes, the 70's are have an inch greater diameter and sit 1/2 inch higher.
However, unless I'm missing something, they aren't narrower. Both are 265 mm wide.
Now as far as the original question -- contact patch; the width is only 1 of the 2 dimensions. I won't pretend to fully understand the determination of contact patch size, but I think it has to do with width, sidewall stiffness, diameter, air pressure, vehicle load, etc. I might be wrong, but my guess is the 70's actually have a larger contact patch. They will, however, probably have less sidewall stiffness (at least in a given line of tires) and this probably effects cornering more than contact patch.
Anyways -- my 2 cents.
