YellowSnow
Banned
So if my 4R is primarily my off road, camping vehicle and sees very little time commuting on paved roads, an E rated tire is still the wrong choice 
hwell:
hwell:
Engine load after a lift and up-size of the tires
- Thread starter Sifrk
- Start date
So if my 4R is primarily my off road, camping vehicle and sees very little time commuting on paved roads, an E rated tire is still the wrong choice
Not in your mind. Do what you want, it's after all your vehicle. But...Facts are facts. The E is more durable but also heavier and that weight will have an effect.
Bumbo
New member
It’s not just the physical weight of the tire, but the way it flexes and interacts with the terrain. Some of my observations driving on an E load:
General ride was harsher, the suspension felt like it was working more because the tire wasn’t absorbing as much of the impact, transferring it into the suspension.
The effects of airing down didn’t provide as much compliance and comfort when compared to C or D. It was easier to feel what was tire and what was suspension with E, the tire provides very little compliance, contrast to C and D and it “blends” in a lot better, it almost all feels like suspension and feels more cohesive. End of the day it feels like you actually have more suspension than you really do.
It’s a little difficult to put everything into words, but after few thousand miles of off-road playing with different tires, you can really start to notice.
My camping buddy who tows a massive 5th wheel to the desert on a 2500 HD desire truck used the same tires… it starts to put things into perspective when you consider a single E load tire can pretty much carry the weight of our entire 4Runner.
General ride was harsher, the suspension felt like it was working more because the tire wasn’t absorbing as much of the impact, transferring it into the suspension.
The effects of airing down didn’t provide as much compliance and comfort when compared to C or D. It was easier to feel what was tire and what was suspension with E, the tire provides very little compliance, contrast to C and D and it “blends” in a lot better, it almost all feels like suspension and feels more cohesive. End of the day it feels like you actually have more suspension than you really do.
It’s a little difficult to put everything into words, but after few thousand miles of off-road playing with different tires, you can really start to notice.
My camping buddy who tows a massive 5th wheel to the desert on a 2500 HD desire truck used the same tires… it starts to put things into perspective when you consider a single E load tire can pretty much carry the weight of our entire 4Runner.
Last edited:
Sifrk
New member
Absolutely! I remember posted about the short MPH quite a while ago, but no chimed in about this shortfall. I just lived with it but the 275s seemed to have leveled it out.
What do the TRD Offroad trims come with in terms of tires? I didn't note the Terra Grapplers load rating before swapping them out but I imagine they were probably P also.
Sifrk
New member
Have you ever ridden the BFGs Bumbo? Again, with limited experience and therefore ability to compare and contrast, I found the KO2 super comfy. The Grapplers weren't bad but the ride was harsh in comparison.
Yeah, I've already admitted to this, and not having done that research up front will cost me (no matter what option I end up going with). Hopefully the next guy thinking about a tire upgrade will stumble across this and be more informed.
Bumbo
New member
Yes, the 3 tires I had in rotation at one point in time was the E Load KO2, the BFG 3-Ply Baja Champion Mud Terrain , and the Michelin LTX M/S2.
This was all when I had a little more time, but after getting tired of swapping tires and playing around, I settled on the MT and sold the KO2.
rmbertoldi
New member
Just my two cents but I HIGHLY recommend the Falken Wildpeak A/T 265s, my stock Runner came with highway Goodyear Duratrac 255s on it which I never realized until I went to upgrade and realized they were sized down..which is why I was getting 20+MPG pretty regularly on my daily commutes. After swapping out to the Falkens the roadnoise is nill, traction is a whopping improvement, size is a bit beefier but still within reason for a 2-2.5" lift...however with the added weight of the tire (which they are known for) I've lost about 4+mpg. For me it's a fair trade because I have ZERO fears now going everywhere in brutal NE winters and I also will never flat a tire again on the minefield of potholes we have in the NE. Falken's tho I can't say enough great things about otherwise, at a fraction of the price of the A/T KO2 or KO3 Goodyears.
mteolus
New member
I am sure you are not getting as good of gas mileage with 265's as opposed to 255's (weight and rolling resistance), but since the circumference is larger your MPG gauge will be different. One turn will take you further. So maybe not 4+ but maybe 2 MPG less.
Jetboy
New member
This is your first car?
YellowSnow
Banned
No...data, you have any? Still waiting for all these modified, lifted broken down Toyota sightings on the side of the road.
Jetboy
New member
You can't be serious. Obviously you're not involved in any science field. But this is pretty basic even for having ever owned a car.
Did I guess right? First car.
If you're really serious, consider reading about bearing fatigue life. Toyota manufactures fantastic mechanical parts but it doesn't escape the laws of physics. Larger tires = greater bearing loads = shorter life of every rotating bearing. Engine, transmission, transfer base, u joint, wheel bearing. All will have shorter life spans.
Last edited:
YellowSnow
Banned
Yeah, no...still don’t care :wacko:
Jetboy
New member
having fun
New member
If running e rated tire you can bring your pressure down to smooth it out a LITTLE.
And when modding these or any vehicle, it does put more strain on the different parts.
And no, I DONT HAVE SCIENTIFIC FACTS on it, just personal experience, then again I dont really care ethier.
And when modding these or any vehicle, it does put more strain on the different parts.
And no, I DONT HAVE SCIENTIFIC FACTS on it, just personal experience, then again I dont really care ethier.
Rhinle
New member
He's just a troll.
Jetboy
New member
With e rated tires they should be run at higher pressure on the road. The heavier sidewall generates more heat st the same pressure. As a general rule about 45psi is the target.
The history of off road is empirical evidence of the reduced service life of components with larger tires. This forum is a essentially a forum of how to deal with that fact and how to repair the consequences. There's also libraries worth of scientific journals full of testing and results matching the experience in the field. It's like asking for empirical evidence that liquid water is denser than air and then expecting a data on every lake where water collects in a low spot. They all do.
Last edited:
Jetboy
New member
As a response to the original question of engine load - you can buy a blue tooth data link for pretty cheap and it'll give you the ECU's calculation of engine load in real time. You could log that information and then compare to stock tires on the same road at the same speed.
Or you can just assume MPG is a rough approximation of the inverse of engine load. The engine isn't uniformly fuel efficient, but it's close enough between two tires that are relatively close in size. The E rating probably has more rolling resistance than the extra height causes. An E rated tire in the same 265/70/17 size will reduce your mpg typically in the range of around 5-10%.
I would avoid E rated tire unless you spend a lot of time going fast in the desert or rock crawling. E rated tires are more durable. But there's no reason for the load capacity in a 4Runner. I've been through the Rubicon on P rated tires without a flat. I've also run around Poison Spider Mesa and many times through Hell's Revenge on P rated tires without issue. The Colorado passes are do-able on street tires of about any type. I've done them on P rated tires too. Also without issue. OTOH if you're headed to Pritchet Canyon or Johnson Valley or going to do high speed desert runs, more durability is worth it.
If you want to cross Africa where a flat is a huge PITA and potentially dangerous, I'd go with E rated tires. For traveling to very remote places (there are none in the lower 48 that qualify to me as being remote like Africa or Australia) I'd go with two spares, E rated tires, and probably just stock size. When the closest service station is further away than San Diego is from Seattle, the whole calculus changes.
The main point is that it's not a one size fits all solution. Sometimes an E rated tires is the only choice. That's why I have them.
I had a lot of problems with P rated Toyo AT2's to the point that they bought me a new set of Cooper AT3s to replace them. Is that because I was damaging them or because they're just shitty tires? I'm not sure. I had one flat, but mostly they were unbalanceable. I now have Cooper AT3's in a 285/75/17 (the 34" version) and they only come in E rated so that's what I have. If they had a C rated tire in that height, I'd gladly swap for a lighter weight tire casing. I wanted an AT tires for quiet highway manners. I live 700 miles from the Rubicon. A trip there is 1400 miles of highway and 30 miles of dirt. Doesn't make a lot of sense to drive on mud tires.
I would follow the same standard used in heavy trucks - consider the service intervals based on EPA mpg. Then adjust based on the ratio of your mpg to EPA mpg. For example if the oil change is 10,000 miles and 19mpg is the baseline. If you're getting 15mpg I'd change the oil ever [(15/19)*10,000] = 7,900 miles. That's how OTR trucks do oil change intervals and it's based on a lot of testing. MPG is a pretty decent representation of engine load and wear.
good luck.
Or you can just assume MPG is a rough approximation of the inverse of engine load. The engine isn't uniformly fuel efficient, but it's close enough between two tires that are relatively close in size. The E rating probably has more rolling resistance than the extra height causes. An E rated tire in the same 265/70/17 size will reduce your mpg typically in the range of around 5-10%.
I would avoid E rated tire unless you spend a lot of time going fast in the desert or rock crawling. E rated tires are more durable. But there's no reason for the load capacity in a 4Runner. I've been through the Rubicon on P rated tires without a flat. I've also run around Poison Spider Mesa and many times through Hell's Revenge on P rated tires without issue. The Colorado passes are do-able on street tires of about any type. I've done them on P rated tires too. Also without issue. OTOH if you're headed to Pritchet Canyon or Johnson Valley or going to do high speed desert runs, more durability is worth it.
If you want to cross Africa where a flat is a huge PITA and potentially dangerous, I'd go with E rated tires. For traveling to very remote places (there are none in the lower 48 that qualify to me as being remote like Africa or Australia) I'd go with two spares, E rated tires, and probably just stock size. When the closest service station is further away than San Diego is from Seattle, the whole calculus changes.
The main point is that it's not a one size fits all solution. Sometimes an E rated tires is the only choice. That's why I have them.
I had a lot of problems with P rated Toyo AT2's to the point that they bought me a new set of Cooper AT3s to replace them. Is that because I was damaging them or because they're just shitty tires? I'm not sure. I had one flat, but mostly they were unbalanceable. I now have Cooper AT3's in a 285/75/17 (the 34" version) and they only come in E rated so that's what I have. If they had a C rated tire in that height, I'd gladly swap for a lighter weight tire casing. I wanted an AT tires for quiet highway manners. I live 700 miles from the Rubicon. A trip there is 1400 miles of highway and 30 miles of dirt. Doesn't make a lot of sense to drive on mud tires.
I would follow the same standard used in heavy trucks - consider the service intervals based on EPA mpg. Then adjust based on the ratio of your mpg to EPA mpg. For example if the oil change is 10,000 miles and 19mpg is the baseline. If you're getting 15mpg I'd change the oil ever [(15/19)*10,000] = 7,900 miles. That's how OTR trucks do oil change intervals and it's based on a lot of testing. MPG is a pretty decent representation of engine load and wear.
good luck.
Last edited:
Bayou_Pro
New member
I'd state the obvious but your speedometer and mpg's from the T4R are off.
Good info to compare but for it to work out correctly all tires would have to be perfect according to their specs. We all know there can be a 1/4" or so difference in 2 different brands of tire having the same 265/70R17 size. Again good comparison though.
