Need input: BFG Mud Terrain KM2 vs. BFG All Terrain

awpsome

awpsome

New member
I have a dilemma which tire to get.
It's between the two in either 285 or 265

I onroad majority of the time and off road occasional few times a month.
If I off road, most of the trail is dirt roads with some rocks with occasional awesome mud pits or some sand areas.

Seems like All terrain is the way to go but I like the design and capability of the mud terrain.

Also another choice I in either 285 version or the 265

If I go 285 I have to buy wheel spacers.

What do you think?
 
Register to hide this ad
I'd personally avoid wheel spacers, but that's just me.

Out of the two you mentioned I would probably pick the All-Terrain. Even though the MT would look better they will probably handle worse on road. Personally, I think that the AT is plenty capable for most Hawaiian style dirt trails.

Other than the two have you considered the Goodyear Duratrac? I had my set installed on the 4Runner yesterday and I think that they are a good middle ground between the BFG AT and BFG MT. They look aggressive as hell and perform well both on and off road. I have had a set on my Tacoma for about a half year now and I love those tires.
 
Yea I've also thought about the Goodyear duratracs but can only get a good deal on BFG tires right now through a friend of mines.

Im leaning towards all terrain due to my driving situation. But my friend keeps telling me the mud terrain km2s are pretty good on road and not much different then the all terrains only thing would be that the all terrains would last slightly longer.

One thing that really bugs me about the AT is also when the tread wears down dam that tire starts to look ugly. They look sick new but I seen some after many miles put on them and they look like crap.
My friends got the MTs and needs to be changed in the near future yet they still hold their look and don't really look like they are dull as they are supposed to be.
Iunno that's just me though haha
 
I like my D rated BFG A/Ts much better then my BFG KM2s. If most of your time is spent on pavement, then the extra traction you require can be attained by reducing air pressure. Get A/Ts in 265 size and invest in an air compressor to keep in the truck.
 
I would go with the AT's if you're using them on the street more. The MT's obviously perform better on mud, but the AT's will beat 'em in just about every other condition. And I would take an ugly looking bald tire at 70k vs a better looking bald tire at 40-50k.

That being said, if you really like/want the look of the MT's, go for them. They do look super beefy!
 
It does really depend on your intended use, and it seems you may be better suited for the AT's.

I now have KM2's and they perform awesome offroad, especially in the mud. They have also done fine for me so far on the rocks etc. They are significantly louder than the AT's on the road but the hum seems less noticeable on the highway, so I would say they are louder at lower speeds. They are slightly quieter than my old Mickey Thompson MTZ's.

I used to run BFG AT's. They were a good on-road tire because they were quieter and wore OK. They were an average contender offroad. They did the job but I got stuck several times on certain trails where my KM2's will walk right through. I also had some punctures on the AT's, that in my opinion should not have happened.

For me, in the mountainous terrain that I wheel in, I prefer the KM2's. I wheel maybe 10 times in a 4 month period (summer) and the rest of the miles are spent on the highway and DD'ing. I personally can live with the noise as the 4Runner isnt meant to be a quiet luxury cruiser. My .02
 
I just went through this same dilemma myself and ended up on with the KM2s. Here's why:

My OEM wheels have basically brand new Michelin LTX M/S's on them now in the standard 265/70R16 size. They're a great on-road tire and haven't left me wanting in the winter what with their siping, etc. These are going to be my December-through-April tires, KM2s on aftermarket wheels after the winter chemicals and sand are gone.

BFGoodrich has jacked up their prices recently, and this seems to only be trending upward. So, with the price difference being only $30 (for a 285/75R16), I went ahead and plunked down the extra money for the KM2s. The last thing I wanted was to spend over $1K on tires only to be left stuck because the All-Terrains caked up. Their on-road behavior is quite good considering how "aggressive" (it's all relative) the tread is and the noise is very tolerable IMO. Also in my experience, all the stuff I read about the Load Range E's having a harsh ride is nonsense.

All that being said, if you want a compromise all 'rounder, I think the All-Terrains are probably what you'll be happier with.
 
The at's dont have any better of a sidewall then the mt and ive seen lots of km2s go 40k and thats about the avg life of the at's to. I just put a set of 285 km2's on my 96 a couple days ago and so far i love them. You can feel the lugs when going slow but they are really smooth on the highway and arent all that loud for how agressive they look. Either way you go id step up to the 285 if your lifted cause they just fill the wheel wells better and make the truck look more proportionate.
 
trailmix said:
ive seen lots of km2s go 40k and thats about the avg life of the at's to.
Click to expand...

I'd have to disagree with you there. I'm working on my 4th set of AT's. The first two lasted well over 70k and the last set was at over 60k with plenty of rubber to spare before I sold the truck they were on. Not to mention they're warrantied to 50k.
 
well ive had them on lots of superduties and diesels and thats about all i can get out of a set even with regular rotations. I realize thats different on a truck that weighs half as much as my diesels do. Im not knocking bfg's just to let yall know, they are all my family and i run on our trucks.
 
AT's are probably the safer / smarter bet....but I love the look of MT's on my truck! I mainly DD it, but wouldn't run anything else!
 
trailmix said:
well ive had them on lots of superduties and diesels and thats about all i can get out of a set even with regular rotations. I realize thats different on a truck that weighs half as much as my diesels do. Im not knocking bfg's just to let yall know, they are all my family and i run on our trucks.
Click to expand...

That would make sense. Every set I've ran was on a vehicle that weighed about the same as these 3rd gens.
 
The AT's would be good because they will be great on road and last longer, but I would also get the KM2's because you are 2wd and the extra traction off road would be very beneficial to you. I don't know what you wheel in Hawaii, but if there is any rocks or sharp lava rock neither would be ideal. If you are mudding and sand then the KM2's would be best. How many miles a year do you drive?
 
wow thanks for all the input everyone. im still in the middle of which one to go for..
i do like the idea that the AT will last longer so a much better investment. but also the KM2s on my friends truck is at 50k and still got quite a bit of life left.

i was reading through other threads and is it true the duratracs are sorta mix between the AT and the MT? like an inbetween? ive seen a lot of people tag in their sigs they run the duratracs but i figured that was for those who off road much more then i do..

also for those who said the sidewalls and stuff are weak on the KM2s, i would have never guessed! i thought they were advertising the whole 8 or 10 ply side wall kevlar whatever stuff? so i thought was pretty beefed up.

im thinking AT just because of my driving being mostly on pavement and they would still do pretty good off road.


any inputs on those duratracs? or even general grabber at2s? or general grabber something?
 
i bought some cheap long trails when i first got my T4R. I just put 285 BFG A/T's on in january. LOVE THEM. Now when I go to my dads' hunting land i dont even need 4X4 to get up the enormous hill to the cabin. I hope to be able to buy some M/T KM2s and put them on a new set of wheels as backups though.
 
One of Central Overland's guides is running Duratracs on his Montero. Every time I see them in action I am more impressed. They are great tires, and are an ideal mix of off road performer and street manners. They will probably be my next set of tires. Tough carcass, adequate lug voids, and an advanced siping pattern are characteristics that usually do not collide in the same sentence. YMMV.
 
awpsome said:
wow thanks for all the input everyone. im still in the middle of which one to go for..
i do like the idea that the AT will last longer so a much better investment. but also the KM2s on my friends truck is at 50k and still got quite a bit of life left.

i was reading through other threads and is it true the duratracs are sorta mix between the AT and the MT? like an inbetween? ive seen a lot of people tag in their sigs they run the duratracs but i figured that was for those who off road much more then i do..

also for those who said the sidewalls and stuff are weak on the KM2s, i would have never guessed! i thought they were advertising the whole 8 or 10 ply side wall kevlar whatever stuff? so i thought was pretty beefed up.

im thinking AT just because of my driving being mostly on pavement and they would still do pretty good off road.


any inputs on those duratracs? or even general grabber at2s? or general grabber something?
Click to expand...



Get both of them...:fro:

2011-06-10_17-16-24_397.jpg~original


Mind you that these are the older mudterrains..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 960 (members: 5, guests: 955)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,312
Messages
3,554,085
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top