Need Input on Choosing 315/75R16 Tires

[Bandit Runner]

So I’m due for a new set of 35 inch tires. My MTZ’s lasted me about 4 years and 40,000 miles, but the tread is getting really low. I’m hoping they will last until spring, but I’m not sure. Anyway I’ve been looking at different tires to replace these. The MTZ’s were great, but they got really loud at about 50% tread. And since 90% of my driving is on the road, I am considering something that is a little less aggressive.

The problem I am running into is that almost all 315/75R16 tires are E load range, except just a few which are D load range. I know that E load range tires are for heavier trucks and will ride really stiff on our 4Runners. They are also much heavier, thus reducing MPG’s. The MTZ’s are D load range, and I really prefer to stay with that load range.

I looked at every brand tire I could think of, in both mud terrain and all-terrain. Here is what I found (with load range and weight if available).

Mud Terrains:
Mickey Thompson MTZ – D 67 lbs
Maxxis BigHorn MT-762 – D 66 lbs
Goodyear Wrangler MT/R w/Kevlar – D 67 lbs
BFGoodrich Mud-Terrain T/A KM2 – D 66 lbs
General Grabber Red Letter – D 75 lbs
Toyo Open Country M/T – E 76 lbs
Nitto Trail Grappler M/T – E 81 lbs
Cooper Discoverer STT – E ? lbs
ProComp Xtreme M/T 2 – E ? lbs
Kumho Road Venture MT KL71 – E 79 lbs
Hankook Dynapro MT – E ? lbs
Firestone Destination M/T – E 72 lbs
Mickey Thomson Deegan 38 – E 73 lbs

All Terrains:
General Grabber A/T2 – D 61 lbs
Goodyear Wrangler DuraTrac – E 64 lbs
Mickey Thomson Baja ATZ P3 – E 67 lbs
Cooper Discoverer S/T MAXX – E ? lbs
ProComp Xtreme A/T – E ? lbs
BFGoodrich All-terrain T/A KO2 – E 68 lbs

My ideal tire would be D load range and similar or less weight than the MTZ’s, but with a slightly less aggressive tread pattern and better tread wear. I pretty much had my mind made up on the Maxxis Bighorns until The Kid (aka [MENTION=60147]the great him[/MENTION] ) mentioned having roundness issues with his. Now I’m leaning toward the Goodyear MT/R’s.

I know there are several folks running this size tire on here. I would like to hear advice from anyone running the Goodyear MT/R’s in this size, especially on tread wear and ride quality. Also for those of you running any of the E load range tires, is the ride stiff and did your MPG go down due to the weight increase?

 

[4Running Daily]

Sub'd. I too face this decision.

 

[KidVermicious]

I'm running E range KM2s in 255/85r16 on my '85. I don't find them loud and I didn't notice a MPG hit coming from p245/65r16 Big-O Bigfoot ATs. I briefly had E range 285/75r16 KM2s on the wife's '99, and replaced them with E range 265/75r16 Duratracs and didn't notice a MPG increase (though the Duratracs are definitely louder).

Based on that tiny slice of info, I rightly conclude that skinny KM2s are The Best Tire Ever and anybody running anything else is a ninnyhead. You're welcome.

 

[krenaud33]

Have you looked at the Kelly Safari TSR's? They are another Load E tire you might consider. I have them. I don't think it really stiffened my ride. Yes MPG's went down, but the only other thing I have to compare to was my stock tires.

 

[csp]

I doubt if the weight is going to make the mileage decline. It's rolling weight, so it isn't a 1:1 relationship.

It's the additional rolling resistance from a wider tire, the additional drag from the higher stance of the vehicle and gearing vs tire size (if it isn't adequate) that makes mileage drop.

People always seem to focus on weight when it comes to MPG. You're probably adding less weight than it would be to have another passenger, and nobody decides not to have other people in their car because it might hurt MPG.

You gotta pay if you're going to play, so if MPG is a concern get a little car, IMO.

 

[Bandit Runner]

I'm running E range KM2s in 255/85r16 on my '85. I don't find them loud and I didn't notice a MPG hit coming from p245/65r16 Big-O Bigfoot ATs. I briefly had E range 285/75r16 KM2s on the wife's '99, and replaced them with E range 265/75r16 Duratracs and didn't notice a MPG increase (though the Duratracs are definitely louder).

Based on that tiny slice of info, I rightly conclude that skinny KM2s are The Best Tire Ever and anybody running anything else is a ninnyhead. You're welcome.

Thanks. Interesting that the Duratracs were louder than the KM2's. My issue with the KM2's is that there is very little siping. The more siping the better in Michigan winters.

Have you looked at the Kelly Safari TSR's? They are another Load E tire you might consider. I have them. I don't think it really stiffened my ride. Yes MPG's went down, but the only other thing I have to compare to was my stock tires.

Thanks for the suggestion. I do like the tread pattern of the TSR's, but I am trying to stay away from E load ranges. I couldn't find a weight for them on their website unfortunately. Does Goodyear make Kelly tires?

 

[KidVermicious]

People always seem to focus on weight when it comes to MPG. You're probably adding less weight than it would be to have another passenger, and nobody decides not to have other people in their car because it might hurt MPG.

But the weight of a passenger isn't spinning on the outer circumference of the tire providing inertial resistance (is that a thing? What word am I looking for there?). Tire weight makes a huge difference.

Thanks. Interesting that the Duratracs were louder than the KM2's. My issue with the KM2's is that there is very little siping. The more siping the better in Michigan winters.

Yup. The KM2s were horrible on icy roads until I had them siped. Now they're passable, but I think your winters are icier than ours maybe? They're usable, you just have to stay within their limits and not pretend you have a race car.

 

[Bandit Runner]

I doubt if the weight is going to make the mileage decline. It's rolling weight, so it isn't a 1:1 relationship.

It's the additional rolling resistance from a wider tire, the additional drag from the higher stance of the vehicle and gearing vs tire size (if it isn't adequate) that makes mileage drop.

People always seem to focus on weight when it comes to MPG. You're probably adding less weight than it would be to have another passenger, and nobody decides not to have other people in their car because it might hurt MPG.

You gotta pay if you're going to play, so if MPG is a concern get a little car, IMO.

Good points. The weight difference between D and E tires is around 10 lbs per tire, rougly. And the weight is unsprung weight, which I believe makes a more significant difference than extra weight in the cabin. FWIW I am geared adequately with 5.29's. I don't mind paying to play, I just don't want worse mileage than I had with the MTZ's. Oh, and I can't stand little cars!

 

[csp]

But the weight of a passenger isn't spinning on the outer circumference of the tire providing inertial resistance (is that a thing? What word am I looking for there?). Tire weight makes a huge difference.

I disagree. If geared properly the inertial resistance is minimal. It takes very little horsepower if the leverage needed is there.

Compare breaking a lug nut free with a 3/8" drive ratchet vs. a 24" breaker bar. It's the same thing.

 

[4Running Daily]

I'm running E range KM2s in 255/85r16 on my '85. I don't find them loud and I didn't notice a MPG hit coming from p245/65r16 Big-O Bigfoot ATs. I briefly had E range 285/75r16 KM2s on the wife's '99, and replaced them with E range 265/75r16 Duratracs and didn't notice a MPG increase (though the Duratracs are definitely louder).

Based on that tiny slice of info, I rightly conclude that skinny KM2s are The Best Tire Ever and anybody running anything else is a ninnyhead. You're welcome.

Except they wear very quickly and don't do very well in sand.

 

[cdrewferd]

I'm currently running 285/75-17 Toyo MT's. I love them. They are heavy, but they ride great and aren't loud at all. They do very well in rain and snow. Tires are hard to pick, because you don't want to be unhappy with them. I think if you went to an AT you would be lose the aggressive look your beautiful 4Runner has and that would make you want to replace them sooner. [MENTION=67615]Dirtco[/MENTION] is running the MT/Rs, maybe he can give you his input as I know he daily drives his.

 

[Bandit Runner]

I'm currently running 285/75-17 Toyo MT's. I love them. They are heavy, but they ride great and aren't loud at all. They do very well in rain and snow. Tires are hard to pick, because you don't want to be unhappy with them. I think if you went to an AT you would be lose the aggressive look your beautiful 4Runner has and that would make you want to replace them sooner. [MENTION=67615]Dirtco[/MENTION] is running the MT/Rs, maybe he can give you his input as I know he daily drives his.

I agree, I probably won't go with an AT, unless it is a very aggressive AT. If load range/weight didn't matter, My first choices would be Toyo MT's or Nitto Trail Grapplers.

 

[KidVermicious]

I disagree. If geared properly the inertial resistance is minimal. It takes very little horsepower if the leverage needed is there.

Compare breaking a lug nut free with a 3/8" drive ratchet vs. a 24" breaker bar. It's the same thing.

Inertia doesn't matter. Got it.

Except they wear very quickly and don't do very well in sand.

Really? Mine haven't worn horribly quickly (although the truck has been parked for a year), and they do better in sand than any other MT I've seen. Or more to the point, I don't seem to have to air down as much to get sand traction as other guys with other MT tires. Maybe that's just because I'm awesome?

 

[BrandonF]

I disagree. If geared properly the inertial resistance is minimal. It takes very little horsepower if the leverage needed is there.

Compare breaking a lug nut free with a 3/8" drive ratchet vs. a 24" breaker bar. It's the same thing.

Rotational weight is the absolute worst weight you can add to your vehicle. Think about a point on your tire. It experiences translation (moving down the road like the rest of your vehicle) as well as rotation. Therefore, this tire weight has to be moved way farther than any other part your vehicle.

In terms of kinetic energy, it takes (1/2)Iw^2 + (1/2)mv^2 to move your tires, whereas the rest of your vehicle that isn't rotating simply takes (1/2)mv^2.

w is the rotation of the tires and I is the moment of inertia of your wheel/tire combo, and is equal to mv^2.

This means that it takes that much more power to move those tires, as well as stop them. As was already mentioned, tire weight is also unsprung weight, which will decrease the performance of your suspension as well.


All that being said, I just bought a set of 285's on LX450 wheels to replace my haggard 265's so :flipoff: to mpg, power and braking performance.

 

[4Running Daily]

Inertia doesn't matter. Got it.



Really? Mine haven't worn horribly quickly (although the truck has been parked for a year), and they do better in sand than any other MT I've seen. Or more to the point, I don't seem to have to air down as much to get sand traction as other guys with other MT tires. Maybe that's just because I'm awesome?

I think I'll get just over 30,000 miles out of them. And for the $1,200 I paid for them, that doesn't seem like a very good deal.

 

[GSPRunner]

I think I'll get just over 30,000 miles out of them. And for the $1,200 I paid for them, that doesn't seem like a very good deal.

Yeah I don't know what happened with your KM2s, but my 285s lasted me forever. And by forever I mean I sold them with 10/32nds tread and they had 50k miles on them. I'll be buying KM2s again next spring when I move to 35s.

 

[Andy in Pa]

It sounds like you want to stick with more of an MT, and you can't go wrong with the MTR/K's. I have known many running these in 35's, and they are not that noisy on-road, and work very well in snow and off road. Also, I have heard many good things about the Pro Comp Extreme MT's too. Both are kind of pricey, but I have seen both work very well in all circumstances. I ran a set of 35" KM2's on my MJ, and I was impressed with how they did in deep snow/mud/rocks. They were not as good in light snow on-road though, they just didn't have enough siping. If your used to the off/on road ability of the MTZ's, then the recommendations above should be right up your alley.

I am running a set of 295-75-16 General Grabber AT2's on my 3rd gen T4R, and they have very good road manners. I haven't had them off road yet, but I expect they will perform like an AT off road, so I don't plan on traversing any deep mud without my recovery equipment..:biggrin1:

 

[busmup808]

When I buy new, I run Goodyear MT/Rs. I ran my 1st set that was givin to me by my friend. It was the 1st gen, but worked like a champ when wheeling and not that loud on the road.

Then I moved from HI to WA and bought new MT/RKs for my FJ80. Both are great when wheeling and not as loud on the road.

When I'm up for new rubber, I will definatly buy another set of MT/RKs

 

[Bandit Runner]

It sounds like you want to stick with more of an MT, and you can't go wrong with the MTR/K's. I have known many running these in 35's, and they are not that noisy on-road, and work very well in snow and off road. Also, I have heard many good things about the Pro Comp Extreme MT's too. Both are kind of pricey, but I have seen both work very well in all circumstances. I ran a set of 35" KM2's on my MJ, and I was impressed with how they did in deep snow/mud/rocks. They were not as good in light snow on-road though, they just didn't have enough siping. If your used to the off/on road ability of the MTZ's, then the recommendations above should be right up your alley.

I am running a set of 295-75-16 General Grabber AT2's on my 3rd gen T4R, and they have very good road manners. I haven't had them off road yet, but I expect they will perform like an AT off road, so I don't plan on traversing any deep mud without my recovery equipment..:biggrin1:

Thanks for chiming in. That's good to hear about the GY MT/R's. What about tread wear? How many miles were they getting out of them?

That's the first good thing I've heard about the Procomps.

 

[Bandit Runner]

When I buy new, I run Goodyear MT/Rs. I ran my 1st set that was givin to me by my friend. It was the 1st gen, but worked like a champ when wheeling and not that loud on the road.

Then I moved from HI to WA and bought new MT/RKs for my FJ80. Both are great when wheeling and not as loud on the road.

When I'm up for new rubber, I will definatly buy another set of MT/RKs

Thanks. How many miles do you think you'll get out of the MT/RK's?