New AT/3s? 4s vs LT? B vs C?

[ade678]

Hi All,

I’m writing to ask if anyone has any opinions about the new Discoverer AT/3 tires. I’m currently running a set of the older model AT/3s in load range C — thanks again to everyone on this forum who helped me with this decision. The tires have been great, but I’ll need a new set for this summer’s road trip, and Discoverer has changed their lineup a bit.

As I expect many on this forum already know, Discoverer has divided their AT/3 into three categories: 4S, LT, and XT (listed from least to most aggressive). The 4S is available in load range B, the LT and XT are available in C and E.

Like most people who overland, I really only need the off road capabilities for one or two months out of the year. The rest of the time I need a daily driver tire that’s not too noisy. When I'm offroad, the 4Runner is packed with a family of 4 and a 100 lb dog, while also carrying a fully loaded Gobi rack and towing a 2000 lb off-road trailer (I punctured 3 of the OEM Dunlops on the backroads of Utah and British Columbia before switching to the AT/3s), so my best guess is that the "mid-range" LT in 6 ply C load would be the best fit for my needs (The XT's and E loads seem a bit excessive.)

Anyone have any opinions?

Many thanks as always for your advice!

 

[MAST4R]

I am a fan of P metric (not aired down) but with an offroad trailer and lots of weight, LT-C sounds right to me, too.

I don't see the point of going all the way to E unless that also gives you a third sidewall ply which is really only offered on the KO2 and the ATZ P3, afaik. There is also an LT-D Ko2 in 265 70 17 per Discount Tire but that would entail switching to a fairly different style of AT tire.

 

[Harrisnc]

I have the c load at3 on my Silverado in the 265. They are quieter than my ko2s on the 4runner. I like they stiffer more planted feel on the Cs. I only have 7k on them but at this point I’d buy them again.

 

[bane]

I have the AT3 LT (load range C) in stock size. They're great. I also had the old AT3 in P-metric which I liked as well, but I did get a puncture at the end of their life.

One thing to note is that the AT3 LT is M+S where the AT3 4S is mountain snowflake so if you do lots of winter snow/ice driving then the AT3 4S might be better. If not, then the AT3 LT sounds like it would be good for you.

 

[4FL]

Thank you for asking this. I am going to buy tires this spring and settled on the Coopers, but now I see they have different types than what a lot of threads talked about.

I wanted the one size bigger, but the 4s does not have it, stock size is fine, not going to complain.

I was looking between the 4s and the LT, tire rack though shows the 4s has having a higher load rating, but I thought it was P rated versus the C rated which should have a higher load?

 

[Decipher]

Your load range should be a deciding factor. For what you’re doing, I’d definitely go Load Range C. E is overkill for the rest of your year and while P series has served me well, I would feel more comfortable having that heavy of a load and being that far off pavement.

Regarding your tire selections, I’d go at least middle of the road if everyday MPGs are your concern. My logic is this...I’d rather sacrifice some everyday mileage for dependability when I’m off the beaten path and a good tire matters most.

Snow performance matters to me so if it’s not mountain snowflake rated, I’m not interested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Firstoneman]

3ply issue

Am down in Mozambique...curious about 3 ply sidewalls. I've never thought I needed it on my other stateside trucks, but a guy in these parts mentioned it a few years back and said it's a necessity here...just a month after I had purchased my General Grabber ATs 265-70 R16 (which didn't have 3 ply sidewalls). I am now in need of replacing my tire set and am considering the sidewall issue. Can anyone tell me what kind of ride characteristics are had with a 3 ply sidewall? I've had e-load tires on my 3/4 ton because of hauling stone loads regularly, when unloaded that swap was harsh (might those have had 3-ply sidewalls?). Can you get a d-load with 3 ply sidewalls?

Thanks in advance for thoughts.

 

[MAST4R]

I was looking between the 4s and the LT, tire rack though shows the 4s has having a higher load rating, but I thought it was P rated versus the C rated which should have a higher load?

They balance out. P-metric in 265 70 17 are normally 115T for AT tires, including the 4S. LT-C have lower load ratings. However, P metric tires in BoF application are supposed to be derated 9% and so the P and the LT-C even out.

I am much more familiar with offroad use than any serious towing (our trailer is 1000 lb loaded) so I am not sure why but everywhere LT is suggested for towing even if the load ratings are the same. It is obvious with LT-D and LT-E because they can handle much higher loads.

Now what most people here seem not to want to hear is that load ratings are the same but not at the same pressures. LTs needed to be run at roughly 10 psi higher than P in this tire size to actually deliver on their potential.

Running an LT with a trailer at 30-35 psi goes against everything the industry and the tire shop websites say.

Your load range should be a deciding factor. For what you’re doing, I’d definitely go Load Range C. E is overkill for the rest of your year and while P series has served me well, I would feel more comfortable having that heavy of a load and being that far off pavement.

Regarding your tire selections, I’d go at least middle of the road if everyday MPGs are your concern. My logic is this...I’d rather sacrifice some everyday mileage for dependability when I’m off the beaten path and a good tire matters most.

Snow performance matters to me so if it’s not mountain snowflake rated, I’m not interested.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ this.

Am down in Mozambique...curious about 3 ply sidewalls. I've never thought I needed it on my other stateside trucks, but a guy in these parts mentioned it a few years back and said it's a necessity here...just a month after I had purchased my General Grabber ATs 265-70 R16 (which didn't have 3 ply sidewalls). I am now in need of replacing my tire set and am considering the sidewall issue. Can anyone tell me what kind of ride characteristics are had with a 3 ply sidewall? I've had e-load tires on my 3/4 ton because of hauling stone loads regularly, when unloaded that swap was harsh (might those have had 3-ply sidewalls?). Can you get a d-load with 3 ply sidewalls?

Thanks in advance for thoughts.

I don't know if the 3rd ply makes a difference about the ride characteristics as the load rating of a D or E would be the same whether using 2 or 3 plies. So, the 3rd ply is more of an offroad enhancement and a pretty big one at that. Sounds like you can totally benefit from a 3 ply sidewall.

LT-D and LT-E have the added benefit, depending on your street pressures, of offering better handling and better cornering due to the stiffer sidewalls. But you pay the price with a harsh ride if running proper street psi on an empty vehicle, especially one much lighter than the super duty trucks those tires are meant for.

According to Discount Tire there is now an LT-D 265 70 17 KO2 but I have not seen that tire listed anywhere else, including on the BFG site. So it may not be available everywhere or not yet.

I would totally consider an LT-D with a 3-ply sidewall under the right circumstances.

 

[Firstoneman]

3 ply reply

I don't know if the 3rd ply makes a difference about the ride characteristics as the load rating of a D or E would be the same whether using 2 or 3 plies. So, the 3rd ply is more of an offroad enhancement and a pretty big one at that. Sounds like you can totally benefit from a 3 ply sidewall.

LT-D and LT-E have the added benefit, depending on your street pressures, of offering better handling and better cornering due to the stiffer sidewalls. But you pay the price with a harsh ride if running proper street psi on an empty vehicle, especially one much lighter than the super duty trucks those tires are meant for.

According to Discount Tire there is now an LT-D 265 70 17 KO2 but I have not seen that tire listed anywhere else, including on the BFG site. So it may not be available everywhere or not yet.

I would totally consider an LT-D with a 3-ply sidewall under the right circumstances.

Thank you for this info. Will be very helpful. Will see what's available in the channels down here. One thing that's been difficult here is that it's very hot all the time and I think the longevity of the tire takes a hit. I do pavement a lot for long distances mostly, but some of it is riddled with potholes. I've got to balance the ride quality for my wife, who has a messed up set of disks in her neck. We work out the compromise. I'm getting upgraded suspension so that should go a long way to smooth things out for her.

Thanks again...very useful.
Cheers
Dave

 

[MAST4R]

Thank you for this info. Will be very helpful. Will see what's available in the channels down here. One thing that's been difficult here is that it's very hot all the time and I think the longevity of the tire takes a hit. I do pavement a lot for long distances mostly, but some of it is riddled with potholes. I've got to balance the ride quality for my wife, who has a messed up set of disks in her neck. We work out the compromise. I'm getting upgraded suspension so that should go a long way to smooth things out for her.

Thanks again...very useful.
Cheers
Dave

Yeah, balance is tough. I am in AZ so I doubt it is any warmer there! But maybe humid, too. At least it is very dry here.

Have you considered using a 255 75 17 tire?

Many people in South Africa, Australia, or elsewhere, inclined to look for function first, swear by thinner tires. If you drive muddy tracks, skinnier tires get down to the more solid stratum underneath.

There are two other reasons to consider 255 75 17:

1/ A bit more sidewall=more comfort.

2/ There are several MT tires with 3-ply sidewall in LT-C in that size. Nothing like that is available in 265 70 17.

Finally, for comfort, I would first go down to 16" wheels, if possible. Doing that will aid comfort tremendously as that's a lot more tire to take on the potholes etc.

 

[Firstoneman]

Yeah, balance is tough. I am in AZ so I doubt it is any warmer there! But maybe humid, too. At least it is very dry here.

Have you considered using a 255 75 17 tire?

Many people in South Africa, Australia, or elsewhere, inclined to look for function first, swear by thinner tires. If you drive muddy tracks, skinnier tires get down to the more solid stratum underneath.

There are two other reasons to consider 255 75 17:

1/ A bit more sidewall=more comfort.

2/ There are several MT tires with 3-ply sidewall in LT-C in that size. Nothing like that is available in 265 70 17.

Finally, for comfort, I would first go down to 16" wheels, if possible. Doing that will aid comfort tremendously as that's a lot more tire to take on the potholes etc.

I have a 16" now. I did mention the size of my Generals up top (265/70 R16), but in this thread the 17" have also been discussed. What is the 115T number you mentioned earlier? I'm sure I've been told somewhere along the way, just forgetful.
Thanks again.
Cheers!

 

[MAST4R]

I have a 16" now. I did mention the size of my Generals up top (265/70 R16), but in this thread the 17" have also been discussed. What is the 115T number you mentioned earlier? I'm sure I've been told somewhere along the way, just forgetful.
Thanks again.
Cheers!

Yeah, sorry about the tire size. Here:

Tire Load Range & Load Index | Load Range & Index Rating Chart | America's Tire

For example, 115=2679 lb

The letters are the speed ratings.

 

[Firstoneman]

Yeah, sorry about the tire size. Here:

Tire Load Range & Load Index | Load Range & Index Rating Chart | America's Tire

For example, 115=2679 lb. The letters are the speed ratings.

Thank you for the link...helpful

 

[4FL]

Thanks for the info MAST4R. I am not looking to tow or anything, not ever serious towing or long distance that is if ever having to. 4S seems perfectly fine for what I want.

I use to drive only trucks, an F-350, so know all about D and E ratings, about zero clue for anything else, lol.

 

[MAST4R]

Thanks for the info MAST4R. I am not looking to tow or anything, not ever serious towing or long distance that is if ever having to. 4S seems perfectly fine for what I want.

I use to drive only trucks, an F-350, so know all about D and E ratings, about zero clue for anything else, lol.

That sure seems the right truck for an E tire!

I have zero experience with vehicles that size.

But I had LT-D KO2s on a Subaru, so there's that!

I saw a F150 today next to me wearing P265 70 17 115T tires, same as my size and ratings. I was surprised. I know they use P, but I thought they would be XL or bigger size on a 150.

 

[ic0517]

Ha ha ha - wish I would have read this thread before I bought General Grabbers in stock size and E load rating instead of C load rating. Guys at Tire Rack were like WTF. I was worried about speed rating and my daughter's lead foot. After I left Tire Rack I say oh f--k better google that, will what do you know. So lets see, I'm 55, by the time I hit 60 I will finally know how to buy a set of tires?

The ONE good thing is they seem to handle Chicago-area pot holes better, roads are like a effin obstacle course. Get scary when little cars start weaving around them. Once (if?) the potholes are filled, overkill.

When I slam on the brakes on wet pavement, the ABS no longer engages.

Stock size and stock original rims/wheels because my roof rack wipes the garage door every so often. Put the roof rack back on because my son says its alot easier to pick out the 4Runner out in a parking lot, and I noticed the same thing, they are unique. Stock garage because wife doesn't want to replace garage;6' height on a good day. Taking the cross bars off once the weather is better.