NEW AT: Yokohama Geolander X-AT

[Thai]

Hey all,

This tire just came out July 2019 from Yokohama...introduced in late May.

Official link: GEOLANDAR X-AT | Yokohama Tire Corporation

Newsroom: Yokohama Tire Delivers Ultimate Off-road Performance and Comfort with the All-new GEOLANDAR X-AT™

Quick summary: 3-ply sidewall, BFG KO2-ish tread pattern (but less aggressive), quiet on highway (so claimed to be as quiet as their normal Geolander AT G015), and tough as nails tread.

 

[Thai]

Very good review and more info on the tire: Yokohama Geolandar X-AT Tire Review

More articles about it:

Reviewed: Yokohama’s Geolandar X-AT Tire – Expedition Portal

Tire Review: Yokohama Geolandar X-AT - Off-Road.com

 

[drei4runner29]

Just as an FYI to those at looking on purchasing these tires or just looking at purchasing new tires in general.

At Big Brand Tires, they're going for $169.99 per tire. To top it off, they're knocking off $60 for a set of 4 tires.
Yokohama Geolandar X-at - LT265/70R17 | Big Brand Tire & Service

At Discount Tires, for the same size tires, they're going for around $205 a tire w/ $150 worth of mail in rebates.
Yokohama Geolandar X-AT | America's Tire

I sent Discount Tires Big Brand Tires site to see if they'll price match and hopefully if they do, along w/ the extra $60 discount right off the bat.

 

[MAST4R]

Thanks, [MENTION=2]Thai[/MENTION] for monitoring the market and posting new tires. This is very helpful.

I love the 3-ply sidewall as only a handful of ATs offer that (Cooper Maxx, LTD/E KO2, ATZ P3). The fact that the shoulder protectors provide full coverage is also notable. Some tires with robust shoulder protectors leave gaps between them.

However, LTE only is a no-go for me and the weight is 56 vs an LTD KO2 at 54 lb that also features a 3-ply sidewall plus outstanding shoulders. Considering the LTC 3-ply sidewall options in 255 75, I would personally look there for a 3-ply sidewall tire. I wonder if they will release a 255 7517 in LTC. That's the size that usually gets LTC because, I think, of the Jeeps. I think 285 70 17 is becoming the new LTC size because of the current stock Rubicon sizes. It is worth noting that the Yokohama MT tire comes with 3 ply sidewall in LTE but not in LTC. So I wonder whether an LTC version of this tire would actually have a 3-ply sidewall.

With all these brand new offerings, I am very curious to see if Toyo will come up with an AT III and Goodyear with a Duratrac II. The AT II was a great tire when it came out but that was some 10 years ago. On top of my head, the Toyo AT II and the Duratrac are the oldest major AT tires on the market today.

All in all, it is amazing how far this market segment has come in a decade.

 

[Thai]

Thanks, [MENTION=2]Thai[/MENTION] for monitoring the market and posting new tires. This is very helpful.

I love the 3-ply sidewall as only a handful of ATs offer that (Cooper Maxx, LTD/E KO2, ATZ P3). The fact that the shoulder protectors provide full coverage is also notable. Some tires with robust shoulder protectors leave gaps between them.

However, LTE only is a no-go for me and the weight is 56 vs an LTD KO2 at 54 lb that also features a 3-ply sidewall plus outstanding shoulders. Considering the LTC 3-ply sidewall options in 255 75, I would personally look there for a 3-ply sidewall tire. I wonder if they will release a 255 7517 in LTC. That's the size that usually gets LTC because, I think, of the Jeeps. I think 285 70 17 is becoming the new LTC size because of the current stock Rubicon sizes. It is worth noting that the Yokohama MT tire comes with 3 ply sidewall in LTE but not in LTC. So I wonder whether an LTC version of this tire would actually have a 3-ply sidewall.

With all these brand new offerings, I am very curious to see if Toyo will come up with an AT III and Goodyear with a Duratrac II. The AT II was a great tire when it came out but that was some 10 years ago. On top of my head, the Toyo AT II and the Duratrac are the oldest major AT tires on the market today.

All in all, it is amazing how far this market segment has come in a decade.

Agree...this tire is a no go. Too heavy. BFG KO2 is like a ballerina next to this Yoko X-AT!

For me, i am planning to upgrade tires within next 2-3 months. So, this is why i am rushing to research every damn tire that comes to market!

 

[AZ Craig]

Bumping this thread. After a lot of agonizing between going to 275/70R17 versus sticking with 265/70R17, I've decided to run a Yokohoma X-AT as the replacement for my Terra Crapplers on my 2020 Pro. Tires are going on at Discount this Friday. Sticking with LT265/70R17 despite the weight

I've previously run BFG KMs (C load 255/7517), Nitto Trail Grapplers (C load 255/75R17) and Nitto Exo Grapplers (E load 285/70R17) on my 2012 JKU, and had LT265/70R17 Falken Wildpeak AT3Ws on my 2016 Trail once I pulled the HT tires.

I know a lot of folks are down on E-load tires, but as I do most of my off-roading in Arizona, Utah and Colorado (and quite a bit by myself), a flat tire can turn into quite a character building experience very quickly. Thus the extra durability that comes out of a tire like this is driving my choice.

General Grabber AT-X in 275/70R17 was a very strong runner up for consideration. I also thought about BF-G KO2s in both 265/70R17 (C) and 275/70R17 (E). Cooper ST-Maxx and STT Pro, and Grabber X3s were also in consideraton. I thought about Duratracs but could not stomach the reportedly weak sidewalls. So why the Yokohomas?

1. This is a bit of an odd reason, but I like trying something different and new. I also generally will lean towards more "recent" tire releases as I generally feel like technology is so rapidly advancing in this arena that it's interesting to try the latest and greatest.
2. I really wanted a severe snow rating (thus the focus on the Grabber AT-X), but ultimately decided it was not necessary in this case as it's predominantly something I use for ski trips (which I foresee being minimized for at least the next 12 to 18 months with COVID-19). Early snow reports on this tire are pretty good overall also (I assume they should at least rival a ST Maxx or Mickey Thompson ATZ).
3. The Geolander AT-X effectively gives a mud tire carcass in a more highway friendly tread design. Durability should be way up there.
4. After ripping a sidewall out of one of my original KMs on my Jeep in C-load on Black Bear Pass with only ~6000 miles on the tires, I've been focused on durability as a significant factor.
5. The fact that Yokohoma went to a true 32" tire in LT265/70R17 brings this close to the size of the 275/70R17 Grabber and BF-G KO2. Ultimately if I stick with factory size I can probably avoid replacing my spare next time around and have access to the much greater range of tires in this size versus 275/70R17.
6. 285/70R17 is a non-starter since I want to keep my 7" Pro wheels and don't want to flirt with needing a BMC.
7. Price is pretty damn good at $210 a tire currently. The 45000 mileage warranty is also an interesting selling point. I imagine these will last quite awhile as most E-rated ATs hold up on 4Runners quite well from what i saw with my Falkens (those were still going strong with close to 45000 miles on them).
8. I would have considered Falkens again but I had a lot of balance issues with my previous set plus they raised the price up on the E-rated significantly from what they were. They used to be an absolute steal (I think I got my first set for something like $175 a tire).

I'll get some pictures up on this thread in the next week and will be taking a pretty significant road trip up to Colorado in September including running these on some trails in the Ouray and Crested Butte area. Will be a very interesting initial test of them in a lot of different conditions. If anyone is interested in results, I can definitely post back.

 

[JoshByGosh]

Bumping this thread. After a lot of agonizing between going to 275/70R17 versus sticking with 265/70R17, I've decided to run a Yokohoma X-AT as the replacement for my Terra Crapplers on my 2020 Pro. Tires are going on at Discount this Friday. Sticking with LT265/70R17 despite the weight

I've previously run BFG KMs (C load 255/7517), Nitto Trail Grapplers (C load 255/75R17) and Nitto Exo Grapplers (E load 285/70R17) on my 2012 JKU, and had LT265/70R17 Falken Wildpeak AT3Ws on my 2016 Trail once I pulled the HT tires.

I know a lot of folks are down on E-load tires, but as I do most of my off-roading in Arizona, Utah and Colorado (and quite a bit by myself), a flat tire can turn into quite a character building experience very quickly. Thus the extra durability that comes out of a tire like this is driving my choice.

General Grabber AT-X in 275/70R17 was a very strong runner up for consideration. I also thought about BF-G KO2s in both 265/70R17 (C) and 275/70R17 (E). Cooper ST-Maxx and STT Pro, and Grabber X3s were also in consideraton. I thought about Duratracs but could not stomach the reportedly weak sidewalls. So why the Yokohomas?

1. This is a bit of an odd reason, but I like trying something different and new. I also generally will lean towards more "recent" tire releases as I generally feel like technology is so rapidly advancing in this arena that it's interesting to try the latest and greatest.
2. I really wanted a severe snow rating (thus the focus on the Grabber AT-X), but ultimately decided it was not necessary in this case as it's predominantly something I use for ski trips (which I foresee being minimized for at least the next 12 to 18 months with COVID-19). Early snow reports on this tire are pretty good overall also (I assume they should at least rival a ST Maxx or Mickey Thompson ATZ).
3. The Geolander AT-X effectively gives a mud tire carcass in a more highway friendly tread design. Durability should be way up there.
4. After ripping a sidewall out of one of my original KMs on my Jeep in C-load on Black Bear Pass with only ~6000 miles on the tires, I've been focused on durability as a significant factor.
5. The fact that Yokohoma went to a true 32" tire in LT265/70R17 brings this close to the size of the 275/70R17 Grabber and BF-G KO2. Ultimately if I stick with factory size I can probably avoid replacing my spare next time around and have access to the much greater range of tires in this size versus 275/70R17.
6. 285/70R17 is a non-starter since I want to keep my 7" Pro wheels and don't want to flirt with needing a BMC.
7. Price is pretty damn good at $210 a tire currently. The 45000 mileage warranty is also an interesting selling point. I imagine these will last quite awhile as most E-rated ATs hold up on 4Runners quite well from what i saw with my Falkens (those were still going strong with close to 45000 miles on them).
8. I would have considered Falkens again but I had a lot of balance issues with my previous set plus they raised the price up on the E-rated significantly from what they were. They used to be an absolute steal (I think I got my first set for something like $175 a tire).

I'll get some pictures up on this thread in the next week and will be taking a pretty significant road trip up to Colorado in September including running these on some trails in the Ouray and Crested Butte area. Will be a very interesting initial test of them in a lot of different conditions. If anyone is interested in results, I can definitely post back.

How about those pics and an update on your thoughts?