To piggy back off this, the Standard load range is what majority consumers purchase? The only reason why someone would want "E", is for more tread and haul heavier loads?
New Falken AT tire (A/T3W)
- Thread starter weeeee
- Start date
To piggy back off this, the Standard load range is what majority consumers purchase? The only reason why someone would want "E", is for more tread and haul heavier loads?
CharlesNellis
New member
Or for puncture resistance if mainly rock crawling.
Or you have no choice cause it's the only rating available for your size. (I wanted to run a 255/80r17 and it is only available in an E rating.)
SpeedyKevin
New member
Do you mean to ask why the C weigh more than the E? (as listed on Falken's website)
Last edited:
That's the reason I have E load range tires, because they are more durable off-road.
Every time I've taken a P-rated tire on a trail, I've gotten a flat.
nwebb01
New member
carlodonz
Member
LOL I'm sorry, yes I meant why Load C (6 plies) weigh more than Load E (10 plies)!
I just wanted to add as a data point for those interested: I looked up the DOT code, and my tires were fabricated in the Buffalo NY plant. Still going strong with no vibration whatsoever at any speed.
El Dusty
Member
I picked up a set of 285/70/17 C loads from a gladiator bro. Coming form the same size but Load E Toyos AT2's, I can tell you these Falkens are considerably heavier and require noticeably more braking force than the Toyos. I'm not sure how I feel about the Cs at this point and probably wouldn't recommend them.
TRD PANTHER
New member
Stepped up from BFG KO2 E load 275's to AT3W 285's in SL
Just when you thought this behemoth of a thread was gone, I brought it back.
Last Saturday I bought new SL AT3W 285/70-17's to replace my BFG KO2 275/70-17 E load tires. My Pro had no modifications at all prior to the 285's except 1.5/1" Cornfed Pro spacers. No mods required either for the 285's with no clearance issues at slight to moderate articulation. Impressions: AT3W's make more noise than the KO2's. Not much and not annoying. The 10 ply KO2's cornered a bit better, and had a tad less nose dive. AT3W's ride a tad smoother and absorb bumps a little better than the 275's. I think the KO2's have a slightly more aggressive tread look, but, the AT3W's are a great looking tire. Matter of personal opinion. I like them both. I have had KO2's before, both in E loads, and I think they are super tough and have never had a flat with either set. Although, I only had 13k on the 275's, but, 55k on my 2001 T4R. Uphill grades have a slightly longer shift point, of course, but, not that bad at all. Overall I am happy with them so far. I went this route for a little smoother ride, the larger tire/looks and the price.
Just when you thought this behemoth of a thread was gone, I brought it back.
Last Saturday I bought new SL AT3W 285/70-17's to replace my BFG KO2 275/70-17 E load tires. My Pro had no modifications at all prior to the 285's except 1.5/1" Cornfed Pro spacers. No mods required either for the 285's with no clearance issues at slight to moderate articulation. Impressions: AT3W's make more noise than the KO2's. Not much and not annoying. The 10 ply KO2's cornered a bit better, and had a tad less nose dive. AT3W's ride a tad smoother and absorb bumps a little better than the 275's. I think the KO2's have a slightly more aggressive tread look, but, the AT3W's are a great looking tire. Matter of personal opinion. I like them both. I have had KO2's before, both in E loads, and I think they are super tough and have never had a flat with either set. Although, I only had 13k on the 275's, but, 55k on my 2001 T4R. Uphill grades have a slightly longer shift point, of course, but, not that bad at all. Overall I am happy with them so far. I went this route for a little smoother ride, the larger tire/looks and the price.
Attachments
Last edited:
So what is the general consensus of PSI people are airing down for desert and rocky environments on the SL rated tires? I know the recommendations MAST4R has given based on his anecdotal experience which has some really good insight, but after scouring tacoma/jeep and various other forums I still see a majority of people running between 16-25psi. I mostly run trails in Socal and have tried 25-30 PSI and still feel unsure of what PSI I should be targeting for good traction without compromising the softer load of the SL's.
SpeedyKevin
New member
Im using lt tires so cant help you there. However, i will say that try not to get hung up on what everyone else is running. If it works and you got up the trail, then go from there. From what i can recall, the sl and lt wildpeak have the same sidewalls so you should be ok.
TRD PANTHER
New member
25 is good for moderate trails. I would not go lower than 15psi. 15 for rocks and tough trails. I’m talking about an E load.
Last edited:
Baystate4Runner
New member
Got the same tires delivered today - not installed yet - but mine are Made in USA.
Looks like they moved production to the US.
Oh and build date is 09/20 for one tire and 21/20 for the other three.
Thanks for the info - please keep us updated after you get them mounted and some miles on them.
Mine are still doing great. Bit more road noise than the OEM tires on the highway, but to be expected considering the additional tread depth.
I was hoping my last set was made in USA. But no good. All 3 sets I had all had same issue. My tire place installs a lot of the Falkens with no issues at all. I had no luck with them.
How do you know they are US made or not? are they stamped? I haven't paid much attention.
Baystate4Runner
New member
Yes - it says on the tires "Made in USA" or wherever.
ForRun
New member
Just to the left of "Falken"
Attachments
It’s stamped on the tire made in USA.
