New Falken AT tire (A/T3W)

[Swipter]

I just put on LT265/70-17 BFG KO2 replacing my factory Bridgestone Dueler P265/70-17. I was getting 19.1 mpg with my factory tires. Now I'm getting 19.0 mpg. However, hunting season is in so I'm pulling a 4-wheeler trailer more now.

Did you use C pr E ply?

 

[N2TRKYS]

Did you use C pr E ply?

I went with the C rated. I thought that would be a big enough upgrade over the P rated factory tires. Forest Service and logging roads will be roughest thing mine will be on. Lol

 

[teotwaki]

Looking for real world feedback on these tires from those who decided to go with the SL version of the tires instead of LT. I’ve only had my 265/70/17 SL’s for a few days and only have a few fire road miles on them but they look and feel great so far.

I’d like to hear from owners who have taken them out on trails and their experience. Are sidewalls getting punctures or sliced easily ? Regrets about not having LT’s on the trail ? Would someone be foolish to go on anything but fire roads or very easy trails with these tires? Anyone really test these out yet?

Thanks in advance !

My experience with the stock size Falkens covers

wet pavement
loose dirt and rock
rocky terrain

No snow or mud yet. Daily driving on the streets gets 15-16 mpg and long steady freeway driving at 65-70 gets 20-21 mpg.

Back in May and first time out on this trail with the tires I was a bit careless and ran a sidewall into a sharp rock. I think the air pressure may have been a bit low for all of the weight I had so maybe a bit too much sidewall bulge? It was still driver error.

A few months later in September I ran the same trail with an eye out for nasty rocks and came through without damage. Not sure if I would swap to a C range in the future.

 

[Barcelona4runner]

My experience with the stock size Falkens covers

wet pavement
loose dirt and rock
rocky terrain

No snow or mud yet. Daily driving on the streets gets 15-16 mpg and long steady freeway driving at 65-70 gets 20-21 mpg.

Back in May and first time out on this trail with the tires I was a bit careless and ran a sidewall into a sharp rock. I think the air pressure may have been a bit low for all of the weight I had so maybe a bit too much sidewall bulge? It was still driver error.

A few months later in September I ran the same trail with an eye out for nasty rocks and came through without damage. Not sure if I would swap to a C range in the future.

Thank you sir! This was exactly what I was looking for and I think it will be helpful for others too. I like your overlanding rig.

 

[Barcelona4runner]

My experience with the stock size Falkens covers

wet pavement
loose dirt and rock
rocky terrain

No snow or mud yet. Daily driving on the streets gets 15-16 mpg and long steady freeway driving at 65-70 gets 20-21 mpg.

Back in May and first time out on this trail with the tires I was a bit careless and ran a sidewall into a sharp rock. I think the air pressure may have been a bit low for all of the weight I had so maybe a bit too much sidewall bulge? It was still driver error.

A few months later in September I ran the same trail with an eye out for nasty rocks and came through without damage. Not sure if I would swap to a C range in the future.

What psi are you running on regular streets/freeway driving ? I’m running them at 34 and they look a little bit on the deflated side. Tire shop set them at 32.

 

[teotwaki]

What psi are you running on regular streets/freeway driving ? I’m running them at 34 and they look a little bit on the deflated side. Tire shop set them at 32.

35psi is typical for me to start with but I try to monitor treadwear and adjust from there especially since this is my first set of the Falkens.

 

[Barcelona4runner]

35psi is typical for me to start with but I try to monitor treadwear and adjust from there especially since this is my first set of the Falkens.

Thanks! I’ll keep an eye on it and drop some feedback here in the future. Going to put a couple hundred miles on them this weekend including some light trails in big bear

 

[jeroweezy]

will running LT version of this have any benefit in wet conditions vs the SL variation? being that the LT has a deeper thread

 

[Diablo6]

will running LT version of this have any benefit in wet conditions vs the SL variation? being that the LT has a deeper thread

I don’t think so, since the SL version has a different silica compound to aid with traction on wet surfaces which the LT doesn’t have. So deeper tread vs different compound, I’d vote compound since the SL tread is already pretty deep

Just my .02

 

[jeroweezy]

I don’t think so, since the SL version has a different silica compound to aid with traction on wet surfaces which the LT doesn’t have. So deeper tread vs different compound, I’d vote compound since the SL tread is already pretty deep

Just my .02

thanks good to know..might go the SL route then.

 

[Koddo]

There's a reason why BFG only makes KO2's in LT/C-E rated. These P-rated offroad all-terrain tires make no sense to me whatsoever. Some may say they only go on light gravel roads and don't need the capability of a heavy LT tire...but then why not just go with a P-rated highway tire? P-rated aggressive all-terrains seem like the ultimate poser tire.

P-rated aggressive all-terrains is essentially saying - I like aggressive looking tires, I don't actually offroad, I'm fine with a heavy tire P-rated tire with worse gas mileage than a P-rated highway tire, but in the rare circumstance I do actual offroading on pointy rocks I'm fine gambling with a blown sidewall or other damage that can easily result with a weaker tire.

To each their own, but to me this easily falls into the non-logical camp on all accounts. Akin to lifted Subaru outbacks/crosstreks with oversize tires and armor - like why? If some cares to explain the logic to me, I'm all ears.

 

[teotwaki]

There's a reason why BFG only makes KO2's in LT/C-E rated. These P-rated offroad all-terrain tires make no sense to me whatsoever. Some may say they only go on light gravel roads and don't need the capability of a heavy LT tire...but then why not just go with a P-rated highway tire? P-rated aggressive all-terrains seem like the ultimate poser tire.

First off, there are plenty of posers driving overbuilt vehicles with expensive mud terrain E rated tires and bead lock rims but they never go offroad. Equipment cost or a particular vehicle brand does not make you a better qualified offroader.

Folks who select tread style based on driving gravel roads are not posers. Gravel roads can get snow, lack maintenance, become muddy etc. Highway tires would just get someone stuck.

P-rated aggressive all-terrains is essentially saying - I like aggressive looking tires, I don't actually offroad, I'm fine with a heavy tire P-rated tire with worse gas mileage than a P-rated highway tire, but in the rare circumstance I do actual offroading on pointy rocks I'm fine gambling with a blown sidewall or other damage that can easily result with a weaker tire.

My experience is that people with extremely harsh forum opinions and belittling statements are trying to prove something to strangers rather than look for better ways to share and educate other forum members.

To each their own, but to me this easily falls into the non-logical camp on all accounts. Akin to lifted Subaru outbacks/crosstreks with oversize tires and armor - like why? If some cares to explain the logic to me, I'm all ears.

I sampled your post history and honestly don't quite believe you are all "all ears". What you usually do is jump into a thread to mock and insult other's choices.
(Samples below)

If you spent more time sharing pictures and stories of your 4Runner offroading in Arizona, pictures of the Bradshaw mountain's remoteness and beauty, the rough jeep roads in the canyons, old mining town history and so on....... that would be much appreciated by all.


- - - - - - - - - - - -

I said it before, and I'll say it again.

Fat people. It takes work to keep them sweaty giblets insulated in 5 inches of blubber at a comfortable temperature.

All this bickering about engineering, cost, Toyota not using the best technology/having best interiors.

Its fat people. Wanting their ventilated seats and cooling seats for their fat sweaty nether regions.

But posts like this make me want to run back to a Jeep. At least that forum community doesn't ask about blindspot monitoring, power lift gates, makeup bins, heated/cooled/anal play seats, aroma emitting fart machines, any other luxury gizmo that doesn't mean jack to any person that is considering a utilitarian 4x4. Or at least its much more of a rarity there...

Clicked on link expecting to find an opinion on a cool capable offroad worthy vehicle, was sorely disappointed :blabla:

Just paint color, extra cup holders for your monster drinks, and a small indentation in the pleather seats to caress the family jewels while taking washboards at 60 mph.

Sorry I can't resist a PRO thread...

Nice fit to limit your 4R to the cement.

:der:

You traded from an extremely off road capable, dependable, high utility, no nonsense BOF SUV for a douche drive-like-an-ahole from a stop light for 1000 yards before you hit the next light and jam on the brakes, soccer mom, wine-bar mobile that you will tire of in 3 years and trade for another one at a huge depreciation hit.

But by god, you have a SUV with a Porsche logo and you can drive like a crazy f*ck on the public streets.

I see dozens of em' here in Scottsdale....everyone I see driving them fits the Snottsdale profile.

I may be biased....

Nope.

But you sure damn take it personal. I didn't slap your baby in the face. It's just dimensions, and dimensions don't lie. I would say 80% of dirt roads (mine roads, old forest roads, etc) arn't maintained for a full size vehicles. And what are 99% of dirt roads in the western states? Old mine and forest roads. Hastily graded through the landscape 80-130 years ago. Moab and all those roads are old uranium roads.

But keep on trying to stick that square peg in a round hole and trying to find very specific circumstances where they could go.

 

[Koddo]

First off, there are plenty of posers driving overbuilt vehicles with expensive mud terrain E rated tires and bead lock rims but they never go offroad. Equipment cost or a particular vehicle brand does not make you a better qualified offroader.

Folks who select tread style based on driving gravel roads are not posers. Gravel roads can get snow, lack maintenance, become muddy etc. Highway tires would just get someone stuck.



My experience is that people with extremely harsh forum opinions and belittling statements are trying to prove something to strangers rather than look for better ways to share and educate other forum members.



I sampled your post history and honestly don't quite believe you are all "all ears". What you usually do is jump into a thread to mock and insult other's choices.
(Samples below)

If you spent more time sharing pictures and stories of your 4Runner offroading in Arizona, pictures of the Bradshaw mountain's remoteness and beauty, the rough jeep roads in the canyons, old mining town history and so on....... that would be much appreciated by all.


- - - - - - - - - - - -

Am I wrong with any of those comments - from the number of likes on each I gather other people have the same opinion as me. I stand by each of those 100%. Some people post dumb shit on here that make no sense and I like to call it the utter crap when I see it. I also posted experiences and comments which arn't so "critical" but you conveniently selected the ones that support your butt-hurtness. Enjoy your P-rated tires that I criticized.

 

[momo.75]

Ok kids. Please keep this on topic. You guys can pm each other to continue whatever...

 

[Koddo]

Ok kids. Please keep this on topic. You guys can pm each other to continue whatever...

Aye Papiiiiii

 

[teotwaki]

Ok kids. Please keep this on topic. You guys can pm each other to continue whatever...

Thanks for the suggestion of PMs. However we both know that boobs on a boy pig would be more useful :lmao:

Falken A/T3W SL (P-rated) tires are very capable and are no more a sign of a "poser" than someone who runs a stock roof rack instead of a steel "overlanding" rack. Offroad super powers are not instantly gained from expensive gear that internet experts insist you must purchase.

Falken SL's are reliable performers in rugged terrain and feature a four ply thick sidewall created with two plies wrapping around the bead and rising back up, ending just shy of the upper sidewall tread border. Falken has stated they use this same construction for all sizes. (Drew Howlett, Product Manager---see his email below)

It is also noteworthy that a Falken SL tire in 265/70/17 has a listed 2679 lb load rating at 51 psi as well as a load index of 116, both slightly higher than the LT tire.

The Falken tire sidewall's shoulder blocks of SL (and LT) tires help to protect the tire from sharp rocks.

I ran LT Duratracs on my 4th Gen 4Runner and managed to damage a sidewall on those a few times so sidewall damage is not exclusive to P metric. The accumulated negatives of the Duratrac are what made me try the Falkens this time around.


So the main facts boil down to 6 plies at 57 pounds (270/75) to 4 plies at 46 pounds (265/70) and if you actually offroad in a manner that demands the extra plies as opposed to kowtowing to Internet Vitriol.

------------------------------------------------

"I'm responding to your inquiry on behalf of our technical team here at Falken Tire.

I would 100% agree with your initial inclination to opt for our non-LT 265/75R16 WILDPEAK AT3W with Load Index 116, which is in between a Load Range C (112 Load Index, aka 6-ply) and a Load Range D (119 Load Index, aka 8-ply), and far stronger than your OE fitment which was most likely P265/70R16 112.

I also agree the Load Range E version LT265/75R16 (123 Load Index, aka 10-ply) will be too much tire for a Tacoma, sacrificing fuel economy, and comfort as you said. The LRE version is really designed for a 3/4T truck application such as an F-250. You would actually compromise more than just comfort and fuel economy with the Load Range E version, as the contact patch would not be ideal, and could sacrifice wet and/or other traction characteristics. In fact, I always recommend our non-LT version for Tacoma owners, when asked in person or by email, and openly on TacomaWorld.com.

In terms of pure load carrying capability, our 265/75R16 116T WILDPEAK AT3W is superior to competitor offerings in p-metric P265/75R16 Load Index 112, as well as superior to competitor offerings in LT265/75R16 Load Range C Load Index 112.

To answer your question exactly, the construction of our WILDPEAK AT3W is as follows:
Sidewall: 2 -PLY POLYESTER WITH HIGH PLY TURN‐UPS
Tread: 2-PLY POLYESTER, 2 FULL STEEL WIDTH BELTS, 1 FULL POLYMIDE (NYLON) CAP PLY

As noted above, the WILDPEAK AT3W uses a 2 ply construction with high-ply turn-ups on all tire sizes, so both our LT version and non-LT 265/75R16 116T are quite robust in terms of sidewall protection and durability. Furthermore, the upper sidewall features of the tire actually protect against rocks and punctures, specifically when aired down, they're not just for looks.

Also, I have owned a Tacoma in the past and used this exact size in both non-LT and LT versions so I can speak from quite a bit of experience on this topic, I have never had any issue with the non-LT off-road around 20psi. On the other hand, if the truck is fully loaded with gear and people, I have found that 20psi is a bit too low and could cause a pinch flat or bead unseat, therefore I usually recommend no lower than 25psi in a loaded off-road application for a Tacoma. Off-road air pressure is a sensitive subject that really depends on a lot of factors such as speed, conditions, load, rim width, driving style, etc.

I know this was a lot of information, but I hope it is helpful for you in your quest for new tires for your Tacoma. If I could be of any further assistance, please don't hesitate to reach me by email or cell phone below.

Thank you for considering Falken Tires!

Drew Howlett
Product Manager, Light Truck & SUV Tires
Tires For Cars, Trucks And SUVs | Falken Tire | +1.909.261.6668"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So if your 4Runner looks like this it's obvious you won't be running SL tires

Jason Sampson's amazing SAS'ed 4Runner

For everyone else the choice can still be based on the facts of tire construction and the sort of offroading you do and not based on factless keyboard pounding.

 

[jeroweezy]

think im gonna pick up some SL


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Big_Cuss]

P-rated haters are too stupid to consider the reasons someone might want a tire that's better than the stock Dunlops for all of the below reasons:

-slightly more robust construction
-way deeper tread blocks
-Mountain Snowflake rating - so that you can avoid having to carry chains up snowy mountains. No, literally, park rangers and police during or right after storms if you have chains in the Sierras if you're on roads with signs up saying you ahve to carry them. And if you don't have chains you'll get a traffic ticket -- unless you have snowflake-rated tires. Then you get an excemption.

 

[teotwaki]

This is a pretty good video that showcases the Falken tire's features as well as the reasons the tire is a good choice for replacing street specific tires yet retaining good mileage and gaining off-road performance

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/l_P-YDro0io" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[Bongos]

co-worker has these on his Tacoma.. really like them.. will be my next tires after I put some miles on my stock AT20