New Falken AT tire (A/T3W)
- Thread starter weeeee
- Start date
Last lived in Wood Dale, Illinois. Escaped in 2009.
MrGainzz
New member
Same here! I went with SL265/70/17 and this’s what I’m getting. I have 1.5” lift the front.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TangentAudio
New member
Just got a set of non-LT 265/70R17 on my TRDP. Looking forward to seeing how they do - so far I've only got 20 miles on them but they're nice and quiet.
The original Nitto Terra Grapplers were always super noisy from day 1 (WUB-WUB-WUB-WUB above 40MPH), wore terribly, and were cupped to hell by 25K miles on my 4R. I'll take some of the blame for their wear since I pushed out tire rotations to 7500 miles. I was diligent about checking pressures (32psi) but now I am questioning whether I was under-inflating since they wore heavily on the inside and outside edges. I have been getting ~20.1MPG with summer gas, and it tends to drop into the 19's in the winter with the cold temps and different gas formulation we get in the northeast.
I'll be keeping an eye on wear, noise, and MPG. Looking forward to seeing how these are on dirt, as well as how they do in the snow since they are 3-peak rated.
*I noticed after I got home that they put one side on with the subtle logos facing out, and the other side has the raised lettering facing out. Annoying but not worth the hassle to go back.
The original Nitto Terra Grapplers were always super noisy from day 1 (WUB-WUB-WUB-WUB above 40MPH), wore terribly, and were cupped to hell by 25K miles on my 4R. I'll take some of the blame for their wear since I pushed out tire rotations to 7500 miles. I was diligent about checking pressures (32psi) but now I am questioning whether I was under-inflating since they wore heavily on the inside and outside edges. I have been getting ~20.1MPG with summer gas, and it tends to drop into the 19's in the winter with the cold temps and different gas formulation we get in the northeast.
I'll be keeping an eye on wear, noise, and MPG. Looking forward to seeing how these are on dirt, as well as how they do in the snow since they are 3-peak rated.
*I noticed after I got home that they put one side on with the subtle logos facing out, and the other side has the raised lettering facing out. Annoying but not worth the hassle to go back.
Attachments
Last edited:
I'd go back as I'd notice that every time I looked at them.
progress4m
Member
Thanks for posting, if you do not mind, can you update on MPG after you get some mileage on those?
I have Nitto TG2 now and thinking switching to Wildpeak AT3W (stock size) in the near future, so just want to see MPG impact (if any) when switching from Nitto.
Thanks in advance!
P.S. as a side note, my Nitto TG2 have about 45K on them and they are very quiet, smooth and with plenty thread left (I rotate every 5K) … the only negative thing is that they are getting scary in the rain… they had very good wet traction when new (newer), but not anymore…
Decipher
New member
Definitely post back with your ongoing impressions. I’d absolutely have them change that. Most people don’t know there are two different lettering styles so I’m not surprised they messed that up. Surprised it doesn’t happen more often.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Had no idea there were two options on the sidewall either. I should probably check mine.
teotwaki
Senior Member
My first set of stock sized Falkens were purchased in May of 2018 and now have 17k miles. Tread depth is about 65% and the wear is even.
That "used" set of tires are now on my offroad trailer on matching rims and I had 4 new AT3w's installed on the 4Runner.
I have had no issues with the tires being balanced or staying balanced
That "used" set of tires are now on my offroad trailer on matching rims and I had 4 new AT3w's installed on the 4Runner.
I have had no issues with the tires being balanced or staying balanced
Got these beauties delivered from Amazon within three days and had them installed over the weekend with a Cornfed 1" front spacer. Really loving these tires so far with just over 100 miles on them. Quiet, smooth and aggressive looking. I've experienced no drop in MPG, but would probably be fairer for me to judge over a longer period.
Attachments
progress4m
Member
Just want to add my experience with Falken Wildpeak A/T3W.
After a lot of research, I got a set of P rated stock size (265/70R17) of A/T3W (from Discount Tires), they replaced Nitto TG G2 that had about 40K on them… main reason for new tires was degraded wet traction with my old Nitto.
My Impression after 3 weeks and about 650 miles:
Good: they are very quiet for the aggressive thread, on the road traction is great so far (dry, wet)… not enough mud at my haunting land to make any statements for off road use yet; truck feels sure-footed on the road, cornering is better vs. Nitto and they look great! Got them for $126.59 each with almost $100 rebate (Labor Day sale).
Bad: the ride is harsher than with Nitto… it is not horrible, but I definitely felt the difference… and I maybe lost about 0.5 MPG.
I had to go back to DT for rebalance after one week… They were balanced properly, but vibration was present… not the steering wheel shake… just not settle feeling in the whole truck… DT did the road force matching on 3 out 4 tires and the issue was resolved- I watched them doing each tire.
Ride is smooth now.
I am assuming harsher ride is a result of stronger sidewall and over tire construction… so I may have to leave with it… interesting part is that I think the ride got better after first couple of hundred miles… or maybe I am just getting used to it…? I am still in “30 day trial period”, but as of today I am still leaning towards keeping them…
As another note: I believe they are bigger than any tires in 265/70R17 size… wider and taller, my truck now sits at least 3/8 of the inch higher… I think I would get the same result with most of tire brands in 275/70R17 size and possibly with some of the brands in 285/70R17.
My $0.02
After a lot of research, I got a set of P rated stock size (265/70R17) of A/T3W (from Discount Tires), they replaced Nitto TG G2 that had about 40K on them… main reason for new tires was degraded wet traction with my old Nitto.
My Impression after 3 weeks and about 650 miles:
Good: they are very quiet for the aggressive thread, on the road traction is great so far (dry, wet)… not enough mud at my haunting land to make any statements for off road use yet; truck feels sure-footed on the road, cornering is better vs. Nitto and they look great! Got them for $126.59 each with almost $100 rebate (Labor Day sale).
Bad: the ride is harsher than with Nitto… it is not horrible, but I definitely felt the difference… and I maybe lost about 0.5 MPG.
I had to go back to DT for rebalance after one week… They were balanced properly, but vibration was present… not the steering wheel shake… just not settle feeling in the whole truck… DT did the road force matching on 3 out 4 tires and the issue was resolved- I watched them doing each tire.
Ride is smooth now.
I am assuming harsher ride is a result of stronger sidewall and over tire construction… so I may have to leave with it… interesting part is that I think the ride got better after first couple of hundred miles… or maybe I am just getting used to it…? I am still in “30 day trial period”, but as of today I am still leaning towards keeping them…
As another note: I believe they are bigger than any tires in 265/70R17 size… wider and taller, my truck now sits at least 3/8 of the inch higher… I think I would get the same result with most of tire brands in 275/70R17 size and possibly with some of the brands in 285/70R17.
My $0.02
MAST4R
New member
I never felt they were harsh but it it is possible that the higher load rating plays a part. I assume you mean the P version, the LTE will of course be harsh.
They are definitely very wide for a 265. They are 8.9" wide in the tread vs 8.3" for the stock tire. They are wider in 265 than a typical 275. They also match a couple of 285s in tread width.
For diameter, I replaced new stock tires with the new AT3W and measured the same distances from the ground. Therefore, it should be exactly as tall as the stock tire. But the width definitely creates the perception that it is much bigger.
If you are running LTE at higher pressures, than it may be up to a quarter inch taller on the street.
progress4m
Member
Thanks for reply.
I got P version, so I was surprise that they felt harsher vs. Nitto that were also P rated… load range is the same… maybe Nitto just have softer construction… maybe same applies to how tall Nitto were (on the small side) vs. Falken… obviously plus new (not worn down) thread on Falken.
Fried_man7
New member
Rub?
Getting a 2.5 around with Dobinson, and wondering if you had rub with the 285? or did you take off the flaps? Moved the fender liner? BMC?or should i stay with the 265? i will be placing on my trail wheels.
Getting a 2.5 around with Dobinson, and wondering if you had rub with the 285? or did you take off the flaps? Moved the fender liner? BMC?or should i stay with the 265? i will be placing on my trail wheels.
Decipher
New member
I answered your PM but I’ll post here for others who are curious and haven’t been through the entire thread...
I only had minor rub with 285s on a 2.5/1.5 lift. I had to cut the fender liners straight across at about the first bolt up where the fender liner meets the body panel. Pushing the liner in just didn’t cut it. Beyond that, I have no rub anywhere else and no need for a BMC on my rig. I never had mud flaps but I’m sure they would rub with articulation.
I hate to say it, but I’m looking forward to the fact that the Farmers Almanac is predicting a bad winter with lots of snow. I’m excited to try these in the snow after a little hiatus with other tires.
Like most people in this thread I have been going back and forth between the SL and E tires in a 275/65/18.
The way I see it the Pro's/Cons are:
SL:
-13lbs lighter per tire
-Silica Compound, better in the wet and snow (In in Canada)
E:
-~4/32 more tread stock
-Harder tread, wear better (Also a con in regards to winter)
-Stronger sidewall
Heavily leaning towards the SL's...any other good reasons to go either way?
The way I see it the Pro's/Cons are:
SL:
-13lbs lighter per tire
-Silica Compound, better in the wet and snow (In in Canada)
E:
-~4/32 more tread stock
-Harder tread, wear better (Also a con in regards to winter)
-Stronger sidewall
Heavily leaning towards the SL's...any other good reasons to go either way?
str8flexed
Member
Well I looked it up and the SL in that size is wider. It is 10.9” vs 10.7”. Not sure if that is noticeable but perhaps.
I am assuming because the tread is more shallow on the SL, in order to make it the same diameter as the E tire, they increased the actual “donut” size to make up the height, and thus it is also wider. (Complete speculation on my part)
I also have heard the E rated is overkill for the weight of 4Runners. C would be preferable.
I am looking at 285/70/17 and am deciding between P and C rated..
str8flexed
Member
I noticed.. personally I would go SL if it were a DD..
Decipher
New member
Between the two, SL is just the better tire for our rigs. E load is way overkill. I do believe C load is perfect but in the case of this tire, the weight savings of the SL has proven to make the tire an absolutely pleasure on road.
Off road, I’ve pushed my SLs harder than any other tire and it’s held up better than expected (not a single issue). I’ll continue to post if my experience changes but so far they’re great on and off road.
M4ster will likely post up here but he’s pushed his SLs further than probably anyone and has been super happy with them.
Conclusion: If load range C is an option and you don’t mind the weight penalty, that’s the way to go with our rigs. They ride great. You will sacrifice daily drive ability due to weight. Beyond that, I’d take SL over E and I’m glad I did.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
