New Falken AT tire (A/T3W)

[4central]

Well he is comparing 2 completely different kinds of tires. Those Nokians will be useless in deep snow/mud and won't be tough enough to take off road.

Not to drag the thread into somewhere else, but need to correct few things. Snow and mud off roading are different animals. You dont want to dig snow much to propel yourself, you want to stay on top of it, you want to pack it. Because of this, winter tires with less aggressive threads can do snow off roading, and can do good. Just today's picture from my trip ( I hope pictures make it):

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

Imgur: The magic of the Internet

I stayed on top of the snow, didn't dig myself into snow.

 

[PauldF]

Hi, I posted the following asking for info in the "What tires are you running . . ." thread and this may be a far better place for it, so here it is:

I know almost nothing about leveling kits, spacers and other types/components involved in increasing ground clearance etc for my 4rnr. Years ago when I bought my 1990 FJ62 LandCruiser the suspension was worn out and I went to a local FJ specialist supply and service place in Simi Valley, CA and had a full OME suspension put on that raised the overall height of the vehicle (not necc ground clearance, but that was significanly improved as well) by about 2-3" and the overall effect on both highway and offroad was simply amazing. I need to find a very thorough and simple to understand thread or website that discusses the pro's and con's of all the options I read about here on the Toyota 4Runner forum. I have saved up about $800 towards doing some kind of lift in the near future to increase ground clearance and keep the cabin out of any shallow water crossings (had some serious flooding up here last winter in NorCal) but am not interested in height for looks or that would increase body roll etc. - purely utilitarian and for light weight off-roading only - I do not intend on hurting my new baby/daily driver! Getting new tires for my new 4rnr is the first step.

I believe I have settled on getting an LT C-rated tire for my truck. I like what I hear and see about the Wildpeak AT3W's. Snowpeak is running 275/70/17's and has minimal rubbing with a stock TRD ORP like mine. Moltenburn is running the 255/80/17's and likes them and a number of others are running the 265/70/17's and are very happy.

So here's my questions about these choices over a more stock 265/70/17:

275/70/17's - main benefit is wider contact patch only?
255/80/17's - main benefit is very slight greater clearance height and maybe slightly better looking by filling up the wheel wells a bit more than a 70 - but perhaps adding some body roll due to increased sidewall flex?

Any other input or pro's/con's I've missed?

I am getting mixed information about the availability of getting LT C-rated AT3W tires in each of these sizes - TireRack info is sparse when I plug my vehicle in, and the Falken site 'Spec' page seems to have errors. As you are in the business, can you shed some light here? And anyone else of course!

Thanks again! I need to pull the trigger before I head up to the snow the next couple of months.

 

[bjaxon9]

The shop that installed mine set them at 32 psi (same as stock tires, probably following the data plate). I inflated them to 45 psi, found a large vacant parking lot, and chalked the tread before driving about 75 yards. Checked the wear pattern, let 5 psi out, and did it again. At 35 psi the chalk looked evenly worn across the tire, so I'll stay at 35 psi until I do something that adds more vehicle weight.

Same. I chalked mine, and ended up at 35psi as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Been very pleased with my stock size at3w in rain rock dirt and snow (not a fan of mud). Have about 13k miles on them (1500 offroad). Wear has been good at 14/32 (came at 17/32) Running them at 38psi on the road and 16 to 18 for rocks. 24psi for for washboard. Considering moving up to 285/75 next (34)

Edit: they came in at 17 not 16

 

[MAST4R]

Been very pleased with my stock size at3w in rain rock dirt and snow (not a fan of mud). Have about 13k miles on them (1500 offroar). Wear has been good at 14/32 (came at 16/32) Running them at 38psi on the road and 16 to 18 for rocks. 24psi for for washboard. Considering moving up to 285/75 next (34)

Just to highlight this extremely useful piece of info.
[MENTION=362200]SpeedyKevin[/MENTION] is using the 4R very well and yet getting decent mileage out of the tires.

This seems to confirm that LT tires last longer with serious offroad use. Compare to my P metric, much worse mileage. The opposite should be true if the vehicle sees less offroad or just mild forest roads.

 

[ElDude2]

New at3

I am currently running the AT3s on my 3rd gen. They are a great set of tires. I am going to be grabbing a set for my f250 for sure.

 

[CementTruck]

Had a set of 285/70/17 installed over Black Friday weekend. Prior All-Terrain tire experience includes 23k miles on the stock TRD Pro Nitto Terra Grappler AT tires and the difference really is night and day. In the rain, I would easily lose traction with the Nittos on a couple of off-camber right turns to leave my complex and also most freeway on-ramps (again, right turns from a stop), but with the Wildpeaks I haven't had ANY loss of traction in the rain; and in some cases I've given it a little extra gas on those turns to test it and still maintains traction. Outside of wet traction, they certainly feel more comfortable but hard to tell if road noise is any different. I'd definitely buy again.

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Been very pleased with my stock size at3w in rain rock dirt and snow (not a fan of mud). Have about 13k miles on them (1500 offroad). Wear has been good at 15/32 (came at 17/32) Running them at 38psi on the road and 16 to 18 for rocks. 24psi for for washboard. Considering moving up to 285/75 next (34)

Just to highlight this extremely useful piece of info.

[MENTION=362200]SpeedyKevin[/MENTION] is using the 4R very well and yet getting decent mileage out of the tires.

This seems to confirm that LT tires last longer with serious offroad use. Compare to my P metric, much worse mileage. The opposite should be true if the vehicle sees less offroad or just mild forest roads.

Corrected the original numbers. Tires came new at 17/32 and are now 15/32 at 13k miles.


ALSO, just did a 2019 mile road trip (175 miles offroad) through Utah and Nevada. Had a bit of snow and mud and the tires did pretty well for what they were (not a mud tire). What was more impressive though was that the tires showed no significant wear as they are still measuring at 15/32 (15k miles now). Very impressed.

Was also originally planning on moving up to 34s but decided not to as I didnt want to mess up my crawl ratio (34s+ regear is expenssivvvveee). Stuck with stock size and will not likely move up to a 33 (285) as the performance upgrade over a 32 for crawling is negligible imho. Spent the money instead on getting the Marlin Crawler LCA frame brace installed. Had to weld and chop some of the skids to get them to fit but they are beefy!

 

[MAST4R]

Corrected the original numbers. Tires came new at 17/32 and are now 15/32 at 13k miles.


ALSO, just did a 2019 mile road trip (175 miles offroad) through Utah and Nevada. Had a bit of snow and mud and the tires did pretty well for what they were (not a mud tire). What was more impressive though was that the tires showed no significant wear as they are still measuring at 15/32 (15k miles now). Very impressed.

Was also originally planning on moving up to 34s but decided not to as I didnt want to mess up my crawl ratio (34s+ regear is expenssivvvveee). Stuck with stock size and will not likely move up to a 33 (285) as the performance upgrade over a 32 for crawling is negligible imho. Spent the money instead on getting the Marlin Crawler LCA frame brace installed. Had to weld and chop some of the skids to get them to fit but they are beefy!

Hey, that's a serious upgrade! Maybe one day... Well done.

Your mileage is very impressive. I know that in theory LT tires should last longer in actual LT use (doh) but the KO2 on my Subaru did not last any better than any P metric tire I have run. This even though they were D load and for them carrying the Subaru must have been as hard as carrying a feather.

Either way, my upgraded suspension is a little stiff over certain types of terrain for street pressures, so I may move over to LT anyway. If I have to air down, a key reason for staying P metric will be gone. BUT, I am not going E load or over 50lb so it will be a different tire.

You don't have any trips planned in western AZ, do you?

 

[Decipher]

Hey, that's a serious upgrade! Maybe one day... Well done.



Your mileage is very impressive. I know that in theory LT tires should last longer in actual LT use (doh) but the KO2 on my Subaru did not last any better than any P metric tire I have run. This even though they were D load and for them carrying the Subaru must have been as hard as carrying a feather.



Either way, my upgraded suspension is a little stiff over certain types of terrain for street pressures, so I may move over to LT anyway. If I have to air down, a key reason for staying P metric will be gone. BUT, I am not going E load or over 50lb so it will be a different tire.



You don't have any trips planned in western AZ, do you?

Really interested to see what you end up in and what your thoughts are compared to this tire.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MAST4R]

Really interested to see what you end up in and what your thoughts are compared to this tire.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks!

I have been eyeing the 255 75 17 Destination MT2 for a while.

It has all the features I want: relatively low weight (49lb), 3-ply sidewalls, C-load, price under 200 (only at Firestone Centers, Tire Rack is much pricier).

On the flip side, Discount Tire does not normally sell it and the width used to be listed as 7.8 at Tire Rack. When I had a stock suspension and then stock shocks, I was worried about stability. But the tire is now listed at 8.2 vs 8.1 for the 265 70 17. I will have to measure one myself at Firestone.

More importantly, with the upgraded suspension, I am no longer sweating the idea of narrower tires. The 265 Wildpeaks have the width of many 285s but I no longer feel I need that for stability. The suspension keeps wheels planted vs bouncy and light-footed stock.

So that is the only mud-terrain I am interested in. The Yoko 003 would be in the running if it had a 3-ply sidewall in C load. But it does not. So why pay the same price to get less?

When it comes to ATs, the only C-load options for me seem to be KO2s and Destination XT. Neither has a 3-ply sidewall but KO2 has a more robust casing. In addition, the XT does not seem to be any quieter.

But as you know I am reluctant to go back to KO2 though the desert here is great for it. Hence my interest in the MT2.

Plus, I have never had MT and I would like to try. I live in PHX, after all, not the Oregon coast. Sure, we drive all over the west, but not as much as to justify tire selection based on rain performance.

I have time, I think. And I am still curious to see the new Toyo AT III though I have no idea when it will be released. Toyo said they don't know when.

 

[SpeedyKevin]

Hey, that's a serious upgrade! Maybe one day... Well done.

Your mileage is very impressive. I know that in theory LT tires should last longer in actual LT use (doh) but the KO2 on my Subaru did not last any better than any P metric tire I have run. This even though they were D load and for them carrying the Subaru must have been as hard as carrying a feather.

Either way, my upgraded suspension is a little stiff over certain types of terrain for street pressures, so I may move over to LT anyway. If I have to air down, a key reason for staying P metric will be gone. BUT, I am not going E load or over 50lb so it will be a different tire.

You don't have any trips planned in western AZ, do you?

Actually have been reviewing the Charles Wells book for Arizona! Would love to get back to Utah but too much snow at the moment (had a pretty terrifying slide on fins and things and had to reverse hard). So looks like Arizona is next!

If the Wildpeak in C-load was lighter I'd consider it but right now have my eyes on some MT tires. Thinking of the KM3, STT Pro, or Wildpeak.

 

[MAST4R]

Actually have been reviewing the Charles Wells book for Arizona! Would love to get back to Utah but too much snow at the moment (had a pretty terrifying slide on fins and things and had to reverse hard). So looks like Arizona is next!

If the Wildpeak in C-load was lighter I'd consider it but right now have my eyes on some MT tires. Thinking of the KM3, STT Pro, or Wildpeak.

Maybe PM me if coming this way. There are some awesome trails near Quartzsite.

This is my favorite AZ desert trail:
Drive the Hogsback and see Apache Chief Mine - Jeep the USA

We drove Preacher Pass on Jan 1. There are some really nice trails in KOFA. I will PM you later with some more info.

 

[seatia]

Just put on a set of Wildpeak P265/70/17 on stock rims for use in northern Michigan snow. Hope they do well.
Driving 1600 miles up from S Florida
They ride nicely at 80mph on I95 here and aren't noisy at all.

 

[SKT_07]

Just put on a set of Wildpeak P265/70/17 on stock rims for use in northern Michigan snow. Hope they do well.
Driving 1600 miles up from S Florida
They ride nicely at 80mph on I95 here and aren't noisy at all.

Pics?

 

[Decipher]

My snow experience on 285/70-17 vs 265/70-17 is interestingly worse. The 285 just doesn’t perform as well. Both are P rated. While the 285 does well and better than both the KO2 and Ridge Grapplers I ran, I’m thinking the wider footprint of the 285 hurts the snow performance in a notable way. The 265s were straight planted.

If snow performance is your primary reason for buying these, I would strongly consider 265/70 or perhaps splitting the difference in 275/70. If you’re like me and you HAD to have 285 (my look and off road requirements mandates 285s) then you’ll suffer a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Decipher]

Thanks!

I have been eyeing the 255 75 17 Destination MT2 for a while.

It has all the features I want: relatively low weight (49lb), 3-ply sidewalls, C-load, price under 200 (only at Firestone Centers, Tire Rack is much pricier).

On the flip side, Discount Tire does not normally sell it and the width used to be listed as 7.8 at Tire Rack. When I had a stock suspension and then stock shocks, I was worried about stability. But the tire is now listed at 8.2 vs 8.1 for the 265 70 17. I will have to measure one myself at Firestone.

More importantly, with the upgraded suspension, I am no longer sweating the idea of narrower tires. The 265 Wildpeaks have the width of many 285s but I no longer feel I need that for stability. The suspension keeps wheels planted vs bouncy and light-footed stock.

So that is the only mud-terrain I am interested in. The Yoko 003 would be in the running if it had a 3-ply sidewall in C load. But it does not. So why pay the same price to get less?

When it comes to ATs, the only C-load options for me seem to be KO2s and Destination XT. Neither has a 3-ply sidewall but KO2 has a more robust casing. In addition, the XT does not seem to be any quieter.

But as you know I am reluctant to go back to KO2 though the desert here is great for it. Hence my interest in the MT2.

Plus, I have never had MT and I would like to try. I live in PHX, after all, not the Oregon coast. Sure, we drive all over the west, but not as much as to justify tire selection based on rain performance.

I have time, I think. And I am still curious to see the new Toyo AT III though I have no idea when it will be released. Toyo said they don't know when.

Why not try the Wildpeak M/T 01?

They are more highly reviewed everywhere than the Firestone’s, they offer them in LR C, and they are a great looking tire. I’ve seen them in person and had strongly considered them before landing back in these AT3W. Plus, your size weighs in at 53.1 lbs which is right in your ballpark.

I may consider those next time around.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[seatia]

Pics?[/QU
Here ya go
In reverse only, they barely touch the plastic inner fender at the front when turned, so without mods, can't go any bigger.

 

[pDubs]

My snow experience on 285/70-17 vs 265/70-17 is interestingly worse. The 285 just doesn’t perform as well. Both are P rated. While the 285 does well and better than both the KO2 and Ridge Grapplers I ran, I’m thinking the wider footprint of the 285 hurts the snow performance in a notable way. The 265s were straight planted.

If snow performance is your primary reason for buying these, I would strongly consider 265/70 or perhaps splitting the difference in 275/70. If you’re like me and you HAD to have 285 (my look and off road requirements mandates 285s) then you’ll suffer a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yup! It's recommended to run narrower tires for snow.

https://blog.tirerack.com/blog/hunters-ramblings/why-are-narrower-tires-better-for-winter

 

[Anand]

I should update my original feelings on these tires.

I installed the A/T3W's in 265/70/17 (SL) at the beginning of October '18 on the stock TRD-OR wheels; my truck at approximately 1,100 miles on it at that point. Through a number of "wheeling" trips, countless road trips, daily driving, and plenty of dirt/gravel (to include the 1,000mi Kentucky Adventure Tour) these tires did everything they were asked to and much more (except once). The "except once" was Kentucky quicksand-like clay/mud on the DBBB where the traction boards and a bit of digging were required to get us out.

After 33,900 miles of abuse they've been retired, not because of an issue, nor because of worn tread. They've been retired because a new set of 255/80/17 Wildpeak A/T3W's have been installed on a fresh set of wheels.

They were rotated at roughly 5,000mi intervals, however, did get a bit louder around the 25,000mi mark. For the entirety of their on-road life they were left at 35psi, which seemed to be the perfect mix of fuel economy and tire wear, while never leaving me wishing for more traction. Even on the KAT we left them at street pressure with no issues. "Wheeling" trips would get aired down to about 22-24psi, but I'm not really sure that made any substantial differences. They still have plenty of tread left (I'll measure next week when I put them up for sale w/ my original wheels) and would probably have lasted another 20,000 miles or so.

Now for the new stuff! I went with 255/80/17, which, when the FedEx guy delivered them, caused me to check each tire's sidewall at least twice. These things looked SKINNY! Un-mounted they looked almost worryingly narrower than my 265s. They were mounted on a set of 17x8 Level 8 MK6 wheels (ET 0 for those who care). My local shop that was mounting them did have a bit of an issue getting the 255s to seat on the 8" wheels correctly, but in the mounter's own words "I've got the trick now" (it involved using a Cheetah). I think there were no fewer than 7 or 8 times that he reminded me that a 285 would fit fine on the wheel.

The switch from a 265/70 SL tire to the 255/80 E-rated tire is definitely noticeable to me. The steering is slightly heavier and sharp bumps on the roadway/potholes are felt slightly more. Given the extra sidewall height, there's definitely no extra cushioning that was gained. With that being said, I'm not deterred or unhappy about how the tires feel at all.

Since they are new (about 750 miles on them so far) they are definitely quieter than the off-going Wildpeaks, enough so that my need for the ECGS bushing was solidified (and that arrived yesterday).

In dry/wet conditions I can't say that the driving/traction feel has changed at all, maybe a bit more "roll" on long sweeping cloverleaf ramps, but I'll openly admit that I drive them like I'm still driving something prepped for a track day (nearly all my previous vehicles) instead of a lifted 3-ton SUV. My last two tanks were also quite different in driving environment/style than my norm so the fuel economy hit is still to be determined, if I were to guess, maybe somewhere in the .7-1mpg range?

Also FWIW, I did have to trim the passenger side fender liner (ahead of the tire) as I was getting rubbing at full lock in reverse.

And if you've made it this far, why are you still reading? I truly didn't plan on writing a novel when I started this post