New Falken AT tire (A/T3W)

[mikey's2010SR5]

I would rather have more 275/70x17 in C load. Fits with no lift, big enough.

Well I have a lift and cut to make the 34" fit. So I would rather have the 285/75x17. You can have the 275/70x17.

 

[Akkording]

Some like Ds, some like small C to full Cs. As long as it all fits well in between the fenders of course.

:girl:

 

[Spanky4R]

Well I have a lift and cut to make the 34" fit. So I would rather have the 285/75x17. You can have the 275/70x17.

Looking at your build thread I see you have a regear on your wish list. How is your 4R running with the 285/75's w/o the regear. Are the tires too much? In the spring I'm going 295 or 285/75 but a regear will not be happening for me.

 

[mikey's2010SR5]

Looking at your build thread I see you have a regear on your wish list. How is your 4R running with the 285/75's w/o the regear. Are the tires too much? In the spring I'm going 295 or 285/75 but a regear will not be happening for me.

It is doable with out the regear but it is a slug, likes to hunt for gears ALOT, and mileage is terrible (all of which i expected). Granted I also have a lot of weight added. I know I will enjoy my truck more once the gears are done.

 

[Spanky4R]

It is doable with out the regear but it is a slug, likes to hunt for gears ALOT, and mileage is terrible (all of which i expected). Granted I also have a lot of weight added. I know I will enjoy my truck more once the gears are done.

I expect it too. I'm about as heavy as I'm gonna be, maybe 50lbs more with a hitch tire carrier, unless on trips. I guess I just need to decide between the shorter .50", wider . 50", but 3-4lb heavier 295 MT or the AT3W 285/75.

 

[Offwidth]

It is doable with out the regear but it is a slug, likes to hunt for gears ALOT, and mileage is terrible (all of which i expected). Granted I also have a lot of weight added. I know I will enjoy my truck more once the gears are done.

And that is why I just went for 275/70 With Kumho C-load, same wheel weight on lighter TRD rims as stock tire on stock rims. Going another inch and a half in tire size - cascading list of necessary upgrades.

I am somewhat used to off-roading in non lifted vehicles. One can go further than many people in US think possible.

 

[MAST4R]

And that is why I just went for 275/70 With Kumho C-load, same wheel weight on lighter TRD rims as stock tire on stock rims. Going another inch and a half in tire size - cascading list of necessary upgrades.

I am somewhat used to off-roading in non lifted vehicles. One can go further than many people in US think possible.

Very true, but many people enjoy the process.

 

[Donkey]

Almost 45,000 miles, still ride and handle like new. 7/32” of tread remains. No issues getting anywhere during hunting season or while towing our camper. Will buy again, they are perfect for my usage.

 

[Akkording]

AMERICA:usa:

 

[newbian]

Was debating between these and BFG KO2s at stock sizes of 265...am I seeing this correctly that with the Falkens, there is a P rated option and their LT version at this size is only E rated?

I was always a bit confused about why a tire manufacturer would make an all-terrain, P-rated tire? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to go off road? Or are they only intended for the most minimal of trails?

Those of you running Falkens at 265....are you mostly going with the P or LT version?

 

[OCalan]

I went with the P rated. Not planning on much rock crawling, just lighter off-roading and snow primarily. It's my daily driver and I was also worried about the MPG hit with going to E. Still look cool regardless what load rating you get

 

[gsroot]

Was debating between these and BFG KO2s at stock sizes of 265...am I seeing this correctly that with the Falkens, there is a P rated option and their LT version at this size is only E rated?

I was always a bit confused about why a tire manufacturer would make an all-terrain, P-rated tire? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to go off road? Or are they only intended for the most minimal of trails?

Those of you running Falkens at 265....are you mostly going with the P or LT version?

LT 265 70 17.

I had P rated AT3Ws on my Jeep Grand Cherokee and did not feel comfortable airing down. Just purchased 2019 TRD Pro and 1st mod was to buy Falken AT3Ws in LT stock 265 70 17. Haven't been off road, yet, but will have to issues airing down when I do.

 

[newbian]

LT 265 70 17.

I had P rated AT3Ws on my Jeep Grand Cherokee and did not feel comfortable airing down. Just purchased 2019 TRD Pro and 1st mod was to buy Falken AT3Ws in LT stock 265 70 17. Haven't been off road, yet, but will have to issues airing down when I do.

Looks like those only come in the E version. How harsh is the ride compared to the stock Nittos?

 

[brtnstrns]

Was debating between these and BFG KO2s at stock sizes of 265...am I seeing this correctly that with the Falkens, there is a P rated option and their LT version at this size is only E rated?

I was always a bit confused about why a tire manufacturer would make an all-terrain, P-rated tire? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to go off road? Or are they only intended for the most minimal of trails?

Those of you running Falkens at 265....are you mostly going with the P or LT version?

I went p-rated. As the other guy said though, I have zero plans on rock crawling or anything that extreme.

 

[chicklet]

Balance well and handle great at highway speeds (P metric)!

 

[Spanky4R]

Was debating between these and BFG KO2s at stock sizes of 265...am I seeing this correctly that with the Falkens, there is a P rated option and their LT version at this size is only E rated?

I was always a bit confused about why a tire manufacturer would make an all-terrain, P-rated tire? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to go off road? Or are they only intended for the most minimal of trails?

Those of you running Falkens at 265....are you mostly going with the P or LT version?

I went with LT for the fact that some of the places I go there are alot of big sharp rocks & wanted a lil extra peace of mind. I've got 45,000 on them and 10/32 left. They have been excellent through everything I've driven on. Wish they came in a 295.

 

[MAST4R]

Was debating between these and BFG KO2s at stock sizes of 265...am I seeing this correctly that with the Falkens, there is a P rated option and their LT version at this size is only E rated?

I was always a bit confused about why a tire manufacturer would make an all-terrain, P-rated tire? Doesn't that defeat the purpose of trying to go off road? Or are they only intended for the most minimal of trails?

Those of you running Falkens at 265....are you mostly going with the P or LT version?

I know it is a long thread but maybe start from this review:
https://www.toyota-4runner.org/3205490-post1137.html

and then read all posts from #16 on here:
https://www.toyota-4runner.org/3205490-post1137.html

LT 265 70 17.

I had P rated AT3Ws on my Jeep Grand Cherokee and did not feel comfortable airing down. Just purchased 2019 TRD Pro and 1st mod was to buy Falken AT3Ws in LT stock 265 70 17. Haven't been off road, yet, but will have to issues airing down when I do.

That's the mistake people make all the time. I have no problem taking my P metric Wildpeaks into rocks (which I am sure is more often than most).

There is no need to air down P-metric tires as SoP. They are not harsh. They have much better traction than E-load tires at the same psi. And you don't have to air down a TRD 4R except in deep sand. An SR5 or Limited will have to air down on harder trails as Atrac is no substitute for the locker. The only other time you want to air down, but not much, like 25 and surely above 20 is when driving over sharp rocks, even if small. Otherwise they can puncture through the tread.

And if your tires can last anything above 25k, no matter the brand, you are not spending enough time off pavement... Of course, not everyone has a vast desert around the corner.

If going E-load, then better just get KO2s since those at least have a 3-ply sidewall. The E-load Falken gives you nothing over the P metric except that the two plies are thicker, which is about towing. Of course, a very heavy build or a vehicle towing a heavy trailer may benefit from LT tires.

 

[Decipher]

I ran my P-series over all kinds of terrains without a single issue. Unless you are constantly on sharp rocks or towing heavy loads, I can’t see the need for the overkill E-load. Our trucks don’t need E-Load tires.

I took my stock sized P series Falkens places others wouldn’t and they always came out just fine. Plus I had a more complaint ride every day.

C-Load tires are perfect for our trucks. I have extra peace of mind with the higher load but it limits your options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sn_85]

I ran my P-series over all kinds of terrains without a single issue. Unless you are constantly on sharp rocks or towing heavy loads, I can’t see the need for the overkill E-load. Our trucks don’t need E-Load tires.

I took my stock sized P series Falkens places others wouldn’t and they always came out just fine. Plus I had a more complaint ride every day.

C-Load tires are perfect for our trucks. I have extra peace of mind with the higher load but it limits your options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree with this. Fortunately the AT3/W come in a 275 C-rated which I think is the perfect size and load range for our 4Runners. I came to this realization quickly over the past few weeks. About 4 months ago I went from a 265 C-rated KO2 to a 285 E-rated Cooper AT3 XLT. I live at 5000ft and travel to about 6600ft for work. The 4Runner drove like a slug and I frequently had to downshift to 3rd gear to maintain 70mph going uphill. MPG, braking, acceleration suffered and it would constantly gear hunt. At altitude you definitely need to re-gear if you go 285's.

Had my AT3/W 275 C-rated installed yesterday and already notice a big difference all around. It can accelerate uphill much easier and overall the 4Runner doesn't feel like a such a slug. Thing is I've taken my 265 C-rated KO2 on trails in Utah and Colorado without issue so C-rated is fine for most things except extremely rocky trails and high speed desert running.

Hell I seriously contemplated trading the 4Runner in for a Land Cruiser because it felt so slow. With the 275's it feels like it got some of the pep back. I still will probably trade for a Land Cruiser in the future but hopefully can hold out for another 2-3 years.

 

[mlnhtrang]

any pictures? i have a '18 ORP w/ kdss and trd pro bilstein suspension, i wonder if it'll rub if i go 275 wildpeaks..anyone know?? from what ive read, 275 ko2's wont rub.. just not sure about these tires.

Agree with this. Fortunately the AT3/W come in a 275 C-rated which I think is the perfect size and load range for our 4Runners. I came to this realization quickly over the past few weeks. About 4 months ago I went from a 265 C-rated KO2 to a 285 E-rated Cooper AT3 XLT. I live at 5000ft and travel to about 6600ft for work. The 4Runner drove like a slug and I frequently had to downshift to 3rd gear to maintain 70mph going uphill. MPG, braking, acceleration suffered and it would constantly gear hunt. At altitude you definitely need to re-gear if you go 285's.

Had my AT3/W 275 C-rated installed yesterday and already notice a big difference all around. It can accelerate uphill much easier and overall the 4Runner doesn't feel like a such a slug. Thing is I've taken my 265 C-rated KO2 on trails in Utah and Colorado without issue so C-rated is fine for most things except extremely rocky trails and high speed desert running.

Hell I seriously contemplated trading the 4Runner in for a Land Cruiser because it felt so slow. With the 275's it feels like it got some of the pep back. I still will probably trade for a Land Cruiser in the future but hopefully can hold out for another 2-3 years.