SE w/ Cladding and New Tires

H

HuntRunner

New member
I know this has been discussed before, but I am looking for some new opinions (pics if you have them) on which way to install the tires; REVOS - white letters in or out?
I have the galactic gray sport with the unpainted cladding (body armor).
By the way, the Dunlops have 40K on them!
 
Register to hide this ad
Letters out, it's not a Sport with black tires.

Go with Revos, 265/6517, you will be shocked in comparing them to the Dunflops.
 
Sac State said:
Letters out, it's not a Sport with black tires.

Go with Revos, 265/6517, you will be shocked in comparing them to the Dunflops.
Click to expand...

You are probably in the minority suggesting the 265/65 vs the ever so popular 265/70......but that is probably what I am getting. I am about 60/40 on my decision.
 
I put the white lettering in...just prefer it that way.

I've noticed that the sidewalls on mine are a little bit different between the black lettering and the white lettering. You might want to look at it in case it factors into your decision.

Whichever way you mount the tires, they are so much better than the Dunlops that there is no comparison, IMHO.
 
HuntRunner said:
You are probably in the minority suggesting the 265/65 vs the ever so popular 265/70......
Click to expand...

Probably popular because they are easier to find/locate.

I didn't want to mess up my ABS, speedo, etc. Plus, if you aren't lifting it, you lose an inch of wheelwell clearance. IMO.

I am not knocking the look of the 70 series tire, just don't like it so 'stuffed' looking under the wheelwell. The meaty tread of the Revo offsets the Dunflop, so it is the same size, but meatier looking w/o adding the 70. Again, IMO.
 
Black wall out!

Nice clean black sidewalls, wipe it down with tire dressing....primo. Proper look with a nice clean car is to keep it clean and free of distractions.

White lettering out reminds me of the 1970s....fat tires on Cragar rims with white lettering on a '67 Chevelle or '71 Boss Mustang.

go 265/70/17. Fills in the wheel wells and looks so butch.
 
Re: Black wall out!

olliebear said:
go 265/70/17. Fills in the wheel wells and looks so butch.
Click to expand...

I agree with the look......but the last time I went up one tire size, I could never get over how much a difference it made in mpg and power loss. I even have to wonder if it contributed to the transmission failure.....no, it was a GM.....never mind the transmission part.
:confused:
 
Re: Re: Black wall out!

HuntRunner said:
I agree with the look......but the last time I went up one tire size, I could never get over how much a difference it made in mpg and power loss. I even have to wonder if it contributed to the transmission failure.....no, it was a GM.....never mind the transmission part.
:confused:
Click to expand...

1/2 inch difference should not be noticable if you look at teh added size difference only. However you have to factor in the type of tire you are using...A/T are not sticky hi-po tires and won't bite as well when you stomp on the gas hard. The Bridgestone or Dunflops are more H/T and will bite a bit better from a dry road start.

A/T tires have deeper treads than H/T that come with the truck. The deeper tread will squirm more under accleration. The slightly taller sidewalls will also flex more before turning so you FEEL less power.
 
If you drive on pavement 95+% of the time and only go off-road once in a while, go with the 65s. With a shorter sidewall and a wider tread width the 65s will perform better, on-road. If you need to squeeze out every fraction of an inch (approx 5/8
 
Last edited:
Koz said:

The 65 is a better tire for towing (shorter sidewall, smaller diameter)......

Koz
Click to expand...


I do tow a lot.....though I am not sure I understand the 65 being better for towing? How does the shorter sidewall improve this?
Thanks for all the info!
I was pretty well set on the 65's for the reasons you mentioned. I would like the extra height of the 70, and I do think it would look better, but I am not sure the trade-off is worth it. I have made it this long without the extra height, my biggest need has always been better traction in the mud and something stronger for those rocky areas, while still keeping it a good daily driver.

Thanks for the pic Mark86.....and I see you went with the 65's.
 
HuntRunner said:

Thanks for the pic Mark86.....and I see you went with the 65's.
Click to expand...

No problem. I went with the 65's because I didn't want to take a chance with any problems. I got around fine with my Dunlop 65's (until they wore out) so I didn't want to change.
 
I don't think tire size affects alignment.


Larger tires = longer warranty. :D


Revo 265/65/17 are 40 lbs.
Stock Dunlop AT20s are 36 lbs.
Michelin CT SUV are 40 lbs.
Revo 265/70/17 are 43.

MT/Rs are 50 lbs.

What do the various stock rims weigh?
At what % weight do you worry? More weight = more wear. But I don't think the wear will be significant enough to warrant concern.


If there is a remote possibility you'll benefit from the extra clearance, go for the 70s.

If going up a size is so bad, why not downsize? ;):
 
Bluto said:

If there is a remote possibility you'll benefit from the extra clearance, go for the 70s.

If going up a size is so bad, why not downsize? ;):
Click to expand...

There is always the possibility. It's not like my skids don't have any marks/dents in them.

I wonder if you downsize if there is any gain in power :D
 
HuntRunner said:
I do tow a lot.....though I am not sure I understand the 65 being better for towing? How does the shorter sidewall improve this?
Click to expand...
The lower the sidewall the more stability and less flexing. The better handling tires are wider and have lower profiles. This does not apply for off roading.

Koz
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 411 (members: 5, guests: 406)

Forum statistics

Threads
278,310
Messages
3,554,080
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Share this page

Trending content

Back
Top