The BFG KO2 tires: weight vs. size?

[Sup41]

Got one for y’all I can’t find here in the forum...

I was about to pull the trigger on some 275/70/17 BF Goodrich all terrain KO2’s when I noticed they are all E range and weigh 55 LBS. I then noticed the 285/70/17’s actually come in C range and those weigh 51 LBS. That’s 16 LBS lighter all together...

My question is..which is going to be worse for MPH and loss of power? I’m trying to minimize both. Would also love to hear about your 285’s C range if you got em?

 

[Olddudesrule]

SOTP power preception between the two, negligible. Fuel economy difference, likely negligible also, maybe tenth's of a gallon difference towards the "C" load range tire. Do you need the added sidewall protection that the "E" range offers? I bought mine with the "E"'s already installed, so that's what I'm running. For AZ offroading, I'm ok with the trade off, as we have loads of trails with large, sharp rocks. Otherwise, the "E's" are kind of a waste in my opinion. The tow rating on our 4Runners is no where near high enough to need that rating anyway.

 

[pDubs]

If you can fit the 285s I would go with those if I were in your shoes.

I think the mpg would be pretty much the same but the general feel in turning, accelerating, etc. I would think the C would win.

 

[mteolus]

I just got C-load KO2's. Not sure about the gas mileage difference between the two options, I'm guessing because of the added rolling resistance of the 285's and the added weight of the 275's the mileage hit would be similar. My MPG on the display shows 14.5 mpg and before it was around 17.5. I just got these a week and a half ago so I haven't been on any long highway stints so most of my driving has been city with lots of stop and goes (Dallas traffic is abhorrent). The 14.5 will be lower than actual because each turn of the wheel will travel further than stock. I will be testing MPG with my GPS next highway trip.

And again as many have said before, if you want a 4x4 4Runner, MPG shouldn't be one of your concerns especially if you modify it.

Your biggest reason why you would want the 51 lb C-load over a 55 lb E-load and the reason I got them is a lower unsprung weight. Do some google searches on that. It does make a difference. That's why I got the SCS wheels too since they only weight 24.5 lbs. Even still, my unsprung weight on each wheel increased by 7.5 lbs. 4.5 lbs less going from stock wheels (29 lbs) to SCS (24.5 lbs) and 12 lbs more (stock is 39 lbs) going from 265 Duratrac P rated tires to C-load KO2 285's.

One other note, I had to remove the mudflaps for them to fit.

So far the tires are great. Haven't been on snow but have been on rain and they do fine. Rental place in Ouray rents Jeep Rubicons and they all have C-load 285 KO2's on them and they don't blow out with 99% off road travel so their durability is still great. I think E-load is overkill unless you are doing extreme off-roading. And they are almost as quiet as the stock Duratrac highway tires and are actually quieter on textured concrete. Duratrac's would whine more on concrete.

 

[Sup41]

SOTP power preception between the two, negligible. Fuel economy difference, likely negligible also, maybe tenth's of a gallon difference towards the "C" load range tire. Do you need the added sidewall protection that the "E" range offers? I bought mine with the "E"'s already installed, so that's what I'm running. For AZ offroading, I'm ok with the trade off, as we have loads of trails with large, sharp rocks. Otherwise, the "E's" are kind of a waste in my opinion. The tow rating on our 4Runners is no where near high enough to need that rating anyway.

Just to note...i'm talking about the difference between 285's and 275's in addition to the C and E change.

But good to know you don't think the E's are worth it if I can avoid it! Unfortunately, they don't make a C range in 275...

 

[Sup41]

I just got C-load KO2's. Not sure about the gas mileage difference between the two options, I'm guessing because of the added rolling resistance of the 285's and the added weight of the 275's the mileage hit would be similar. My MPG on the display shows 14.5 mpg and before it was around 17.5. I just got these a week and a half ago so I haven't been on any long highway stints so most of my driving has been city with lots of stop and goes (Dallas traffic is abhorrent). The 14.5 will be lower than actual because each turn of the wheel will travel further than stock. I will be testing MPG with my GPS next highway trip.

And again as many have said before, if you want a 4x4 4Runner, MPG shouldn't be one of your concerns especially if you modify it.

Your biggest reason why you would want the 51 lb C-load over a 55 lb E-load and the reason I got them is a lower unsprung weight. Do some google searches on that. It does make a difference. That's why I got the SCS wheels too since they only weight 24.5 lbs. Even still, my unsprung weight on each wheel increased by 7.5 lbs. 4.5 lbs less going from stock wheels (29 lbs) to SCS (24.5 lbs) and 12 lbs more (stock is 39 lbs) going from 265 Duratrac P rated tires to C-load KO2 285's.

One other note, I had to remove the mudflaps for them to fit.

So far the tires are great. Haven't been on snow but have been on rain and they do fine. Rental place in Ouray rents Jeep Rubicons and they all have C-load 285 KO2's on them and they don't blow out with 99% off road travel so their durability is still great. I think E-load is overkill unless you are doing extreme off-roading. And they are almost as quiet as the stock Duratrac highway tires and are actually quieter on textured concrete. Duratrac's would whine more on concrete.

Wow. 4.5 seems like a lot. No racks or other additions to the vehicle? What kind of lift did you get?

 

[Bumbo]

The main reason I even stepped away from the KO2 was the lack of load range in the sizes that I wanted to run.

As a solution, I just started looking at different tires. I like the KO2, but it isn't the end all be all tire.

Especially if you want a more road worthy AT. The KO2 is pretty aggressive off-road tire that has its roots set in baja / desert racing. Unless you live in places like AZ where your terrain is rocky, there are other more viable options to consider.

 

[mteolus]

Wow. 4.5 seems like a lot. No racks or other additions to the vehicle? What kind of lift did you get?

I assume you mean 3 MPG difference. I have a 3 inch Toytec Boss lift, full aluminum skids except for the gas tank, and sliders (110 lbs). KDSS also will add weight compared to one that doesn't have them and I have a sliding rear cargo deck that not all 4Runners have (I bet at least 20lbs there). I got aluminum skids to save weight but my sliders didn't come in aluminum. No plans to get steel bumpers nor a winch. I don't do any extreme off road stuff so I don't feel like I need it. And since the MPG will be off with a larger diameter tire, I probably lost 1.5 to 2 MPG by putting on bigger tires rather than the 3 the display says. Highway driving shouldn't be much different. It's the starting and stopping with all of that additional weight that eats the gas.

O and I switched my spare to a 285 too. Instead of getting another 51 lb KO2, I got a 43 lb P-rated Pathfinder from Discount Tire. That adds another 4 lbs.

Most people would probably say, 4 or 5 lbs, who cares? But it all starts adding up. Heck, I am thinking about that console safe but that weighs 13 lbs!

 

[jhguth]

C range is a lot more comfortable on road

 

[Grape Ape]

I run 285 KO2s E rated and there is little difference in gas mileage or performance...if you can even use the word performance when talking about a 4R.

 

[Grug556]

factor not just reducing tire weight but also look at reducing rim weight. I went with C 265/70s K02s.

 

[Sup41]

What MPG do you get?

I run 285 KO2s E rated and there is little difference in gas mileage or performance...if you can even use the word performance when talking about a 4R.

what MPG do you get?

 

[Sup41]

The main reason I even stepped away from the KO2 was the lack of load range in the sizes that I wanted to run.

As a solution, I just started looking at different tires. I like the KO2, but it isn't the end all be all tire.

Especially if you want a more road worthy AT. The KO2 is pretty aggressive off-road tire that has its roots set in baja / desert racing. Unless you live in places like AZ where your terrain is rocky, there are other more viable options to consider.

Strictly baja bound!

 

[tacoyota]

Strictly baja bound!

If you are baja bound then you do want E rated tire. Other than that...Rolling resistance has a greater effect on mpg than weight. Reducing both will net you the best MPG. I would consider 285 C rated for myself next

 

[Grape Ape]

what MPG do you get?

I've been at 15mpg since I bought the truck, same as with my '10 TE - I ran the same tires on both and didn't see any noticeable change with either vehicle. I ran the stock Nittos on the TRDP for a few months before upgrading and it was the same.