Toyo Open Country MTs, Wheels and Lift... Anyone Interested?

[elcidsurfer]

Sorry to be missleading, but they are not for sale (yet...).

Im looking at a '99 T4R online and and it is currently running 285/75/16 Toyo Open Country MTs on 16" Bronze Konig Counter Steer Offroad Wheels and a Drop Diff Lift. I love the T4R, but if I bought it, I would pull the lift/tires/wheels off and put it back to stock so I got better MPGs. Thus selling the lift/tires/wheels.

Yes, yes, I know I could just regear and get better MPGs, but I want a stock T4R for my DD. I already have a 1st. Gen T4R that will become my "project" if I bought this newer T4R.

So what would someone pay for the combo? And does anyone wanna get in line for it if I get the T4R?

Less than 5K miles on the tires...

 

[J-money$$$]

you would probably get better mileage with 33's and stock gearing. More distance traveled per revolution of the tire.

 

[elcidsurfer]

Im pretty sure I'll loose MPGs coinsidering 285/75 are heavier than stock 265/75 and it will take more torque/power from the engine to turn them.

 

[Bfaulken]

Any Idea what kind of lift it has?

 

[Gerdo]

Drop Diff Lift.

Are you talking a drop subframe (bracket) lift?

If so, you really don't want to remove it. To do a drop subframe lift, they had to cut out the factory crossmember that holds the diff in the stock location. If you remove the new crossmember, there will be nothing to mount the front diff to.

 

[elcidsurfer]

Its a RevTech 3" Lift. It's just a simple "spacer lift". See link..

Revtek Suspension | Toyota Suspensions

 

[PitbullRescuer]

Im pretty sure I'll loose MPGs coinsidering 285/75 are heavier than stock 265/75 and it will take more torque/power from the engine to turn them.

You'd be measuring your loss or gain in pennies. The cost of a regear to gain MPG's is a terrible investment. The 33's aren't that much bigger than stock tires, the lower gears would hinder your MPG's because your RPM's would be up, at least highway. Might do slightly better in the city. But still nnot worth it.

 

[Shibby!]

Im pretty sure I'll loose MPGs coinsidering 285/75 are heavier than stock 265/75 and it will take more torque/power from the engine to turn them.

You sir are partially correct.

1) Stock size is 265/70/16, but 75's fit.
2) 285's are (depending on tire) about 10lbs /tire heavier rotating mass
3) 285's net you worse mileage even considering RPM adjustments.

I don't question your decision at all. I'm lifting my truck, but probably running 265/75 for that reason. More power, better gearing ratios, and higher MPG. A few MPG worse can cost over 1000 per year in fuel bills.

 

[CodyX36]

My brother was actually looking at getting those wheels and tires for his Tacoma. Any photos? Also, any chance you'd ship up here to Seattle?

 

[elcidsurfer]

Shibby, your right, I meant 70's, but I would probably go with 75's too and perhaps even keep the lift on.

Cody, I would coinsider it, given that you pay for shipping and packing materials. Ive never shipped anything as large as 4 wheels and tires, but my neighboor has shipped 4 37's before so Id pay him a case of beer to do it for me.

 

[absalom]

you would probably get better mileage with 33's and stock gearing. More distance traveled per revolution of the tire.

This doesn't sound right ... :shrug:

 

[Bennythbeaver]

Not all tires weigh the same. Just cause you go down a size doesn't mean you save weight. Toyo's are heavy. A toyo 285/75/16 is 68.3lbs, when you could go get a bf km2 285/75/16 at 58.18lbs each. Shoot a km2 315/75/16 is also less at 65.94lbs.

 

[4R99JB]

You sir are partially correct.

1) Stock size is 265/70/16, but 75's fit.
2) 285's are (depending on tire) about 10lbs /tire heavier rotating mass
3) 285's net you worse mileage even considering RPM adjustments.

I don't question your decision at all. I'm lifting my truck, but probably running 265/75 for that reason. More power, better gearing ratios, and higher MPG. A few MPG worse can cost over 1000 per year in fuel bills.

I just wanted to throw my 2 cents at this...

( my 1999 2WD ) = 17 MPG city X 12,000 miles yr = 705 gal gas.

Reduced to 14 MPG city X 12,000 miles yr = 857 gal of gas.

So 857 - 705 = 152 gallons X $4.00 gal = $608

But. $1000 lost gas mileage = 250 gallons @$4.00 or...

My stock T4R would need to drop to 10.84 MPG to tear through an additional $1,000 which isn't likely. As pitbullrescue stated the gain/loss is more likely measured in pennies.

Never spend a dollar chasing down a lost dime.

My 2 cents anyways.:whipping2

 

[Brilliant]

I just wanted to throw my 2 cents at this...

( my 1999 2WD ) = 17 MPG city X 12,000 miles yr = 705 gal gas.

Never spend a dollar chasing down a lost dime.

its actually 12,000 miles / 17 mpg, your way you'd get miles^2/gal. And you rounded wrong, its 706 not 705 ... haha

 

[Shibby!]

But. $1000 lost gas mileage = 250 gallons @$4.00 or...

My stock T4R would need to drop to 10.84 MPG to tear through an additional $1,000 which isn't likely. As pitbullrescue stated the gain/loss is more likely measured in pennies.

Never spend a dollar chasing down a lost dime.

My 2 cents anyways.:whipping2

Some people drive more then 12,000 miles a year. That's 19,200 km/yr. I personally drive 35,000 km/yr

Pennies? You just proved it would be approx $608/yr more to run 33's + the difference in tire cost (~$200). That there shows in approx 12,000 miles use, you'll almost have a brand new set of tires paid for. Actually you could sell the tires used with 12,000 miles use, and buy new tires every year to have new tires.

I don't see how that's not perfectly clear he would save a lot of money running smaller tires.

 

[Shibby!]

Not all tires weigh the same. Just cause you go down a size doesn't mean you save weight. Toyo's are heavy. A toyo 285/75/16 is 68.3lbs, when you could go get a bf km2 285/75/16 at 58.18lbs each. Shoot a km2 315/75/16 is also less at 65.94lbs.

This is true. I was comparing the BFG A/T 33 to a Duratrac 32.

In fact the 255/85/16 KM2 is 54lbs and over 33" in diameter.

Then you have to consider thread. It's not simply weight but tread design factors rolling resistance. Mud tires = bad, AT's not great, Street tires = better. Adding to this is the distance that weight is to the center of the tire. It might be a light tire, but in the case of the 255, it's far from the hub = worse mileage. So although it weights the same as some 265's, it won't get anywhere near the same mileage.

If ones tight on cash, running large mud terrains will cost 1000's more a year. Not to mention some wear a lot faster increasing replacement cost, or $/mile traveled.

 

[4R99JB]

We're missing the point...

I was merely stating that at 12,000 miles which is typically used in the industry for excessive mileage on a lease or "Free gas for a year" with purchase, etc.

My point was actually that it's highly unlikely that a well maintained 1999 (2WD) would ever get ONLY 10.84 MPG with a stock curb weight of 3,600 lbs.

The 1999 H1 hummer at 7,154 lbs is rated at 10.3 MPG city. If all else were equal, then...

Each tire/wheel would need to weigh 888.5 lbs more.

I'm not a mathematician, I just didn't think that anyone should be throwing around $1000 lost mileage claims without doing a little math. I'm aware that many other factors would come into play but even close math does not almost buy another set of $200 tires with $608; it would buy three... a 25% error.

It's all Good ... You (We) should get what we want only because we want it...

:lookout:

 

[elcidsurfer]

Missing the point... I think we (myself included) missed the point of this thread a long time ago, haha.

So back on track...

Other than Shibby, anyone interested in the wheels/tires/lift if I were to buy the 4Runner?

 

[ttran]

Got any pics?

 

[spenedwrds]

why buy a lifted 4runner and take all the goodies off? buy one that is stock and not lifted or have bigger tires.. alot less work just saying