Everything about tires for LR4/ LR3 with 18" wheels

[colb45]

I have spent the last couple of weeks doing research on some good all-terrain/ mud tires for my LR3. In my research I have done (maybe not enough) that i would be able to get away with a 265/65-18 with out doing J-rods and would only succumb to minor rubbing (other vehicle is a slammed vw so rubbing does not bother me).

This vehicle is not my daily and is going to be primarily for camping and adventuring, at the end i would like to still have full range control due to 2-5hour stretches of highway driving before I can go adventuring.

open to any recommendations for tires or what i should do.. im used to going low and pavement princess style vehicles.

 

[PowerBroker]

I also got the new BFG at ko2 put on yesterday. 276/65x18. Decided to put them on my old 5 spoke wheel and mounted the spacers too. Pretty sweet having the tires flush and no worry over UCA rubbing either.

Pics of this please!

 

[gghaggis]

Does anyone know if access mode is accessible with 285/60s on; driving slow and turns (not worried about slight rub as this will eventually go away over time)?

Hi Kevin,

On the Compomotives, there's no issue getting to access height on 285/60R18's.

Cheers,

Gordon

 

[bullmrkt]

I've ordered my 18" Compomotives and need to select a tire. First a bit about how/where I'm going to be driving my LR4. I'm a construction project manager in Ohio so I do a lot of highway driving between home, job sites, and the office–often in inclement weather. Currently, our "challenging terrain" job sites are in Niagara, NY (hello snow), a historic bridge replacement at a mostly unpaved proving ground in south-central Indiana, and some old Army barracks in NW Illinois. I tow a 20ft enclosed car hauler (sports cars), total weight 5000-7000lbs. Finally, I'd like to get back into more camping/adventuring, probably in SE Ohio, Kentucky, and the North Carolina mountains.

With all that in mind coupled with the intensive research I've done, and the fact that my preferred local tire shop carries them, I've settled on the BFG KO2's but the size is still up in the air. At first I wanted to go 285/60 for the "beefy" look, but I'm worried they won't do as well as 265's in the crappy mixed midwest winters. So if I narrow it down to 265's I then notice that the 265/60 tread is actually 0.5" wider than the 265/65 and has an OD only 0.5" taller than OE 19's/20's, so they'll fit well on the truck and in the spare location. Maximum OD probably shouldn't be a priority for me because the off road conditions in my region are more dirt/mud and not much rock. In addition, the 265/65's cost 14% more than 265/60 (or 285/60), which adds up when we're talking 5 tires. Thoughts? Has anyone used 265/60's? Seems like its either 285/60 or 265/65 around here. Thanks!

 

[Boaz]

The first number in a tire size is the tread width, so the two 265's would have exactly the same tread width. The second number is the ratio of the width to the sidewall, so the 265/65 would have more sidewall (and a larger overall diameter) than the 265/60.

I've had the 285/60/18's before in both the Nitto Terra Grapplers, and the Cooper Zeon LTZs. They both fit great and had no problem fitting in the spare location, but needed to be aired down to do so. The overall diameter is about 31.5", which is as big as you want to go without a lift kit. You will not get any significant rubbing even in Access Height. The only rubbing I ever got was in Rock Crawl mode. The top front of the rear wheel wells showed a little rubbing under full compression.

As far as traction, the 285's will have a wider footprint (about an inch wider), so you'd get better traction from that size, especially when aired down. If you like the 265's though, I'd stick with the 60's, since they will fit better than the 65's.

Here's a great site for getting size data when thinking about changing tire sizes:
http://www.1010tires.com/Tools/Tire-Size-Calculator

 

[bullmrkt]

The first number in a tire size is the tread width, so the two 265's would have exactly the same tread width. The second number is the ratio of the width to the sidewall, so the 265/65 would have more sidewall (and a larger overall diameter) than the 265/60.

I've had the 285/60/18's before in both the Nitto Terra Grapplers, and the Cooper Zeon LTZs. They both fit great and had no problem fitting in the spare location, but needed to be aired down to do so. The overall diameter is about 31.5", which is as big as you want to go without a lift kit. You will not get any significant rubbing even in Access Height. The only rubbing I ever got was in Rock Crawl mode. The top front of the rear wheel wells showed a little rubbing under full compression.

As far as traction, the 285's will have a wider footprint (about an inch wider), so you'd get better traction from that size, especially when aired down. If you like the 265's though, I'd stick with the 60's, since they will fit better than the 65's.

Here's a great site for getting size data when thinking about changing tire sizes:
http://www.1010tires.com/Tools/Tire-Size-Calculator

The first number is not tread width, it's section width, and even then it's not an exact science—you have to check the specs for each tire. BFG KO2 265/60 has a tread width of 9.1" and the 265/65 is 8.7", while the 255/50/20's currently on my LR4 have a width of 9". http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=BFGoodrich&tireModel=All-Terrain+T/A+KO2

Wider tires have better traction in dry conditions and sand but that's about it. A narrower tread will do much better in both rain (hydroplaning) and snow/slush where you want the tire to cut through to the road surface instead of float on top.

Thanks for the feedback on the 285/60's.

 

[jwest]

As far as traction, the 285's will have a wider footprint (about an inch wider), so you'd get better traction from that size, especially when aired down.

This is not true in all conditions. In fact, for mud and snow, and the narrower tire will work better due to higher ground pressure "especially" when airing down. Even on gravel, the wider tire is actually going to slide more on the tops of pebbles rather than digging into the subsurface.

Even when comparing a wider smaller diameter to a narrower but larger diameter, resulting in equal contact patch square inches, the narrower tire wins in almost all conditions due to having less frontal resistance as in sand.

With 285/60 and 265/65 being so close at first consideration, the narrower tire ends up being better in almost every aspect except where the 285 might look more cool to some people.

Where people think it being wider will create more traction, this is also offset by the fact that it's section width is near the limit of sensible proportions for an 8" wide wheel. The resulting section shape is disproportionately wide at the tread which degrades the handling at highway speeds or twisty roads where one might expect its width to prevail.

Lastly, a narrower tire will roll more fuel efficiently on the highway as well.

As a disclaimer, my first LR3 tires were 285/60x18 Nittow Terra Grapplers and yes, they looked very cool being wider. However, there is almost zero aspect where they are the better choice technically speaking.

 

[Boaz]

I stand corrected on the wet conditions. I'm in AZ so usually on dry stuff or fording streams, both of which feel better on a wider footprint. Thanks for the clarification on section vs tread width. Looks like it can vary significantly from brand to brand. Good to know.

 

[Surfrider77]

Agree with most points here. The only reason I went with the 285/60s was because my off roading here in the desert is almost exclusively sand. I need the "float". If I were stateside, I would probably go with 265/65 like most everyone else.

 

[bullmrkt]

Agree with most points here. The only reason I went with the 285/60s was because my off roading here in the desert is almost exclusively sand. I need the "float". If I were stateside, I would probably go with 265/65 like most everyone else.

Agreed. I was hoping someone would chime in on 265/60's based on my uses. I'm not sure the extra weight, braking distance loss, hassle, cost, and fuel efficiency loss makes the extra inch of OD the 265/65's have worth it to me. My wheeling will be casual and probably not very rocky here in the Midwest.

Now if I could only convince BFG to make a 275/60R18 I'd hop all over it. At 31", it's the ideal size for a multipurpose LR4.