Thread: Puma Fuel economy on larger tyres

Hi Mick ;

It's a Nice truck you got yourself , I do Like the Colour from your figures the puma is getting about 10.3/100Km. I couldn't tell you what 255/75/16 's would have on the fuel consumption , but wouldn't you factor it how heavy the vehilce would be at the time? how many passengers ? and how hard you are on the pedal ?

255s will be better for economy than the 285s by quite a margin...

I remember mine were

Your doing well to get 600/650k's from a tank,mine see's 550 at best.My Tdi used more fuel going from 235's to 255's but it works harder than the Puma. Pat

I am just about to up grade tyres. Can't decide between -

265x75x16 MT BAJA MTZ's, 32inch in the old talk (Nice looking tyre)

or

BFG 255x85x16 KM2's, 33inch.

I like the idea of taller tyres as it will offer better traction and fix the speedo error but will it
· reduce fuel economy, as it is harder to push the taller tyres.
· reduce drivability / power delivery.
The MT's are a little wider but standard height. I think 285 x 75 x 16 would be just too big, too tall.

And beware of the standard drive line components with such tall tyres.....

285s are actually smaller diameter then 255s, 33.3 vs 33.7 if i remember correctly, just a wider tread face, i have compared the 2 side by side, i have 255s in maxxis bighorns as well as 285s in Mickey Thompsons at home already(I have way to many tyres ask my wife...) the 285 is definetly heavier though i havnt tried to weigh them, both are on dynamic 16x8's but wider offset on the 285s as they are for my county with large flares. the 255s are definetly taller and are worn more then the 285s, the Mickey T's seem larger then most other 285s i have compared them too as well(BFGs AT's MTs and KM2s, Maxxis bighorns, and some others)

Drover, What do you get out of a tank now you have upgraded the I/C, chip and decat? and what did it get prior to this?

Originally Posted by cal415

Drover, What do you get out of a tank now you have upgraded the I/C, chip and decat? and what did it get prior to this?

Hey Cal,

Fuel economy has improved noticeable since the up grades.

Sitting on/over 110k's prior to up grades was about 11Lp/100k's now it is down to very low 10lp/100k's.

I have a 140lt tank and don't fill it up unless I am going on trip so my figures are estimates, but I am in no doubt that fuel figures have considerable improved.

Good info on the tyre sizes, thanks.

140L tank would be nice, is that a Long ranger tank with small side tank? i cant beleive they only put a 75L in a 130, it seems crazy, even the disco has a bigger tank.

Cal, I am running 285/75'sR16 Wranglers and getting about 11.5L/100 with a BAS remap on an 08 110 Puma.