235/85R16 vs. 265/75R16 vs. 255/85R16

[Mick-Kelly]

Rightio boys and girls. Im going in tomorrow or the day after to slap down a serious pile of mullah on some new black round things. Goodyear MTR's to be exact. Im contemplating either of the three tyre sizes from the subject heading. Im currently using a set of bald arse 205/80R16's on a stock ride height disco. A lift off 2 inches is on the cards in the near future and im not worried about taking a small slice out of the back guard either. What worries me from the tyre guide on the disco web pages is the comment that the spare will not fit without spacers for the 255's . What sort of spacers and for what reasonf too wide or too fat. Is anyone running any of these sizes on the rig at the Mo. and if so are you happy with your choice.
cheers
Mick

[rmp]

I reckon go narrow not wide. 235s, not 265s. Further back in this forum is a discussion on the merits of wide vs narrow.

If the tyre is oversize you need to make sure the local policeman doesn't notice ;-)

[Mick-Kelly]

Now that ive give myself a sound thrashing with the baton, i'll probably be going for 235's which give a diameter of 32 inches but a width at tread of 7.3. The 265's give a diameter of 31.7 but a width at tread of 8.4 so theoretically the 265's should interfere with the body work panels the least. Ah i may aswell throw a dart at a chart on the wall at this rate. As far as the traffic branch boys go ours are more concerned with overall safety and trying to keep a lid on the idiot brigade. Who would have thought that Mt Isa would be full of clowns in skylines doing laps of the city on a Thursday night. Cant get away from em anywhere.
cheers
Mick

[LandyAndy]

Hi Mick-Kelly
If your suspension setup allows go for the 255/85 setup.I have a similar size on my Series(8.25x16)
A taller narrower tyre works really well in climbing/mud/sand.
You just need to get info from somebody with a simalar suspension setup/tyre size to see if they fit your vehicle.
Andrew

[Mick-Kelly]

G'day guys
Suspension is stock at the moment but will be getting 2 inch higher Kings and a fresh set of Bilsteins in the near future. A second question or rather the first in a different light is what is better on corrugated gravel, wider or skinny. My first thought was skinny as less contact area gives less area for punctures but up here tyres seem t loose it in the side wall. Hence why every second fourby has these MTR's with a 3 ply side wall. The plot thickens.
cheers
Mick

[LandyAndy]

Hi Mick
In my experience wide tyres are bad news in gravel,and muddy wet gravel roads as they wear.They "hydroplane" just as well on gravel as they do on a wet sealed road.
The narrower/taller tyres give more "footprint" area but in a longer pattern than wider.This is what improves their performance and ride over wide tyres.
Andrew

[rmp]

Originally posted by LandyAndy
Hi Mick
In my experience wide tyres are bad news in gravel,and muddy wet gravel roads as they wear.They "hydroplane" just as well on gravel as they do on a wet sealed road.
The narrower/taller tyres give more "footprint" area but in a longer pattern than wider.This is what improves their performance and ride over wide tyres.
Andrew

Agreed...mostly! The contact patch of a tyre is proportional to the vehicle's weight and the pressure the in the tyre. A narrow tyre of say 32 inch will be the same footpring as a wide tyre, but as LA says above the wider tyre will have a wide, short footprint instead of a long, narrow one. But the contact patch overall size is exactly the same.

Take a look at the 4WD race vehicles on events like the Rally of Australia. 235/86/16 is the go for them. Narrow tyres may not look cool, but they've always been fitted to Landrovers and you'd expect them to know a thing or two about the subject.

Narrow tyres are not good if you are racing on bitumen in the dry though. Too much movement between the rim and tyre.

[Defender200Tdi]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Narrow tyres may not look cool, but they've always been fitted to Landrovers and you'd expect them to know a thing or two about the subject.[/b][/quote]

I don't know whether I would always agree with the last part of that sentence. :wink:

If you're set on Goodyear MTR's then I think your only choice is between 265 & 235. AFAIK they don't offer 255/85's.



Paul style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

[Mick-Kelly]

Thank you gentlemen for your sage words, Ive placed the order for some 235's which should with luck be in town tomorrow. then its just up to me to find a fun track to let em lose on.
cheers
Mick

[dungarover]

I have these tyres on my 83 Rangie (235/85R16 Goodyear MT/R's) and done over 20,000 kms on them. They are great off-road and love rocks best. Mud they are about par with a all-terrain, marginally better maybe.

I had to replace one recently because the side had a large cut in it and was not reparable as you could see the chords (went to 3 places and they all said it was a write off!!). It never went down ot was dangerous but replaced it anyway, so I can be testiment to the 3 ply sidewall construction.

I paidm $265 on intrest free for mine (they were $290 retail 8O ). Enjoy them

[Pedro_The_Swift]

would be interested in the price Mick-Kelly 8)

[Mick-Kelly]

Looks like I endup with the raw prawn Im being hit for $320 each fitted, best price i could find in town and the only one whos interest free. Definately a sellers market. Plus because there so damn popular round here i now have to wait till the midle of the month before he gets more stock

[Slunnie]

Originally posted by Defender200Tdi
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Narrow tyres may not look cool, but they've always been fitted to Landrovers and you'd expect them to know a thing or two about the subject.

I don't know whether I would always agree with the last part of that sentence. :wink:

If you're set on Goodyear MTR's then I think your only choice is between 265 & 235. AFAIK they don't offer 255/85's.



Paul style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif[/b][/quote]
The 235/85 and 265/75 also have different tread patterns (same design though) in the MTR. The 265/75 is more open in comparison.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

$320 x four = LOTS!

can you buy them elsewhere and transport them?

[p38arover]

Mick,

If the tyres are too big in diameter, you may have to invert the spare wheel carrier to get clearance between the tyre and the rear bumper.

I'm pretty sure Kelvin (Dolfn on this forum) did this. You could try a PM to him.

As far as spacing the tyres, that could be just 'cos they are wider and would touch the door skin.

Ron

[PeterM]

Did a bit of window shopping today for new rubber and settled on getting 235/75 R16s. Currently running 225/75s but want a little more height and width. Looking at Cooper STs for $250 a pop, fitted. Other options were to stay with 225/75 = $230 or try 215/85 = $240.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

cant really go wrong there PeterM,,
went from that to 245's--
now tyres rub on full lock,, its only the raised white letters but its still a worry.

[disco200tdi]

I run 255/85r16 cooper ST's for my road/touring tyres on my 200 Tdi disco. With stock gearing the car would not be able to get them moving in high range. To overcome this I installed 1.41 defender high range t/c gears.
I also had to cut front and rear guards for them to fit. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif This size is excellent for floatation over sand and tends bag le

235/85r16 is a better size for a fairly stock deisel disco 1 but rear wheel arch cutting is still required. The only problem is in this size the MTR pattern is very closed, much more than a normal M/T tyre.

A tweak of the fuel pump will help with the initial lack of go.

John D

[VladTepes]

So to clarify (I'm not too bright) the height issue.

The 255's are taller than 235's ? (would give more clearance under the diff) but would also raise the gearing slightly, yes :?: :?

[incisor]

in picture form so even you can get the gist of it vlad style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

punch the sizes into the link below!

http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

[VladTepes]

so the 265/75 is slighty wider and taller than 235/85 ?

(The calc only goes to 80 not 85 but I'll forgive you).

If this is the case (ie ever so slight height increase and marginal width increase), why would anyone NOT get the 265 and opt for the 235 instead ?

[dungarover]

Vlad, I almost bopght 265/75's and decided against it as my theory is narrow tyres leave wide ones for deal in off-road terrain.

The reasion is they can bite in and bain traction much quicker (especially in mud) compared to a wider tread tyre. With a narrower tyre you can always drop the tyre pressure a bit to gain more footprinting in certain situations (such as sand).

Also, a 265 is 31.6 wheras a 235 is 31.7, nothing in it really.

Trav

[VladTepes]

Thanks Mate.

I have 235/85's on the Defender and will stick with that size.

Don't know what I'll end up with on the Rangie - I get what I get.

[one_iota]

As I understand it it's the length of the tread in contact with the road that gives traction. Never mind the width. Tyre pressure is the regulator.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Originally posted by VladTepes
so the 265/75 is slighty wider and taller than 235/85 ?

(The calc only goes to 80 not 85 but I'll forgive you).

If this is the case (ie ever so slight height increase and marginal width increase), why would anyone NOT get the 265 and opt for the 235 instead ?

please clarify "marginal width increase"

more or less than 245-75's???

[VladTepes]

Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)

[Defender200Tdi]

Another one of those online tyre calculators (that goes beyond 85 profile):

http://www.tyremaster.com.au/fitment_tips/...s/diam_calc.htm (http://www.tyremaster.com.au/fitment_tips/diam_calc.htm)


Paul style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

[incisor]

Originally posted by VladTepes
Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)

when was that ?

we have been XTRA nice to you i thought

hehehehehehe

that would be right, knight's a man and your the old woman!

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Originally posted by VladTepes
Go look for yourself.

(Well, that's what you people normally say to me!)


ooopss!!! :oops:

[uninformed]

basicly brand to brand they will vary slightly but for a 235/85 r16 it is:
235 = 235 mm wide
85 = aspect ratio in height, 85% 0f 235 = 199.75
r = radial
16 = inch rim, 16 x 25.4 = 406.4

therefore 199.75 x 2 (tyre above rim and tyre below rim) + 406.4 = 805.9mm or 31.72834646 inches tall
this will also vary due to rim width and air pressure.
now IMO a narrowISH tyre is better because it has less rolling resistance. think of it this way look across the width of the tyre and imagine this pushing through soft sand or mud its actullay creating friction so the wider the more friction or resistance. Now grond pressure is different, this is where a tall tyre is good because its long foot print supports the vehicle and stops it digging straight down
serg

[VladTepes]

that's great serg but where does the 25.4 come from ?

[rmp]

Originally posted by uninformed
basicly brand to brand they will vary slightly but for a 235/85 r16 it is:
235 = 235 mm wide
85 = aspect ratio in height, 85% 0f 235 = 199.75
r = radial
16 = inch rim, 16 x 25.4 = 406.4

therefore 199.75 x 2 (tyre above rim and tyre below rim) + 406.4 = 805.9mm or 31.72834646 inches tall
this will also vary due to rim width and air pressure.
now IMO a narrowISH tyre is better because it has less rolling resistance. think of it this way look across the width of the tyre and imagine this pushing through soft sand or mud its actullay creating friction so the wider the more friction or resistance. Now grond pressure is different, this is where a tall tyre is good because its long foot print supports the vehicle and stops it digging straight down
serg

Tall/narrow has same contact patch as wide/short. Contact patch is dependent on pressure in the tyre and weight of vehicle.

[rmp]

Originally posted by VladTepes
that's great serg but where does the 25.4 come from ?

25.4mm to the inch.

[lewy110]

In bfg mud terrains

235/85-r16 is 32inch O/D

255/85-r16 is 34inch O/D

[VladTepes]

Doh :!: :oops:

[uninformed]

RMP QUOTE

Tall/narrow has same contact patch as wide/short. Contact patch is dependent on pressure in the tyre and weight of vehicle.[/quote]

yes but a narrow tyre dosn't have the same resistance, think of 4 cyclists riding in single profile and then side by side, they have the same surface contact but less resistance, in there case wind/drag. in our case mud/sand- plus wider tyres/rims with more offset put more pressure on wheel bearings etc.
serg

[def90]

I went from 235 stock general grabbers to 265s Coopers SST. That way I could keep my ratios, speedo, insurance and add a bit of beef to the tyres. They work well off and on road, a bit noisy but its a defender right...?

265s arent that fat anyway.....

[rmp]

RMP QUOTE

Tall/narrow has same contact patch as wide/short. Contact patch is dependent on pressure in the tyre and weight of vehicle.

yes but a narrow tyre dosn't have the same resistance, think of 4 cyclists riding in single profile and then side by side, they have the same surface contact but less resistance, in there case wind/drag. in our case mud/sand- plus wider tyres/rims with more offset put more pressure on wheel bearings etc.
serg[/quote]

I agree, and I didn't contradict that part of the post when you stated that. You have a good analogy there, I'll borrow it for some time in the next two weeks when this topic comes up again!

There are disadvantages to narrow tyres, but they do have advantages even if they aren't the current trend.

There is a mindset that sees people desperately trying to fit the tallest and fattest tyres they possibly can on their 4WD without really thinking about whether they need to do so, the pros and cons, and the other ramifications of such mods. Some cars are very well engineering and much more capable as a result, others are reliabilty problems waiting to happen.

[VladTepes]

Ok then - what disadvanatges are there to narrow tyres ?

[Greylandy]

Originally posted by def90
I went from 235 stock general grabbers to 265s Coopers SST. That way I could keep my ratios, speedo, insurance and add a bit of beef to the tyres. They work well off and on road, a bit noisy but its a defender right...?

265s arent that fat anyway.....

Yup .. like def90 I also went for 265's .. the rolling diameter is 3mm different from standard which will have almost no impact on speedo and drive ratios. I would dare to say none of us will even notice the difference offroad between 265 and 235 .. and if you do ... you spend too much time on being anal about tyre size instead of enjoying the view where you are. :wink:

[VladTepes]

So - why go from 235's to 265's if there's no advantage ?

[rmp]

Originally posted by VladTepes
So - why go from 235s to 265s if there's no advantage ?

Well as Henry says I doubt you'd notice the difference. Doesn't mean to say there is no difference, but it would be difficult for it be readily apparent.

265s look fatter ("a bit of beef" as Def90 puts it), and looks are important to some people. Probably the easiest tyre to get is a 265/75/16, so availability is one reason.

But why fat tyres versus narrow?

On-road handling in the dry is the only logical reason I can think of. The wider tyre is less prone to rim/tyre slip. The same is true in the wet but the then the extra width of the tyre begins to work against it; a 265 has 30mm extra width of tyre to clear of water versus a 235.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Originally posted by VladTepes
So - why go from 235's to 265's if there's no advantage ?

AND lose steering lock---

[Greylandy]

Originally posted by VladTepes
So - why go from 235's to 265's if there's no advantage ?

I didn't think there was much difference at the time but thought the wider tyre would perform better onroad. Like def90, I prefer the look of a wider tyre on a Defender style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[VladTepes]

On 7" rims I presume ?

[Greylandy]

Originally posted by VladTepes
On 7" rims I presume ?

That is correct.

http://www.greylandy.com/16T/images/16T18.JPG

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Nice greylandy, er Greylandy style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

[Greylandy]

Originally posted by Pedro_The_Swift
Nice greylandy, er Greylandy style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

Thanks Pedro .. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

[Steinzy]

I have just put 265/75/16's Cooper STT's on my rangie and am very impressed. How have you found the wear and tear on the so far Greaylandy???

[Greylandy]

Hi Anthony,

I'm very impressed with the wear on my BF muddies. I've done 45,000kms now with lots of tread left. I reckon they'll easily go to 80k. Just make sure you rotate them every 10k ..

[MickG]

Originally posted by Greylandy
Hi Anthony,

I'm very impressed with the wear on my BF muddies. I've done 45,000kms now with lots of tread left. I reckon they'll easily go to 80k. Just make sure you rotate them every 10k ..

Excuse this novice question but by rotating, does this mean swapping the front to the back or the left to the right or does it just mean sticking the tyre randomly on another corner of the car.......is there a scientific or considered reason for doing it any particular way?

Running to 265/75R16 BFG Muds on my Disco II with a 2" lift and they have performed admirably to date, no gaurd cutting or rubbing even at full lock and full articulation - very happy with them!!

Aye, Mick

[Steinzy]

Correct me if I'm wrong - but I think that the rotation goes something like this:

Back Left to Front Right
Front Right to Back Left
Front Left to Back Right
Back Right to Front Left

:idea: I'm sure I saw another tread on tyre rotation in the Tec foroum - I will try and find it

[Steinzy]

Here it is

http://www.aulro.com/modules.php?name=Foru...iewtopic&t=8135 (http://www.aulro.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=8135)

Mick - this shoul help

[JamesH]

Hi All

Does anyone know how I can calculate the diameter of a tyre size 7.5R16 (ie my Michelin XPCs). I want to compare it to 235/85/16R (what I may end up getting for the Defender)

[MickG]

Nice one Steinzy, mine are due for a rotation soon.

Aye, Mick

[Scouse]

Originally posted by JamesH
Hi All

Does anyone know how I can calculate the diameter of a tyre size 7.5R16 (ie my Michelin XPCs). I want to compare it to 235/85/16R (what I may end up getting for the Defender)
Try this if you like:
http://www.carbibles.com/tyre_bible.html
and scroll down to "Classic / vintage radial tyre sizes" where you can convert imperial to metric (I don't know how accurate their conversion is though).

It has a tyre difference calculator at the end.


I use this one for "normal" car tyres:
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

[seqfisho]

Originally posted by JamesH
Hi All

Does anyone know how I can calculate the diameter of a tyre size 7.5R16 (ie my Michelin XPCs). I want to compare it to 235/85/16R (what I may end up getting for the Defender)


Hi James try this link

http://members.shaw.ca/jbarge/tires.html

I shows about 1/10th of an inch difference, not sure if that is case diameter or full tread although I thought that there was minimal difference between them diameter wise just the 235's are wider by a half inch.

[tombraider]

Originally posted by lewy110
In bfg mud terrains

235/85-r16 is 32inch O/D

255/85-r16 is 34inch O/D

255/85-R16 is 33.3" O/D

And perfect size for Defender without mods.

Cheers
Mike

[tombraider]

Originally posted by Greylandy
Hi Anthony,

I'm very impressed with the wear on my BF muddies. I've done 45,000kms now with lots of tread left. I reckon they'll easily go to 80k. Just make sure you rotate them every 10k ..

Interestingly look around the tread edge where it meets the sidewall.
Lots and I mean lots of BFGs at the moment have little dots (like a raised full stop) around the edges.

These are belt wires poking up under the surface and making their way to the outside ready to fail.

This is a frighteningly common occurance at the moment and we have had 3 people with relatively new BFG Muddies fail (blowout) on suburban roads.

BFG is failing to recognise this (must be related to LC100 suspension warranty blokes! :twisted: ) but the fault is definately there in the post 2004 BFG tyres.

I used to run them, now I wont touch them. Go Goodyear or Mickey Thompson/Dick Cepek. Now there is a strong tyre! And the FC-II is awesome, even in slop for an agressive AT.

My next set for the spare rims will be the new MTZ due Feb 06. (avail now but in Feb they will have Oz sizes)

Cheers
Mike

Mike

[dungarover]

Yes, The BF's seem to have an issue also with the edge near where the bead seals.

When off-road and you drop your tyre pressure, when driving through mud, it tends to work it's way between the bead and the rim, causing the tyre to deflate or slowly leak. There's a couple of letters in the current 4WD monthly on this topic.

Plus I also had this same problem on my BF's prior to my MT/R's, had 2 flat ytres and took a couple of hours to get then re-inflated once i was able to clear the crap out from the bead and have them seal (one still leaked, had to stiop 3-4 time on the way hokme and re-inflate :evil: :evil: ). I was considering going back but after hearing about this issue I'll stick with my MT/R's even if they are a bit pricey.

The MT/R's are highly recomended, have 3 ply sidewall as well like BF's, without the tyre bead hassles.

Trav

[Steinzy]

Bloody hell I'm glad I got the Coopers not the BFG's. Almost bought a set of BFG's cos I could get them interest free on my GE card but decided to stick with the Coopers because of all the good reports I've heard.

[abaddonxi]

Just to go against everyone. How about some Kumhos?

I bought a set because both my mechanic and the tyre guy said 'unkillable'.

They also both said no to BFGs.

There you go.


http://www.kumho.com.au/showtyre.pip?id=83

































And if you're worried about it you can always get them put on white side in so no one can tell.

Also under $200 per tyre. Closer to $150 if you've got hte gift in a haggle.
style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif

Cheers
Simon

[Steinzy]

Good Buy - I wish I knew that about a week ago. Mind you I'm still very happy with the Coopers, but if I could have piad half the price I would have been even happier

[DEFENDERZOOK]

<span style="color:blue">does anyone know what they are like on road....
or how well they wear compared to a bfg.....?



they do appear to be a copy of the bfg....but what compund is used....?</span>

[VladTepes]

Interesting - I have Kumho Ventures on the truck at the moment and they have been on there since I had it. While I can't vouch, therefore, for the wear characteristics (except that they scrub out when the tie rod is bent style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif ) I have had no problems or flats with them.

(The only flat was actually due to a dented rim not the tyre)

If the Mud Terrain pattern is any good, the price certianly seems better HOWEVER I don;t know where I can buy them - nobody local seems to know, or care.

[VladTepes]

and interestingly the 235/85 has a 10 ply sidewall while the 265/75 only has a 6 ply sidewall :?: :!: :?


also help me with a brain fade I'm having - Disco 1 steelies - 7,5" or 7" width ???? :roll:

[Lucy]

Disco steelies = 7" width

[VladTepes]

Yeah thats what I thought but the Kumho size chart says 7.5" rim needed for 265/75 16's :!: :? :?: :?:

[Lucy]

Bugger

[alexcd]

I run 265/75 on my Rangie on standard 7" rims. BFG , cooper and others all say 7" is ok.

[dungarover]

Originally posted by alexcd
I run 265/75 on my Rangie on standard 7" rims. BFG , cooper and others all say 7" is ok.

Thought so, I've seen 285's on 7 inch rims before as well 8O

Trav

[VladTepes]

The Kumho 834MT's are available in 235/85R16 for (quoted price) of $210 fitted and balanced. (As compared with the no doubt better but heaps expensiver Cooper STT in the same size at $272). Unfortunately KUMHO don't import the 265/75 size that they DO manufacture and sell in other markets.

A Cooper STT 265/75R16 comes in at $318 8O
Lovely - but expensive when a set of 5 would set me back $1590 which Mrs Vlad will NOT go for. :cry:

And the advice I see around the place (and here as well) is that if gping for the Mud tread pattern the wider tyre is the better choice.

Damn Kumho !


ANyone have the Cepek/

[VladTepes]

Originally posted by tombraider
Go Goodyear or Mickey Thompson/d**k Cepek. Now there is a strong tyre! And the FC-II is awesome, even in slop for an agressive AT.

My next set for the spare rims will be the new MTZ due Feb 06. (avail now but in Feb they will have Oz sizes)

Cheers
Mike


I can't find a website for this other than thsi ad:
http://www.4wdworld.com.au/products/mickeyt/
ANyone konw where I can see feedback about this tyre - prices / onroad and offorad manners / dealers ??

[Phoenix]

This is their main webpage
http://www.mickeythompsontires.com/

as for prices, no idea, but a couple of places in my area sell them.

I think this page has a review on them, and may even sell them.
http://www.offroader.com.au/

[VladTepes]

http://www.dickcepek.com/

The FC-II quote is $279 fitted and balanced.

Looks like a good pattern somewhere between an all terrain and mud terrain - probably would be the sort of thing that would suit adaily driver well.

Mike (tombraider) - you have used these tyres have you ? If I was looking at the 265/75R16 have you any idea what life I might expect out of them ?

[seqfisho]

Originally posted by VladTepes
http://www.dickcepek.com/

The FC-II quote is $279 fitted and balanced.

Looks like a good pattern somewhere between an all terrain and mud terrain - probably would be the sort of thing that would suit adaily driver well.

Mike (tombraider) - you have used these tyres have you ? If I was looking at the 265/75R16 have you any idea what life I might expect out of them ?

Hi Mike,

Welcome back to the real world

Chris S (trip co-ord) from the LROC has them on his fender tray so you should ask him how he's finding them they looked pretty new and I think they were the 265/75 size. They seemed to work ok at Clear Mountain. :wink:

[VladTepes]

I thought I recognised the tread pattern but wasn't sure they were the same brand.

Yeah he is pretty happy with his tyres.

[tombraider]

Originally posted by VladTepes
Looks like a good pattern somewhere between an all terrain and mud terrain - probably would be the sort of thing that would suit adaily driver well.

Mike (tombraider) - you have used these tyres have you ? If I was looking at the 265/75R16 have you any idea what life I might expect out of them ?

Sorry, been a little absent of late.

FC-IIs, Awesome.....

I have had BFG, Coopers, Michelin, Grabbers, MTRs, Duelers, Kuhmos etc on my 4wdrives. The old BFG Muds were nice, but not that great.

Then I went to Claws... Awesome tyre, noisy but not bad on road, good in wet roads too (serious) but offroad, whilst they clambered up stuff really really well fast gravel was, um, err, interesting...

Example, banked curve, FCII on cruiser = no drift
Claws on Defender = Drifted across corner, hit embankment, bounced back onto track at 70km/h.... Not so nice :?

Changed to FC-IIs following day https://www.aulro.com/afvb/ Its nice to have mate who is a tyre dealer :twisted:

Same track, same conditions 1 month later, same corner, 100km/h no worries :wink:

To give you some insight, the tyres on mine (I never wear them out - just trade in every 6-12 months!) have done 20,000kms and have lost 2mm of tread from new.

This includes Rocky track (Toolangi) and hours upon hours in the rock outside Whyalla. Plus a 900km round trip to Adelaide each week-end.

The Only damage they have is from a bolt in my flare extension coming lose the last Sunday and its cut the edge of about 4 lugs after a bug crossaxle at Point Gibon.

The pattern is very self cleaning and in mud surprisingly good.. Better than the MTR.

I've never lacked for traction against BFG MT equipped vehicles. in fact exceeded their capabilities on many occasions.... Including Toolangi where I was driving on FC-IIs vs the others (all rovers) on Centipedes.
I never had an issue there either... This is with 305-70-16s on 16x8 wheels (+26mm offset)

And to elaborate, "Lara" (Defenders name) runs open diffs, all the others had at least a rear locker on board.

The other vehicle is my 99 TD5 Disco which has 265/75/16 FCIIs.
The 265 has the highest load rating and strongest sidewall in its class.
It too plays out here regularly (although is more a tourer by spec).

It has done 30,000km on them with little to know wear although and edge copped a bit from some hard rock october LWE, and they're still better than the BFGs they replaced.

With care I'd expect to see 70,000km on the disco at least and 50-60,000 on the defender.

Adelaide members, email me (or PM me) for the best prices in SA through my mate.

Cheers
Mike
2001 Tombraider Edition Defender with lots of good stuff
1999 TD5 Discovery (Grey of course) with lots of other good stuff!

[VladTepes]

Wish I had a mate who was a tyre dealer. :!:

[dungarover]

Originally posted by VladTepes
Wish I had a mate who was a tyre dealer. :!:

I do.

Trav

[VladTepes]

Does he do discounts for a "mate of a mate"?

(ahem, that's me!)

[tombraider]

My mate will, but you sort of have to be in Adelaide :wink:

[DEFENDERZOOK]

<span style="color:blue">how many ply are these tyres and what sort of price range.....?

and is there anything wrong with kumho tyres.....
or general grabbers.....they also come in muddies.....</span>

[dungarover]

Originally posted by VladTepes
Does he do discounts for a "mate of a mate"?

(ahem, that's me!)

Dunno, haven't asked. He may not do them for the price I can get them but you'll save.

Shop around first, you may get what you want for the price https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Trav

[tombraider]

Ok, you've heard the saying "Oils ain't oils"

Well, tyre plys arent tyre plies.... :wink:

the 265-75-16 FCII is a 10 ply rated tyre, has much thicker ply cords than the BFG, Cooper etc.. and has the highest load rating in its class.

They are extremely strong. https://www.aulro.com/afvb/

Can I make a suggestion to you, for the sake of a quick 5 minute phone call you should ring my mate Darren.

He's a no-bull bloke, will tell you the truth about tyres in all brands, not just the ones he sells (he has access to coopers and BFGs too). He'll explain the construction differences of each brand and the performance on a 4wd.

He's built a fantastic reputation in Adelaide for his enthusiast approach to 4wd tyres, asking lots of questions before recommending a tyre to suit.

His company details are: Total Traction tyres Ph: 08-8186 1011

He will be more than happy to just chat, even if theres no sale in it.

Tell him your mate, Mike Hayes sent you!

Cheers
Mike

[Robmacca]

Bringing an old thread back to life...

I've got a '96 Def110 Wgn (currently running 235/85/16 on OEM alloys) and a '09 Def110 Wgn (currently running 265/75/16 on OEM alloys) but with an inner guard tank installed.

It's now coming up to time to think about tyre replacement & I would like a taller tyre if possible that I can use on both Def's. The problem I have with the Puma is that with the inner tank installed and running the factory Alloys, I'm concerned that a taller tyre on the OEM alloy rim will under upward flex in the rear that it might well hit on the bung that comes standard with these inner guard tanks. This bung I assume is to be used on conjunction to fill a Aux Sill fuel tank from the one original Fuel filling point. I certainly don't want to be damaging this bung on my Inner guard tank. I know that a different offset rim would solve this but at this point in time I don't want to go down that path...

I've recently come across a tyre size of 225/95/16 which equates to a 33" tyre. This sounds like it might be worth looking into so I was wondering if others have had any experience with this size tyre? I know the availability of this size is limited but I'm still interested to find out more info on this option...

Going up to a 255/85 would be the ultimate but again I think that using this tyre on the factory alloys would definitely rub on that bung...

comments/thoughts??