Thread: 18in tyres for Disco4

Just my opinion, but when buying tyres price should not be in the deciding factor, people say " but they are $100 more per tyre " . So an extra $500 for a full set that last 60,000km and 3 years at a very minimum. $166.67 / year, $3.20 / week or about $8.00 / 1000km.
If you need to worry about that cost maybe a 4wd isn't your best choice of transport, especially a D3/4
Buy the tyre that suits your requirements the best and miss a latte a week.

I love BFG's, great traction in all conditions except red clay, strong and reliable, noise is not a issue for me and I don't consider them to bad

Originally Posted by discomatt69

Just my opinion, but when buying tyres price should not be in the deciding factor, people say " but they are $100 more per tyre " . So an extra $500 for a full set that last 60,000km and 3 years at a very minimum. $166.67 / year, $3.20 / week or about $8.00 / 1000km.
If you need to worry about that cost maybe a 4wd isn't your best choice of transport, especially a D3/4
Buy the tyre that suits your requirements the best and miss a latte a week.

I love BFG's, great traction in all conditions except red clay, strong and reliable, noise is not a issue for me and I don't consider them to bad

Exactly,you only get what you pay for.

How many complaints have i ever seen about BFG A/t's on this site?

Not many,if any.

And they are used by many on here,so these are real world use,not what someones brothers uncles sister said a few years ago.

I have personally run them for almost 20yrs,never had an issue,and only had one puncture.

i have actually given up carrying two spares in remote areas.

Maybe i have been lucky,and Murphy may catch up,but who knows,its a risk i take,i have tyre plugs,etc.

Saving a few $ on the purchase of tyres may actually cost a lot more if you do have a failure or two in a remote area.

Can you say submerged rock? Cooper LTZ in 19” ruined

Originally Posted by garrycol

The BFGs have a 119 load rating compared with the Bridgestone load rating of 114 so one could assume not as strong as the BFGs.

Garry

It’s not like that. Not that simple...

Load rating doesn’t equal strength.

A simple test for tyre strength is totally forget the BS advertising and numbers on the side of the tyre.
Walk into the tyre shops and give the side wall and tread a good press and massage and see what tyre is stiffer and more resistant to pressure.
It is amazing how "squishy" some tyres are in the side wall.
Some may disagree but if I can easily depress the carcase of a tyre with my thumb its not going on my car

There's Metric, P-std, P-XL, LT, Cargo, Floatation, etc. The load rating is not a reliable measure of sidewall strength by itself. It just tells you how how much weight the tyre can support at its max pressure. A P-std and P-XL is rated to the exact same load up to a certain pressure, but the XL can hold more pressure and therefore support more weight when inflated higher. Plus we tend not to use the P prefix under the ETRTO standard, but the Yanks tend to under T&RA. So somewhat confusing...

But Tombie is quite right in that higher load does tend towards stronger sidewalks. But one 116 can be constructed very differently to another and therefore be significantly more or less puncture resistant through the sidewall.

An LT tyre has a slightly different shape to a P also. By design it has a squarer shoulder and wider tread face.

Legally a tyre needs to have LT moulded in if that's what it has been built to. Simple as that. If it has LT moulded in before or after the size then it is an LT. If not, then it is not. The construction dictates that, not the load rating. All LTs have standardised load ratings for the size and the range. C, D, and E are pretty common in our sizes. Higher is higher. But, for example, all range C LT285/60R18s will have the exact same load rating (118). Where P tyres can vary a fair bit, in comparison.

And to confuse things more,some BFG tyres had LT meaning Long Trail,not Light Truck,moulded into the tyre wall.

Originally Posted by scarry

Exactly,you only get what you pay for.

How many complaints have i ever seen about BFG A/t's on this site?

Not many,if any.

And they are used by many on here,so these are real world use,not what someones brothers uncles sister said a few years ago.

I have personally run them for almost 20yrs,never had an issue,and only had one puncture.

i have actually given up carrying two spares in remote areas.

Maybe i have been lucky,and Murphy may catch up,but who knows,its a risk i take,i have tyre plugs,etc.

Saving a few $ on the purchase of tyres may actually cost a lot more if you do have a failure or two in a remote area.

I gave up on them.. after shredding 2 sets in short order.

One set didn’t even make a hill climb without losing several lugs...

And the 3rd set (on Lara) came off when small pimples that turned out to be the edges of the steel belts coming through the rubber. In the following 2 years there were lots of early failures in them.

Now this is a limited exposure, just like many here, n=1

But I’ve had multiple brand and model derivatives- and on some vehicles certain tyres are total rubbish... others just “work” and get on with it.


What doesn’t play out is price = value = quality = performance.

That’s long since changed - American rubber is expensive, often harder compounds (mileage is a huge thing in the USA) and quite average. There are exceptions though.

Anything over 70k and most tyres are work and age hardened and performing poorly by then.

Recently I took a very big step and went for a Chinese made, Australian designed and specced, Aussie QA tyre that cost $200 each.. its an LT and in MT spec. It’s had a bit of a hiding so far and showing no damage and reasonable wear. I’ll know more in another 10-20k.