Thread: MT vs AT vs HT in sand

It’s not just tyre pressure nowadays.

It’s meeting that AND the electronic requirements of the vehicle.

Matching them is easy, and once done sand driving isn’t a problem.

Originally Posted by Gav 110

I’d have to agree with Mick, reminds me of a saying an old tradie taught me when I was a boy “long and thin slips right in”
The 235 or 255/85 heaps better on sand than a 285
The bigger the bow wave of sand your pushing the more fuel your burning

You are missing the point though that the 285s can be run at a lower pressure. When you do that, then they will do much better.

For real comparisons you need to be somewhere that has variable grades from easy to impossible and try different tyres and pressures. That is where you see what is best. I’ve done this and pressure beats everything. Larger tyres allow lower pressures so can always do better if you use them the right way.

That said a longer narrower footprint is better than a wide short one. But the only way to get there is bigger diameter.

I wonder why the armies around the world who operate in sand run tall & skinny tyres with a non aggressive beaded pattern tread on their vehicles.
If muddies are the go in sand then why are they called muddies & not sandies?
Just wondering...

Muddies are designed to dig holes, which is a bad thing on sand.

In Saudi Arabia, Nissan used to offer the option of aircraft type tyres with a round profile and longitudinal grooves only.

These were for oil exploration vehicles.

Would be crap on road but great on sand.

I read test in 4x4 Australia where they compared Muds and ATs on the same vehicle at equal pressures on a dune. they stopped within 2 feet of each other.

I had no trouble on Stockton with my RRC towing my camper on the dry sand on BFG ATs at AFAIR 15PSI and was easily able to climb out the exit. Mind you I was in Low 2nd and 3rdat over 3000RPM.

I got bogged on Blacksmiths in a Toyota FJ cruiser when it ran out of ground clearance. had to drop to about 12PSI and be snatched out. It was on 33inch BFG ATs but to me the difference is centre located diffs which get hung up whereas LR has offset diffs. It's the clearance that is the main issue to me.

Regards PhilipA

In the old days,with series vehicles and the like, many ran aircraft tyres in sand.Ballooned well at low pressure and with virtually no tread.
But these vehicles were much lighter and underpowered compared to what we have now.
In fact once loaded,these older vehicles didn't do well in sand at all.

These days,as Tombie pointed out,electronics take over,and we have generally a lot more weight and power.
Thats why MT's,at low pressures work well in sand.

Originally Posted by Milton477

I wonder why the armies around the world who operate in sand run tall & skinny tyres with a non aggressive beaded pattern tread on their vehicles.
If muddies are the go in sand then why are they called muddies & not sandies?
Just wondering...

Low tread tyres are more foolproof and you need foolproof when dealing with grunts. Mud tyres offer a bit more traction. I’ve run the tests side by side. But if you spin them you dig down very fast. For that reason you need to know what you are doing.

They run skinny because they are safer for staying on track if you don’t know what you are doing. They are not trying to be the best off road. They are just trying to do a job.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Muddies are designed to dig holes, which is a bad thing on sand.

Never tried it hey....

Muddies work magnificent on sand. I even had a friend who was a non-believer bring his Centipedes to Robe. We fitted them, aired them down and off he went.

Then I told him to stomp on the throttle - started digging.

I’ve climbed a Coffin Bay Dune at idle on Muddies... none of the AT guys could get close with a run up!

Simply, if you are good at throttle control and reading your vehicle - muddies will make sand work easy. If you think the throttle in binary - problems will occur