Thread: Narrow tyres V Wide tyres

I ran BF Goodrich All terrains 33x12.5x15 on my Defender for about four years. It was great in the paddock (even when towing a spray boom). But then I did some serious stuff through the top end and into the Kimberley Region. Was not impressed with the qty of blow outs when working hard and that you just could not replace them when you needed to in remote areas. Hence, I went bak to the standard 7.5x16 on both my Defender and my 2A; havent looked back since. I play with pressures a bit more but have been very happy.

Apart from the benefits on soft sand, I reckon that its not worth the money to put larger wheels on the vehicle. Its got a lot to do with what you do and where you go.

Originally Posted by olmate

Apart from the benefits on soft sand, I reckon that its not worth the money to put larger wheels on the vehicle. Its got a lot to do with what you do and where you go.

I use 245/75R15 Cooper ST instead of the standard 255/65R16 but that's 'cos I got 'em cheap. I don't do enough off-roading to comment.

Some years ago, Overlander did a comparison between wide tyres and stock 205R16 tyres.

The stock narrow tyres performed better on sand as, when the pressures were reduced, the tyre patch elongated more than the wide tyre widened. The narrow tyre had more surface area to support the car on sand.

It seems that the "wide" tyres we generally see are more for looks than effect. Note that I'm not talking of genuine balloon sand tyres.

Ron

I used the standard Aussie after market white steel rims with wide tyres for years on my 1996 110 then went back to the original Defender rims. The only reason that I changed from works standard to start with was that a tyre retailer told me (wrongly) that I could not fit tubeless tyres to the original rims and I was sick of inner tubes. I think that Defenders are better running on the original 7.5 x 15s.

Ron didn't pick up on the spelling mistakes .....

Hi,
A few months ago I read an article about this in a mag. When you are on slippery surfaces (wet clay tracks) wider tires perform better. When you go into a muddy bog hole with a foot of mud thinner tires can penetrate deeper into the mud.
Wider tire will probably reduce you fuel consumption, and reduce your turning circle.
Cheer
TheEntertainer

Originally Posted by waynep

Ron didn't pick up on the spelling mistakes .....

I did but didn't bother. Have you read Easo's posts?



Ron

My 130 had big wide tyres on it when I bought it. Made the steering heavy/vague I thought, and they were reasonably noisy over 80Km/h.

I've gone back to the standard issue 750.16R Michelin XZL tyres on Wolf rims and it feels a lot better and quieter too.
David.

I always ran standard, mainly because Mitsubishi and then when I got wise, Land Rover put that size on for a reason.
All the steering mechanics are set up for that size.
The one time I really did the research on info provided by tyre manufacturers I found that they recommend narrow.
A longer footprint works better to keep traction and cuts through mud better. Even in sand they recommend narrow as you are pushing less sand infront of the tyres so the vehicle works easier and you are less likely to get bogged.
I now run 265/75R16 purely because I changed to Disco rims because the defender rims required tubes and the tubes kept failing.
Hope this helps.