Tire Selection for Expedition Travel

Scott Brady

Founder
A few months ago I researched tire selection in detail, and produced this white paper.

My findings and tests have changed the way I (and others) purchase tires.

I thought some of you would appreciate the read. And I am always open to additional thoughts and feedback.

Tire Selection for Expedition Travel
 

Jonathan Hanson

Supporting Sponsor
I humbly consider myself a bit of a lonely pioneer in this field, in the U.S. anyway. In 1986, I think, I installed a set of factory Toyota split rims (16x6) on my FJ40, along with BFG All-Terrains in 235/85R16--a VERY rare commodity then. This was after reading many accounts of expedition work in Africa and Austrailia, where skinny Michelin XS 7.50x16 tires seemed to be the standard. All my friends had 33x12.5s stuffed into their wheels wells, and laughed at my bicycle tires. When it developed that I could go anywhere they could, with obviously less strain on steering and suspension and biceps, they changed their minds.

The split rims didn't work out for this country, because tires here are not made for tubes (which I found out the hard way after two catasrophic tire failures). But I never abandoned the narrow tire concept, and now run 255/85/16 BFG Mud Terrains. It took Scott to elucidate so clearly why narrow tires work so well.

In Africa the universal standard is still a 7.50x16 tube-type tire on split rims, often manufactured in Africa. Firestone makes a 10-ply tire in Kenya that is nearly indestructible; I've also seen BFGs and Dunlops, among others. Not many fancy tread patterns, just simple lugs. Wide tires are almost vanishingly rare except in cities.

A mechanic I know there related a long remote drive during which he suffered two flats, using up both spares. He dismounted one tire and stuffed it with grass, giving it enough shape to reach the next village. The tire was destroyed by then, but he saved himself a 40-mile walk through hyena country at night.

So, another advantage to narrow tires: It takes less grass to stuff one!
 

awalter

Expedition Portal Team, Overland Certified OC0003
So, another advantage to narrow tires: It takes less grass to stuff one![/QUOTE]

ROTFLMAO :jump:
 

Scott Brady

Founder
Jonathan Hanson said:
So, another advantage to narrow tires: It takes less grass to stuff one!

I dont know how I missed that :) I need to add that to the tome...

Seriously though, the 255/85's look great on Jonathans cruiser, and perform excellent too.
 
J

JWP58

Guest
Im digging my skinny tires. They have done great in snow so far and have not affected mileage.
 

NothingClever

Explorer
I think this was one of the original threads that convinced me to go with a 235/85R16 on my Toyota Tacoma.

Now I'm trying to replicate that tall, narrow profile on a Ford F350 4x4 with a mild, Carli 2.5" lift/leveling kit and wondering if I should stick with the OEM 17 x 7.5 wheels or go up to an 18 x 8.5 wheel.

And, of course, the issue of what size tire to install still lingers. 35" just right? 37"? What's the impact?

Etc, etc, etc.
 

work_truck

New member
I'm not sure how to phrase this question, but i figured here would be as good as any place to ask instead of making another thread. But does vehicle size have an impact on what tire size or width I should choose? I would like to go with a 255/85r16 on my 2006 suburban, but its hard to find examples on a vehicle that size, and it makes me worry it is not a good choice.
 

bftank

Explorer
i went with a 37" goodyear mt oz tire and 24 bolt hummer wheel combo for my f350.

my reasoning was that they are cheap to get here in the states, where i do most of my traveling. they are easy to work on on the side of the road. they have the weight capacity that i need. they perform great in the snow and ice after siping, decent in the rocks and gravel roads and meh in the mud.

i have six tires and 5 wheels total this gives me the ability to slap a spare on fairly easy to get me to where i can work on the busted tire more comfortably.

i chose a 37" tire because, this size will work best given my eventual engine and transmission capabilities. the trans i will be swapping in has an overdrive of 0.89:1. and the axles will have 3.54 gears. this equates to 2000 rpms at 75 mph roughly.

there are definitly some compromises, but i think i am comfortable with them. time will tell.

DSCN0985.JPG
 

OdessaAbe

New member
255 85 should be a fine size on your sub. they are E rated for good weight capacity and narrow enough to make clearance easy.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,538
Messages
2,875,659
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top