Tires: Wide or Narrow?

Nonprophet

Observer
I don't do a ton of hardcore stuff anymore, but I live in the boonies in Oregon and I'm taking a trip up to Alaska this summer and would like to get some new tires.

Back in my hardcore 4x4 days I was in the Landcruiser Club in Boulder, CO. For the most part the younger guys all had 31 10.50's or wider (33's, 35's) on their rigs, while the older guys usually had taller, but narrow tires. Interestingly enough, the older guys rarely got stuck......lol.

I've got a '99 Tacoma now with 31 10.50 15's--the Kelly Safari MSR's. I really like the tires a lot--great for mudding and pretty smooth on the road too. But personally, I prefer a narrower tire. I could go to 31 9.50's, but they are shorter, and I'm not lifted so I need as much clearance as I can get.

I could go to a 16' wheel and get a narrower tire that way, and so I'm wondering what the general consensus is these days--wide or narrow??


Thanks!



NP
 

crawler#976

Expedition Leader
There are way too many variables involved for me to give you a "correct answer", so I'll give you my personal perspective based on my needs here in AZ, and on my experiance based on 30 years of wheelin'...I started wheelin pretty much every weekend back in 1987, and had been an occasional wheeler ever since I got my licence in 1976. Started going out just to hunt, and it turned into a passion when I got my first 4x4.

In the old 1970 GMC I wore out more tires than I can count...got it with 70000 miles, sold the truck with 285000 on it. Started with the "rancher" tires - bias ply nylon traction treads. If the mud had a bottom, they'd find it. Flat spotted every morning... Tried A/T's - hated'm, used BFG 32/11.5 M/T's for over ten years - a new set every 16 to 20K. (and changed tie rod ends at about the same interval :D )

Got into hard core wheelin' in 2001. I like the 35/12.5-15 MTR's on my SAS'd BPOS '87 Toy trail rig - for what it does, a wide tire works very, very well. It isn't just a rock rig, but that's it's primary purpose, so having a fairly wide tire aired down to 4 to 6 PSI offers me the traction required to get over the rocks, sand, or snow. While I enjoy playin' in the mud, it's not the SloYota's intended purpose. The 12.5's work OK, but I don't have the power to clean'm via wheel spin, and 109:1 gearing doesn't help. If I was gonna keep the BPOS, I'd prolly be going with an even wider tire for the nest set - 13.5's at a minimum. But, I won't have to deal with that - my wore out left knee isn't up to playing with a clutch much longer.

On both the '98 and '05 Tacos tires in the 10" section range do well in the general use they see. I'm still using 31/10.5-15's on the '98, and am using 265/75-16's on the '05. Neither truck is exceptionally heavy like some of my previous rigs were. Both trucks are on MT/R's as well - I like the durability of the GoodYears for hard use, but definately pay a penalty at the pump.

Mark
 

OverlandZJ

Expedition Leader
I am also looking at going to a narrower and slightly taller tire. I have been running BFG/MT 33x12.5x15 and am seriouslly considering a swap to something around a 285x75x16 for what i believe to be a 34 x 11.2 in a metric equivelant BFG/MT also.

I dont wheel the rocks anymore and really have no need for something 12.5" wide.
 

Sleeping Dog

Adventurer
Wide vs tall tires

A few years ago I came across the attached exchange. The debaters cover a number of good issues and it is worth a read.

http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/sandtire.htm

A couple of things to keep in mind, a wider tire is usually heavier and tougher on the equipment. Also in soft sand a wider tire has more friction to overcome.

Where wide tires really shine is if the vehicle can 'float' atop the surface.

For what its worth I watched the Camel Trophy vids that someone posted here a few weeks ago and one thing I noticed was that all the LRs had tall, narrow tires.

Jim
 

paulj

Expedition Leader
Nonprophet said:
I've got a '99 Tacoma now with 31 10.50 15's--the Kelly Safari MSR's. I really like the tires a lot--great for mudding and pretty smooth on the road too. But personally, I prefer a narrower tire. I could go to 31 9.50's, but they are shorter, and I'm not lifted so I need as much clearance as I can get.

Aren't both sizes more or less 31" in overall diameter?
paulj
 

teotwaki

Excelsior!
Last edited:

Schattenjager

Expedition Leader
:iagree:

I run 235/85/16 for all the reason that have been covered already.

And really, when is the last time you saw a rig float on anything? Rafts excluded...
 

asteffes

Explorer
Nonprophet said:
I could go to 31 9.50's, but they are shorter, and I'm not lifted so I need as much clearance as I can get.

I could go to a 16' wheel and get a narrower tire that way, and so I'm wondering what the general consensus is these days--wide or narrow??


The general consensus here is that narrow is better, although some of the LC guys run some large tires (305s?)

265-75-16 will fit a stock Tacoma and is about 32" overall, 1" taller than stock. You'll get a larger footprint when you air down and still have a good cushion of sidewall. Excellent control arm clearance with factory wheels, too. 285s require aftermarket wheels and usually a lift to accomodate.
 

mike h

Adventurer
Asking a group like this board, which, IMO, is a pretty well educated and experienced group, most will agree a narrow tire is better. Scott's white paper supports that well.

The wide tires I see on trucks are mainly for looks, for people that like that style. The only reasons I can think of to justify a wide tire are for very heavy rigs (maybe loaded LCs but more like baby RVs: Sportsmobiles or Mogs), or floatation like the icelandic glacier LCs use. I'm not really sure exactly why you'd want an excessively wide tire on rocks, it seems that rocks are where you are paying attention to sidewall abuse, and I prefer a narrow tire - especially when the tires are often the overall widest point on the vehicle.

Rotational weight is a major factor on every aspect of drivetrain and suspension stress, as well as acceleration and mpg, so I'm at a loss to explain why the market is filled with 'fat' tires, other than looks (and sales).

I've always wished for a BFG 31 x 9.5 x 15 for my Nissan, it would be perfect for my use. Tall and skinny tires served all those Willys jeeps quite well!

m.
 

crawler#976

Expedition Leader
Schattenjager said:
:...And really, when is the last time you saw a rig float on anything? Rafts excluded...

In 2004 I got into perfect snow conditions for floatation. I ran the beater for over 40 miles in snow that varied from 30 to 48" in depth - yet I only cut tracks about 8" deep. At 4 PSI I got enough foot print with a 35/12.5-15 to stay up on top of the snow pack. It took several attempts to get the rig up on top of the snow - having a crawler box allowed me to just creep up on top of the snow pack. Had to do the same thing several times when I broke thru...had to do a little shovel work to free the rig - when it sank, it high centered. The run started at 6000', and I crested over the high point at 7400' - came down into a main road and encountered several groups of stuck rigs. They were all surprised to see us coming down from the top.

In 2005, my wheelin buddy and I tried to do the same run, but the snow was a bit too light to get good floatation. In the attached pic the snow was mid thigh deep. The old CJ was on 33/13.5-15 swampers.

In both cases a skinny tire would have been trying to find the bottom.

Mark
 
Last edited:

Martinjmpr

Wiffleball Batter
Hmmm...I like the idea of narrower tires. Right now I'm running the factory 265/70 16's that came on the truck and I'm not that crazy about them. Does anyone know if a 235/85 16 would fit without a lift? By my calculations it's only about 1" difference (30.6" vs. 31.7") so, given that an inch difference in diameter is 1/2" difference in radius, I can't imagine that it would be a problem. My only other question is whether my stock wheels (the steel 16" "styled" wheels) are too wide to accomodate a 235. Anyone tried this? I probably won't need tires until autumn at the earliest (my rig only has 44k on it and I figure I'll be getting at least 55-60k on these tires) but it would be good to know so I can start shopping around for bargains (being the cheapskate that I am! :D )

BTW I agree that too often fat tires are put on for looks. The military has gotten along for years with fairly skinny tires and if you go to a lot of 3rd world countries where "off roading" is the only way to get around, most of the trucks and SUVs have fairly skinny tires.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
185,527
Messages
2,875,534
Members
224,922
Latest member
Randy Towles
Top