It's almost tire time again for me. I bought a set of BFG Rugged Trail E-rated 265/75/16s that I've been running for over 60K miles now and they've still got a little ways to go. The only issue is that my front end apparently went out of alignment and the toe-out ate up the insides of the front tires on the last 5K rotation.I've read TONS of information on tires and I'm always a function over form guy, which makes it hard to wade through the "they look cool" recommendations I always come across. I've considered a 255/85/16 because I like the tall, skinny (I have 4.10s) aspect. However, I've heard horror stories about getting a flat and not being able to find a replacement fast. I've read good things about the Cooper s/t and the Toyo M55 but I can't afford the Toyos.It seems that the 265/75/16 is a very common tire size so that may drive my decision a bit. The Firestone Transforce A/T seems to be another good tire, but I can't find any mileage reports on it. I know the H/T will last a long while, but I don't really want a pure highway tire because I do a good amount of mountain dirt road traveling. What do y'all recommend in size and brand? I'm not looking to spend a whole lot, I got my BFG Rugged Trails at Sears for $700 with the road hazard warranty, and if it comes down to it I'll just do that again since they're wearing so well. Thanks!

Day2: I REALLY.. REALLY.. like these tires.

Day2: I REALLY.. REALLY.. like these tires.

lol I said the same thing a week after I bought my 255's they wear like friggin iron too, still look brand new and I have been running them for almost a year now

Does anyone know if any other tire company besides BF Goodrich makes a tire in 33x12.50-R16.5?

Looks like Cooper and GoodYear make tires in that size.

Looks like Cooper and GoodYear make tires in that size.

sorry i cant seem to find them on there website. where are you looking?

16.5s are a dying breed, and the prices are well over that of a 16 or 17, in most cases..

change wheels

I agree with changing the wheels out. I had the 16.5 stock rims on my old ford truck and I spent a month checking everywhere for tires. I couldn't find a set in a close to stock size for less than $1000!!! Ended up buying wheels and new tires for less than $800.

okay that's great to hear I will start researching rims and tires. I thought I would end up spending more by switching but if I can do it and spend less money that's great!Sent from my RM-820_nam_att_100 using Tapatalk

You might be able to find a good deal on craigslist too. Lots of people buying and selling rims/tires there. That's where I found mine. Someone had bought a brand new truck and went straight to the tire shop to get fancy rims put on. I was able to buy his stock rims and tires for cheap.

Pizza cutter type tires are way better in and on snow and ice than the "wide and cool looking" CF type tires. JMNTBHO!!!

285/75/r16 or 33" are a great compromise between look and function. Big enough to look proportionate and function well enough in the snow and off road...as long as you have 4x4. Mixed feelings about coopers as of now because my shocks were completely shot which caused cupping and outer wear. But, on the path to 40,000 miles or more with 15,000 on them now.

- - - Updated - - -

285/75/r16 or 33" are a great compromise between look and function. Big enough to look proportionate and function well enough in the snow and off road...as long as you have 4x4. Mixed feelings about coopers as of now because my shocks were completely shot which caused cupping and outer wear. But, on the path to 40,000+ miles or more with 15,000 on them now.

A lot of guys around here with utility bodies and commercial trucks are running firestone transforce with great results, wear and longevity.

Pizza cutter type tires are way better in and on snow and ice than the "wide and cool looking" CF type tires. JMNTBHO!!!

Reason why is beause the contact patch is smaller and the weight of the vehicle is concentrated and given more Pound Per Square than a wide tire or like dual trucks which can be rather wild. Now that I got 2 trucks in the 20's MPG bracket either gas or diesel powered tire do make a affect in MPG like it or not.

On the other side of the page is when I run narrower tires in the conditions and how I use them I have only gotten about half the life from them.OH NO there are cons to them too...........I find them to not handle very good and not as stable and they don't track as straight as a bit wider tire either. If they were on the back of a dually I would say ok but not on the back of my 2500's.In the long run for what tires cost versus the wee bit they may save in fuel is a wash.

That I'll have to disagree with. 265/75 R16 (10.43"/7.82" R16) 235/85 R16 (9.25"/7.86" R16) 10.43" - 9.25" = 1.18" Difference in Width (Basically 1" narrower) 7.86" - 7.82" = 0.04" Difference in Heigth (Basically a washout) 265's average weight is about 85 pounds with wheel 235's average weight is about 62 pounds with wheel More on Rotational Interia http://hpwizard.com/rotational-inertia.html Then cost difference I typically only pay $600 to $650 for 235's vs 265 at about $850 to $900. MPG Difference is about 2-3 MPG on average over a set of tires the is quite a bit of savings...

All fine and dandy if all it does is roll down the pavement unloaded.............for those of us that don't have that ability.................tire life and safe stability and handling are more important.:2cents:Every time I have tried 235 tires I can't drive a straight line to save my hide. they follow every single crack in the road and they feel like I am riding on a tub of jello. I have never noticed a lick of mileage difference either but that is the difference in territory and use. I would love to live in the mountains"only for mpg reasons", every time I have been there every rig I drive gets way better mileage 3-4 mpg better than in the windy rolling hills of the plains.

All fine and dandy if all it does is roll down the pavement unloaded.............for those of us that don't have that ability.................tire life and safe stability and handling are more important. Every time I have tried 235 tires I can't drive a straight line to save my hide. they follow every single crack in the road and they feel like I am riding on a tub of jello.

To follow up on this, the roads in North Dakota really suck compared to roads in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. I am running a pretty wide tire and couldnt imagine running anything more narrow just because of the road conditions here. Like you said, I feel that if I had narrow tires, the road would be pushing and pulling me all over the place.

I love throwing a good debate out there on the table. Thanks Bill for the good table battle...

To follow up on this, the roads in North Dakota really suck compared to roads in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. I am running a pretty wide tire and couldnt imagine running anything more narrow just because of the road conditions here. Like you said, I feel that if I had narrow tires, the road would be pushing and pulling me all over the place.

Wanna see some bad roads.............come the northern "The Peoples Republic of Illinois"!!!! The gravel roads in NoDak are smoother than most of our crumbly paved roads here!!! IMHO, the paved state highways in NoDak are beautiful to drive on!!! W&F...........one reason may be that the "narrower" tires often times have a taller sidewall than the wider tires.........especially if you want to stay close to the same diameter of the tire/rim combo. The taller sidewall flexes more than the "lower profile" tires and won't handle as well. That's one reason to air up the tires..............to stiffen the sidewall. Stock tire size on my '04.5 is LT265/70 17E.....................I sure with I could find a LT255/80 17E or a LT245/85 17E

I have some things I want explained in greater detail....What is the difference on bearing loading for different wheel/tire setups? I mean the weight of it sits on the ground and the car didn't change weight so the bearing load would theoretically be the same. Meaning bearing frictional differences would be the same with any wheel/tire. What is the difference in rotational wind resistance between tires of different sizes (not straight forward head on resistance, just rotational turbulence). In my feeble mind, an object with similar surface tread surfaces and similar width/diameter, would have equal rotational force required to keep it at the same velocity. Read that carefully...I am talking about an acceleration of 0... So what I mean is a flywheel from a steam engine that weighs 1000lbs and a reproduction of it that weighs 100lbs (made of plastic), would require the same forces to keep it spinning a set velocity with 0 acceleration. Why? Because they have the same rotational wind resistances (they are replicas of each other as you recall). The only thing that would matter is the friction from the bearing loading. Put them both on some sorta weird magnetic levitating bearing and then tell me, is there a difference in the force required to keep them both spinning 1000RPM?.... Im pretty sure they would have the same force. Not sure cause I'm never right but thats my theory. To me the only factor in tire sizes/weights is the factor of acceleration, which is the title of that inertia article. Obviously in the previous example, the 1000lb flywheel is going to take a lot more force to spin up to 1000RPM than the 100lb plastic replica at the same rate of acceleration. However.......by varying time, you could theoretically apply the same force to both and stop when each reached 1000RPM. The heavy flywheel would take a longgggg time to get up to speed while the plastic one wouldn't. In conclusion, I think acceleration in the end is the only real difference. Tread patterns cause differences in road friction, surface area causes differences in wind resistance, but in the end, 2 similar wheel/tire combinations of completely different weights would equate to equal mileages on the highway in my mind because you have 0 acceleration and all other forces are equal. So we have the mileage differences.....which I believe will be experienced more from people who accelerate often (stoplights, etc) than those who don't. I think tread pattern and differences in wind resistance are what changes things for similar weight setups concerning 0 acceleration scenarios.Mike also told me how he accelerated in the old days and he didn't waste any time getting up to speed lol. I accelerate veryyy slowly when I am getting all my 27mpg readings. Someone else on here told me the best they had ever got out of a jeep like mine was 18.5, but I am getting 22 religiously at this point. One interesting thing I read a while back was that wider tires are actually better because the deformation caused by narrow tires takes a lot of energy to deform, kinda like having a flat tire. By deforming I mean where the tire touches the road and flattens out... With a wide tire, the surface area means more weight distribution and less deformation, whereas a narrow tire deforms a lot more because of all the weight on the smaller surface area. Alright, tear my theories apart now