Tire talk

[nakman]

@DaveInDenver yeah decent article, and good they agree the Firestone is superior in snow. I have also locked up in wet braking, so yeah they got that right also.

I am guessing the snow ability is because of the vertical ribs they have on the side of the lugs, which I believe the article is referring to as "biters." And what is cool is that even towards the end of tread life, those little guys are still there doing their job.. I also like how the siping goes all the way down also, I can't remember which either Toyo or Nitto where after the first year the siping was gone, and I was left with essentially an old BFG Mud terrain... not so with these Firestones

 

[DaveInDenver]

When you mentioned the "biters" it reminded me that I also should say I run my Falkens at 45 psi. I bet that has something to do with the performance I see. The article touches on it but the AT3W has those dealies sort of down in the middle of the tread and not on the shoulders while the Firestone has a bunch of them across the whole width. If you run your tires at a pressure that doesn't favor the middle that probably has a lot to do with the different experiences. Part of the reason I run them them so high is the truck's extra weight and to help with their fairly poor fuel economy, also things he mentions. It all seems to add up why I love these things in the winter!

 

[Hulk]

I need to take my Toyo AT3s to Discount Tire to see if they are all out of whack or if I just knocked off a bunch of balancing weights.

 

[HDavis]

I had the AT3W on the 200, and Firestones on the GX. I have an uphill stop sign on the way to my house. On a snowy day coming up the little hill the 200 would lose traction on all 4 tires... a little atrac, back at home. If I stepped on it I could get the whole truck to shift sideways a bit before the technology took over. Immediately park and then take the GX up the same hill- no loss of traction when accelerating normally, just went. And when I stepped on it I could make it peel out, but also got pushed back into the seat as the acceleration was easily double compared to the 200. Some of that I'll attribute to the skinny tires, as like you Dave I'm a firm believer in that particularly for lighter vehicles.

@HDavis how's the Kenda on Monument hill when it's super snowy out? Like downhill, borderline panic braking, evasive maneuvering, etc. to me that's the only test that matters, everything else I can compensate for with air pressure, line selection, skinny pedal, try again, or recovery gear. Toyo MT and Nitto Trail Grapplers both fail this test IMO, the Ridge Grapplers were better but still not great. I know that if I want performance like a Blizzak I should just get blizzaks.. but dang it those Firestones were really good for this. Curious if the Kenda competes?

I can't speak to experience with snow and ice with the Kenda's. we purchased them in late April.

 

[Corbet]

I was really enjoying the tire anrticle until I hit the sand comparison. I’m not buying how a few extra pounds of tire weight will have any measurable impact on traction when that represents such in insignificant difference to the total vehicle weight. Copied and pasted below.

Sandy Hills​

Out of both tires, the Firestone Destination X/T provide you with better traction capability. That’s because this tire features a softer built, so lowering air pressure yields a firmer sand to rubber contact.

And, it’s less aggressive sides is not that susceptible to digging. Which is exactly what you want on sand.


Falken Wildpeak AT3w, conversely, weighs a lot more (with 2 extra polyamide layers on sidewalls, going up to 84 lbs), and this forces its sharper sides to dig in more comparatively.

 

[DaveInDenver]

I was really enjoying the tire anrticle until I hit the sand comparison. I’m not buying how a few extra pounds of tire weight will have any measurable impact on traction when that represents such in insignificant difference to the total vehicle weight. Copied and pasted below.

Tires are unsprung mass, rotating unsprung mass at that. No idea if his logic is faulty or not, just saying that it's dynamic mass with respect to tires rather than weight. Perhaps mass is relevant here but it would seem to me as it relates to torque and a question of displacement of material. Specifically the rate that material is moved, so how the tire accelerates and keeps momentum. A heavier tire could have stiffer lugs that move more dirt, thus "dig" faster. The implication is that you want to move dirt in a way that allows the tire to propel the truck. So either displace loose dirt to find something solid or contain and compact it to provide the force (or work) necessary, e.g. grip. The sprung gravitational mass (weight) makes a great deal of difference to the system to determine that. That is least equally important to performance in the end. A heavier truck needs more force imparted but also helps compress the dirt by it's own weight. Variables are not independent nor mutually exclusive. So there can't be one "best" because it depends. Seems plausible the same tire works differently on two trucks, which is what I'm dancing around in an earlier post. Which might also bring up load range. The upside of a range E is a stiffer sidewall so what you lose in sidewall squish you gain in efficiency in the drivetrain creating torque and force on the contact patch.

 

[Corbet]

I fully agree that mass affects rotational performance. his statement stated less susceptible to dig which would imply slow speed. Pretty much simple down force due to weight.

 

[CardinalFJ60]

I'll chime in on the Firestone's. I've been running them about a year or two now and I really like them. no joke about the on-road snowy performance, they are very grabby. they haven't let me down as far as traction off road, but they are not a mud tire. they will pack up like all the other at's out there. I did tear a sidewall at Cruisers on the Rockies, but that was operator error.

 

[MountainGoat]

I'll chime in on the Firestone's. I've been running them about a year or two now and I really like them. no joke about the on-road snowy performance, they are very grabby. they haven't let me down as far as traction off road, but they are not a mud tire. they will pack up like all the other at's out there. I did tear a sidewall at Cruisers on the Rockies, but that was operator error.

Sean, are you running Firestone ATs or XTs? Just trying to keep things straight in my head. So many tires.

 

[CardinalFJ60]

the destination X/T.

 

[rover67]

Not sure on the Recon Grapplers but the Ridge Grapplers we have on the Tundra have been dissapointing, they wore fast and have pretty poor snow, ice, and gravel road traction. I wouldnt get them again.

 

[Burt88]

Not sure on the Recon Grapplers but the Ridge Grapplers we have on the Tundra have been dissapointing, they wore fast and have pretty poor snow, ice, and gravel road traction. I wouldnt get them again.

I was wondering if anybody else hated the Ridge Grapplers. I call them a 20% tire. No better than 20% traction on any terrain. Deadly on snow. I was afraid of them after sliding around too much.

 

[nakman]

I was wondering if anybody else hated the Ridge Grapplers. I call them a 20% tire. No better than 20% traction on any terrain. Deadly on snow. I was afraid of them after sliding around too much.

I kinda liked them less and less the longer I had them, wasn't sad to see them drive off when I sold the 60. And there are some pretty comical reviews about the Recons being even worse, like guys getting stuck on wet grass kind of stuff... that one is definitely out for me.

I keep coming back to the Toyo AT3.. would be easier if I was more flexible on size, but I really don't want to get any wider than a 255

 

[J1000]

I like the RG on my LX470. They work out good for me. I got about 50,000 miles out of my last set, load range E. They are tough as nails which I like. I have the same on my 80 and they are ok but not amazing. Maybe they need a heavier truck to bite in. Definitely on the poor side of the spectrum for snow and ice but still not the worst. Maybe that's just my inexperience and I don't know what I'm missing.

Toyo and Nitto are owned by the same parent company and made in USA which is awesome. Sounds like everyone loves the Falkens too.

 

[pwil393]

May I add chaos to the world of tires? I also like them. The smell. The look of AT’s. I’ve been looking into tires for a near purchase before the snow starts flying.

I debated KO2’s, Yokohama’s, and Falken’s but landed on the Nokian Outpost nAT’s (275/65/18) due to reviews on snow, gravel, dry roads, and road noise. Below is a thorough thread from various other LC/LX owners from Ih8mud:

Thread 'New Shoes - Nokian Outpost nAT LT275/65r18'
https://forum.ih8mud.com/threads/new-shoes-nokian-outpost-nat-lt275-65r18.1322759/

 

[subzali]

I was going to suggest the Bridgestone Dueler Revo but it doesn’t look like it’s available in the sizes you are looking for.

 

[Corbet]

I picked up my first snow tire today. Remaining 4 coming from a SLC warehouse. 275/70r18 Toyo open country WLT1

 

[J1000]

I was just reminded the reason I went with Ridge Grapplers was because @mcgaskins recommended them to me based on, I assume, Rivian testing. And he had them on his 200. Not sure if he's at liberty to talk more about any tire testing that may or may not have happened during that time but I would welcome it...

 

[Corbet]

well after todays spare tire fitment experiment on the 250 it looks like I’m sticking to the 275/70r18 size as my max. The Falken AT4W has some of the largest specs of that size. Probably headed that way or Yokohama G015 if I choose a more responsible on road experience.

 

[mcgaskins]

I was just reminded the reason I went with Ridge Grapplers was because @mcgaskins recommended them to me based on, I assume, Rivian testing. And he had them on his 200. Not sure if he's at liberty to talk more about any tire testing that may or may not have happened during that time but I would welcome it...

Unfortunately we never got around to testing the Ridge Grapplers on the Rivian, but we tried KO2s and much preferred those to the stock tires. I bought a set of 275/65/20 RGs for our R1S, then I ended up selling it before I put them on. But I ran 3 sets of RGs on the 200 and another vehicle and loved them for everything but winter. Last year I decided to switch over to Falken for the first time, and I put the 285/75/17 RT01 on the 200. Even though they're slightly heavier than the RGs which are already pretty heavy, I am a huge fan in all conditions including winter. They've proven to be extremely tough with only a little more noise and have worn better than the RGs which were mostly toast after 20k (admittedly hard) miles.

Funny enough, this one marked "spare" was the best one left over when I replaced them. The RT01s have ~8k miles on them and barely show any wear now.