Tire talk

[Corbet]

The same tire in a LT is 63lbs, 18.5/32" tread, "E" rated.

 

[allen.wrench]

oh 63# is a lot more than 48#. About 31% more. The max load 3195# is carried by a higher max pressure 80 psi of the LTs. So it could be argued the LT sidewall carries less of the load. Using the same logic, more of an LT's weight is in the tread.

I wonder if the STD sidewall might be better for off-roading. If a sidewall carries more load with zero pressure, then is it stronger & tougher?

Allen

 

[Corbet]

oh 63# is a lot more than 48#. About 31% more. The max load 3195# is carried by a higher max pressure 80 psi of the LTs. So it could be argued the LT sidewall carries less of the load. Using the same logic, more of an LT's weight is in the tread.

I wonder if the STD sidewall might be better for off-roading. If a sidewall carries more load with zero pressure, then is it stronger & tougher?

Allen

Well I can't see 2.5/32" of tread adding that much to the total weight. I'm sure there is more to the overall carcas of the tire. Both rubber and belts/cords.

My personal fear always with tires is a sudden sidewall failure occurring when I'm already at my max limits preventing me from flopping while perched on some kind of shelf road. So I tend to error is the side of durability over ride quality if faced with that decision.

 

[allen.wrench]

Makes sense. I think of rubber in tires being there mostly for traction and air holding/sealing. The other "secret" ingredients, the belts/cords and their arrangements, are what I imagine carry load when there is little to zero pressure in a tire. Thick enough rubber will eventually carry loads, but then the tire would be much closer to straight up solid like on a forklift. I realize it is actually a more complex composite structure, but since manufacturers hardly share design details I have to simplify how I imagine tire components' functions.

I am also concerned in situations like you're describing. I definitely want to know if I can rely on my tires.

So if a sidewall can carry a greater load with less tire pressure, like that STD Mickey, then I imagine the sidewall has more belts/cords. But a lot of people say LTs have stronger sidewalls than lesser rated tires. It is all very confusing.

Allen

 

[Johnny Utah]

Agreed, quite confusing. I’m seeing more tires being offered in Load Range C which is potentially good. Although I’m not sure if I’m ready to try a set yet.

I feel like tire manufacturers moved away from the load range C there for a while, so hopefully they’re making a comeback.

I’ve always been of the opinion that our Land Cruisers (and other similar vehicles) don’t really need a load range E rated tire. It seems that type of tire should be for 3/4 to 1 ton trucks. But, that is typically the only option we have to choose from when buying the tires we want.

I’d love to see some real world applications of similar tires with different load ratings (E,D,C,SL) doing the same trails or obstacles. I want to know how they compare.

If a load range C tire (or SL for that matter) is just as strong off road and on, and it has the potential to be lighter, or cost less (yeah right) I’d be interested.