Is everyone running E load tires?

[Lion77]

Thats why the Ford spec KO3s are nearly and inch narrower than standard 285/70R17 profile tires from other brands. Even the non OE spec KO3s like the white letter version even in load C is 1/2 wider tread than the Ford spec. Its to meet their EPA targets. KO3s run narrow, but the OE spec reduces tread with even more.

I think that for me, before I consider going up a size im going to try the Pirelli XTMs in 285/70R17 first. They have nearly 1" wider tread but same diameter as the KO3s.

Width gives you flotation and lateral traction in corners, diameter gives your more forward bite.

At the same air pressure, changing tire profile doesnt increase or decrease your contact patch, rather it reshapes it.

Lowering air pressure is what actually increases it. Also thicker side walls need to use lower air pressure to get the same contact patch and debead more easily since the thicker sidewall transfers more force to the bead (less flex).

Thats good in high performance cars on a track, bad on an offroad truck a
running with reduced air pressure.

Sponsored

 

[cc1999]

Thats why the Ford spec KO3s are nearly and inch narrower than standard 285/70R17 profile tires from other brands. Even the non OE spec KO3s like the white letter version even in load C is 1/2 wider tread than the Ford spec. Its to meet their EPA targets. KO3s run narrow, but the OE spec reduces tread with even more.

I think that for me, before I consider going up a size im going to try the Pirelli XTMs in 285/70R17 first. They have nearly 1" wider tread but same diameter as the KO3s.

Width gives you flotation and lateral traction in corners, diameter gives your more forward bite.

At the same air pressure, changing tire profile doesnt increase or decrease your contact patch, rather it reshapes it.

Lowering air pressure is what actually increases it. Also thicker side walls need to use lower air pressure to get the same contact patch and debead more easily since the thicker sidewall transfers more force to the bead (less flex).

Thats good in high performance cars on a track, bad on an offroad truck a
running with reduced air pressure.

That is interesting, I knew they were crazy narrow for a 285 tire. Didn't know that about the OE spec being different from the other versions.

 

[cc1999]

I went from C to E on my f150 tremor, pretty much the only option for 35's and the ride quality, fuel economy, and acceleration suffered. But they looked good, the Baja Boss is really nice tire but its also heavy


be nice if there was some more 34" C rated options for the RR, keep in mind if you go bigger than stock with the FP Tune you voicd their warranty

Yep, I agree.

I had the 295s load Es on my truck, they really killed the fuel milage.
I was down in the low teens. 12-14mpg

I went to the 285 Falken AT4Ws and got pretty much the same actual tread width as the 295s a full inch wider then the OEM KO3s and was able to get them in an P285 SL, so I got rid of all that added weight and gained back about 2-3 mpg. Now back to 15-16 mpg.

 

[Lion77]

Yah the width gives you the "big tire" look more so than diameter. So a 33x12.5 looks bigger than a 285/75R17 even though its larger diameter than the 33x12.5. Check out the forum from the aussie guy with a custom fabed bumper. He ahd 33x12.5s on his raptor showing the custom bumper and parked it next to a stock RR and the 33x12.5s looked huge compared to the stock KO3s despite being a measly 0.2 in bigger diameter. Its the width.

https://www.ranger6g.com/forum/threads/custom-aluminium-bumper.29107/

Look at the pics, would you believe those are both 33" tires?

 

[MarcR]

Yah the width gives you the "big tire" look more so than diameter. So a 33x12.5 looks bigger than a 285/75R17 even though its larger diameter than the 33x12.5. Check out the forum from the aussie guy with a custom fabed bumper. He ahd 33x12.5s on his raptor showing the custom bumper and parked it next to a stock RR and the 33x12.5s looked huge compared to the stock KO3s despite being a measly 0.2 in bigger diameter. Its the width.

https://www.ranger6g.com/forum/threads/custom-aluminium-bumper.29107/

Look at the pics, would you believe those are both 33" tires?

Is that linked post's tire the Pirelli's XTM AT on stock size 285/70/17? Holy cow.

 

[Pic-N-Stick]

Yep, I agree.

I had the 295s load Es on my truck, they really killed the fuel milage.
I was down in the low teens. 12-14mpg

I went to the 285 Falken AT4Ws and got pretty much the same actual tread width as the 295s a full inch wider then the OEM KO3s and was able to get them in an P285 SL, so I got rid of all that added weight and gained back about 2-3 mpg. Now back to 15-16 mpg.

Hey, how loud are the Falcons compared to OEM BFG's that have been broken in? My BFG's are quite a bit louder with 3300 on them than new.

 

[cc1999]

Hey, how loud are the Falcons compared to OEM BFG's that have been broken in? My BFG's are quite a bit louder with 3300 on them than new.

I think they are quieter day one and now that I have over 10K on the first set on my 2024 RR, I still think they are quieter then the K03s.

 

[Lion77]

Is that linked post's tire the Pirelli's XTM AT on stock size 285/70/17? Holy cow.

No. Those are Maxxis Razr MTs. They are 33x12.5, and thats next to a stock RR with 285/70R17s. There's literally only 0.2" difference in diameter.

The "big tire look" on that truck is coming entirely from the additional tire width and the added wheel offset. The high clearance bumper and front level probably adds to it, but most of the big tire look is from the tread width and wheel offset.

 

[MarcR]

No. Those are Maxxis Razr MTs. They are 33x12.5, and thats next to a stock RR with 285/70R17s. There's literally only 0.2" difference in diameter.

The "big tire look" on that truck is coming entirely from the additional tire width and the added wheel offset. The high clearance bumper and front level probably adds to it, but most of the big tire look is from the tread width and wheel offset.

Ah got it. When I read over that briefly, I thought the Maxxis Razr were the rim/wheel name, not the tires. Did you install the Pirellis and have any pics? Seems like most brands will always be bigger in tread with compared to the stock KO3s after looking into comparisons in tirerack.

 

[PCDan1]

The Toyo AT III comes in a 295/75r 17 and is a C rated tire. It’s 34.4 tall … not sure I wanted to go quite that extra diameter, but I don’t really want an E rated tire. Odd that nearly all 295/70s are E sidewall tires.

 

[Lion77]

Ah got it. When I read over that briefly, I thought the Maxxis Razr were the rim/wheel name, not the tires. Did you install the Pirellis and have any pics? Seems like most brands will always be bigger in tread with compared to the stock KO3s after looking into comparisons in tirerack.

Not yet, I only have 24k on my RR so the stock KO3s aren't needing replacement yet. Based on where they are at now im thinking they will need it at about 40k but well see.

 

[Gravy Jones]

Yep, I agree.

I had the 295s load Es on my truck, they really killed the fuel milage.
I was down in the low teens. 12-14mpg

I went to the 285 Falken AT4Ws and got pretty much the same actual tread width as the 295s a full inch wider then the OEM KO3s and was able to get them in an P285 SL, so I got rid of all that added weight and gained back about 2-3 mpg. Now back to 15-16 mpg.

It’s interesting you saw such a big decrease. I’m a couple of tanks in on 295/70-17 KO3’s and am only seeing about a half mpg decrease. Was averaging around 17 mpg on the stock tires. Now averaging around 16.5.

Also, my ride quality concerns with E’s were a lot of worry for no reason. I can tell they are slightly firmer, but that is really splitting hairs. After a few days, couldn’t tell any difference in ride quality.

 

[cc1999]

It’s interesting you saw such a big decrease. I’m a couple of tanks in on 295/70-17 KO3’s and am only seeing about a half mpg decrease. Was averaging around 17 mpg on the stock tires. Now averaging around 16.5.

Also, my ride quality concerns with E’s were a lot of worry for no reason. I can tell they are slightly firmer, but that is really splitting hairs. After a few days, couldn’t tell any difference in ride quality.

I have had that same set of 295s on 2 different trucks at this point.
Had the same results both times.

I only average 15-16 with all 3 of my RRs which they are all on the same P285s 4 ply Falken AT4Ws mounted on +30 Bronco SAS rims.

Now here in the heartland, where the wind blows 15-30 mph at pretty much all times and we have 75-80mph interstates I tend to see a little less fuel mileage then guys with similar trucks in different parts of the country. Which couple the wind and higher speed limits with a heavier tire and higher rolling resistance, I suspect puts my EcoBoost more on the boost then what others see in their areas.

 

[Lion77]

It’s interesting you saw such a big decrease. I’m a couple of tanks in on 295/70-17 KO3’s and am only seeing about a half mpg decrease. Was averaging around 17 mpg on the stock tires. Now averaging around 16.5.

Also, my ride quality concerns with E’s were a lot of worry for no reason. I can tell they are slightly firmer, but that is really splitting hairs. After a few days, couldn’t tell any difference in ride quality.

So far most of the reviews comparing the new Pirelli XTMs to the KO3s say they ride very similar onroad. The difference isnt so much comfort but rather how the bumps feel.

On the KO3s bumps are a bit more muted but also a bit bouncy feeling (like the tire oscillates a bit). With the XTMs bumps are a bit more pronounced but one and done, no jitter. Road noise on the XTMs was surprisingly good onroad.

Steering precision on the XTMs is notably better than the KO3s both on and offroad, making their traction limits more accessible, some i value coming over from the V8 muscle car world (2016 Mustang GT PP).

Right now the ONLY Pirrelli XTM made at the moment in 285/70R17 is an E Load. Tropher tested them at a pirelli event where they ran them on the broncos and jeeps and really liked them, especially the steering precision and predictability, allowing you to better exploit the chassis capabilities.

But my roundabout point seems to line up with your experiences across multiple comparrison reviews to C koad KO3s and E Load XTMs. So maybe the tire design overall plays as big of a role as the sidewall ply #.

 

[HighDesertRanger]

Here’s a pretty interesting discussion of the difference between load range tires and what really goes into them:

Sponsored