Wheels & Tires sorted: 295/70R17 34” tall 12” wide +30 offset / Update +30 offset now running Falken AT4W P285/70R17s

[bossy]

Me too. I am very thankful for your post, pictures and attention to details. I've been trying to figure out my direction and the information here saved me from a lot of mistakes. I have new SAS wheels in paint to make them the same color as the Raptor wheels and rings. I ordered Duratrac RTs 285/75R17s but modified the crash bars with a set from ReadyLift that gives me the space I need to avoid rubbing on 34s. Will see if the mileage gets terrible and perhaps revert to something else..

In any case, will post pictures once done for the benefit of all of you..

So following this thread and learning from all you guys experiments, I switched to SAS wheels. Powder coated them as I did not like the shiny black. Mounted them with Duratracs 285/75R17s, which are effectively 34s. Since rubbing was expected (and verified), modified the crash bars with ReadyLift bars (Amazon). No rubbing. Ride is still great (despite E rated tires). Fuel consumption has not changed. The whole thing looks better.. Thank you again for all the great info you have shared...

Sponsored

 

[cc1999]

I had my Bronco rings powder coated to a similar grey color I was running with the Ranger rings the truck came with.
I put these on last night.

Before

After.

After a quick bath. LOL

 

[Fordfknranger]

Front crash bars, especially when turned full lock to the right and backing up, which I probably do that about 2-4 times a day. Still not a huge deal. I could have taken the bars off and I still might.
I am mainly just wanting to experiment a bit with the OE tires on the Bronco Rims.

So far I know or have learned the following.

The rub is gone.

The ride got noticeably rougher which was surprising, since my 295 Yokohama tires were 10 ply E rated.

I am not crazy about the look of the 285s, 33" height is fine but I don't like that I lost width.
My rings seem to stick out further then I would like. Overall I think the truck looked better with the 295s (34" tires ), mostly just miss the width of the tire.

Fuel mileage is looking better, but I have only driven it 30-40 miles with the stock tires on the SAS rims, but where I was showing 13-14, I am now showing 16-17, however that could change soon as I put it on the interstate at highway speeds which is where it really seems to like to guzzle the fuel.
With the 10 ply 34" Yokohama tires I was running it always got better mileage zipping around town 30-60 mph then out on the highway running 80 mph.

I am now looking into possibly going to a 33x12.5R17.
That should get my width back without the height.
Only kicker seems to be that would put me back to the heavy 10ply or in the case of the Yokohama like the 295s I have, those jump to load range F 12 ply tire, so I was looking at the FALKEN Wildpeak R/T01 33x12.50R17LT 120R 10 Ply

I am searching for a real pic of one mounted in the 33x12.5R17 size.
Hard to tell exactly what it would look like in that size .
This is the stock image of the tire.

As being a Bronco bl sas 2.7 owner and a RR owner... Those beadlock capable wheels are heavy af. That's why everyone is dumping them. That's why your mpgs tanked. I went from 35 sas setup to 37's with Aftermarket wheels and toyo rt trails and my mpgs hasn't changed. Yes it's all recalibrated.

 

[cc1999]

I agree rotating mass is important, I have however seen more weight come from a larger heavier ply tire then I have seen with most wheels. But in the theory all rotating mass changes +/- will have an effect on performance both speed and efficiency performance.

However.
I don't know that the wheels were a factor in my case.

The factory wheels that came on my truck were the ranger bead lock capable wheels.
Only difference was the offset. Weight should have been the same.
With my current setup my milage has improved quite a bit.
I generally in the 15 mpg range rather than the 13 mpg, and when trying and traveling back roads at more of a 55-60mph pace with minimal winds I can get back close to 20 mpg which is pretty much what the truck got on the stock tires with the factory bead lock capable Ranger wheels.

Not that it would not be even better with lighter wheels, but I can safely say the changes I saw in the 34" 10 ply tires to the 33" 4 ply tires that I have on it now are 100% tire related effects on the mpg since my wheel weight has not really changed.

 

[quickstang1]

As being a Bronco bl sas 2.7 owner and a RR owner... Those beadlock capable wheels are heavy af. That's why everyone is dumping them. That's why your mpgs tanked. I went from 35 sas setup to 37's with Aftermarket wheels and toyo rt trails and my mpgs hasn't changed. Yes it's all recalibrated.

What wheels are those?

 

[cc1999]

Update: Sticking with the Falken AT4W P285/70R17 for the added width over the stock BFGs.
Still using the Bronco SAS wheels too.
The 2nd RR got the exact same wheel and tire combo.
Still really happy with this setup.

 

[PA RR]

Front crash bars, especially when turned full lock to the right and backing up, which I probably do that about 2-4 times a day. Still not a huge deal. I could have taken the bars off and I still might.
I am mainly just wanting to experiment a bit with the OE tires on the Bronco Rims.

So far I know or have learned the following.

The rub is gone.

The ride got noticeably rougher which was surprising, since my 295 Yokohama tires were 10 ply E rated.

I am not crazy about the look of the 285s, 33" height is fine but I don't like that I lost width.
My rings seem to stick out further then I would like. Overall I think the truck looked better with the 295s (34" tires ), mostly just miss the width of the tire.

Fuel mileage is looking better, but I have only driven it 30-40 miles with the stock tires on the SAS rims, but where I was showing 13-14, I am now showing 16-17, however that could change soon as I put it on the interstate at highway speeds which is where it really seems to like to guzzle the fuel.
With the 10 ply 34" Yokohama tires I was running it always got better mileage zipping around town 30-60 mph then out on the highway running 80 mph.

I am now looking into possibly going to a 33x12.5R17.
That should get my width back without the height.
Only kicker seems to be that would put me back to the heavy 10ply or in the case of the Yokohama like the 295s I have, those jump to load range F 12 ply tire, so I was looking at the FALKEN Wildpeak R/T01 33x12.50R17LT 120R 10 Ply

I am searching for a real pic of one mounted in the 33x12.5R17 size.
Hard to tell exactly what it would look like in that size .
This is the stock image of the tire.

Did you ever find any pics of the 33x12.50-17. Love to see what it looks like on a RR.

 

[cc1999]

Did you ever find any pics of the 33x12.50-17. Love to see what it looks like on a RR.

No, I imagine it could be done , would likely require some added modifications to run a tire that wide on the +30 offset wheels I am running.

Plus all the tires I have seen in that 33x12.5R17 size are load range D,E. or F (8, 10, or 12 ply).

‘Meaning they are all heavy and after running those 295s that were seen at the start of this thread , that added rotating mass kills performance in pretty much every category, especially mpg.

It was about a 2 mpg hit to run those 295s load range E Yokahoma tires I had on the truck, and later put them on the 25 model for a brief period just a week or so till I could get the Falken P285/70R18s ordered and installed. Those taller heavier tires again had the same performance penalties on the 25 model that I saw on the 24, as should and was to be expected.

Honestly it’s a performance truck, I have had Gen 1 Raptors, TRXs, AT4x etc etc, I am use to crappy mpg , and really don’t care that much, I do care about crappy mpg when I only have a 20 gallon fuel tank, that starts to be a PIA . Lol


The Falken P285/70R17 tires have an actual width much closer to the same as those 295s, just that slight bit 1/2 inch or so shorter height stopped the rubbing and the need to remove my crash bars or add a lift which the lift potentially opens up another can of worms for fox live valve shocks.

I truely feel I found the perfect tire for my ideal stance, using the +30 offset Bronco rims, and avoiding any performance, or need for further modifications to the truck.

That specific 4 ply Falken tire I am using is the widest 285/70R17 on the market, it’s almost an inch wider tread width then the same size OEM BFG ko3. Granted not 12.5 wide but a good compromise given the other hurdles and issues I would have had to deal with to fit a 12.5 wide tire on there.

 

[ryanO]

So following this thread and learning from all you guys experiments, I switched to SAS wheels. Powder coated them as I did not like the shiny black. Mounted them with Duratracs 285/75R17s, which are effectively 34s. Since rubbing was expected (and verified), modified the crash bars with ReadyLift bars (Amazon). No rubbing. Ride is still great (despite E rated tires). Fuel consumption has not changed. The whole thing looks better.. Thank you again for all the great info you have shared...

I wonder if those ReadyLift crash bars will fit a 2025 XLT?

Sponsored