Load range C or E ?

Mickey Bitsko said:
Thank you , I'm probably going to get the c rated for my needs, but one question , does going to these heavier tires affect your overall mpg's ?
I think it probably does affect it, I know it takes more umph to pull away from a stoplight with them on. Not a huge difference but not insignificant either.
 
I suspect the answer lies primarily in how much more does alternative tire "Y" weigh then OEM tire "X". If that variance is significant, likely it affects mpg. Could be hard to measure an mpg difference and attribute it to heavier tires, where oftentimes the alternative tire has a more aggressive tread pattern, a long recognized mpg depresser, and where oftentimes the alternative tire has a somewhat greater diameter which has an effect on final drive ratio, a sort of "overdrive" gearing effect.

From personal experience I know that significantly heavier, aggressively treaded, and taller tires has a material effect on handling, especially braking, due to the "flywheel effect" which the additional rotational mass provides. The first time I put a set of 11.00 x 33.00 Bandag recaps on my 1967 IH Scout 800, with 4 wheel drum brakes (with only faint power assist), I blew through the stoplight just a couple of blocks from the tire store: light went yellow, I got off the gas, applied the brakes, and nothing much happened. I penetrated the intersection before opposing traffic started off, but it was a real eye-opener!

Foy
 
2016 tundra trd off road with Michelin ImageUploadedByWander The West1461772239.018062.jpgImageUploadedByWander The West1461772256.644683.jpg

Just put a hole in sidewall of passenger front tire, partial curb at 5 mph, 1500 miles on them. No weight in truck. Tire pressure may have been low. Set at dealer I hope, other front was at 32 pounds. Truck door says front should be 33, back 30 psi. Seems low to me. Sad. Love to have a more durable sidewall e rated on/off road. Anyone used nitto trail grapplers on tundra and camper combo? Looking to put a camper on, fwc hawk, atc, etc. Yet, last thing I need is a sidewall puncture in the middle of no where. Spare is full size, but rim says "temporary use only". And thinking I should get a regular rim for the spare. Thanks all. Newbie here to the forum.


2016 Toyota Tundra TRD off road 4x4 quad cab.
 
The michelins are generally pretty decent but they do have softer side walls. Toyota likes to put them on the larger trucks for quiet smooth highway ride quality. And long wear. But... Sidewalls are a tad soft. My Sequoia had them too. Good tire but a little tender on the side walls.

I always end up putting BFGs on my trucks its the zero issue truck tire. LOL I even have a set of touring BFGs on our car and they have been really good.

I have the Rugged Terrains on the Sequoia. They have been good. A little noisy at 40-45mph but highway speeds they didnt seem noisy. I didnt really notice a mileage change 15-18mpg is the norm and didnt seem to change with the tires.
 
CALIcamperdad said:
The michelins are generally pretty decent but they do have softer side walls. Toyota likes to put them on the larger trucks for quiet smooth highway ride quality. And long wear. But... Sidewalls are a tad soft. My Sequoia had them too. Good tire but a little tender on the side walls.

I always end up putting BFGs on my trucks its the zero issue truck tire. LOL I even have a set of touring BFGs on our car and they have been really good.

I have the Rugged Terrains on the Sequoia. They have been good. A little noisy at 40-45mph but highway speeds they didnt seem noisy. I didnt really notice a mileage change 15-18mpg is the norm and didnt seem to change with the tires.


Thanks. Sounds good.


2016 Toyota Tundra TRD off road 4x4 quad cab.
 
The trend towards ever larger rim sizes also reduces the sidewall height of the tire, which all things left the same results in a stiffer sidewall. That in turn increases dynamic response (turning, braking) but it decreases road compliance and ride comfort. So OE's spec a tire with a softer sidewall so that the ride isn't too harsh.

Late model Tundras can have either 17in or 18in rims. For this use of those trucks you want the 17's. I am told by an owner of one of these trucks (& occasional poster here) that 16's won't fit over the brakes - so that option is out. Hopefully he can chime in.

We initially ran Goodyear Duratracs in 315/75R16, Load D on our '96 CTD, typically at 50 psi. Any more pressure tended to pull the outer edges of the tread up off the pavement. Though I thought them a great tire they got noisy fairly fast. We now have Yoko A/T-S II's in 315/70R17, unknown load range. 50 psi is still the magic pressure for pavement. These tires are nowhere near as aggressive looking as the Duratracs, but they are working far better in every way. We now have about the same miles on them as the GY's did when replaced and they don't even show any wear!
 
My 2012 Tundra is the base trim version, I changed out the stock P-metric tires (and 18" steel wheels) for a set of the 17" Rock Warrior package wheels and 285/70R17 Nitto Terra Grapplers, load range E. I noticed a drop in mileage (~1 mpg) but I attribute it more to the taller/wider tire than it being heavier. The ride is different but definitely not harsh - it feels more controlled to me. I keep them at the stock Rock Warrior recommended tire pressure of 46 psi which seems to work fine (should probably up the rear a bit now that its carrying a FWC Hawk along for the ride full time). I've been happy with the tires on and off road, and they seem to be wearing well with over 25k miles on them so far.

As Thom mentioned the 2nd gen Tundra from brake size makes even most 17" wheels hard to fit - the Rock Warrior wheels seemed the best option to me at the time - they're a nice forged wheel with reasonable offset. The only other 17's that I've heard fit are made by Method, and have zero offset - more for the flatbill crowd I think.

Its not easy to find anything other than LR E (or P-metric, which I wouldn't want to take offroad) in the sizes that fit these trucks. I think a LR D tire would work fine, they just arent available. I see no significant downside to just using LR E on these trucks.

Gratuitous truck & camper shot:
_DSC6997.jpg
 
nice looking rig have 35" duratracs, started studded, with twenty plus thousand on them on my wrangler rubicon on off road no issues, knock on wood 42 psi on road, off down to 8 bead locked looked at their site no 18" ImageUploadedByWander The West1461853704.415411.jpg the wheels on the new tundra are shockingly light when I had to swap out the spare for tire repair on the front Michelin


2016 Toyota Tundra TRD off road 4x4 quad cab.
 
Nissan Frontier w/Eagle. I run Yokohama Geolander LT235 85 16's Load Range E and carry E rated spare, plug kit and compressor. Fortunately I've only ever needed the compressor to air up when I get back to pavement. For highway I'm usually at 45 psi front and back and have gone as low as 20 in deep sand.

This is my 4th set of Yoko's I think, I ran them on my last truck too. Traction on and off road is good and they are pretty quiet on the freeway. I put about 40k on them before I feel the need to replace them, would probably go 50k if I didn't like to boondock so much. I've never had a flat or sidewall damage with them. I get mine from Discount tire and they've always been a good deal compared to other E rated LT's, at least here in Reno.

I'd take a realistic look at the weight of your truck and a fully loaded camper including all your camping gear and expendables plus max tongue weight of a trailer. Make sure whatever you buy can handle the load and then some. If the price difference is not huge I'd go E rated for the extra peace of mind.
 
As a few people have mentioned, the choice of tread design is just as important as load range to balance performance, safety, and economy. A lot of people run tires that are more aggressive than they really need, which has several downsides. I just wrote a bit about it here.
 
I really like the C Cooper AT3... so much so that on my new heavier diesel I am getting the E of same. They are quiet and great in snow too. All the tire I will need (or want)
 
JHanson said:
As a few people have mentioned, the choice of tread design is just as important as load range to balance performance, safety, and economy. A lot of people run tires that are more aggressive than they really need, which has several downsides. I just wrote a bit about it here.
Great commentary. The tires I posted up have taken me many places that most people would think they need a more aggressive tire. Death Valley, The Panamints, Eastern Sierras, Mojave, etc.
 
I agree, super blocky tread is too noisy and wears poorly. I want a tire that will do well both on and off pavement and it's not like I take my truck mud bogging.
 
I found myself wishing I had a mud terrain tire when I came to a halt on a road in the Carizzo plains (which I did manage to get out of) but when I thought about how many times I've been stuck in the mud I realized in twelve years its only been one time. For all the reasons Jonathan and others mentioned I'll stick with all terrains.
 
Craig,

If that ever happens to me I'll crawl in the mud and put on my chains (always have but never used) if that doesn't work then I have really screwed the pooch.
 
I always try to claim the old shower curtain liner for those jobs like putting on chains in the muck. If they last thru the ordeal OK, but if it gets trashed in the process we're not out anything. In the mean time they keep me out of the muck.
 
Well if I'd turned around when I knew I should have instead of being stubborn...I had the tools to get out but I'm glad a little back and forth and some generous application of the go pedal was sufficient. The Jeep does have mud tires and it would have laughed at that little puddle. Different vehicles for different applications though.

I tried Toyo mud terrains once. Expensive but man they looked nice on the truck, for a while. Got horrible mileage out of those ;(
 
Back
Top Bottom