Here I am

Michelin LTX M/S2 265/70/17 Tire pressures

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Questions Horn Stuck, Where to hook Fuel Pressure Gauge,

reverse tap in for camera

Status
Not open for further replies.
I put Michelin LTX M/S2 265/70/17 on my 2005 2500 with 56K miles on it.



I was wondering what tire pressures are being run unloaded to get the best mileage, wear and ways to avoid cupping.



Driving is mainly on paved roads and freeways up to about 80 MPH.



The factory sticker for light load shows Front 45 PSI and rear 40 PSI. This seems low to me.



Thoughts?



Thank you for your assistance in advance.



John
 
I always use the Michelin website for tire pressure vs. weight. 45 psi sounds low for the front... ... I always run about 60 in front and 40 in back. I have a heavier front bumper though.
 
These pressures give me excellent wear on both trucks...

Empty

65 psi in the front

55 psi in the rear


Loaded (hooked to fully loaded fiver plus firewood packed around the hitch)

70 psi in front

75 psi in rear

Mike
 
I run pretty close to Mike

Empty 65/55

Loaded 75/75

I prefer the steering/suspension feel at 75 on the front when loaded. My loaded FAW is actually lighter than empty if the TT is hooked up, but that is static and in corners I can tell when I don't air up.
 
Thanks for your replys and help.

Mine is a 4X2 so it is just a little lighter but I do not think that would not make that much difference.

On another subject... . how do you add the information at the bottom of your pages??
 
Thanks for your replys and help.



Mine is a 4X2 so it is just a little lighter but I do not think that would not make that much difference.



On another subject... . how do you add the information at the bottom of your pages??



when you are looking at this page (or any page on the forum) go to the top (a few lines down) & on the left side you will see "forum actions" select it, when select edit profile.



Now on the left of the new page is: my settings, under that "my profile" under that "edit signature"
 
Last edited:
I run at least 65 up front, and lately I've been running 60 in the back.

Often I'll fill the fronts to 70 and let them leak down to 65 over a period of weeks, then refill to 70.

I've got 96k on the OEM Michelin's (LTX A/S), and will easily get over 100k if I don't hit anything. Treadwear is even.
 
I just changed over to the LTX MS2s on my '06 Mega Cab. I usually put 65-70 front, and 55-60 rear empty. I find that when I pull in on my concrete driveway, the tires on the rear do not have any "white" from the concrete about 3/8" from the edge of the tires, and the front tires have the "white" across the tread up to a fingernails width in from the edge of the tires. Using this method to see how the tread was rolling on the pavement gave me 79K on my OEM BFGoodrich Rugged Trail T/A's, and they still had 7/32" tread left when I changed them out about 2 weeks ago. They were getting some dry rot cracks on the sidewalls, and I didn't want to push the envelope with them. Had I driven it more, I probably would've gone over 100k with the originals. I do like the Michelins as they feel like there is less rolling resistance, truck rolls faster down my slight hills according to the speedometer with all else being the same. They do have 1/32" less tread depth than my other LTXs did new on my '02 truck, and 1/32" less than the BFGoodrich tires did originally. Other than that, I love the way they handle...
 
They do have 1/32" less tread depth than my other LTXs did new on my '02 truck, and 1/32" less than the BFGoodrich tires did originally. Other than that, I love the way they handle...

Is this a case of inflation? I mean, are new tires 1/32" shorter in the tread than they were 10 years ago?

-Ryan
 
Good question, rbatelle. I have never seen where inflation pressure changed the depth of the tread. I guess it may be a possibility, but as long as you have kept the inflation pressure within the recommended limits on the tire, I have measured mine at 80psi and at 45psi and it measures the same. Running the maximum pressure (80psi) may change the size and shape of the tread patch that actually hits the road from what it looks like at 45psi, thus changing the wear pattern across the tread, along with making the tire tread look more rounded from sidewall to sidewall, but I have never heard or seen it lower the tread depth just from increasing tire inflation pressure.

I think that they just lowered their tread depth from 15/32" to 14/32". Why? Your guess is as good as mine. But I have some ideas as to why... . In the past 15 years, I have seen more load range 'E' tires dry rot to the point of being unsafe yet still have lots of tread depth left, more so than tires that are worn bald to the point of showing the cord through where the tread was. Does this mean that there's too much rubber on the tread? Can the factory make the same tires with less tread depth (i. e. using less rubber overall) and still get by with the tire buying public? I don't know. Personally, I would like to see a tire that provides great traction in all conditions (not too hard of a compound), last as long as what I have had before (70K+ miles thus not too soft of a compound), and resist UV weathering and cracking so that the tire will last longer than 6-8 years. But would that help the manufacturers sell more tires? I don't think there's much of a push to do that in the marketplace. We've already got rubber down to an art and a science such that we don't have to replace fan belts, radiator hoses, and heater hoses every year like I did on my dad's late 50's-early 60's autos. And I am grateful for that!

I think that price is the major factor that is driving the research & development at this point, not just the quest for the best tire that could be made and sold. Since price is the major limiting factor in selling your product in the marketplace, and since manufacturers must sell their tires in order to stay in business, the challenge is to make a product that will be widely accepted, have a fair reputation, sell it cheaply enough to be competitive, and to attract enough customers to stay in business. I do not subscribe completely to buying the cheapest product out there when it comes to my tires, but for the average buying public, that's the number 1 issue that most tire dealers are hit with. What's the total cost out the door for my set of 4 tires?

So, overall, will that missing 1/32" of the original tread depth make a difference in my tire purchase? I don't know, but if it goes as I suspect, probably it won't make any difference at all. The only thing I feel remorse about is that 3 years ago, these tires were 1/2 the price of what they cost now. But if I had purchased them at that time, would they have been 1/2 used up from oxidation of the rubber in the 3 years of storage? Of course, 3 years ago, diesel fuel was 1/2 of what it costs now, so why am I complaining.....
 
Good question, rbatelle. I have never seen where inflation pressure changed the depth of the tread.

HA! Sorry, I meant "inflation" in the monetary sense, not the pneumatic sense. I need to be more careful how I type in a tire thread.

You make an interesting point about reducing tread depth because the tires dry rot before the tread is used up. I'd like to think it's that kind of practicality on the part of the tire manufacturers.

My tires are now 10 years old. They have some microcracks in the sidewall, but I don't see these as a problem and certainly not dry rot. They have quite a bit of tread left, although part of that is because I rotate the spare into the mix, so I should get 20% better tire life than average.

-Ryan
 
HA! Sorry, I meant "inflation" in the monetary sense, not the pneumatic sense. I need to be more careful how I type in a tire thread.



You make an interesting point about reducing tread depth because the tires dry rot before the tread is used up. I'd like to think it's that kind of practicality on the part of the tire manufacturers.



My tires are now 10 years old. They have some microcracks in the sidewall, but I don't see these as a problem and certainly not dry rot. They have quite a bit of tread left, although part of that is because I rotate the spare into the mix, so I should get 20% better tire life than average.



-Ryan



I understand your double meaning, and not to worry about that... What I worry about is tire manufacturers getting too practical to where tread depth are less and we end up getting less usable life out of the tire. You've done well to get tires to go that long.
 
Have used 65# frt at all times for even tire wear; 60# rear empty & 80# rear when loaded. My Michelin LTX MS2's seem to be wearing on the outside for the first time in 8 years; prompting a call to manuf. rep. I've always had perfect flat even wear on the first 2 sets, significant outside wear on set #3, and seems like same story for current set #4.
 
My Michelin LTX MS2's seem to be wearing on the outside for the first time in 8 years; prompting a call to manuf. rep.

Is this happening only on the fronts, or at all 4 corners?

If it's only on the fronts you may have steering geometry issues.

-Ryan
 
First trip observations

Great info. Let us know what the rep says!



After an 1100 mile trip last week, with the majority being interstate travel, and not loaded and not towing, I find that 55 psi looks good toward keeping the proper wear pattern on the rear tires. I am a bit suspect, however, of the 65 psi in the front tires. I have used my tread depth gauge across the tread on the front tires and find no variation in tread depth yet, but the wear pattern appears to show a tad bit too much contact near both the inside and outside edges of the tread as if they are a bit underinflated. Having worked with my tires and vehicles over the past 40 years, you just "know" these things when you see them. My observation is this: I think there is a bit of difference in the sidewall constructionof the tire right at the point where the sidewalls meet the tread area on these MX2 tires versus the original MX tire. The MX2 seems to be more "round" in that area whereas the MX tires were more square. The sidewalls in that area on the older MX did not seem to "bulge" out as much as the newer ones do. This is my "uneducated" observation, and not formed from any provided information or technical literature. I only have had them on for about 3k miles thus far, so my opinion my change. I will try to adjust the front pressure to 70 for this next trip to see if there is any difference.



I don't think that in itself is a big problem in ride, handling, traction, etc. , but it may be more of a challenge to find the "sweet spot" in regards to tie pressure for the best longevity and still keeping the proper tread patch on the road. I did enjoy the ride on these tires, as they seemed to transmit less "booming" noise into the cab from potholes and bumps in the road while at the same time providing a secure ride in going interstate speeds in tight corners. You could pick a line to go around the curve and it would "lock in" tightly without feeling "squirrelly" in the curves on the west va turnpike. I'll post my report after the next trip in 2 weeks.
 
Just to put my two cents in... . I've got an 06 3500 dually. Been running michelins since I changed out the originals at 53,000 miles. I run 75 psi all the way around. First set got 106,000 miles. Now I'm on my second set .

I'm sold on these Michelins!!
 
Got to the first rotation of the new Michelins. 65# seems just great in the front, and 55# in the rear. Tread is flat and smooth from one side to the other on the front not showing any feathering of the edges, and rears look nice and level on the tread, neither too much wear in the middle or on the edges. I'm sold also! They're great...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top