Pics of new tires - 285/75/17 Toyo OPEN COUNTRY A/T

[JasonCzerak]

Yeah... . road racing stability in a 7000 lb truck. I guess your response says it all for me.



I have done quite a bit of real road course racing. I was just never fool enough to try in in a 4wd pick-up, especially on public roads.



Then somehow delinquent behavior in your truck qualifies you to judge tire load ratings? Bit of a stretch eh?

I've said this 100's of times before. . Drive within your and your vehicle's limits. Drive no further then that and you'll be fine.



There are more flipped over, crashed, and bent rims of vettes, vipers, ricers and super cars then there are 7000# trucks I'm sure.



And while we are Mr. public safety and over 24K #'s, I don't recall any weight rating on any dodge truck over 24K, MMMMmmmMMM Kay?

 

[JasonCzerak]

I can say that I have rolled the nittos while playing around a corner (60 psi in the front). I could never do that with the OEM michelins...



These truck handle pretty good IMO for the size, and fun to toss around because the long length with send you a telegraph if its going to come around on ya :-laf





... .

LOL, telegraph, 'Now that's no lie tho on water and snow, things can move perty quick.

 

[JFlagg]

BHolm, not to add fuel to the fire, just a little devils advocate, but if an "E" tire needs 80 PSI to make the same weight rating as the comparable "D" tire at 60PSI, why not air the "D" to 80PSI? If the only difference is sidewall stiffness, wouldn't that make the "D" wear/last longer? Of course you have to figure in the tread deformation; i. e. wearing the tread center out prematurely due to overinflation. If the tread on an "E" doesn't wear out the center at 80lbs and a "D" will, but the "D" sidewall is as stiff at a lower PSI, why don't they make tires with a "E" tread but a "D" sidewall? Wouldn't that be the best of both worlds?

 

[brods]

How about this concept. Load capacity is determined by the tires ability to dissapate heat. Too much heat and you have a tire failure right? Heat is generated by sidewall flex primarily, the more it squishes down as the tire goes around, the more heat generated. One way to lessen this flex is to increase tire pressure. So an E rated 265/70-17 tire is rated for 3195 lbs at 80 psi. The 285/70-17 tire is rated for 3195 lbs at 65 psi AND has a taller sidewall. It would seem to me that the E is actually the weaker of the two because it needs more pressure to carry the load right? Common sense tells me the 285 D tire must have stiffer sidewalls to carry the same load with less pressure right? Otherwise, if you guys are right about this, wouldn't the taller sidewall tire with less pressure in it have to be rated for a lighter load because of too much sidewall flex? Fact is, it is rated for exactly the same load. Do you really think the tire manufacturers would put that load number in lbs right on the sidewall if it wasn't true? Can you imagine the liability? There is no way you can convince me as a generality that D rated tires have weaker sidewalls than E rated tires. Look at the facts and mechanics of the whole thing, it just doesn't make sense. Your milage may vary but my experience also tells me there is no problem.

Um…wow! Clearly you have had good experiences with D range tires. That’s great and good to share. However, comparing the load ratings of two different size tires is comparing apples to oranges. As for reverse engineering the tire designs …well try reading this link and perhaps think about cutting back on the koolaid.



Bridgestone Commercial Truck Tires

 

[Tomeygun]

You mention that the C rated tires are cheaper. Did I leave the impression somewhere that I buy these D rated tires because they are less expensive? That isn't the case.

no, you didn't give any impresion, my point was really if the same tire meets your wieght rating needs - and regardless of the letter, you would buy the least expensive... I mean who wouldn't? But you just mentioned about that the load C does not meet your needs, so I understand where your coming from there

Problem is, the C range tires DO NOT have the wieght carrying capacity. Take for example a stock size tire for our trucks, the 265/70-17 size. In a C load range the tire is rated for 2470 lbs per tire, the E that comes with the truck is rated for 3195 lbs per tire as is a 285/70-17 D rated tire... ... .



There is no reason to fear a quality D rated tire..... just put the kool-aid down and step away

That makes me wonder if the OEM load E of 3195 a tire (or 3495 for nitto 295's) is really meeting the needs of some CTD owners?



For example - I'm not sure of the load already on the back tires, lets say 3000pounds (thinking 7400 total minus 4400 on the front). So when I go and get my pallet of 80# bricks, and the pallet holds 48 of them (heavy retaining wall bricks) - I am looking at 6840 on the back tires (tire rating of 6990?)



WAY to close for me. So I guess the main consensus is to make sure the tire meets you max load needs. For me, the load D are not enough when hauling heavy...

 

[BHolm]

Um…wow! Clearly you have had good experiences with D range tires. That’s great and good to share. However, comparing the load ratings of two different size tires is comparing apples to oranges. As for reverse engineering the tire designs …well try reading this link and perhaps think about cutting back on the koolaid.



Bridgestone Commercial Truck Tires

Ummm, didn't find much in the way of answers there. Besides, congratulations on fitting commercial tires to your truck. Most of us only bother with regular old light truck tires. Apples and Oranges? As if a 285/70-17 is soooo much larger a tire than a 265/70-17. Good job missing the point completely.

 

[brods]

Lol, no, I didn’t expect you to get anything out of the link. I thought it was interesting and that others might find it interesting too. I also assume commercial tire designs are similar enough to light truck tires that the information has value in this load range discussion. Do you have reason to believe that assumption is incorrect?



Fwiw using the tire charts and some rough calcs, the difference in air volume between the two sizes looks to be around 20 to 25%. Sounds like it could be significant, but I have no idea. Do you know how significant that is?



You might have noticed in the link, reading between the lines at the end of the engineer’s answer, that it may lend some credibility to your position that a particular tire’s quality of design and manufacture may be more important than the actual letter load range, but alas, you are too busy with your childish replies rather than trying to seek the truth. Forget about egos and who’s right or wrong, isn’t the point to get at the facts?

 

[CUMMINZ]

In 10 words or less what was the real point?

 

[Tomeygun]

In 10 words or less what was the real point?

Buy tire to meet your needs



ha! there did it in 6 words :-laf

 

[DocDetonancour]

I have run many D rated tires and they have met the need. I do like the "less squat" look of the E rated on the front. Doc

 

[Matt400]

So an E rated 265/70-17 tire is rated for 3195 lbs at 80 psi. The 285/70-17 tire is rated for 3195 lbs at 65 psi AND has a taller sidewall. It would seem to me that the E is actually the weaker of the two because it needs more pressure to carry the load right?

I see your reasoning and you make some good points.

However I wouldn't look at the E as weaker though, instead I would see the 80 psi as required to hold up the same load due to a smaller volume of air.

I relate that to a narrow bicycle road tire @ 100 psi. Then again that pressure may be needed to hold the load with such a puny sidewall construction looking at it your way.



I, same as you am more interested in load index than letters.



I read here:

Understanding Tire Load Ratings

where the fella claims that load index is the tires ability to hold weight vertically while the load range is the tires ability to deal with loads horizontally but I don't know where he gets that from.

 

[BHolm]

There is a difference in construction to be able to hold the additional load pressure, or is there?



I know that when it comes to speed rating car tires that there is additional expense involved in certifying tires for higher speeds. Is it possible load rated LT tires are subject to similar circumstances? What I am saying is that two tires may be identical in construction except for a load or speed rating. The difference to the manufacturer may be addition expensive testing to get to the next level. If the consumer need isn't there, the testing isn't done and the lower rating affixed to the tire. Saves everybody money in the end right?



I did read between the lines on the Bridgestone page concerning the various ways to build tires. I already knew, and posted my experience with otherwise identically rated and sized tires from different manufacturers. Earlier I had question whether or not the instabilities people were experiencing could be based more on cheap tires than on load ratings.



Some of my responses may seem childish but some of the arguments made are so incredibly baseless that I couldn't restrain myself.



So if the facts are important, what factual proof does anybody have that a D rated tire is somehow inferior to an E rated tire. I guess I have yet to see any facts about that, just lots of speculation.

 

[BMH95]

So here's my tire guys take on this. He says that a 285 70 R17 D, with a load rating of X (I think mine is like 123 or something like that), has the same load rating as a tire in size 265 70 R17 E (same load rating specs from manufacturer). So then, why would the manufacturer do that? Well, because a 285 doesn't require the same amount of tire pressure to carry the same load, due to it's size differences. Remember, the tire is not spinning as fast, given the spead / circumference. Also, a heavy load will put more load on a smaller tire, since it has less mass to deal with the pressures.

 

[BMH95]

Maybe a better way to say it is this:



Tire size X requires air pressure Y to carry Z load. The manufacturers have determined their tire load carrying characteristics, and thus determined that a load range D in 285 @ 65 psi will safely handle the same weight as a 265 @ 80 psi. They have rooms full of engineers that figure this stuff out. So, the reason Cooper does not offer the 285 in E, but does the 265, is that the 285 does not require the same air pressure that the 265 does to be safe.

 

[evldsl]

Just got them on...



You can tell in the first mile that these are E rated and not crappy D rated like the nittos that came off. They feel real nice and handle good so far.



The only issue I have is that they look a little too wimpy - I mean they just dont have that aggressive look of some "A/T" tires I have seen.



Funny how they look right in place though - they measure a true 34inches tall with 60lbs in them. I cant imagine a 265 tire on this truck, yuck!!!



pics for ya:

now you got it, I have been running my 35's for around a year and the e rating has made my truck way more stable.

 

[ElkFarmer]

I agree that good load range d tires are perfectly safe. I used 33/12. 5-16. 5 BF mud terrains 15 years on 3 seperate dodge diesels starting in 89. They had a load range of 2910 and I never had a problem. I farm and ranch for a living and have hauled or pulled just about everything and have never had a blow out or felt uncomfortable with the tires. Those tires also made the 1000 mile trip to Colorodo(from Texas) every year to elk hunt pulling 6 horses and a couple thousand pounds of gear. I have blown countless load e tires on the trailers but never on a pickup. I now run BF mud terrain in a 285/70-17 on my 05 with a 3195 load and I will be heading to Colorodo next month and the least of my worries will be the load range D tires.

 

[ColoradoKing]

I am almost ready to replace the BFG ATs on my 3500. This thread has a lot of discussion regarding D or E ratings, which has me wondering what I'll decide in the end. I don't want an aggressive mud tire, but I need one with good snow capability and high load range. The Toyos look good, but I'm wondering if people could chime in on their preference for what tire offers the best compromise of filling the wheel wells (min 33"), has a decent load range (+3000lbs), can clear snow and wears well? I'm not keen on replacing with BFGs. The do a great job of filling up the wheel well, but they rub on the lower control arm, have worn out way faster than I thought, and I think the tread pattern is dated.

 

[Matt400]

I'm wondering if people could chime in on their preference for what tire offers the best compromise of filling the wheel wells (min 33"), has a decent load range (+3000lbs), can clear snow and wears well?

Maybe consider these in a 285/70R17:

Goodyear Wrangler Featuring SilentArmor Technology



I have them on a Jeep and they are a pretty nice tire, excellent in the snow, quiet on the road. The "pro-grade" is a more heavy duty version you have to request because they make that same tire without the pro-grade label.

 

[brods]

Some of my responses may seem childish but some of the arguments made are so incredibly baseless that I couldn't restrain myself.



So if the facts are important, what factual proof does anybody have that a D rated tire is somehow inferior to an E rated tire. I guess I have yet to see any facts about that, just lots of speculation.

Humm... so its ok for you to aggressively voice your opinion on load ranges without any supporting facts, but anyone who doesn’t agree with you must supply factual proof to support their opinion? Sounds like a double standard, yes?



Well. . I have no proof. The laws of physics requires that a pressure vessel that holds higher internal pressure must have stronger walls than a vessel that has less internal pressure. That vessel can be a steel tank or a rubber tank, like a tire. So it seems intuitive that the tire with higher maximum pressure is likely to have stronger and stiffer sidewalls.



A call to BFG’s and Toyo’s tech lines confirm the E load range tires are stronger and have stiffer sidewalls, though I’m sure there are a few exceptions that can be found. Toyo recommends to stick with the load range on the vehicle inflation sticker, even if the lower load range tire meets the load carrying requirements of the vehicle. But, coming from me its just hearsay, so anyone who needs proof can call Toyo at 1-800-442-8696 or BFG at 1-877-788-8899.



Guess I’ll scrap the H2 takeoffs idea (they are D range) and get these Toyo’s instead. Sorry for the hijack Tomeygun. Thanks for posting the pictures, they look great. Some time down the road, give us an update on how they are holding up.

 

[Tomeygun]

Guess I'll scrap the H2 takeoffs idea (they are D range) and get these Toyo's instead. Sorry for the hijack Tomeygun. Thanks for posting the pictures, they look great. Some time down the road, give us an update on how they are holding up.

Well... . my 3 day review so far is that they handle great, not alot of wag in the turns (on and off throttle), and they are starting to grow on me in terms of looks. They have that tall and simple look - not as cool as the aggresive tire look though...



One thing to note, the smaller 285 width and the 60psi in the back tires make for some really easy 3rd gear 50 foot patches