| Author |
Message |
    
John
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 01:33 am: | 
|
I am in the planning stages of a trip covering a good portion of the US, parts of Canada and Alaska. My question is this.
I am taking a 110 with OME HD springs, fully laden. I have looked at several different tire options and what I want. I know I want a mud biased tire(as we are trying to cover as much offroad as possible). Here are the choices I am looking at:
Michelin XZL - 8.25 x 16 (approx. 33")
Michelin XZL - 7.50 x 16 (approx. 31")
BFGoodrich MT - 235/85 R 16 (approx. 31")
BFGoodrich MT - 265/75 R 16 (approx. 32")
Here is what I am looking at. I would like to carry 2 spares as we are going to be a good bit from civ. at times. I would like to carry one on the rear mount and one on the bonnet. Weight is an issue with the tires. But I also would rather have a heavier tire that will last longer rather than a lighter tire that won't. I also would prefer a narrower tire than wider.
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks, John |
Al Oliveira (Offroaddisco)
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 01:42 am: |
|
Sounds like you want the 235/85 BFG's. The 265's are what came stock on the NAS D90's but I don't think you'll clear them well on the hood. If you CAN fit the 265's go with those. The BFG's will last a long time but then I haven't used the XZL's. |
John Kruger (Johnnyk)
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 07:55 am: |
|
I will be running a new set of BFG MT's 265/75 R16 on our expedition to Hudson Bay. There will be reviews posted on our site on all of our sponsors equipment. I have been running their Radial Mud Terrains and had great success.
John |
chrisvonc
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 08:21 am: |
|
I run the Futura Enforcer MTs 235/85. I got @35K miles on my last set that included 2 x-country round trips from philly to moab. They are a hair thinner than the BFGs if I recall. Cheap, tough & readily avalible size.
Just another tire worth considering.
Chris von C |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 10:09 am: |
|
XZL all the way , the tire is so tough it makes the others look like cheap junk.
i have the futuras and they've done okay, but they tend to unbalance themselves every 10000 miles. you never notice till one day your driving along with no one in the passenger seat and its shaking.
the prob with the XZL is the pricetag. oh and the 8.25 x 16 are closer to 34" i believe.
rd |
Greg Davis
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 10:58 am: |
|
John, I've heard great things about the Michelins, but one thing you may want to cosider is replacements in the field. From what I understand, they can be difficult to locate. That may be an issue 'cause you don't want to get stuck running different brands (read that as diameters) if you can't find replacements anywhere. The BFG's are available just about anywhere. |
kyle
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 11:12 am: |
|
Get 6 XZLs and forget about it.... Also , you may want to consider calling Expedition Exchange to get some Equal for them. Ask Roberto how they ride....
Kyle |
John
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 05:00 pm: |
|
Thanks for all your responses. I really would prefer the XZLs. I don't really care for the pricetag, but I have heard nothing but good things about them.
Rob, you mentioned you thought they were closer to 34", what is your opinion on mounting one on the bonnet. I know they are narrower, so I am thinking that they wouldn't be that bad. Also, what about the weight.
Thanks again, John |
Kennith P. Whichard III (Kennith)
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 05:10 pm: |
|
XZL, used on expeditions and in competitions all over the world. They are tough as nails.
Cheers,
Kennith |
Kyle
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 08:08 pm: |
|
The tire weighs about 65 pounds or so with no rim I think. Its pretty close to 34" not sure how it will do on the hood there.... Thats the 8.25
Kyle |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 08:43 pm: |
|
the tread may be 8.25 but the tire seems fatter than that
rd |
Mike B.
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 09:49 pm: |
|
For your purposes, I'd go with an AT (All Terrain) tire over a MT (Mud Terrain). It's not like you are going to be able to much slugging through deep mud with a fully laden vehicle. So in my opinion, MTs would most probably be overkill. Additionally, those MTs are going to be loud and and give you a very rough ride.
I'd suggest that you take a look at the BFG AT tire (or something similar). It will handle the load and it is a high mileage tire. Better yet, its quiet and will give you a pretty smooth ride. It's good in snow, sand, and rocks (however, it sucks in deep mud). It's readily available and pretty durable. I've seen them go 55K miles with no problem.
Thanks,
Mike B. |
Barry
| | Posted on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 10:56 pm: |
|
Mike B. is right on. If you plan to carry an expedition load, a durable All-Terrain such as the BFG AT/ko will also give superior flotation on sand.
If you are prepared for snow...with snow chains, you will have the ability to upgrade your mud traction needs.
-Barry |
John
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 12:14 am: |
|
Thanks for the info. I looked at the BFG ATs. However, a good bit of the path chosen in Canada and Alaska has mud. I have had ATs in the past and they are not adequate in the mud.
I have pretty much decided on the XZLs, I am checking on prices and delivery tomorrow. I know they are a bit more price wise, but from my research (and talking with John Lee today), they seem to be the best tire out there for this type of trip.
Thanks for the weight of the XZL, as that was a concern, however the tires we have run in the past were not much less than the XZLs, so I think they will be fine.
I will post with any additional info.
Any additional info is always welcome.
Thanks again, John |
Ho Chung (Ho)
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 11:29 am: |
|
john, you will be so fucking happy with the XZLs.  |
John
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Thanks Ho, I certainly hope so. |
Rob Davison (Pokerob)
| | Posted on Saturday, June 29, 2002 - 02:55 pm: |
|
http://www.michelin-us.com/us/eng/news/20020603xzl/page.htm |
Shane
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 02:30 am: |
|
if you haven't already purchased try
Bill's Tires in Pacheco, Calif., 925-689-2678
cheapest prices I've seen for XZL's in US |
nadim
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 03:19 am: |
|
Guys...
I have been planning to istall 35-36" tires on my Disco with a 2" suspension lift, the Aust. Flares, and a body lift IF necessary.
I have always been fond of the XZL, and I think that the narrow 9.00x16 would fit, however:
1. Will it provide adequate flotation when needed (versus the 35/36x12.5 tires)?
2. Does it perform as well in the mud as Intercos or Simexes?
3. Is it TRUELY an all-rounder. I encounter grass, rocks, mud, snow and gravel during one outing!
4. The Disco is still my daily driver. Since I may be opting for Boggers or Simex Extremes, I am wondering in the XZLs would perform better on tarmac?
5. Are the 9.00x16 that much of a better size than the 8.25x16? I do not want to break stuff while having fun (Yin-Yan theory).
Thanks in advance,
Nadim |
Shane
| | Posted on Sunday, June 30, 2002 - 04:17 pm: |
|
the 9.00x16 XZL's are like 36.7" tall.
Most 35's actually measure out at 34-34.5".
Let me be the first to say that if you DO want to break stuff these WOULD be a good choice
But since you say you DON'T want to break, you would be better off with the 8.25's.
Even still you better have upgraded axles shafts and diffs. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page