By Wesley on Sunday, June 24, 2001 - 11:01 am: Edit

Hey All,
I know this has been disussed a thousand times and I have read the threads and the tech sections.
I have a 97 D1 with stock bumpers, OME HD matched length Driver's side coils, and am currently running BFG AT 245/70-16 which look a bit small for my tastes.
What I would like to know are adv/disadv of tire sizes that I can easily fit with minimal cutting.
I would replace with BFG AT vs. MT, but size I am unsure of. Considering 245/75 vs. 235/85 vs. ??
Wondering about ease on trail, tracking on highway, etc.
Sorry for the rambling and repetitious question, but would like different experiences.
thanks in advance,
Wesley

By Troy on Sunday, June 24, 2001 - 05:45 pm: Edit

235/85r16 will be taller than the 245s and you can run them with roughly the same amount of trimming. Anything taller and you're going to run into problems. Personally, I like tall/skinnys like the 235s . . . on and off-road-
Troy

By Steve (Oz93discov8) on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 03:29 am: Edit

I went from 205 80 R16 Michelin XPC's to 245 75 R16 BFG A/T's on a D1 with HD springs all round and a bit of rear panel trimming & bump stop adjustment I also have a Bilstein steering damper. I only noticed a little tracking with the extra width and a little loss in acceleration due to the larger O.D. as I didn't change the gear ratios. I like the look of the tyres and they handle on & off road heaps better than the XPC's. I didn't go for the 235 85's because I thought they should really have even more lift and probably a gear ratio change.
I would go for this setup again for what it's worth!

By Chris Browne on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 05:28 am: Edit

Small as in height or width?
I've seen 245, 265 and 235 and run 750r16

By Jeff Bieler (Mrbieler) on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 05:42 am: Edit

I am very happy on and off-road with our Radial Rover RT's in 215/85R16's (about the same as 700R16). I did have to make small cuts inside the rear fender to stop rubbing at full compression. We have OME springs and shocks.

They are skinny, which throws a lot of people off when they see them at first, but have proven very capable in the dirt, over rock gardens, loose sand, and in mud. Street ride is nice too. Firm grip, no noise, etc.

By Wesley on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 07:46 am: Edit

Chris,
I meant small as in height.
Thanks,
Wesley

By KEITH FIDONE on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 12:26 pm: Edit

I JUST BOUGHT A DISCO II WITH ACE AND WAS WONDERING IS 255-55-18 THE ONLY TIRESIZE THAT CAN BE PUT ON THOSE MONSTER 18 INCH RIMS OR CAN I GO ANY WIDER??

By Mike B. on Monday, June 25, 2001 - 02:36 pm: Edit

Good luck finding tires in the 18" size. Chances are you will need to switch to 16" or 15" rims. By the way, the 18" rims are worth way more than the 16" rims, so don't do an even trade!

Thanks,
Mike B.

By tim on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 - 08:59 am: Edit

IF you are interested, I have a set of disco2 16 inch wheels with 255/70 michelin tires for sale for 1200obo for the works, including lug nuts.

By Glue Factory truck driver on Wednesday, June 27, 2001 - 09:26 am: Edit

Beating the dead horse? I just ran over the dead horse with a set of Goodyear 315/80R22.5 tires. Great traction through the guts, and 14-ply polyester sidewall construction for optimal durability without sacraficing ride comfort

By wesley on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 07:14 am: Edit

Thanks everyone,
235/85 then, unless there is a need or reason to go to 265/75. Can anyone talk me into those for any reason? How would they benefit over a 235/85 in mud vs. rock vs. etc.?
wesley

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 08:21 am: Edit

tall and narrow (235/85) for the mud,

fat for the rocks (245/75 - 265/75).

Where do you spend most of your time...in the mud or on the rocks? There's your answer to the tire size question.

By Ron on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 08:22 am: Edit

If you run 265 75 it will rub more and your will lose more tuning radius. But it is better on rocks and sand.

Ron

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 08:48 am: Edit

235/85 do just fine on rocks and sand.

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 08:52 am: Edit

yeah - we're only talkin a difference of 0.394" in tread width on the 235 vs. 245

and a diff of 1.182" on 235 vs. 265

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 08:59 am: Edit

bill, dont' forget the length too.
taller tires have longer contact patches.

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 09:23 am: Edit

right on - I'll have to add those contact patch length calcs to my Super Scientific Tire Size Calculator - did you ever get that email?

By Ho Chung (Ho) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 09:50 am: Edit

yes i did, but never posted because you never added the length patches.

By Blue Gill (Bluegill) on Friday, June 29, 2001 - 10:10 am: Edit

well what the hell is wrong with me? I'll have to get on it asap to preserve my good standing on the dweb (if it ever was indeed good)