By Joshua Weinstein on Monday, April 02, 2001 - 06:35 pm: Edit

I am looking to get opinions on these two tires compared. They will go on a lifted disco. I am also contemplating between 235/85/16 which I have now or going with 265/75/16. Any opinions appreciated!

By ho on Monday, April 02, 2001 - 06:59 pm: Edit

there seems to be a lot of talk on the MT/R as being the newest tire.
so far, it's all good. but i guess too soon to know about it's shortcomigns.

i've had BFG MTs for a while now, and all i can say is it's a very solid tire. because the carcass is stiffer than other tires, it'll wear out unevenly easily if not properly inflated.

about tire size, i like the 85s...
235/85 seem to track and ride better than 265/75.

good luck.

By Milan on Tuesday, April 03, 2001 - 03:59 am: Edit

MT/R. And I used to love the BFG. You'll get better traction with it everywhere, including on-road. Quieter too. Thicker sidewalls. I'm just waiting to see how long they wear but even if they don't last as long as the BFGs I'd buy them again.

I'd take the 235/85 or 32x11.50R15 if you want wide. They don't make 265's yet.

Check http://www.goodyear.com/ca/tires/tirecatalog/WRLMTRSize.html for sizes.

By Discosaurus on Tuesday, April 03, 2001 - 06:01 am: Edit

I've been running MT/R's for about a year and have
a lot of off road miles in both the Midwest (mud)
and CO (rock) on them.

They don't seem to clear mud quite as well as the
older GY MT design (the military design tread) which worked as well, if not better then the BFG,
but they're OK. If you wheel in lots of mud, go all the way and put on Swampers.

On rock, they work great. Good grip on slick rock and reasonable performance on talus (for their width).

They also seem to be better in the wet then the original. Of course, 'better' still means "Oh, S**t...!", after all they ARE a big 'ol lugged design.

They seem to have real good sidewall puncture resistance, a lot better then the original MT.
Of course, as with any MT, don't get them near ice and hardpack snow !!

Oh, I'm running 235/85-16's...

Keith
Discosaurus

By Ron on Tuesday, April 03, 2001 - 06:25 am: Edit

How about the new trXus (sp) from super swamper? They seem like a good tire and are a good deal too (100 each for 235 85). I only know one person who has them so far, though.

Ron

By Parker on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 06:31 am: Edit

I've had MT/R's for about a year now and have loved them in every situation that I've used them. Work great in Moab (in fact they're taking over as the most popular tire down here), drive quietly on the street, and so far seem to be wearing quite well. Keith, f.y.i. they are Radials (MT/ "R") and they work excellent in the snow and ice. Would definitely recommend them over BFG's. Plus, why not support a company like GoodYear that does so much for our sport and stands behind their products.

By Milan on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 09:13 am: Edit

Actually MT/R stands for Maximum Traction/Reinforced. It just happens to be of radial construction. It is a traction tire not a mud tire, that's why it won't do too well in mud but it all depends on the type of mud too. Given the large voids between the tread blocks and great self-cleaning abilities of the tire, I'd say in mud it will do better than BFG MT (Mud Terrain).

Even if it does not preform better than Mud Terrain tires in mud, I don't care as for mud I like Swampers/Boggers/Claws the best anyway. I'm waiting for the spring thaw to asses the mudding capabilities of the tires. But so far I have not been disappointed.

By Discosaurus on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 09:21 am: Edit

> Keith, f.y.i. they are Radials (MT/ "R") and
> they work excellent in the snow and ice.

Ha. Excellent in comparison to what, Dunlop SP9000's in 35-series profile ?? The typical MT
is the most ill-mannered beast on the planet when subjected to ICE and HARDPACK snow.

Big tread blocks and no edges mean no traction.
BTDT...every winter. Of course, they rule in wet, deep, snow !

keith
discosaurus

By Ron on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 09:23 am: Edit

Mud: You want Hawgs or Boggers, but you can't get boggers in anything that would work on a disco so Hawgs.

Ron

By Clint on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 09:52 am: Edit

If you've ever watched any TOP TRUCK CHALLENGE,
every vehicle had super agressive tires, either super swampers or boggers. The boggers were the only tire that appeared to have much greater traction than anything else, especially on the mud. The conditions were wet clay/mud, tire pit, sandy hill climb, wet logs and rocks.
Clint

By Ron on Wednesday, April 04, 2001 - 10:08 am: Edit

They all run boggers but fitting a bogger on a disco is not going to happen. Hawgs you can get on there. Hawgs are about as good in mud and come in somethings that might fit on a non-defender rover. P78 (33in or so) I am going to try to fit on the rangie on 5.5in steelies I have sitting around when I get motivated. I think I will have to get RTE or fabitron links though and they cost money. The reason is that I don't want to cut into the door so I will effectively lengthen the wheelbase with the new links. I have yet to sit down and figure it all out (only had the truck 3 days). This way I will have the hawgs for off road on a seperate set of wheels and can run the 245s on road.

Anyway, another tangent for the day.

Ron

By Troy on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 02:44 am: Edit

I've run the MTRs for 4 months. I have 2 runs to Tellico with them so far - 1 wet, 1 dry. They performed far better than the BFG MTs, ATs, & Tracedges I've run in the past-- especially in the mud. All of my BFGs seemed get sliced up on the sidewalls and chunks of tread would have a tendency to get torn off. Not so with the MTRs. By looking at them, you wouldn't be able to tell they'd been off-road.
Troy

By nadim on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 06:35 am: Edit

Both of these tires are way more expensive that the super swampers...my best advice will be to get a set of ATs for onroad and snow use, and extreme offroaders for mud, rocks, and all that stuff...

if you get TSLs radials 265/80 16 for 120$ each for example, you will save 45$/tire on each tire from a 265/75 16 BFG tire, therefore, you can pay 45$ more per tire, and have a nice combo of 2 sets...

me, I currently run those TSLs and BFG trac edges, in the future, I hope to get 33s 15 TSL bias ply, and BFG ATs 265/75 16...

just my thoughts...

By Bruce on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 07:05 am: Edit

I read an article in Four-Wheeler magazine while on the plane and it addressed the Goodyear tires, MTR and the AT. It was essentially a shootout for traction comparison between the two. The only test that was not executed was in the mud, however, through all other traction tests, the AT was dead equal with the MTR. Why and the heck they did not test in the mud and why they even bothered to report eqaul results of tire traction was beyond my comphrehension. I guess they had a deadline to meet and they were out of beer.
Anyway, I live in Florida and that means mud, so I am currently looking to replace my Stock Michs.

By Clint on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 09:38 am: Edit

Uh yeah Bruce,
I definately can see why you'd want to do that.
Mud tires, even mild ones, make a huge difference in the mud.
Clint

By nadim on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 09:58 am: Edit

bruce...i read that article as well, and they address other tires aas well in that issue...
notice how they put the superswampers on a pedastle when it comes to mud!

By disco2guy on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 10:30 am: Edit

I considered all the others, but went with the Super Swamper TSL Radials in a 33x10.5x16. Great price (4WheelPartsWhores) and they are incredible in everything but sand. I run them at speed and for distance, have yet to air them down, and have tried really hard to puncture/cut them. They're the shiznit. Just be sure you know where the volume knob on your stereo is, because they howl like a banshee. Seem to be lasting really well, though.

disco2guy

By Bruce on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 10:59 am: Edit

What exactly is shiznit? Is that a special code word that people in the North use to designate a tire that has all around performance?

By Parker on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 11:32 am: Edit

Quote: (Keith) "The typical MT
is the most ill-mannered beast on the planet when subjected to ICE and HARDPACK snow."


Yes, I agree with your thinking that the general MT doesn't "shine" in ice. However, MT/R's are not your typical MT. I believe they have something like 300% more EDGES for traction than the tire it replaced. I've used mine all winter and these tires DO work in the hardpack snow and the deep stuff. BTDT as well. I'm pretty sure that I wasn't comparing to a 35" Dunlop...

By disco2guy on Thursday, April 05, 2001 - 11:34 am: Edit

If I had a clue, I'd tell ya... Hang around Pagosa Springs, CO long enough and you'll hear it as a replacement for "shit" in a good way. And I'm not even Jewish...

disco2guy