Tires

[Erick]

I run the 285/70/17 BFG A/T ko's on my Expedition and they have never left me in the mud, not nearly as good an off road tire as the BFG M/T's but a better ride and fuel mileage on road. For what you say you want to do with them I would say get the BFG M/T's as they will be better off road and still behave on long trips if you need to, I know I have personally driven them from Indiana to Wyoming a few times on a F-250. Dad run's the 35" BFG M/T's on his truck and gets around 50,00 miles out of them, I've got over 60,000 on the A/T's on my truck right now (over 65,000 I think) but I don't think they'll see the 70,000 mile mark maybe but I doubt it.

For all around off roading it's hard to beat a Super Swamper TSL Radial say a 38 x 15.50 x 15 bolted to a 78 F-150 with a 460 and lockers at both ends, I love mine.

I've worn out a lot of tires and I can say I will be putting the BFG A/T's back on my truck when the time comes.

 

[RDT]

You will like these in the mud.

Joking you wont like the way they wear.

 

[RDT]

This is my vote.

 

[shaunbagone]

When I had my jeeps I ran super swamper LTB's. Bias ply tire. Very aggressive, Very good wear. Yes they were noisy but I didnt care. Very inexpensive compared to BFG muds or Goodyear MTR's. You do get the bias ply flat spot if the truck sits for a couple hours but it rounds back out in about a mile of driving. Both my jeeps were daily drivers too. They lasted longer that any other mud tire ive owned.

 

[Wood Junkie]

50k out of the BFG M/T's isn't bad...... but those Bogger's look sweet.....just not practical.... I haven't considered a Super Swamper. I'm looking hard at the BFG M/T's and the Firestone Destination M/T's. The tread design is almost identical. I have a month or so to decide. That's when the budget works them in. Maybe I could find some used and have extra for a 361,or a 7900...or a log splitter!!

 

[spacemule]

your 96 2500 came stock with 2.45 -75R 16

or same as my 97 cummins 2500 4x4. currently running 2.85 - 75R 16. but would like to reduce width for better mileage.

One thing to keep in mind is that the original tires will show better mileage because they're a smaller diameter, and hence the odometer is not accurate with the bigger tires, unless you've programmed for it.

For instance, 245-75 means the tread width is 245 mm wide and the sidewall height is 75% of 245, or 183.75 mm high.

The 285-75 will have 213.75 mm high sidewalls. That's ((213.75-183.75)/183.75)*100 = 16.33% taller sidewalls on the 285-75. So, if the two sizes yield equal actual fuel mileage, say 15 mpg, the larger size will give you calculated (1-.1633)*15= 12.55 miles per gallon, while the smaller size will show the accurate 15 miles per gallon.

Edit: I followed evenrudes link, and I'm off on my calculations. I figured the percentage change in sidewalls for mileage, but the diameter of the tire is what needs to be figured. You have to take the hieight of the sidewall, multiply by 2, and add the diameter of the wheel to get the overall diamter of the tire in order to figure differences. The acutal difference will work out to 7.8%.

Just remember when you're figuring your mileage with the big tires to add 8% in order to compare to the originals.

 

[Evanrude]

Personally, I would stay away from Goodyear MTR's. They always seem to wear fast/uneven on my friends' vehicles. Plus, they're a little more $$$.

Here is a very handy resource when looking to change tire size.
http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html

 

[Slvrmple72]

The Firestone Destination M/T tires got a good review on tirerack.com. Better than BFG's for deep snow and mud. Anyone used these? They are right at $200each installed at a local Firestone dealer.

My 2001 F-350 I got early last year came withem up from TX. So far I really like them but when I need to get new I will get Gdyr Wranglers.

 

[Slvrmple72]

You will like these in the mud.

Joking you wont like the way they wear.

But the chick in the passenger seat will like the on road vibrations