Jump to content

Looking at 275/70/18 nitto terra grapplers

boom11

By boom11
in Tires, Wheels & TPMS

Recommended Posts

boom11 Enthusiast

boom11

Posted
  • Author
Posted

ok thanks rims and tires should be here tomorrow says fed ex tracking hope n to go get them mounted tomorrow if i get them early enough but maybe friday pics to come sooooon

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lbkthree Enthusiast

lbkthree

Posted
Posted

heres the baby...the tires do rub a bit anyone got ideas on how to trim wheel well???

 

 

Personally, I don't like trimming. I would through a zone 1.5" BL on and call it good. Just my 2 pennies though.

nbuchanan Enthusiast

nbuchanan

Posted
Posted

heres the baby...the tires do rub a bit anyone got ideas on how to trim wheel well???

 

 

Personally, I don't like trimming. I would through a zone 1.5" BL on and call it good. Just my 2 pennies though.

 

 

Trimming is alot easier and cheaper for some of us!

dirtfan21 Senior Enthusiast

dirtfan21

Posted
Posted

heres the baby...the tires do rub a bit anyone got ideas on how to trim wheel well???

 

 

Personally, I don't like trimming. I would through a zone 1.5" BL on and call it good. Just my 2 pennies though.

 

 

I second that comment, but also know money is tight sometimes. Trust me on that one.

 

The body lift is a pretty easy install and can be had for around $200 with rear bumper brackets.

ajensen383 Enthusiast

ajensen383

Posted
Posted

Looks great...Perfect stance, and the 275's look great as well...good combo... What is the offset on those rims??? 0 or +14??

 

You may be rubbing a little beacuse Trail Graps run bigger than most in diameter

boom11 Enthusiast

boom11

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks guys for the input and ideas..as for the offset i think its zero...when you say offset what do you mean by that i know it has to do with rim size but could you be more specific?? and do you think the 1.5 body lift would stop the rubbing?? another option was the 3.5 rough country sup lift but i like the not to high look of the truck with the big tires

 

and as for the tires they are the toyo m/t's and the 275/70/18 are 33.6 inches tall so pretty big but i love them

dirtfan21 Senior Enthusiast

dirtfan21

Posted
Posted

If you do the 1.5" body lift you will not rub, I would bet on those odds. As for the 3.5" Rough Country lift, people have royally dogged that lift since day one on here. Not many reviews in favor but I have read they again have redesigned it, so who knows.

 

Truck looks great!

ajensen383 Enthusiast

ajensen383

Posted
Posted

thanks guys for the input and ideas..as for the offset i think its zero...when you say offset what do you mean by that i know it has to do with rim size but could you be more specific??

 

Offset is basically the distance the hub mounting surface is from the center of the wheel, also called backspace (distance from the backside of the wheel to the mounting surface).. It should say on the wheel box that it came in what the offset is ( 0 or +14) or the backspacing ( 5.0" or 5.6" )...Or even a part number would help...Love the way your truck looks, and want to duplicate the stance.

boom11 Enthusiast

boom11

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks guys for the help.and the MPG with these dropped from 18 to19 with stock tires and rims to about 16MPG wiht the new set up and as for power loss not really its a beast in the snow the tires dig in great so as far as i can see not to bad as far as power lose. Im looking into the body lift but i just dnt like the look of the body under showing but is alot cheaper then sup lift.

dirtfan21 Senior Enthusiast

dirtfan21

Posted
Posted

If you are reading mpg's off your DIC then it is wrong. As soon as you change tire sizes the DIC won't calculate your MPG's correctly.

 

As for the body lift, this was a pic of my truck with the 1.5". You can barely see any more frame than stock.

 

5.jpg

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...