Jump to content

Max towing Tires and Wheels - What is GM thinking?

tbrown176

By tbrown176
in Engines & Drivetrain

Recommended Posts

sugarjohnson Enthusiast

sugarjohnson

Posted
Posted

I have same truck as you with 20's. I literally drove off the lot and over to Discount Tire. They gave me a trade in on the crappy Goodyear's and I immediately put Michelin LTX/MS2 on. I tow my TT a ton and they are great tires. 3rd set I have run on my trucks.

Rme2513 Enthusiast

Rme2513

Posted
Posted

VBi78Mt.jpg?1k3TIoYZ.jpg?1

 

I replaced the stock Goodyear LS2's with only 100 miles on my NHT. They ride fine, but they aren't going to last long and I don't want to run them in a Michigan winter. Went with the BFG KO2 :D

Let us know what kind of real world MPGs you are getting with the tires. I love the look of a mud tire just would rather have better gas mileage
Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

I didn't give the Goodyear SRAs a valid MPG test since I took them off before I even had 200 miles on the truck. Kinda wish I would have, just to see what the MPG difference would have been. But, I am guessing it's probably around 1-2mpg at most.

sugarjohnson Enthusiast

sugarjohnson

Posted
Posted

I didn't give the Goodyear SRAs a valid MPG test since I took them off before I even had 200 miles on the truck. Kinda wish I would have, just to see what the MPG difference would have been. But, I am guessing it's probably around 1-2mpg at most.

Sounds about right. I previously had Nitto Trail Grapplers on my 2011 and saw around 9-10 towing a 6K TT. Same trailer with my 14 and Michelins I get a pretty solid 11mpg.

Rme2513 Enthusiast

Rme2513

Posted
Posted

I had stock tires on my 09 5.3 there were like 42 lbs I put 275 75 18 cooper stt max on it and they were 62 lbs and I went from 16 to 13 and it was a hell of a load on the truck at 75 mph I took them off within a month I love the tire just was to much for the truck without changing the gears out

robvas Enthusiast

robvas

Posted
Posted

Let us know what kind of real world MPGs you are getting with the tires. I love the look of a mud tire just would rather have better gas mileage

I'll never know what mileage I would have gotten with the old tires, but I just traded in a 14 Z71 5.3 3.42 double cab with a 2" level, no air dam, and the same tires in 285/65-18 size and was able to still knock down 19-20 on the highway. I'll report back in a month or so.

Spurshot Senior Enthusiast

Spurshot

Posted
Posted

GM just went cheap on tires, IMO. I would not be towing a 3 horse 7500lb trailer with P tires, let alone 12,000lbs. Things get ugly when towing, if you loose a tire.

barcia51 Enthusiast

barcia51

Posted
Posted

My dealer traded the 20" s for 18" s and for the difference in price they sprayed my bedliner, installed leveling kit, mud flaps, and weather tech floor mats! I have aftermarket 20"s I run in the summer and will be putting BFG KO2's on the 18" s before the snow flies.

  • 2 weeks later...
TxTruckMan Senior Enthusiast

TxTruckMan

Posted
Posted

I have a 6.2L 1500 Sierra on the way with Max Towing Package (NHT). The max towing capacity is 12,000 lbs. When you upgrade to the 6.2L the package adds 20 inch wheels.

 

What benefit would 20 inch wheels give me to my max towing capacity?

 

In my mind a 20 inch wheel on a truck adds rolling mass and weight. It is a purely cosmetic addition.

 

My second question concerns the tires that come on this truck are P275/55R20. The load per tire on these is 2409lbs. These are passenger car tires. In my mind I should be using LT tires not Ps and I should have a load rating of E. For example: BF Goodrich T/A KO2 in a LT275/70R18s.

 

Did GM do this just to make the truck look good and boost MPGs? I appreciate your thoughts on this. Please let me know if I am just looking at this all wrong.

The OEM tires are fine for most 1500 applications. And FYI, an LT tire will likely add 20 lbs or more over the stock tire. That'll probably more detrimental to performance than the larger wheel as that mass is even further from the hub.

 

LT tires on a 1500 are overrated IMHO. I've used Wrangler or Dueller P-rated tires on every truck I've owned over the last 20 years and never had a tire failure. Plenty of nails, tears and cuts, but never a failure.

EXSlider400 Senior Enthusiast

EXSlider400

Posted
Posted

When the SR-A's wear a little more I plan to replace with a P series AT with an XL load rating. Maybe AT3 from Cooper. Better grip and towing with not alot of noise and ride quality change...but KO2 looks awsome.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,914
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    AidenVorpagel
    Newest Member
    AidenVorpagel
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 545 Guests (See full list)

  • 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...