Jump to content

275/65R18 BFG AT's

FL335i

By FL335i
in Modifications & Accessories

Recommended Posts

FL335i Enthusiast

FL335i

Posted
Posted

Anyone have pics of the stock 18's with the +1 size tires? Looking like I want to go with a 275/65R18 on the factory 18's which I love. OE 18's are 18x8.5. Just wondering if anyone has pics or has done this...

smrr1 Senior Enthusiast

smrr1

Posted
Posted

I has nittos in that size on my 14. Worked well. Looked good. I'll try to get a pic later.

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

I have Cooper pics in this size in my build thread.

 

Sent from Tapatalk App - Samsung S6

tnchevy Senior Enthusiast

tnchevy

Posted
Posted

I has nittos in that size on my 14. Worked well. Looked good. I'll try to get a pic later.

How did the nittos impact your gas mileage. I had a set on my 2002 model after I wore down the factory ones and took about 1 mpg off but that was going with the original size (265-75/16) which is still a taller tire by a few tenths of an inch than my current stock 18 inch wheel set up! That stock good years are the thing I want to change the most on my truck because they look like crap IMO and I want to put a set of 275's AT's on there pretty bad but I am also a tight **s and don't want to spend the money.

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

No gonna lie here, the stock Good Years are a good MPG tire. Swtiching to any AT tire, and you're gonna take a 1-2mpg hit.

larryz71 Enthusiast

larryz71

Posted
Posted

I have a set of 275/65R18 Nitto G2s sitting in the garage with ~2,000 miles on them. I took them off my 08 before I traded it in for my 15. Planning on getting them put on this weekend. I will post up some pics.

smrr1 Senior Enthusiast

smrr1

Posted
Posted

How did the nittos impact your gas mileage. I had a set on my 2002 model after I wore down the factory ones and took about 1 mpg off but that was going with the original size (265-75/16) which is still a taller tire by a few tenths of an inch than my current stock 18 inch wheel set up! That stock good years are the thing I want to change the most on my truck because they look like crap IMO and I want to put a set of 275's AT's on there pretty bad but I am also a tight **s and don't want to spend the money.

Just saw i typed has not had. Oops. I put them on the truck at maybe 1,000 miles so the truck never really broke in. Not sure what it would have done with stock tires. It was a double cab 6.5 bed 4x4 6.2 and i regularly averaged 18. Very close to original size and not as heavy as a LT or E rated tire.
FL335i Enthusiast

FL335i

Posted
  • Author
Posted

There is another thread regarding E rated tires... and their weight. I cannot go the BFG AT route b/c they are an E rated tire in this size and 55 Lbs IIRC. Thus far, I found some Goodyear Kevlar Wranglers that weigh in at 48 Lbs with C rating, not E. Relatively light compare to all the tires I've been looking at in the 275/65R18 size with "all terrain" rating. I don't need a very agressive tire, just something +1 on the aggressive scale also. A GY Wrangler would be perfect.

bcbz71 Enthusiast

bcbz71

Posted
Posted

2014 DC with RC 2.5 and Nitto TG G2 275/65r18 (not LT). Leveled, removal of front air dam, and larger tires has my mileage around 17mpg at best (usually 16...was around 19 when stock with GYs . Lifetime over 10K miles is 15.5mpg, but it's reduced because I get 10mpg when I tow. Tires were put on before the level and fit fine....I think 285s might fit without a level.

 

Look decent when next to truck and from the front and rear because they bulge out a little. Tread width is around 10" and with the weight of the truck, they stand about 30" tall.

 

When you approach the truck from the side, they don't appear tall enough. 285s would look better and 295s are too big for just a level. I'm contemplating a 1.5 BL so I can go 295 next.

 

Non-LT Nittos don't have tall tread (aka thick rubber), so they look kinda worn even when they are new. They are warrantied to 60K, but I don't see them lasting that long. Bad on wet roads and clay.....smooth on highway with little noise.

 

Hope that helps.

post-138034-0-72902300-1438914605_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-46710800-1438915038_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-72902300-1438914605_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-46710800-1438915038_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-72902300-1438914605_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-46710800-1438915038_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-72902300-1438914605_thumb.jpg

post-138034-0-46710800-1438915038_thumb.jpg

FL335i Enthusiast

FL335i

Posted
  • Author
Posted

thanks for the pics guys. ^ That's exactly the look I want. I'm pretty dead set on not running a E-rated tire. Stiffness and weight... overkill. the GY Wrangler's with Kevlar are C rated, 48 Lbs and look good and have great reviews on TR. But yes, the 275/65R18 is the way to go. Pics sold me!

bcbz71 Enthusiast

bcbz71

Posted
Posted

thanks for the pics guys. ^ That's exactly the look I want. I'm pretty dead set on not running a E-rated tire. Stiffness and weight... overkill. the GY Wrangler's with Kevlar are C rated, 48 Lbs and look good and have great reviews on TR. But yes, the 275/65R18 is the way to go. Pics sold me!

 

Post pics when your setup is complete!

 

In your truck description, what do you mean by shimmed gas pedal? My gas pedal had a lot of flex in it, so I put some cardboard behind it to make it stiffer. The trucks with the adjustable pedals have a nicer gas pedal, but the dealer said I couldn't buy just the gas pedal since my truck didn't have that option.

FL335i Enthusiast

FL335i

Posted
  • Author
Posted

^I got tired of a 1/2" travel before the it kicked in. Noticed the assembly flexes like a Twizzler on a hot day in FL. So my fix was shimming the back side of the assembly, between the floorboard and the pedal assembly, with a paint stick piece. Super glued it in place. World of a difference. I took pics and did a post, search for it...

 

 

Back to tires. Last night I was looking at the GY Kevlar wranglers and the BFG KO2's.... seems like it's down to those in the 275/65R18. Stinks the BFG's are so heavy and E rated. I'm pretty scared that with that kind of tire on a truck that is known for "vibration" issues it's only going to accentuate the issue. Big $ gamble if the truck rides like crap and vibrates afterward. Right now it does not vibrate. Only a little at high speeds on the highway in the heat of the day from the back end. Overall, no my truck does not vibrate. Hence why I'd like to avoid an E rated tire.

Panik Enthusiast

Panik

Posted
Posted

 

 

Back to tires. Last night I was looking at the GY Kevlar wranglers and the BFG KO2's.... seems like it's down to those in the 275/65R18. Stinks the BFG's are so heavy and E rated. I'm pretty scared that with that kind of tire on a truck that is known for "vibration" issues it's only going to accentuate the issue. Big $ gamble if the truck rides like crap and vibrates afterward. Right now it does not vibrate. Only a little at high speeds on the highway in the heat of the day from the back end. Overall, no my truck does not vibrate. Hence why I'd like to avoid an E rated tire.

 

Can I throw another tire suggestion out there for you to consider? If you haven't already, check out the Hankook ATM's. I have the 275/65/R18 E rated ones and have been very pleased with their performance. I originally wanted to get the GY Kevlar's but had difficulty finding them for anything less than donating an arm, leg, and my left testicle. While I got the E rated because I do some heavier towing they do make them in options between P and E ratings.

 

 

They are very quiet especially compared to the Duratracs that used to be on my wife's rig. The only vibration I have is exactly between 77-78 mph which is a harmonics thing with this set of tires. I've put close to 15,000 on these tires and have had no issues. Granted they are not as aggressive looking as some of the other options.

 

T2

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...