Jump to content

285/70/17 On Stock Height

02hawk
 Share

Recommended Posts

02hawk New Member

02hawk

Posted
Posted

Just like the title says. For now i just want to get some beefier tires on since the stock 245/70/17 look really bad. I have a 2007 Sierra c1500 Will 285/70/17 tires fit on stock rims(17x7.5) and will i have any rubbing issues? I am also thinking of getting different wheels to match the truck, what offset would be best for my application?

 

I tried searching but all you guys are way ahead of me when it comes to suspension mods.

Stevens03 Senior Enthusiast

Stevens03

Posted
Posted

You might need a little leveling kit but thats easy enough. If you go with 9-9.5" wide wheels, you'll need 5.5" of backspacing. If you go with 8-8.5" wide wheels, then 4.5" of backspacing works just fine.

 

Steven

Gryphon Enthusiast

Gryphon

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't know if you're driving an NBS or a Classic, but FWIW I saw an 03 Avalanche with 285/70R17s (Goodyear Wranglers) and they just barely cleared. I was considering putting the 285s on my 05 Sierra but realized they'd protrude past the body a bit, and I don't have fender flares. Tires protruding beyond the body is illegal here and I didn't want to add flares to make it compliant, so when time comes for new rubber I'll be getting the same size I've got, 265/70R17s. They're pretty beefy already.

 

As for fitting the wheel, the BFG AT/KOs are listed as fitting a 7.5-9" rim so depending on the tire you can probably squeeze them on there.

Edited by Gryphon
02hawk New Member

02hawk

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
I don't know if you're driving an NBS or a Classic, but FWIW I saw an 03 Avalanche with 285/70R17s (Goodyear Wranglers) and they just barely cleared. I was considering putting the 285s on my 05 Sierra but realized they'd protrude past the body a bit, and I don't have fender flares. Tires protruding beyond the body is illegal here and I didn't want to add flares to make it compliant, so when time comes for new rubber I'll be getting the same size I've got, 265/70R17s. They're pretty beefy already.

 

As for fitting the wheel, the BFG AT/KOs are listed as fitting a 7.5-9" rim so depending on the tire you can probably squeeze them on there.

 

 

I have the NBS 07 Sierra. That picture on your signature; are those 265/70R17s?

 

 

This is a setup im looking from Tirerack. The wheel specs are Offset: +25mm Backspacing: 5.47" Bolt Pattern: 6-139

 

 

Would the bacskacing and offset work on my truck?

 

I will be combining these with either 265/70/17 BFG AT /KOs or if i get the leveling kit ill get 285/70/17

ultra_rogue_bml_ci3_l.jpg

Edited by 02hawk
sablowme Enthusiast

sablowme

Posted
Posted

im going to shoot for to wide on that, last gmt900 truck i did with 9 wide on wheels and bigger than 11" wide tires, had to be trimed, and that was a 4.8 4wd truck. I try to stay with no more than 11" wide of a tire, then you got to watch your style of tire as well....no M/Ts or crazy lug patterns there not measured with the size of the tire. Or if you do they have to be realy skinny like 10" wide.

 

just good to keep in mind.

mipsco1 Enthusiast

mipsco1

Posted
Posted

i put my 285/70/17 on my truck while it was still stock height with no rubbing whats so ever.

pics before the lev kit.

post-49413-1247710524_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710532_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710524_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710532_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710524_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710532_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710524_thumb.jpg

post-49413-1247710532_thumb.jpg

  • Like 1
cerbomark Senior Enthusiast

cerbomark

Posted
Posted

dumb question time/ what size makes it a 32-or 33 inch tire as opposed to our 30-31(I would guess they are stock)? And will they fit on a stock 17 inch rim. My stock 17s just touch the GMC flaps when backing and turning. Also dont really want a leveling kit after reading some issues here with them.

meade01 Enthusiast

meade01

Posted
Posted
dumb question time/ what size makes it a 32-or 33 inch tire as opposed to our 30-31(I would guess they are stock)? And will they fit on a stock 17 inch rim. My stock 17s just touch the GMC flaps when backing and turning. Also dont really want a leveling kit after reading some issues here with them.

 

 

I put 285 Firestone M/T on my 2005 4x4 with a leveling kit and they still rub, especially on the drivers side.

05silvycrew Enthusiast

05silvycrew

Posted
Posted

on a 2 wheel drive, i would think you'll be real close to rubbing 285/70/17, that's roughly 33" tall by 11.50 wide.

 

a little bit smaller tire would be the 265/70/17 option. they're just under 32" tall and just under 11" wide

 

if you're concerned with the tires being to wide, look into 255/75/17. they're just over 32" tall and 10" wide.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined

  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,694 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...