Skinny Tire

Would someone please help me understand why people prefer a skinny tire? is it better off road? How about on mpg's? Shopping for tires myself and just curious if this would be an option on a stock 16" wheel.

 

The 255's i had were wider than the craptastic stock 265's.

 

Not sure who you're looking at that wants skinny tires.
Most seem to want a 285+ which to me is not skinny.
Skinny would be like a 245.

 

Skinnier tire = less weight (thus less power loss and less fuel economy loss), less potential for rubbing issues, and better in snow.

My next set of tires will likely be the same BFG KO2, but in the "skinny" 34x10.5x17 flavour.

 

255, 285, then the 2 side by side

 

Yea, i've read a few guys like the taller tire skinny look. One guy even discussed a 235 which just shocked me. Just trying to educate myself.

 

Which one did you go with? If the 255 then was it for performance as well? Thank you in advance.

 

How about for a 16" wheel? 255/80/16??

 

I took the 255's off in favor of the 285's. There wasn't a problem with them. Just wanted something bigger and more aggressive. I off-road multiple times per month.

 

I love your set up dude.

Haven't seen any of those. It would give you better MPG but thats about it.
To be fair you may get some MPG but you won't have as great of traction off road (if you're doing that) and you wont get as big of a footprint when you air down.

I'm thinking trying to find a 265-275 with a 80% side wall. Something that will get me around a 33inch tire in height.
Not sure if its even a size thats available though.

 

the fuel is the only reason I'm thinking a 265 80 16 over a 285 70 16
But not sure if I'll be able to find them.

 

It's getting there. Needs regeared and some bumpers. But I'm taking a break on it for now in favor of my other expensive hobbies

 

I only lost 0.3-.4 MPG when I went from 255-285. That's likely due to the weight difference between AT and MT

 

265/80 has more "tire mass" than 285/70 (265*80 > 285*70), and will thus weigh more. <edit> This is a guess, not a fact. Tire composition, structure of tread, etc. will all play a role in the weight. </edit> I suspect the higher weight will off-set any gains you get from lower rolling resistance and air dynamics of the thinner tire.

 

I'd go with a 255 80 but from the looks of it can't find any in a 16" rim

Not sure what I'll do for winters. Might keep the same size as summers or just go skinny and whatever height (like a 30-31")
Since skinnier will be better for steering in snow.


Seeing as I'll be taking delivery around January, I should probably be looking more into winters than summers lol.

 

Need a 255/85 if you're going 16". That's a 33"

 

My spare is a 255/85-16. Same rolling diameter as my normal tires.

 

Yeah, I'm not aware of anything that's exactly 255/80/16. I'd get in on that myself. The KO2 34/10.5/17 is equivalent to 265/80/17, and that's probably as close as you can get to an 80-profile while still staying skinny~ish.

255/85/16 would be great, too.

 

Skinnier tire = less weight

Meanwhile.... I can tell ya, 285/75R16 gets you 16-17MPG

 

Be careful with this. Yes in theory a skinnier tire is less weight, but usually skinny tires above 32" cannot be found in a light ply. They're usually AT and MT only at that point, so they're heavy duty and the tread compound alone of tires in that range will eat gas mileage. Always look at the tire weight, OP