Tire size without needing a lift?

What’s a good size of tire that looks good but doesn’t need a lift or suspension upgrade. I’ve looked a lot and maybe leaning towards 265 75 size just so I don’t need to upgrade since I don’t have thousands of dollars for suspension

 

Good choice, I put on 265/75/16 KO2’s, they look and work well. I assume 16” on a 4x4? You should also replace the spare with the same brand and size you get, too.

 

Yeah 16” 4x4. Nice yeah looking between KO2s or falkens

 

P rated Falken would be my choice..

 

Before 1.5” lift - 1st trip out with the KO2’s, they added about 1” of lift just in tire alone over stock. I hit a really rough and rocky steep part of this road later that same evening this pic was taken and they did really well.

 

Those KO2s look nice! Awesome setup!

 

255/85/16 has been really popular lately. Next time I get tires, this'll be the size I get.

More info here:
https://www.tacomaworld.com/threads/255-85-r16-owners-experience.155849/page-210#post-15595487

 

265/ 75/ 16 works well without any mods

 

SSG665 that’s good to know bc I’m new to all this so thank you

 

They are good for more traction under certain road conditions, mud, snow, etc, but do cause the treads to push down more (PSI), thus not as good on sand (floatation) or on sharp rough rock as wider tires.

 

I've been trying to find the article I was reading on the physics of how this tire works, but it's supposed to be better on sand and rock when aired down.

Y'all will think I'm full of it, I'm sure - but I'll keep looking for it. I'll post it up if I find it.

AHA! Found it. Thought I had it here at work, but it was on my home system. Enjoy! http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html

 

I saw that report, too- wider tire (and aired down tires) add more contact area and lower pressure against sand and rock. But they found that narrower tires benefited traction when pushing down harder on snow, ice or mud.

I chose wider since I’m mainly a dry desert off-roader and went with a E rated tire since I sometimes carry heavy loads and also tow off road as well.

 

Correct.

It's my understanding that they're better in snow and mud because they dig down to a solid surface faster, am I getting that right?

 

That was their reasoning, correct. There’s a good thread on 255’s paralleling this one you should see- and some of the links on it are good too. If I lived in snow or back east, I’d run 255’s for sure also.

 

I was an idiot and bought stock sized KO2's just last year, thinking I wouldn't be offroading my "new" (at the time) rig all that much.

 

Those 265/70’s are great- don’t fret it. I’d run them until you need new tires, the side walls are only less than about 1/2” lower than a 265/75.

 

I was fretting about the height difference between mine and the 255/85/16s. Isn't that about 1.5"?

 

You’re right, I was thinking the 265/75’s. are you running a lifted truck? You can get that 1.5” easily with four 5100’s and a AAL set for less than the cost of a new set of KO2’s. But your axles and undercarriage won’t go up any, I guess that’s more desirable.

 

265/75/16's were what I wanted to put on my truck, but I could not find any info at the time that said the front tires would not rub, so I went with 265/70/16's. Same height as stock tires, but wider, so they did not change how the speedometer reads. One place even put a new 265/75/16 tire next to the stock tire and it looked like it would rub to both of us. From what I’m reading now, it sounds like they would have worked.

 

I'll be lifted soon, just waiting to get some Dakar leafs to go with the Icon Stage III goodies in the garage.