Tires, should I go back to OEM size?

just replaced my tires-2015 -4cyl 4x4 245/75/16 I stayed with those

 

I may be wrong but I *think* 4-cyl trucks used that narrower tire. Maybe something to do with slightly lower rolling resistance to go with lower power output of a 4-cyl engine.

 

4 cyl Tacomas come with the 245s because all of the lower trim models (non-TRD) come with 245s. I am currently planing to replace my 265/70/R16s with Michelin Defenders and am still debating in my head the 265/70 and 245/75 question. I think it likely makes no difference whatsoever in perceived performance. Just curious if the slightly narrower, and lighter, tires would make a difference in fuel economy.

Going up a size to 265/75s is not a consideration for me because how a tire looks is not a relevant consideration when choosing tires.

 

I know this is an older thread that’s been resurrected but I too am facing this dilemma- I’ll need new tires soon and have the stock size (245/75/16) Falken Wildpeaks at3 that were on the truck when I bought it. Other than aesthetics, is there a benefit to the 265’s? It’s a daily driver that sees snow and an occasional dirt/gravel road but no real off-roading.

 

On fresh powder and deep, clean snow pack taller, narrower tires are generally preferred. For hardpack snow, slush and ice mix, shorter and wider tires aired down a bit are generally preferred.

 

I’ll have a set of 265/70/16 Falken Wildpeak at4s for sale tomorrow with 4K miles on them. I’m sure gas or shipping would kill the deal though.

 

if I was a little closer I’d seriously consider your offer. Thank you anyway

 

No worries, I’d stick with the larger tires if anything just for cosmetic reasons.

 

About 3 years ago I went from larger oversized tire to new, almost zero mile set of 2021 takeoffs. 2006 TRD OR, Compared to the prev tire the reduction in tire noise was significant and the OEM had far better highway manners and mileage was better. Fast forward 3 years and I bought the 265 Wildpeaks to replace the OE tires, there wasn't a big increase noise, the mileage probably suffered slightly, it wasn't significant and the ride with wildpeaks to me was just as good as the OEs for whatever that's worth.

 

Interesting, I thought it was the opposite. I thought narrower was generally better for every application except those where you want flotation (like powdery snow).

I think people usually clarify that 265 isn't really a wide tire, either. 255's are considered narrow, 285 starts getting into the wide realm, from what I've seen.

 

Another thing to consider and I don't think it's that great of an issue here is that with the wider tires, you will have slightly, I say slightly fewer pounds per square inch of weight of surface contact and if you live in the rust belt it may make a slight difference in snow and ice. Soft surfaces like mud and sand, wide tires can be an advantage.

 

That's another point I forgot: the different sizes will call for diff pressures. Should be 29 psi for the 265, but your door frame should tell you the pressure for the 245s.

 

I run 32~33, came back from the tire store with 36 which was harsh but got good mileage, I've switched to back down to 33, seems to be a happy medium between ride quality and mileage.

 

About the same here, running 32 in my 265/75s.

 

I’m sure there are as many thoughts on this as there are types of snow

I was always taught (and drove up north) that you want to cut through the fresh powder and get deeper into the firmer packed snow underneath the powder, and that narrower tires are preferred since the narrower contact patch kind of slices through the powder more effectively.

But I could also see like 4’ of fresh pack you’d want as wide as you could since you couldn’t reach the hardpack 40” down.