New Falken Wildpeak AT4W ????

The word is yes.

 

Mine fit with the typical modification to the tabs. But mine's a 2nd gen and not sure if there are any minor differences on the 3rd gen. Toughest part is getting it situated so it doesn't contact the diff.

 

Thanks!

 

@Discount Tire any word when the new Rio Rancho, NM store will open?

 

Anybody with experience going from the At3w to this yet?

 

Yes. Went from SL at3w to E at4w, both in 265/75R16. No noticeable differences on dry or wet roads - have yet to try them in the snow. Both are very smooth running tires. At4w is a really good upgrade from at3w.

 

Did you notice any difference in ride, handling, or mpg when you went to the E rated tires?

 

Maybe a 1mpg worse maybe, but it's nothing that I notice. Can still get 20-21mpg on the highway going 60-65mph and that's with a 2" lift. Acceleration is slightly slower than my bald SL load at3w's but I don't even notice that anymore. Ride and handling honestly feel the same. You might notice a slight difference for a few days after switching over but then it becomes the new normal and it's fine.
TLDR: No hugely noticeable differences in anything.

 

^ Thanks!!

 

Anyone here run the at4 255/85r16 off road much? If so, how do they behave? Is the C load durable enough for moderate rock gardens? I’m planning a bunch of solo trips all over California with a variety of trail difficulties/terrain and have been eyeing this size for the extra ground clearance without having to do all of the trimming/chopping required of wider tires.

 

Haven't been into anything really jagged yet, but so far they are everything I had hoped for.

 

Oh, also scaled this easily on Mon., without airing down.

 

Man those really are such a great size for the 3rd Gen.

Based on that terrain in your photos, it seems like the C rating holds up pretty well to rocks if that’s typical for the type of stuff you’re doing.

 

1000% durable enough. The sidewalls on that size are BEEFY. Don't bother paying any attention to load ID, it's almost a useless piece of info unless you're actually talking about load. Load and durability are not the same thing.

The sidewalls on my C load AT4W are as thick, if not thicker, than my E load G003's. The AT4W in that size is super heavy because it has a lot of built in durability. Even my old SL load AT3W's, which were very light and didn't have beefy sidewalls, did just fine over all sorts of rocks in the Eastern Sierra's and throughout the Mojave preserve.

 

The pics in the first post were aired down to 17 PSI. The C rated sidewall works very well on these tires. Time will tell how they hold up, but they have given me no indication that they won't keep performing as suggested. There are places we go to that have bigger, sharper rocks. At this time, access to that area is denied...but we are looking for more...

Besides the rocks, we come across areas where the roads consist of anything from sand to gravel (3/4" to 4"), to mud...water holes 15-18" deep. I haven't come across anything that concerned me yet.

Falken has hit a home run in my opinion. And yes, this is the perfect size!

 

There is a reason these tires are as heavy as they are. The DuraSpec construction is for real!

 

Great photos!! Thanks for sharing. I’m thinking I’ll put an order in for them next week!

 

That’s all great to hear and great info!

 

Would you be able to measure the actual mounted height and width of these tires?

 

Someone else asked me this. I don't have the numbers off the top of my head but they were very close to Falken's published numbers.