Downsizing 265/75/16 to 265/70/16 to prepare for camper, thoughts?

I really tried not to make another 265/70/16 vs 265/75/16 thread, but here I am.

I currently have 265/75/16 Cooper AT3 (C load range) tires on my truck. I have no complaints about the tires, they've worn well and have handled as well as I could ask off-road. I went with C load range because the truck has a full-time topper (AT Habitat) and is usually loaded with our camping gear--sure it meant a little more weight and the expected loss of MPG, but it's an old Toyota truck so I never really had high hopes for MPG anyway. I went with the slightly bigger 265/75/16 over the stock size because they fit without any modifications, and being just slightly bigger gave the advantage of slightly higher ground clearance without too much compromise in performance (gearing, acceleration, etc.).

We're now switching our camp setup to a heavier slide-in camper and in preparation for that I'm making the switch to E load range tires. Obviously with the jump from C to E load range, there comes more unsprung weight and with that I expect worse acceleration and fuel economy. So I'm thinking I'll drop back down to the stock 265/70/16 size in an effort to reduce the impact of that added weight. I suspect that the smaller diameter may also help acceleration "feel" improved due to smaller gearing, but it'll probably be unnoticeable (if there's any truth to that hypothesis at all).

The knowns are:

• I need new tires (this is true regardless due to the age of the ones I have now)
• The new tires will be E load range (this is recommended by the camper manufacturer but would have been my independent decision anyway for peace of mind given the added weight)
• In 265/70/16 I will most likely do Cooper AT3 again; it comes in E-range and I had a positive experience with my 265/75/16 AT3
• A 265/70/16 (E) AT3 weighs the same as a 265/75/16 (C) AT3, 46lbs
• IF I decide to instead go for 265/75/16 (E), I'm considering:
  • Cooper Stronghold AT (Americas/Discount Tire claims 48.77lbs, but no one else seems to list it)
  • General Grabber A/TX (53lbs)
  • Falken Tire A/T4W (53lbs)
  • BFG KO3 (55.5lbs)
• We don't really need the marginal increased ground clearance for 99% of our "adventure" needs
• Every bit of new weight we don't add helps since in addition to the camper we've got a full set of skid plates, winch, steel rear bumper, sliders
• On road handling is a higher priority than aggressive off-roadability, but we'll still want a tire that performs well in snow
  
• I'm not looking to regear--at least for now, I instead chose to spend that money towards upgrading to a 6 piston big brake kit--I felt that was a better investment ahead of adding the additional camper weight

What I'm still unsure about is what the impact will be to fuel economy at highway speeds. Like I said, I don't expect "good" fuel economy out of my truck regardless, but man it'd be a shame to have the smaller tire and get crappier MPG haha. "City" driving MPGs may be better due to the minor shift in gearing from the smaller tire, but most of our driving in this truck are long trips to/from camping destinations and I'm not sure how the laws of motion might factor in here. At my usual cruising speed of 65mph the smaller tire will be spinning faster than a larger tire so I expect higher RPMs to achieve the same speed with the smaller tire, but maybe that would be more ideal for the "powerband"? On a similar note, I expect that my speedometer will be "off" again, but at least it would be off in a "factory specs" way, for whatever that's worth. I expect transmission shift points to be affected too, but probably not at 65mph where I expect to be in the final gear for either tire size, at least on flat ground.

Thoughts and suggestions welcome, I'm still at least a month away from ordering the tires so I've got time to keep second guessing myself or finding out about anything else I failed to consider.

 

For me, Since I wanted to stick with Duratracs, going to E load forced me to step up from 265/70r16 to 265/75r16. They didn't have the smaller size in E load.

I also went from an AT Habitat to a truck camper. When going to E loads, we also re-geared the truck from the stock 3.73 to 4.56. It might be a little deep for this size tire, but we also tow a lot. The lower gearing made it possible to use all 5 gears of the automatic, rather than constantly driving around in 4th so the truck wasn't hunting back and forth heating up the torque converter/transmission.

 

What camper you going with?

 

Following in your footsteps essentially, going from an AT Habitat to a Scout Yoho.

 

My 2007 is at 253,000 miles. It came with 38 lb P rated 265/70/16's on it. I moved to P rated 265/75/16's after the factory tires wore out. Never could tell any difference in performance or fuel mileage. Several years ago I ran across a great deal on some 265/75/16's, but they were only available at the good price in an E rating that weighed 53 lbs each.

My truck had less acceleration, you could feel a noticeable difference pulling away from a light or merging onto an interstate. But fuel mileage never changed. Probably because they were a mild AT tread similar to all the previous tires. IME it's aggressive mud tires that kill fuel mileage.

In your case going to 265/70/16 makes sense, there isn't that much difference in size either way. IF they make that size in an E rating. You may have to go to 265/75/16 to get E rated tires.

 

I definitely remember seeing a drop in MPG when I went from the tires the truck had on it when I bought it (some P-rated 245 something or another) to the 265/75 C-range, but a I also changed out suspension parts resulting in a mild lift around the same time so it's hard to say it was completely the tires (although the tires definitely got bigger and heavier). Anyway, it wasn't too significant of a drop, something like 1, maybe 2 mpg. I also noticed the slight difference in off the line acceleration but as you said, I went from a essentially a "street" tire to an all terrain (that also happened to be bigger and heavier). Never really noticed any differences like shifting or gear hunting though.

So far the E-rated options I've found in 265/70/16 that I'm considering, are the Cooper AT3 and BFG KO2, with a KO3 in D-range coming Feb 1st--all claiming to be available for order by Americas/Discount Tire, at least of today, maybe that will change when I'm ready to make a decision undoubtedly sending me spiraling again haha.

 

I’m running 285 70 17 C load with a canopy, winch, small lift. On a non stop 283 mile road trip Kamloops BC to Jasper AB with 51lb KO2 285s and a 60mph speed limit I got 21mpg. Lots of hills, Truck felt great with 51lb tires.
I’m now trying Falken AT3w in the same size and load range but they weigh 61lbs, holy chubby! On a recent road trip again from Kamloops to Tsawwassen Ferry terminal non stop 282 miles I got 19 mpg. 60 and 70 mph speed limit.
Surprisingly not that bad considering a couple mtn passes and 10 pounds extra per tire.
If your concerned about snow get the KO3 or check out the Firestone Destination XT, they kicked the Falken AT4 butt in snow and ice performance. I’d stick with 265 70 16 size tire but in E.
Screenshot is from YouTube - The Fast Lane channel starting and stopping from 30mph.

 

That's an interesting datapoint on the KO3s, thanks for pointing me to the FLT review! Tire Racks recent comparison that featured the Stronghold, KO3, and A/T4Ws up against each other in the "LT" all terrain comparison (edit: whoops apparently the Falken in this test was NOT an LT like the KO3 and Stronghold) showed the Falkens as a better performer than the KO3 and Stronghold--it's the only reason the Falken was on my radar. I'm actually surprised at how poorly the Stronghold did in their review because my AT3s have exceeded my expectations in every way but it seems the Discoverer Road & Track (sadly not available in E) is more of an AT3 successor. I do dig the the look of the BFGs weirdly more-so in the more modest sizes--I think subconsciously it gives me Marty McFly Toyota 4x4 vibes (thanks marketing!). My biggest reservation about the BFGs is that my brother has had KO2s on his T4R for and I've seen them seek traction on wet, mud, sand, and snow on the same lines where my Tacoma on AT3s had no issue; to be fair though, we're talking different trucks, loads, sidewall plys, drivers, etc. so my feelings are just more subjective than scientific. I'm still willing to give the KO3s a chance though, but in 265/70/16 they're only going to be D it seems.

I'm envious of your mileage, looking back at the past 2 years of data I gave, I average about 13-14 mpg between fillips city, 15ish of mixed, and on a really good stretch of pure highway I might get lucky enough to see up to 19 if there's a fair amount of downhill haha.

Tire Rack vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCW5IXY_rIM

 

These trucks were designed around a 55, 60 mph speed limit 1750 rpm, that’s a lot of roads in my area. If I was doing 75 or 80 my mpg would be in the shitter haha.
The Falken AT3w is better in the snow and ice than the AT4w if you like Falken.

 

All your talk of tire weight, I decided to look up my E load Duratracs... 51 pounds. Making me feel good about that, thanks, lol. Obviously a more aggressive tire that's not helping my mileage any, but hey, at least it's not 10 pounds heavier!

 

Oh yeah I was surprised the Falken AT3w C load 285 at 61lbs is heavier or same weight as a real MT E load tire haha
Patagonia Milestar MT E - 62 lbs
Yokohama Geolander MT 003 E load - 58.2 lbs
Cooper Discoverer STT Pro E load - 62 lbs

 

OP, seems pretty simple. Go with the stock size tire 265/70R16 to keep the weight down. For the current 99% of places you go now and you don't need the clearance, I'm guessing going from the habitat to the huge exterior size gain of the Yoho, you'll be able to go to 99.9% of where you'd want with the new setup and smaller tires.

 

I'm in agreeance, but I do want to add that I feel I can still get the Yoho everywhere I could with the Habitat, EXCEPT where I'd hit trees... albeit slower, of course. It feels way more stable than you'd think. But when you are so off camber you'd hit the trees lining the trail... not much you can do but back up

 

Thanks all!

Yep, that 1% of places I expect we probably won't venture to is mostly those places where I expect the added height of the Yoho would be a little sketch.

Again, thanks to everyone for your responses, I think I'm leaning to going back to 265/70/16s in E range, I'll be sure to chime back in after the change and after picking up the camper. The hard part now is just waiting for the call that we can pickup our new camper.

Oh and btw, the AT Habitat is still for sale, mention this thread for a discount haha!

 

Where you picking up the Scout at?

 

Equipt1 in SLC, UT, so we'll be planning to break it in on the way home back to southern California, through Nevada.

 

Tentative update... After a lot of analysis paralysis, I landed on going with the Cooper A/T3s in 265/70R16, I have the pre-refresh (2017) versions in 265/75 and have been happy with them so I figured I'd give the new ones a shot. Then I priced them out and I relapsed into indecisiveness when they came out to more than the KO2s--which made my think about the KO2s again.



With the KO2s coming in slightly cheaper I figured I'd give them a shot, after all they're still well-rated tires despite their age, so last week I went to my nearest America's Tire to set up an appointment. Then the guy behind the counter threw me a curveball, why not the KO3s in the same size? The KO3s are more affordable and it's supposed to be an improvement over the KO2s.

If you've been following along, I called it (but pricing was as much as KO2s at the time, like 281.99 vs 282 or something like that):

Of course after he sent me spiraling again he found that he wasn't able to order the KO3s--they were in some weird not discontinued, not coming soon, but not available for ordering state. So he suggested we order the KO2s and see if the status on the 3's changes in the meantime. Fast forward to this week, the KO2s arrived and when they called to let me know I asked about the KO3s and the guy who answered the phone said still no ETA and it would likely be months based on past experiences.

Yesterday I finally convinced myself to just do the KO2s; waiting months is too risky a move given that I want to be ready to pick up the camper by mid-March. So I went to schedule an appointment for install online and guess what? Of course the KO3s say they're "Available, 1-5 days to [my] store".

I called this morning to see what it says on their end and he confirmed, shows 3-5 business days on his end, so I ordered the KO3s. I'm skeptical they'll actually arrive next week, I feel like the universe is just messing with me at this point.

Now who wants to convince me that 117 load index (~2800lbs) on the KO3s is not going to be enough? The load E range options are at a 121 (~3100lbs), so it's about a 1400lbs capacity difference from 117->121. I was initially leaning to the Es in my original post, but I think for our trucks, the D would still be more than up to the task--they're never going to see anywhere close to their max of 11k lbs on my truck.

 

Welp, got a call from the tire shop that the KO3s won't be in any earlier than May. So KO2s it is!