Need help choosing tires -- 2004 Taco DC (265/70r16)

I need help choosing tires for my 2004 Tacoma double cab (269,000 mi). I'm a bit pinched $-wise at present, or I'd probably just throw Duratracs or KO2s on there and call it good.

Background: I have been working as a contract surveyor (1-man crew) in the Rocky Mountain / Denver front range area. I've worked from Limon to the base of Mt Evans. Most of my work has been in the foothills. I do a LOT (probably mostly) highway driving... BUT I have to contend with mud @ construction sites to dirt trails to gravel roads (all sizes gravel) to rough & rocky (including sharp rocks) 4x4 trails cut up mountain side where the slope could possibly reach as high as 30%. Oh yeah, I've probably got somewhere between 2-500lbs of gear in the back of my Taco at all times.

My first set of tires were, if I recall, Cooper Discover M+S. Great winter tire, but didn't last terribly long (I ran them year round). I went up to 265/75r16 Duratracs for my present set. Unfortunately, I did not lift the truck yet, so they always rubbed the front fender wells. Plus I didn't rotate them as I should have, and they wore unevenly, and I typically get a vibration around 65mph. Also... my gas mileage took a hit of at least 2-3mpg when I put the Duratracs on. Also, that extra 2-500lbs of gear start living full time in the back of the truck when the 265/75r16 Duratracs went on. Before I was able to get 21-22.5mpg on some trips. Now the best I see is about 18.5mpg, but often in winter I only see 16-17mpg. Not sure how much mileage hit is due to larger tires, vs extra weight in the back.

I would rate the performance categories that I am interested in, most important to least important as follows:

1. No Chinese-brandname (e.g. Ling long etc) (prefer brandname, preferably Made in USA, then Japan, then S. Korea or Taiwan)
2. Dependability / Durability / Reliability (can't really afford to get a flat offroad on some 4x4 road at 10,000ft elevation a mile or so from the highway when I'm all by myself). So... am guessing this means puncture / cut resistance, esp. in the sidewall?
3. Mileage
4. Off-road traction
5. On-road handling / braking for all conditions: dry / wet / snow / ice
6. Cost
7. Noise

And of course... I want it all as cheap as possible. Out the door for $400 would be great, but I don't expect that. If I could be out the door for $600, that would be great too, but not sure that is doable? I usually go to Discount Tire, but am open to other suggestions (Big-O). The Duratracs I bought via Tirerack and had my mechanic mount & balance them. I'll probably forego certificates if I go to Discount... if a tire goes bad, Discount will try to talk me into replacing all four tires anyway, but the cert will only be valid for the bad tire... so why bother?

Do I need to go with an LT tire for sidewall durability? OR can you get good sidewall strength / cut resistance etc in SL-rated tires? Do I need 3-ply sidewalls, or can a good 2-ply sidewall work? What tires have 3-ply sidewalls (Nitto Grappler?)

I'm not hard over on any one brand. My preference is probably Goodyear, but doesn't have to be. I figure Michelin and BF Goodrich are out of my price range. Other brands I've been tossing around & researching include Cooper (Discovery line), Sumho, Falken, Nitto (Grappler line), General (Grabber AT line), Yokohama (Geolander A/T line).

Probably the one tire that has caught my eye as maybe the best all around performer / best compromise is the Goodyear All Terrain Adventure with Kevlar... but reviews on Tire Rack seem to be so-so -- the Goodyear Trailrunner seems to have better reviews.

Any help / recommendations welcome.

(Figured I'd throw this post up so it could start collecting advice while I continue to wade through threads & Google search results.)

 

That's a lot of info to take in. I'm not sure which tires have 2/3 ply sidewalls but in your case I'd definitely try for a 3 ply. Keep in mind E rated will hurt your mpg's pretty bad. Good luck finding tires made in the USA that are super cheap. I'd look into Falken, they launched a new AT recently and it's got good reviews

 

I got a set of Falken AT3W. Bought them on eBay through Discount Tire Direct. I'm in NY state near Ithaca. I wanted something with better traction than the Good Year Adventure stock tires (almost gone at 11k) For snow and that would also be good in the dirt and seasonal roads. For the money I couldn't be happier. $500 delivered. Another $80 to mount and balance and your a 30 pack under your budget of $600. Even more if you buy them with the elusive eBay 20% off coupon. I got the stock size, no hit to gas mileage, can still use the stock spare if i need to. They drive well, no shimmy or funny business, good road manners, predictable in corners, excellent in the rain and snow, no increase in noise and they look real nice.

I made the mistake of taking a seasonal road in January. The road is maintained from May through November. Big down hill, mud, a little ice, some snow and general slop. I crawled down the hill and made it home safely and I'm certain it has everything to do with the tires I will be buying till i find something better and cheaper. The Falken AT3W.

Again, I cannot understate how fast the stock good year adventure tires wore down! This has been my experience with all the good year stock tires on all the Toyotas I have owned.

 

Thanks for the Falken suggestion. Having a look at them. Only downside according to ConsumerReports is noise.

The door jamb on my truck says P265/70R16. The LT265/75R16 Duratracs on there now were "C-rated." I recall when I researched tires several years ago reading here on TW that "we" prefer C-rated tires rather than D or E load ratings. Is there any particular reason for that? Are D / E load rated LT tires on Tacos dangerous? Or is it just a matter that the tires are really heavy and kill gas mileage? (I do seem to recall something about the D/E load rated tires being too "stiff", perhaps, for off-road performance? But I can't remember.)

 

Generally C rated tires are 6 ply, D are 8, and E is 10 (tread plies). Most E rated all terrains or mud terrains I have seen have 3 ply sidewalls. They're going to be much tougher when you're talking offroad, more plies means harder to puncture. The reason people don't like them as much on tacomas is primarily because they are more heavy and more expensive. C rated tires can still be pretty tough though, and with a 3 ply sidewall may be a better option if you do a lot of highway driving and care about mileage. I would see what options falken has to offer for that size

 

Consumer Reports may say they are noisy, but I'm not quite sure what surfaces they tested on and how they come to that opinion. An LT tire is a much heavier and more heavy duty tire. More for load and towing capability. Like for a box truck or cargo van. Not dangerous, just devastating to fuel economy. IMO also putting LT tires on your truck will add to wear and tear just through having heavier tires. In same sized tires, Falken at3w 265/75/16, SL rated tire is 43.9lbs and the LT rated tire is 55.3lbs. If sidewall ply is your thing though the falkens are 4 ply for the SL.

http://www.falkentire.com/tires/light-truck-suv-cuv-tires/wildpeaka/t3w-tire

 

Toyo AT2 are the quietest and best wear for all terrains, I would buy them if I planned to keep a truck for a long time.

Nitto Terra grapplers are fairly similar to Toyo AT2's, not super aggressive but that translates to quieter and longer lasting.

Duratracs are almost AT/MT hybrids, really good offroad, not great sidewalls, fairly noisy.

BFG's have good winter traction, look great, but are noisy and have many balancing issues.

Michelin LTX AT2 is a poor choice all around, avoid them, they are noisy, poor off road and have terrible wear issues.

I have no experience with Falkens, they seem really over hyped on Tacomaworld, but I have no way to weigh in on them.

 

I second that michelin is the worst brand in the world to run for an offroad capable tire

 

Yet the LTX M/S is the best on road tire for a truck, I suppose it's why they own BF Goodrich.

 

Michelin trumps all others in the ratings on pavement. Usually has highest mileage warranty in class too. Awesome tires for street use no doubt. I've never ran BFG's but I've always been partial to coopers. All the BP down here switched to them from the KO2's. They must perform

 

Any one have any experience or heard of anyone else's experience / postings about Nankang AT-5 Conqueror? Discount has the LT245/75R16 for $109. Tread looks decent. E load rating with 3-ply sidewall @ 45.5lbs. Tire has 14/32" tread depth. But it says 7.5" wide rims... I have the stock Taco aluminum rims from 2004 and they came with P265/70R16's on them. Can I mount 245/75R16's on those rims, or are the tires going to be too narrow?

 

Which Coopers did they switch to? I can't keep the various Discoverers straight.

 

Discount tire has the cooper HTP, ATP, and MTP line (highway, all terrain, mud terrain). They're all running the ATP's, but I cannot vouch for them as far as noise and comfort. Cooper also has tons of other tires. The at3 is a popular one that people custom order. Kind of a hybrid between at/ht

 

Summary:

1. Do I really need LT C or E load rated tires? Or will P-metrics be just fine? (Am I overthinking this?)
2. Am strongly considering 245/75r16 tires. Far wider variety of LT tires available in this size. Same diameter as OE 16" tires, only 0.7" narrower. (But narrow is good, right? See Skinny Tire thread.) Tires also cheaper, and lighter in this size.
3. Might be able to do Toyo LT245/75R16 C-rated tires @ $150 each. Worth it? (Otherwise, am thinking LT245/75R16 E-rated Nankang @ $109 each @ Discount and save my pennies.)
4. Can somone summarize general consensus of the following tires?
   • Falken Wildpeak A/T3W (tread pattern reminds me of Duratracs)
     
   • Hankook Dynapro ATM RF10 (tread pattern reminds me of Discoverer ATP?)

So I found some photos of this one fairly steep construction road someone cut up the side of a hill. My memory said lots of jagged rock. LOL, not so much. Yeah, there are rocks in there, but it is mostly a steep dirt road, with rocks / gravel mixed in. So my off road requirements are probably somewhat more modest: moderate 4x4 trails, steep construction access roads with large gravel / small rocks, construction mud, snow a few months out of the year (with packed snow / ice / slush on side streets), and lots of highway driving. Would be nice if I could get back to 20+mpg on the highway.

I'm strongly considering (as in probably am, unless someone convinces me otherwise) to go to a slightly narrower tire, but with same diameter as the 16" OE tires: 245/75R16. I give up only about 0.7" wide tread patch (9.8" for 245/75R16 vs 10.5" for 265/70R16) for a 6.3% reduction in "flotation," but the guys on the Skinny Tire thread sure seem to like slightly narrower tires.

After spending a day on this topic, my priorities have become:

1. Cost
2. Dependability
   
3. Off-road traction
4. Winter / snow traction (incl. ice / icy conditions)
   
5. Gas mileage
6. Wet road handling
   
7. Noise

Question: Are LT, C-rated tires worth the extra expense? Or should good P-metric tires be adequate? I'm trying to decide if I'm getting hung up on "gotta have an LT tire." I don't think I am willing to pay for an E-rated tire in gas mileage. For the cost savings in P-metrics, I could afford a brand new spare, or put the $$ in the piggy bank, should I blow a tire out and need to replace it. The more I think about it... the less I think rocks are the real worry, and the bigger risk might be a stick or stump or branch through a sidewall as I pick my way through down timber at a potential homesite. Or maybe rebar, nails, or other metal scraps around foundation / construction sites.

From a "internet chat representative" at the tirerack.com website today, the rep stated that you typically only get 3-ply sidewalls in an E-rating tire. And many E-rating tires only have 2-ply sidewalls. And P-metrics typically have 2-ply sidewalls. Though C- and E-rating tires have more rubber in the sides.

Here are some photos of my Taco working:

Along a construction access road cut into a hill up to a potential mine (along Hwy 107 on the way up to Mt Evans):



Typical gear I always have in the back:

A typical high alpine meadow up around 9000ft elevation. The grass / ground is soft & the client didn't want me leaving ruts. So it is important to 1) not get stuck and 2) not spin the wheels. Typically I used 4Low (no locker) and just crept along nice and steady.

 

If you're 4wd and not doing hardcore offroading skinny C rated tires should do you fine. If discount says a 245 will fit your stock wheel, it will fit fine. You'd be amazed what 4x4 can accomplish regardless of tires.

Just make sure to get one with a decent mileage warranty

 

I would recommend going with the load range C tires for the extra durability. I don't think you will need the E load range. The 245/75/16's should work well for you and return your fuel economy too.

 

the falken wildpeaks are pretty good imo, less road noise than my old ko2s and better on and off road

also pretty good traction for winter conditions

 

I have several hundred web pages open, scattered across tens of browser windows. In one of them, someone discusses load range C, D, and E tires and the (apparent) fact that while load range C is for six plies, load range D is for 8 plies, and E for 10 plies... manufacturers no longer use that many actual plies in construction of their tires. The author stated that a tire manufacturer may only use two plies in the construction of a load range C tire, but that those two plies are the equivalent to 6-ply construction of yesteryear. (Do we happen to have any tire engineers here on TW that can speak to this topic authoritatively?) FWIW, the internet chat representative @ Tirerack also stated in a chat yesterday that C, D, or E load rated tires do not necessarily have 3-plies in the sidewall. But he added they typically have "more rubber" in the sidewall than SL / P-metric tires.

I have come to the conclusion that, at least in the "grey" area of C load range tires... it is better to look at 1) tire weight and 2) service rating (e.g. the 3 numbers in 108Q or 111T or 114T) in choosing a tire. I have found the service rating a bit more informative, then sort through tires based on their weight, looking for the lightest tire that specifies a 114 service rating, for example.

So in my particular case, as I have been looking for a P245/75R16 tire, because it has nearly the same diameter / circumference as the 265/70R16 that came stock on my 2004 Taco DC, I noted that the Falken P245/75R16 Wildpeak A/T3W (click on the Sizes and Specifications tab) is listed with an XL load rating and a 6 Ply Rating. I have read elsewhere that XL has been used by tire manufacturers to specify a SL tire that has extra load capacity or strength. And I do find it interesting that Falken specifies a "ply rating", NOT number of plies. In perusing the various Falken XL-rated Wildpeaks, I see that the "C load range" for the 15" tires given by Flotation Descriptions (e.g. 30x9.50R15LT) are also listed as 6 ply rating. Oh, I almost forgot -- Max Pressure. Falken lists a max pressure of 50psi for the Wildpeak XL-rated tires. 50psi, of course, is also the max tire pressure for tires with a load range C1 rating. (A C2 rating is less.)

So, in summary, to me, a Falken P245/75R16 Wildpeak A/T3W tire (item #28034608) described as XL-rated, 6 ply rating, having a max load of 2469 lbs (service rating 112T), with a max pressure of 50psi, and a tire weight of 38.6 lbs is, for all intents and purposes, a C-rated tire.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, has a max pressure of 50psi, has a service rating of 111 or above, may have a 6 ply rating or 6 ply equivalent description, and weights about the same as a C load rated tire... I think it is, for all intents and purposes, a C-rated tire. If anyone has differing opinions, I am interested in hearing them.

 

Oh yeah... I suppose I ought to thank everyone for their input on / help with my choosing my next tire... <drum roll, please...> which will be a Falken Wildpeak A/T3W, most probably in P245/75R16 guise. At a price of $112 each, that alone is hard to beat. But the XL-rated tire appears to be the equivalent of a C load rated tire. Even if price were not a factor, I believe it is competing with the likes of a Goodyear Trailrunner or Toyo Open Country A/T II. In fact, in Consumer Reports, the Wildpeak earned a Recommended rating, and the same 68 rating as the Goodyear Trailrunner. The only poor point was that CR rated it as only FAIR in the Noise category. But few people here on TW have complained of Wildpeak noise. CR also rated the Wildpeak ahead of the Toyo OC AT2.

I considered the Nankang Conqueror AT/5, but in the end decided that the E load rating and higher tire weight (45lbs for the LT245/75R16) would not help my gas mileage, and would probably adversely affect the ride quality.

I also considered the Hankook Dynapro AT-M, but in the end, noted that TW members who had had both Wildpeaks and Dynapros almost unanimously chose or would choose the Wildpeaks over the Dynapros. That's not to say the Dynapros are a bad tire -- those that had posted about their experiences were olverwhelmingly positive.

But for me, it's going to be a set of Wildpeaks.

The other thing I have noticed about the Wildpeaks... is that the tread pattern is reminiscent of a Duratrac pattern, perhaps not quite as aggressive. From that point of view, the Wildpeaks tread almost seems to fit in between that of a Duratrac and a Goodyear Trailrunner.