Tire ply for 285/70/16 Nitto Grapplers?

Hi guys I’m looking to buy tires 285/70/16 Nitto Grappler I’m being asked what ply do I want. But not sure they told me 4,8,10 ply one said 10 I should go the other said 4 any recommendations? 2020 Tacoma TRD off rd 4x4 mostly highway driver I’m thinking 10 ply?

thanks

 

4 or 6 unless you plan on wheeling over rocks

 

LT E is 10 ply
LT C is 6 ply
SL is 4 ply

IMHO E rated is overkill for the taco unless you rock crawl and they ride rougher as well. C load is a good choice, not too heavy and a bit tougher tire if you go off pavement, also much softer than e load. If you always do highway than just get SL tire.

Just dont get MT tires if you never plan to go offroad

Edit: I was wrong. Its not actually how many plies tires have, its just a rating.

 

The number of plys in a tire are directly related to tire strength.

Think of this as resistance to impacts like speed bumps, potholes, railroad tracks or supporting a load. The more plys a tire has, the stiffer it will be and give a firmer ride.

If you only run on hard surface with the occasional load from the local Big Box store, then 4 or 6 ply should be sufficient.

 

I'm only seeing one tire from Nitto in that size and it's an E-rated(10-ply) Trail Grappler.

 

10ply tires will reduce your MPG due to being much heavier.

For mostly highway, look at the Michelin LTX as they get the highest MPGs. There are a few TW members here that rav about them off-road as well.

 

So, tires don't have "Plys" any more - thats from old school bias-ply tire days. They all have two or three plys. E-rated tires are designed for ultra-heavy trucks hauling ultra-heavy loads, and are designed to run 80psi. So tires any more come in E, C, sometimes D, XL, SL, and a few others.

If you look at the door placard of your truck, you will see the tire rating your truck needs. You need a P-metric SL rated tire rated for 112T - thats 1120 kilos, or 2469 lbs. The weight rating on an SL 112T tire is still greater than the weight rating of your axle.

The problem with an E rated tire is they are heavy AF. 50-plus lbs, wher the OEM SL rated tire was 38 lbs. When you put an E rated tire on your truck, it will ride like a buckboard, and you will take a hit to accelration, braking and gas mileage.

C-rated tires are designed or jeeps and light vehicles so they will often have a lower weight rating than an SL rated P-metric tire.

A lot of guys will run E-rated tires because they want a big chunky, cool looking tire and are willing to take the hit to performance. But puncture resistance and tire strenght comes down more to the tire's construction, more than the tires rating. Duramax tires, E-rated, only have a two-ply sidewall, and so they are known to fail in rocky conditions all the time. The SL rated Wildpeak has a 3-ply sidewall and is very robust.

TLDR: get an SL 112T rated tire.

 

Are you asking about this in a theoretical way as an analog for load range (e.g. the 10 ply = range E) or because you think you're actually getting 10 plies in your sidewalls?

I ask because tires now are actually either 2 or 3 plies in the sidewalls. The 4, 6, 8, 10 ply number is a throwback to days when tires were bias ply and actually had 10 plies. With radial construction like they are now the number of actual plies has no connection to their ply rating.

If you want tires that will tolerate more abuse then, sure, 3 plies such as you might find with BFG usually are tougher than 2 plies. But they'll ride a bit more harsh, too.

But even in 2-ply a load range E sidewall will be slightly stronger than a SL-rated or C-rated LT just because to achieve the higher load range the sidewall has to be able to take 80 psi and will be a little thicker due to that. A standard load range tire (like a regular passenger tire) only has to tolerate 35 psi, a C-range a max of 50 psi.

It's the air in the tire that determines how much weight you can put on it.

I personally run E-rated but that's really only because selection isn't great in the sizes I use. I have had 2-ply and 3-ply tires (currently 2-ply Falken E-rated Wildpeaks) and my experience is 3-ply like the BFG KO2 are a little better in sharp rocks but so much so that you can approach things like you're driving run flats.

 

E rated for hauling ass down unmaintained gravel roads/wheeling over rocks/airing down (thicker less punctures etc) otherwise 4ply.

 

I thought the Wildpeak had a 3-ply sidewall?

I dont' run E's anymore, it's not worth the hit to everything else. And I don't do anything extreme enough to warrant them. Im in the dirt every week but rarely crawling through rock gardens anymore.

 

This might be one of the most under recognized characteristics in tires. Everyone assumes a E-rated LT is better than a SL-rate P-metric and that's not necessarily true. They can hold more air pressure and might at 80 psi carry more weight but with it comes a ride penalty as you say.

I think a lot of people run their C-, D- and E-rated tires under pressure. Even Discount when I do a rotate puts them at the door sill pressure, which is too low.

If you follow the manufacturer charts you'll find that going from a SL P at, say, 35 psi to an E-rated LT requires you to use a higher psi to achieve the same weight rating.

This from the Toyo manual.

https://www.toyotires.com/tires-101/tire-load-and-inflation-tables

 

I dunno, mine are not. They are 2 in the sidewall according to, well, the sidewall. Got them in November 2019, size is LT265/75R16 Wildpeak A/T3W.

 

Yep! Most people run LT tires under pressure, and as you've pointed out, when you do this, your LT tire will not be able to handle the weight rating of an appropriately aired up SL tire.

Tires are the most important thing on your truck, next to your brakes, and yet so misunderstood.

 

NO! All things being equal I've never found any measurable difference in fuel mileage with E rated tires vs passenger car tires and I've been buying them for 40 years. Most off road tires with aggressive tread also tend to be wider, and taller. It is the tread pattern and size of the tires that hurt fuel mileage. I've been running E rated tires on my Tacoma for several years. They are 15 lbs each heavier than the factory tires but are very close to the same size with a similar mildly aggressive AT tread. Fuel mileage is exactly the same.

I lost just over 1 mpg when going to E rated tires on my F150, but they are a bit bigger with a more aggressive tread. If you want best MPG you want a narrow tire with a street tread pattern. Tire weight is just not that important. Michelins typically do very well.

Tires are no longer rated by plies. Tacoma's come with P rated passenger tires which will carry more weight than the truck is rated for. But if you do drive off road, or even on rough, poorly maintained roads an E rated tire is a lot tougher and will hold up better. I use E rated tires on my trucks for this reason. I've damaged too many P rated tires and had to replace them before they were worn out. I find it cheaper in the long run to just buy E rated tires. If you get the air pressure figured out they ride virtually the same as P rated tires.

The C rated tires are rated to carry LESS weight than the P series tires that came on Tacoma's assuming you buy the same size. The D rated tires are rated for the same weight. Those tires are rated for light duty SUV's like Jeep Wranglers that don't haul or tow any real weight.

 

It does indeed. But it also depends on how often you start/stop. If you mostly do highway miles, yeah, it's not going to make that much of a difference, but if you are spinning them up, and then having to slow them down all the time, you bet your ass it makes a difference. Heavier tires also put a measurabe amount more strain on suspension and brake components. I can't remember the exact ratio, but as I recall, unsprung weight, basically is multiplied by a factor of three. Add ten pounds in tire weight, thats equates to 30 lbs per tire (times four tires) that the truck needs to spin up and slow down and the suspenion needs to damp over bumps.

 

My truck has E rated tires and I get significantly better gas mileage than most folks. Driving habits are more relevant. The next set will probably be C rated. The ride is a bit rough over unpaved roads with these. I would not consider P rated tires. The sidewalls are too soft for any off road use.

 

Are you thinking of the ratio of rotating mass to static mass? That's usually stated that reducing unsprung mass, e.g. tires, wheels, axles, etc. by 10 lbs gives you the same effect as reducing sprung weight on the chassis or body by 30 lbs when dealing with tuning shocks or something like that.

But it's also true of things like flywheels. Increasing or decreasing any rotating mass has more effect than static weight.

I'm not really sure there's a general ratio on tires like that other than tire weight has more impact than wheel weight because of the distance from the hub and you want everything to be as light as possible if efficiency is your goal. OTOH having more mass in the tires I suppose could make the ride smoother due to conserved angular inertia.

 

Same, i noticed zero difference in MPGs or performance when going to E load ko2s.

 

I believe you are incorrect about ratings. SL rated tires are the equivalent of 4 ply tread/1ply sidewall, C Load tires are the equivalent of 6 ply tread/2 ply sidewalk, and E Load are the equivalent of 10 ply tread/3 ply sidewall.

SL stands for Standard Load which replaced the old P rating (Passenger) is for on road use only and are also the lightest.

C and E Load tires used to be designated as LT (Light Truck) and have greater load capacity and puncture resistance.

Here in Texas, if you want to drive the unmaintained roads in BBRSP, they require you to have a minimum of a C Load tire, and recommend E Load. SL rated tires are not allowed on the unmaintained roads because of the poor puncture resistance. They also require a second spare and recovery equipment.

 

Same, i noticed zero difference in MPGs or performance when going to E load ko2s.