Larger tires vs. heavier tires vs. aggressive tread

Hey folks,

All else being equal, what has the most negative affect on acceleration and economy? Larger tires or heavier tires?

If you had to choose between a heavier AT tire such as an E rated BFG AT (50LBS) in a stock 265 70 16 or a lighter tire in a 265 75 17 such as an SL rated Toyo Open Country AT3 (41LBS) which do you think would be worse for acceleration and economy?

Also what would be worse an aggressive tread in stock size or a highway tread 265 76 16?

Thanks in advance!

 

I think that generally weight is the major issue for unsprung weight.

rolling resistance will play into the equation as well but in the example provided, the smaller, but heavier tire will have more impact (negatively) on your fuel economy and acceleration.

basically the engine just has to work harder to turn heavier things.

 

The first question is what do you actually need the tire to do 90% of the time? That will determine the functionality needed.

Then within that 'class' of tire, you start to consider the other factors.

But your post reads like you're seeking MPG. If that's the goal, and it's mostly a pavement pounder, nothing larger, heavier or aggressive will be your friend.

 

It’s a combination of all three, and it really depends on the tire in question as to which factor is the most important. In general though, extra weight is often a big factor. Aggressive tread will also destroy mpg.

There is also a caveat with height- the gearing on your truck. For example, my truck has 4.30 gears, and so with the stock 29” tires, it’s running 3000 rpm on the highway. I’m thinking that if I bumped the tire size up 10% without adding significant weight, I might gain a little mpg ( the later versions of my truck did have taller tires)

 

well 45% of the time i am looking at and admiring my Tacoma, 45% of the time I am driving it on the road, and 10% will be in very remote locations where durability is a factor.

I have run BFGs since the second generation (1986) long before they were KO2s and they did everything I needed and looked the way I wanted.

but im smarter now and wonder if the weight is something I can do better on.

i dont 'need' to go up to 265 75 16 but i want to for looks...but wondering if a 265 70 16 BFG would check more boxes for me than a 265 75 16 Toyo AT3.

looks wise-I am trying to run white letters so this limits things

 

of the 10% remote, much of that will be in rocky severe conditions

 

IMHO (and because I am secure in my manhood) if 90% of the time you are on the road locally or on the highway then you should run street tires of the most beneficial size that you can get. For the fun bits I suggest you get the biggest nastiest tires/rims your rig will run and take them with you to the trail head. Pull your stock tires (you do have a jack of some nature for offroading right?) and swap the meats. Chain your street tires to an out of the way tree and go have fun (a$$Ume'ing you are coming back to where you started from). I have had to convince my youngest son of this with his race car tires, if you run them on the road your milage will suck and you will tear them up before race day. Run the dopey looking stock tires and get good mileage to and from work and know that you can smoke check anybody off the line even in street tires. Ignorant laughter from someone you will never meet means nothing unless you let it bother you.

Cheers,

Doc

 

On various trucks, I have lost about two mpg going from highway to all terrain tires in the same size. I have no idea if it was the extra weight or the tread but it's a data point. I lost about 3 mpg with a combination of 4.88 gears and 285's in an all terrain on my Tacoma. With $4.50 gas and 20,000 miles yearly I figure that costs $600 a year to look cool at the mall

 

Good thoughts. Secure male here...I have a 99 Civic beater with peeling paint that I really enjoy driving. I re-did the interior because that is where 'I spend my time'. That Civic is great-beat and incognito on the outside and new and clean on the inside. Manual and fun to drive. I would drive it more to work but clients and colleagues would not be cool with it. I appreciate the thoughts on switching tires but this won't fit into my lifestyle. I will be taking 5-10 long weekend trips per winter and will be leaving late after work. I will not have the time to change tires and wouldn't want to if I did have the time.

Looks do matter to me. Not for validation from strangers but for my own enjoyment. Functionally, I have enjoyed good AT tires over the years and BFGs have gotten me through some hairy terrain (jagged rocks in the Mojave desert far away from anything) without incident.

I suppose though I am looking for a unicorn tire. 75% of the performance, looks, and security of the BFG with 25% of the penalty. I even thought of the Dueler AT Revo in the larger size. Seems good as an E rated at 44 lbs. Tread is a bit more oriented for the street, which is not a bad thing..and I think (E rated) the durability is there:

 

I've had tires that weighed 38 lbs, and tires that weighed 53 lbs. Fuel mileage was exactly the same. But both sets of tires were within 1" of the same diameter, and they were the same width. They also had a very similar mildly aggressive All Terrain tread. I've seen guys go from a street tire to a mud tire in the same size, similar weight, and the same load rating and lose 2 mpg.

The real negative to heavier tires is slower acceleration. It does take more power to get those tires turning and when pulling off from a stop or merging into traffic there is some loss of performance. But once up to speed it takes no more power, or fuel to keep the heavier tires moving. I suppose if someone drove 100% of the time is urban stop-and-go traffic it could start to hurt fuel mileage. But it has never made any difference for me