1. Welcome to Tacoma World!

    You are currently viewing as a guest! To get full-access, you need to register for a FREE account.

    As a registered member, you’ll be able to:
    • Participate in all Tacoma discussion topics
    • Communicate privately with other Tacoma owners from around the world
    • Post your own photos in our Members Gallery
    • Access all special features of the site

235/85 r16

Discussion in 'Wheels & Tires' started by jrm, Feb 9, 2010.

  1. Feb 24, 2012 at 1:43 PM
    #21
    Fiveology

    Fiveology Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2011
    Member:
    #64464
    Messages:
    203
    Gender:
    Male
    MD
    Vehicle:
    11 DC TX PRO 4X4
    3" Lift OME 885's with a top plate spacer in front, Toytec AAL in rear, OME Nitrochargers, DWreck/FamousFab bolt on sliders, 255/85R16' KM2's
    HUH?
     
  2. Feb 24, 2012 at 1:54 PM
    #22
    JaSkynyrd

    JaSkynyrd Ron F. Swanson

    Joined:
    May 26, 2011
    Member:
    #57269
    Messages:
    486
    Gender:
    Male
    Chattanooga, TN
    Vehicle:
    2001 XtraCab 4x4 V6 SR5
    I thought that sounded crazy at first too but I believe what he is saying is the tire will have the same width/height ratios, not necessarily the same width and height. Though I don't think it will look the same since even though the ratio is the same 255 is wider and would therefore look meatier to me.
     
  3. Feb 24, 2012 at 9:43 PM
    #23
    tubesock

    tubesock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2010
    Member:
    #33528
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
    That's a surprisingly large drop in fuel economy. I've done a little digging around and I've concluded based on some studies i found of freight trucks that rolling resistance is the biggest factor between tires of the same size. Weight does play a factor, but but only during acceleration. Once you are at speed it will not make any difference. I found a pretty interesting calculator at a hypermiler website http://ecomodder.com/forum/tool-aero-rolling-resistance.php

    The stock tires are 245/75 dunlop grandtrek at20s which are supposed to be very efficient in terms of rolling resistance.. of course they blow at everything else. Anyway, my assumption is that aggressive mud tires would double the rolling resistance.

    If that calculator is correct then doubling the rolling resistance will generate about a 15% drop in fuel economy at 60mph. Which is way more than I would have expected.

    Also this article basically explains everything I just said but much better and also has pictures. I wish I found this article before i did all that research and wrote all the other shit in this post. Too late now.
    http://www.fourwheeler.com/techarticles/wheels/129_1104_tires_and_fuel_economy/viewall.html
     
  4. Feb 25, 2012 at 12:09 AM
    #24
    anethema

    anethema Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2011
    Member:
    #51833
    Messages:
    987
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    J
    Dawson Creek,BC
    Vehicle:
    08 TRD OR Access cab 4x4
    ARB Bumper,OEM Roof rack modded for access cab, Allpro Rock Sliders,Icon Adjustable coilovers,More Tie Downs in bed, Firestone Airbags in rear,Block heater
    Ya I just mean it will look like a smaller version of a 255/85R16. A smaller 'tall and skinny'.

    It will look a bit less meaty for being smaller, but it will not look disproportionately skinny as opposed to a 255/85. Just smaller.

    Correct I do not mean it is the same width or height.
     
  5. Apr 22, 2013 at 7:51 AM
    #25
    MatthewMay1

    MatthewMay1 I'm an amateur professional.

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2011
    Member:
    #67486
    Messages:
    5,700
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Matthew
    The Lone Star Republic
    Vehicle:
    01 Tacoma TRD 4x4 v6
    Lots 'o stuff. Look at my build! -->
    Would 235/85/16 fit on a stock first gen with no rubbing?
     
To Top