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

255/85 R16 Owners Experience

Discussion in 'Wheels & Tires' started by rsbmg, May 8, 2011.

?

255/85 R16's?

Poll closed Jun 7, 2011.
  1. My tire of choice has worked great in all conditions

    58.3%
  2. Ran em but didn't work for me, went wider and am happy I did.

    16.7%
  3. Ran wide before now run the skinnies and am much happier

    25.0%
  1. May 8, 2011 at 8:36 AM
    #1
    rsbmg

    rsbmg [OP] Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Member:
    #45160
    Messages:
    1,070
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Rob
    Vista,CA
    Vehicle:
    2011 Tacoma Doublecab TRD Offroad
    Front Aluminum bumper by Relentless Fab. Smittybuilt Winch Complete set of skids by ATO TC UCA's Fox Ext. Travel Front Reservoirs.
    Been reading for over a month on this tire size including the write up at expeditions west. Seriously looking at going this route on my 2011 o/r dc and wanted those who currently run or have run these tires to offer their opinions and experience with this tire.

    My tentative plan is to run an icon suspension set-up and mount the KM2's on either my stock rims or maybe go with an 8'' rim. I live in socal so primarily will be doing desert driving, loose sand, rocks etc...

    Thanks for the input
     
  2. May 8, 2011 at 8:37 AM
    #2
    08pretaco

    08pretaco Almost there

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2008
    Member:
    #9502
    Messages:
    9,127
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Oliver
    az
    Vehicle:
    2014 Tundra 4x4 CM 5.7L SR5
    AFE pro dry s, Husky X-act Contour
    Love em! I have the Cooper ST though.
     
  3. May 8, 2011 at 10:36 AM
    #3
    steve o 77

    steve o 77 braaap

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Member:
    #26726
    Messages:
    19,952
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steven
    In a corn field, OH
    Vehicle:
    2001 4x4 5Spd Xtra Cab V6
    205k+ miles, 265/75/16 BFG A/T's, OME 881's, Wheelers 5 leaf pack, 5100's, Home Made Sliders
    I ran the cooper s/t for a while but ended up switching them out because of all the freeway driving I do now. I loved the size though and would go back if I ever got a car to DD.
     
  4. May 8, 2011 at 10:47 AM
    #4
    Tim A

    Tim A Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    Member:
    #28169
    Messages:
    448
    Gender:
    Male
    Montana
    Vehicle:
    2011 TRD Offroad 6 spd Double Cab
    My experience is similar but I had 255/80/17 KM2s (same diameter)

    For freeway driving I actually had an increase in MPG coming from 265/70/17. This is due to the larger diameter tire, which will allow engine RPMs to be lower at the 60 mph (for instance) vs. a smaller tire. At least that's the way I understand it.

    But stop-n-go daily driving really hurt the MPG and my auto trans would shift at weird times making me think that is not a good tire size for automatics with 3.73 gears. I sold mine and went back to 265s.

    With that said, they do look bad ass.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  5. May 8, 2011 at 10:56 AM
    #5
    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
    I run this size in the KM2's and they are great. Works actually good on the freeway because of the higher size compensates for the too-low 6th gear in the manual transmission.

    Also since a narrower tire has a smaller contact patch, you will have much greater friction than the same tire size that is wider.

    Plus you can fit a 255/85r16 tire on a small easy to do lift with no cutting/folding etc. No rubbing.

    You have a very large sidewall in comparison to absorb rocks, less rotating mass, and all kinds of advantages to off-road traction.

    The KM2's are actually -very- quiet as well on the road (at least for a mud terrain, quieter than other all-terrain's ive run in the past) and seem to be very tough. I've crawled up some pretty crappy places with em and they did fantastic in mud, snow, and hardpack.

    EDIT: Agreed I also think they look pretty bad-ass. Tall and skinny has a certain military vibe to it. You'll notice every military truck out there NEVER uses wide tires, always tall and skinny. And those guys -need- their vehicles to perform haha.

    [​IMG]

    Here is a better shot of the tires.

    [​IMG]
     
  6. May 9, 2011 at 4:52 PM
    #6
    rsbmg

    rsbmg [OP] Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Member:
    #45160
    Messages:
    1,070
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Rob
    Vista,CA
    Vehicle:
    2011 Tacoma Doublecab TRD Offroad
    Front Aluminum bumper by Relentless Fab. Smittybuilt Winch Complete set of skids by ATO TC UCA's Fox Ext. Travel Front Reservoirs.
    167 Views and 4 guys have experience with this size tire :confused: Thanks for the 4 replies though!
     
  7. May 9, 2011 at 4:58 PM
    #7
    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
    You got what you need haha. All the technical data saying they are better in almost every situation, and a few guys saying that yes in the real world they are great too. Go for it!
     
  8. May 9, 2011 at 5:15 PM
    #8
    steve o 77

    steve o 77 braaap

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Member:
    #26726
    Messages:
    19,952
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steven
    In a corn field, OH
    Vehicle:
    2001 4x4 5Spd Xtra Cab V6
    205k+ miles, 265/75/16 BFG A/T's, OME 881's, Wheelers 5 leaf pack, 5100's, Home Made Sliders
    x2, the only situation i found them to not be as good as a wide tire was in deep sand.
     
  9. May 9, 2011 at 7:54 PM
    #9
    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. Though in lots of expedition write ups, I read aired down they form a ski like shape on the sand and for the same PSI fared better than the wider brethren. No experience myself, it is all hard pack, shale, rocks, etc around here. Sharp steep, rutty mountains.
     
  10. May 9, 2011 at 8:00 PM
    #10
    sierrahsky

    sierrahsky Expedition Style

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Member:
    #42021
    Messages:
    1,422
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Josh
    Reno
    Vehicle:
    09 TRD Tacoma V6 Ex Cab | Extreme Sierra
    When I aired down my 285's in a 17" wheel to 10 psi, I had the same tread patch as my buddies 285's in a 16" wheel @ 25 psi. Because of the sidewall size.

    The only thing I have found that makes the wider tires better are on road handling, mud, snow, and deep sand. You really have to drop the 255's low to get a wide patch and when you go to low you risk popping a bead.

    I have found 285's work for 99% of my off roading in the sierras. That being said I am looking to get a set of 255's for the summer months here as I do almost no deep sand or mud.
     
  11. May 9, 2011 at 8:03 PM
    #11
    Krazie Sj

    Krazie Sj Resident Jackass

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Member:
    #9849
    Messages:
    13,540
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Power Serge
    LV-426 (Acheron)
    Vehicle:
    07 TRD Off Road 4x4
    Borla Catback Exhaust, Airaid Short Ram Intake, 285x75R16 Mickey Thompson MTZs, 16" Konig Countersteer rims, ARB Bumper, All Pro LT w/Walker Evan Shocks front and back, All Pro expedition leaf pack, 10,000lb Superwinch, Intake Manifold Spacer, Bed Rack with ARB RTT, Rotopack and Hi Lift mounted, Husky Liner mats and an air freshener from 1995.
    Tread patch is going to be the same because the tires get longer instead of wider at a certain point.
     
  12. May 9, 2011 at 8:55 PM
    #12
    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
    My point is wide or long doesn't matter. Look at skis. You can go in snow with them and barely sink and they are only a couple inches wide! :D

    Narrower tires do end up with a smaller contact patch though and while this is normally an advantage (higher PSI on the ground) in sand this may get you.

    I'm just regurgitating what I've read though as I have 0 sand experience in my 255's. There simply isn't any around here.
     
  13. May 9, 2011 at 9:25 PM
    #13
    steve o 77

    steve o 77 braaap

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Member:
    #26726
    Messages:
    19,952
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steven
    In a corn field, OH
    Vehicle:
    2001 4x4 5Spd Xtra Cab V6
    205k+ miles, 265/75/16 BFG A/T's, OME 881's, Wheelers 5 leaf pack, 5100's, Home Made Sliders
    Just thought I'd post up a pic of the coopers for comparison.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. May 9, 2011 at 10:13 PM
    #14
    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
    The science and a LOT of comparison posts disagree with you lrgrnr. Friction has nothing to do with width, only pressure. Smaller contact patch=more pressure. Larger aspect ratio/skinnier tire also gives you more ability to air down and get friction from other means.

    http://www.expeditionswest.com/research/white_papers/tire_selection_rev1.html

    Agreed on far less tire choices. The #1 MT is available in it though(BFG KM2), in E load rating, so I'm pretty much happy with that. Also agreed on the road handling, lower aspect ratio the better for the road.

    I have a feeling your comparison was driver skill or familiarity.
     
  15. May 9, 2011 at 10:19 PM
    #15
    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
    Again friction has nothing to do with contact area. Area is not even in the equation for friction force.
     
  16. May 9, 2011 at 10:21 PM
    #16
    steve o 77

    steve o 77 braaap

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Member:
    #26726
    Messages:
    19,952
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steven
    In a corn field, OH
    Vehicle:
    2001 4x4 5Spd Xtra Cab V6
    205k+ miles, 265/75/16 BFG A/T's, OME 881's, Wheelers 5 leaf pack, 5100's, Home Made Sliders
    area has to do with the ammount of pressure put down on the rocks which does affect friction.

    edit: nevermind you're right. Friction force = μ*N
     
  17. May 9, 2011 at 10:21 PM
    #17
    OH-MAN

    OH-MAN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2009
    Member:
    #16324
    Messages:
    2,279
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steve
    Sunny Az.
    Vehicle:
    10 4X4 O.R. White
    TRD skid painted black,
    I have the BFG KM2. I like them they have a great reputation and while they are 10 mm narrower they do weigh 10 Lbs more than stock so I think you will lose some milage but that is expected with bigger and heavier tires.
     
  18. May 9, 2011 at 10:28 PM
    #18
    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 narrower tire = higher psi=more friction and surface molding = better :)
     
  19. May 9, 2011 at 10:42 PM
    #19
    achirdo

    achirdo First Class White Trash

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Member:
    #34819
    Messages:
    10,164
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Adam
    North DFW
    Vehicle:
    06 dodge ram 3500 5.9 cummins
    So basically what yall are saying is that a tire the width of a bike tire and a 12.5" tire will yield the same traction results? I doubt it. Skinny tires are better in some situations(like slick grass going up a hill) and wider tires for mud/sand
     
  20. May 9, 2011 at 10:43 PM
    #20
    steve o 77

    steve o 77 braaap

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    Member:
    #26726
    Messages:
    19,952
    Gender:
    Male
    First Name:
    Steven
    In a corn field, OH
    Vehicle:
    2001 4x4 5Spd Xtra Cab V6
    205k+ miles, 265/75/16 BFG A/T's, OME 881's, Wheelers 5 leaf pack, 5100's, Home Made Sliders
    yeah basically wide is better for soft surfaces and narrow is better for hard surfaces.
     
To Top