Benefits of 285/70R18 vs 265/70R18 tires.

[6thGen1419]

What are the real world benefits of 285/70R18 vs 265/70R18 tires? Can it be quantified, e.g. "10% improvement", etc?

Sponsored

 

[SNDR]

Totally depends on the terrain. Slimmer tires aka "Pizza Cutters", are better in snowy conditions. They cuts through the snow and less "float". I'm no pro in rock crawling but I'd assume a larger surface area (wider tire) gives you more traction and footprint.

 

[6thGen1419]

Totally depends on the terrain. Slimmer tires aka "Pizza Cutters", are better in snowy conditions. They cuts through the snow and less "float". I'm no pro in rock crawling but I'd assume a larger surface area (wider tire) gives you more traction and footprint.

Thanks. I am trying to get an idea on how much more traction and footprint or how much of a disadvantage in snow.

 

[SNDR]

Wider tires arguably look better. How much snow you getting down there in New Mexico?

 

[BonRunner]

Why don't you meet in the middle with 275/70/18 like I do?

 

[climbv1]

Mine is 285 70 r18. Metrics? 10% MPG drop. lol.

 

[ACJ]

It seems most people choose their tires for looks. The tire size does not affect the contact patch, the area of rubber contacting the ground. That area is dependent on vehicle weight and air pressure. You air down to increase your contact patch. I will be replacing my OEM tires with tires better in snow, 3peak rating but keeping my OEM size. This will maintain my speedometer and odometer and help keep the tire weight down. A narrow tire contact patch is better in rain and snow. It is more comfortable and has better fuel Economy. When out exploring I am a Onx Green Trail driver so do not need anything too aggressive.

 

[RunnerRocks]

Why don't you meet in the middle with 275/70/18 like I do?

^^^ +1

Toyo OC AT3 LT275 /70 R18

 

[3rdRunner]

Hmmm..not sure I agree that there is no difference in contact patch between wide vs narrow. Aired down the narrow tire will produce a longer contact patch which is desirable in rocky conditions -think of a tank tread. Check out @TinkerersAdventure for a good demonstration. I think a lot of folks go for a “look” - which is fine. I try to stay narrow for scrub radius, articulation, less rolling resistance. That said, wider does win out in terms of float, so if mud is your thing that’s a consideration. The wheel offset also plays a very significant role in both appearance and performance.

 

[ACJ]

Hmmm..not sure I agree that there is no difference in contact patch between wide vs narrow. Aired down the narrow tire will produce a longer contact patch which is desirable in rocky conditions -think of a tank tread. Check out @TinkerersAdventure for a good demonstration. I think a lot of folks go for a “look” - which is fine. I try to stay narrow for scrub radius, articulation, less rolling resistance. That said, wider does win out in terms of float, so if mud is your thing that’s a consideration. The wheel offset also plays a very significant role in both appearance and performance.

There are people who have measured the contact area. A quick Google search equals https://www.driveaccord.net/threads....565388/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=organic . In a IDEAL world the engineering math says the patches should have the same contact area. I know it is not a IDEAL world.

 

[3rdRunner]

Hmmm…not tryin’ to upset anyone. How’s this - although the contact patch is pretty much equal in area/size, it is different in orientation/ shape with the narrower tire producing a longer/more longitudinal contact patch - which happens to correspond with your desired direction of travel. Well, my desired direction of travel anyway - to each his own. Which is really what it boils down to with tires as well. There are a lot of factors (size, weight, tread design, construction, ride quality, appearance) and all of us can make a pretty good case for what we’re running. I have two sets - the stock 265/70/18 AT3 (SL). Very practical, comparatively light, can comfortably handle the beach or light off road, great on wet roads, best choice in around town - 17.2 MPG consistently. I kept them specifically for those reasons. I also have 35/11.5/17 Toyo R/T Pro (E), absolutely awesome off road, traction+ (loose, sharp shale shelf roads -say that 3 times fast, mud, crawling over rocks, steps, technical stuff), very little concern about punctures, look aggressive, comparatively noisy, firmer ride, heavier - 14.2 MPG consistently. I can make a case for either one depending on the situation - it’s what’s important to you.

 

[JCinNC]

Mine is 285 70 r18. Metrics? 10% MPG drop. lol.

I have the same Pro...did you get any rubbing on these new (non-stock) tires?

 

[romik]

I've upgraded mine to C load 275/70/17. Not only do they look amazing, but no one can tell whether they're 275s or 285s. On the other hand, they're much lighter than 285s and have very good fuel economy. I get 19–20 MPG.

 

[4Everest]

Hmmm..not sure I agree that there is no difference in contact patch between wide vs narrow. Aired down the narrow tire will produce a longer contact patch which is desirable in rocky conditions -think of a tank tread.

You're right about the length vs width on contact patch, but I think they were referring to the area of the patch remaining the same, which is also correct.

For anyone interested, here's the link to a video on this with analysis (Tinkerer's Adventure x Outdoor Auto).

 

[25PRO6G]

Mine is 285 70 r18. Metrics? 10% MPG drop. lol.

Did you do any suspension lift or modification to fit 285 70 18?

Sponsored