mgreenspan
Founding Member
We like you.
Haha.
BFG KM3's
- Thread starter Jeff B
- Start date
Haha.
I had two great sets of first-generation BFG M/T KM - 33" and 35".
I had three and a half horrible sets of BFG M/T KM2, and hope to never see them again. I still have a set, but will try to dump them on C-list.
I have two beautiful sets of Michelin XZL - far better tread pattern than KM2 (with, maybe an exception for ice - on which KM2 suck as well), rounder and quieter by far.
9.00-16" is taller than its nominal 34", though.
I had three and a half horrible sets of BFG M/T KM2, and hope to never see them again. I still have a set, but will try to dump them on C-list.
I have two beautiful sets of Michelin XZL - far better tread pattern than KM2 (with, maybe an exception for ice - on which KM2 suck as well), rounder and quieter by far.
9.00-16" is taller than its nominal 34", though.
GynormousMellon
Well-known member
1of40
Well-known member
This is helpful. I know two local guys that have used them and have had overall good experience. I feel you?re right though re daily driving aspects.
AdamSanta85
Well-known member
Wow XZL are quieter than KM2? KM2 are the only M/T I have owned and they are definitely not quiet.
mgreenspan
Founding Member
Definitely. They provide good tread and grip and are incredibly affordable. If you plan on your tires getting cut up on rocks and the knobby mud terrain bits getting torn and worn from the same then they are perfect. You used to be able to request certain carcasses from specific brands. I don't know if you can still do that.
85RED110
Well-known member
Measured my 255 Toyo M/T's yesterday. With 45psi they measure about 32.5". I was a bit surprised and thought maybe I was using a Chinese tape measure. Maybe without the weight on the truck on them they would be a little taller, but certainly not a whole inch taller, like Toyo lists as the diameter. They only have about 2k miles on them, so there hasn't been any significant wear, either.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Adam, i have both the 255s bfg mt and 235 bfg at. My trail tires are xzl 8.25s. The tires are quiet for what they are an aggressive mt style tire. The real downside is the weight. they are heavy. this is a huge upside on the trail. recently ran them 16 hours each way on the highway to meet up with Peter and company and they did great. Putting my lighter bfgs on for daily driver duties. Bfg is a good tire, alittle noisy and as peter said not great on ice.
Are you measuring from the ground? You need to measure horizontally. The weight of the truck will certainly deflect the tire an inch.
rover4x4
Well-known member
As much as I hate to admit Maxxis Bighorn in a 255/85 D load range are most likely my next tire. Should've kept those GCR rims for 33x10. The Toyo are incredibly expensive and apparently really heavy. My current KMs 255/85 D load have well over half thier tread remaining but are rotten
I also recently put a used set of 8.25R16 XZLs on my truck to try them out. I am 100% happy with them and I'm going to buy a couple sets to have once we have a permanent place to live. They were fine at Winter Romp, I was expecting them to be worse. I've had them in some mud in Vermont and they were fine, but it wasn't super sloppy deep mud. No complaints on the rocks.
On road they definitely ride better than the KM2s. They are really loud at 20-40 MPH, but after that, the wind noise drowns out the tire noise, and on the highway they are quieter than KM2s. The sound they make is totally different from any other tire I've heard. It is much higher pitched and sounds almost like the noise of a straight cut gear. My wife noticed they are quieter on the highway, so its not just me.
I've got a 4.6 and 4:11s. The gearing is a little low for the highway to be honest.
85RED110
Well-known member
MountainD
Technical Excellence Contributor
If weight is applied, then they will be wider if measuring horizontally.
BTW, the formula, for a 255/85R16 (or any other tire) is: 255x85/2540x2+16 (the 2540 converts to inches). So it is 33.07" approx when new in theory.
But, like any round object such as this, when you apply pressure down, you will shorten height and widen width. Press a ball with your hands, you will see the same thing.
I am dissatisfied with my BFG KM2 255/85R16's. I have owned BFG KM Series for 15 years and I am never going back.
I will get something in the 34" range, good all around, that is what I am doing next.
BTW, the formula, for a 255/85R16 (or any other tire) is: 255x85/2540x2+16 (the 2540 converts to inches). So it is 33.07" approx when new in theory.
But, like any round object such as this, when you apply pressure down, you will shorten height and widen width. Press a ball with your hands, you will see the same thing.
I am dissatisfied with my BFG KM2 255/85R16's. I have owned BFG KM Series for 15 years and I am never going back.
I will get something in the 34" range, good all around, that is what I am doing next.
It won't. Your ball analogy is not analogous to a pressurized tire.
In any case. What is important for us is clearance created by the tire and this is set by the loaded radius. The best thing for people to look at is the revs/mile that are listed in the spec sheets for a tire and that will give a real comparison between specific tires.
1of40
Well-known member
My only reference is someone I met back in October. The guy has 20+ years of daily driving experience with his 110 and said he was shocked at the road performance. He also said the performance in sloppy mud conditions and rocky conditions were also above expectations. He is using the unique 750’s which I really found interesting as well.
