Tire guru's I need help. Yes, another tire thread....

[ScottP]

I couldn't use chains on the front on my 2005 either.

I put E rated goodyears on my tacoma and I thought it destroyed the ride. It's possible the shocks were shot on it also though.

I use C rated duratracs now, and I'm unsure if the ride upgrade is worth the lack of durability or not. I have had a few flats, but not so many that it makes me 100% convinced I need to go back to E rated. I certainly don't baby that vehicle, and it's gone some really god awful places with those tires on.

I wish they made more tire options in C rated. There's very few aggressive tires made in C ply on rims larger than 15". I think C is a good compromise on mid size vehicles though. I drive a ton of washboard roads, and the difference in my Toyota with 6 plys and my F150 with ten plys is night and day.

This is where I'm at right now. I had a 2015 and ran E rated Duratrac. Great tire, but as you can imagine adding 20lbs at each corner ate up MPG (~4 for me). Ride was fine, better than my work 1/2 tons.

I'm now driving a 2018 Taco and looking to ditch the Wrangler Kevlars (ok tire, 4 punctures so far repaired in tread) and go with either the C rated Duratrac or another E rated AT tire. The C rated tire really does split the middle in terms of lbs of tire weight, so it wouldn't take as much of a MPG hit. I'm just wondering how it will perform in the durability category. Never had to repair my E rated tires on the 2015... but so much of my driving is on pavement and USFS gravel roads (hence the nails, screws, etc)

 

[Shangobango]

Ugh, Ya'll are muddying the waters for me . I had my mind made up. Thinking about losing 4 mpg over the life of a set of tires is causing a cost/benefit analysis of E rated tires in my situation.

This is where I'm at right now. I had a 2015 and ran E rated Duratrac. Great tire, but as you can imagine adding 20lbs at each corner ate up MPG (~4 for me). Ride was fine, better than my work 1/2 tons.

I'm now driving a 2018 Taco and looking to ditch the Wrangler Kevlars (ok tire, 4 punctures so far repaired in tread) and go with either the C rated Duratrac or another E rated AT tire. The C rated tire really does split the middle in terms of lbs of tire weight, so it wouldn't take as much of a MPG hit. I'm just wondering how it will perform in the durability category. Never had to repair my E rated tires on the 2015... but so much of my driving is on pavement and USFS gravel roads (hence the nails, screws, etc)

I couldn't use chains on the front on my 2005 either.

I put E rated goodyears on my tacoma and I thought it destroyed the ride. It's possible the shocks were shot on it also though.

I use C rated duratracs now, and I'm unsure if the ride upgrade is worth the lack of durability or not. I have had a few flats, but not so many that it makes me 100% convinced I need to go back to E rated. I certainly don't baby that vehicle, and it's gone some really god awful places with those tires on.

I wish they made more tire options in C rated. There's very few aggressive tires made in C ply on rims larger than 15". I think C is a good compromise on mid size vehicles though. I drive a ton of washboard roads, and the difference in my Toyota with 6 plys and my F150 with ten plys is night and day.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

The door placard on the Silverado I drive for work says 38 psi, front and back. I have 10 ply tires set to 38 psi. The only reason to run higher is if you are hauling a higher payload/towing heavy. In fact, for off road applications one should be airing down to increase traction and reduce the risk of putting a rock through the tread face.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

You can also affect fuel mileage with tire pressure. No free lunch.

You're absolutely correct. I should have specified from a safety perspective, the only reason to run higher is payload. You'll certainly get better mileage running 60 psi. Hell, I could put 80 psi in my Tundra and it'd still ride smoother than my Ram did.

 

[mtmuley]

I must be an unusual tire buyer. I don't give a shit about ride quality, gas mileage or tread wear. The tires on my truck get me where I am going. They have to be up to it regardless of the three things I mentioned. mtmuley

 

[hank4elk]

Ride quality? I'm in NM....lol
Great hwy ride does no good if I can't get to the hwy.

 

[mtmuley]

Sorry, I forgot to preface that I only drive on asphalt, and that my vehicle runs on soy sauce.

Soy sauce, or ground rice? mtmuley

 

[rwc101]

I always suspected mtmuley lived in a Copenhagen ad, but now it's confirmed.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

Soy sauce, or ground rice? mtmuley

If you put some wasabi in there, it's like having a supercharger.

 

[mtmuley]

I always suspected mtmuley lived in a Copenhagen ad, but now it's confirmed.

I chewed that stuff for awhile. I just don't factor in that fluff when looking for a tire.

 

[Shangobango]

I must be an unusual tire buyer. I don't give a shit about ride quality, gas mileage or tread wear. The tires on my truck get me where I am going. They have to be up to it regardless of the three things I mentioned. mtmuley

I completely get what you are saying. I am just weighing in everything. This particular truck is probably going to see approx. 90% highway miles and 10% off highway miles. Of those off highway miles maybe 30% are going to be in an area that I have to worry about an increased risk for punctures. I don't see how I can't take that math into consideration.

So, let's say I see a 2 mpg decrease due to using an E rated tire vs. a C rated tire:

50,000 mile life of set of tires at 18 mpg with average cost per gallon of $2.25 = $6,249.98

50,000 mile life of set of tires at 20 mpg with average cost per gallon of $2.25 = $5,625.00

$624.98 difference. That's a long way toward a whole new set of tires. Let's say I ruin a tire prematurely due to my gamble. Subtract 175 bucks for a replacement C grade, mounted an balanced. That brings my savings to $449.98 difference.

Given the numbers I have plugged in that equals 3% of the miles on these tires will be off highway with an increased chance of puncture. That is 1500 miles over the life of the tires.

The question then becomes do I possibly sacrifice $624.98 to be better equipped for that 1500 miles of travel over the life of the set of tires. That is $2.40 per mile. Not to mention the fact that I may well be wishing I had a better ride quality for at least 45,000 of the 50,000 mile life of that set of tires. That 45,000 miles translates to 750 hours at 60 mph.

Decisions, decisions.

If anyone sees anything glaringly missing or wrong with this assessment please chime in.

I know I am an over thinker. I think it comes from playing millions of hands of poker.

And this is why almost no one I know likes to play poker with me.....

 

[mtmuley]

Sheesh. mtmuley

 

[Shangobango]

Sheesh. mtmuley

Whatev. Most of that was thought out while rebuilding the tank on half bath toilet....

 

[mtmuley]

Whatev. Most of that was thought out while rebuilding the tank on half bath toilet....

I'm glad I live in Montana where the tire selection is easy. Good luck. mtmuley

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

I completely get what you are saying. I am just weighing in everything. This particular truck is probably going to see approx. 90% highway miles and 10% off highway miles. Of those off highway miles maybe 30% are going to be in an area that I have to worry about an increased risk for punctures. I don't see how I can't take that math into consideration.

So, let's say I see a 2 mpg decrease due to using an E rated tire vs. a C rated tire:

50,000 mile life of set of tires at 18 mpg with average cost per gallon of $2.25 = $6,249.98

50,000 mile life of set of tires at 20 mpg with average cost per gallon of $2.25 = $5,625.00

$624.98 difference. That's a long way toward a whole new set of tires. Let's say I ruin a tire prematurely due to my gamble. Subtract 175 bucks for a replacement C grade, mounted an balanced. That brings my savings to $449.98 difference.

Given the numbers I have plugged in that equals 3% of the miles on these tires will be off highway with an increased chance of puncture. That is 1500 miles over the life of the tires.

The question then becomes do I possibly sacrifice $624.98 to be better equipped for that 1500 miles of travel over the life of the set of tires. That is $2.40 per mile. Not to mention the fact that I may well be wishing I had a better ride quality for at least 45,000 of the 50,000 mile life of that set of tires. That 45,000 miles translates to 750 hours at 60 mph.

Decisions, decisions.

If anyone sees anything glaringly missing or wrong with this assessment please chime in.

I know I am an over thinker. I think it comes from playing millions of hands of poker.

And this is why almost no one I know likes to play poker with me.....

That price difference is almost nothing when it comes to a vehicle. A lot can happen in fifty thousand miles.

Me personally, if you're not towing I'd go for the smoother ride.

Muley is a simplist, a lot goes into a tire purchase, don't let him sweat you for properly analyzing a decision.

 

[Shangobango]

I'm glad I live in Montana where the tire selection is easy. Good luck. mtmuley

Yup, if I lived in Montana it would be a no brainier.

 

[Deleted member 20812]

My biggest concern is performance on snow and ice. Second is puncture resistance. Road noise and ride comfort and down the list a ways.

Base your decision on your needs.

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

My biggest concern is performance on snow and ice. Second is puncture resistance. Road noise and ride comfort and down the list a ways.

Base your decision on your needs.

sage advice

 

[mtmuley]

That price difference is almost nothing when it comes to a vehicle. A lot can happen in fifty thousand miles.

Me personally, if you're not towing I'd go for the smoother ride.

Muley is

Muley is a simplist, a lot goes into a tire purchase, don't let him sweat you for properly analyzing a decision.

I'm a "simplist"? mtmuley

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

I'm a "simplist"? mtmuley

simplistic better? Didn't feel right saying simple, cause that seems mean. Being simplistic is a simplist? Seems legit...