SAS Replacement Tires - I've looked at every tire made, losing my mind. 🫠 Done=Baja ATs

[rdg04578]

I would argue that the Goodyear Territory's are more suited as an on road tire than a all terrain based on the soft rubber compound, weak sidewalls, and the amount of siping on the tread. Non of those are desirable off road characteristics.

Sponsored

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Despite their crafty name, the stock GY MT’s are actually AT’s.

GoodYear made a statement that the M in MT stands for Max , not mud.
More crafty advertising/naming, but yeah they have never claimed it to be a Mud Terrain, but since every other brand's mud tire is a MT, they are riding on their coat tails for the Starbucks Bros, so they can claim they have "MT's" on their rig.
(sips from grande PSL)

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Falken Wildpeak AT4w

All of the latest versions are claiming a tougher tread compound.

I suspect ....
They are making these tires for the super/heavy duty crowds running 3/4 tons or better.
That "tougher" compound will also be stiffer, which may not grip as well as the previous version.
The Falken 4w is primarily what I am thinking of ... the 3w has always had EXCELLENT wet and cold weather reviews... I am curious about how the 4w will do on lighter vehicles like Jeeps and Broncos.
For what it is worth, the Rubitrek is damn near identical to the 3w performance and compound wise. I wondered why they made two identical tires for awhile, my bet is they knew the new 4w was in bound and the 3w is going away, so they came up with the Rubitrek.
Not even sure if they have a 315 rubi ???

Toyo .. I have the 35x11.5-17 Open Country AT3 , load range C.
It is the worst road tire I have ever owned, DESPITE 18 billion glowing reviews.
The wet and snow road performance is down right dangerous.
I SUSPECT the LT versions (C range and better) all use a stiffer tread compound than a SL, so just thinking a C will ride or grip better is not always true.

 

[RaceRedOBX]

All of the latest versions are claiming a tougher tread compound.

I suspect ....
They are making these tires for the super/heavy duty crowds running 3/4 tons or better.
That "tougher" compound will also be stiffer, which may not grip as well as the previous version.
The Falken 4w is primarily what I am thinking of ... the 3w has always had EXCELLENT wet and cold weather reviews... I am curious about how the 4w will do on lighter vehicles like Jeeps and Broncos.
For what it is worth, the Rubitrek is damn near identical to the 3w performance and compound wise. I wondered why they made two identical tires for awhile, my bet is they knew the new 4w was in bound and the 3w is going away, so they came up with the Rubitrek.
Not even sure if they have a 315 rubi ???

Toyo .. I have the 35x11.5-17 Open Country AT3 , load range C.
It is the worst road tire I have ever owned, DESPITE 18 billion glowing reviews.
The wet and snow road performance is down right dangerous.
I SUSPECT the LT versions (C range and better) all use a stiffer tread compound than a SL, so just thinking a C will ride or grip better is not always true.

My buddy runs the Toyo AT3 in a 35x12.5r20 on his tundra and he said they are slick on wet roads as well. He is a salesman for Southern Tire Mart and they are a preferred toyo dealer so he got a great deal on them, but still says they are lacking in wet traction.

 

[1st 75th ranger]

I've researched/searched at nauseum, tires this size for the use case are annoying me. I have to decide on something this week.

My wife's HLE arrives this weekend, the SAS tires do not jive with our gravel driveway, that is the only reason I'm replacing them ASAP. I don't want higher than a load range D tire, on-road, quiet and wet traction needs to be good.

I'm leaning toward the Mickey Thompson Baja EXPs (D) or the Falken Wildpeak A/T4W (C), how are these with gravel compared to the SAS tires? Are there less aggressive options that don't look nerdy and not in the E/F range?

Even these are overkill since it will never be off road. I have my old 35" Baja ATs sitting the garage, I was going to put those on this new Bronco, but again that'd be a waste so I'll put those on the Jeep since the Goodyear MTs are trashed.

Thanks!!

you have done your homework ...too lol
if your in warmer states go mickys if colder state falkens period
i wanted aggressive went with 36x12.5x17 mtx on sas 0 issues

 

[Cruiser]

Toyo at3 will be replacing my Nitto ridge grapplers when the time comes

 

[akturbo]

All of the latest versions are claiming a tougher tread compound.

I suspect ....
They are making these tires for the super/heavy duty crowds running 3/4 tons or better.
That "tougher" compound will also be stiffer, which may not grip as well as the previous version.
The Falken 4w is primarily what I am thinking of ... the 3w has always had EXCELLENT wet and cold weather reviews... I am curious about how the 4w will do on lighter vehicles like Jeeps and Broncos.
For what it is worth, the Rubitrek is damn near identical to the 3w performance and compound wise. I wondered why they made two identical tires for awhile, my bet is they knew the new 4w was in bound and the 3w is going away, so they came up with the Rubitrek.
Not even sure if they have a 315 rubi ???

Toyo .. I have the 35x11.5-17 Open Country AT3 , load range C.
It is the worst road tire I have ever owned, DESPITE 18 billion glowing reviews.
The wet and snow road performance is down right dangerous.
I SUSPECT the LT versions (C range and better) all use a stiffer tread compound than a SL, so just thinking a C will ride or grip better is not always true.

I had Toyo ATs on a previous 3/4ton, they were so so. I do run Toyo studless winter tires my truck, they're amazing on compact snow and ice loaded with the sled deck.

Tried to find the 3Ws for sale anywhere, no luck for 17" rims. The 315 Rubitreks are only Load E, they looked good.

Sucks the Legend EXPs sling gravel, I had those in the cart before starting this thread, DiscTire had accepted an awesome price match. Next option was to run my 35" Baja ATs sitting in the garage, they have some hard miles on them, lot of life left but chunked and cut up.

Just bought the Falken A/T4W C's and scheduled for install in a few days! Not a fan of the weight but it checked off all the other boxes. Thanks for the feedback and discussions, I didn't expect to pick the A/T4s. Since I looked at so many E tires and my truck's summer tires are past due I'll probably get Cooper Discoverer AT3 XLTs in the spring.

 

[bhoth1011]

I had Toyo ATs on a previous 3/4ton, they were so so. I do run Toyo studless winter tires my truck, they're amazing on compact snow and ice loaded with the sled deck.

Tried to find the 3Ws for sale anywhere, no luck for 17" rims. The 315 Rubitreks are only Load E, they looked good.

Sucks the Legend EXPs sling gravel, I had those in the cart before starting this thread, DiscTire had accepted an awesome price match. Next option was to run my 35" Baja ATs sitting in the garage, they have some hard miles on them, lot of life left but chunked and cut up.

Just bought the Falken A/T4W C's and scheduled for install in a few days! Not a fan of the weight but it checked off all the other boxes. Thanks for the feedback and discussions, I didn't expect to pick the A/T4s. Since I looked at so many E tires and my truck's summer tires are past due I'll probably get Cooper Discoverer AT3 XLTs in the spring.

So did you stick with the same size? 315-70/17? And how much more do they weigh?

 

[akturbo]

So did you stick with the same size? 315-70/17? And how much more do they weigh?

Yeah, same size. They are heavy, 76lbs.

 

[Mtrctylarry]

Yeah, same size. They are heavy, 76lbs.

I would think about the 35 11.50 17 load range C. About the same height, just about an inch narrower, at 68 lbs.

 

[nolimits]

I would think about the 35 11.50 17 load range C. About the same height, just about an inch narrower, at 68 lbs.

Sounds like @akturbo made his choice already but for those still looking and referencing this thread, it may be worth comparing actual dimensions of the tires instead of what’s on the sidewall.

One that sticks out in my head is the Yoko Geolandar MT G003’s. Advertised as 35x12.5. Actual dims of 34.70 x 13.20. Measured on a 10” wide rim. All factory data from their website.

They are a more true to height than many but much fatter than most. The measured rim comes into play because with width you lose/gain right about 2/10” for each 1/2” variation in actual wheel width vs measured rim width.

For instance, instead of 13.20 wide on a 10” rim I would see closer to 12.60” on an 8.5” rim. Delta is 1.5” between actual and measured rim.

1.5 / 0.5 = 3 x 0.20 = 0.60” adjustment

Skinny tires will obviously be more skinny BUT they are also likely to have a smaller measured rim. I don’t have any data off the top of my head but have compared before and it’s not uncommon to see a measured rim of 8 to 8.50”. When you don’t have to adjust as much for measuring rim and actual rim width differences you may find the skinny tire isn’t quite as different as you initially thought. Obviously you have to factor in the actual width of the skinny tires, but I’ve seen several 11.50’s with actual widths of 12 to 12.2.

While the Yoko is a fat 12.5 most 12.5’s will be closer to 12.50 actual. Get a slightly fat skinny 11.50 tire against an average wider 12.50 tire and you may have very little variance.

 

[akturbo]

Sounds like @akturbo made his choice already but for those still looking and referencing this thread, it may be worth comparing actual dimensions of the tires instead of what’s on the sidewall.

One that sticks out in my head is the Yoko Geolandar MT G003’s. Advertised as 35x12.5. Actual dims of 34.70 x 13.20. Measured on a 10” wide rim. All factory data from their website.

They are a more true to height than many but much fatter than most. The measured rim comes into play because with width you lose/gain right about 2/10” for each 1/2” variation in actual wheel width vs measured rim width.

For instance, instead of 13.20 wide on a 10” rim I would see closer to 12.60” on an 8.5” rim. Delta is 1.5” between actual and measured rim.

1.5 / 0.5 = 3 x 0.20 = 0.60” adjustment

Skinny tires will obviously be more skinny BUT they are also likely to have a smaller measured rim. I don’t have any data off the top of my head but have compared before and it’s not uncommon to see a measured rim of 8 to 8.50”. When you don’t have to adjust as much for measuring rim and actual rim width differences you may find the skinny tire isn’t quite as different as you initially thought. Obviously you have to factor in the actual width of the skinny tires, but I’ve seen several 11.50’s with actual widths of 12 to 12.2.

While the Yoko is a fat 12.5 most 12.5’s will be closer to 12.50 actual. Get a slightly fat skinny 11.50 tire against an average wider 12.50 tire and you may have very little variance.

That's great info, thank you for sharing! Wife picked rims today, Dean Cross, gotta check the specs and do the math tomorrow, just got home from wheeling.

 

[gwp]

That's great info, thank you for sharing! Wife picked rims today, Dean Cross, gotta check the specs and do the math tomorrow, just got home from wheeling.

I like those wheels. I’d love a set in black with the same style and chrome cap. Where did you order them from? All I see is a Japanese site online.

 

[akturbo]

I like those wheels. I’d love a set in black with the same style and chrome cap. Where did you order them from? All I see is a Japanese site online.

Dean Wheels, I never heard of them but they have some unique designs. Haven't ordered them, just found a website...$$$$?! My wife found the white ones on Ebay, dunno the the deal yet. There's black for ya! https://streettracklife.com/en-us/collections/dean-wheels

 

[gwp]

Dean Wheels, I never heard of them but they have some unique designs. Haven't ordered them, just found a website...$$$$?! My wife found the white ones on Ebay, dunno the the deal yet. There's black for ya! https://streettracklife.com/en-us/collections/dean-wheels

Thank you

Sponsored