All Terrain Tyre Comparisons

saxj wrote:
BFG's have a reputation for longevity, puncture resistance, gravel road use, and really crap wet weather performance. They also don't fair very well on sand, and don't grip very well on rock.

I'd have said the BFG's where more at home on sand and rock tbh, as that is what they are built for. Much of mainland USA is sand and rock unless you are East Coast.

300bhpton wrote:

saxj wrote:
BFG's have a reputation for longevity, puncture resistance, gravel road use, and really crap wet weather performance. They also don't fair very well on sand, and don't grip very well on rock.

I'd have said the BFG's where more at home on sand and rock tbh, as that is what they are built for. Much of mainland USA is sand and rock unless you are East Coast.

On sand e.g dunes, they don't flex very well and have a tendency to debead.
On steep rock I have noticed they tend to slip a lot more than other tyres - Jimny's with Firestone, Bridgestone and Yokohama

Thanks.

Don't get me wrong, I believe the BFG KO2s are good tyres - but from what I've read they are very strongly oriented to off-road rather than on-road. I understand the strong side walls give a more unforgiving ride (same as any LT?) and that people's actual experience with them is that they are not good on wet tarmac. Don't have an immediate reference for that, but it's 'out there' on the Web in a number of places. saxj on this thread has also mentioned that.

Where on Earth the Euro B rating for wet grip came from I just don't know. I can only repeat, it doesn't seem to be users' actual experience. Makes me a bit sceptical about all these tyre ratings, to be honest. Sooner go with what people have found in practice.

If you do ultimately go with the BFGs I shall be interested in your thoughts. Might have bought my own Geolandars by then - but there's always replacement tyres to think about!

Cheers - and hope your Gen 4 arrives soon.

Thanks for putting me straight on that Lambert. It was actually unidirectional tyres I had got confused with.

Andy, please take note - I was wrong!

Guy 2 wrote: Thanks.

Don't get me wrong, I believe the BFG KO2s are good tyres - but from what I've read they are very strongly oriented to off-road rather than on-road. I understand the strong side walls give a more unforgiving ride (same as any LT?) and that people's actual experience with them is that they are not good on wet tarmac. Don't have an immediate reference for that, but it's 'out there' on the Web in a number of places. saxj on this thread has also mentioned that.

Where on Earth the Euro B rating for wet grip came from I just don't know. I can only repeat, it doesn't seem to be users' actual experience. Makes me a bit sceptical about all these tyre ratings, to be honest. Sooner go with what people have found in practice.

If you do ultimately go with the BFGs I shall be interested in your thoughts. Might have bought my own Geolandars by then - but there's always replacement tyres to think about!

Cheers - and hope your Gen 4 arrives soon.

I think it depends on your expectations and intended use tbh.

The original BFG AT was IMO pretty dreadful in the wet. Part of this is the rubber goes hard after a few years. This is partly what makes them last a long time, but makes them very poor on wet tarmac.

The KO2 I've not actually run yet myself, but the tread has the inclusion of sipes, these should in theory make them much better on wet tarmacs than the previous ones. The tread is somewhat aggressive for an AT, but they are still pretty mild overall.

I'm not sure if they are available in a Jimny size, but my choice of AT tyre would be something like the Goodyear Duratrac. This is standard issue on many OEM vehicles and is a nice blend of on and off road performance.

Overall though, I tend to run MT's over AT's. A mild MT with sipes will often run almost as well as many AT's on the road, but perform much better in the mud and off road.

The new BFG KM03's looks very nice. My biggest gripe with BFG tyres in the UK at least is the cost of them. They are significantly more expensive than almost anything else. And while they should be good, I don't believe they are significantly better than many others.

I'm running Kumho MT51's on my Range Rover and tbh they are almost as quiet and comfortable as the road tyres that I took off it. But are so much better on lanes, fords and going across the fields.

Andy2640 wrote:
Dear Mr Gadget: When you say your lovely Geolanders have effected fuel consump.....and ride quality, may i ask to what degree?

Cheers fellas.

Andy.

Hi Andy, it's difficult for me to provide concrete evidence, as I only had the stock tyres fitted for 200 miles, however my perception is that acceleration isn't quite as sharp since moving to the heavier tyres and that fuel consumption is 2 or 3mpg down. Averaging under 34mpg at the moment, however there aren't many auto box can cars for me to compare against.

I don't think comfort has suffered. It was more jiggly immediately after fitting, as they'd set pressures 10psi too high. Seems fine now back at 26psi. I could probably drop to 23, but don't want to risk dropping mpg any further.

Really need a stock auto car to do a back to back test with.