Arctic Offroad Forums

I want to make a final decision on tires for the LJ this summer. The original MTRs are just about done so mid summer I'll be replacing tires, putting on the 2" springs, and aligning all in 1 shot. I've pretty much decided on the tire but not the size.



The stock MTRs are 245/75R16 - supposedly 31" but really more like 30.5" new and then less when worn down. Plus they're load range E and really stiff.

The front bumpstops are about 1 1/2"-2" off the axle sitting flat right now. With 2" lift I'll have room to extend the bumpstops a bit to keep the new shoes from rubbing. I'm keeping the stock rims and don't want to use wheel spacers at this point. Unless the tire shop I go to allows some test mounting and shop flexing, I'll need to know ahead of time what's the biggest I can run without rubbing.

The S/T sizes I'm comparing are:
265/75R16 - Load range C - approx 31.6"X10.5"
285/75R16 - Load range D - approx 32.8"X11.3"
305/70R16 - Load range D - approx 32.8"X12.3"

So does anyone have insight on what'll rub and what won't?

S/T-C - C meaning "Cut and Chip resistant" come in 285/75R16 so that may be another option for that size. Anyone know anything about the rubber compounds? Does "cut and chip resistant" really just mean "hard inflexible rubber"? I do like the notion in looking at how harshly I cut up the tread on the old MTRs.

I wouldn't go wider than an 11.5 on stock wheels...even then as you go to a taller tire you'll still potentially rub on control arms at full lock. My stock TJ wheels with 31x10.5's rubbed the CA's badly. Others claim less rubbing on their similar setups, but are usually AT's with less aggressive sidewalls. I heard each side lug of my MTR's pinging off of the control arms.

The cooper S/T's are what we run on the work trucks at the mine. They do alright, but they're not spectacular, and they wear like iron, but funny. High speeds (70+) melt the tread after a bit, but that could be from running them with a full bed load and not enough psi. Mind you, this is on F250's. And no, I don't do 70+ in fully-loaded work trucks, but it's been done, I've heard. They tend to gum up in thick muck but if there's a bottom they grip well even so. Mannerisms may change with the lighter weight of your LJ.

SHoppe715 Wrote:...The stock MTRs are 245/75R16 - supposedly 31" but really more like 30.5" new and then less when worn down. Plus they're load range E and really stiff...

I call BS on this whole sentence.
First off, we all know that MTRs never wear out. Plus, the stiffnesss has nothing to do with the load range.





What made you pick that particular tread?

sevenslats Wrote:I call BS on this whole sentence.
First off, we all know that MTRs never wear out. Plus, the stiffnesss has nothing to do with the load range.





What made you pick that particular tread?

Geoff has a skewed view of reality. Basically just because Trxxus tires have the same wear endurance as a sheet of single ply government toilet paper, he thinks MTR's are hard tires. In fact, Trxxus tires have about the same worth in this comparison.:p

I am curious where you say that stiffness has nothing to do with load range. I don't doubt what you say, because I am uneducatd in such matters.

Steve, why not go with a moreopen tread for your tire?

"Durawall Technology"! Marketing gimick.

Yes, load range E will have much stiffer sidewalls than a LR C or D. That's a fact.

naturalbornmudder Wrote:Steve, why not go with a moreopen tread for your tire?

sevenslats Wrote:What made you pick that particular tread?

Now that the GB is up and running I want a less agressive tread for my DD. It sees about 95% highway miles and the reviews of the S/T seem pretty good. They also seem to be on the agressive end of the AT tire world which would probably suit this weekend wheeler (reality check) pretty well. Besides, I'm actually not a huge fan of deep, sticky mud holes. Down the road, when the "L"ittle "J"eep evolves further, it'll be a good trail rig for my kids to drive so I'll always have a buddy vehicle to go wheeling.

My take on the load range thing is more plys = stiffer sidewall = more durable sidewall but less footprint tread wraping around stuff. People say just air down farther with a stiffer tire, but you can only go so far before blowing beads. If I had beadlocks I actually wouldn't care as much about load range because I could air down way lower (just ask Eric). I've heard Goodyear actually uses different rubber compounds in different sizes of MTRs based on the expected use and weight of vehicles.

Go with the STT's, you will be happier. They are a little louder, but worth the difference offroad. Also, if you added a 1" body lift, you could run a 33 no problem, but you would need spacers for anything over 10.5 unless you adjust your steering stops.

The STT's also have a kevlar sidewall

So 285/75R16 might be my best bet to not rub on the control arms? If they do it would be barely and I'm considereing upgrading the LCAs anyway. The stock arms are taking a beating... I should say not taking the beating very well.

FWIW, I've seen guys flip the stock CAs upside down. Then, maybe, the lugs on the tires wouldn't catch the stamped steel.
Just a thought...

Ronster Wrote:Go with the STT's, you will be happier. They are a little louder, but worth the difference offroad. Also, if you added a 1" body lift, you could run a 33 no problem, but you would need spacers for anything over 10.5 unless you adjust your steering stops.

The STT's also have a kevlar sidewall

I really like STTs but for the amount of highway miles I put on this thing, I'm thinking they'll wear out quicker than the S/Ts and they're quite a bit more expensive. I probably won't have as long a commute to work by the time I wear out the 2nd set of tires so I'll go to a bigger MT tread for set #3. (see LJ future brainstorming thread about fender ideas)

I used round stock length procomp control arms to achieve just what Geoff said. They still rub, but on round stock instead of lip end like the OEM stuff is made of.

sevenslats Wrote:FWIW, I've seen guys flip the stock CAs upside down. Then, maybe, the lugs on the tires wouldn't catch the stamped steel.
Just a thought...

I think I know a guy around here who's pretty good with tubing and has made TJ control arms before... I don't like the stamped steel arms anyway.

naturalbornmudder Wrote:I used round stock length procomp control arms to achieve just what Geoff said. They still rub, but on round stock instead of lip end like the OEM stuff is made of.

And then only at full cut, slow rolling, right? So no real wear damage from rubbing I'm guessing?

If your going to up grade them do all 8, just ask Merick he'll tell ya.

SHoppe715 Wrote:And then only at full cut, slow rolling, right? So no real wear damage from rubbing I'm guessing?

no, there was no real wear damage from rubbing at all. It rubbed the paitn off of the procrap arms, but nothing else.

http://rustysoffroad.com/mm5/merchant.mv...de=RC-CAC1

I like these for the front lower, yes replace them all, and maybe go with the 305/70R16.

:yes:

If you like those look into a set of stock WJ LCA's they are built with the same bend. I think they are the same length also.

ajpthng Wrote:If you like those look into a set of stock WJ LCA's they are built with the same bend. I think they are the same length also.

Really? Got a pic? I thought they were bent down, not to the side. If they are that would be cool.

i think Derrick runs a Rusty's lift, you should ask him how he likes it, I could not believe it when I seen the control arms merrick showed me, it looks like they made the arms out of sheet metal, I got under James dodge truck and the control arms are made out of the same material. cheap and flymsy. I would definitely look into upgrading those.

Here is a Pic, The top arm is an stock XJ and the bottom is a stock WJ



Here is the link for the write up http://www.madxj.com/ Click on Show MADXJ Technical Articles then click on suspension.

IMO, $145 isn't a ridiculous price for LCAs, but it would be a steal if they were adjustable. Is the stamped steel ZJ arm worth it?

If I remember correctly crawling around under my WJ the control arm wasn't stamped like the XJ,XJ,TJ,MJ arms.

sure looks like it in that pic. maybe it's boxed, at least?

But, I ran stock control arms for 11 years on 0", 2", 4", and 6" lifts. twekaed the ears, but never bent/broke one at all. hrug:

PM sent

I think they are boxed.