Notices
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners 2nd/3rd gen pickups, and 1st/2nd gen 4Runners with IFS
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: DashLynx

Any drawbacks to 33x9.5R15s?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-12-2008, 04:39 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Any drawbacks to 33x9.5R15s?

This relates to my 4Runner (different weight vehicles need different width tires). The 31x10.5s really don't work so well on ice and snow. If fact they kind of suck. I'm thinking of going to a 9.5" tire instead to increase the ground contact psi. The way I see it, it is easier to control the size of the footprint (thus contact psi) with a 33x9.5" tire. (Recall that most of the tire foot print size gained my airing down comes from tread length not width. I urge you not to reply saying that your 12.5" wide tires are great on shallow snow/ ice, the laws of physics would prove you wrong.) Also, if you do not own 33x9.5 tires, please rea this article first: http://www.expeditionswest.com/equip...bfg_mt_km.html

Last edited by Matt16; 12-13-2008 at 11:12 PM.
Old 12-12-2008, 04:45 PM
  #2  
Registered User
 
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hillsboro, OR
Posts: 1,903
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Not only do wider tires look cool, they are amazing on ice, i dont know what you are talking about, the bigger the tire the better. LOL jk.


I have some 30x9.5R15 Mudcat M/Ts (same tread pattern as BF Goodrich Mud Terrain T/A KM) on my 94 runner haha. Got em for $100 for all 4, 50% tread left.

Id say go for it, narrow tires for the win.
Old 12-12-2008, 05:41 PM
  #3  
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
4x4YOTA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: colorado
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
greatest tires I have "ever" owned I cant wait to get another set for my new truck
Old 12-12-2008, 05:44 PM
  #4  
Registered User
 
Bigblock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: So MS
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They don't drive as good as the 12.50's but who cares?
Bigblock
Old 12-12-2008, 05:49 PM
  #5  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Bigblock
They don't drive as good as the 12.50's but who cares?
Bigblock
Precisely what do you mean by this?
Old 12-12-2008, 05:52 PM
  #6  
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
muddpigg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Enterprise, AL
Posts: 4,374
Received 35 Likes on 30 Posts
Go for it.
Old 12-12-2008, 06:05 PM
  #7  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by muddpigg
Go for it.

It won't be this year, I have too much tuition to pay. But, when it comes time to change the tire out, I want to have it in my mind what is best. On top of the cost of tires, there's the cost of 4.88s or 5.29s (lets not get into that debate).
Old 12-12-2008, 06:30 PM
  #8  
Banned
 
Trustyrusty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: (Rednecks Inbreed In) Kansas
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Just run 33x12.5's and stop yer whinin! If it rubs beat the crap outta your pinchweld and ignore it.. If you don't wanna listen to it rub.. lift it two inches..
Old 12-12-2008, 06:40 PM
  #9  
Contributing Member
iTrader: (3)
 
4Crawler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 10,817
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes on 26 Posts
I've run both 9.50s and 10.50s, both on 6" rims. I actually prefer the 10.50s, but the 9.50s work well, too. Only two downsides I had to the 9.50s was they would not air down as far as the 10.50s. Much below about 10 psi and the center of the tread buckles upwards and the tire actually lose traction. The 10.50s don't seem to do this, perhaps related to the tire vs. rim width. Also I find the 9.50 sidewalls tend to lay over a lot easier on side hills than the 10.50s. But for driving in wet snow, slush and ice, the skinny 9.50s perform well.
Old 12-12-2008, 06:41 PM
  #10  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Trustyrusty
Just run 33x12.5's and stop yer whinin! If it rubs beat the crap outta your pinchweld and ignore it.. If you don't wanna listen to it rub.. lift it two inches..
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?

Last edited by Matt16; 12-12-2008 at 06:55 PM.
Old 12-12-2008, 07:03 PM
  #11  
Registered User
 
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hillsboro, OR
Posts: 1,903
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Matt16
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?
HAHA, holy crap.
Old 12-12-2008, 07:15 PM
  #12  
Registered User
 
bigt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: chippawa niagara falls ontario
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
just barn yard relations 101
Old 12-12-2008, 07:25 PM
  #13  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Tubbyfatty
Not only do wider tires look cool, they are amazing on ice, i dont know what you are talking about, the bigger the tire the better. LOL jk.


I have some 30x9.5R15 Mudcat M/Ts (same tread pattern as BF Goodrich Mud Terrain T/A KM) on my 94 runner haha. Got em for $100 for all 4, 50% tread left.

Id say go for it, narrow tires for the win.
Have you run 10.5" tires as well as 9.5" tires? Did you notice any difference if you did?
Old 12-12-2008, 07:31 PM
  #14  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by 4Crawler
I've run both 9.50s and 10.50s, both on 6" rims. I actually prefer the 10.50s, but the 9.50s work well, too. Only two downsides I had to the 9.50s was they would not air down as far as the 10.50s. Much below about 10 psi and the center of the tread buckles upwards and the tire actually lose traction. The 10.50s don't seem to do this, perhaps related to the tire vs. rim width. Also I find the 9.50 sidewalls tend to lay over a lot easier on side hills than the 10.50s. But for driving in wet snow, slush and ice, the skinny 9.50s perform well.
Were the 9.5s significantly better on ice than 10.5s? I find myself at a loss of traction most often in the winter. In the warmer months, I find if my forward travel is stopped, I can back out of it, and usually try another line. In snow, as often as not, once I lose forward momentum, I'm stuck.
Old 12-12-2008, 07:31 PM
  #15  
Registered User
 
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hillsboro, OR
Posts: 1,903
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Matt16
Have you run 10.5" tires as well as 9.5" tires? Did you notice any difference if you did?
Na. Ive only ran stock or the ones i have now.
Old 12-12-2008, 08:06 PM
  #16  
Registered User
 
RobD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 2,243
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
My main concern with the 33x9.5s is limited availability. I looked at them last year and the only ones who made that size is BFGoodrich. The tire dealer told me that they were discontinuing that size because everyone wants big fat tires and not pizza cutters.

Just my 3 cents.
Old 12-12-2008, 08:28 PM
  #17  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Matt16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
Originally Posted by RobD
My main concern with the 33x9.5s is limited availability. I looked at them last year and the only ones who made that size is BFGoodrich. The tire dealer told me that they were discontinuing that size because everyone wants big fat tires and not pizza cutters.

Just my 3 cents.
That's a real shame. It annoys me that people consistently choose looks over performance time after time. About the only place wide tire seem to excel in "bottomless" soft mud and snow such as muskeg.

The 1997 front wheel drive (open diff) VW van we had with 205/65R15 snow tires did about as well in snow (considering respective ground clearances) as my rear locked 4wd 4Runner. Granted the VW had snow tires, but the 4Runner has 2 more drive wheels (3 vs. 1 drive wheel). Whereas the 205/65r15 tires seemed to dig down to something worth gripping, the 31x10.5s seem to be quite content to turn the packed snow to ice.

Once must also take into account the frontal area of the tire when going through deeper snow.

Last edited by Matt16; 12-12-2008 at 10:04 PM.
Old 12-13-2008, 05:02 PM
  #18  
Registered User
 
FredTJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ USA Age:60
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Matt16
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?
If you look at his profile you'll see why he spews out nonsense

age:17



Fred
Old 12-13-2008, 05:42 PM
  #19  
Registered User
 
86tuning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 738
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Matt16
Granted the VW had snow tires
Snow tires will ALWAYS work better on snow than all-seasons/terrains or pretty much anything else.

When I had snow tires on my mk1/2/3 jettas (I've had a bunch of vws over the years) I could outrun almost anyone in the city when it snowed. Easily outrunning awd wonders like subies and whatnot that were on all seasons.

That said, we'll see how well my 33x10.5 km2's feel this winter on the pickemuptruck.
Old 12-13-2008, 06:00 PM
  #20  
Contributing Member
 
turboboost's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 378
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I personally think that is a fantastic size for snow and ice.


Quick Reply: Any drawbacks to 33x9.5R15s?



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:55 AM.