flyAddict

Here's my 2 pennies. The BFG AT KO look far more aggressive. I've had mine for 63K miles and they've still got about a 1/4 of tread left. As for their on road performance they are far better than the goodyear wrangler RT/s that were on it when I got it. They have also never let me down. BFG offers a year adventure assistance or some suck warrenty, where if you ever get stuck they'll come tow you out. Which for all intents and purposes isn't very practical, but it does go to show their confidence in their tires. The BFG MTs are even more aggresive but are lousy on wet roads, louder and don't last nearly as long as the AT KO's, from what i've heard.

Mulkey

The BFG AT look better but the Revos are better Had them in snow, mud, sand. No rocks but they are sticky to say the least.

Duec66

I'm about to replace my revos for some more. They performed great in all weather conditions. The BFG's look a little cheap to me with just the lugs, no sipes or anything.

ALBPM

More Revo Sidewall pics:







I've owned 2 sets of BFG KOs both were nice until they had about 35000 miles on them. After you wear the softer outer compound off the treads they ride hard as a rock and become very slick on wet pavement not to mention they dry rot very fast in the dry Southwest climate.

The Revos are much better in wet sloppy conditions. They channel water like no other tire I've seen. They are also very quiet for an AT Tire. They are quieter than the Michelin M/S LTX tires they replaced on my Runner. The Revos also have a three ply sidewall if you get the "C" or "D" load range instead of the SL type.

2001Millrunner

BFGs look tougher. That's the reason that made me choose BFG AT over REVOs however I might try the REVOs next time.