Newbie Tech Section Often asked technical questions can be asked here

BFG 33/9.5s?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-30-2010, 08:32 PM
  #1  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Greenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
BFG 33/9.5s?

I've always thought that tall and skinny makes sense for an off-road tire. I've carried a 33/9.5 BFG MT as my spare for years (it came with the truck) and I've been thinking my next full set might be that size. I just noticed on the BFG site that they make the AT in that size!

Why don't more people run 33/9.5s? Am I missing something?

Last edited by Greenman; 05-31-2010 at 04:10 AM.
Old 05-31-2010, 12:37 AM
  #2  
totally a bro
Staff
iTrader: (2)
 
vital22re's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kick yer face
Posts: 8,158
Received 45 Likes on 28 Posts
i'm goin 33/10.50/15 when i get the cash.. I like the look of the tall and skinny. I dont' think the wieght and less mpg are worth wider tires. Most of my driving is paved hard surface. And for snow i just air down.
Old 05-31-2010, 12:47 AM
  #3  
Registered User
 
1981 yota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Cle Elum washington
Posts: 1,639
Received 4 Likes on 4 Posts
ive looked can you even find a 33 9.5 mt
Old 05-31-2010, 04:09 AM
  #4  
Registered User
Thread Starter
 
Greenman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Can anyone offer a performance comparison of 33/10.5 vs. 33/9.5?
Old 05-31-2010, 06:56 AM
  #5  
tc
Contributing Member
 
tc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Longmont, CO
Posts: 8,875
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Greenman
Why don't more people run 33/9.5s? Am I missing something?
Because the industry is DOMINATED by the domestic/fullsize demand. I was talking to a mfg one time and they said SEMA studies show something like 80% of the "offroad aftermarket" is people who have full size domestic trucks. Toyota and Jeep split the remaining 20%.

Hard to get the load rating on a tall/skinny tire, so most manufacturers don't make them despite all the benefits for those of us with lighter rigs.

Originally Posted by Greenman
Can anyone offer a performance comparison of 33/10.5 vs. 33/9.5?
There isn't really any discernable difference. I've run the 10.50's and AxleIke used to run the 9.50's. Remember, there is no factor for width/area in the friction equation - just weight and material.

The big thing is finding a rim narrow enough to hold on the 9.50 when aired down - you really need a 6" rim. The 10.50 works great with stock 7" rims.
Old 05-31-2010, 07:05 AM
  #6  
Registered User
 
xxxtreme22r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wilkes-Barre, PA, USA
Posts: 13,574
Received 69 Likes on 48 Posts
Originally Posted by tc
Because the industry is DOMINATED by the domestic/fullsize demand. I was talking to a mfg one time and they said SEMA studies show something like 80% of the "offroad aftermarket" is people who have full size domestic trucks. Toyota and Jeep split the remaining 20%.

Hard to get the load rating on a tall/skinny tire, so most manufacturers don't make them despite all the benefits for those of us with lighter rigs.
This is probably the same reason why it's hard to find a 35/10.50

Last edited by xxxtreme22r; 05-31-2010 at 07:06 AM.
Old 05-31-2010, 07:21 AM
  #7  
Registered User
 
Travisfab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: San Diego
Posts: 344
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I have 1 33x9.50 mud terrain for sale if anyone wants it.

Located in San Diego
Old 05-31-2010, 07:38 AM
  #8  
Registered User
 
scuba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 11,338
Received 120 Likes on 59 Posts
255/85/16


Old 05-31-2010, 07:41 AM
  #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 am wearing out my last pair of 9.50 MTs, Mine are about 14 years old and about 1/2 tread left (they had been spares for about 10 years). I find I like the 10.50s better, they have a little better stability in off-camber situations:
http://www.4crawler.com/4x4/BFG_AT_KO.shtml
Old 05-31-2010, 08:34 AM
  #10  
Registered User
 
PismoJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Pismo Beach, California
Posts: 2,259
Received 84 Likes on 56 Posts
x2 I have 33x10.5 BFG AT KO's and they hook up sweet in most terrain! In think 10.5 is plenty narrow for a taller tire
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
nvwiggins
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners (Build-Up Section)
13
06-16-2016 03:05 PM
muddpigg
Axles - Suspensions - Tires - Wheels
8
11-02-2015 05:36 AM
87SR5justin
Tires & Wheels
2
09-29-2015 02:45 PM
94toyy
95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners (Build-Up Section)
12
09-14-2015 06:18 AM
AkitaDog
Vehicles - Trailers (Complete)
0
09-03-2015 09:01 PM



Quick Reply: BFG 33/9.5s?



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:17 AM.