Wow, that's awesome. I am coming up on needing a set of tires and I am going to seriously consider these Nitto's. I wonder how they would do in desert wheeling? My biggest concern is sidewall strength/resistance to being punctured by twigs/rocks. I guess there is only one way to find out.

 

on the nitto terra. unless you want 33's or 35's your out of luck for 15" rims

http://www.nittotire.com/popup_terra_sizes.asp

sweet, my kumho AT's ranked #5 and i have liked them.

 

i ran around in sand and they did fine. they have thick sidewalls and look like they'd hold up fine. they are some heavy SOB's, that's for sure!

 

Do the Yoko Geolanders really suck that bad in snow/ice?

 

$133/ea in load range D/$40 to mount and lifetime balance and with their warranty certificates I'm getting my set (265/75/16) for under $700 out the door.
Not a bad deal considering the full replacement,no questions asked warranty and the lifetime balance can come in handy plus I like not having to rotate the tires myself.
So,I'm paying $173 including tax a tire overall for the whole thing and so the Revo price is $126 to just buy the tire so I don't think Discount has too bad a deal.
Lose the warranty certificates and that knocks the TerraGrapplers down to a bit over $150 each out the door.

 

not bad, considering how popular they've become. with popularity comes price... in Oct 2003 when I got mine, I paid $540 for (4) 265/75-16's mounted, balanced, and out the door including tax.

 

I had a set on my '97 and I didn't think so and they went through some pretty deep snow but so do my boring Maxxis Bravo HTs which while ho-hum looking they were a nice all around daily driver tire but I can't wait to get the Nittos on my '99.

 

did anyone happen to notice that this study rates tires for on-road conditons only? consumer reports is the same magazine that gave the honda element the SUV of the year award of somethign like that.

i dont think they even consider off-road ability in any of their ratings...i remember reading a review of the 4th gen 4runner in CR and they were saying that the solid axle in the rear was not good because it made the ride too rough...

 

I think you guys bagging on CR have NO idea what you are talking about. They test products more scientifically, and analytically then ANY of us could ever, or will ever. Just because YOU disagree with them, doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

Heck, you seem to have no problem with their #1 pick, so why poo-poo the rest of their picks?

CR employs engineers who each specialize in the segment they are testing. (ie. the same guys who test cars do NOT test toasters.) I happen to be friends with a CR engineer, so clearly I'm biased, but that's the truth.

It looks to me like this test had nothing to do with offroading and why should it? CR is geared toward middle of the road consumers, not enthusiasts. For on road use, I can see why a BFG AT KO wouldn't do well. People who never wheel would find them loud and rough.

[nomax on]

 

The same engineers who rated the Ford Taurus as a best buy multiple years in a row. In addition to the acclaim from CR, the Taurus also had the distinction of having the most recalls of any car ever, the lowest customer satisfaction index, and having the lowest resale value of any car year after year after year. It's record tied, then exceeded the Ford Escort...

 

CR overall does a very good job. They have faced lawsuits from car manufacturors when they have deemed a model not safe. They do more testing than most other reviewers on car safety, child seats, and a lot of things not car related. Car makers actually listen to their advice and alter some issues in next years model.
They have made so mistakes and now generally don't recommend cars for which reliability is unknown. Furthermore, I would take their tire reviews with a grain of salt, you hardly ever know what the long term wear will be from their ratings.
The problem from a offroad point of view is that CR recommends SUVs for the general public. Therefore independent rear suspension, no low range gear, on road manners is prefered over off road ability. This is what probably 90% of the readers are looking for.

 

I figured I'd better get them soon since less than 6 months ago Discount had 'em for almost $20/tire less and the Yok Geolandars jumped from $103/tire to $134/tire and I'm sure recent events have raised the price on a lot of things.

 

And THAT is the money quote. Don't go to a periodical that generally advises consumers away from SUVs if you want a review of off-road tires. Understand what audience they're writing for.
BTW, I bought my BFG Long Trails based on a CR piece several years and 67K miles ago. They were supposed to be a good, high mileage, decent in the rain, snow and off-road tire (in other words, a compromise) -- and that's exactly what they've been for me. No regrets here!

 

I had the Yoko Geolanders on my 2nd gen before I sold it. They did well in the NJ snow last two years. Had to take it out in the middle of a snow storm and they performed quite well. I would buy them again, if they were cheaper. However, it's Revo's for my 4th gen.

 

Here's what Consumer Reports said:

The size lineup for the BFG All-Terrain KO is larger than what we tested and includes only LT rated and High flotation (31x10.50 type) sizes. The KO is typically marketed more with more off-road focus than the models we typically test where we focus more on the on-road performance as thats what most people do but the biggest reason is that we tested a P265/70R17 size not included in the KO's lineup.

Here's what I replied:
Following the link they do offer a 265/70 R17, and in fact the equivalent size would be 31.6x10.4 R17 anyway. You're correct in that the "all terrain" crowd hugely likes the tire, but wasn't the title "all terrain" tires after all? That was a severe faux pas in my opinion, and a slap in the face to BFGoodrich who has spent 30 years improving their all-terrain tires.

 

Looks like I'm hopefully getting my set of Nitto's tomorrow. I'm going back down from the Dueler A/T 285's to the Nitto 265's. Hope to get some of my mpg back.

It was a choice between the Nitto Terra Grappler or the Dueler A/T D693 II. It is only about under $2.00 difference, so looks like I'll opt for the Nitto to try something else.

Thanks for friends in low places, I'm getting the Nitto's 10 percent over his cost, mounting and balancing included.

I'll keep you guys informed how they turn out.

 

I finally got a reply from BFG. They confirm Consumer Reports' story. The BFG AT is an LT (light truck) tires - the others are P-Metric (car) tires. BFG said it would be like comparing apples and oranges. The AT is in a whole other class. The ones they tested are wannabe's.

 

Wow,BFG wasn't being biased were they?

Go tell that to the members here that run Yoks over Moab every year but even I'll admit most of teh others might not compete with the BFG off road but still for a DD the BFGs can't compete when on-road which is realistically what most of our trucks see everyday.
I just had my Nittos up in Slaughterhouse last week and they did fine and I don't see how a set of BFGs would do me better. BFGs are a great off road tire but I love to see a dry grip,wet grip and hydroplane resistance tests versus all the other tires.

 

Consumer reports knows nothing about tires and I would never ever use their advice for tires. I don't know their motives, but they always go against reality when it comes to tires. For instance they had the dunlop axiom rated as the top passenger tire. In reality it was the worst. There were so many problems with those tires that dunlop dropped the line. They seem to have something against Michelin because you always see their products rated very low. Like the BFG being at #14. Please do not buy tires based on their tests.

 

my thoughts exactly. CR may help you choose a decent vacuum cleaner (big whoop) but i doubt their input would be a boon to most of this board's denizens who've done their own "extensive field testing"