kodiak2000

Thanks for all the comments... no doupt now that I'm going with the AT-S's.

X-AWDriver

I got out and drove in my mom's Runner shod with those Yoks and definetly a great tire for a DD and I'd get them if I didn't off road as often as I do.

mkgarrison5

hey you have pics of the tires clean?? glad you like em i cant wait to get some on the tacoma and give the tires sometime to break in. they will quiet down and ride smoother... did the tire place give you an tips like howoften to rotate and tire pressure and etc?? btw you got 265's to fit without rubbing? my tacoma has 235's and plenty of space left... good looking tires!

aviator

I guess yoko has changed the tire design recently?
A few years ago I was looking at them and was advised that they had a bad record when installed on our trucks for being dificult to balance and wearing in a wierd and unusual [read unsafe] way. Any thoughts

X-AWDriver

My mom's truck will likely never see much more than a dirt road and she's picky about how her Runner rides and she says the ride is nice and no issues with balancing.

Mulkey

I replaced Bridgestone Revos with the Geolanders AT+ II's (11-05) b/c they were 200+ bucks cheaper and I didn't think there would be that much difference. Wrong. I wish I had spent the extra 200+ bucks. The REVOs in water are much better. In snow can't really tell that much difference but the REVO's seem a little more sticky and I am in a lot of snow. Dry pavement the Geolanders are much louder, harder and tough as hell to keep balanced. The REVOs were balanced once and lasted 55K miles. In mud and off-road in the summer- the REVO road better and handle off-road better. In other words REVOs are rated so high for a reason.

4biker

I've had experience with BFG AT-KO's and Bridgestone Revo's. I had the BFG's on my '99 Cherokee Sport and the Bridgestones on my finally-sold '99Ranger. I loved the look and off-road of the BFG's, but overall the Revo's took the cheese (or whatever). Both sets wore like iron but water and snow were much better suited to the tread design of the Revo, as was road noise. I also wheeled a little at moab with them (in my late Ranger) and they stuck very well. I also pulled a bunch of trucks out of the snow up the canyon last winter - I was really impressed. I'll go with muds on my next off-road set (when I build the 4Runner), but definitely check out the Revo's, if only for comparison. Good luck, it's an expensive move!

4biker

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/survey....jsp?type=ORAT
This is a customer survey for a bunch of different tires at Tirerack.com - kind of interesting

Mtriple

I'll try and get some pics tonight or tomorrow. I have about 300 miles on them now and they have definitely softened up a bit.

I was in and out at the tire place, he just mentioned to come back at 6000 miles for my free rotation.

And yeah, 265/75/16's on stock sagging suspension with NO rubbing.

Joshs98Runner

The Yoko's are alright, they look like a pretty decent tread pattern for street use. I don't have a problem recommending Yoko's if you want to save a few bucks, the guys are right about the earlier versions, they wore horribly, cupped fast as could be and just plain sucked. The most true and tried tire is the BFG A/T. Hands down the BFG kills the competition as far as reliability goes, at least for the two years I spent as a tire tech. The only other tire that I think is the absolute best for mileage and pure true roundness and excellent wearing manners is the Michelin's. The Michelins kidna suck for offroad use, but if you want a street tire that is by far the quitest, most reliable and long lasting tire made, you will love the Michelin's, in two years I had not seen a single Michelin blowout that wasn't caused from wearing down past the belts or a protruded object in the sidewall or pure neglect. Don't bag on the BFG's just because you have something else, they are still an excellent tire, any tire can get a flat if you wheel it, especially at different air pressures with poor drivers.

glenyoshida

I've got the 31/10.5R15 Geolander AT-S and have about three thousand miles on them now. I've read that they are not quite as good at packed snow but on the snowfalls we've had here in Denver I'm not sure how much better they can get. They don't want to stray to the side when you step on it and did much better than I thought they would on snowy trails. They are certainly not worse that the Michellins that I had on them before. Overall I'm very happy with them.

mkgarrison5

the geolander at II's are the "old" version of the A\T's.. the new is the A\T-S.. the redesigned the tire to wear better and etc.. i have heard nothing but good things about the at-s.. i have heard some bad things about the a\t II's

X-AWDriver

The AT-S is more of a street going tire with decent off road capabilities while the AT+IIs are more of a real offroad tire. They did not replace the AT+II.

I had the AT+IIs on my '97 and they were a solid tire off road and very grippy on dry pavement with good wet weather performance but they have a soft compound and will wear a bit quick hence their 380 treadwear rating. Nice tire but my Nittos are better IMO.

mkgarrison5

just talked to the yoko guy at their customer service number and he said that the at-s' are going to phase out the II's.. they will stop producing the II's and stick with the newer version the at-s's

kodiak2000

I got my AT'S's mounted today and I'll have them on the 4Runner by the end of the month, or as soon as the 3 feet of snow melts. I'll let you guys know what I think of them after 500 miles or so. Thanks for all the input!

AppalachianOffRoader

I know this is an old thread to bump, but in case anyone was considering the Geolander AT/S tires:

Just got them put on three weeks ago. I happened to get the friend deal from a good local tire shop. So I can't comment on the price/value, bang for your buck.

However, since I've put them on, I've driven approximately 4k miles. Driven through light mud, gravel/dirt roads, lots of wet pavement, and LOTS of highway. My initial impression is that they are a much smoother ride than my old BFG AT's. but for such a sleek looking tire, man are they loud! I normally ride with my radio up pretty loud, but I turned it down for whatever reason and thought I was having transmission/ diff problems with all the noise! Haha

They did very well on gravel, rocks, and dirt. Pretty well for the light mud. Wet grass they kinda suck a little, but not terrible. Unfortunately for my paint job, they also shed rocks and mud well too. And I was actually kind of blown away at how well they did on wet pavement. Granted, you have to know how to drive on wet pavement, but these tires don't tend to slip much, if any at all. Obviously I can't comment on their longevity, but otherwise it's a great tire. If they last as long as my BFG AT's did, I'll probably continue to use them for my daily driver/AT tires.

Rich L.

I bought a set of these new but didn't like them. They were noticeably heavier than the OEM Dunlops. Dirt grip was good but wet road traction was if-y. I sold them on CL. YMMV.

Rich

Rich L.

I should mention, these were 265/65/17 tires on 4th gen t4r wheels. Made my 3rd gen feel much worse on rough roads.

Rich