I am almost ready for new rubber and I do not want to make my 4Runner into something that I hate to drive so.....................
Since this is my daily driver, I am always concerned about mods that decrease MPG. I would not mind replacing my 265/70 16 Dunlop’s with 265/75 16 Revo’s but I have read that several folks who did this reported a significant decrease in MPG. Any decrease is too much IMHO.
This is for my ’00 5-speed 4Runner which, I am guessing, has 410’s.
I have a little time to decide as I still have the panhard drop to do prior to new tires and alignment. I am leaning very heavily towards the stock size tire but gee whiz, it would look better with a larger tire.

As a side note, a friend here at work noticed my new Sonoran rear bumper and asked, “What did you do, get smaller tires.” I guess the OME’s, TJM and Sonoran Steel, & Stubbs are really making the tires look teenie!

All opinions welcome but I am especially interested in hearing from folks who've done this and the results.

Thanks,
Mike

 

Tough one. My mileage is about .5 MPG worse with 265/75's. My rig is also noticeably slower. But the tires do look much better.

I think I am going to go with 70's my next go around with a more aggressive tread pattern. That should take some of the pain out of the decision. We'll see.

 

I barely notice any change. So somewhere within .5 MPG difference and I have the "D" Load range 265/75/16 Revos.

 

Goldtaco,

Yup, you probalby read my thread awhile back. My mileage went down around 1.0 to 1.5 mpg (18.0 to 18.5mpg). However, I've done some things to bring it back. So now my avg mpg is around 17.0 to 17.5 mpg. Higher if driving alot of highway miles. Also, I've noticed that there is some power loss too.

Curiously, the 75s were cheaper than the 70s. I'm talking about hte Revos. So over the lifetime of the tire (50k miles), the savings in gas about equal the cost difference between the 75s and 70s. Go figure.

Looks-wise, you can't beat the 75s. They just look so much better plus the added 1/2 height.

Like 96, most likely i'm gonna buy a chunky 70 next time. Maybe some MTRs or BFG ATs. But what makes the decision so hard is that Revos are such awesome, AWESOME tires.

Bob

 

I went from the stock 265/70/16 Dunflops to 265/75/16 BF Goodrich T/A KOs. I noticed the following things:
Without a lift, the tires rubbed the inner fender when turning hard and going over a small bump. With a lift, no problem.
The BFGs rode significantly harder than the Dunlops. BFG recommends a max inflation pressure of 55 psi. I ran 45 psi briefly and started loosing teeth. I dropped to 35 psi and the ride was tollerable, but I decreased the life of the tire significantly.
As for gas mileage...I really didn't notice a significant loss. Maybe .1-.3 at most. A TRD 160° thermostat will cause a greater loss than that. Also, when I calculate my mileage, I compensate for the larger tires. I add 3.4% to the trip mileage since the wheels are turning 3.4% slower with the larger-than-stock tire.

Hope that helps!

 

Hey Paul-

I hoped you'd see this, I was wondering if you noticed any change in mileage when you had the 275/70's on prior to the Revos? This might be another (slightly larger) choice for him, if he can find a tire he likes...

 

Excellent thoughts from all the usual suspects. Thanks.
This is going to be as hard to decide as I figured. I really want the Revo’s but it sounds like half of y’all that have gone to 75’s are planning on switching back to 70’s. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Why can’t we have it all?

 

just a side note, tirerack.com has a deal on the revo's. $50 rebate when you buy four until May 22nd.

 

Mike,

Yes, planning to switch back but that does not necessarily mean that I personally will. The Revos are pretty damn awesome tires and it will be a hard decision to make.

I'll let Christian make the first move.

Bob

 

I really liked the 270/70/16 Michelin LTX M/S tire so they moved over to my wife's Tacoma when I got the Revos.

The 270/70/16 size ride nice and I didn't notice much change in gas mileage going to the slightly larger diameter tire. The extra width was nice and made the Runner feel more solid. There should not be any rubbing issues with non-lifted Runners with this size either.

The only problem with the Revos is you can't get "C or D" Load range unless you get the 265/75/16 or larger sizes.

If you are going to do any wheelin in rocky areas I recommend getting at least the "C" Load range for a stronger sidewall. Someone just posted this week about blowing out his second sidewall on a "P" rated Revo 265/70/16 on a rocky trail.
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...ighlight=Revos

Go back to 265/70's again.

Nope, not me..... I still get good gas mileage and the 265/75 feel good.

 

I would seriously doubt that you would notice any change in MPGs or power with such a slight change. A 5% change in aspect ratio is not significant. You are only talking about a 1" change in diameter. I would suspect that anyone who claims that their gas mileage has suffered because of the larger size tires has not compensated for the fact that their odometer is recording fewer miles because of the larger diameter tires.

 

On pinstonslap's note, does anyone have a formula for calculating speedometer error by tire size? I'm going from stock to 3 inch lift and 285/75-16 Revos next week and am wondering how much my speedometer and odometer will be in error.

thanks

 

Piston,

I based my calculations off my GPS, not my odo.

Bob

 

I have a '00 5spd as well. I was stock when I went to the 265/75s and I did notice a slight loss of power. Basically I just adapted my shifting habits to compensate. Since then I've done the deckplate mod and most recently converted to electric fans and I feel like I've got all the power back.

In regards to gas mileage, it's hard to say since the larger tires cause the odometer to be off. But I gotta ask, if you want to stay with stock sized tires then why the lift?

 

I did not start out wanting a lifted truck. I needed shocks (and wanted springs) so after tons and tons of reading, I went with the OME's. The lift came along for (with) the ride.
I also wanted a deer-deflecting bumper because where I live, that is a common occurance so I got a TJM. The next thing I knew, I had Stubbs and a Sonoran rear bumper. It's not my fault. It just happened! Really.
I have been planning on new tires once the suspension stuff is done and it's getting close.
The thing is that this is primarily my drive every single day car and will see very little off-roading, at least for a little while.
Thanks for asking,
Mike

 

It is significant to me. Besides, I posted a thread a while back where some math guru's helped me with my math calculations. There are a number of factors were are dealing with in these slightly larger tires:

More rotational mass, greater contact patch (friction), and a slightly larger diameter. Place all these together and you have a noticeable difference in power and mileage.

 

What is the stock size that you have now?

 

Christian,
Didn't you switch from alloys to steel wheels at the same time? Do you think that had any significance?
Mike

 

Then I'd say it's about time that 33"s "just happened". Blame it on the gap that the rear bumper left to fit 35"s.

 

Here's more threads on this issue....
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...ight=tire+size

https://www.yotatech.com/forums/show...ight=calculate