Notices
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners 2nd/3rd gen pickups, and 1st/2nd gen 4Runners with IFS

Any drawbacks to 33x9.5R15s?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 04:39 PM
  #1  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Any drawbacks to 33x9.5R15s?

This relates to my 4Runner (different weight vehicles need different width tires). The 31x10.5s really don't work so well on ice and snow. If fact they kind of suck. I'm thinking of going to a 9.5" tire instead to increase the ground contact psi. The way I see it, it is easier to control the size of the footprint (thus contact psi) with a 33x9.5" tire. (Recall that most of the tire foot print size gained my airing down comes from tread length not width. I urge you not to reply saying that your 12.5" wide tires are great on shallow snow/ ice, the laws of physics would prove you wrong.) Also, if you do not own 33x9.5 tires, please rea this article first: http://www.expeditionswest.com/equip...bfg_mt_km.html

Last edited by Matt16; Dec 13, 2008 at 11:12 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 04:45 PM
  #2  
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,903
Likes: 2
From: Hillsboro, OR
Not only do wider tires look cool, they are amazing on ice, i dont know what you are talking about, the bigger the tire the better. LOL jk.


I have some 30x9.5R15 Mudcat M/Ts (same tread pattern as BF Goodrich Mud Terrain T/A KM) on my 94 runner haha. Got em for $100 for all 4, 50% tread left.

Id say go for it, narrow tires for the win.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 05:41 PM
  #3  
4x4YOTA's Avatar
Registered User
15 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,308
Likes: 0
From: colorado
greatest tires I have "ever" owned I cant wait to get another set for my new truck
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 05:44 PM
  #4  
Bigblock's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
From: So MS
They don't drive as good as the 12.50's but who cares?
Bigblock
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 05:49 PM
  #5  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by Bigblock
They don't drive as good as the 12.50's but who cares?
Bigblock
Precisely what do you mean by this?
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 05:52 PM
  #6  
muddpigg's Avatar
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,374
Likes: 37
From: Enterprise, AL
Go for it.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 06:05 PM
  #7  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by muddpigg
Go for it.

It won't be this year, I have too much tuition to pay. But, when it comes time to change the tire out, I want to have it in my mind what is best. On top of the cost of tires, there's the cost of 4.88s or 5.29s (lets not get into that debate).
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 06:30 PM
  #8  
Trustyrusty's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,349
Likes: 1
From: (Rednecks Inbreed In) Kansas
Just run 33x12.5's and stop yer whinin! If it rubs beat the crap outta your pinchweld and ignore it.. If you don't wanna listen to it rub.. lift it two inches..
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 06:40 PM
  #9  
4Crawler's Avatar
Contributing Member
20 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 10,821
Likes: 34
From: SF Bay Area, CA
I've run both 9.50s and 10.50s, both on 6" rims. I actually prefer the 10.50s, but the 9.50s work well, too. Only two downsides I had to the 9.50s was they would not air down as far as the 10.50s. Much below about 10 psi and the center of the tread buckles upwards and the tire actually lose traction. The 10.50s don't seem to do this, perhaps related to the tire vs. rim width. Also I find the 9.50 sidewalls tend to lay over a lot easier on side hills than the 10.50s. But for driving in wet snow, slush and ice, the skinny 9.50s perform well.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 06:41 PM
  #10  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by Trustyrusty
Just run 33x12.5's and stop yer whinin! If it rubs beat the crap outta your pinchweld and ignore it.. If you don't wanna listen to it rub.. lift it two inches..
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?

Last edited by Matt16; Dec 12, 2008 at 06:55 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 07:03 PM
  #11  
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,903
Likes: 2
From: Hillsboro, OR
Originally Posted by Matt16
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?
HAHA, holy crap.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 07:15 PM
  #12  
bigt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,278
Likes: 2
From: chippawa niagara falls ontario
just barn yard relations 101
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 07:25 PM
  #13  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by Tubbyfatty
Not only do wider tires look cool, they are amazing on ice, i dont know what you are talking about, the bigger the tire the better. LOL jk.


I have some 30x9.5R15 Mudcat M/Ts (same tread pattern as BF Goodrich Mud Terrain T/A KM) on my 94 runner haha. Got em for $100 for all 4, 50% tread left.

Id say go for it, narrow tires for the win.
Have you run 10.5" tires as well as 9.5" tires? Did you notice any difference if you did?
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 07:31 PM
  #14  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by 4Crawler
I've run both 9.50s and 10.50s, both on 6" rims. I actually prefer the 10.50s, but the 9.50s work well, too. Only two downsides I had to the 9.50s was they would not air down as far as the 10.50s. Much below about 10 psi and the center of the tread buckles upwards and the tire actually lose traction. The 10.50s don't seem to do this, perhaps related to the tire vs. rim width. Also I find the 9.50 sidewalls tend to lay over a lot easier on side hills than the 10.50s. But for driving in wet snow, slush and ice, the skinny 9.50s perform well.
Were the 9.5s significantly better on ice than 10.5s? I find myself at a loss of traction most often in the winter. In the warmer months, I find if my forward travel is stopped, I can back out of it, and usually try another line. In snow, as often as not, once I lose forward momentum, I'm stuck.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 07:31 PM
  #15  
Tubbyfatty's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,903
Likes: 2
From: Hillsboro, OR
Originally Posted by Matt16
Have you run 10.5" tires as well as 9.5" tires? Did you notice any difference if you did?
Na. Ive only ran stock or the ones i have now.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 08:06 PM
  #16  
RobD's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,243
Likes: 5
From: Calgary, AB
My main concern with the 33x9.5s is limited availability. I looked at them last year and the only ones who made that size is BFGoodrich. The tire dealer told me that they were discontinuing that size because everyone wants big fat tires and not pizza cutters.

Just my 3 cents.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2008 | 08:28 PM
  #17  
Matt16's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,377
Likes: 5
Originally Posted by RobD
My main concern with the 33x9.5s is limited availability. I looked at them last year and the only ones who made that size is BFGoodrich. The tire dealer told me that they were discontinuing that size because everyone wants big fat tires and not pizza cutters.

Just my 3 cents.
That's a real shame. It annoys me that people consistently choose looks over performance time after time. About the only place wide tire seem to excel in "bottomless" soft mud and snow such as muskeg.

The 1997 front wheel drive (open diff) VW van we had with 205/65R15 snow tires did about as well in snow (considering respective ground clearances) as my rear locked 4wd 4Runner. Granted the VW had snow tires, but the 4Runner has 2 more drive wheels (3 vs. 1 drive wheel). Whereas the 205/65r15 tires seemed to dig down to something worth gripping, the 31x10.5s seem to be quite content to turn the packed snow to ice.

Once must also take into account the frontal area of the tire when going through deeper snow.

Last edited by Matt16; Dec 12, 2008 at 10:04 PM.
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2008 | 05:02 PM
  #18  
FredTJ's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,518
Likes: 1
From: Tucson, AZ USA Age:60
Originally Posted by Matt16
Opinion noted and disregard. Do they teach reading in Kansas?
If you look at his profile you'll see why he spews out nonsense

age:17



Fred
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2008 | 05:42 PM
  #19  
86tuning's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 738
Likes: 2
From: Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted by Matt16
Granted the VW had snow tires
Snow tires will ALWAYS work better on snow than all-seasons/terrains or pretty much anything else.

When I had snow tires on my mk1/2/3 jettas (I've had a bunch of vws over the years) I could outrun almost anyone in the city when it snowed. Easily outrunning awd wonders like subies and whatnot that were on all seasons.

That said, we'll see how well my 33x10.5 km2's feel this winter on the pickemuptruck.
Reply
Old Dec 13, 2008 | 06:00 PM
  #20  
turboboost's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 378
Likes: 1
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
I personally think that is a fantastic size for snow and ice.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:12 AM.