unscientific chopping and analysis of 2 tires
BFG MT

MTR

Showing the comparative thickness-MTR's are clearly thicker


article
http://www.offroader.com.au/features...nstruction.cfm

 

at the same pressure thicker usually means a more harsh ride.....

 

Ride quality is last on my list for an off-highway tire, while traction and durability are #1 and #2...

The MT/R's have been far superior to the BFG's in both the above catagories.

 

I stayed away from the BFG's because of the reputed thin sidewalls.

I have ripped two sidewalls out of my MT/R's.

You want to have a good time, go to the tire shop and feel a Krawler or better yet a Swamper sidewall. There is the beef.

 

I had the Swamper SSR and those suck for rocks (cut sidewall). I had the BFG MT and I liked those but I prefer the MT/R for sure. Something about the BFG sidewalls, they tend to get indentations on sidewall from thread towards rim.

 

Take a look at the Firestone Destination M/Ts...I've never run a better, tougher tire, hands down. And they are quiet and smooth on the highway, too! What more could you ask for.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires....omCompare1=yes

Honestly, way better than BFG and far better treadlife than MTRs. Just my 2 cents

 

I agree... but I think the jury is still out on overall durability. They haven't been really tested by the general public yet, so the fact that you and I love them are of little value to most people who do any amount of serious wheeling.

 

This is true, being a fairly new tire. I can attest that I was sold, however, when I (unintentionally) jumped the front end onto a pointy-ass boulder on a jetty at the beach and the tire just sat straight on top of it. It landed with a ˟˟˟˟load of force and the rock was sharp enough that you could shish-ka-bob a deer on it Not to mention the sidewall durability...I've jammed those tires into dry, rock lined ruts in west texas and barely even scuffed them. And, no, I don't work for Firestone

 

Whenever people talk tires, I like to hear what all they have ran and where all the wheel as well is what matters in a tire.

I have run BFG AT's and MT/R's. The MT/R's are better for me in all respects.

I am at almost 40k of mileage and the MT/R's ought to be good for another 10k. This has been abusive wheeling in Colorado, Moab, Arizona and road time to and from.

I will never buy a firestone product no matter how much they can shish kabob.

 

I run BFG AT's. If I were to go with a mud terrain and money was not a factor.....MT/R's without a doubt. But if I were on a budget the BFG MT is an excellent tire by all means.

Not that it matters, but I think the MT/R's look cooler too.

 

Yes, I agree. I liked the cutup test because I finally got to see the MTR "durawall" labeling on the tires is not just marketing fluff.

 

just thought of another factor.... are those cutup pics the same? like ar ethey the same sized tire and same load class? becasue a class c load range bfg mud is going to have a thinner sidewall then a class e load range bfg mud for example.....

 

FWIW, according to both the manufacturer websites, that size 265/75/16, is only available in load range D, for those tires.

 

also that looks like the old radial mt instead of the new ones. I dunno how much they changed em but the new ones sure do have a better looking side tread.

 

hmm i gt destination mts when they first came available.i work for firestone i had them before the promo stuff was outfor them. i had them for 6 months and sold them.wore fast,very noisy,didnt stick to flat rock very well. the sidewall after the side tread was pretty stoudt though. worst thing was the ride was super harsh. felt everything in the road and tended to wander easily

after i got rid of them i had trxus mt.tire was great no noise except when turning,indestructable sidewall,stuck like glue to anything. unbelievable wet traction. they wear kinda fast though.

i now have mtrs.i dont drive it on the road anymore put i had a set when i did. they wore well,handled great. as far as trail ability they are pretty good. wet traction on rocks sucks i am considering cutting mine up now. besides for wet traction on rocks work fine. no problems with sidewalls or punctures.

 

I have run MTRs as well as BFG A/Ts. Personally, I adore the MTRs. Ever since I first began looking at tires, people told me to stay away from the MTRs, while others told me they were awesome ... eventually it sounds like it comes down to luck of the draw, as some people are unable to get the MTRs to stay balanced for long. However, mine never had a single problem, and the on-road handling even in rain was beyond compare.

The only reason I looked into another tire was because I could see the MTRs starting to wear and they are so nice that it seemed a pity to wear them out in on-road driving situations before they'd even gotten much play off-road. So, for the remainder of the school year, I will be running the BFG A/Ts ... eventually I may switch to a smaller tire, like a 285 MTR.

(have 4 275s sitting in my garage all perfect, clean, and lonely)

Anyway ... thus far, the BFGs have handled well, but haven't made quite the impression on me that my MTRs did. Plus, when it rains, they (BFG A/Ts) have a funny feeling on the streets around here that I never experienced with the MTRs.

Both are great tires, but there's a soft spot in my heart for the MTRs.

 

i currently have the MT/Rs and I absolutly love them. zero complaints so far

 

I've got the MT/R's as well. Only complaint is that they seem to float a bit on packed snow and ice. But what mud tire is made for ice???

 

Kudos to the guy who has gotten 40k miles on his MT/R's. Where I live on the east aka wet coast the MT/R's suck as they are not a mud tire as all. I had a set when they came out and the only reason I have a set now is b/c my rubicon came with them. I've ran swampers, wild countries goodyears bridgestones and a few others and I must say the swampers and BFG's either performed the best on and off road or either lasted the longest. Not that getting 75,000 miles out of a set of BFG's has any influence in me buying another set

 

I went with BFG MT b/c they came in the size I wanted, 33x10.50x15. IF the MTR's came in a 33x10.50I would of bought them...

BFGs come in a wider variety of sizes.