| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=86033 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Polak [ Tue Jan 24, 2017 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 |
Getting new tires for the CRD. After I lift it in the coming weeks, I’ve decided to replace the current 235/70/16 on 24 lb stock wheels with 255/70/16 on my 16x8 21 lb Alcoa wheels. Seems like a good compromise of height, width, weight, and gear ratio. I’ve narrowed it down to the 2 options above based on year round on/off road use in ND, MN, and WI. I’M NOT LOOKING FOR OTHER TIRE SUGGESTIONS. My off-road use has more to do with hunting trails and boat ramps than wheeling. My on road use includes 7 hour drives monthly. I want the new tires to be relatively quiet. Our other CRD has LT245/75/16 duratracs on moabs and they are louder than I’d like. I would also ask my new tires to not hurt my fuel economy more than an MPG or 2. So, I’m trying to keep the tires pretty light. In P255/70/16 the Nokians weigh 31.9lbs and the Kumhos weigh 34.6 lbs. The Nokians are rated for a bit more weight and higher speed than the Kumhos. But the Kumhos have a 5000 mile longer warranty. They both got AA ratings in UTQP tread compound tests. They are also both severe snow service rated. I think the Nokian rubber compound is designed to be slightly lower rolling resistance. It’s made from some kind of synthetic rubber. Also the nokians are 13/32nds vs Kuhmos 13.1 32nds. I can get 5 Nokians installed for about $130/tire. 5 Kumho’s installed for about $110/tire. Both less with rebates in April. The Kumhos are definitely more available. Just trying to determine if the Nokians are worth the extra $100 I guess. Any input is helpful. |
|
| Author: | WolverineFW [ Wed Jan 25, 2017 10:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 |
Pretty sure the Nokians are the same tire that I have on my Chevy work van. They are pretty solid in the snow and the rain. Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk |
|
| Author: | mindbomb [ Thu Jan 26, 2017 5:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 |
Consider the hankooks P rated dynapros - should be same price range, very low noise, low rolling res, great grip Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
| Author: | Polak [ Thu Jan 26, 2017 10:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 |
The Dynapro ATM RF10's are on average $10 more/tire in Fargo than the Kumho AT51's. I did give them a hard look, but ultimately decided they didn't offer any more for the money than the AT51's. Hankooks weight rating, weight, tread depth, UTGP, noise, and tread life are all about the same as the AT51. The Nokians on the other hand may have a little better on-road comfort/noise than the AT51's. Just couldn't make up my mind so I thought I'd ask the forum. |
|
| Author: | u2slow [ Sat Mar 18, 2017 9:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Nokian Rotiva AT vs Kumho Road Venture AT51 |
Very pleased with winter & rain performance on Nokian products. Had two sets before. Currently running Hakkapeliitas in 245/75R16. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|