| LOST JEEPS http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/ |
|
| No lift: 245/70/16 vs 235/75/16 dilema http://www.lostjeeps.com/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=22511 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | opo [ Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | No lift: 245/70/16 vs 235/75/16 dilema |
Hi there, I'm about to buy some new bfg ko's. My KJ is stock for now. I just need to decide between the 235-75-16 and the 245-70-16. I like the skinny/taller look of the 235 but I don't dislike the 245's. I'd like to hear your comments. Thanks Octavio |
|
| Author: | ProjektKJ [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
more possibility for rubbing with the 235/75 |
|
| Author: | Diver [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
good chance of rubbing on the 245 if you dont have spacers. I got the 240/70 Revos. love em Diver |
|
| Author: | Cowcatcher [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have 245/70 16 Toyo Open County AT's on a stock CRD and no rubbing. |
|
| Author: | KJGREECE [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think, the dimension 235/75 16 doesn't exist. There is 235/70 16. I had the bf all terrain 245/70 16, with some rubbing. |
|
| Author: | tulsa [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:49 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I have seen posts from people using both 245/70/16 and 235/75/16 with no problems. diameter on the 235/75/16 should be about 29.9". |
|
| Author: | KY Liberty [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
The 245/70R16's fit with an early KJ without rubbing. On the newer KJ's, you'll probably want a clevis lift, or 1/2" strut plate up front, and a set of extra spring isolators in the rear. |
|
| Author: | spoonplugger1 [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Have 3 KJs at work running 245/70X16s, 1 CRD and 2 gassers. No one is rubbing. One is a 2002. |
|
| Author: | Skyjump136 [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 10:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No lift: 245/70/16 vs 235/75/16 dilema |
opo wrote: Hi there,
I'm about to buy some new bfg ko's. My KJ is stock for now. I just need to decide between the 235-75-16 and the 245-70-16. I like the skinny/taller look of the 235 but I don't dislike the 245's. I'd like to hear your comments. Thanks Octavio Stick with the 245/70/16. There are a lot more choices in that size (BFG does not make the KO in 235/75/16, btw) and you only give up .2" in ground clearance. Plus you get the added stability of a wider tire. |
|
| Author: | opo [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: No lift: 245/70/16 vs 235/75/16 dilema |
Thank you everyone, It seems that the 245/70 will be the best choice fit-wise and that extra 1cm of width its a plus for stability. I'll keep you guys posted on my desition, Cheers, Octavio |
|
| Author: | Guest [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 7:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
KJGREECE wrote: I think, the dimension 235/75 16 doesn't exist. There is 235/70 16. I had the bf all terrain 245/70 16, with some rubbing.
the 235/75-16 is an oddball size, but it does exist. Factory equipment on some later model GM 2wd trucks. |
|
| Author: | DarbyWalters [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
The best thing about the 235/75/16 is that it comes in D and/or E load range. They are capable of heavier weights and the sidewalls will be tougher. Even if you didn't buy a lift you could use the "clevis lift" for the front and just add one spring isolator for the rear IF they rub. |
|
| Author: | Guest [ Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
My biggest issue with the D and E load range tires is that they come with a hefty weight themselves. I understand the reasoning for stronger sidewalls, but I carry a spare tire in case I have a cut sidewall...that extra weight also transmits into extra abuse on the already allegedly weak front axle and the CV shafts (I say allegedly because I haven't had any issues)...and I don't have those hanging off my tailgate 
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|