It was obvious these Bighorns had been stored outside as there was varying amounts of desert grit inside the tires. A thorough cleaning with compressed air prepared them for a trip to the tire shop.
Inside of the bead, this sand was difficult to blow out.
The Bighorns were not going on my nicest set of wheels, but my local Les Schwab Tires still used their nice, new rim-clamp machine to insure damage free mounting.
Rim Clamp tire machine.New high-pressure valve stems were purchased for the TRD Rock Warrior wheels.
My experiences with Maxxis tires, all LT255/85R16D prior to buying this set of used 285s, have been positive. The Bighorns are a little loud, a softer, nicely gripping tire, and I’m usually impressed with how little weight they require to balance.
Having the correct, small center cone for the balance machine is important.Hunter Road Force GSP9700 tire balancer.
These 285/70R17s did not disappoint, the Hunter GSP9700 balance machine indicated the tires needed little weight to balance, even with their uneven wear.
Tire #1. Amazingly little weight for a dynamic balance of a 33" mud tire. The final balance required 1 ounce on each side.
Balance Data
On my shop scale these 17-inch Bighorns weighed 55–57 pounds depending on how much rubber remained, and 80 pounds mounted on the very light forged aluminum 17″ TRD Rock Warrior wheels. Although I’ll often use a static, single-plane balance for truck tires, these Bighorns were dynamically balanced.
1.00/1.00
2.50/2.00
2.00/4.75 (The most cupped, unevenly worn tire.)
3.50/1.50
The lack of wheel weight required to balance these 33-inch mud tires was amazing. Tire #3 needed 6.75 ounces, still very respectable for a new tire, and simply impressive for one that has notable uneven wear.
Rear Maxxis Bighorn with 15/32" of tread remaining.
Careful inspection of the tread confirmed what I’d thought upon initial scrutiny: It’s obvious which pair of tires had been on the rear axle of the turbo-diesel Cummins and which had been on the front. The rears were evenly worn but had about 2/32″ less tread than the fronts, an obvious result of the substantial diesel torque, loading, and type of use they received.
17/32" in the center of a front tire.
The additional tread in the centers of the fronts was nice, however the outer edges were unevenly worn due to poor front-end alignment, driving style, or both.
Front Tire Feathering.Rounded Outer Lugs, Front Tire, Maxxis Bighorn 285/70R17D.
Below you can see there is 10/32″ of remaining aftermarket siping in the center lugs.
10/32" of remaining siping cut into the center lugs.
My friend Paul recently referred to Craig’s List (CL) as “the end of the internet”, and I found it both funny and appropriate. Paul says he and his brother Chuck will visit their favorite sites, and then end up on Craig’s List looking for deals. A recent CL find in a nearby town seemed worthy of investigation…
Normal Cruise Speed In Tundra, 65 MPH
“Almost new Maxxis Bighorns, paid $900, only asking $600, still have the nubbies on them”. Since I’ve used and enjoyed Bighorns before, and had a naked set of wheels begging for new rubber, I called and got the skinny. I was told the tires had “about 1,000 miles on them”, from a few trips to the neighboring city, taking kids to school, etc. The guy said he would take $500, sounded genuine, so I decided they were worth a look and made the 1.5 hour drive one morning.
1,000 Miles x 5
Exiting my truck with my tread depth gauge in-hand, the first tire I measured had only 15/32″ tread in the center. I showed the seller, who used to work at a Les Schwab Tire store in Idaho, and he responded with: “Wow, I didn’t realize they were wearing that fast”. New 285/70R17D Maxxis Bighorns come with 19/32″ of tread, and though they can be a fast wearing tire, there was no way they lost 4/32″ in 1,000 miles, even on the rear of a powerful turbo-diesel with a young right foot driving them. During further discussion one trip from Nevada to Idaho and back was mentioned, and from the wear I guessed the tires had logged at least 5,000 miles. The fronts had more tread in the centers but the outer lugs were feathered from poor alignment or driving.
Maxxis Bighorn Tread Closeup
Since I needed more tires like the preverbal hole in head, and wanted to insure I could resell them if the the Tundra or I didn’t like them, I told the seller I didn’t want to offend him, and then offered him $300. He said he wouldn’t go that low, and that there was a much better market for his tires back in Idaho. I increased my offer to $350 (add $50 in gas to that), and said I understood if he didn’t accept, I enjoyed the drive and would be on my way. He and his wife tossed it around for a few minutes, and then accepted my cash.
LT285/70R17D Maxxis Bighorns, Center Lugs Are Siped
Loaded, strapped down, and heading home, I stopped for a cold drink at the local gas station, it was a warm spring day. I took a few pictures of the new toys, had a snack, and watched a tow-truck driver try to perform a lockout on a new, 5th Generation 4Runner for over a half-hour. This reinforced the value of my practice of always carrying two ignition keys, one in each front pocket. It’s been a very long time since I’ve been locked-out of one of my vehicles, more than sixteen years.
It takes effort to accidentally lock the ignition key inside a new car as long as it stays in the switch, or in your pocket. Lay the key on a seat and all bets are off.
While driving home I planned the mount & balance and test-drive with the new to me Bighorns.
Will The Most Efficient Tires Please Drive Forward
It’s often stated that narrower, lighter, less aggressive tires are more efficient and will yield better fuel economy, but how much better? To properly compare apples and pears one must take care to reduce the variables that are always present during real-world tests. In this case I used the same vehicle, same gas pump, during similar weather conditions and time of day, calculated the odometer error, and used the same section of freeway. The GPS-confirmed road speed was 64-MPH and was maintained by cruise control. The tires were inflated to 35-PSI in all but the last test with the Dick Cepek F-C II treads where I goofed and only used 32-PSI. The F-C II tires performed so well I doubt they could have provided better economy with an extra 3-PSI.
Cooper S/T 255/85R16D on Toyota 4Runner, @ 15 PSI.
If you think the fuel economy numbers listed below are too high you are partly correct, the tests involved almost zero city driving. The variables of in-town driving are not repeatable and won’t yield consistent data. What these tests do show is the fuel economy potential of this vehicle and establishes a baseline against which other tests can be measured. For each test the modified 2006 4.7L V8 4Runner was fueled and then driven a few blocks to the same freeway onramp, onward to a specific exit, and then the route was reversed and terminated at the same gas pump where the engine was promptly turned off.
Dean SXT Mud Terrain & Cooper S/T, both 255/85R16. Two of the narrowest 255/85 tires made.
All the tires used were close to the same diameter, about 33-inches, and they were all mounted on Toyota FJ Cruiser TRD 16 x 7.5-inch aluminum wheels. Because of the slight differences I tire height, one corrected odometer reading of 56.76-miles was used for all the tests. Listed below with the figures are the weights of each tire/wheel combination.
Results:
Cooper S/T LT255/85R16D: 75-lb 3.027-gal. = 18.75 MPG
TreadWright Guard Dog LT285/75R16E: 87-lb 3.331-gal. = 17.04 MPG
Dick Cepek F-C II LT285/75R16D: 83-lb 3.121-gal. = 18.18 MPG
Maxxis Bighorn 255/85R16D, TreadWright Guard Dog 285/75R16E, Cooper S/T 255/85R16D
Commentary
I was a little surprised that the very narrow and light Coopers consumed more fuel than the heavier, more aggressive Maxxis Bighorns. Though when filling-up after the Cooper test the gas-pump didn’t stop normally and a little gas spit from the filler, possibly contributing to the lower reading. Longer distance tests would likely be more accurate, but this type of testing is very time consuming and expensive.
It was expected that the heavier, wider TreadWright Guard Dogs with their aggressive lug tread would use more fuel. The Cepek F-C II tires impressed me by splitting the difference and topping eighteen MPG!
Cooper S/T 255/85R16D, Dick Cepek F-C II 285/75R16D
Surely tread design, width, and weight all make a difference. My theory is that width and tread design have a larger impact on fuel economy than tire weight, at least when there is only a few pounds difference. There is five pounds separating the Maxxis Bighorn 255/85R16 and TreadWright 285/75R16, but I don’t think those additional few pounds account for the 1.77 mile-per-gallon difference. There is a seven pound difference between the Maxxis Bighorns and Cooper S/Ts, but the results for these two 255s were so close you could call it a tie.
This blog will not always be so tire centric, but it seems a popular topic so I’ll continue in this vein for now.
Dick Cepek F-C II
This is a review about one set of Dick Cepek F-C II tires I have been tracking. Longevity is only one consideration when choosing a tread, and needs to be balanced with other criteria, but everyone always asks about wear. Some might argue that long wear is the most important characteristic, however that really depends on how you want your tires to perform. Some off-highway enthusiasts care much more about traction or noise.
Hummer H2 with 38" Dick Cepek F-C II
A few years ago this Hummer H2 was lifted several inches, and at the same time these 38×15.50R20LT Dick Cepek F-C II tires were mounted. I’m aquatinted with the owner and he’s not a conservative driver, or maybe he is now but he didn’t used to be. Admittedly this H2 is a street queen, though it has traveled a few fire roads when goin’ fishin’. The tires were rotated with each oil change, about every 5,000 miles.
When doing the photo shoot the owner knew the tires had logged several thousands miles, though not exactly how many. After he confirmed the date and mileage of the installation, I had the data I needed for this story.
Dick Cepek F-C II 38x15.50R20 with 20/32" tread depth.
The F-C II is no longer offered in this size, but came with 20/32″ of tread, as seen here on the still new spare.
Dick Cepek F-C II after 40,000 miles, with 10/32" of tread remaining.
Slow Wearing Tread Design
After 40,000 miles of driving, the rate of wear was nothing less than exceptional. Four thousand miles per 1/32″ of tread wear on a heavy, modified utility wagon running a fairly aggressive traction tire is outstanding.
Still plenty of tread and siping after 40,000 miles on a 38" F-C II.
Without prompting, the owner shared that the F-C II is a great winter tire, which is a common accolade. While not a dedicated winter design, the shape and density of tread sipes, combined with the layout of the center tread blocks helps make the F-C II an outstanding winter performer. This tire does well many places, that’s why Dick Cepek Tires calls it an any-terrain radial.
A visual always helps. In these pictures you can see the circumferential raised lips, or beads, on a typical light-truck wheel which are often called the “safety bead”. They help the tire stay on the wheel. The first photo below shows a relatively new, 17 x 8-inch TRD Tundra wheel, but they are all similar. The safety bead ring is inboard approximately one inch from the actual tire bead seat.
TRD 17 inch Tundra Rock Warrior wheel safety bead rings.
Below is another example, a very well used 16 x 7.5-inch TRD FJ Cruiser wheel, which has had several sets of tires mounted.
TRD FJ Cruiser 16 x 7.5-inch wheel with circumferential safety bead rings.
I received the email below asking for input, and with the reader’s permission, decided it would be nice to respond to his question on the blog and share with everyone.
Do you have a question for RoadTraveler.net? When you do, send an email, maybe RoadTraveler can help.
Question:
I was wondering if I could pick your brain for a minute. I just bought another F350 CC today. 97 Powerstroke with built E4OD. It is going to need rubber soonish, and I have also recently bought a 2700 lb slide in camper. I am looking for a load range E 315-75 R16. All i have found so far is the Toyo MT. I am fine with those, aside from cost vs wear ratio. Any other hats you could throw in the ring?
Much appreciated, Red Thies
Answer:.
I love the old, first generation 7.3L Power Strokes, sounds like you found a good one. As you know, you have a substantial load with that slide-in camper. I assume you desire a load-range E 315/75R16 because you want the added capacity of over the typical load-range D, and possibly the added stiffness to reduce sidewall flex and heat.
Does the camper weigh 2,700 pounds dry or is that the gross-vehicle-weight-rating (GVWR)? My guess is that with the weight of that camper you will be very close to the maximum capacity of two typical 315/75R16Ds, which is 3,195 pounds each at 50-PSI. Depending on how you set-up the F350, you might have close of 3,000-pounds riding on the rear axle (I do) when you are wet & empty before you install the camper. Using these estimates, you would have about 690-pounds of total rear axle tire payload remaining.
I’m generally a fan of the Toyo M/T because it’s a high-quality, rugged tire that balances well and rolls nicely down the road. However, you raise a very valid point; value. The Toyo M/T is generally pretty expensive, and depending on the application, wear is not always fantastic. I also know a few people who didn’t get great mileage out of their Toyo A/Ts either. As the saying goes, your-mileage-may-vary, there are always others who can share they get great wear out of Toyos. Depends. Do you want a mud-terrain tire? Diesels can be hard on tires, and so can maximum loads, therefore starting with a tire that has a spotty reputation for wear is a big gamble.
The GoodYear DuraTrac LT315/75R16 is a load-range E tire, rated for 3,860-pounds each at 65 psi, a very healthy increase in capacity. But like the Toyo M/T, some seem to get great wear out of the DuraTrac while others receive a very short life. I like the appearance of the tread, but it hasn’t been able to lure me away from the Dick Cepek F-C II.
The Firestone Destination M/T is a load-range E in 315/75, and comes with a whopping 20/32″ of tread. The Firestone Destination A/T is also a load-range E, but is a very conservative 5-rib all-terrain tread design.
