# Going from a 265/75/16 to 235/85/16 ?



## green frog (Jan 2, 2007)

I need tires an wondering if I could save a little gas money going to a skinny tire. Would I be loose anything by making the change? Like traction, I don't care about ride its a work truck.


----------



## mgt379 (Jan 17, 2009)

Traction is a possibility a skinny tire will dig deeper and a wider tire will stay on top of the snow (in theory) that's why high flotation tires are used and that's how those mat-tracks work overall i don't think you would see that big of a difference in gas millage im not sure what the difference in rotating mass is

have you looked into getting a power chip for you truck that saves gas big time i hear


----------



## Eronningen (Dec 20, 2008)

mgt379;722403
have you looked into getting a power chip for you truck that saves gas big time i hear[/QUOTE said:


> No not really they don't. Maybe a slight bit


----------



## IPLOWSNO (Oct 11, 2008)

Eronningen;722413 said:


> No not really they don't. Maybe a slight bit


thats a hell of an answer lol, i did it to my gmc and it looked queer, i dont care about mileage as i have to use a truck.


----------



## RODHALL (Nov 23, 2005)

265 75 16
Stock tire width is 10.4 inches. . 
Stock tire thickness is 7.8 inches. . 
Stock tire diameter is 31.6 inches. 

235 85 16
New tire width is 9.2 inches
New tire thickness is 7.8 inches
New tire diameter is 31.7 inches 

I don't know that you be saving anything. tire width not going to give more then one or two tenths. 265 will get better traction on bare asphalt, 

i think you would save more if you picked the cheaper of the two sizes.


----------



## Mick (May 19, 2001)

Not a good idea. I did exactly that last winter, but not for the same reason - they were off a one ton I'd sold. Kept getting stuck cause the truck and A-frame sat too low.


----------



## mgt379 (Jan 17, 2009)

Eronningen;722413 said:


> No not really they don't. Maybe a slight bit


Really? i would have figured that with all the torque the makers of these claim they add i would figure you would need less gas to get going and maybe that would help you? or maybe it would help you plowing with more power? huh i honestly dont know


----------



## justme- (Dec 28, 2004)

In a gas engine the chips don't seem to save much, in a diesel on the other hand they help a lot!
I have plowed with both sizes- there is little mileage difference- in most cases the diameter is almost the same, which is why I chose 235/85 as a sub for the 265s. 

My Cummins has too much torque for the 235's in normal season- they corner hard (limited slip) and wear fast, the 265's look better and wear better for me. And generally the plow fine
If you're thinking of changing tire size for plowing AND mileage, you want to go to a smaller diameter tire- 245/75 for example. Narrow like the 235, but shorter giving you easier acceleration off the line, which is where you'll noitice the mileage- I got slightly better mileage around town on those then the taller ones.


----------



## JDiepstra (Sep 15, 2008)

What truck are you even talking about? The Ford or Jeep? Whatever you do make sure it has the load capacity to hold the weight of the truck and plow.


----------



## wahlturfcare (Oct 24, 2005)

i would recommend going to the skinnier tires for the added traction(year round), but go with a load range d or e tire. I run powerking rvt's (6 1/2'' wide) on all my 1 tons and they have helped out alot campared to 8'' wide tires.
They shouldn affect your gas mileage too much, but will. if you have low gears, you will loose gas mileage unless your pulling a load or so. if you have a empty load, high gears work great.
also engine tune up will help out also.


----------



## green frog (Jan 2, 2007)

Sorry talking about the F250. The 265's are load D the 235's are load E.


----------



## fulltiltwill (Aug 23, 2005)

*235's*

I switched my 285 terra grapplers to 235 BFGs for the winter and they are sweet. I find myself in 2wd more often, which saves gas. I would go with the 235's


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

The 97 GMC had 245/75/16 Cooper ATRs when I bought it two winters ago. This is the recommended size. They were OK. Last year went to General Grabber AT2 235/85/16 studded. A little taller and skinnier. Hated them from day one. Lousy traction in snow. Pulled studs and ran for summer. Running Courser MSR 235/85/16 studded this year. They absolutely rule. Plow mostly in 2WD with any weight on. Will put on 245/75/16 this spring. Hopefully BFG AT. Would go 265 but do a lot of towing and the truck isn't exactly overpowered, and 1st gear isn't that exciting either. All the LT rated 235, 245, and 265 should carry 3,042 lbs, regardless of Load Range D 8ply or Load Range E 10 ply.


----------



## JDiepstra (Sep 15, 2008)

2COR517;724389 said:


> The 97 GMC had 245/75/16 Cooper ATRs when I bought it two winters ago. This is the recommended size. They were OK. Last year went to General Grabber AT2 235/85/16 studded. A little taller and skinnier. Hated them from day one. Lousy traction in snow. Pulled studs and ran for summer. Running Courser MSR 235/85/16 studded this year. They absolutely rule. Plow mostly in 2WD with any weight on. Will put on 245/75/16 this spring. Hopefully BFG AT. Would go 265 but do a lot of towing and the truck isn't exactly overpowered, and 1st gear isn't that exciting either. All the LT rated 235, 245, and 265 should carry 3,042 lbs, regardless of Load Range D 8ply or Load Range E 10 ply.


Where are you getting this info? It does not appear to be remotely accurate from what I have seen.


----------



## snowandgo (Oct 26, 2008)

In theory, the 235's will give better mileage and better traction in snow, but every time I see someone say it does or doesn't, they are switching between tire sizes and brand or tread patterns at the same time. i.e., it is not a fair comparison.

If you have 16x8 rims on the ford, that is the largest recommended width for the 235/85.

If you go with a 265/75E, you would gain 400# load capacity per tire.

Your best mileage gains would probably be switching to a 235/85 HT, but snow traction on HT's is not good.


----------



## 2COR517 (Oct 23, 2008)

This is BFG's chart for the All-Terrains. I have owned both 245E and 265D, which is where I had my info from. They make a 265/75/16 Load Range D which carries 3,042 at 65 PSI. I see they also make a 265E which carries 3,415 at 80 PSI. I don't see plys advertised, but I'm pretty sure the D's were 8, and the E's were 10.

http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/specs/all-terrain-t-a-ko/44.html

From Cooper's website for comparison-

235/85 - http://www.coopertires.com/html/tireselector_bySize.aspx?twtd=235&artw=85&rd=16
245/75 - http://www.coopertires.com/html/tireselector_bySize.aspx?twtd=245&artw=75&rd=16
265/75 - http://www.coopertires.com/html/tireselector_bySize.aspx?twtd=265&artw=75&rd=16
These are all Load Range E, so the 265's do carry more weight. They don't show PSI, but I presume 80 for all.

Here's the lookup tool
http://www.coopertires.com/html/tireselector.aspx

Does anyone make something like a 265/85/16 that carries about 3500 lbs? That would be perfect for the 81. Not too wide, but a full 32 or 33 inches.


----------

