!¿ Best 20” AT Tire for Range?! ???

[Supratachophobia]

Source?

The guy who ran the grabbers....

Sponsored

 

[ksurfier]

The guy who ran the grabbers....

Tirerack reviews show Chevy Suburbans routinely getting 70-80k with the Grabber HTS 60, the Rivians torque likely shortens that a bit but I think it’s safe to say they are a fairly long-life tire and should be comparable to other high mileage tires…

 

[RivianRiverRat]

Thought I would chime in here
I’ve got this on my original 20 ats
15 months of driving
All of it in northern AL and southern TN
getting near the wear indicators

 

[Jason C]

Looks like it's Firestone Destination X/T for the win, at least 3 sizes that fit, my vote is for 285/65R20 (34.5" and 9.6" wide)...can save 2 pounds if drop down to 33.5" (285/60R20) and it's 9.9" wide...
Better snow performance with the 34.5" (due to height) and better offroad performance with the 33.5" (due to width).

Comparing Destination XT and Dueler AT: https://tiredriver.com/bridgestone-dueler-at-revo-3-vs-firestone-destination-xt/
"...my perspective the Firestone Destination XT features a superior on-road grip when it comes wet and snowy pavements. And off-road it provides better mud, sand and rocky terrain traction. The Bridgestone Dueler AT Revo 3 on the other hand, is much better in terms of dry traction, noise dampening, and fuel economy. Moreover, although by a slight margin, it also gives you longer tread life."

Comparing Destination XT and Toyo OC AT3:
https://tiredriver.com/firestone-destination-xt-vs-toyo-open-country-at3/
Highlight:
"...my perspective the Toyo Open Country AT3 provides you with better dry grip, though its really needs some wet traction. It’s supplies better noise dampening, wear resistance, and off road it shines on rocks. The Firestone Destination X/T, on the other side, offers better overall comfort, wet traction and fuel efficiency."

Based on the articles you provided. It seems like the Bridgestone dueler A/T revo 3 is more of a On road all terrain tire. Focus on comfort and will provide a slightly better MPK. While the Firestone XT would be a better off road tire.

Technically you might show a better MPK with the Firestone XT 285/65r20 since it's a 33.5" compared to the Bridgestone dueler a/t revo 3 which is a 34.1 but that could be from the mis-calibration. I wish Rivian would allow use or a tire center to enter our own tire diameter within reason to dial in the system.

Based on that would you conclude the Bridgestone dueler A/T revo 3 be a closer match to the OEM Pirelli 20" tire?

 

[ksurfier]

My vote is a no for the REVO:
But it's a fair comparison (OEM Pirelli vs AT Revo 3), so here goes:

My overall feeling is that the heavy weight of the R1 is not going to be well supported by the REVO tread pattern (also looks like a very noisey design).

These reviews are useful: " The road noise of the tires bother me most. Much louder than the BFG K02 I had before. Snow and ice traction don't impress me but are fine enough. I feel they are a rough noisy tire for what they are. I'm most likely going to just replace them early as they bother me that much."
" Road noise not very good. Slight vibration at 70 ish, even had them rebalanced, rotated and 4 wheel align. again, still the same. Cornering in deep snow is the worst I have ever had in an all wheeled drive. My VW Bug 30 years ago was better steering in deep snow....Its either the tires or my all wheeled drive isnt working. Check my wheels front wheels and they spin in snow so my 4 wheeled drive must be working "

OEM Pirelli (48#), 13/32", 51 psi	AT Revo 3 (51#), 16/32", 80 psi
116H (130 mph)	126S (112 mph)

OEM Pirelli is ECO Focus of 'ELECT', the REVO has no ECO Focus...
Widths are pretty much the same (9.1" vs 9")
Tread noise is likely an issue with the Revo:
"What We’d Improve: Tread noise is very noticeable."
Looking at the REVO tread there is a lot of open space which is what creates the noise...
Revo wet stopping and cornering were 135'/0.57 G-force
OEM wet stopping and cornering were 140'/0.58 G-force
Subjectively speaking, when I add up scores for both tires it's pretty much a wash, so I think your assessment is correct, the average treadwear rating is lower for the Revo so I wouldn't expect it lasting a whole lot longer than the OEM Pirelli.

If looking at prices (REVO is $403), there is also a 52# Firestone Destination X/T that is $338 (LT275/65R20 - 123/120R). I'd say the Firestone Destination X/T is a much better option than the REVO...

 

[LL75]

The guy who ran the grabbers....

I'm currently using the grabber HTS60. there is a member here also used it and he said it lasted around 20K miles. For $200 a tire, I don't mind it at all.

 

[ksurfier]

To add/summarize the most efficient AT (20")...if you want a ~34" then you should look for something in the low 50 pound ranges (51# Firestone Destination X/T - 285/60R20 which is 33.5"; $414).

If willing to go to 33", then the best AT option appears to be the Nitto Nomad Grappler (45#; $250), it's 116H and XL (not SL). Another option would be the Toyo OC R/T Trail in the P275/60R20 (43#) or P295/55R20 (47#) sizes (~$340).

If dropping to 115H then tire pressure will need to be adjusted up by 1-2 psi due to load rating change. If it's a 44 psi max tire then you'd want to run no lower than 43-44 psi to achieve a high enough load rating...this may result in a slightly larger contact patch than ideal, but you could bump up the pressure to ~47 psi if concerned and it makes a difference.

If possible, should not run a lower speed rating than recommended (H = 130 mph) as this plays a role in how the tire's load rating will decrease with speed (a tire at 80 mph has a lower load rating than the same tire at 40 mph). Significantly lower speed ratings could result in safety issues.

 

[Zorg]

So, has anyone run the Firestone XT?

 

[ksurfier]

So, has anyone run the Firestone XT?

EVMike has them…looks like around same as 20” OEM…check his most recent posts…

 

[Epicloop]

In going through all this I did not come across any conversation regarding 265/65r20 or 255/65r20. Any reason not to go this route? A narrower/lighter without loosing sidewall seems like a reasonable compromise for efficiency.

 

[josh0]

I did. questions about the numbers but in general just hoping to find a similar high mileage range focused person who wants legit at capabilities too

Currently have wranglers. I am ok with these but have heard there are better options for AT tire with range for qusft

When you say Wranglers, do you mean the new OEM ones? What sort of range/efficiency are you getting on those? Not to hijack your thread, but I was considering switching to them from road tires for the 3PMS and better performance on dirt roads (the OEM road tires are actually decent, but could be better).

 

[Supratachophobia]

In going through all this I did not come across any conversation regarding 265/65r20 or 255/65r20. Any reason not to go this route? A narrower/lighter without loosing sidewall seems like a reasonable compromise for efficiency.

Is it taller? For some reason the diameter has a lot to do with efficiency, which I didn't realize.

 

[onesoil]

In going through all this I did not come across any conversation regarding 265/65r20 or 255/65r20. Any reason not to go this route? A narrower/lighter without loosing sidewall seems like a reasonable compromise for efficiency.

255/65R20 would be 33.05," so it would be comparable to the 21s/22s (at least in diameter). I would think this would perform a little better in snow and mud, but you may lose some on-road traction in dry and wet pavement due to having a reduced area. I also have wondered about a 255/70R20 as an alternative to the 275/65R20 (almost the same diameter), but I haven't seen any mention of tires in this size even existing (and any that I'm interested in don't come in this size).

I've decided that my next tire will be the Nokian nAT 275/65R20. My dad has been loving his set. According to my dad they are much quieter than the OEM Pirellis, give much better comfort and feedback, have much better grip in mud and likely slush/snow (no personal experience yet, but others report great performance in snow for an AT), and with 18/32" tread depth, we are expecting a much longer wearing tire (he had almost bald tires at 22k miles, in part due to a couple bad alignments from the SC, but the Pirellis also just seem like they wear really quickly). He hasn't noticed much, if any range loss, though he's mostly driving locally at <50mph speeds. I have 17k miles on my pirellis and one of them is down to 3/32nds! I will likely eke out more months on my set before throwing Hakkas on for winter, and then get nATs in the spring. This tire seemed to mostly fly under the radar on this forum, but I've seen more rave reviews lately, and it seems like a nearly perfect balance of on and off-road capability, range, ride comfort, wear characteristics, etc.

 

[mkhuffman]

Is it taller? For some reason the diameter has a lot to do with efficiency, which I didn't realize.

It depends on the efficiency you are measuring. EPA efficiency is different than highway efficiency. Depending on your speed, and the amount of stop and go traffic, each factor impacts efficiency differently.

There are three wheel related attributes that impact efficiency:
1. Rolling resistance,
2. Acceleration resistance, and
3. Aerodynamics.

Wheel diameter impacts aerodynamics. It should not impact rolling resistance. If the larger diameter means the tire is heavier, it would impact acceleration resistance. Aerodynamics could be better with the larger diameter tire, but acceleration resistance would be worse if the tire is heavier.

I put larger diameter wheels on my Mach-e and got much better highway efficiency (7% improvement). I think the biggest factor was lower rolling resistance of the new tire, but I also think the fact the rim is spinning 2.6% slower measurably reduced rotational resistance at highway speeds. At slow speeds, it probably made no difference. But also the larger and smooth sidewall of the tire probably also decreased rotational resistance.

In my case, a wider diameter tire (Hankook Ion) was much more efficient than the OEM one it replaced.

 

[Epicloop]

Is it taller? For some reason the diameter has a lot to do with efficiency, which I didn't realize.

265/65=33.5"
255/65= 33"

Sponsored