Nokian Outpost nAT Tires 15,000 Mile Update

[SeattleSteve]

With these being popular for the all-terrain crowd, I want to share a 15k update.

PROS

• Road noise acoustics are much better than OEM Pirellis. At 15k miles of use, the Nokian tires certainly are not quiet, but the noise is a different (better) pitch/hum than OEM.
• Tread wear is excellent. No uneven nor excessive wear.
• The Nokian Aramid sidewall technology is living up to the hype. No tears in the sidewalls like I had on the Pirellis.

CONS

• I can only think of one "con." The shoulders of the tires get absolutely thrashed with rocky forrest service road driving. The sidewall design has little notches that tear. All four of my Nokian Outpost nATs (shoulders) look like the photo below. The sidewall and main tread are holding up great, though.

Sponsored

 

[Mountain Vibes PNW]

A lot of posts about this tire this week... I've had a set for 2 weeks now, still evaluating them. Cheers.

 

[Riviot]

Mpk over 15k miles?

I just put my AT3Ws back on today, still debating what I want to switch to next. They're all at an even 10/32" after 13k miles, I think I'll get another 25k out of them.

 

[zefram47]

I'm curious about your wet weather experience with these being in the PNW. My personal opinion after 6k miles is that wet traction sucks compared with the factory Pirelli AT and dry traction is noticeably reduced as well. They are relatively quiet and go down the highway nicely, but I do get an odd resonance at around 30 mph and again around 50 mph. Yet to experience any snow with them, but that ought to change soon. After the first snow I'll decide if I leave them on or switch to my Blizzak LTs for the winter. I didn't wind up doing any off-roading this season, but that was one reason I went this route, so glad to hear they're holding up well in the rocks other than chunking which is kind of normal anyway.

I've been doing a fair amount of towing, so I don't have any good long term efficiency stats. But known trips unladden they're comparable to the OE Pirelli AT, maybe 5% worse according to ElectraFi data (but that includes towing trips as they don't make a distinction). In any case, we're talking about an LT E-load tire getting similar efficiency as the P-metric OE tire despite being heavier and more off-road worthy...at the cost of handling dynamics.

 

[SeattleSteve]

Mpk over 15k miles?

1.8 miles/kWh

 

[SeattleSteve]

I'm curious about your wet weather experience with these being in the PNW. My personal opinion after 6k miles is that wet traction sucks compared with the factory Pirelli AT and dry traction is noticeably reduced as well. They are relatively quiet and go down the highway nicely, but I do get an odd resonance at around 30 mph and again around 50 mph. Yet to experience any snow with them, but that ought to change soon. After the first snow I'll decide if I leave them on or switch to my Blizzak LTs for the winter. I didn't wind up doing any off-roading this season, but that was one reason I went this route, so glad to hear they're holding up well in the rocks other than chunking which is kind of normal anyway.

I've been doing a fair amount of towing, so I don't have any good long term efficiency stats. But known trips unladden they're comparable to the OE Pirelli AT, maybe 5% worse according to ElectraFi data (but that includes towing trips as they don't make a distinction). In any case, we're talking about an LT E-load tire getting similar efficiency as the P-metric OE tire despite being heavier and more off-road worthy...at the cost of handling dynamics.

My experience with these in wet weather is that the Nokian tires have less wet grip than OEM Pirellis Scorpions. The truck more easily locks up with assertive braking in wet conditions and it'll lose traction much sooner when accelerating from low speed turns in wet conditions than OEM A/Ts.

With that said, these are so much better on forest roads and the sound isn't horrible like the OEM Pirellis.

 

[Mountain Vibes PNW]

My experience with these in wet weather is that the Nokian tires have less wet grip than OEM Pirellis Scorpions. The truck more easily locks up with assertive braking in wet conditions and it'll lose traction much sooner when accelerating from low speed turns in wet conditions than OEM A/Ts.

With that said, these are so much better on forest roads and the sound isn't horrible like the OEM Pirellis.

This is exactly my experience with these nAT tires in 22", less wet grip in acceleration, braking and cornering, especially stopping downhill on city pavement. But definitely the best tire to have anytime off pavement.

 

[SeaGeo]

For what it's worth, my OEM Pirelli shoulder's were in similar condition or worse than what you have on the nATs.

 

[SeattleSteve]

For what it's worth, my OEM Pirelli shoulder's were in similar condition or worse than what you have on the nATs.

Mine, too. My OEM Scorpions were thrashed after 29,000 miles. The sidewalls had cuts and I'm surprised that I never had a flat.

 

[Riviot]

For what it's worth, my OEM Pirelli shoulder's were in similar condition or worse than what you have on the nATs.

Mine, too. My OEM Scorpions were thrashed after 29,000 miles. The sidewalls had cuts and I'm surprised that I never had a flat.

Interesting. 29k miles is when I did my first swap too, but I don't remember shoulder damage. @dleepnw how many tires did I pass to you?

 

[56huck]

1.8 miles/kWh

What did you get on the Pirelli’s?
My overall avg is about 2.1 mi/kWh on my
R1S on the OEM Priellis after 45k miles.

 

[Mkreaden]

I love my nAT 22’s on my Tri-R1S. After 13K miles, road noise is OK (it is an AT tire), range is good (396 mi estimate at 100% in conserve mode). I have these as my 3-season tire and am confident in snow with these tires. I live in Tahoe, so I have to deal with a lot of snow and rain. My winter tire is the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV studded, and I plan to to switch to these before our first big storm of the year (usually 3-4 feet of snow)

 

[SeattleSteve]

What did you get on the Pirelli’s?
My overall avg is about 2.1 mi/kWh on my
R1S on the OEM Priellis after 45k miles.

Very similar consumption on OEM Pirelli ATs for me that you had...it was right there at 2.1x

 

[cjust2006]

Very similar consumption on OEM Pirelli ATs for me that you had...it was right there at 2.1x

Holy crap. On the highway at 70mph I get 2.2mpk. 22% better. What PSI do you run? These need to be at 58.

 

[SeattleSteve]

What did you get on the Pirelli’s?
My overall avg is about 2.1 mi/kWh on my
R1S on the OEM Priellis after 45k miles.

Very similar consumption on OEM Pirelli ATs for me that you ha...it was right there at 2.1x

Holy crap. On the highway at 70mph I get 2.2mpk. 22% better. What PSI do you run? These need to be at 58.

With the 285/65r20 Nokian Outpost nATs, I run them on-road 60psi and off-road 28psi.

I don't prioritize efficiency in the truck

Sponsored