New Tire Recs - Analysis Paralysis

[B Digs]

Yea, I get the engineering behind it. In particular giving the vehicles dampers more control authority over suspension movement, as well as the reduction of rotational inertia. Both of those should result in better accel/decel, as well as improved ride characteristics.

Every time I've added light wheels/tires in the past it's been on sub 3k lb vehicles (Mazda RX7, BMW 318i, etc) where I was making the change for acceleration/deceleration reasons, and was actively autocrossing the vehicle. I just don't have much experience on something that weighs twice as much, and is primarily used for daily driving and off-roading. Really more of my wondering out loud if the juice is worth the squeeze in this application.

Hi @2kwik4u,

Reducing unsprung mass can be even more beneficial for heavier vehicles. It allows the suspension system to work more efficiently, improving ride quality and handling. Additionally, it can lead to better acceleration and deceleration. For daily driving and off-roading, these changes can result in a smoother, more responsive driving experience, enhancing both comfort and control. @DayTripping, has noticed some of these improvements when he switched to the Goodyear tires and Atomic wheels.

Sponsored

 

[UnsungZero_OldTimeAdMan]

Just some of the effects of high unsprung weight:

• Heavier steering feel and delayed response. It's a gyro. Grab a bicycle wheel, holding it by the ends of the axle, trying and steer it with the wheel spinning. Now try the same with a motorcycle wheel. That sport-sedan-like factory handling you enjoy now? gone. It will drive more and more like a truck the heavier tire you get.
• Greater rotational mass means the steering system has to work harder. More power consumption. More stress. More wear.
• Greater rotational mass also mean more stress acting on all suspension pivots and components.
• Greater rotational mass means more energy is required to spin it up and spin it down. That snappy stock pick-up-and-go will be subdued. And if regen is increased at all, you will never ever recover enough energy to offset the negatives of greater usprung weight.
• Greater rotational mass means longer stopping distances, which matters most in emergency stops. And regen alone may not be enough to slow you down, even in mundane situations. So you may find yourself using the brakes more and more. Additional wear & tear and associated maintenance costs.

 

[mkg3]

I've read most of the threads here and on reddit. Now I have analysis paralysis.

Here are the details.

20" AT - Stock Pirelli - The noise is driving me nuts on the highway.
Wants: Less Noise AND ATs, 3PMS, Little to no range loss preferred.

I've been considering:

Nokian Outpost nAT
Michelin Defender LTX Platinum (Not 3PMS)
Toyo Tire Open Country A/T III EV

Is there a clear winner or option I'm not considering?

Thank you for the help!

Hope you got lots of input to confuse you more.

Tire choice is always filled with tradeoffs (so is the tire development). Any 3PMS tire has aggressive tread pattern so it will be noisy on the asphalt or concrete roadway that increases with speed (frequency change) and tire wear.

Higher load index usually means higher weight; hence, increases rotational unsprung mass and reduce handling, accel/braking performances (bad) but is needed for heavy loads such as towing (good).

The question you need to ask is not which tire; rather, what is the use case. Why do you need 3PMS? Are you off road significantly? Do you live in the area that requires winter snow tires and you only want to have one set?

Regardless of make, lighter tires will reduce your rotating unsprung mass and will help range in addition to all the other benefits. Generally, AS tires are more quite than AT tires and summer tires are even quieter (side note, summer tires have different tire compound operating temperatures range that they are effective vs winter or AS tires - tread pattern is almost secondary unless in snow). Of course there is no summer 3PMS tires

 

[R1Tims]

Had the same conundrum and went with the 33" Goodyear tires, could not be happier. The smaller tire size is barely noticeable and I don't off road so the loss of ground clearance is irrelevant to me. I just wanted something that had good traction in snow/ice (I'm in MN), got good efficiency, and didn't scream at me while driving at any speed.

To add to that the GY tires were CONSIDERABLY cheaper than any of the 34" tire options and it cemented the deal. No regrets and would buy them again...though I haven't had a chance to try them in snow yet so TBD on that front.

I agree!
Went with GY here also. After 2 sets of the 34 Pirellis, I could not handle the screaming sisters any longer. It was night and day when I drove away with them on. Also, had a loaner R1S recently with 34 Pirellis, It was so LOUD it reinforced my choice in tires. As stated the 33 vs 34 not noticeable. Truck is 1/2 inch lower. If this makes or breaks then go with the 34s. The GY ride, smooth and quite, and the efficiency increases is great.
I would recommend and have to others.

 

[Polar]

Greater rotational mass means more energy is required to spin it up and spin it down. That snappy stock pick-up-and-go will be subdued.

I always have to laugh about this specifically - it’s brought up a lot with heavy tires.

We (especially quads) have enough available power to easily overcome this.

I sometimes have 115lbs a corner wheels/tires mounted on my R1S, is my accel a bit slower yes, but it’s still absolutely incredibly snappy.

Sponsored