New good year tires , very light

[Gsteve]

In that video they talk about how soft it seems. That look like a worry ?

 

[Stroked out]

The same site that said 52lbs also listed them at 9 inches wide. So basically they took the specs from a smaller tire. I will never buy goodyears again after the way they treated there employees in Danville va. BTW gy has recently acquired cooper , i was thinking about the at3

 

[RotorHead695]

Sticking with Duratracs. Love them!

 

[isis]

I have no problem with the KO2 but if these are as good with mileage and on road traction lighter is always better. I don’t really offroad right now. The tread has the offroad look and if the TRX used them it’s gotta work somehow.

 

[Mister Pinky]

But then you’d have to buy into Goodyear’s woke BS politics. No thanks.

 

[KAH 24]

Every OEM considers overall priorities—Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are among the variables. I know I do pay a great deal of attention to that professionally—as every MPG above/below average impacts the bottom line. This is why our EVs and Hybrids are critical and loved by all who work OEM (love them as they help corporate averages dramatically!).

Lighter, lower density tires, less tread depth, higher psi, on a 6000lb truck with horrific aero efficiency—is simple engineering math to deliver that minuscule bit of documented MPGs. Marketing wise a good spin to promote special P and feathery LTs that ride soft and help with those crucial 0.1, zero-60-zero, gyroscopics, Baja winning, to get to that Starbucks drive through faster than the average bear.

I work for an OEM, but I purchase as a consumer—not a businessman. I consider overall priorities when I purchase tires for our family vehicles (off-road/on-road/MPG/wear/durability/sidewalls/tread depth/grip/ride comfort/cost/etc). Light weight is not one of my parameters for a 1/2 ton that isn’t racing for pinks, nor trying to save 1/2 mpg.

If light weight is a priority to anyone—please understand, it impacts every variable to one extent or another.

NOTE: 100% nerd here. If good looking tires are important to you, and you want maximum acceleration-deceleration—please do not only consider the weight—but Rotational Inertia (where weight is concentrated closer-further from the hub center (you can find the formulas if you are inclined, but it matters more than many consider in wheels/tires).

NOTE2: One of my direct reports is a hard-core engineer, and sharper than I in every way. I am 6’2”, 170lbs, and my wife is 5’4”, 115lbs (total=285lbs). He is 5’9”, 245lbs, and his wife weighs 180-190lb easily (his words—not mine, total=425lbs approx). When we start getting granular in calculating things—I point out that my truck can carry more than his based on ratings. Yes, every detail matters—to those who are engineering everything to a sharp edge.

Enjoy all!

 

[JefferyGT]

Every OEM considers overall priorities—Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are among the variables. I know I do pay a great deal of attention to that professionally—as every MPG above/below average impacts the bottom line. This is why our EVs and Hybrids are critical and loved by all who work OEM (love them as they help corporate averages dramatically!).

Lighter, lower density tires, less tread depth, higher psi, on a 6000lb truck with horrific aero efficiency—is simple engineering math to deliver that minuscule bit of documented MPGs. Marketing wise a good spin to promote special P and feathery LTs that ride soft and help with those crucial 0.1, zero-60-zero, gyroscopics, Baja winning, to get to that Starbucks drive through faster than the average bear.

I work for an OEM, but I purchase as a consumer—not a businessman. I consider overall priorities when I purchase tires for our family vehicles (off-road/on-road/MPG/wear/durability/sidewalls/tread depth/grip/ride comfort/cost/etc). Light weight is not one of my parameters for a 1/2 ton that isn’t racing for pinks, nor trying to save 1/2 mpg.

If light weight is a priority to anyone—please understand, it impacts every variable to one extent or another.

NOTE: 100% nerd here. If good looking tires are important to you, and you want maximum acceleration-deceleration—please do not only consider the weight—but Rotational Inertia (where weight is concentrated closer-further from the hub center (you can find the formulas if you are inclined, but it matters more than many consider in wheels/tires).

NOTE2: One of my direct reports is a hard-core engineer, and sharper than I in every way. I am 6’2”, 170lbs, and my wife is 5’4”, 115lbs (total=285lbs). He is 5’9”, 245lbs, and his wife weighs 180-190lb easily (his words—not mine, total=425lbs approx). When we start getting granular in calculating things—I point out that my truck can carry more than his based on ratings. Yes, every detail matters—to those who are engineering everything to a sharp edge.

Enjoy all!

Okay cool.... So what tires are you going for then?

 

[KAH 24]

@JefferyGT

@JefferyGT

‘Go with your priorities as they may vary from mine/others.
These priorities apply to my Raptor only (not my other vehicles):

1. All-around capability including rain, snow, dirt, gravel, rocks (no mud). My family is in TX and AZ, plus we spend a lot of time in CO in winter.

2. Durability (sidewall and tread) as my grown son and daughter borrow my Raptor when they want to have “fun” even though one owns a modded 4Runner and I have an AEV Rubicon in the garage. In CO where our place is—lots of sharp rocks and potential to cut if hit just right. I’d prefer to have extra beef all around especially sidewalls.

3. Looks and tread wear, noise as tires wear:. Looks are subjective, but we know what looks good to us. 50k miles with solid performance throughout the lifespan. Deeper tread the better as that helps over the miles.

4. Weight: I’m not entering the Baja 1000 and am not racing anyone. If I want to go fast, I have far faster forms of transportation. A heavier tire in OEM size has negligible impact on 0-60 & the quarter—enough not to notice vs. the significant priorities above.

5. MPG: Raptor’s biggest issue is having aerodynamics of a barn door. Stop and go, might lose 1mpg w/heavier tire. At highway speeds—the weight of tire is negligible vs aerodynamics and rolling resistance.

‘Based on those priorities (and my own biases as an OEM veteran & personal experience)—I’d go with any of these in descending order—although it’s pretty close—with tread depth, rain, and noise over time as influences.

Falken Wildpeak AT3 (E)
Goodyear Duratrac (D)
BF Goodrich AT KO 2 (E)

For me, no thanks to a Load Range C or featherweight tire—on a 6000 lb truck. Ford provided owners with an OEM tire which is a choice that some may go with based on their priorities.

Bias Disclaimer: I know why OEMs are warming up to Falken. On my Raptor I like (and glad the previous owner upgraded to) the Wildpeak AT3 (E) enough that we put them on my wife’s LX570 (which is a horrific gas pig even if it were on slicks—but would outlast cockroaches). On my AEV, which of course is lighter than my Raptor—I have BFG KM2s—which I’ll replace with KM3s (heavy E load tire in 35/12.50–17 as all know).

I hope this helps explain my priorities and hope you have a pleasant evening.

 

[quikag]

I just ordered a set and am getting them installed on Thursday. I'll update this thread with my initial impressions.

 

[DFS]

@JefferyGT

@JefferyGT

‘Go with your priorities as they may vary from mine/others.
These priorities apply to my Raptor only (not my other vehicles):

1. All-around capability including rain, snow, dirt, gravel, rocks (no mud). My family is in TX and AZ, plus we spend a lot of time in CO in winter.

2. Durability (sidewall and tread) as my grown son and daughter borrow my Raptor when they want to have “fun” even though one owns a modded 4Runner and I have an AEV Rubicon in the garage. In CO where our place is—lots of sharp rocks and potential to cut if hit just right. I’d prefer to have extra beef all around especially sidewalls.

3. Looks and tread wear, noise as tires wear:. Looks are subjective, but we know what looks good to us. 50k miles with solid performance throughout the lifespan. Deeper tread the better as that helps over the miles.

4. Weight: I’m not entering the Baja 1000 and am not racing anyone. If I want to go fast, I have far faster forms of transportation. A heavier tire in OEM size has negligible impact on 0-60 & the quarter—enough not to notice vs. the significant priorities above.

5. MPG: Raptor’s biggest issue is having aerodynamics of a barn door. Stop and go, might lose 1mpg w/heavier tire. At highway speeds—the weight of tire is negligible vs aerodynamics and rolling resistance.

‘Based on those priorities (and my own biases as an OEM veteran & personal experience)—I’d go with any of these in descending order—although it’s pretty close—with tread depth, rain, and noise over time as influences.

Falken Wildpeak AT3 (E)
Goodyear Duratrac (D)
BF Goodrich AT KO 2 (E)

For me, no thanks to a Load Range C or featherweight tire—on a 6000 lb truck. Ford provided owners with an OEM tire which is a choice that some may go with based on their priorities.

Bias Disclaimer: I know why OEMs are warming up to Falken. On my Raptor I like (and glad the previous owner upgraded to) the Wildpeak AT3 (E) enough that we put them on my wife’s LX570 (which is a horrific gas pig even if it were on slicks—but would outlast cockroaches). On my AEV, which of course is lighter than my Raptor—I have BFG KM2s—which I’ll replace with KM3s (heavy E load tire in 35/12.50–17 as all know).

I hope this helps explain my priorities and hope you have a pleasant evening.

Would you care to elaborate on why OEM's are warming up to Falken? I have zero insight on the company and am getting ready to switch tires. My gf's Gladiator came with the Falken Wildpeak AT3 and I like them a lot.

Thanks in advance,