Looking at Mountain Goat's picture shows the clearance under the diff's. Looks good.

 

I agree and disagree with the wider tire statement from your last post. The more tire you have on the ground the more traction you will have, always. This is why people air down etc. But with that said there are other limiting factors most other rover drivers will have to take into consideration before they worry about that such as non locked diffs, suspension travel and ground clerance. This is why I moved up to a 35" and a 12.50" is fairly narrow for a 35" tire. I would agree in saying the most important reason to go bigger is ground clerance. The extra 1" you will gain going from a 31" to a 32" could mean the difference when on the trails.

 

In certain applications, the wider footprint may be needed or preferred. But for my needs and most likely Slang's as well, I do not feel I need a large enough tire to justify regearing the Disco or other such costs. They definitely will cause more rolling resistance and other issues that I just do not care to deal with.

In the extreme settings though, you are absolutely correct. I see from your mods that yours definitely fits into the Extreme category much more than my casual needs.
Yours is definitely set up for a great off-road experience.

 

haha yea my truck is a bad comparison. I'd say if you're worried about rolling resistance then street driving is your priority and you should be looking at an all terrain not a mud terrain. When I first got my truck it had 245/75 BFG AT's and it was great on the high way and decent enough for light off roading. Forget about thick mud though. I'm sure they would have done okay in the sand. They would have lasted 60K miles too. Best part was, no trimming! The previous owner never would have trimmed the fenders. He'd probably cry if he knew I took 2" off all around.

Anyways - I say do a little bit more research before you jump into a MT, especially if you're not going to use them like they were intended.

Downfalls of MT tires
Poor gas milage
Expensive
Loud
Wear out fast

But obviously if you're going off road you dont have to worry as much about being stuck in the mud!

 

Yeah a minor camel cut is needed for 235/85s. Not much though.



Also, I can get plenty of flotation on the big dunes by airing down my 235s. And I can pass some of the guys wearing 37" bias ply balloon tires...

In quite a few situations narrow is better because your tire exerts more downward force per square inch of footprint. This is true of snow, ice, and any mud or gravel situation that has a solid substrate. In general, military tires are very narrow and they have proven adequate on most terrain across the globe.

I agree with most of your post but rolling resistance is an important consideration off-road as well. When I ditched my 265s in favor of 235s I noticed my truck was less sluggish and easier to steer on trails. YMMV (literally too)...

 

Good discussion..

True, a narrow tire will work better in those conditions. Years ago, I wondered why a WRC would run narrow tires in the snow and muddy conditions.

I like the 265's, just due to the fact I will be mostly on the freeway. The trails to our property isnt that extreme, but I do want to play in the mud occasionally. Airing up the tires will help with MPG's on the freeway. Plus, the bigger tires will look better on the new wheels, with that offset. There will be trimming, definetely.

 

Sounds like guys on 37 balloons need to learn about gears.

Yes military tires are narrow in comparison to height but 40"x14" 20r are not narrow by any means. Hummers also run fairly wide tires but they are designed to do so.

Which tires did you switch 265 to 235? If you switched to KM2's it's the tread pattern you changed. KM2's do not have as beefy tread blocks. Having bad rolling resistance on the trail is a good thing because it means your tires are digging in and not **** packed with mud. Which also effects stopping on the trails. But then again you are running different trails in Idaho than I am in PA. You can compensate for the beefy lugged and larger tires thru gears. But thats a whole other conversation.

Sorry I wont high-jack your threat any more

 

Yeah it's somewhat of a regional thing for sure. I've never wheeled in PA. All I'm getting at is I've never seen a 265 go where a 235 can't with otherwise identical rigs. I'm guessing there may be a situation out there somewhere where that would be true though. A lot of people here run wide tires for the same reasons you are stating, and joke about my "pizza cutters" but I must say it hasn't hurt me on the trails.

There is a good chance that the mud in your area is sticky enough that all that extra floatation is needed. Then again, look at what they used for the Camel Trophy.

Oh and the balloon tires are on the two ****** Jeeps in my sig pic. They are geared so low they can't go above 50. Now that I think about it the fact I could pass them on the dunes must be a 4-cyllinder and shorter wheelbase thing. They aren't that slow, they're just build more for rocks than anything...

 

It's my thread. Jack away. Just no oil or spark plug discussions...i've got that sorted.

Lot to think about here but reality is I don't do any offroading and probably woudn't do much unless I got another truck as DD. Sand capability is a plus. Rocky roads and the occasional ditch is good too.

Don't want to mess with gears. Prefer not to cut or do brake lines but I could for the right reasons.

Really, I'm going to go for these Definity's as any other tire is going to cost me hundreds more. I may do a last minute take it or leave it at Firestone or BFG but they usually leave it on those offers. There's no chance for shipping anything but if you ask to one more time Wheel, I'll call.

Still thinking. Lot's of good points and surely learning. Thanks.

 

Actually, a 40"x14"R20 is a narrow tire given it's height and the weight it is designed to support.
It would be the equivalent of a 355x70R20(if I did the math correctly) About the same as the narrow stock tires we run, only bigger.