As I’ve been researching LR3 tires I keep reading get an E rated tire. The rationalization is it’s a heavy vehicle. With a GVWR of under 7200lbs an E tire in WAY overkill, the load capacity is actually double that number. I don’t see wanting to have more weight, a stiffer ride or have a less flexable sidewall when aired down when the vehicle doesn’t require the extra capacity. Sidewall puncture resistance may be a factor, but that could be as much the tire choice as the load rating. Obviously some tires are only available in E rating, but why did you choose that IF there was an option?

 

The metric Land Rover uses is in certain articulation situations the full weight of the vehicle (Discovery 3) may be supported by only 2 of the 4 tires. It is not "WAY" overkill. Besides, E vs D is more of a psi thing than a weight thing. Where are you getting that number doubled, 2 tires per axle? For sidewall, examples are KO2s and KM2s having better sidewalls in E rating is true.

On D rated toyos the Discovery 3 is almost unable to be aired down more than a few psi before the sidewall bulge/breaking bead is concerning. Same size tire in E rating, you have way more room to play with on airing down.

If you're that concerned about what, ride quality and lifting heavy tires around, there's always the new disco sport...

 

Wow, did I come across as snarky or attacking? I didn't mean to come across that way. I ask because I want to know if I'm missing something, not because I think everyone else is wrong. What I did not consider, which you brought up, is lifting a wheel.

I am looking at 2 different tires, the Falken Wildpeak AT3W and the General Grabber AT2 in 265/70/18, both come in a load range of 116 and 124. If you consider the load rating of 124 you have a capacity of 3527 lbs per tire, or a total of 14,108 with 4 wheels on the ground. Now if you evenly distribute that over 2 tires, you are actually a little low for the GVWR of 7121. I'm not sure how you balance on 2 tires, but you've got me there. If you consider the 116 load rating you get 2756 lbs per tire, or a total of 11,024 for 4 tires on the ground. If you lift a wheel you have a capacity of 8268 which is 1147 lbs more than the GVWR of the vehicle. Granted, we don't know how evenly the weight would be distributed, so that may be up for debate.

As to ride quality... It's my DD with a half hour commute. Plus we occasionally use it for road trips when we need more space than my wife's Volvo. Why not make it as comfortable as possible?

As to weight... I'm not worried about the weight while I'm lifting them, it's about the GVWR. If I have 70 lbs less in tires that's 8.3 more gallons of water, 11.1 gallons of fuel, or one more of my kids I can haul.

As to airing down... This is new to me on an 18" rim. I'm sure I can't air down as much as the 16" rims I had on my pathfinder, that'll take some experimenting. My brother has E rated tires on his Sequoia and hates them, they're too stiff. It's a lighter rig than the LR3, but still, he will air down to 10psi and hardly flex the sidewall.

It's really easy to over do it "just in case", but then you've just added more weight and more cost for no reason.

 

I echo the comments above. I don't think you were being snarky. If you aren't considering technical off-road conditions I don't think that E rating is required. For me, I won't ride on anything lesser for trails. I LOVE the Goodyear MT/Rs with Kevlar but for my size (275/65R18) the load rating is C and that doesn't do it for me.

Also...Sequoias and Pathfinders are NOT LR3s. First of all they are not as heavy and second of all they are 4WD SUVs not 4x4s. If you aren't really wheelin' your LR3 then yeah you can go Load Rating D or even C. If you are going off-road they really need that extra strength that E affords.

 

Can you elaborate on this? I have no idea what you mean.

Yes, the pathfinder is smaller, I only referenced because of the rim diameter and airing down. The sequoia is very much in the same class in terms of size, a little larger, and weight, 200lbs less curb weight stock. His is not stock and is definitely heavier. I think we’d all agree that the LR3 is a more impressive machine, but we’re talking about tires in an off road situation and the size and weight are very close.

 

I have had my LR3 almost balanced on 2 tires before. In a cross axle situation it's not that hard to have happen or uncommon.

If you really want to screw with your thinking, imagine it fully loaded with gear and people, now toss a 4,000 trailer load on the back. Then ask yourself how much you love your stiffer sidewalls...

 

I came across more abrasive than I would have liked. Lately the tire discussion across every single board that covers this model has been either about weight rating or tire size, so this has been regularly beaten to death for a while.

E rated tires are appropriate for the vehicle as it provides the most flexibility and reliability. Better pressure range to work with, stronger for airing down. The Discovery 3 is already ridiculously comfortable, maybe not to the wife but I can promise you it is nothing like the toolshed on wheels a defender or early disco is. For its unladen weight, I would say it (D3) is still at the edge of requiring that rating tire for any medium or heavy duty work.
Comparing a pathfinder or sequoia, with a Discovery's comfort is pointless, even with old hard E rated tires the disco will be more than an easy match for the other vehicles.

As to when it would be supported by 2 instead of 4 tires, any Land Rover challenge course or off road centre has a portion with opposing holes in the road to demonstrate the articulation of the vehicle and balance it on 2 wheels diagonally. Roughly like the photo below. Get anywhere close to the GVWR with this car and do this, you would want that safety margin. I would value safety over comfort all day every day, especially for family.



As for a DD on a 30 minute commute... that's not bad at all, an LR3 with anything, bald skinny pirellis is already comfortable.

I would rather sacrifice a bit of fuel and water for good tires that I could trust always. Even if just on a working car that sees asphalt.

If there is one place to over do it, I would do that on a sensible tire size, sensible tread pattern, but E rated. General rule you hear often is anything between you and the ground is NOT something to skimp on, mattress, shoes, tires, etc. Feel free to disagree.

 

It’s becoming apparent I’m bucking tradition here but that seems to be the way I roll. 😬 Please don’t get frustrated or take it personal, I need to understand the whys.

I won’t be in a trailer situation until we’re out of this condo in a year, as much as I’d like to build a tent trailer. I don’t think the extra 400 lbs of tongue weight would be a deal breaker if I’m still approximately 4,000 under the rated capacity of my lesser rated tires.

Let me switch focus slightly as I try to learn my new rig. Do you guys air down? If so how low? This is part of why I’m struggling with going to the E rated tires. The E’s don’t spread out like a lower ply rated tire, so you don’t see as much benefit. If the tire can handle the weight and flex out to a bigger rock grabbing footprint it’s a win-win.

Has anyone bought the lower rated tires and been dissatisfied?

 

I would certainly agree there's been a lot of discussion on tire size. In terms of weight rating I have not seen any discussion, but hey, it's easy to miss. There's a lot of data out there. What I've read is "get an E rated tire", end of discussion. I'm not trying to convince anyone else to switch, I am trying to determine why people go with the heavier tire when it may not be necessary. It's a personality flaw, I don't follow the because I said so logic. On road it's certainly not necessary, but we're discussing wheelin' so maybe it is necessary.

Anyone care to chime in on how far they air down?

 

Load ratings, as a safety measurement, are going to be conservative. You aren't going to pop a tire the second you get on two wheels if you exceed the load rating. You definitely wouldn't want to take a long highway trip on two wheels, but the chances of that happening are slim.