Have my upgraded Wheels & Tires sorted: 295/70R17 34” tall 12” wide +30 offset

[cc1999]

I switched my over to SAS wheels with 295/70 17 as well but I used BFG's KO2 tires... I wasn't for sure about the white letters but now I love it..

Looks awesome. I like the white letters. Looks really sharp!

My OCD has never allowed me to run a white letter tire with the letters on the inside.
Just looks like someone screwed up and installed their tires backwards. lol

If the tire has white letters, they simply belong on the outside as god intended them . lol


Great looking truck!
Congrats!

Sponsored

 

[WadeC]

Looks awesome. I like the white letters. Looks really sharp!

My OCD has never allowed me to run a white letter tire with the letters on the inside.
Just looks like someone screwed up and installed their tires backwards. lol

If the tire has white letters, they simply belong on the outside as god intended them . lol


Great looking truck!
Congrats!

Thank you… your truck was my inspiration…

 

[cc1999]

Put my stock 285 BFGs over onto my Bronco SAS rims today.
Was running 10 ply load range E 34” Yokohama’s the 295s seen earlier in my thread here.

Wanted to try the stock tires on my +30 offset SAS rims.

I do Think the larger Yokahoma tires looked a little better, but got tired of the rub as well as wanted to see if I could get any of my fuel mileage back.

13 mpg has started getting annoying. More so with Range only getting 23 mpg with small fuel tanks these trucks have.
That 13 mpg is pretty close to what my 700+ hp TRX used to get. Not ever seen much eco out any of these Ecoboost motors.

 

[Grabber]

Just curious, what are the 295s rubbing on?

 

[cc1999]

Just curious, what are the 295s rubbing on?

Front crash bars, especially when turned full lock to the right and backing up, which I probably do that about 2-4 times a day. Still not a huge deal. I could have taken the bars off and I still might.
I am mainly just wanting to experiment a bit with the OE tires on the Bronco Rims.

So far I know or have learned the following.

The rub is gone.

The ride got noticeably rougher which was surprising, since my 295 Yokohama tires were 10 ply E rated.

I am not crazy about the look of the 285s, 33" height is fine but I don't like that I lost width.
My rings seem to stick out further then I would like. Overall I think the truck looked better with the 295s (34" tires ), mostly just miss the width of the tire.

Fuel mileage is looking better, but I have only driven it 30-40 miles with the stock tires on the SAS rims, but where I was showing 13-14, I am now showing 16-17, however that could change soon as I put it on the interstate at highway speeds which is where it really seems to like to guzzle the fuel.
With the 10 ply 34" Yokohama tires I was running it always got better mileage zipping around town 30-60 mph then out on the highway running 80 mph.

I am now looking into possibly going to a 33x12.5R17.
That should get my width back without the height.
Only kicker seems to be that would put me back to the heavy 10ply or in the case of the Yokohama like the 295s I have, those jump to load range F 12 ply tire, so I was looking at the FALKEN Wildpeak R/T01 33x12.50R17LT 120R 10 Ply

I am searching for a real pic of one mounted in the 33x12.5R17 size.
Hard to tell exactly what it would look like in that size .
This is the stock image of the tire.

 

[Grabber]

Gotcha, I agree with you, love the stance of your truck with the larger tires and the side running boards removed. How has been your experience with road rash from the boards being removed?

 

[cc1999]

Gotcha, I agree with you, love the stance of your truck with the larger tires and the side running boards removed. How has been your experience with road rash from the boards being removed?

I took a lot of precautions when I removed them.
The belly and rear fenders have PPF film plus I have some black protective cladding on the belly as well. So far its has been fine.

We have had a lot of snow and ice this month, and truck has been out in it, and when it starts getting slushy, I could see in my mirrors, those bulged out rear fenders are getting hammered with slush.

I washed salt off it this week and they seem to be doing just fine. I was little worried after seeing how much those back fenders get hit from the slush off the front tires.

 

[Grabber]

Thanks for the info!

 

[BlueF35]

Front crash bars, especially when turned full lock to the right and backing up, which I probably do that about 2-4 times a day. Still not a huge deal. I could have taken the bars off and I still might.
I am mainly just wanting to experiment a bit with the OE tires on the Bronco Rims.

So far I know or have learned the following.

The rub is gone.

The ride got noticeably rougher which was surprising, since my 295 Yokohama tires were 10 ply E rated.

I am not crazy about the look of the 285s, 33" height is fine but I don't like that I lost width.
My rings seem to stick out further then I would like. Overall I think the truck looked better with the 295s (34" tires ), mostly just miss the width of the tire.

Fuel mileage is looking better, but I have only driven it 30-40 miles with the stock tires on the SAS rims, but where I was showing 13-14, I am now showing 16-17, however that could change soon as I put it on the interstate at highway speeds which is where it really seems to like to guzzle the fuel.
With the 10 ply 34" Yokohama tires I was running it always got better mileage zipping around town 30-60 mph then out on the highway running 80 mph.

I am now looking into possibly going to a 33x12.5R17.
That should get my width back without the height.
Only kicker seems to be that would put me back to the heavy 10ply or in the case of the Yokohama like the 295s I have, those jump to load range F 12 ply tire, so I was looking at the FALKEN Wildpeak R/T01 33x12.50R17LT 120R 10 Ply

I am searching for a real pic of one mounted in the 33x12.5R17 size.
Hard to tell exactly what it would look like in that size .
This is the stock image of the tire.

You think it will rub at all with some articulation with the +30 offset and stock tires? I'm looking at maybe picking up some of the ford performance methods @ +35 offset and of course nobody makes +55 or even 45 offsets to be close to stock. But I don't want to sacrifice wheel travel/rubbing

 

[cc1999]

You think it will rub at all with some articulation with the +30 offset and stock tires? I'm looking at maybe picking up some of the ford performance methods @ +35 offset and of course nobody makes +55 or even 45 offsets to be close to stock. But I don't want to sacrifice wheel travel/rubbing

Not sure, other then +35 is less likely then my +30s, honestly I think the +35 is probably the best choice for better stance and avoiding a rub concern.

The stock BFG is a narrow 285, where tread width is concerned, it’s a half inch narrower tread width then about any other 285. I really doubt you would have any rub issues with stock bfgs on +35 rims.

 

[cc1999]

Ok, new Falken At4W SL 285/70R17 tires are now on the Ranger .
‘Very happy with the results, the extra width fixed the issue I had with how the stock BFGs looked.
‘The stock 33“ height fixes the rub, even with the SAS Bronco +30 offset rims.

With the Falken tires, I have nearly the same tread width I had with 295 Yokohama tires. Within 0.1”
‘Section Witdth is within 0.2 of 295 Yokohama’s.

‘The SL load range with 2 ply sidewall got the ride smoother then ever, the lighter weight should fix the mpg’s back closer to stock. Seeing 15-16 so far, where with the 10 ply 34“ Yokohama ATs we’re killing the mileage , was only seeing 12-13 on winter fuel.

Overall very happy with new setup.

 

[Banyoncd]

Ok, new Falken At4W SL 285/70R17 tires are now on the Ranger .
‘Very happy with the results, the extra width fixed the issue I had with how the stock BFGs looked.
‘The stock 33“ height fixes the rub, even with the SAS Bronco +30 offset rims.

With the Falken tires, I have nearly the same tread width I had with 295 Yokohama tires. Within 0.1”
‘Section Witdth is within 0.2 of 295 Yokohama’s.

‘The SL load range with 2 ply sidewall got the ride smoother then ever, the lighter weight should fix the mpg’s back closer to stock. Seeing 15-16 so far, where with the 10 ply 34“ Yokohama ATs we’re killing the mileage , was only seeing 12-13 on winter fuel.

Overall very happy with new setup.

 

[Banyoncd]

I truly appreciate your post! It has been extremely informative. Great looking truck!

 

[bossy]

Me too. I am very thankful for your post, pictures and attention to details. I've been trying to figure out my direction and the information here saved me from a lot of mistakes. I have new SAS wheels in paint to make them the same color as the Raptor wheels and rings. I ordered Duratrac RTs 285/75R17s but modified the crash bars with a set from ReadyLift that gives me the space I need to avoid rubbing on 34s. Will see if the mileage gets terrible and perhaps revert to something else..

In any case, will post pictures once done for the benefit of all of you..

 

[Daweism]

I am thinking I may chicken out on the 305 and back that tire size down to 295/70R17.
Still same Yokohama tire.
1/2” narrower and 1/2” shorter.

Found some pics of 295/70R17s , I believe the rims on this truck are a +25 offset.
Those wheel wells look pretty full, stance looks good, with this 295 +25 setup.
Thinking no reason to push a potential rubbing issue or getting poke I don’t want.
If I can get it to look this good.

Those are 35mm offset. The version of this wheel with the imitation beadlock bolts are 25mm offset.

Sponsored