235/70R16 section width big enough to protect rims?

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
When I got my truck it came with 235/70R16 Michelin Latitude Cross on stock rims and they were not really much wider than the rims. So in effect the tire wall and the rim face formed more or less a single flat surface and hence the rim was exposed to damage from rocks/curbs etc.

So I switched to 245/60R16 silent Armors. Now these were protruding well above the rim and provided good protection.

I am about to switch to BFG TA KO2s now. I am inclined to drop back to 235/70R16s since they are P rated hence 10lbs lighter and with much softer sidewall than the 245/70R16 KO2s. So that means better ride and less stress on suspension. However, technically they have the same section width as the Michelins so they should offer no rim protection again. Michelins though were road tires while the KO2 is AT tire. So what's the chance the KO2 offers better rim protection be it because of thicker side walls or larger section width?

Does any of you guys run that size of KO2s on 16 rims? Can you post pictures that show how the sidewall relates to the rim?
 
Last edited:

tommudd

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
22,456
Reaction score
3,642
Location
Southeastern Ohio
When I got my truck it came with 235/70R16 Michelin Latitude Cross on stock rims and they were not really much wider than the rims. So in effect the tire wall and the rim face formed more or less a single flat surface and hence the rim was exposed to damage from rocks/curbs etc.

So I switched to 245/60R16 silent Armors. Now these were protruding well above the rim and provided good protection.

I am about to switch to BFG TA KO2s now. I am inclined to drop back to 235/70R16s since they are P rated hence 10lbs lighter and with much softer sidewall than the 245/70R16 KO2s. So that means better ride and less stress on suspension. However, technically they have the same section width as the Michelins so they should offer no rim protection again. Michelins though were road tires while the KO2 is AT tire. So what's the chance the KO2 offers better rim protection be it because of thicker side walls or larger section width?

Does any of you guys run that size of KO2s on 16 rims? Can you post pictures that show how the sidewall relates to the rim?

First thing,
check to see how much yours has sagged to see if 245-70-16s would even fit
 

CzarKJ

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,605
Reaction score
3
Location
Townsend, MA
^that. Then you could do a quick clevis lift if you only need a little clearance.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
First thing,
check to see how much yours has sagged to see if 245-70-16s would even fit

I am currently running 245-70-16. They fit. I want to go down to 235-70-16 since BFG K02s are much softer and lighter at this size. What bothers me is the chance that the narrower tires won't protect the rim from rock/curb damage.
 

dude1116

Full Access Member
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
3,373
Reaction score
13
Location
Pompton Plains, NJ
I always thought the 235/70's offered enough rim protection. It was 245/75/16 on 8" wheels that always bothered me as far as how the sidewall looked.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
I always thought the 235/70's offered enough rim protection. It was 245/75/16 on 8" wheels that always bothered me as far as how the sidewall looked.

Dunno never seen any of them but the Michelin Latitude Cross which is a road tire and did not offer any rim protection. So that's why I am trying to find out whether the BFG KO2 at that size would be any different before I bite the bullet and get them.
 

u2slow

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2012
Messages
656
Reaction score
107
Location
BC
IMO, 245 is the narrowest tire to put on a 7" wide rim.... for any use other than the mall.
 

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
I've been running the 235/70 on stock steel with the chome looking wheel covers. It's been curbed a few times at the school and my covers haven't been scuffed.

I would agree also on the P rated tire for ride which is already poor, and also for less weight.

I however would suguest you take my tire guys advice (who runs BFG himself) and go on the BFG website to have a look at the KO2 reviews. The treadwear reviews aren't good and my liberty wears even but really burns the tires down fast already. I'm just not willing to pay tat kind of money for tires and not get any life out of them.

My guy also priced me the other versions of the BFG all terrains but both sizes of those have the stiffer sidewalls. I'm gonna pass.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
Thanks for sharing your experience Duster. What model tires are you running?

I am aware that there are quite some complaints about KO2's thread wear. My libby also seems to wear tires faster than the other trucks I've owned (the 3.7 accelerates quite well an I keep it in rwd most of the time so maybe it eats through rear tires). However, I want ATs with snowflake symbol and I've found only two options - KO2s and Duratracs. If I go for Duratracs that's gotta be the 225/75r16 and I can't find this size in Europe. So KO2s are the only choice I have.
 

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
I just ordered a set of General Grabber AT2 tires for mine.

These have the older style BFG tread, but it actually looks like it's an improved version, and they do happen to have the snowflake symbol. Plus they have a 60,000 mile treadwear warranty as an additional bonus. They also should not be as stiff or heavy as the BFG. I don't really see where the stiffness is called for. This is not a full size pickup so I don't need the load rating, and I won't be airing down for rec play either, not to mention I've never put a hole in a sidewall while offroading. So...

I ordered them in 235/70R16.

Reasons are, I already run this size, and while I don't go mudding or crawling with my ride, I do get off road in some rough places in the course of my work, and I am also often hauling a small load inside with the seats down. Nobody really responded about 245/70R16 rub issues with these tires. So I didn't want to risk it over the small amount of width and height gained.

I will let you know how I like them soon.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
You're right about the Grabbers having the snowflake. Missed that in my research. I gave up on them before checking that because of their supposedly bad wet traction. In Europe every tire sold has to be tested and labeled (A,B,C...F) on fuel efficiency, wet traction and noise. For wet traction a grade lower means 3 meters more stopping distance under some standard load on wet tarmac at 50 mph. The Grabbers are rated E while the KO2 is rated B so I skipped on the Grabbers.
 

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
You're right about the Grabbers having the snowflake. Missed that in my research. I gave up on them before checking that because of their supposedly bad wet traction. In Europe every tire sold has to be tested and labeled (A,B,C...F) on fuel efficiency, wet traction and noise. For wet traction a grade lower means 3 meters more stopping distance under some standard load on wet tarmac at 50 mph. The Grabbers are rated E while the KO2 is rated B so I skipped on the Grabbers.

OK, so I got these installed and have a good bit of info to share already, being that my Liberty is literally my rolling office full time for work and also my family ride. I spend more time in my Jeep than in my house.

With that said, addressing the wet traction grade is going to address both of your questions really by the end. Initially, in just looking at them I could not imagine the stopping distance being 12 meters more on these vs the BFG unless the mileage warranty is there because of a harder tread compound. That was my initial thought.

Now that I have ran them mounted I have an additional thing I can say that probably plays into this... which gets into the section width vs height thing.

The Grabber AT2 in 235/70R16 is true to spec on height of 29" I've checked. However, having them mounted in replacement of previous 235/70R16 in the same application... I have realized you can only really consider the section width aspect so much. With a grain of salt if you will you might say.

The reasoning is this is the width measurement to the bubble apex of the sidewalls. This is going to vary depending on the wheel width and tire bead design, and doesn't have much relationship to TREAD WIDTH which isn't a specification although it should be.

I think that plays a role here. There is going to be some variance in actual tread width on the road and therefore contact patch, and these were most likely also tested in a size that is not snow flake marked either which is not fair to the sizes we would be running on the Liberty. Kind of an unfair comparison.

The General AT2 also features a recessed bead relationship to the sidewall much like many ITP brand sport ATV tires (which I also run). How this works is the bead is recessed back so that when the bead seats, the sidewall section actually pops out over top of the rim lip all around it in an o rather than just pressing against the inside of the rim. This protects the rim awesome and also keeps crap out from between the lip of the rim and bead of the tire. But it does alter how much sidewall bubble you have (lessens it).

All in all, unless with use I encounter something I really don't like in the future that is surprising, these will take the place of all future BFG purchases for my usage. I have a sweet "hookup" on BFG tires from the guys I do tire business from. But still yet I got the AT2's which I like more and saved $244 + tax to boot, and also got a 60,000 treadwear warranty. That is really hard to argue with.

With that said, in the 235/70R16 sizing on the AT2 on the stock steel wheels, hindsight is always 20/20. I will typically differ from most and prefer the look and ability of the skinny knarly looking tire over a big fat tire. I'm not a mud bogger for fun anymore, so for what I encounter I typically get better bite out of the skinnier tire.

But, hindsight is 20/20 and if I could go back now knowing what I know now, I would instead be debating between 245/70R16 and 255/65R16. The reason is I was already leaning towards going with the 245/70R16 or 255/65R16 in these to start with. But I could only find a couple Liberty owners running the 245/70R16 size and couldn't get any of them to respond about any clearance or rubbing issues. So I was standing at the counter at the tire store shooting from the hip as far as ordering a size and just chose not to gamble.

I haul quite a bit inside, sometimes more than others, and today was a more day. If I could go back I'd go with a wider width for the hauling because the tread width of these is only 7.5" and with the bead design and wheel width I can see the loading on the tires visually. My previous tires of the same spec size I did not see the same look. Those had a standard bead and a wider tread width with a less square shoulder to the tread. So the tire didn't squat in the same way where you could see the loading as bad.

I checked clearance on these 29" tall tires where people say rubbing comes into play. I have like an inch of clearance at the unaltered pinch weld with the wheels turned to the worst clearance angle, and a bit less at the front of the wheel well. I am confident a wider 29.5" tire would have cleared no problem and and even wider 29.1" tire probably would have as well.

So if you get these you will probably want to go with the 245/70R16 or 255/65R16 if you like the more chubby bubble tire look.
 
Last edited:

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
Oh, and the BFG to me is a better looking tire turned white letter out due to white letter (BFG) vs outline white letter (AT2) which I don't like on anything.

Turned blackwall the AT2 is a better looking tire up close. The KO2 version is better looking at a distance. That larger sidewall lug look is nicer looking from a distance, larger is more visible.

Tread wise, the AT2 tread is better looking. Larger claw looking lugs with more sipes and more tread void between the lugs.

So far I haven't had any issue with them packing up with anything, including stones/gravel. They don't have room to pick up the larger rocks like MT's can, and don't trap or fling the small ones like many AT and HT tires do. I hate hearing rocks sling out at speed and worse I hate the sound of a trapped rock clicking against the pavement when I get back on the road. I always fear I have ran over a screw or nail or something of the sort when I hear it.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
So I did get the KO2s in size 235/70R16. With tires off the rim I put one of my old 245/70R16 Silent Armors standing next to a new KO2. The SA looks a lot wider than the KO2 although the section width should differ by just 10mm. So apparently the thread width is really smaller on the KO2s.

Next thing I did was putting a straight edge across the sidewall of the inflated tire mounted on the rim and measuring the distance between the edge of the rim and the straight edge. This distance is what keeps the rim edge out of harm's way. On the SAs this distance was 23mm and on the KO2s it was 18mm. So, I am getting exactly 5mm less section width on each side totaling to 10mm section width between the 235/70 and 245/70.

So to answer my original question I really lost just 5mm of rim protection on each side. Provided that I am replacing silent armors with KO2 which has much harder sidewall that should not be a big deal.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
I think that plays a role here. There is going to be some variance in actual tread width on the road and therefore contact patch, and these were most likely also tested in a size that is not snow flake marked either which is not fair to the sizes we would be running on the Liberty. Kind of an unfair comparison.

Just a quick note on this - each size is tested separately and gets its own labels. It's not like the model is labeled.
 

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
Yeah I was surprised by the narrow tread width.

Couple that with the rim protector bead design on the Grabber AT2 and it makes you double take.

I like the tires though, and I'm OK with the skinny look. I just think 245/70 or 255/65 would have also cleared and not show the loading when I'm loaded like these do. If I had a do-over I would have went wider.
 

Duster

Full Access Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
252
Reaction score
63
Location
NC
You'll have to post a pic of yours with the KO2 sometime and report back later on the tread wear.

I was real concerned with that being in the southeast like I am with high pavement temp a lot of the year. That seems to be what burned up the Terramax HT tires I did have on. They showed little wear the cooler half of the year. Then the summer months burned them up.
 

jja

Full Access Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Messages
142
Reaction score
0
Location
Bulgaria
I just measured the actual thread width on both models. The 235/70 KO2s have 20cm. and the 245/70 Silent Armors have 21cm. Not that much but quite visible.
 

KJ604

Full Access Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
417
Reaction score
0
Location
Vancouver BC
You're right about the Grabbers having the snowflake. Missed that in my research. I gave up on them before checking that because of their supposedly bad wet traction. In Europe every tire sold has to be tested and labeled (A,B,C...F) on fuel efficiency, wet traction and noise. For wet traction a grade lower means 3 meters more stopping distance under some standard load on wet tarmac at 50 mph. The Grabbers are rated E while the KO2 is rated B so I skipped on the Grabbers.

This needs to be stickied somewhere. Very good to know.

Compound has a lot to do with the traction of the tire. Tread can look good but its the way it behaves that counts. If they tested the tires and they dont stop as quickly in the wet then thats all there is to it.

Grabbers work just fine for lots of people but this is good information to know either way.
 

Latest posts

Members online

Top