I’m calling BULL

[Munkey Boy]

@dcmdon is spot on.

I just put on 35s that weigh 68 pounds (Patagonias) on a Sport S with a manual. My mileage dropped from 20 to 18.5 (recalibration will help when I get to it.) That could be atributed to a tad more wind resistance with around an inch or so of poke outside the plane of the fenders. As for power, easy compensate with the manual with a later shift to get the engine in a higher rpm (BTW the Pentastar absolutely LOVES it.) But also contributing to the mileage drop. Ride is excellent, but different from the stock 31" A/Ts as it should be. The 35s at 37-38 psi are slightly crowned by design so I have a narrower contact patch with the road. The sidewall has a ton of flex as well. Those two factors altered my driving style to let off to a corner earlier and accelerate later just past the apex.

So, as far as "ride, power, gas mileage and handling with bigger tires is negligible" being a bull statement, I completely disagree. Expecting all that to not change at all is bull just as expecting all that to drop off the map. "Negligible" is a relative term, the JT has more than enough quality in every aspect to deliver a better than expected experience in all topics. Beefy suspension with a stellar axle to insure solid handling and ride on and off road, an engine with a deliciously long power range for maximizing torque, also an efficient system for mileage that allows a drop while still affording the use of lower octane to stretch our dollars per mile while still driving a giant LEGO brick on wheels. This beast was designed to travel everywhere, which means there are always going to be compromises (solid front axle bump hunter compared to IFS.) If I wanted something that gave me every one of those aspects at a higher rating BUT ultimately limited to ON road numbers, then I would have bought a Ridgeline. And the smiles per mile would have been unacceptably negligible.

Sponsored

 

[Fastwake]

I have been a car and truck guy all my life. Putting 35s on my jt made no difference in performance. If all you out there are so worried about mpg you should have bought a Prius

 

[MainePure]

So if I went from the stock sport wheels and tire to Rubicon wheels w the 33" Falken Wildpeaks, should I have it reprogrammed for the new tire size? I noticed a significant decrease in mpg(~19mpg--->16mpg) after making the change.

 

[Jeeperjamie]

So if I went from the stock sport wheels and tire to Rubicon wheels w the 33" Falken Wildpeaks, should I have it reprogrammed for the new tire size? I noticed a significant decrease in mpg(~19mpg--->16mpg) after making the change.

Yes you should recalibrate the computer.

 

[MainePure]

Yes you should recalibrate the computer.

Ok thank you. I will make an appointment.

 

[Jeeperjamie]

Ok thank you. I will make an appointment.

You can buy the Jscan stuff and do it yourself. It's cheaper than the dealership will charge you. Jscan is around $90-$95 and the dealership is going to be between $100-$200 and that's all they are going to do is recalibrate the tires. Then if you go down or up a size in tires again you will have to have it done again. Better to just get the Jscan or Tazer, they do more than recalibrate your tires.

 

[MainePure]

You can buy the Jscan stuff and do it yourself. It's cheaper than the dealership will charge you. Jscan is around $90-$95 and the dealership is going to be between $100-$200 and that's all they are going to do is recalibrate the tires. Then if you go down or up a size in tires again you will have to have it done again. Better to just get the Jscan or Tazer, they do more than recalibrate your tires.

Ok I'll check it out. Thanks for the heads up man.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I guess I can understand not liking how the weight makes the truck feel but you will never recoup the costs of aluminum vs steel in gas savings alone. Avoiding things that cause drag like lights and racks above the roofline will save you far more mpg. If anything, steel commonly goes where you want the weight below the COG... my skids actually improved cornering on road and off-camber in the dirt. It all feels more sure footed with less roll.

But tires and wheels are another story... rotating mass is the enemy and will be super noticeable. It's not hard to add 40# per corner going up to 37s even for a Rubicon and you can even double the Sport/Overland corner weights with the right (wrong?) combo.

One of the reasons I went with the tires I did - down the list to about 2 or 3, was weight. These are lighter than the stock Rubicon tires for sure and if I recall, not heavier than the stock Overland tires.

Agree with OP, I went from stock max tow tires to 34” load range C tires and it dropped my mpg by at least 4mpg and definitely rides rougher, also towing 3500lbs is significantly different.

That's another on my list - I didn't want the load range C or higher. The stock overland tires were SL and the ones I got are as well - why go up to a higher load capability when the stock tires already exceed the ability of the truck as far as weight? Over 2500 pounds per tire - that's 5,000 pounds for each axle - will you ever have that much weight on that axle?

And @dcmdon said it well - no use quoting it, everyone can just go up a couple of notches and see it. Good points.
I will highlight the UNsprung weight part, though. Too many don't consider that. It impacts breaking, steering, control over bumps and dips and more. The suspension is there to control how hard and fast that wheel with all the weight attached moves up and down. More mass means less ability to control. For best control over rough roads, hard turns and corners, emergency maneuvers and more - keep that unsprung weight down. When you increase it to lose the ability to control it and your suspension works harder. It's "tuned" for the mass that isn't above the springs. That's what suspension really controls, not the chassis above but what's under the springs.

 

[Mac]

Are there AT 285/70/17 or 285/75/17 33” or 34” tires out there that are not LR C? I have not seen any.

 

[j.o.y.ride]

I will highlight the UNsprung weight part, though. Too many don't consider that. It impacts breaking, steering, control over bumps and dips and more. The suspension is there to control how hard and fast that wheel with all the weight attached moves up and down. More mass means less ability to control. For best control over rough roads, hard turns and corners, emergency maneuvers and more - keep that unsprung weight down. When you increase it to lose the ability to control it and your suspension works harder. It's "tuned" for the mass that isn't above the springs. That's what suspension really controls, not the chassis above but what's under the springs.

Personally I don't really care about handling and hard corners in this truck, I drive it real slowlike when the road gets twisty. I would also rather just upgrade the shocks and keep the bigger tires.

 

[LostWoods]

Are there AT 285/70/17 or 285/75/17 33” or 34” tires out there that are not LR C? I have not seen any.

Doubtful but there might be a scarce few. I don't think I've seen many beyond a 265

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Personally I don't really care about handling and hard corners in this truck, I drive it real slowlike when the road gets twisty. I would also rather just upgrade the shocks and keep the bigger tires.

Referring to those that don't get it and like to bolt on parts like big wheels and tires for that macho look - being clueless as to what they have just done to their truck's abilities on the road.

Around here there's also a lot of "washboard roads" - meaning they shake your teeth out if you have any left. Pits, holes, and quite literally, they look like their namesake. A washboard. evenly spaced ridges and bumps edge to edge for miles
It's not really twisty turny roads as much as bumpy roads, rough roads, and roads with rough spots on corners. A lot of guys put on the huge tires around here and then find out they can't keep it going straight on rough roads because the suspension can't keep the heavy wheels and tires down against the road. I've seen guys go flying off the roads - thinking their high truck on big tires means they can do better under such conditions while it means the opposite.. You have have mud swimming and rock climbing abilities, but it's worthless on our rural roads. Those are highway trucks only, or rock crawling or mudding, worthless on the roads otherwise.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Are there AT 285/70/17 or 285/75/17 33” or 34” tires out there that are not LR C? I have not seen any.

Probably scarce in those sizes but when I was shopping I found that if I clicked options, I could choose other than the default C or E for many sizes I was looking at. I wanted to stay 33 or below, though, because I have no reason to go bigger. Bigger is worse on our snow and roads. Wide tires are not the way to go for snow. Tall tires - I don't need to prove anything - and don't need 34s or bigger - Why would I?
They want to SELL you the heavier load ranges so most places won't offer them up, and the default online is always the higher load ranges even if the same tires are offered in lesser ranges.

 

[InvertedLogic]

I'm pretty particular about the way my vehicles drive which is why I went with one of the lightest 35's with the snowflake rating I could find, and kept the 22lb stock wheels. There is a difference, but a small enough difference to get used to it in about 2 days. It drives great and I get 18-20mpg depending on how much hwy driving I do.

 

[PyrPatriot]

Life is all about them tradeoffs

Started at 22-24mpgs
Adding 250lbs of gear/accessories: 21mpg
35" tires: 20mpgs
Steel Bumper and Winch: 16-17mpgs

Gear/accessories includes the 100lbs rock rails, a 90lb horse mat for the bed, and various tools/recovery gear

I might get back some mpgs when I replace my Falken MTs, those things are about 100lbs each with the wheels

Sponsored