From 265 to 285?

[Gen X]

The time for new tires is near. I've read through lots of posts about tire fit, but would feel more comfortable getting responses to a specific post.

I currently run 265/75/16 BFGs on MB 352 wheels (16 X8.5 6-139.70 -6 BKMTXX).

I have NO body lift, just a PML.

I've decided to go with Milestar Patagonia M/T Mud-Terrain tires.

What is everyone's thought, can I jump from 265 to 285s with no body lift and no extended UCAs?

Here's a comparison of the difference between the sizes, I'm going up just over an inch in diameter and just under an inch in width.

 

[harryron]

I would do a body lift otherwise your going to be doing some cutting on your fenders.

 

[Gen X]

For some reason I don't like the look of the truck after a body lift. Not sure what it is that makes me dislike it. Any idea how much would need to be trimmed? I have no plastic on the fenders as it is, came that way when I bought it. Think that gives me enough space or would I be cutting some of the metal away too?

 

[BEEFY]

I ran 33x12.5r15 on the stock rims with a pml for 4 years. I did bump stop spacers in the rear. Front I removed the mud flaps and trimmed some of the plastic from the front bumper. It did rub a bit when flexing with the tires turned, but not bad enough for me to worry about. I did not have to cut any metal.

 

[Gen X]

Where can I find the bump stop spacers? I was just looking for those thinking they would be needed. I have no issue with trimming the bumper, it's actually already trimmed a bit and I'll upgrade to an offroad bumper at some point. The tires I'm looking at are a hair smaller than what you ran so I'm thinking they'll be ok.

Anyone else with thoughts about what I'm looking to do?

 

[BEEFY]

I used 1"x2" tube between the frame and factory bump stops

 

[Bushnut]

fitment is onething...but weight is another. the bigger the tire the heavier it is. fuel economy and power will suffer. its not like we drive a rocketship. I'm running 265/75/16 Falken wildpeak AT3Ws and couldn't be happier. but I do spend 70% of my time on road as to off. your experience will differ.

 

[12° North Industries]

Just to point out something with your tire calculator..

Contact the manufacture of the tire and get all the specifics as far as dimensions go and find a calculator that allows you to manipulate those variables. I say this because those calculators are generalized and not a 100% accurate.

We have a Ford Ranger project that runs the 285/70R17 Hankook Dynapro M/T has a diameter of 33.7", a width of 11.5", mounts on a 17" rim and has 630 revolutions per mile. It weighs 62 lbs - NOT including the Aluminum wheel. It has a max load of 3195/2910 lbs, a maximum air pressure of 65 psi, a tread depth of 18.5/32" and should be used on a rim width of 7.5-9". This vehicle although going the route of a mid-travel suspension and hanging Deaver leafs on back, currently only sits with a 2" lift kit and 2" B/L..

Far from a 32" tire that calculator suggests. Not only are ALL tires different in aspect ratios but not all calculators can depict an issue; i.g. If you purchased a set of DynaPRO M/T's from us in a 285/70-17 you'd be having a serious fitment issue.

265/75-16 and a 265/70-17 are in pretty close relation and that's what this Ford Ranger originally had on it. In fact, they did quite well when needed to. Pre snorkel kit, water was just about level with top rung of grill and about 70 yards long

Instagram update with 285/70/17 - and they still tuck just enough.
http://instagr.am/p/BmzCilugO3W/ ​

 

[Gen X]

Thanks all. Taking all info into consideration, I'm leaning towards sticking with 265 tires. I don't offroad all that much, every couple of months or so. The extra size would be nice to have, but the added weight of the tires and loss of fuel economy sorta outweighs it.

 

[12° North Industries]

Glad to see you've made a decision but the affect of 24-30lbs of added weight between the sizes in a vehicle already known to not get the best MPG will hardly make a difference...