Opinions/experiences, 2" level tire size

[MikeK1981]

Sorry for the long post but i'm at a point where i need to make a decision on tire size and ive got it narrowed down, i just dont know how far i can go without a level. I know you guys have all been around the block on these questions and every truck is slightly different. I just want to hear what you guys would do, or have done in the past, and what your experiences were. I've got a 2017 suburban lt 4x4 that's currently all stock on the factory 18" wheels. I'd like it to be a little more level and have a bit more tire with a set of Nitto Ridge Grapplers. I'm looking at the fabtech 2" ring style spacers that go above the shocks as a possibility for a simple level that I could likely do myself. I'd like to go with the 275/70r18 E 125/122Q. In your opinions would these be likely to fit without rubbing on the stock 18" wheels and those spacers? Overall diameter is 33.19" by 10.98" on an 8" wheel, but the factory wheels are 8.5" so I'm not sure how much that would affect overall size. Im mainly looking for the tire height to increase vs the width but if i can get away with a little of both thats good too. Other tire size options I'm looking at are as follows:

265/70r18 E 124/121Q
32.87"
10.71"

275/65r18 E 123/120Q
32.09"
10.98"

Would either of those sizes fit without the level? Also there is the option of going with a passenger rated tire instead of the E rated. How much benefit in ride quality would actually be noticeable vs. How much would I lose in durability? Would you guys recommend this over an E rated for ride quality, or stick with the more durable E rated tire? Most of the driving will be my wife in town on pavement but i want to have decent off road capability if we need it, and we do have some pretty bad conditions occasionally in winter. Would these fit with no level? The passenger tire size is:

265/70r18-116S (or SL, not sure if there's a difference).
32.64"
10.71"

What would you guys do in this situation? The level isn't necessarily a requirement and I mainly need new tires. I dont have to have the 33's, some of these in the 32" range would be close enough, and still look and perform better than ones I got with the truck. As you can see I'm splitting hairs on a lot of these sizes as they're very close. Let me know what you guys think, or have done on your trucks and what you would do. I'm confident I could get the level spacers done myself. I'm mechanically inclined, although my experience is mainly engine work and basic maintenance like brakes and stuff. Never messed with suspension mods before.

 

[Jeff_]

275/70/18 BFG K02’s

Fit perfectly on the stock 18" wheels, no rub.
1.75" front level with Bilstein 5100's.

 

[MikeK1981]

275/70/18 BFG K02’s
View attachment 363763
Fit perfectly on the stock 18" wheels, no rub.
1.75" front level with Bilstein 5100's.

Thanks for the info, and good looking truck!

 

[STORMIN08]

here is my 17 with a 2.5f/1.5r, this is a 285/50/22 (33.22" T x 11.2 W), i barely had trim the fabric wheel liner. No doubt, this could be one with a 2" level. i do think you have any worries.

 

[MikeK1981]

Cool, thanks guys! Any opinions on those other two sizes fitting without the level?

 

[olyelr]

In my opinion, a leveling kit really does not offer any more room for tires than at the stock ride height. Where larger tires tend to rub (back side of the front wheel well openings), a leveling kit really does not offer much more clearance at that location, if any at all.

To help better understand what i am saying, with your vehicle parked on level ground turn the wheels a bit and see what type of clearance you have to the back side of the front fenders. Then, put a jack under the front of the vehicle and raise it a few inches. The clearance really does not change much at all.

With factory 285/45/22 size tires (with the oem wheels) on my wifes ‘16 denali there was hardly a finger width of clearance at the back side of the fenders when the tire was part way turned. After the leveling kit, it really wasnt any different.

Just some food for thought!

 

[MikeK1981]

In my opinion, a leveling kit really does not offer any more room for tires than at the stock ride height. Where larger tires tend to rub (back side of the front wheel well openings), a leveling kit really does not offer much more clearance at that location, if any at all.

To help better understand what i am saying, with your vehicle parked on level ground turn the wheels a bit and see what type of clearance you have to the back side of the front fenders. Then, put a jack under the front of the vehicle and raise it a few inches. The clearance really does not change much at all.

With factory 285/45/22 size tires (with the oem wheels) on my wifes ‘16 denali there was hardly a finger width of clearance at the back side of the fenders when the tire was part way turned. After the leveling kit, it really wasnt any different.

Just some food for thought!

Right, I gathered that from other posts on here. Most were slightly different situations than mine, but that's why I'm not opposed to skipping the lift and going slightly smaller if necessary. Sounds like I'll be ok with the 275/70 and the 2" level. That particular size would probably look funny without a level, even if it did just barely fit. Now I just need to know how big others have gone without the level, and which tire you guys would choose. E rated for durability, or passenger rated for comfort/lower cost? The tire size options are close enough that I can fine tune the size for either situation. Just don't want to order online and then have them not fit.

 

[STORMIN08]

on an IFS front end, the level does not offer much in aid of clearance the way many think...like stated above. what fits in the wheel well at stock height is what will fit with the level. That said, possibly on a straight run, full bump situation...the level will keep the added tire height out of the fender above the tire, but most wont get a tall enough tire that is narrow enough to do that.


this theory of levels allowing the larger tire runs deep in the straight axle world also...problem, being the level makes those worse in most cases. the geometry of the front link arms makes the axle pull to the rear when at droop or a level is installed...this aids in making rear fender contact worse.
i can run a 37 x 12.5 on staock wheels with my ram 2500...add the level kit and it wants to hit the rear of the fender.

 

[MikeK1981]

on an IFS front end, the level does not offer much in aid of clearance the way many think...like stated above. what fits in the wheel well at stock height is what will fit with the level. That said, possibly on a straight run, full bump situation...the level will keep the added tire height out of the fender above the tire, but most wont get a tall enough tire that is narrow enough to do that.


this theory of levels allowing the larger tire runs deep in the straight axle world also...problem, being the level makes those worse in most cases. the geometry of the front link arms makes the axle pull to the rear when at droop or a level is installed...this aids in making rear fender contact worse.
i can run a 37 x 12.5 on staock wheels with my ram 2500...add the level kit and it wants to hit the rear of the fender.

Gotcha, the level would primarily for looks. That's why I'm not opposed to running one of the options in the 32" range and not doing the level. Some them are approaching 33 though and I'm concerned that's where I'm going to have rub that will get annoying. Would anything of the options under 33 with the width under 11 fit safely stock?

 

[olyelr]

Gotcha, the level would primarily for looks. That's why I'm not opposed to running one of the options in the 32" range and not doing the level. Some them are approaching 33 though and I'm concerned that's where I'm going to have rub that will get annoying. Would anything of the options under 33 with the width under 11 fit safely stock?

I have seen many people post of pics of 33x12.5’s on the stock 22’s claiming they fit with no rub.

 

[olyelr]

on an IFS front end, the level does not offer much in aid of clearance the way many think...like stated above. what fits in the wheel well at stock height is what will fit with the level. That said, possibly on a straight run, full bump situation...the level will keep the added tire height out of the fender above the tire, but most wont get a tall enough tire that is narrow enough to do that.


this theory of levels allowing the larger tire runs deep in the straight axle world also...problem, being the level makes those worse in most cases. the geometry of the front link arms makes the axle pull to the rear when at droop or a level is installed...this aids in making rear fender contact worse.
i can run a 37 x 12.5 on staock wheels with my ram 2500...add the level kit and it wants to hit the rear of the fender.

Exactly.

I have a power wagon. 37’s fit like a glove. The ram fenders were almost designed around a 37 in my opinion lol


Gm fenders are not so large. The front and rear portions basically go straight down, where as the ram is round. Seems like to fit anything over a 35/37 on a gm truck you either do a lot of trimming or you lift it a foot haaaaaaa

 

[MikeK1981]

Awesome! What's the consensus on E rated vs. passenger rated? Not going to be doing any hardcore off roading but I want more durability and puncture resistance. The tires that the original owner put on have been horrible. Three punctures just driving in town, and on the highway, in like two months. But it's mainly going to be my wife driving it around town so I'm not opposed to spending less and getting better ride quality, as long as I'm still going to have more reliability than the current ones. I do have 295/75r17 nitto trail grapplers on my silverado and I love them but they're E rated, so they are fairly rough on bumpy roads. Im on my third set over the years and they've been trouble free on and off road, and last me a very long time. How much difference is there between the two ratings in real world toughness and comfort?

 

[olyelr]

Awesome! What's the consensus on E rated vs. passenger rated? Not going to be doing any hardcore off roading but I want more durability and puncture resistance. The tires that the original owner put on have been horrible. Three punctures just driving in town, and on the highway, in like two months. But it's mainly going to be my wife driving it around town so I'm not opposed to spending less and getting better ride quality, as long as I'm still going to have more reliability than the current ones. I do have 295/75r17 nitto trail grapplers on my silverado and I love them but they're E rated, so they are fairly rough on bumpy roads. Im on my third set over the years and they've been trouble free on and off road, and last me a very long time. How much difference is there between the two ratings in real world toughness and comfort?

In my opinion, if its just strictly street driving for the most part, the xl rated tires are just fine. I have put the xl rated 285/45/22 nitto terra graps and falken wildpeak at3w’s on my wifes last denali and they were both phenomenal. On her new high country i went with the 305/45/22 toyo at3, which is also xl rated.

The big thing with the e rated tires is they are going to weigh a lot more…and that typically translates into worse mpg’s. They do, however, typically have much deeper tread depth, so maybe they would last longer?

 

[MikeK1981]

Thanks for all the advice so far. Just went out and took a few rough measurements. The current tires are sitting between 30" and 30.25" just eyeballing it. It looks like the tightest clearance will be the rear outside edge of the tire swinging past the fender liner, where i have 1.5" of clearance to work with. I've seen people push that metal back a little. But at 32.87 inches the 265/70 E rated tire should just clear it, having about a 1.3-1.4" difference around the outside. The 265/70 116S is only 32.64" so it would clear even easier. Both sizes are the same width as stock so I'm only adding to the diameter. I think I'll probably stick with that size for now. Pretty close to 33's without needing any other mods. I just need to choose which rating. The level will still be considered after the tires are on but will mainly be for looks if I think it needs it. Any other input on which rating you guys prefer will be much appreciated!

 

[olyelr]

Thanks for all the advice so far. Just went out and took a few rough measurements. The current tires are sitting between 30" and 30.25" just eyeballing it. It looks like the tightest clearance will be the rear outside edge of the tire swinging past the fender liner, where i have 1.5" of clearance to work with. I've seen people push that metal back a little. But at 32.87 inches the 265/70 E rated tire should just clear it, having about a 1.3-1.4" difference around the outside. The 265/70 116S is only 32.64" so it would clear even easier. Both sizes are the same width as stock so I'm only adding to the diameter. I think I'll probably stick with that size for now. Pretty close to 33's without needing any other mods. I just need to choose which rating. The level will still be considered after the tires are on but will mainly be for looks if I think it needs it. Any other input on which rating you guys prefer will be much appreciated!

When you measured your current tires, if you measured them from the ground to the top with the weight of the vehicle on the tires, that will definitely reduce the over height of the tire measurement by quite a bit. Depending on air pressure, it could easily be an inch less give or take.

 

[MikeK1981]

Yeah you're right. I measured side to side and the best I can tell, they are right at 31". But that means those two sizes would fit even easier than I thought. In theory they wouldn't rub the back of fender well liner until about 34" but that's only if there wasn't any added width on the tire as well. The 275/70 probably would fit, with or without the level I guess, since the clearance at that spot wouldn't really change with a level as someone already pointed out. But that's probably the very limit of what I could fit and id hate to order just to have clearance issues. 32.87 is pretty close to 33.19 anyway. Thanks for the tip!

 

[Oh Kee Pah]

Perhaps take a serious look at the following tire: Falken Wildpeak ATW3 - https://www.falkentire.com/tires/light-truck-suv-cuv-tires/wildpeaka/t3w-tire

It sounds like this will be 95% daily driver tire on paved roads and highways. I don't think you stated exactly, but I'm assuming you're riding on the OE 265/65r18 tires. OE 18x8.5 wheels, correct?
There are both P an LT available in 18" that you can choose from. TYForum members are particularly happy with this tire, as I have read. The P rating would probably be a smoother ride (less ply, particularly sidewall) and would cut back on additional tire weight mounted on your current wheels (compared to OE stock tires/wheel combo). These tires are snowflake rated, not sure where in the country you're located, and perform well on snow and rain. You could add sipe them for additonal performance in inclement conditions. Off-road performance should be more than adequate; are you planning on taking this 'Burb into some hairy situations? Doesn't sound like it.

I think these would give you the best of what you're looking for. An agressive looking tire that performs well in all conditions, with a mind toward daily driving on paved roads. Not the cheapest option out there, but not the most expensive either.

I would suggest the following sizes (assuming no leveling kit installed, and avoiding mods to rear of front wheel well):

265/70r18 - Diameter approx. 32.6" and width of 10.8"
275/65r18 - Diameter approx. 32.1" and width of 10.9"

Many people like to stuff as much rubber under the rig as possible. I can't disagree that a big A/T or M/T tire looks pretty great. But what happens when you are driving down that bumpy road and you have some angle of attack to the front wheels while also driving over an obstacle - the suspension should experience more than usual articulation. Am I making sense. I would suggest allowing a little extra room for wheel articulation vs. allowing just enough room for no rub when turning the wheels on the driveway...


Safe Travels!

 

[MikeK1981]

Perhaps take a serious look at the following tire: Falken Wildpeak ATW3 - https://www.falkentire.com/tires/light-truck-suv-cuv-tires/wildpeaka/t3w-tire

It sounds like this will be 95% daily driver tire on paved roads and highways. I don't think you stated exactly, but I'm assuming you're riding on the OE 265/65r18 tires. OE 18x8.5 wheels, correct?
There are both P an LT available in 18" that you can choose from. TYForum members are particularly happy with this tire, as I have read. The P rating would probably be a smoother ride (less ply, particularly sidewall) and would cut back on additional tire weight mounted on your current wheels (compared to OE stock tires/wheel combo). These tires are snowflake rated, not sure where in the country you're located, and perform well on snow and rain. You could add sipe them for additonal performance in inclement conditions. Off-road performance should be more than adequate; are you planning on taking this 'Burb into some hairy situations? Doesn't sound like it.

I think these would give you the best of what you're looking for. An agressive looking tire that performs well in all conditions, with a mind toward daily driving on paved roads. Not the cheapest option out there, but not the most expensive either.

I would suggest the following sizes (assuming no leveling kit installed, and avoiding mods to rear of front wheel well):

265/70r18 - Diameter approx. 32.6" and width of 10.8"
275/65r18 - Diameter approx. 32.1" and width of 10.9"

Many people like to stuff as much rubber under the rig as possible. I can't disagree that a big A/T or M/T tire looks pretty great. But what happens when you are driving down that bumpy road and you have some angle of attack to the front wheels while also driving over an obstacle - the suspension should experience more than usual articulation. Am I making sense. I would suggest allowing a little extra room for wheel articulation vs. allowing just enough room for no rub when turning the wheels on the driveway...


Safe Travels!

Thank for the advice! I am certainly leaning towards the 265/70, and yes they are the factory wheels. I'd rather have a little extra height on the tire versus more width. I'm sure the 275/70 would fit also after taking some measurements, however it would be very tight and we're only talking about 1/3" bigger in both directions vs. the E rated 265/70. Not sure risking fitment issues is worth such a small increase in size, also the 275 only comes in the E rating so it limits my options there. I will check out those Falken wild peaks also.

 

[olyelr]

I have those falkens on my truck in a 35/12.5/17 and they have been great. Also had them on my wifes last ‘16 denali in a 285/45/22 and they were phenomenal as well.

 

[MikeK1981]

I have those falkens on my truck in a 35/12.5/17 and they have been great. Also had them on my wifes last ‘16 denali in a 285/45/22 and they were phenomenal as well.

Cool, thanks