Opinions/experiences, 2" level tire size

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.

olyelr

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Posts
1,645
Reaction score
776
Location
Elk Rapids, MI
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
 
OP
OP
M

MikeK1981

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2021
Posts
32
Reaction score
21
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

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Posts
1,645
Reaction score
776
Location
Elk Rapids, MI
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?
 
OP
OP
M

MikeK1981

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2021
Posts
32
Reaction score
21
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

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Posts
1,645
Reaction score
776
Location
Elk Rapids, MI
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.
 
OP
OP
M

MikeK1981

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2021
Posts
32
Reaction score
21
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

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 26, 2019
Posts
309
Reaction score
330
Location
MAINE
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!
 
OP
OP
M

MikeK1981

Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2021
Posts
32
Reaction score
21
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

Full Access Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Posts
1,645
Reaction score
776
Location
Elk Rapids, MI
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.
 
Top