Skinny or Wide ?

[SCSL]

Far be it from me to start any controversy or debate on the board...

But Thor's post brought up another lively topic for international debate: which is the better choice for off-road? Skinny tires? Or wide tires?

The traditional argument is that skinny tires put more pressure on ground, letting you tear thru the loose dirt & muck and find harder ground upon which to get traction. Further, this argument goes, most of what you get contact-patch wide when airing down is north-south, not lateral.

The traditional counterpoint is that a wider tire lets gives increased "flotation" in mud & sand. I know nothing about sand so would buy this argument, but I haven't seen too many rigs "float" over mud... Further, the counterpoint is that wider tires provide better lateral traction on rocks.

Again, some "cultural" difference here. Clearly those in the UK prefer skinnier tires. In the states, it's rare to see a skinny tire on anything but a Rover or a Zuk. Though this was not always the case... check out vintage and ex-military jeeps... The Stateside mud boggers go with fat Swampers (13.50+), while their UK counterparts go with skinnies,,, what we over here would call "pizza cutters". Not sure what goes on down in Oz.

I myself have mixed feelings on the issue. Or does it depend on terrain? Or does terrain not matter and you are better off digging... or "floating"... or whatever it is your preference does better than the other guy's.

Discuss, debate, and otherwise pontificate.

[Disco Mike]

I run 265's, not a real wide tire but fits the truck well and gives me all the traction I could ever want, I also get a better ride from a wider tire then most people get from a narrow tire.
Mike

[LR Max]

Another thought on the subject:

http://www.expeditionswest.com/resea...tion_rev1.html

Overall, skinny tires have worked very good on my 109 and I have never had skinny tires being my limiting factor (the limiting factor is always...the fact that is a 109).

Here is why I don't like wide tires: First off, all the god damn jeep guys tell me "I gotta have them". Man, piss off. They drive a god damn jeep and that right there is the first reason to hate them. Second, they stick out from the side of the rig and sling mud up everywhere. This does have its advantages but for the most part I can usually compensate with my narrow track. Third off, the wider tires seem to cause more breakage. I am lazy enough as it is I don't need anymore crap blowing up.

[KevinNY]

Define skinny and wide? Most jeep guys consider 10.5's a "pizza cutter" I guess they have never seen a 7.50x16? Stateside I'd call under 11" skinny I guess.

[gordo]

My brother in law runs 33 x 13.50 TSLs on his RRC. I run 34 x 10.50s LTBs on mine. Both tires seem to perform very similar in most conditions. The argument Ive always heard is that skinny tires work better on heavier vehicles where the weight of the truck can push down through mud to the harder ground underneath and fat tires work better on lighter vehicles to help them get traction in mud they might not sink through. Ive also always heard that fat tires work better in sand. I have experience in both sand and mud, and with sand my experience is momentum is the key with any mud tire! For sand an AT is probably a better choice. Gordo.

[01001010]

I tend to go with what I see on Agricultural and Military vehicles. Most of the vehicles that see mud will normally have a tall skinny tire. A wider LARGE tire will usualy require lots of power; something a Rover does't have nor does its weight compliment. Also, a skinny tire is more aero & hydro dynamic, which is good for road use.

Several things I've noticed about large military cargo and recovery vehicles...
1. They almost always have more than 4 wheels (those that have wheels and not tracks
2. They are tall and very wide and tucked into the vehicle - not only because these vehicles carry other trucks that are sometimes larger than themselves - and if they are seen from a frontal point of view, the width of both tires on each side will be a large percantege of the overall vehicle width.

So I guess it does depend what scale you're working on obviously, but in regards to Rovers, my vote goes for the slimmer tire.

[LR Max]

Watch out. Just because the military uses it, doesn't mean its always better.

In the past, I have gone head to head with jeeps equiped with wide tires, while I have my 109 with skinny tires. I run-of-the-mill mud, my skinny tires work better. Many times I have able to cruise through in 2wd while they struggle with high revs and 4wd. I can put it in 1st, 2wd, a little bit of throttle and she rolls right on through. Sometimes I'll go with "precautionary 4wd" and once again, no issues and the wide tire guys are having to throttle out. BTW, we all run BFG MTs. They are all 12.50 wide and I am 235/85/16.

Most places were "floatation" would have the advantage, would only be in a super light rig. Those mud holes are always super deep and are a trap. Unless you've got 52" tires, you are coming outta there on the end of a rope.

Now, my definition of wide tire is 12.50" and greater. My definition of skinny tire is 10.50" and less, but mostly in the 9.5~9" range.

[Thor]

Taken to the extreme... the icelandic vehicles have 18 inch wide tires because they have to stay on top of the snow... there may not be a bottom to speak of.

http://www.icelandrovers.is/useful_information

They seem to use 38 to 44 inch.

I consider my 285's fairly narrow (11.2") realative to their height (33) and I've been very happy with their performance so far.

My last off road trip was in 6" of wet snow, down hill with side slopes. My friend with 33x12.5 MT on his leaf sprund jeep seemed to have his hands full keeping the headlights pointing the right way. Although he did get through.

So many of our tires are not that different... ie 10" to 13". How much change is enough to call wide/skinny? Then you also have to judge how much rubber is actually on the road/trail, AT will have more rubber than an MT of the same size until the lugs are fully sunken in.

I tend toward the narrow end of it for my stock quarter panels and the lateral stability I percieve.

Sorry.... lost my cohesive story a while ago... hurts to much to delete.

[p76rangie]

You need to define wide and skinny. The classic Rangie came out with 205 tyres as STD. Therefore 255's are wide. Unless you are doing a lot of fresh snow or sand, I reckon that 255's to 10.5 inches a plenty wide enough. Wider tyres are harder to fit, drag power out of the car and get worse fuel economy.

[Disco]

There obviously always going to be two separate camps regarding this question. Personally I hate skinny tires, and run 295x60x15 (11.5" tread width and 255x70x16 (10.2" tread width), respectively on both my trucks and I can't wait for the 255's to wear out before going wider.

[SCSL]

Originally Posted by KevinNY

Define skinny and wide? Stateside I'd call under 11" skinny I guess.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by p76rangie

You need to define wide and skinny. The classic Rangie came out with 205 tyres as STD. Therefore 255's are wide. Unless you are doing a lot of fresh snow or sand, I reckon that 255's to 10.5 inches a plenty wide enough. Wider tyres are harder to fit, drag power out of the car and get worse fuel economy.

This is illustrative. Stateside, most would consider a 255/85 to be skinny. You see 'em on DIs, but very rarely on DIIs. Points on power-drag & fuel economy are spot-on, but we're talking off-road performance. To dig or to float?

Another question is stability, or width-of-stance. As rigs grow taller, we tend to offset tires by changing from factory wheel backspacing. Does an extra inch or two in read width compliment that aim?

Clearly American wheelers (most of which drive rigs other than LR) prefer wider tires. But is this for the best? (scratches head, awaits more feedback)

[300bhp/ton]

This is a good debate

But I think there are more factors too it though.

Yeah in the UK wide tyres are not the norm. But this is for many reasons. Partly because vehicles simply didn't come with wide tyres as standard and second that narrow tyres can perform very well on our terrain.

Also in the UK you can not have the tyres exceeding the body work of the vehicle, it is illegal. So wide tyres would mean really wide flares.

Also many over here off road in competitions, these usually involve driving thru narrow gates (cains) over a course. Wide tyres make the vehicle wider and will reduce turning radius. So they are not always beneficial.

A Land Rover D90 is almost idential to a YJ in terms of dimensions, but a kitted out competition vehcile over here would probably be running 205 or 225 width tyres. And on a trial would run rings around a Jeep with 12.50" tyres simply on being able to turn tighter and be more nimble.

Terrain also plays a big part in it. And it's true narrow tyres do have greater pressure per square inch over wide tyres.

Farm sprayers are a good example, some farmers run very narrow wheels on the sprayer:


These apply high pressure and kill the crop where they run but they only affect a small area.

Where as some farmers opt for wide tyres:


The wider tyres affect a larger area but due to less pressure they usually don't kill any crop due to driving over it. They float.

Off roading is the same, sometimes a tyre which floats will give better traction stability, yet at other times a narrow tyre which can cut thru the top layer will find more grip.

On certain terrain a wider tyre will always be the better bet. Yet at other times a narrow type will be best.

Do you ever see swamp buggies with wide tyres? Nope because they want minimal drag and don't want to float, they want to cut thru the water and find grip. A wider tyre would prevent this.



Personally I think wider tyres look the muts nuts

And I choose to run what is generally not a socailly accpeted size of tyre over here. Most think I'm mad but I simply don't care.

However the large tyres have blunted performance, reduced turning circle, increased mass/weight onthe hubs and have more clearance issues on the body work when under articulation.

But they look bad ass, grip like a mofo and improve the ground clearance espcially under the diffs.

[p76rangie]

I have never really followed this skinny and wide argument. They both have things they are good and bad at. Soft ground that you want to float over, use wide tyres. This includes sand, deep snow, and grazing land (paddocks). If you want to dig, like on hard clay and most solid wet tracks, use narrow tyres. Narrow tyres tend to have better sideways grip. At low tyre pressures, wide tyres can give less traction as they tend to cave in up the centre of the tread.
Wide tyres on wet roads will tend to aquaplane, but give excellent grip on dry roads.
Even wide tyres on sand can be worse than a bigger narrower tyre. The sand builds up too much in front of a wide tyre. This sucks a lot more power out of the car and cause it to get bogged.

So it is not which is the best width tyre, it is the best width for a given circumstance. On a relatively light Rangie Classic I find around 10 to 10.5 inches a good alround size. If I lived in another area, I might find another size better.

It is like talking about tread patterns. I run Simex JT2's off road and BFG MTs on road. But this would not suit many people.

[pickuprover]

Skinny..... I drive a 109 with armstrong steering... I am currently running 235's and the next set will be 225's. The wider the tire, the harder the turn at slow speeds, and when off-roading all day, it might mean the differnce of having some arms left, and not...

As for the dig down to the solid stuff, or float over... that is entirely personal preference and vehicle set up... the jeeps can do the floatation due to having more power, as well as the disco's. The series truck do not have that, so digging down is the best option (one that I prefer as it does less damage to the trail....)

my 2 cents....

[SCSL]

Originally Posted by 300bhp/ton

Also in the UK you can not have the tyres exceeding the body work of the vehicle, it is illegal. So wide tyres would mean really wide flares.

I'm not sure my rig would pass MoT in it's current state...........
Do they have rules on sawzall abuse and electrical disarray?

I suppose if I lived in the UK I would have to get a 110 to trailer Molly...