I just noticed my factory Michelin LTX A/S E's only have a 3,195 weight rating. BFG AT's D's has the same rating at 3,195, so are they both equal hauling ratings? What is the difference between D&E?

 

Were the two tires you compared the same size??

Larger tires will usually have a higher weight rating, although they may have a lower load range.

For instance, a 265-75-16 LR-D will have a weight rating close to, or higher than, a 235-85-16 LR-E.

The load range is replacing the old mis-leading PLY-rating that used to be in use.

Each letter represents two ply rating, with LR-A being two ply rating, LR-B = four ply rating, LR-C = six ply rating, D=8, E=10, F=12, G=14, H=16, etc.

The old ply-rating designations caused tire dealers a lot of grief from mis-understanding customers that would buy a ten ply rating tire, then get home and read the fine print on the sidewall that says "tread = four ply -- sidewall = two ply.

Here they would come back to the shop, just a raring, claiming they had been lied to.

We still have a few old wooden-headed farmers that actually believe the old tires had the actual amount of plies that they were rated at, when, in fact, they never did.

 

The old rating with the alphabet is being phased out for the service number. Like 120, 121 etc..... So if your truck came with a service rating tire of 121 stay with that number or go higher.

MikeyB

 

Yeah I am comparing a 265 to a 285 tire. I just realized the E rated tires hold 80psi and the D's hold 65psi. I guess I am just grabbing at straws I want to buy 285's BFG A/T’s but they don't make it in an E. I am pulling my 40' goose with 20-5x6 round bales so I know I need the heavy tire.

 

Load Range is different than Load index (maximum load), which is they're both spec'd. Load range seems to take into account side deflection for handling heavy loads. Big load range D BFG ATs can have a similar load index (max load capability) as a smaller load range E tire, but seem to much more prone to 'death wobble' as they don't seem to have the same stiffness for ahndling heavier loads.

 

..EXACTLY...

 

Ok so it can take the weight but will not be as stiff as the E. I appreciate the help on this guys.

 

bfg now makesa the 285/75 r16 load range E. TireRack had the new ones.
Jim

 

Yeah but my 06 has 17" wheels....


I am now thinking about the Nitto Terra Grappler AT b/c I can get them in a E with a load range of 3,750lbs. I just hope they last.

 

I to am looking at the 285/70/17's in the BFG and was wondering the same thing pretty much except that I really want to know how good the BFG's are in the Sand. I will be taking the Truck out to the outer banks here in NC and the stock Michelins are worthless in the sand????

 

They will be fine in the sand, you don't need an aggressive tread in sand. The BFG's will do better b/c they will be wider in the 285/70/17.

 

Thanks!! I talked to a guy yesterday evening that said that his 285/75/16, that looked new, had 35,000 miles on them and his went great in the sand!! I will be buying some real soon so that I can make at least 2 trips before Davis Island closes down for the winter!

 

My experience with BFG's is limited to the OEM's on my Chevy half ton. They were mediocre for adhesion but wore fairly well. At about 120,000 km with lots of tread left, they, however, began to fail internally. Cracks which were totally invisible outside caused the tires to lose more and more air. My tire store guys said this was fairly common. These tires were on a '94 and much has probably changed since then. Has anyone experienced this on newer BFG's?

 

While the BFG may be plagued with internal cracks, the Michelins, all of them, are notorious for dry-cracking, both tread and sidewall, when about two years old.

 

My real old BFG got alittle rubber cracking at the edge of the steelbelt . The newer ones with the rips on the side wall arent cracking at all 2 of my new style are pretty worn out no cracks or steel showing.

Nitto Grabblers dont even compare to BFGs . Nittos dont wear very long. I will never own them again