Sorry I missed it. Why were you looking to get a 33" or 35" tire again? If it's fuel economy, you aren't going to gain any. You don't need a lift with 33" tires and maybe not even with 35's. 255/85/16's are 33". 235/85/16's are 31" or so. You can't base the overall diameter of a tire just on the size. The brand, tread pattern, etc. will ultimately vary from tire to tire within an inch or so. After 20k miles, a 33" tire won't be 33" anymore.

 

reading this thread makes me understand why people own guns

 

Mainly for the look. I think that larger tires look so much better on the 2500...

The truck is a 4x4. I read somewhere that a 4x4 is generally 2-3" taller
than a 2WD... Does this mean that, because of that, larger tires can be
used with a 4x4 than with a 2WD, keeping everything else stock?

You mentioned that 255/85R16s are 33". However, as I said before,
the truck has the 17" stock alluminum wheels, so it has to use R17 tires.
I was advised that the options I have for it are 285/70R17s and 305/65R17s,
hence the comments I made in my previous post.
Getting Pro Comp X AT tires in those two sizes, as I said, I stood to gain
just about 1" in overall diameter instead of the 2" gain mistakenly assumed
by most people who do not actually measure them, but erroneously
consider the stock ones to be 31" and the 285/70s and 305/65s to be 33"...

So, the bottom line for me is that if there is an available good quality tire
that is at least two full inches taller than stock (the stock ones for the 2500
are 265/70R17, and are exactly 31.60" tall) that can be used with a stock
2500 SLT 4x4... I would go for it right away as soon as I get the truck.
Otherwise, getting rid of the new stock tires in favor of ones less than
2" taller doesn't seem to be worth it to me.

As said before, increased tire width is not important to me... The stock
265/70R17 are 10.40" wide. I remember reading that the wider the tires
are, the more the fuel consumption. Actually, with taller tires (say, 2" taller
and keeping the width more or less the same), if their weight is not much
greater than the stock ones and there is no towing/hauling of heavy loads,
fuel economy does actually improve, due to the lower RPM at highway
speeds, which makes it an added benefit (for the type of driving I'll be
doing anyway).

Thanks...

 

After lunch I was getting out of my usual eating joint and...
lo and behold! guess what?? There's a guy right there getting
out of his Ram 2500 (a brand new Big Horn, by the way, with
what looked like a pretty high lift job and pretty big wheels...)

So I thought, "this is bread from heaven..." and walked straight
up to the guy and talked to him.

He said he's a mechanic and that he just sold a 2500 4x4 on
which he ran (on straight stock) 295/70R17s for years with no
problems whatsoever, and that I might even be able to run
305/70R17s that way...

I just computed those figures and they are 33.25x11.60x17
and 33.80x12.40x17 respectively...

So what do you guys think of it... does anybody here run either
tires on a stock 2500 4x4 (with no leveling kit)?

295s should work... but maybe 305/70 is pushing it a little too
much... (because of the tire being tall and at the same time
thick, therefore more likely to cause brushing during turns...)

I'd really appreciate hearing from those who have been using
either of those for an extended period of time on a stock truck
(not using any type of kits)...

Also, would it be feasible to use something like 265/80R17
(translating to 33.70x10.40) and/or 245/85R17 (33.40x9.60)
on a 2500 4x4? I haven't seen this type of usage mentioned
anywhere, but are these tires available and would they be
according to Dodge Ram specs? I'm totally ignorant of this topic
(I admit it) and not afraid to ask questions at the risk of being
ridiculed (that's how I can learn), but it seems to me that, if yes,
these taller and thinner tires would be even more adequate for
my purposes... Again, I won't tow or haul heavy payloads, and
my purpose for installing taller tires is for the look of it, with the
added advantage of perhaps standing an inch or two taller in
traffic and getting a bit more fuel economy (lower RPM at
highway speeds). This with a cummins 5.9 and axle ratio 3.73...

Thanks so much in advance...

Charles

BTW, I'm going for the SLT QC instead of the MegaCab... The MC
is a wonderful beast, but I just won't spend all those extra thousands
$$$! just to get a few extra inches of space...

 

If you are looking to get better mileage, you will want to go with the 4.10 rear end. Adding the larger tires to the lower gearing will make the engine see the same torque needed to rotate the tires. This is especially evident with city driving. The only way you would get better mileage with the 3.73's and big tires is all highway driving with no load!

 

I have not read all of the posts but I figured that I would throw my 2 cents in. Thr one and only reason for me getting my 06 CTD was for the CTD. I am NOT a Dodge man I am a reliability man. I felt that the CTD had proven itself better than the Duramax when I ordered in April of 06. I bought the truck for the reliability of the motor, and the trans issue I solved with the 6 speed manual transmission. I had a 01 Dodge Ram 1500 before this one and it served me ok but went through front brakes like it went through fuel. The transmission was going out and I had always properly cared for it with oil changes and such since I purchased it. I have not had any real trouble with my CTD at all. I thought I had a few issues a while back but a trip to the dealer and that was taken care of. I am still getting used to the CTD as it is my first diesel ever. I will not go back to gas even in a car if possible. The power and capability of these motors is unbelievable to say the least. I am currently looking for a 4bt Cummins to drop in a S-10 or CJ-7 for a daily driver. If I had to go back and order a new truck again the only thing I would change is that I would get the Megacab and stretch it for the long bed. Other than that I would order the exact same truck that I currently have. I hope that you find what you are looking for and if it turns out to be a CTD then there is a vast array of knowledge on here that will help you when you want to mod it or just want better fuel economy.

 

If you are buying a new truck, go with the 5.9. Every cummins has had its own problems when introduced. The 12v had the bad tranny (as with all Dodges at that time) and kdp which ruined my first cummins cause I didn't know about it at the time. Next came the 24v with the fuel pump issues and the dreaded "53" block, which I have never understood why it was bad. Then the new common rail that had low fuel rail pressures in the first two years, or so I was told by one of my buddies when I looked at one. Both of my diesels are fine, the 96 is great the engine is built for high horses, but I don't hot-dog it all the time. The engine has about 120,000 on it, and it has not had an easy life cause I pull it every chance I get. My 24v is awesome, I put it through way more hell than the 12v. I have ran that truck into the ground and back out again. I will tell you that if it were me, I would stick with the tried and true 5.9. Screw all that emmissions crap, it is all extra weight and power robbing equipment.