I too have 285s now and like the height, but can live without the width. Are the 255/85s available in load range D?

I'm also curious how they will change the road feel when cornering and towing as well as the MPGs. Anyone comment on the 255s that has had 285s? BTW, my 285s are the BFG load range Ds now.

Also, it seems availability is limited. And prices reflect that. Darn!

 

Why would you want to go with a LRD when LRE is preferred?

 

Crud... sorry to confuse. I have "E" now, not "D" and want to keep "E" range in 255/85s. I saw some 255/85 in "D"... but not "E".

 

What does 255-85 convert to in inches? 3?x??x16 ??

 

33.3x10

 

BFG MT and Toyo MT are Load range "E" in the 255/85R16

 

Both good tires, but both in the $220+ per tire range... ouch!

 

In the 17" realm the 255/80 is the cheapest tire I can find... by 100-300 bucks a set...

 

I'm running these: http://www.summitracing.com/parts/ICT-RXM-04R/

They're a D, but the load rating is 3,000 lbs per, so at 12,000 lbs gvw that obviously exceeds the rating of the truck itself. I'll see if I can snap a few shots of it later today.

What I've found so far is that these narrower tires with the siping are better snow/ice tires than the 315 Buckshot mudders I had on there previously. Not as good in mud, though.

Pretty much anything with a decent tread pattern on it would be better than the factory Michelins. Those were the most useless tires I've ever had. Downright scary on anything other than perfectly dry pavement, and putting an M+S on the sidewall was a bad joke bordering on false advertising.

 

Yes, I agree 100% with what you say about the OE Michelins - any mud or snow and you are wondering if you can make it. OK for summer use but no good for winter is my feelings.

mariner

 

Scary doesn't even begin to describe it.

 

toyo m55 are also in 255 85 16

 

so are dean sxt mt.