Which would you choose

[SteveC]

If you had a choice what would you choose or prefer: Im about to buy a set of new mud tyres and they much the same price:

BFG KM2
or
MT MTZ
or
"suggestion"

Steve

[Steve F]

I'm going to try the KM2 next time I think, not sure if that helps your decision though. In saying that the MT MTZ does seems like a nice tyre but I think the KM2 is a little more aggressive.

Cheers
Steve

[jeep_jk112]

I recall hunty saying he has used both and went straight back to the km2's
Imo its personal preference, they both seem like great tyres
If the questions was about there a/ts, micky T's all the way!

[reyzor]

Ive never tried the km2. But I loved my mtz's. Jack of all trades kinda tire. They did get a bit noisy towards the end of my time with them......

[Hunty]

IMHO
The new MTZ looks like the KM2 - I'm guessing based solely on looks as I haven't tried the new MTZ's yet (I did have a set of last years MTZ's) is that they would perform at a very similar (Awesome) level, both these tyres are recommended by most hard core 4x4ers and are generally touted as the kings of off road muddies that still have good sealed road behaviour :)....... I know some of you Hard core guys will be demanding Claws but I don't care LoL I did say at the start IMHO LoL cheers Hunty

[Cpage66]

Wanting someone besides Jacko to try the Federal Couragias...might get a set of those for the HEEP next time. If not, the good ol' Mudstars again...

[Steve F]

I was also looking at the Federal Couragias as well, also looking at what is available in a 35" for a 17" rim as I'm thinking of going to 17's (so I can run the 330mm/13" Falcon discs, up from the 300mm I run now)

Cheers
Steve

[Cpage66]

Gotta' get mine finished so I can go up to a 35"...might be looking at the Silverstones then...they've got a fairly decent 35 inch range and George can get them.

[reyzor]

not sure if youre interested but im loving my pro comps (x-treme MT)..........awsome off road (rocks, mud) havent given it a go in the clayish stuff yet though, but the did go better then my MTZ's in sand....... on road is good, not great but its a MT.....

[glend]

I love my Cooper STTs, they went great on the Cape last year. I considered the KM2s but the lack of block sipes made me think they would be worse in the wet on the tarmac.

[reyzor]

glend, any chipping of the tire yet? ive heard (but cant speak from personal experience) that they chip very easily.......

dont coopers and mickey T come out of the same factory?

[Miraz]

I love my Cooper STTs, they went great on the Cape last year. I considered the KM2s but the lack of block sipes made me think they would be worse in the wet on the tarmac.

The KM2's are fantastic in the wet on the road...much better than the All terrain's which doesn't seem to make much sense.

[AussieCJ7]

I have had good run out of 2 sets of Goodyear MTR's espec for the sandstone and shale rock we have around Sydney

[Wolfe]

Yes I agree with Dave (Irwin) I'm a fan of the Goodyear MTR's, the Maxxis creepy crawlers are good also, don't know if they make them in the size your after.

[glend]

Reyzor, no chipping of the lugs evident after the Cape trip, and the development road would be the place to get them. With the Cooper's (and probably most of them) the air pressure you run is critical - and this is mostly rock/gravel/dirt/sand corrugations. I was down to 25psi on the Cape and never had them above 32psi (cold) on the highway getting there - that was the recommendation from the tyre dealer.

[SteveC]

Thanks guys for the feedback. Excellent !
I did have the KM2 before but sold them, as needed some cash but I'm now able to afford a second set to fit a new set of wheels I bought months ago, which are sitting in the shed staring at me... Though still have a budget restraint!
I did like the KM2 as they performed very well and surprisingly well as Miraz stated on the tar. Though they have been the only mud tyres I have used) And they were quiet once you hit 90k+.
I was not aware of new MT's though as Hunty mentions, so I'll have to look in to them.

The MT's seem to sell a little under the KM2 prices and there is the Pro-comps that has been mentioned o be considered. Its all driving my head in,,,,.

I looked at the Federals too SteveF but the write ups seem to bag them quite a bit compared to many of the main stream ones.

Unlike most of you guys, I'm just after 265/70/17's as not sure I can fit larger without risk (or major upgrades) to the poor old WG.

Any suggestion on good (read cheap) retailers??

[Wooders]

My ProComp M/T are actually over 10 years old (Not sure that's a good thing ;)) they are great on wet/dry roads, and do very well on rock. Surprisingly I think they are very/below average in the mud. So I think for sa lot of people they are a good idea, but from memory they are a little more expensive (or they used to be).
Between BFG KM2, MTom MTZ or GY MT/R I think they are each an excellent tyre each with more pro's than cons.
Another to consider is the new Kumho M/T - these seem to be getting pretty good feedback.
There an't many BAD tyres out there right now - except BFG A/T (which I hate with a passion).

[Wooders]

Any suggestion on good (read cheap) retailers??
If you know the brand/size you want, harrass Colin for a quote ;)

[miller2908]

I'm running KM2's on my XJ no probs so far pulls up straight and has been good in the wet and not too noisey

Mick

[SteveC]

OK
I think the consensus of KM2 wins and I suppose, the fact that I had no trouble with them before, has led me to ordering a set of 4 which will be ready for mounting tomorrow. I think I got a good price...
BTW
I'll need a spare second hand tyre to fit on my 5th spare wheel.
If any one has an unwanted "usable" tyre in the JK size of 245/75/17 (which is the same diameter as the 265/70/17) I'm getting, Please let me know?
Steve

ps Thanks to EVERYONE for their input..

[SteveC]

Guys - see if you can answer this
My every day tyres Cooper ATR3 are 245/70/17, giving me actually 200 mm of surface tread that touches the tar
My new (yipee, don't tell the wife) are 265/70/17 and they also give just 200 mm of surface tread that touches the tar but are 265 at the side wall. What's with mud tyres having less surface?
Is that normal? If I had known I'd go to 285 wide...

[Dieselcon]

They should be 265mm in width and the height of 70% of 265mm.
Mmmmm. Did I read your post wrong?

[SteveC]

They should be 265mm in width and the height of 70% of 265mm.
Mmmmm. Did I read your post wrong?
You read right. The design of the KM2's gives less contact area it appears. They seem to have a more "rounded" edge thus less contact on the road.

[Wooders]

Steve, Where are you finding this contact area specification?
This would very with every different tread pattern, and the more agressive the tread pattern the bigger the voids between the tread blocks. So not surprisingly less rubber touching the grond (for the same size).
Also how is the contact patch measured since this would vary with different rim heights, tyre pressures, individual vehicles weight as well as the brands sidewall specifications - ie all the things that effect tyre bagging out....

[SteveC]

Wooders
Thanks for your input and valid points Dave
I measured across the tread with a tape measure. The At3 measure 200mm as does the KM2's from most outer tread block to other side even though one is 245 and the other 265. Yes the wheel width is 7.5" as opposed to 8" but that would have no affect on my measurements as would inflation unless really low as opposed high. . It looks like mud tyres have less contact area than a AT or H/T would have for the same tyre width dimensions, which I find odd really, well at least for the KM2's.
It would be interesting to know what others know of their tyres. For eg if you have 315mm tyres does that refer to width of the carcass or width of tread??
Any way I'm happy to have got them at a reasonable price after screwing them down a fair bit. I think!

[Paul-JK]

As far as I know the stated tyre width is the carcass width at the widest point of the tyre. I'd assume this this will usually be the side walls, although that could change slightly depending on width of the rims you've got them on and the tyre pressure. I'm guessing it will be measured at a "standard" pressure on "standard" rims but I've got no idea what those standards are. The tread width is always less than the stated tyre width but how much less depends on the tyre design. Can't help with muddies I'm affraid but for the 2 tyres that I've had the measurements were:

GY Wranglers; stated size 245/75/17; tread width 195mm
MT ATZ 4-Rib; stated size 285/70/17; tread width 240mm

[SteveC]

As far as I know the stated tyre width is the carcass width at the widest point of the tyre. I'd assume this this will usually be the side walls, although that could change slightly depending on width of the rims you've got them on and the tyre pressure. I'm guessing it will be measured at a "standard" pressure on "standard" rims but I've got no idea what those standards are. The tread width is always less than the stated tyre width but how much less depends on the tyre design. Can't help with muddies I'm affraid but for the 2 tyres that I've had the measurements were:

GY Wranglers; stated size 245/75/17; tread width 195mm
MT ATZ 4-Rib; stated size 285/70/17; tread width 240mm

Thanks Paul
Your measurements reflect much of what I have thought now. Interesting to see that your 285/70/17 is 240mm while my 265 is 200mm... yet only 20mm spec difference

BTW
If any one can help me, who have put after market wheels. (steelies in particular), how did you cover the front hub nut as in the image attached. The Dynamic wheels I bought don't supply full hubs for Jeep wheels due to the very close face I was told? so I'll need the sort of thing you see on trailers.
I don't want to get dirt inside if I can help it.

Thanks