Just for looks - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > General Technical Discussions > Tires & Wheels > Just for looks

Stainless Steel Door Hinge PinsPoly Door Hinge BushingsSave at JeepHut on Smittybilt Soft tops

Reply
Unread 05-11-2013, 11:10 AM   #1
Shazzzzzam
Registered User
2002 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: St Catharines, Ontario
Posts: 12
Just for looks

I have an 02 liberty that I just lifted , looking to put a tire on that's more aggressive but it's strictly for look not for performance , any recommendations ? Tire size is 245 75 16
Thanks

Shazzzzzam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2013, 11:15 AM   #2
CanaanTSA5
Member
 
CanaanTSA5's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Manchester, New Hampshire
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazzzzzam View Post
I have an 02 liberty that I just lifted , looking to put a tire on that's more aggressive but it's strictly for look not for performance , any recommendations ? Tire size is 245 75 16
Thanks
Is this going a "just for looks" budget as well? What are you looking to spend?
__________________
1998 ZJ 4.0 Stock 225/75R15 General Grabber AT2
181,000mi Strong
CanaanTSA5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2013, 11:53 AM   #3
Shazzzzzam
Registered User
2002 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: St Catharines, Ontario
Posts: 12
Would like to keep it under 1000
Shazzzzzam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-11-2013, 01:53 PM   #4
CanaanTSA5
Member
 
CanaanTSA5's Avatar
1998 ZJ 
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Manchester, New Hampshire
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shazzzzzam View Post
Would like to keep it under 1000
http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/tire-...m/tire-details

http://www.bfgoodrichtires.com/tire-...2/tire-details

http://www.generaltire.com/tires/lig...uv/grabber-at2

http://www.generaltire.com/tires/lig...er-suv/grabber

Like any of those?
__________________
1998 ZJ 4.0 Stock 225/75R15 General Grabber AT2
181,000mi Strong
CanaanTSA5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-12-2013, 06:33 AM   #5
mschi772
Web Wheeler
 
mschi772's Avatar
1997 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 1,991
Check out Treadwright. If you don't care about performance/traction, they might have something you like in your budget. That's not to say their tires perform poorly--when used for their intended applications, Treadwright's tires can be quite good.

How aggressive do you want it to be? How little do you care about your traction, ability to stop/accelerate, etc? If you're OK with crappier mpg, more road noise, and less than stellar street (usually especially rain) performance, just look into MT tires and pick the ones you think are aggressive enough.

BFG Rugged Terrain LOOKS rather aggressive in my opinion without actually sacrificing its road manners.

General Grabber AT2 looks aggressive (for its class like the Rug Ter) and behaves well in all conditions for a good price.

Goodyear Duratracs are a bit of an AT-MT hybrid that some consider as being aggressive-looking that still behave well in all conditions.
mschi772 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-14-2013, 01:09 AM   #6
karlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,535
Discoverer ST MAXX is one of best looking ATs. imho. I also heard good reviews about it.
karlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-14-2013, 10:20 AM   #7
tyvanwie
Registered User
1998 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Boone, North Carolina
Posts: 9,529
I think my duratracs look fairly aggressive.



Sent from my iForum using JeepPhone
__________________
[SIZE="4"][B][COLOR="Red"][URL="http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f22/tys-tj-1475530/#post14926343"]MY BUILD THREAD[/URL][/COLOR][/B][/SIZE]
[SIZE="4"][B][URL="http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f374/tyvanwies-log-transformation-1489190/"]MY FITNESS LOG/TRANSFORMATION[/URL][/B][/SIZE]
[SIZE="4"][B][URL="http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f127/jk-tj-parts-1525039/"]JK AND TJ PARTS FOR SALE[/URL][/B][/SIZE]

I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about. I think...
tyvanwie is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-15-2013, 08:23 AM   #8
Shazzzzzam
Registered User
2002 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: St Catharines, Ontario
Posts: 12
Thanks for all the info , I bought dura tracs, and just in case anyone is looking to purchase tires I got a great deal there is a corporate event on right now at good year dealer beat the local tire place by150 bucks
Shazzzzzam is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-16-2013, 12:02 AM   #9
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Longview, WA
Posts: 3,483
I was going to recommend Cooper AT3 because good looks, quiet, good gas mileage, funtionally very good, and bargain price. More than just good looks.

I see you bought Duratracs. Great tire. Normally expensive, but you got a deal. Won't be as quiet, nor as good gas mileage, but is a great tire and highly functional. More than just good looks.

You got the real deal. You ought to be able to drive just about anywhere now.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-17-2013, 03:26 AM   #10
ADragg
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charley3 View Post
I was going to recommend Cooper AT3 because good looks, quiet, good gas mileage, funtionally very good, and bargain price. More than just good looks.

I see you bought Duratracs. Great tire. Normally expensive, but you got a deal. Won't be as quiet, nor as good gas mileage, but is a great tire and highly functional. More than just good looks.

You got the real deal. You ought to be able to drive just about anywhere now.
Do you know how much the AT3 weighs? Say in a 265/70/17 size? The AT3 and Duratrac are two tires I'm considering quite a bit and the C-rated Duratrac is very light in that size, at 44 pounds. I don't know how much the AT3 weighs but I'd be surprised if it was less as the Duratracs are known for being light and save on gas mileage because of it.
ADragg is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-17-2013, 04:49 AM   #11
mschi772
Web Wheeler
 
mschi772's Avatar
1997 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADragg View Post
Do you know how much the AT3 weighs? Say in a 265/70/17 size? The AT3 and Duratrac are two tires I'm considering quite a bit and the C-rated Duratrac is very light in that size, at 44 pounds. I don't know how much the AT3 weighs but I'd be surprised if it was less as the Duratracs are known for being light and save on gas mileage because of it.
Tread pattern/rolling resistance is WAY more important to saving gas than weight. I think there is no way that these two tires of the same size could differ so much in weight as to make the Duratracs more fuel efficient. I suppose it could be possible that the Duratracs could miraculously get better MPG, but I sure as heck wouldn't count on it.
mschi772 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-18-2013, 12:26 AM   #12
ADragg
Registered User
2003 WJ 
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschi772 View Post
Tread pattern/rolling resistance is WAY more important to saving gas than weight. I think there is no way that these two tires of the same size could differ so much in weight as to make the Duratracs more fuel efficient. I suppose it could be possible that the Duratracs could miraculously get better MPG, but I sure as heck wouldn't count on it.
Hmm... I haven't done much research on it but I would think weight would make much more of a difference. I wouldn't argue it if I saw some proof or evidence, and I don't claim to know a bunch about it, but I just don't see how rolling resistance could make such a drastic difference between tires in the same class. I'm not sure how to tell what characteristics of a tire give it potentially better rolling resistance and how you can quantify it, if that's even possible. I know that generally more aggressive tires are supposed to have more rolling resistance but I've also heard people say that they get better gas mileage with their BFG KM2's than they did with their BFG A/T's and speculated that the more void in the tread pattern or the more "knobby" a tire is, the less friction it should have with less rubber actually contacting the ground. I'm not sure I buy that but I just don't know.

I do know that weight can make a big difference and I've always heard that every pound of weight at the wheels is equivalent to 10 pounds of weight in cargo. I don't know how rolling resistance (which I honestly don't know much about) could be way more important for gas mileage than weight of wheels and tires, but again, I wouldn't argue it if I saw some legit evidence and understood more about what rolling resistance actually is and how you can quantify it or predict it in tires. I do know that weight is important and is something I can clearly quantify and take into consideration. But if rolling resistance is really WAY more important, then I'd like to know more about that!
ADragg is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-18-2013, 07:38 AM   #13
mschi772
Web Wheeler
 
mschi772's Avatar
1997 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 1,991
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADragg View Post
Hmm... I haven't done much research on it but I would think weight would make much more of a difference. I wouldn't argue it if I saw some proof or evidence, and I don't claim to know a bunch about it, but I just don't see how rolling resistance could make such a drastic difference between tires in the same class. I'm not sure how to tell what characteristics of a tire give it potentially better rolling resistance and how you can quantify it, if that's even possible. I know that generally more aggressive tires are supposed to have more rolling resistance but I've also heard people say that they get better gas mileage with their BFG KM2's than they did with their BFG A/T's and speculated that the more void in the tread pattern or the more "knobby" a tire is, the less friction it should have with less rubber actually contacting the ground. I'm not sure I buy that but I just don't know.

I do know that weight can make a big difference and I've always heard that every pound of weight at the wheels is equivalent to 10 pounds of weight in cargo. I don't know how rolling resistance (which I honestly don't know much about) could be way more important for gas mileage than weight of wheels and tires, but again, I wouldn't argue it if I saw some legit evidence and understood more about what rolling resistance actually is and how you can quantify it or predict it in tires. I do know that weight is important and is something I can clearly quantify and take into consideration. But if rolling resistance is really WAY more important, then I'd like to know more about that!
That 10:1 ratio is WAY too much, and I wish it wouldn't get spread around so much. It's more like 2:1. See this article for a highly educational read http://hpwizard.com/rotational-inertia.html

Rolling resistance is very complicated, but Wikipedia has a decent list that might give you a little of a gist of what it's all about. Contact patch (determined by the tire's size), tread pattern and rubber compound(determined, obviously, by tire model) are big contributors. Tire size and, to a lesser extent, tread patter also affect a tire's aerodynamic drag.

Weight, rolling resistance, and size as it relates to aerodynamic drag (tires have to cut through the air, too) are all attributes that determine how a given tire will affect your efficiency. Since you're already limited to a given size range and tire type, I wouldn't stress too much about these sorts of things though. I'd focus primarily on the tire's performance providing traction--that's far more important that what little variation in efficiency you might find.
mschi772 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-23-2013, 04:56 PM   #14
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Longview, WA
Posts: 3,483
Rotating mass has to over come a lot of inertia to speed up or slow down. So it matters a lot.

However, I doubt a Duratrac is lighter than a Cooper AT3. If anything, the AT3 is probably lighter. Unfortuneately I can't find any info about AT3 weight. So we can only guess.
My local tire store sells Duratrac and Cooper AT3. I suppose I could bring a scale and weigh them. Any of you could do the same. Any volunteers? I already went to tire store and photographed new version Grabber AT2 for a couple guys in another thread. If I go back again with scale, the tire store guys will think I'm nuts.
Tread pattern, compound, and amount of sipes affect rolling resistance. Rolling resistance affects gas mileage. Cooper AT3 is less knobby tread and has silica in tread compound - both decrease rolling resistance.

I don't think tire aerodynamics matters much, but to whatever extent it matters, the AT3 obviously has less aerodynamic drag than Duratrac. Look at the treads.

Common sense tells me a Cooper AT3 will get better gas mileage, be quieter, and smoother riding.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 05-23-2013, 06:03 PM   #15
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Longview, WA
Posts: 3,483
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschi772 View Post
Tread pattern/rolling resistance is WAY more important to saving gas than weight.
Usually heavier tires also have more rolling resistance too.
Examples are MTs in any load rating; and load D, and especially load E, in any tread. An MT in load E has all things against it for gas mileage.
So usually a tire that is bad at one, is bad at the other, but there could exceptions where a tire is only bad at one of those, but not the other.

Duratrac is light per size and load rating, but I'd bet has higher rolling resistance than any typical AT tread tire.

Also, I doubt Duratrac is lighter than typical AT tires.

The Duratrac is lighter than any MT, and has less rolling resistance than any MT. That's where Duratrac shines, IMO.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote




Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.