AT vs. MT Opinion

Wrenching and Technical Information

Moderator: Club Officers

User avatar
HintonYota
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:56 pm

AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by HintonYota »

When comparing an at vs an mt just offroad what is the main difference? I know traction in mud, mt are superior, but what about rocks? Wet vs dry rocks and loose rock.
2002 4Runner Sport
User avatar
alk1174
Club President
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Floyd

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by alk1174 »

After having been around this hobby for awhile I have come to the conclusion that the driver and the vehicle setup are far more important than the tire. The big exceptions to that are thick nasty mud and snow a good tire can make a noticeable difference then. In the rocks I don't see aas much difference unless it's a really soft or sticky tire that you wouldn't want to run on the street anyways. For a street driven tire mileage and sidewall strength would by my main concerns and then cost.
User avatar
BadAssEddie
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by BadAssEddie »

I think this is the biggest thing that AT's get put on the bottom shelf for as an offroad tire. Some of the cheaper load range C ATs look like they are at 5 psi at 20 psi.
alk1174 wrote: Mon Sep 11, 2017 6:39 pm sidewall strength
MTs are cooler than ATs but cost more and wear faster. :flipoff2:

Rocks like at Big Dogs, they don't differ in performance as much imo than at other places like Rausch and Harlan that have lots of loose dirt and mud with their rock gardens. I've turned into a Ko2 fanboy because I think they offer the best balance between looks, street tire performance, cost, and offroad performance.
1969 Cadillac Deville 7.7 Big Block
1978 Ford F-150 6.4 FE
1993 Ford Bronco 5.8 Windsor
1994 Ford F-250 7.3 Powerstroke
2016 Ford F-250 6.7 Powerstroke
User avatar
alk1174
Club President
Posts: 1232
Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 5:53 pm
Location: Floyd

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by alk1174 »

I know people dog on the BFGs a lot but my last set of KOs were my first tire to last over 40k miles. Running the KM2s now and they are about to break 40k and should go over 50k. My biggest complaint about either one has been noise and uneven wear. They seem to do great for about 20k and then they start to get loud.
User avatar
Mr.WJ
Website Admin
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:06 pm
Location: Blacksburg/Chesapeake, VA

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by Mr.WJ »

I bought the Falken AT3W's, my opinions on those as follows with 25k on them
Pros:
-Cheap
-Snow Rated
-Wet traction is good
-Performed well on the snow
-Quiet for a AT (You know I'm picky)
-Bought XL version and it mixes it between a C and D load range
-Even wear

Cons:
-Heavy
-Wearing quicker than expected (Estimating 30k tread life of the 55k warranty)
-Did cake with mud until applied some throttle to spin them

Overall, for a vehicle that is a DD/Commuter they're fine. Advantage over these would be E range because of thicker sidewalls, (Ryan at Harlan) But that also comes down to the driver. :thumby:
- 04 WJ Overland 4.7 HO, Bilstein 4600s, Tuned, 242HD Swap, 31" A/T's for cool kids
- 04 WJ Laredo 4.0, 3" OME HD Lift, Bilstein 5100s, JKS TB, IRO LCA's UCA's
- 05 LJ Rubicon 4.0, 3" OME HD Lift, Bilstein 5100's, JKS TB, Bumpers, Warn 9500ix, on 33 MTRs :cool:
- Bronco Water Pump Specialist, now leaks, fixed again and leaks for the second time
User avatar
HintonYota
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:56 pm

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by HintonYota »

I have a second set of wheels, would it be worth to buy a cheap set of MTs and also keep my street tires, or to spend up for a quality at like a ko2?
2002 4Runner Sport
User avatar
BadAssEddie
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by BadAssEddie »

HintonYota wrote: Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:59 pm I have a second set of wheels, would it be worth to buy a cheap set of MTs and also keep my street tires, or to spend up for a quality at like a ko2?
See what you can find used for cheap and try it out. If you don't like swapping wheels, sell both sets and buy a nice AT.
1969 Cadillac Deville 7.7 Big Block
1978 Ford F-150 6.4 FE
1993 Ford Bronco 5.8 Windsor
1994 Ford F-250 7.3 Powerstroke
2016 Ford F-250 6.7 Powerstroke
User avatar
VerticalTRX
Club President
Posts: 758
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:51 pm
Location: Southwest VA
Contact:

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by VerticalTRX »

I agree with Krantz, deep mud is the main place you'll see any difference. I have BFG A/Ts on my '49 cj-3a, '88 f250, '99 f250 and my wife's '77 f150, ranging in size from 215/75r15 on the cj up to 35x12.50-15 on the f150. They go surprisingly well off road, the best of any a/t I've ever run and actually do decent in the mud if you have the power to spin them hard enough. I only run load range E tires on my 3/4 and 1 ton trucks, they don't ride well and don't air down as well on light weight rigs. Sidewall strength becomes less of an issue off-road IF you air down enough and take it slow on the rocks. A tire at 12 psi is much more compliant than one at 32psi and less likely to get punctures, bruises or broken cords, at least in my experience. That said, for an all out trail rig built for crawling you want the toughest tires you can get, usually bias ply.

FWIW, I just bought a new set of cheap 33x12.50-15 mud tires ($500) for the '79 as a more streetable tire for the local trails. We'll see how they do at Potts but from my initial testing they are pretty similar in performance to my 36" tsls and 35" bfgs on my trails here at the farm. Maybe tires don't make as much of a difference as we'd all like to believe...
'79 F-150
'49 CJ-3A
User avatar
HintonYota
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:56 pm

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by HintonYota »

FWIW, I just bought a new set of cheap 33x12.50-15 mud tires ($500) for the '79 as a more streetable tire for the local trails. We'll see how they do at Potts but from my initial testing they are pretty similar in performance to my 36" tsls and 35" bfgs on my trails here at the farm. Maybe tires don't make as much of a difference as we'd all like to believe...
What is the brand of those tires you just bought?
2002 4Runner Sport
User avatar
YellowDodgeBrian
Posts: 232
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2016 11:37 am

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by YellowDodgeBrian »

HintonYota wrote: Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:59 pm I have a second set of wheels, would it be worth to buy a cheap set of MTs and also keep my street tires, or to spend up for a quality at like a ko2?
This is what I plan to do. My KM2's are great offroad and have not let me down at all, but they are very loud on the road and after three hours on the road Im about to lose my mind. Im planning on trading my KM2's for some military tires and just buying some nice wheels and all terrain tires for on the road. What I did notice when I had the AT3 coopers is that they had much more grip on the rocks than my KM2's. That may also be due to the KM2's becoming stiffer with age but it may also be better from the increased surface area. If it was me buying tires, I would buy a nice all terrain tire. For the road comfort and for the fact that they are cheaper and I dont really think it would make that much of a difference with the wheeling we do.
Can conquer anything in my path with my yellow turd. My truck doesn't burn oil it burns transfer cases at mile marker 187. My truck doesn't get dented it simply molds to it environment becoming faster and more agile. Patches is made from fence posts that were used to keep in the monsters from hell. Patches doesn't have horsepower, it has god power. Patches doesn't drive over rocks, it forces them beneath it because it is superior.
User avatar
VerticalTRX
Club President
Posts: 758
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:51 pm
Location: Southwest VA
Contact:

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by VerticalTRX »

HintonYota wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:30 pm What is the brand of those tires you just bought?
Achillies Desert Hawk Xmt, there are other similar 'cheap' mud tires, go to www.simpletire.com and put in your size and browse through them. Not sure I would buy from them online, but many local shops can get those off brand tires for the same price or less. Another thing, if you have or can run 15" wheels you can often get tires cheaper. The older floatation size tires especially 31x10.50-15, 33x12.50-15 and 35x12.50-15 are usually cheaper than thier metric counterparts, sometimes by a lot. You can get a set of 35x12.50-15 bfg km2s from 4 wheel parts for about $830 right now, which is cheaper than the same tire in a 265/75r16.
'79 F-150
'49 CJ-3A
User avatar
FJCcrawler
Posts: 505
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 2013 7:18 pm

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by FJCcrawler »

YellowDodgeBrian wrote: Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:52 pm
HintonYota wrote: Tue Sep 12, 2017 7:59 pm I have a second set of wheels, would it be worth to buy a cheap set of MTs and also keep my street tires, or to spend up for a quality at like a ko2?
This is what I plan to do. My KM2's are great offroad and have not let me down at all, but they are very loud on the road and after three hours on the road Im about to lose my mind. Im planning on trading my KM2's for some military tires and just buying some nice wheels and all terrain tires for on the road. What I did notice when I had the AT3 coopers is that they had much more grip on the rocks than my KM2's. That may also be due to the KM2's becoming stiffer with age but it may also be better from the increased surface area. If it was me buying tires, I would buy a nice all terrain tire. For the road comfort and for the fact that they are cheaper and I dont really think it would make that much of a difference with the wheeling we do.
I never had a problem with noise on the road. But I will say that in anything mildly wet, the km2s kinda sucked. They work great in almost anything else especially aired down to single digits.
'01 4Runner -New lower ball joints
'85 4Runner
'04 GX470
’88 Xtra cab
’94 Land Cruiser
Chris
User avatar
hoveyg
Posts: 40
Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2016 10:58 am

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by hoveyg »

I have KO2's on my jeep and i have 18k miles with 2/3 of the tread left. For an all around tire KO2's are solid. They also ride amazing on the road even with being E rated.
User avatar
BadAssEddie
Posts: 2635
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2009 11:12 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by BadAssEddie »

hoveyg wrote: Mon Sep 25, 2017 1:37 pm I have KO2's on my jeep and i have 18k miles with 2/3 of the tread left. For an all around tire KO2's are solid. They also ride amazing on the road even with being E rated.
The KO2s are doing better on my 6.7 vs my 7.3. Not sure why, but either way I've still liked both sets and will probably buy more for other vehicles.
1969 Cadillac Deville 7.7 Big Block
1978 Ford F-150 6.4 FE
1993 Ford Bronco 5.8 Windsor
1994 Ford F-250 7.3 Powerstroke
2016 Ford F-250 6.7 Powerstroke
User avatar
Mr.WJ
Website Admin
Posts: 865
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 8:06 pm
Location: Blacksburg/Chesapeake, VA

Re: AT vs. MT Opinion

Post by Mr.WJ »

BadAssEddie wrote: Tue Sep 26, 2017 7:35 amThe KO2s are doing better on my 6.7 vs my 7.3. Not sure why, but either way I've still liked both sets and will probably buy more for other vehicles.
Camber not an issue on 6.7?
- 04 WJ Overland 4.7 HO, Bilstein 4600s, Tuned, 242HD Swap, 31" A/T's for cool kids
- 04 WJ Laredo 4.0, 3" OME HD Lift, Bilstein 5100s, JKS TB, IRO LCA's UCA's
- 05 LJ Rubicon 4.0, 3" OME HD Lift, Bilstein 5100's, JKS TB, Bumpers, Warn 9500ix, on 33 MTRs :cool:
- Bronco Water Pump Specialist, now leaks, fixed again and leaks for the second time
Post Reply