Nitto trail grappler vs bfg km2 - JK-Forum.com - The top destination for Jeep JK and JL Wrangler news, rumors, and discussion

Notices
JK Talk General discussion forum regarding thoughts, opinions and rumors about the Jeep JK Wrangler or related subjects that don't quite fit in the Modified, Stock or Electronics forums.

Nitto trail grappler vs bfg km2

 
Old 01-03-2013, 07:47 PM
  #1  
JK Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 21
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Nitto trail grappler vs bfg km2

Sorry to post another tire thread but I'm looking for people with real world experience with both of these tires. I'm going to go with a 35x12.5x17. I had the bfg's on my old truck and really liked them a lot but I've heard good things about the nittos. One dislike of the bfg's is they run small and the nittos are heavy. Anyone out there have any opinions? Thanks!!
-Buck- is offline  
Old 01-03-2013, 08:40 PM
  #2  
JK Jedi
 
mattgt5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Gray, GA
Posts: 4,406
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I have run both on on my last three jeeps in 35 and 37" heights. Both are fantastic tires off road. Both are quiet and smooth on road. The nitto has a stronger sidewall supposedly, but I have never had ay issue with either. The only place I have seen a real difference is in tread life. The BFG will last longer and wear better. There are people on this forum that say they have gotten 50k+ out of their TG. I have yet to personally see a set hit 40k.

Last edited by mattgt5; 01-05-2013 at 04:19 AM.
mattgt5 is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 02:29 AM
  #3  
JK Junkie
 
red2010rubi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Indianapolis, in
Posts: 2,110
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mattgt5 View Post
I have run both on on my last three jeeps in 35 and 37" heights. Both are fantastic tires off road. Both are quiet and smooth on road. The nitro has a stronger sidewall supposedly, but I have never had ay issue with either. The only place I have seen a real difference is in tread life. The BFG will last longer and wear better. There are people on this forum that say they have gotten 50k+ out of their TG. I have yet to personally see a set hit 40k.
Interesting thoughts I am thinking about these tires currently as well
red2010rubi is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 03:24 AM
  #4  
JK Freak
 
rtguy1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 752
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

nitto's are heavy but stronger. bfg's run way small...it will be 33" mounted. in the 35" size the nitto is e rated while the bfg is d rated. nitto's are better imo. have heard about the sidewall issue but no real experience with the issue. my bfg at ta/ko's are tough as nails
rtguy1 is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 03:59 AM
  #5  
JK Junkie
 
JKZinger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Sahuarita, Arizona
Posts: 2,802
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

I have run both and they both did well. I do feel that my current Trail Grapplers are much tougher on the trail as far as sidwalls go and have better on road and off road traction. I also did not need to balance my Nittos as they are perfect as they come from the factory. Bolted them up on my beadlocks and don't even have a vibration at any speed!
JKZinger is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 05:30 AM
  #6  
JK Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 21
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Thanks for all the replys. I think I'm leaning towards the BFG's. It just bugs me to pay for a 35" and get something closer to a 33" I read in a diferent thread that someone got 35"s and once they were mounted and on his umlimited they measured 33.5"
-Buck- is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 06:25 AM
  #7  
Super Moderator
 
Ryan0260's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Hendersonville, Tennessee
Posts: 10,672
Thanks: 0
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default

I would go with the Trail Grapplers. Besides being heavier, they are better performing tires, and tougher. The Bfg's do run small as mentioned, and they do last longer on road if you take care of them, but once a mud terrain gets to a certain depth, they are pretty much useless anyways
Ryan0260 is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 07:50 AM
  #8  
JK Enthusiast
 
HighRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 273
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I've run both and this thread has hit on pretty much all the +/- of each. In the end if you're really looking for size, let that make your decision. You won't like a 33 if you want a 35. GL.
HighRoad is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 07:13 PM
  #9  
JK Enthusiast
 
HighTide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Richmond Hill, GA
Posts: 141
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ryan0260 View Post
.... but once a mud terrain gets to a certain depth, they are pretty much useless anyways
EXACTLY


Both are great on the trail. I feel the Nittos wear bit better on the pavement.

A 35" Nitto will be larger than a 35" KM2.

Last edited by HighTide; 01-04-2013 at 07:15 PM.
HighTide is offline  
Old 01-04-2013, 07:39 PM
  #10  
JK Jedi
 
mattgt5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Gray, GA
Posts: 4,406
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Not sure why the km2 35 is referred to as a 33. Mine are 34.3. My tg were 34.6. Not a huge difference.
mattgt5 is offline  

Quick Reply: Nitto trail grappler vs bfg km2


Contact Us About Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: