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

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 3, 2013 | 07:47 PM
  #1  
-Buck-'s Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
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!!
Reply
Old Jan 3, 2013 | 08:40 PM
  #2  
mattgt5's Avatar
JK Jedi
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,406
Likes: 1
From: Gray, GA
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; Jan 5, 2013 at 04:19 AM.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 02:29 AM
  #3  
red2010rubi's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,110
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis, in
Default

Originally Posted by mattgt5
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
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 03:24 AM
  #4  
rtguy1's Avatar
JK Freak
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 752
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
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
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 03:59 AM
  #5  
JKZinger's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,805
Likes: 2
From: Sahuarita, Arizona
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!
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 05:30 AM
  #6  
-Buck-'s Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: Albuquerque, NM
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"
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 06:25 AM
  #7  
Ryan0260's Avatar
Super Moderator
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 11,054
Likes: 85
From: Hendersonville, Tennessee
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
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 07:50 AM
  #8  
HighRoad's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
From: West Chester, PA
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.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 07:13 PM
  #9  
HighTide's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
From: Richmond Hill, GA
Default

Originally Posted by Ryan0260
.... 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; Jan 4, 2013 at 07:15 PM.
Reply
Old Jan 4, 2013 | 07:39 PM
  #10  
mattgt5's Avatar
JK Jedi
 
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,406
Likes: 1
From: Gray, GA
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.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:15 PM.