I went with 33s and now regret it. Go with 35s...you'll be happy with it.

 

I had the same dilemma. I don't know if you have a 2 door or 4 door, but in my opinion - the only way the 4-door actually looks good is if you put the 35s on. I finally made the decision and went with the 35 inch tires and you can't believe how many compliments I've received about it. So... my vote is 35" tires. I'm happy with the decision I made and I think you would be too!

 

To all of you who have made the switch to 33" or 35", by how much did your MPG change ... with volatility of gas prices, it is something to be considered in everyone's budget. Thanks.

 

I am going with the 33s because the JK already has a good bit of clearance. Also, the 35s will decrease gas milage, be tougher on the transmission and such, may even need different gearing (not sure), and also cause issues with the tailgate spare holder needing to be replaced. Now, I am going to go with the 1.75" lift from rough country just to give it a little more play and look a little better too.

 

When I went from 32 to 35 my mpg went from 18 to 14. Then I wregeared to 5.13's and my mpg went back up to 18.

More power, more rubber the same mpg; it's a win win situation - even if many can't quite wrap their heads around it. It's counter to old school wisdom.

 

35s and 5.13s. It would help to know if it's a 2 or 4 dr. 4drs. need 35s or bigger to look right.

 

Yeah, but regearing is in the ballpark of a thousand or more. So while it may look better and get the same MPG. You just spent a ton of extra money for ONE extra inch of clearance if we are talkin 33 to 35. Plus you will need to buy a new rear bumper with a tire carrier on it unless you wanna destroy the tailgate, which is another grand. Now don't get me wrong, the 35 looks bad ass on a 2 door and for the most part seems to be the only way to go for a 4 door, and I really would love to throw 35's on my JK!!! But in the end you spend a ton of money on extra stuff for a Jeep that is just slightly more capable than it was before. So why bother unless youve just got money to burn???

 

Thank your everybody for the posts

 

Before I respond to post like this I always look at where the poster is from. I'm sure there are lots of parts of the country where the additional clearance wouldn't be of much benefit. In my neck of the woods (Colorado and Utah) we have mountains, shelves, rocks and boulders. I will tell you that I screwed up big time going with 35's as in no way are they sufficient for a 4 dr. I'm going to go bigger as soon as I can; maybe 37's and possibly 38's.

Looking bad ass has absolutely nothing to do with it. It's a pure performance issue. I have a Rockhard engine skid and trans/TC skid. I thought I didn't need a gas tank skid. Well if you were to crawl under my JK with it's 4" of lift and 35's you'd see that theskids are pretty well beat up and my gas tank capacity is probably down 2-3 gallons. Before I can add the RH gas tank skid I'm going to have to drop the tank and factory skid and beat the dents out so it's flat and the plastic tank can expand.

You need a rear bumper anyway as you'd tear it off - same goes for the front. The rental companies take the bumpers off because if they don't they'll get torn off.

I've been out with a bunch of JK's in various states of modification; the difference is easy to see. When a guy with a stocker sees how much better a modified one is the conversation at lunch and that evening is always about the mods they're going to do. Jeep built it for the 95% that will never take it off road or more than on ski trips. They did what they did because of money; not because it was the best way to set up a Jeep.

So yeah, if you want to play with the big boys you have to throw a bit of money around. It may be a waste for you but it's not for me. And I still have to but D60's under it and a V8.

 

If you have the money go 35" with a lift. No doubt about it.