NOT your average 35" tire question
First, I have a 2011 6 speed, 321 gears. Poeple say dont do 35's I have the wrong gearing. My question is. 95% (Iam guessing) of 35 inch tires people are running are 12.5 inches wide. What if I went with a narrower one? 10 inch? Thats 10 inches of less rubber that i would be trying to get moving on the ground.
Less rubber on the ground, less drag, = better gas mileage? I havent looked for narrower tires yet. I was just wanting to know what other people think. I will be useing 1 1/2 spacers for the wide stance look. Any input would be great. If any one is doing this can you please post some pictures and info of your set up. Thanks again.
Less rubber on the ground, less drag, = better gas mileage? I havent looked for narrower tires yet. I was just wanting to know what other people think. I will be useing 1 1/2 spacers for the wide stance look. Any input would be great. If any one is doing this can you please post some pictures and info of your set up. Thanks again.
First, I have a 2011 6 speed, 321 gears. Poeple say dont do 35's I have the wrong gearing. My question is. 95% (Iam guessing) of 35 inch tires people are running are 12.5 inches wide. What if I went with a narrower one? 10 inch? Thats 10 inches of less rubber that i would be trying to get moving on the ground.
Less rubber on the ground, less drag, = better gas mileage? I havent looked for narrower tires yet. I was just wanting to know what other people think. I will be useing 1 1/2 spacers for the wide stance look. Any input would be great. If any one is doing this can you please post some pictures and info of your set up. Thanks again.
Less rubber on the ground, less drag, = better gas mileage? I havent looked for narrower tires yet. I was just wanting to know what other people think. I will be useing 1 1/2 spacers for the wide stance look. Any input would be great. If any one is doing this can you please post some pictures and info of your set up. Thanks again.
Dont forget the diameter itself is going to rob you of a ton of power also.
Well, assuming that the narrower tires are also lighter than the wider tires, it should equate to less power loss over the wider tire but not sure how noticeable it would be since I have never driven one. The issue you have is the going from a stock tire to a bigger tire in general. Depending on the weight difference there, you may notice something. So if your stock tires weigh 75 pounds and you put narrower 35's on that weigh 85 pounds, that little weight difference coupled with the larger diameter will probably be felt. Maybe less so than going with an 85 pound 35 that is wider but you won't have a frame of reference.
I think your theory makes sense. Just hard to prove unless you run both wide and narrow 35's to test the "subjective" nature of the power loss.
Whatever the case...still can't believe they used 3.21's on a Jeep.
I think your theory makes sense. Just hard to prove unless you run both wide and narrow 35's to test the "subjective" nature of the power loss.
Whatever the case...still can't believe they used 3.21's on a Jeep.
If you had a 2012 I'd say go for it but I can't speak for the 3.8 ( mine was stock). I just put 35x12.5x15 km2's on my 2012 with 3.21s and manual. It's fine around town, not TOO bad on highway, especially if my commute were flat. You will definitely lose 6th probably. I tach 1750-1800 rpms in 6th at 65mph, 5th is like 2100, which is fine. On flat road doing 68+ I can use 6th.
Gas mileage goin to work (all highway over 2 mountains, 28 miles) has gone from 19-22 to 16-17.
Gas mileage goin to work (all highway over 2 mountains, 28 miles) has gone from 19-22 to 16-17.
Trending Topics
In my 07 6-speed with 3.73s on 33s I've basically lost 6th as it is unless its super flat ground over 70ish.. I know I would regear for sure before going to 35s no matter how skinny/light they are but that's just me.. For sure would be a little better being lighter though.
Ps stock tire/ wheel combo is 60lbs each with 17" wheels. My mb tko and 35" km2's are 83.5 lbs each according to UPS
Attachment 409681
Attachment 409682
Attachment 409681
Attachment 409682


