Notices
Modified JK Tech Tech related bulletin board forum regarding subjects such as suspension, tires & wheels, steering, bumpers, skid plates, drive train, cages, on-board air and other useful modifications that will help improve the performance and protection of your Jeep JK Wrangler (Rubicon, Sahara, Unlimited and X) on the trail.

PLEASE DO NOT START SHOW & TELL TYPE THREADS IN THIS FORUM

NOT your average 35" tire question

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:29 AM
  #1  
scratchkenny's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
From: Gloucester Va.
Default 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.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:37 AM
  #2  
Rob 12B1P's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 2
From: Bakersfield Kalifornia
Default

Originally Posted by scratchkenny
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.
It would help but the closest Ive seen is 285 75R17 in a skinny and theyre only about a 34. It would be neat if they made a true skinny 35. I think interco makes a skinny but they are only for like 15 or 16 inch wheels.

Dont forget the diameter itself is going to rob you of a ton of power also.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:38 AM
  #3  
finfreeze's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
From: Rifle, Co
Default

Wouldn't it only be 2.5" of less rubber?

Just go with 35's. You really won't be satisfied unless you find out for yourself.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:39 AM
  #4  
mpkelley20's Avatar
JK Super Freak
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,381
Likes: 1
From: East Bridgewater, MA
Default

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.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:42 AM
  #5  
kh202's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,142
Likes: 2
From: Rockwood, TN
Default

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.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 05:43 AM
  #6  
kh202's Avatar
JK Junkie
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,142
Likes: 2
From: Rockwood, TN
Default

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

Click image for larger version

Name:	image-2326172736.jpg
Views:	914
Size:	84.2 KB
ID:	409681



Click image for larger version

Name:	image-20270513.jpg
Views:	253
Size:	70.2 KB
ID:	409682
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 06:41 AM
  #7  
scratchkenny's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
From: Gloucester Va.
Default

Originally Posted by finfreeze
Wouldn't it only be 2.5" of less rubber?

Just go with 35's. You really won't be satisfied unless you find out for yourself.
I was figuring 2.5 inches per tire.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 07:02 AM
  #8  
sandaddict88's Avatar
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
From: Santa Maria, CA
Default

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.
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 07:10 AM
  #9  
speedrcr's Avatar
JK Newbie
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Joliet, IL
Default

Originally Posted by kh202
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
What size lift are you running? I to have a 2012 and want to run 35's
Reply
Old Jan 15, 2013 | 07:11 AM
  #10  
finfreeze's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
From: Rifle, Co
Default

Ok. Your wording made it sound like you subtracted 10" from the tire.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:20 PM.