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

315/70r17 or 35/12.5r17 Nitto Trail Grapplers?

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 7, 2012 | 01:03 PM
  #1  
fanatic's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: Southwest PA
Default 315/70r17 or 35/12.5r17 Nitto Trail Grapplers?

Trying to decide which to go with when I go to 35's. They are really close in size ( the 315 is a little shorter), but the 315 is a load range d instead of e. I would assume this would translate to a better ride and a lighter weight. Does this seems like reasonable thinking? I'd like to hear everyone's opinion and why. Thanks!
here are the specs

LT315/70R17 D121/118Q 205-940 20.0 34.61 13.27 8.0-(9.5)-11.0 3195/2910@50
35x12.50R17LT E121Q 205-730 21.0 34.84 13.19 8.5-(10.0)-11.0 3195@65

Last edited by fanatic; Jan 7, 2012 at 01:12 PM.
Reply
Old Jan 7, 2012 | 03:23 PM
  #2  
jovatr's Avatar
JK Newbie
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Houston, TX
Default

x2. Interested as well. Would there really be a noticeable difference in ride quality?
Reply
Old Jan 7, 2012 | 04:53 PM
  #3  
bbrown626's Avatar
JK Freak
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 723
Likes: 2
From: Murrieta, CA
Default

At Discount Tire Direct the prices are just about the same..
315 - $326
35" - $330

Noticed on Nitto's site that the 35 is rated for a wider wheel (8.5 min) compared to the 315 (8.0 min).

The E rated 35 has a few more plys to withstand greater load. It must be heavier and less pliable.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 07:42 AM
  #4  
fanatic's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: Southwest PA
Default

No opinions on this? I'm surprised.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 04:15 PM
  #5  
fanatic's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: Southwest PA
Default

One last bump.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 04:36 PM
  #6  
Ryan0260's Avatar
Super Moderator
10 Year Member
 
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 11,054
Likes: 85
From: Hendersonville, Tennessee
Default

I run 35x12.50 e-rated trail grapplers and it rides fine. You just need to run lower psi. I run mine 28-30 on the street. They are awesome tires
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 05:19 PM
  #7  
fanatic's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: Southwest PA
Default

I'm ok with the way they ride( I have 295's now), and like the tire(had them on my previous rig also), just wonder if the d range tire will make a big enough difference in weight to overcome the slightly smaller size. If they are close in weight, I would go with the taller of the two. It's hard to find the weight of the 315 cause it's a newer size. The 35 is like 10 lbs heavier than all but the Toyo mt.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 05:34 PM
  #8  
Lotus F1's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 266
Likes: 2
From: NYC
Default

Originally Posted by fanatic
I'm ok with the way they ride( I have 295's now), and like the tire(had them on my previous rig also), just wonder if the d range tire will make a big enough difference in weight to overcome the slightly smaller size. If they are close in weight, I would go with the taller of the two. It's hard to find the weight of the 315 cause it's a newer size. The 35 is like 10 lbs heavier than all but the Toyo mt.
295 Is the way to go. It is not as wide..thus better gas mileage and snow penetration
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 05:49 PM
  #9  
fanatic's Avatar
Thread Starter
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
From: Southwest PA
Default

Originally Posted by Lotus F1
295 Is the way to go. It is not as wide..thus better gas mileage and snow penetration
At this point I guess gas mileage is out the window cause with the 295's I'm getting like 13 mpg. If I'm gonna get that poor fuel economy I might as well have the larger tires. I'm actually now thinking about finding The lowest weight, tallest 35 I can, which might put this tire out of the running, which sucks, cause I like the tire! That is why I was hoping the 315 was a lot lighter with it being a d tire, but can't find an accurate weight.
Reply
Old Jan 8, 2012 | 06:58 PM
  #10  
Lotus F1's Avatar
JK Enthusiast
 
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 266
Likes: 2
From: NYC
Default

Wow really that bad?.. Maybe I should consider a 275/70/18..33.6" tire.

I don't see weight as being the biggest hit on fuel. I know uprung weight effects handling and suspension the most. It would seem that width and outer diameter would cause the biggest hit on rolling resistance, gearing and mileage. Not sure why your mileage is so poor.

Last edited by Lotus F1; Jan 8, 2012 at 07:01 PM.
Reply



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