Point to ponder, hornets nest stir

RoyJ wrote:
285/65r16C - Sprinter super single, 30.5" tall, 4300 lbs payload per tire. That's beyond the rear GAWR of any SRW pickup, and within earshot of a dually.

But I'll have to agree with mkirsch, no one wants a big bad 1 ton pickup rolling on 30s so they won't market one. Works perfectly on a Euro van though.

I slapped on 235/65r16C (Ford Transit tires) on my old 2nd gen cause it's not worth re-gearing an old truck. Dinky little 27.8", but easily exceed my axle capacities. Amazing mileage and braking, but little respect from local rednecks.

You're correct sir....
And leave it to someone on RV.net to find the literal needle in the haystack and pretend to profess that it is somehow a viable option.

Why?
Antagonistic by nature?
Need feelings of self importance?
Age regression?

Roy,

I drive a T250 with them dinky 235 10ply tires. They carry 3000 lbs rated like the 245-75-16 tires on a sprinter, a number of GM pickups also use the 245 tires at 30.5". The 245s handle equal GRAW loads way better!
285s handle loads pretty well too. I would prefer my 285-65-18 32.5" 10 ply on my pickup. Better yet, something in the 305-325 width relm if going upwards of 5000 lbs capacity per tire. That's better than the 215-85-16 on my 05 dually had. 245s made for better handling, lasted twice as many miles vs the stock 215s.

Marty

285/65r16C - Sprinter super single, 30.5" tall, 4300 lbs payload per tire. That's beyond the rear GAWR of any SRW pickup, and within earshot of a dually.

But I'll have to agree with mkirsch, no one wants a big bad 1 ton pickup rolling on 30s so they won't market one. Works perfectly on a Euro van though.

I slapped on 235/65r16C (Ford Transit tires) on my old 2nd gen cause it's not worth re-gearing an old truck. Dinky little 27.8", but easily exceed my axle capacities. Amazing mileage and braking, but little respect from local rednecks.

mkirsch wrote:


Fashion has lot to do with the tires that get put on SRW trucks. It's easier to sell a truck that's jacked up and rolling on 35's.

I would say fashion has alot to do with the style of rims (appearance) and style of tires (some limited models offered with oversize or mud tires, like a Raptor or Trailboss or a Ram Rebel). And those "special model" trucks with bigger or more aggressive tires also existed 40 years ago, once pickup trucks started becoming more than strictly utility vehicles, in the 70s.

Other than limited models like those, I'd say you're 100% wrong and you missed the boat that all the weight cops here harp on. Load capacity.

Take special edition or limited upscale models out of the equation, as they make up a very small percent of overall sales, and show me a single new production half ton that has tires that are larger than needed to gain weight capacity needed, or aggressive tread. They're not there, that's why there's so many "takeoff" wheels for sale for those that want "jacked up on 35s" as you put it.
Now HD trucks, even more the case. You want 4000lbs payload in your F350 or Silverado 3500 srw?
Show me the skinny (talking 235-245 width) short (31"-32") tires that can achieve anywhere near the needed load capacity to meet the above payload "ratings."
You won't find them unless going to a heavy carcass med duty tire like a 225-75-19.5 Flintstone tire. Which is not even remotely practical for daily driver use.

PS a 33-34" tire (typical HD truck "stock" tire height) provides more stability on an 18" or 20" rim compared to the same height tire on 16" rims. This is an improvement in safety and stability when it comes to hauling and load capacity. Not sure I can even think of a stock HD pickup that comes with "35s."

To the back of the line, try again sir...lol.

rhagfo wrote:

BB_TX wrote:
Well, his reply was correct. SOME 350/3500 SRWs have payload capacities in excess of 4,000 lbs now with certain configurations.

While that may be true, that doesn’t mean you can haul a 5th wheel with a 4,000# pin. That payload sticker is only valid on the factory floor. Anything added to that 5er after that time, reduces that payload. Depending on number of passengers and stuff carried in the TV the available payload left for pin might be as low as 3,000#!

My 2014 f350 platinum has 4000lbs of payload available with a full tank of gas and myself already in it. take off another 200 lbs for wife and dog and I have 3800lbs available. don't know what it is by sticker weight just going by tires and axels, but if it was just myself going away I could haul a 4000lb pin but with the wife and dog I would have to drop that to 3800. my fith wheek is 2800 lbs and I have never been left wishing I had a DRW.

Grit dog wrote:

MFL wrote:
^ I don't have a real answer to your question Spoon, but smaller tires/wheels help keep a vehicle that is mostly used for hauling a load on rear axle, lower to the ground.

Jerry

And duallies have significantly shorter tires than comparable newer srw trucks, where greater rim size would eat into the preferred sidewall height, IMO.
Smaller diameter apples to apples also = more power to the ground.

Also not official answers, but viable.
And one of the downfalls of a dually as well, when it comes to front tires. Skinny pizza cutters that are running far closer to their rated capacity than comparable weight srw trucks = recipe for increased treadwear.

Fashion has lot to do with the tires that get put on SRW trucks. It's easier to sell a truck that's jacked up and rolling on 35's.

All the answers are applicable to spoons question. AND jimlins answer re tire/rim manufactures do not have tires capable of handling the loads.
Another issue on semis has been loading dock heights. They are generally speaking, limited to a 36-38" diam tire, as any taller would make a truck/ trailer bed height too tall for warehouse decks.
Only in last 10 yrs or so, have manufactures come up with technology to make a 20" wide tire, in a needed 35-55 series tire with stand the minimum 20.5k to 22.5k lb per tire capacity to meet federal bridge laws.
Their are tires as I noted earlier that could work on pickups in the 5-5.5k relm. Not always the best riding tires.
Another point or two to ponder.

Marty

MFL wrote:
^ I don't have a real answer to your question Spoon, but smaller tires/wheels help keep a vehicle that is mostly used for hauling a load on rear axle, lower to the ground.

Jerry

And duallies have significantly shorter tires than comparable newer srw trucks, where greater rim size would eat into the preferred sidewall height, IMO.
Smaller diameter apples to apples also = more power to the ground.

Also not official answers, but viable.
And one of the downfalls of a dually as well, when it comes to front tires. Skinny pizza cutters that are running far closer to their rated capacity than comparable weight srw trucks = recipe for increased treadwear.

The higher GVWR truck has less capability per tire, because there are more tires to carry the weight.

4x2500 is more than 2x3500.

By the way, the point of DRW was WEIGHT CARRYING CAPACITY ONLY. It was never, and will never, be for "safety in case of a blowout." The problem with that theory is that when one tire in a dual set blows out, the other suddenly becomes grossly overloaded, and likely got damaged from the shrapnel of the blown tire.

Just a funny aside, but when I was a kid riding the school bus, one of the other kids described a fanciful tale of what would happen if a tire blew. The one tire would blow, immediately taking out the other tire, causing the rear axle to hit the ground and tear off. Now with the bus nose-high, the engine would tear free from its mounts and slide back along the frame rails wiping everyone out in the bus. So far none of you have managed to match that level of devastation.

^ I don't have a real answer to your question Spoon, but smaller tires/wheels help keep a vehicle that is mostly used for hauling a load on rear axle, lower to the ground.

Jerry