Hi Iam new to the forum so this is my first post, we have been caravaning for quite a few years now and Iam considering fitting A/T tyres to the tug . Just wondering about road noise, and wear . Your views would be much appreciated Regards Ron....

Gday...

Firstly, welcome to the forum Ron-D

As you no doubt realise, there quite a few A/T tyres on the market - often a fair few types under each brand. 

It would probably help to let us know what vehicle you have - year and model - any modifications to suspension - standard wheels? - and how you intend to use it apart from towing the van.

There are many of us on here who would be using A/T tyres (myself included). However, to get a representative opinion that may be of value to you, it would be best to have the experience of owners of vehicles similar to yours.

Different vehicles - of different models and years - don't always seem to handle A/T tyres the same. Often the same model and year of vehicle using any particular brand can have different outcomes - depending on how the driver uses the vehicle.

Cheers - and sorry for seeking info rather than offering advice - John

thanks for your reply John the car is a Mitsubishi challenger 2011 model, the cars running on Bridgestone dueler 265/17 R/Ts

Bob Jane has a great deal on dueler A/Ts at the moment $225 each so hense my question 

The cars stock standard fitted with a nudge bar ,Weight dist hitch and it tows the Van very well...

Ron...

Hi Ron,

I to had BFG A/T on our old Ota .

We are about to replace our Dunnots ( Dunlops) with BFG A/T's on our tow truck. Look at Tempe Tyres on Ebay in Sydney. Great value. Worth the drive.

I missed them for the past three years.

Jim

Mutley wrote:

---

As Peter said, AT's are noisier & wear quicker than HT's on bitumen. They also make the car feel less car like & more truck like. That said, if you are travelling dirt roads, they handle better than HT's & a far more reliable (especially on loose gravel).

We have HT's on our Pajero, because it is a daily drive around the burbs & they are better suited to it. We have AT's on our Navara, as it does the dirt roads when we go away. If we go away in the Paj, it will get new AT tyres before we go.

:)

---

Peter_n_Margaret wrote:

---

AT tyres typically means they have a more aggressive tread pattern and softer compound to resist chipping on gravel roads.
That means:
1. Higher noise levels than highway tyres.
2. Higher wear rates on bitumen (and less chipping on gravel).
3. Higher fuel consumption.

Cheers,
Peter

---

 Gday...

As I said earlier Ron, getting advice on tyres of any type is like opening a can of worms.

We all have differing, sometimes contradictory, experiences on the same type of tyre on the same, or different, vehicles.

Dougwe is correct in that we both have Cooper Discoverer A/T3 tyres fitted and that we both have polarised experience. However, it should be noted that his A/T3's are LT whereas mine are not. Cooper don't make LT A/T Discoverers in my wheel size. That could be why the different experience - or is it because he has a Colorado and I a Discovery. 

I had two sets of Cooper Discoverer H/T (highway pattern) on my Landy before moving to the A/T3's. I struggled to get 40,000Km from the H/T tyres. However, the set of A/T3's I have now fitted have done 54,000Km and still have enough tread to pass a roadworthy. I probably do less than 10% of my Km on dirt roads let alone 4x4 roads - and tow 2,600Kg van full-time with both the H/T and A/T's fitted.

So comments that A/T's wear quicker than H/T's is not necessarily true ... However, it seems that has been Mutley's experience but not mine.

Interestingly, my son uses Cooper Discoverer STT MAXX on his Hilux - and THAT is an aggressive pattern. He uses probably 50% highway and 50% dirt and off-road 4x4. He has done 72,000Km and they are still roadworthy - some chips out of the tread from his 'rock-crawling' but not even a puncture in all that time. Others in the 4x4 world have no time for Coopers ... so makes ya wonder.

Peter states A/T higher noise than highway tyres - definitely not my experience - but again I don't have LT ... perhaps that is the difference.

Peter states A/T higher wear rate - again that has not been my experience - but logic does make one think they should wear higher because of the more aggressive pattern.

I DEFINITELY do not have a higher fuel consumption with the A/T's - I keep a spreadsheet recording actual Km and actual Litres used. The fuel economy of my Discovery has not altered, either improved or reduced, since fitting the A/T's.

Sorry for stirring up the can of worms ... but it is very obvious that how tyres perform, in all their aspects, is a varied and puzzling thing.

Cheers - John

Peter_n_Margaret wrote:

---

AT tyres typically means they have a more aggressive tread pattern and softer compound to resist chipping on gravel roads.
That means:
1. Higher noise levels than highway tyres.
2. Higher wear rates on bitumen (and less chipping on gravel).
3. Higher fuel consumption.

Cheers,
Peter

---

 I missed one :)

AT tyres will almost certainly require a longer braking distance on wet bitumen than highway tyres.

In Europe it is now compulsory to include a rating for all new tyres sold.

It is impossible to look at a tyre and estimate their performance.

http://www.michelin.co.uk/tyres/learn-share/buying-guide/future-tyre-labelling

Cheers,

Peter

Yeah thanks for the information every one , we free camp when we can but the vans not an offroad model and I like to look after my vehicles ,so dirt tracks are usually no more than a few Kim's In and not to rough.

Personal opinion here I hate corrugated roads 

So after reading your excellent posts  road tyres for some one that sticks mostly to the black stuff seems to be the best option Jim Thanks for the info regarding Tempe tyres I will give them a call to morrow..

Cheers Ron. 

Hi Guys,

I run B F Goodrich All Terrain on my 100 Series and can't fault them. Recently put a new set on after doing 130,000km. and only 1 Puncture which was in the hills at the Painted Desert. Not a bad recommendation in my book, I won't use anything else.

Greg 

Thanks Jim your spot on with Tempe tyres $190.00  per tyre the quote locally ( I won't mention the dealer) was $290.00 per tyre massive difference, they said they could not match Tempe,s price because they can't even buy them for that price go figure ?..

It was looking like a drive to Sydney that was until I contacted Bob Jane , they said there policy is to match the competitions prices,there only 10 Kim's from home yep $400 in myback pocket .

Thanks mate

Cheers Ron...

We're runnin BFG a/t's and have about 50,000 on them,they are a good strong tyre with tough side walls .These tyres have had a hard time, done trips thru the Kimberly kalumbru road gibb river road,central Australia,and the tanami,no puntures but have chopped up a lot ,the pictures are of these tyres after their first 16,000 thru the Kimberly.After 50,000 I'm having balance probs with one of them but when you look at the chunks missin no wonder.

BFGs are good tyres. They chip more than some AT tyres because they tend to have a harder compound. They also last well, for the same reason.
Chipping is a risk with harder compounds, but can be reduced significantly by keeping the speed well down.
Chipping is typically much worse on the rear tyres than the fronts, I believe this is because the stones are often on edge instead of laying flat.

This is an extreme example of chipping after a high speed run up the Strzelecki and down the Birdsville. It was all driven in 4WD.

Rear tyres...

Front tyres.

Cheers,

Peter