Monday, Mar 27, 2006 at 20:23
Roachie,
Thought you might like this comparison of BFG Muds to MTRs (pinched from LCOOL >
Ivan I have been running both for a while, admittedly though on an 80
Series. At this point in time, I can't speak highly for the BFG Mud TA in
comparison to the MTR (both 285/75 x 16).
The areas where I found the MTR better are (in no particular order):
- Far better at shedding mud. The BFGs clog quickly and you not only lose
traction but more importantly, you lose sideways stability.
- Tougher in that rocks don't rip chunks out of the tread blocks.
- Stronger sidewalls. Sharp objects don't tear the sidewall as easily as
they do on the BFGs and when they do, it's a small cut that can be repaired
to get you out.
- Better traction on the road by a fair margin - particularly when wet.
Areas where the BFGs are better, again in no particular order:
- Softer sidewall with less heat build up at speeds over 130 kph.
- Slightly better wear on the road.
One aspect which is neither here nor there is the fact that you need to
lower tyre pressure a fair bit lower on the MTR on sand and snow than you do
with the BFGs. I put that down to the fact that the sidewalls on the MTRs
are much stiffer and they tend to support the vehicle. For example, to
achieve the same floatation on the MTRs I need to air down to under 10 psi
that the BFGs offer at 15 psi. I don't see that as a negative though because
of the stronger MTR sidewall that does a better job of resisting sidewall
damage than the BFG at 15 psi.
I also think that the MTR would suit your
suspension setup better than the
BFG. The reason is that the MTR isn't as "lively" in the way it bounces back
after an impact and it will give you a better chance of keeping the tyre in
contact with the ground.
As far as applications go, if it's high country work, then I think that the
MTR has the edge. On fast outback dirt roads, it's a hands down win for the
MTR - greater stability and comfort. On road, the MTR is a tad noisier than
the BFG.
FollowupID:
417996