C vs. E loads and the BS (not back spacing!).

[Jeff Allan]

Here's a good direct comparison I just got done with. For weeks I searched and asked on this stuff and couldn't find much out, So I finally got to satisfy my curiosity thanks to DT (the best shop!!). My TJR has 16" wheels and recently got a set of BFG KO2s 265/75. A lot of jeep guys were telling me C is what a jeep needs and E loads are too much or bad for the ride, mileage etc....I felt I was missing something...so I went with 17's, 265/70 C load which equalled the exact same diameter as the E's. Each wheel and tire were 9-10 lbs. lighter.

They mounted it all up and the black wheels looked really good. The wheels with the offsets had the tires sticking out a ittle bit more, it was a good look. I felt I made the right choice and was excited to drive off and show off the new look. As soon as I drove, immediately my jeep felt sluggish and more resistance. on the highway, much more tire noise. The rolling resistance was immediately felt. I drove home (20+ highway miles) and I never seen my gas gauge move so much from that usual drive, I could totaly feel the resistance. To be fair, with the tires sticking out and inch, probably a little more wind resistance, and the tire was .2" wider, but I thought the lighter weight wheels/tires would counter that and the jeep would feel more peppy and at least not lose mpg.

Here's the other thing that I kept reading- E load tires will feel more bumps and ride rougher. Not for these! With the C, I felt every little bump and imperfection in the road. jeep was bouncing all over the place, hated it. With the E's, small bumps aren't really noticed and all the bumps are more distant. I'd compare to wearing thicker soled shoes I guess. Plus they roll easier/smoother/quieter compared to the C's. The C's were at 40 psi but felt like they were aired down, I wanted to put 45- 50 in. But just took it back, and begged for my old tires back. DT was so cool, and I offered to buy 'em all dinner/beer, but they said it's business as usual and not to sweat it. Super great bunch of guys and store.

There is this blanket statement that E load is not good for jeeps. I think many aren't taking into account the tread design, or maybe they tried an E MT compared to a C AT and then post something or maybe they just read what some other guy says and perpetuate the myth. Hopefully this thread can help some like me, who just had to find out for themselves.

My Rubi came with E's and I think they got it right. I liked how it drove for many years, but start believing all this crap... Everybody should try for themselves of course, as we all want/need different things. I wanted a nice riding tire that got decent mpg, that is super tough. The KO2/E load seems to be best fit. ST MAXX was on my list too, had I known now, I might've gave that one a shot. Maybe in about 10 years, lol.

 

[mrblaine]

Here's a good direct comparison I just got done with. For weeks I searched and asked on this stuff and couldn't find much out, So I finally got to satisfy my curiosity thanks to DT (the best shop!!). My TJR has 16" wheels and recently got a set of BFG KO2s 265/75. A lot of jeep guys were telling me C is what a jeep needs and E loads are too much or bad for the ride, mileage etc....I felt I was missing something...so I went with 17's, 265/70 C load which equalled the exact same diameter as the E's. Each wheel and tire were 9-10 lbs. lighter.

They mounted it all up and the black wheels looked really good. The wheels with the offsets had the tires sticking out a ittle bit more, it was a good look. I felt I made the right choice and was excited to drive off and show off the new look. As soon as I drove, immediately my jeep felt sluggish and more resistance. on the highway, much more tire noise. The rolling resistance was immediately felt. I drove home (20+ highway miles) and I never seen my gas gauge move so much from that usual drive, I could totaly feel the resistance. To be fair, with the tires sticking out and inch, probably a little more wind resistance, and the tire was .2" wider, but I thought the lighter weight wheels/tires would counter that and the jeep would feel more peppy and at least not lose mpg.

Here's the other thing that I kept reading- E load tires will feel more bumps and ride rougher. Not for these! With the C, I felt every little bump and imperfection in the road. jeep was bouncing all over the place, hated it. With the E's, small bumps aren't really noticed and all the bumps are more distant. I'd compare to wearing thicker soled shoes I guess. Plus they roll easier/smoother/quieter compared to the C's. The C's were at 40 psi but felt like they were aired down, I wanted to put 45- 50 in. But just took it back, and begged for my old tires back. DT was so cool, and I offered to buy 'em all dinner/beer, but they said it's business as usual and not to sweat it. Super great bunch of guys and store.

There is this blanket statement that E load is not good for jeeps. I think many aren't taking into account the tread design, or maybe they tried an E MT compared to a C AT and then post something or maybe they just read what some other guy says and perpetuate the myth. Hopefully this thread can help some like me, who just had to find out for themselves.

My Rubi came with E's and I think they got it right. I liked how it drove for many years, but start believing all this crap... Everybody should try for themselves of course, as we all want/need different things. I wanted a nice riding tire that got decent mpg, that is super tough. The KO2/E load seems to be best fit. ST MAXX was on my list too, had I known now, I might've gave that one a shot. Maybe in about 10 years, lol.

I just removed a set of Load Range C MTR's and mistakenly installed a set of E range in the new BFG All Terrains. I'll trade anyone straight across for another set of C's in the same tire and I'll pay for the mount, balance, and give them a discount of a hefty nature on a brake kit. The E's suck donkey balls. These are both 33" tires.

 

[Chris]

I too had a set of E loads once upon a time and good lord was that a mistake. It rattled my brains out over every single bump. I replaced them with the same tire in a C load and it felt like the biggest difference in the world. Just my experience...

 

[Jeff Allan]

Then you had too much air pressure. When I first got my E's they put 35 psi and it was a bit much, down a few and it's amazing. Perfect. E's for me are by far better once the pressure is right. With the C's being softer, thinner, you feel/notice every little imperfection in the road. Think of a gym shoe vs. a hiking shoe. With the C's going through a construction zone was horrible as each section of road was not level and I felt every bump and imperfection in the road, and even little pot holes were big. You might like that, but I didn't.

Tires are completely about compromise. E's have Less rolling resistance/smoother roll vs. more traction/friction with the C it seems for the wranglers. With the E's I could ride over small rodents and barely notice it. and I barely press the gas pedal, an egg under the pedal wouldn't even crack. With those C's, they felt more like my 10 year old, worn MTRs but I never had to press so much skinny pedal.
So far my traction has been good since getting the pressure right, I'm waiting for snow to really see. But no way will I go to a C again.

Now what I did, which you did not, is keep as many variables out of it. I had two brand new tires with the SAME tread, SAME tire diameter, drove SAME route, SAME weather conditions, I A-B'd these back to back with an hour of each other, only critical things that changed was the load and weight. I really truly thought all the weight at the wheels would make the jeep feel peppy and a smoother ride. As I said it was the complete opposite.

I just removed a set of Load Range C MTR's and mistakenly installed a set of E range in the new BFG All Terrains. I'll trade anyone straight across for another set of C's in the same tire and I'll pay for the mount, balance, and give them a discount of a hefty nature on a brake kit. The E's suck donkey balls. These are both 33" tires.

 

[Jeff Allan]

I too had a set of E loads once upon a time and good lord was that a mistake. It rattled my brains out over every single bump. I replaced them with the same tire in a C load and it felt like the biggest difference in the world. Just my experience...

There are many variables but the air pressure is a biggy. I had too much pressure and it was harder, but when I got it right, it's as close to the best of both worlds. Maybe not for airing down for rocks, with stiffer sidewall I don't know or care about that. Probably would want that really spongey tire with lots of friction/traction. But for riding on the road, I dont want to feel every single bump.

iIt was like shoes, E's are like a thick sole, or hiking shoe,you won't feel the little stones or as much uneven terrain, compared to some Chuck Taylors lol. Common sense if there's more material/distance between me and the terrain, the bumps and road holes were more distant.

You know I wanted the C's, Chris. I wanted them bad, and when I saw them and even the KO2s C loads feel very beefy, the sidewalls are so much thicker than the Duratrac D loads they had on display. then when they mounted it all up, it looked badass. I loved it. Soon as I drove 10'...I hated it.

On the mileage, the stiffness of the E seemed to relate to the rolling resistance. I just hope traction is good enough for the snow, because these tires are getting some great mpg so far. And they are new. They will improve as they get broken in!!

 

[mrblaine]

Then you had too much air pressure. When I first got my E's they put 35 psi and it was a bit much, down a few and it's amazing. Perfect. E's for me are by far better once the pressure is right. With the C's being softer, thinner, you feel/notice every little imperfection in the road. Think of a gym shoe vs. a hiking shoe. With the C's going through a construction zone was horrible as each section of road was not level and I felt every bump and imperfection in the road, and even little pot holes were big. You might like that, but I didn't.

Tires are completely about compromise. E's have Less rolling resistance/smoother roll vs. more traction/friction with the C it seems for the wranglers. With the E's I could ride over small rodents and barely notice it. and I barely press the gas pedal, an egg under the pedal wouldn't even crack. With those C's, they felt more like my 10 year old, worn MTRs but I never had to press so much skinny pedal.
So far my traction has been good since getting the pressure right, I'm waiting for snow to really see. But no way will I go to a C again.

Now what I did, which you did not, is keep as many variables out of it. I had two brand new tires with the SAME tread, SAME tire diameter, drove SAME route, SAME weather conditions, I A-B'd these back to back with an hour of each other, only critical things that changed was the load and weight. I really truly thought all the weight at the wheels would make the jeep feel peppy and a smoother ride. As I said it was the complete opposite.

I suspect you don't quite understand this isn't my first rodeo.

 

[Jeff Allan]

I suspect you don't quite understand this isn't my first rodeo.

Well it sure doesn't sound like much of a comparison. Comparing two different tires and leaving out a ton of other variables. I think someone commenting on the load thing would try and eliminate as many variables as they can before making some kind of judgement. Make as apples to apples as possible. That's why this crap gets slung around.

 

[mrblaine]

Well it sure doesn't sound like much of a comparison. Comparing two different tires and leaving out a ton of other variables. I think someone commenting on the load thing would try and eliminate as many variables as they can before making some kind of judgement. Make as apples to apples as possible. That's why this crap gets slung around.

Same rig, same rims, same roads, same terrain, same everything with the only change being a tire swap from sub 5000 mile MTR's to the All Terrains and I've been monkeying with tire pressure and advocating such for years. I live in a wheeling world where the difference in making an obstacle and not can be the difference between 8 psi and 9 psi.

The only thing wrong with the MTR is they hum in a certain range that really bothered Kat's ears. In comparison, I also put a set of them on her other rig to replace the MTR's for the same reasons and they are perfectly fine in Load Range C with nary a bothersome habit or nuance. I don't sling crap. If I say something, I have a very valid comparison and reasons for doing so. I have the luxury (depending on your perspective) to be able to drive rigs back to back, and I get to test drive a lot of rigs due to all the work I do on them. I'm also one of those that pays inordinate amounts of attention to how stuff rides, handles, and performs due to all the suspension, steering, and brakes I design and build.

 

[Jeff Allan]

Same rig, same rims, same roads, same terrain, same everything with the only change being a tire swap from sub 5000 mile MTR's to the All Terrains and I've been monkeying with tire pressure and advocating such for years. I live in a wheeling world where the difference in making an obstacle and not can be the difference between 8 psi and 9 psi.

The only thing wrong with the MTR is they hum in a certain range that really bothered Kat's ears. In comparison, I also put a set of them on her other rig to replace the MTR's for the same reasons and they are perfectly fine in Load Range C with nary a bothersome habit or nuance. I don't sling crap. If I say something, I have a very valid comparison and reasons for doing so. I have the luxury (depending on your perspective) to be able to drive rigs back to back, and I get to test drive a lot of rigs due to all the work I do on them. I'm also one of those that pays inordinate amounts of attention to how stuff rides, handles, and performs due to all the suspension, steering, and brakes I design and build.

Again, your not even comparing the same tire, and now you say there was close to 5K miles on the MTRs.

I just got done comparing same new tires/tread in same diameter on the same day, same road conditions and weather. I ain't even seen a magazine do this, and I looked hard for this.

When I tried those KO2 C's, it reminded me of my 9 year old worn MTRs. bumpy and jerky and noisy, with every nuance in the road noticed. The E's are quiet and roll easy. Again it's all about compromise. I look for something very different than you. So don't sling the "sucked donkey balls crap" after you compare two very different tires and one is broken in yet, lol. You don't seem to get that we don't all want the same thing in a tire.

 

[mrblaine]

Again, your not even comparing the same tire, and now you say there was close to 5K miles on the MTRs.

I just got done comparing same new tires/tread in same diameter on the same day, same road conditions and weather. I ain't even seen a magazine do this, and I looked hard for this.

When I tried those KO2 C's, it reminded me of my 9 year old worn MTRs. bumpy and jerky and noisy, with every nuance in the road noticed. The E's are quiet and roll easy. Again it's all about compromise. I look for something very different than you. So don't sling the "sucked donkey balls crap" after you compare two very different tires and one is broken in yet, lol. You don't seem to get that we don't all want the same thing in a tire.

When is the last time you spoke with anyone about tires who used to run load range E on the front for better steering and load range C on the rear for better traction?

For the record, I never disputed what you want in a tire, nor do I care. I also don't believe for a second that any blanket statement can be made about a tire when tire technology is changing faster than we can wear out a set.

 

[Jeff Allan]

"The E's suck donkey balls"

That's pretty much the blanket statement if there ever was one, and that's what I was reading and gets perpetuated.

My jeep is bone stock, and driven that way for nearly a decade, so the tire change was really magnified. It ain't like I've been driving it for a year and then did it. 99% of you real jeepers have so many mods going, and constantly changing it up.. a zillion variables makes it hard to know what's affecting what.

I wanted to put a post out there that people like me who want to stay a bit more practical, but still love their jeeps.

 

[mrblaine]

"The E's suck donkey balls"



That's pretty much the blanket statement if there ever was one, and that's what I was reading and gets perpetuated.

Perhaps you can go put that back in context and try it from a fresh less defensive perspective. What I said about the E rated tires that I own is 100% accurate and true. So much so that as soon as I can find someone to swap, they are leaving. If I can't find someone to take them, then I will remove them and toss them. The only thing I'm perpetuating is the fact that I have a set of E rated tires on a rig that are miserable.

As for running different loads, that makes my other point...My jeep is bone stock, and driven that way for nearly a decade, so this experiment completely highlighted the differences, as I know just how the jeep handles and drives, one change will be magnified.

How is it you are able to discount my experience with a 2004 rig that was bone stock up until a couple of years ago and no other change was made except tires?

99% of you real jeepers have so many mods going, and constantly changing it up.. a zillion variables makes it hard to know what's affecting what.

That is insulting and disingenuous. You did an AB tire comparison. When my helper and I wanted to be able to speak accurately as to how suspension, shocks, and springs worked, we used his rig as a test platform for AB comparisons of mods a couple of months ago.

We wanted to know exactly how much effect each had on perceived ride quality and performance climbing. We hopped in the rig and did some climbing, some road coarse, so washboard, and steering and stopping. Both of us in the rig.

We only did the rear mid arm, no shocks, springs, tires, etc. changed, just the rear mid arm and then we put it all back together and drove it. Then we did the front mid arm and drove it. Then we out-boarded the rear shocks and drove it. It just about doubles the amount of work involved but we wanted to know and understand the exact effect each one had on how the rig worked.

I wanted to put a post out there that people can use for a resource because I read a lot of topics about guys asking, and unsure. I feel it was a great comparison and the main things I wanted to know, I had to find out for myself.

The elephant in the room is will you predict that everyone will have your same experience with all C and E tires?

 

[Jerry Bransford]

"The E's suck donkey balls"

That pretty well describes my opinion of them too. I dunno why anyone would actually prefer that load range for a Wrangler unless they had masochistic tendencies.

 

[Chris]

I too have ran E load tires (with the correct tire pressure) and I think they suck big time. Going back to a C load was one of the best things I ever did on my old XJ. I'll never run an E load again.

 

[Jeff Allan]

That pretty well describes my opinion of them too. I dunno why anyone would actually prefer that load range for a Wrangler unless they had masochistic tendencies.

Nope, try again, not hurting mpg was high on my list. I certainly never thought it rode bad. Main thing for me, the C's had way too much resistance. Felt like I had put marshmallows on the jeep, as it was sluggish and I noticed I had to really push the gas pedal. they were 40 psi, tried a bit higher, but didn't want to go to 50 as that's max for that tire.Tires were very loud on the highway and I never seen the fuel gauge move so fast.

This jeep has had MTR (E's) and then KO2 E's and never was it as sluggish/slow, and thirsty as with those C's. From this, I'd say a stiffer tire has less rolling resistance, not more, like many said and told me. It just rides damn easy and smooth.

I asked my 8 year old how the new tires rode, and her words- "smoother, less bumpy daddy".- from the mouth's of babes.

 

[Jeff Allan]

I too have ran E load tires (with the correct tire pressure) and I think they suck big time. Going back to a C load was one of the best things I ever did on my old XJ. I'll never run an E load again.

Not really a correct air, When they had 35 it was too much, got it down to 32 and it's just right. Chris,you know I wanted those C's bad, the wheels looked so damn good. Everything I was concerned about, the tires sticking out too far, or the spare not fitting on the carrier, it all worked out perfectly. when it was done, I had a killer looking jeep… I was so excited until I drove it and knew I couldn't keep it with how uncomfortable it drove (to me) and how bad it sucked gas.

Man..I'm bummed, she was looking good..

 

[Jerry Bransford]

Nope, try again, not hurting mpg was high on my list. I certainly never thought it rode bad. Main thing for me, the C's had way too much resistance. Felt like I had put marshmallows on the jeep, as it was sluggish and I noticed I had to really push the gas pedal. they were 40 psi, tried a bit higher, but didn't want to go to 50 as that's max for that tire.Tires were very loud on the highway and I never seen the fuel gauge move so fast.

This jeep has had MTR (E's) and then KO2 E's and never was it as sluggish/slow, and thirsty as with those C's. From this, I'd say a stiffer tire has less rolling resistance, not more, like many said and told me. It just rides damn easy and smooth.

A steel wheel has less rolling resistance yet but there comes a point of diminishing returns. We were never talking rolling resistance, we were talking 'ride'. I would only be worried about less rolling resistance than a C has if I were driving a Prius and trying to achieve an extra .1 mpg to satisfy some overactive quest for some green-related thing. The last thing I am going to be worried about when I choose to drive a Wrangler is mpg. If that was high on my list, I sure wouldn't be driving a Wrangler. That's like worrying about ground clearance on a Porsche Carrera or 1/4 mile times on a Prius.

 

[Chris]

The last thing I am going to be worried about when I choose to drive a Wrangler is mpg. If that was high on my list, I sure wouldn't be driving a Wrangler. That's like worrying about ground clearance on a Porsche Carrera or 1/4 mile times on a Prius.

Hahaha! Well said!

 

[Chris]

Not really a correct air, When they had 35 it was too much, got it down to 32 and it's just right. Chris,you know I wanted those C's bad, the wheels looked so damn good. Everything I was concerned about, the tires sticking out too far, or the spare not fitting on the carrier, it all worked out perfectly. when it was done, I had a killer looking jeep… I was so excited until I drove it and knew I couldn't keep it with how uncomfortable it drove (to me) and how bad it sucked gas.

Man..I'm bummed, she was looking good..
View attachment 1128

Honestly man, I would just go with whatever makes you happy. If it works for you, that's really all that matters!

 

[billiebob]

This thread is the most fun to date on TJ Forum.
Thanks for chiming in Jeff.

No doubt the differences between C & E are there. Buy what appeals to you. Me, I'm buying 15" Rims this spring so I can buy something like 33x10.50x15 KO2s. Tired of the brutal ride over washboard and rocky roads with the 255/85R17 MTs I now have or the 245/75R16 MTRs which came on my TJR. Just wish there was more selection of C Ratings in 16" & 17" sizes.

My winter grips are C Rated Yokohamas. Absolutely love changing over every fall. Night and day ride difference. No difference is gas mileage tho.

Love the donkey balls comment. Should win a prize