Tire diameter logic (illogic?): 31s vs. 33s and lift height
- Thread starter matkal
- Start date
New enough to still have the casting nubs on the tread face. I was told 500 miles, but I believe it was far less than that.
In a quick internet search that MTR measurement was either an oddity or just wrong.
Seems most people measure them at 34.25-34.75. Goodyear claims 34.8.
My last set of MTR’s, granted this was the old style when they were first being released, I had some of the first 37’s on the west coast, on a 15x8 wheel with vehicle weight on them, correctly measured across the section was 35.5”. So maybe things have changed with Goodyear. Hopefully cause I was pretty upset considering the 37’s cost over a $100 more per tire over the 35’s....
Went to bias Iroks which at the time, were as close to true size but still measured barely over 36” for the 37’s...
This isn’t anything new.
Stay on 31" tires. You will never get the performance back from running larger tires without spending tens of thousands of dollars. For the most part you'll only get "close" to where you are now. If you don't need bigger tires staying on 31s is the best decision you can possibly make.
I suppose that might help regain some performance to overcome the weight. Those things are stinkin heavy.
I can see where I could have been off about a 1/4" on my tape measure. What I do know is that the 35" MTR I looked at is larger than my 35" Patagonia.
I think pitbull is the one to go with if you want true to size.
In order to properly measure they have to be off the vehicle, on the right size wheel and at an absurd pressure.
Ever had pit bulls but I had read that.
I always laughed when I was told the “proper” way to measure tires. Like, no...I want a true measurement that the tire will be in the actual use, not some commie bs self inflated number to flex on fools.
Conveniently people run 35’s on TJ’s, JKU’s and F350’s, they won’t all be the same size under vehicle weight.Ever had pit bulls but I had read that.
I always laughed when I was told the “proper” way to measure tires. Like, no...I want a true measurement that the tire will be in the actual use, not some commie bs self inflated number to flex on fools.
Very true but I was taught during my time at a small off-road shop to not only measure on the vehicle they go on, cycle the suspension to check if things fit or not. That the reasoning behind it and makes sense to me, so that is how I’ve always done and will continue to do so. So my 37’s might be 35’s...I’m fine with that cause I don’t run them at 50 psi and without vehicle weight.
Your logic is likely correct since you qualified it with what you now have works fine. And if 33x10.50s are what you want probably good to go, But 33x12.50s add a lot more width.
The real question tho is if 31s are doing everything you need..... why buy 33s?
Very true but I was taught during my time at a small off-road shop to not only measure on the vehicle they go on, cycle the suspension to check if things fit or not. That the reasoning behind it and makes sense to me, so that is how I’ve always done and will continue to do so. So my 37’s might be 35’s...I’m fine with that cause I don’t run them at 50 psi and without vehicle weight.
Since putting on these larger tires, I have cycled the axles again to check the fit. And knowing that the tire I really want is slightly larger still, I have been keeping an eye out and planning for that a well. The actual size is somewhat irrelevant and incidental when we are talking small fractions. I just want stuff to fit together nicely.
Honestly, I like the look of a TJ with 33s and I really like pizza cutter 33s but they're too limited as far as selection. The other reason is ground clearance but I would only be gaining an inch. I'm 90% function over form so I probably will stick with 31s for now, I plan on either a body lift(I already have the pucks) this coming winter when I tackle the body rust or possibly a 2 or 2.5" spring lift further down the road.
Similar threads
