Big O vs. BFG's vs.Dunlops

[CSDMAX]

I know there are numerous threads out there regarding various tire sizes and what you guys like most. I see BFG's, Dunlops, Michelins, etc. but I do not hear you guys mention anything about Big O'tires.
I have decided to go with 255/85's but have not made up my mind on what brand. What are your thoughts on these tires, namely, the Bigfoot X/T's? Are they really a big "0"????

[Desert Diesel]

I too am interested to know if anyone is running Bigfoot X/T's. My neighbor just put a set on his F-250 and the compound felt way too soft to me.
They have a great warranty! What kind a mileage can one expect?

I'm hesitant to try them after having soft compound Yokahama tires on my K2500 burb that only lasted 18,000 miles.

I've always run BFG M/T's with excellent results.
But, would like to try something different.

Regards,

David

[deckhand]

I had a Big O tire on my Volvo P1800 once and it seemed to have the consistency of a bowling ball. I couldn't wear the darn thing out. I bought it in Utah while on vacatin. I haven't seen any around this neck of the woods.

[badbowtie]

I have a set of the Hoosier radial DT's on my 98 k2500. They are the same tread pattern as the big-o tires. I am not happy with the tread life 12000 miles and already down to 7/32".

[NutNbutGMC]

^...Michelins....'Nuff said.

[CSDMAX]

Hey Nut...I mean NutNbutGMC,

Yeah...I hear what you are saying. I had Michelin's on my 97' CC dooley and they were great..ALL 7 of them.

I just want a beefier A/T tire that still has at least a D rating for towing.

[toyboxrv]

I have BFG AT's in 265/75-16D size and with over 80K miles on them I don't have any reason to complain. BTW Michelin has owned BFG tires for a long time.

[NutNbutGMC]

^..Michelin 265/75/16 M/S comes in a load range E. I hear you on the beefy..... :D
Good luck.

By the way, what the heck is a "dooley"?
Is that one of dem dar rear dool wheel assemblies? :D :D

I thought mdrag was the only one wif a rear dool wheeler. :D

[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: NutNbutGMC ]</p>

[CSDMAX]

Hey NutNbutGMC,

hmmmm...dooley...dually...blah..blah..blah. What can I say is, I'm just readen and a writen what GM put it in them thar catalog as "Big Dooley", ya know a rear dool wheeler. ;)

[xwing]

OK, I have the stock Firestones on my 2001 2500HD D/A 4x4 ExCab longbed. The rears, after 21,000 miles, need replacing. The fronts have over half tread left (oops, never rotated them smile.gif
so I plan to get a set of new Firestones for the rear, which should end up dying in another 21,000 miles...just when the FRONTS should die.

Besides not looking very aggressive/big, why should I get Michelins, BFG's etc? The Firestones worked well for me, even in Wisconsin winter 2000 (Winter 2001 wasn't much snow at all).
I haven't priced out the Firestones yet...are they more expensive than the Michelins or something? Had I rotated them I could have gotten about 30,000 miles out of the set. Do others wear way longer?

[CSDMAX]

xwing,

Quit burnin rubber and the rears will last longer. :D I am surprised to hear that without rotating your tires that the rears are worn out instead of the fronts. Usually it is the other way around. You know with cornering, turning, parking, etc.

I think that with all the hype about Firestone and the recalls it leaves that burnt rubber taste in your mouth. Ya know! Not to mention the stock tires have NO traction. I'm sure most will agree.

[zip]

:D NutNButGMC-- What are you- a city boy?
That's just the way we talk around HERE.
See ya
zip