- Location
- Southern Indiana
What are the pros and cons of running 33x12.50 vs 33x10.50 tires on an XJ?
-
Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.
33x12.50 vs 33x10.50
- Thread starter ExTankerGuy
- Start date
TomH
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Winchester KY
I run 33x10.50 on stock rims. For the most part I have liked this combination. I don't have flares, so they don't stick out the sides too far. They will be lighter than a 12.50.
The real downside of this combination would be the lack of a "bumper" on side obstacles.
The real downside of this combination would be the lack of a "bumper" on side obstacles.
- Location
- Hammertown, USA
Don't forget less contact area, therefor less traction.. 
2xtreme
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Kayak Pt, WA
The pro's of the wider tire is that it will provide more protection for the body of the xj (they stick out farther and therefore provide more side protection.
Con's they throw more mud and debris outside of the wheel well. They also put more stress on ball joints and steering systems.
I have always been a fan of narrow tires, however. I really like the protection that the 33x12.5 gives me in the tight rutted trails that I run most of the time.
Michael
Con's they throw more mud and debris outside of the wheel well. They also put more stress on ball joints and steering systems.
I have always been a fan of narrow tires, however. I really like the protection that the 33x12.5 gives me in the tight rutted trails that I run most of the time.
Michael
gearwhine
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- Denver, CO
If you plan on wheeling, definitely go with the 12.5, the extra width truly helps you plant your tires where you want them in the rocks, and not get wedged in every little gap. The 2" doesn't seem like a big difference, but comparing the two side by side makes them look much larger.
gorp
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- moapa,nevada
i have been running 10.5s for 2yrs now. i wheel with a group of guys that run 12.5. i have never been left behind. i also run homemade rock rails that work well. i like them for the weight,gas milage and that they dont fling mud as bad.
Boghog1
NAXJA Member #1221
- Location
- Milford NH
cal said:Don't forget less contact area, therefor less traction..
Not nessasarilly true. smaller contact patch means more pressure per square inch. Here in the north east there is a trend for those that see more mud to run skinny, I prefer the wider tire. It really comes down to personal preference. There are issues as pointed out like more stress on components but if you are worried about extra stress either go with a 31 or get beefier axles. it really is not that hard to replace the bearings just expensive
Kurt
- Location
- Port Orchard, WA
bull shit!planoxj said:
back that up - please! i want to read this...
cloudswimmer
NAXJA Forum User
- Location
- So.Cal.
XJ_ranger said:
Ehhh..........Well I'll throw my 2 cents in here. In the mountains of So.Cal. where
I'm at, we have lots of winding roads to and from trails.With my 33x10.50 radial swampers it could get REAL hairy at any kind of speed in corners, any kind of instant evasive manuever and I know I would have gone over.After switching to 33x12.50 MTR's its MUCH more stable now, much wider footprint than I had before.I can take corners at speed and not freak my passengers out.Haven't had a chance to get out to the hammers or Big Bear yet with the new MTR's, but on the road in my case skinnier was definately more tippy.
- Location
- Hammertown, USA
cloudswimmer said:
I think going to 33x10.5 MTR's would have had very simular results.
- Location
- Wasatch Range
How's this for a twist.........285/75/16's. 33" tall and 11" wide......mmmmm, delicious.
