View Poll Results: Which 35" tire?
BFG KM2
11
57.89%
MTR with Kevlar
8
42.11%
Voters: 19. You may not vote on this poll
35's bfg km'2 V.S. mtr kevlars
#1
35's bfg km'2 V.S. mtr kevlars
So basically here's where I'm at. I have out aside the cash to buy new tires for my Jeep, and I'm leaning towards the mtrs but I'm looking to see what u guys think.
Throw out a vote, and or your experience with both.
Throw out a vote, and or your experience with both.
#2
CF Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Owensville, MO
Posts: 1,423
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1998
Model: Grand Cherokee
Engine: 5.9
I've never run either, but I have to say I think the BFG's look a lot cooler and people say good things about them. JMO
#5
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: City of Trees, CA
Posts: 7,387
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
9 Posts
Year: 93 2 door
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
these are a tough decision that I am currently struggling with as well. I think you would be happy with either one they both recieve good reviews. I went to JPmagazine for more info
KM2 http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...2/viewall.html
MTR http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...r/viewall.html
test results of 33 different tires (2012) http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...d/viewall.html
basically, KM2 and MTR were rated very similarly.
street and heavy rock use were rated equally and KM2's rated better on sand, MTR's rated better in mud and snow. I think I'm dead set on KM2's because the 35's measure to a 34.8" and supposedly weigh a little less and found for slightly cheaper. I think I'll be happier with them in the dry dusty rocks of the sierras in summertime. if I saw more mud and snow I'd choose MTR's. both tires look awesome though good luck on the tough decision
KM2 http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...2/viewall.html
MTR http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...r/viewall.html
test results of 33 different tires (2012) http://www.jpmagazine.com/techarticl...d/viewall.html
basically, KM2 and MTR were rated very similarly.
street and heavy rock use were rated equally and KM2's rated better on sand, MTR's rated better in mud and snow. I think I'm dead set on KM2's because the 35's measure to a 34.8" and supposedly weigh a little less and found for slightly cheaper. I think I'll be happier with them in the dry dusty rocks of the sierras in summertime. if I saw more mud and snow I'd choose MTR's. both tires look awesome though good luck on the tough decision
Last edited by Atmos; 11-05-2012 at 12:20 AM.
Trending Topics
#8
The km2 DO NOT measure even close to 35. That was my main turning point to them.
They measure some where between 33.8 and 34.2
If you look at the weight of the 33x12.5 km2 and the 35x12.5 km2 it's like 8 pounds. That tells me there not much bigger
There also have a thinner side wall which can be good and bad depending on where the wheel.
Km2 arw not directional which is a plus though if you plan on carrying a spare
They measure some where between 33.8 and 34.2
If you look at the weight of the 33x12.5 km2 and the 35x12.5 km2 it's like 8 pounds. That tells me there not much bigger
There also have a thinner side wall which can be good and bad depending on where the wheel.
Km2 arw not directional which is a plus though if you plan on carrying a spare
#9
The km2 DO NOT measure even close to 35. That was my main turning point to them.
They measure some where between 33.8 and 34.2
If you look at the weight of the 33x12.5 km2 and the 35x12.5 km2 it's like 8 pounds. That tells me there not much bigger
There also have a thinner side wall which can be good and bad depending on where the wheel.
Km2 arw not directional which is a plus though if you plan on carrying a spare
They measure some where between 33.8 and 34.2
If you look at the weight of the 33x12.5 km2 and the 35x12.5 km2 it's like 8 pounds. That tells me there not much bigger
There also have a thinner side wall which can be good and bad depending on where the wheel.
Km2 arw not directional which is a plus though if you plan on carrying a spare
I havent run the mt/r's, but i'd consider them for my next tire, never heard anythign terrible about them.
I have run the km2s and love them. Worked absolutely awesome everywhere offroad, great on the street, excellent tread life. got 55k miles out of them and they are still kicking (though just about bald now).
#10
Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Palmer AK
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 2001 Classic
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
I've had a set of both Km2s and MT/R's. If I had to choose 1 set again I'd go with the MT/R's just because they are 10 ply tires with Kevlar. I'd say they're equally as loud on the road. They both handled great off road not so much on snow or ice.
#12
CF Veteran
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Dubuque IA,Libertyville IL
Posts: 2,450
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Year: 1992
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0 HO
I love my KM2's they are great all year round and great offroad. never had the MTR's but i wouldnt mind having those either since they seem to get good reviews from a lot people. either way i think you will be getting a great tire
#13
CF Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 2,322
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Year: 1990
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
imma buy kevlars. they do better in snow and such as far as i've read. but like stated before, extra plies and overall toughness factor....plus i think they just look cooler, i seen a set on a jk in the princess auto parking lot the other day, and they just look rad.
#14
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: St Peters MO
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Year: 1999
Model: Cherokee
Engine: 4.0
Tire rack survey shows a better performance on the BFG.
See results here.http://www.tirerack.com/tires/survey....jsp?type=ORMT
See results here.http://www.tirerack.com/tires/survey....jsp?type=ORMT