Sponsored

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
I had a great deal fall into my lap on some wheels and tires. Outside of the pressure that was in them and not realized until the TPMS finally registered a few miles into this test, you can't really ask for a better comparison. The 2 runs were nearly identical, including braking points for ICE shutdown. Tire size changed in BCM and trans reset, only 10 miles or so driven post relearn before these results. The timing of the runs is testament to repeatability.

22 Powerboost, test weight 6500lbs, 87 octane
Factory, 20" 275-60-20, 38psi Hankook AT2
BFG AT Revo 3 lt275-65-20 34psi 34.1" (under inflated, possible mileage discrepancy)

Test course:

From stop accelerate in eco mode to 65mph, run some distance, slow for a light, cruise control back to speed, stop at a light.
Accelerate back to 65mph, speed increase to 75mph, stop at light, make U turn (*2) and accelerate back to 75mph, stop for light photo results.
Terrain is 18 rolling hills, solid boost on climb, at least 2 10-to-9 downshifts.

Stock
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696824704512


LT
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696824739977


*2 - reset other trip meter at the u-turn
Stock
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696824807307


LT (cruise braked shutting down ICE prematurely approaching light)
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696824836225


The trip continued through various traffic and lights, the results are less conclusive due to traffic / light conditions outside of repeatability.

Stock
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696825294503

Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696825324836


LT
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696825359339

Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696825384278


Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696826056096

Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696826032189


I think under-inflation was playing a roll here. There's only 23 miles of fuel in the tank and 40 is needed for the test, changing fuels so can't re-run with proper inflation to see what changes. 93 e0 has more energy and will likely show increase in efficiency, combined with proper inflation the results will no longer be like-for-like. This is the best repeatable test I could run with identical variables (wheels are same, just different colors). Hopefully this informs someone in the future of what to expect. These are on the light side of LT tires and have the factory tread width of 275mm.

Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course two


@Administrator added images of wheels / tires to replace generic

Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course one
Sponsored

 
Last edited:

JIMFOUNTAIN

Well-known member
First Name
Jim
Joined
Jan 27, 2021
Threads
6
Messages
355
Reaction score
449
Location
Austin, Tx
Vehicles
2021 F150 SCREW PB 6.5' 701A
Nice to see a very repeatable comparison. Surprised to see the almost identical results.

Thanks for posting for all to see.
 

Polo08816

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
418
Reaction score
227
Location
MD
Vehicles
2014 BMW 335i
I had a great deal fall into my lap on some wheels and tires. Outside of the pressure that was in them and not realized until the TPMS finally registered a few miles into this test, you can't really ask for a better comparison. The 2 runs were nearly identical, including braking points for ICE shutdown. Tire size changed in BCM and trans reset, only 10 miles or so driven post relearn before these results. The timing of the runs is testament to repeatability.

22 Powerboost, test weight 6500lbs, 87 octane
Factory, 20" 275-60-20, 38psi Hankook AT2
BFG AT Revo 3 lt275-65-20 34psi 34.1" (under inflated, possible mileage discrepancy)

Test course:

From stop accelerate in eco mode to 65mph, run some distance, slow for a light, cruise control back to speed, stop at a light.
Accelerate back to 65mph, speed increase to 75mph, stop at light, make U turn (*2) and accelerate back to 75mph, stop for light photo results.
Terrain is 18 rolling hills, solid boost on climb, at least 2 10-to-9 downshifts.

Stock
1696824704512.png


LT
1696824739977.png


*2 - reset other trip meter at the u-turn
Stock
1696824807307.png


LT (cruise braked shutting down ICE prematurely approaching light)
1696824836225.png


The trip continued through various traffic and lights, the results are less conclusive due to traffic / light conditions outside of repeatability.

Stock
1696825294503.png

1696825324836.png


LT
1696825359339.png

1696825384278.png


1696826056096.png

1696826032189.png


I think under-inflation was playing a roll here. There's only 23 miles of fuel in the tank and 40 is needed for the test, changing fuels so can't re-run with proper inflation to see what changes. 93 e0 has more energy and will likely show increase in efficiency, combined with proper inflation the results will no longer be like-for-like. This is the best repeatable test I could run with identical variables (wheels are same, just different colors). Hopefully this informs someone in the future of what to expect. These are on the light side of LT tires and have the factory tread width of 275mm.
So the fuel economy appears very similar between a standard load versus load range E tire?

I'm of the opinion of the huge fuel economy drops people see are when moving from a factory sized highway oriented tire to a much larger mud terrain load range E tire.

I'm of the opinion that I would replace my standard load tires with load range E tires when they are worn out if the load range E tires would not make the ride too uncomfortable. You should get more durability out of the load range E tires as well as them being more puncture resistance.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
HammaMan

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
So the fuel economy appears very similar between a standard load versus load range E tire?

I'm of the opinion of the huge fuel economy drops people see are when moving from a factory sized highway oriented tire to a much larger mud terrain load range E tire.
Some people change multiple variables like tread width and size, and don't really document like for like. I have no need for LT, but wanted to at least test the larger size in going from 33 to 34. I just happened to get the wheels and tires for less than what I could have got the wheels for, and the tires are ~95% life remaining.

So with this, the wheels are just painted version of the factory 20s, the tread width is the same, the only difference is 33 to 34" diameter and LT tires. They're 10lbs heavier per tire. This was done 24hrs apart with all other conditions remaining constant. So few examples retain this many variables.

One of the impacts on mileage from EV testing is different wheel designs can impact mileage up to 5% just on the wheel's aerodynamics. Tires sticking outside of the wheel wells will absolutely murder efficiency. That's a big hit on aero drag that can have an easy 10-15% impact. While I'd prefer an XL or SL tire, what this shows is that the additional mass and even additional size had very minimal impact. Roughly 2/3 of this mileage data is 75mph, about 1/3 is 65mph. Within about 5 miles of leaving a light, the fuel economy has stabilized. This is rolling hill state highways and not flat interstate where mileage is much better. Another component to this is that the truck now sits another 1/2" taller.
 

travisN000

Well-known member
First Name
Travis
Joined
Sep 13, 2021
Threads
4
Messages
322
Reaction score
259
Location
Oregon
Vehicles
2021 F150 Powerboost CCSB
I made the jump to 285/65r20 Maxxis Razr ATs; specs show it being 34.7 in diameter, and 65 lbs. I get similar results in eco below 60-65 MPH, but anything above that and my MPG begins to suffer significantly.
 

Sponsored

StoneGray22

Well-known member
First Name
Jonathan
Joined
Nov 28, 2021
Threads
7
Messages
250
Reaction score
138
Location
Texas
Vehicles
22 SCREW, 500A, 3.5 EB, 4x4, Max Tow, 157"
Very nice! Now, you're gonna repeat this for us every weekend, right? Hahaha.

What are your thoughts on the Bridgestones as far as noise and ride quality?
 
OP
OP
HammaMan

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
As suspected, I changed to a 93 e0 fuel (full tank worth) and was able to run the 2nd part of the test including the rest of the journey and the results were notably different. I get this fuel for the same price as other stations sell 90 e10 mid grade. Tires also taken from 34 to 44psi, the miles traveled lines up properly now. Tried to hit the same braking spot where cruise kicked out the LT run and went into ICE off prematurely. Temp was 61 degrees, previous runs were at 67 degrees.

*2
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696901106422


Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696901134223


Pasted in from above so you don't have to go back up
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696901627329


Stock
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696901664242

LT
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1696901692949
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
HammaMan

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
Very nice! Now, you're gonna repeat this for us every weekend, right? Hahaha.

What are your thoughts on the Bridgestones as far as noise and ride quality?
Noise is unchanged, ride is impacted due to being LT. Unless someone has a very specific need for LT like sharp rocks hitting the sidewall, I strongly suggest using XL where available, SL else. You just can't beat the ride of the lighter tires and they provide plenty of capacity even for towing at 5klb per axle. As to why XL -- the factory hankooks are XL and can take 51 psi which is good to reduce tire squat (not to be confused with suspension squat) when heavily loaded / towing. If max pressure is 44 psi, it's SL, if it's 50 psi, it's XL (some XLs say SL, but the max pressure indicates if it's XL)
 

Polo08816

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
418
Reaction score
227
Location
MD
Vehicles
2014 BMW 335i
Noise is unchanged, ride is impacted due to being LT. Unless someone has a very specific need for LT like sharp rocks hitting the sidewall, I strongly suggest using XL where available, SL else. You just can't beat the ride of the lighter tires and they provide plenty of capacity even for towing at 5klb per axle. As to why XL -- the factory hankooks are XL and can take 51 psi which is good to reduce tire squat (not to be confused with suspension squat) when heavily loaded / towing. If max pressure is 44 psi, it's SL, if it's 50 psi, it's XL (some XLs say SL, but the max pressure indicates if it's XL)
So I think only one OEM tire is XL and that's the General Grabber HTS 60:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/Tire...SpeedRating=Q&minLoadRating=S&performance=ALL

I would agree with the XL but I don't think there's that many "good" options for the 275/60/20 tire size.

That's why I would consider moving up to a 275/65/20 load range E tire.

The factory tire size of 275/55/20 for the Expedition is a different story. You get two good XL options which are the Continental TerrainContact H/T 117H and the new Michelin Defender LTX M/S2 117T.
 
OP
OP
HammaMan

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
So I think only one OEM tire is XL and that's the General Grabber HTS 60:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/TireSearchResults.jsp?tireIndex=0&autoMake=Ford&autoYear=2023&autoModel=F150+4WD+SuperCrew&autoModClar=275/60-20,+Max+Trailer+Tow+Pkg&width=275/&ratio=60&diameter=20&sortCode=60065&skipOver=true&minSpeedRating=Q&minLoadRating=S&performance=ALL

I would agree with the XL but I don't think there's that many "good" options for the 275/60/20 tire size.

That's why I would consider moving up to a 275/65/20 load range E tire.

The factory tire size of 275/55/20 for the Expedition is a different story. You get two good XL options which are the Continental TerrainContact H/T 117H and the new Michelin Defender LTX M/S2 117T.
Recon grappler is an easy XL 50psi choice for factory size for AT. I'd run it but if you do anything over 1 inch front leveling, the factory 33" just look like too little of a diameter. Their 34" version becomes SL 44psi. Are you only interested in HT tires?
 

Sponsored


Polo08816

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
418
Reaction score
227
Location
MD
Vehicles
2014 BMW 335i
Recon grappler is an easy XL 50psi choice for factory size for AT. I'd run it but if you do anything over 1 inch front leveling, the factory 33" just look like too little of a diameter. Their 34" version becomes SL 44psi. Are you only interested in HT tires?
Generally, yes. I don't have any off-roading in my plans - more so just towing a track car on a flat bed tilt trailer and road tripping.

All else equal on a road surface, a HT tire should be better in snow than an AT tire.
 

nitrobass24

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2023
Threads
13
Messages
316
Reaction score
209
Location
Dallas
Website
redboxplus.com
Vehicles
'21 F150 Platinum PB
Occupation
Roll offs and Porta-Potties
Thanks for sharing this @HammaMan I am about to switch over to the Pirelli A/T in 275/65/20 116H. These are supposedly optimized for Elec vehicles as they come on the Rivians as an OEM tire.

How was changing the tires size using Forscan? Any advice here having recently done this?
 
OP
OP
HammaMan

HammaMan

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2022
Threads
79
Messages
4,977
Reaction score
5,225
Location
SE US
Vehicles
2022 307a PB, Mach E GTPE
Thanks for sharing this @HammaMan I am about to switch over to the Pirelli A/T in 275/65/20 116H. These are supposedly optimized for Elec vehicles as they come on the Rivians as an OEM tire.

How was changing the tires size using Forscan? Any advice here having recently done this?
For a 34.1" tire it's this
Ford F-150 Apples to apples efficiency comparison -- factory 33s vs. LT 34s tires, fixed course 1697170224027
 

Polo08816

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2020
Threads
1
Messages
418
Reaction score
227
Location
MD
Vehicles
2014 BMW 335i
Thanks for sharing this @HammaMan I am about to switch over to the Pirelli A/T in 275/65/20 116H. These are supposedly optimized for Elec vehicles as they come on the Rivians as an OEM tire.

How was changing the tires size using Forscan? Any advice here having recently done this?

It's interesting how the standard load range tire is significantly more expensive than the load range E tire on TireRack:

https://www.tirerack.com/tires/Tire...&rearRatio=40&rearDiameter=17&performance=ALL
 

draggam01

Well-known member
First Name
Mark
Joined
Oct 6, 2023
Threads
5
Messages
66
Reaction score
31
Location
Windham, ME
Vehicles
2021 Ford F-150 Powerboost XLT
Occupation
retired
I had a great deal fall into my lap on some wheels and tires. Outside of the pressure that was in them and not realized until the TPMS finally registered a few miles into this test, you can't really ask for a better comparison. The 2 runs were nearly identical, including braking points for ICE shutdown. Tire size changed in BCM and trans reset, only 10 miles or so driven post relearn before these results. The timing of the runs is testament to repeatability.

22 Powerboost, test weight 6500lbs, 87 octane
Factory, 20" 275-60-20, 38psi Hankook AT2
BFG AT Revo 3 lt275-65-20 34psi 34.1" (under inflated, possible mileage discrepancy)

Test course:

From stop accelerate in eco mode to 65mph, run some distance, slow for a light, cruise control back to speed, stop at a light.
Accelerate back to 65mph, speed increase to 75mph, stop at light, make U turn (*2) and accelerate back to 75mph, stop for light photo results.
Terrain is 18 rolling hills, solid boost on climb, at least 2 10-to-9 downshifts.

Stock
1696824704512.png


LT
1696824739977.png


*2 - reset other trip meter at the u-turn
Stock
1696824807307.png


LT (cruise braked shutting down ICE prematurely approaching light)
1696824836225.png


The trip continued through various traffic and lights, the results are less conclusive due to traffic / light conditions outside of repeatability.

Stock
1696825294503.png

1696825324836.png


LT
1696825359339.png

1696825384278.png


1696826056096.png

1696826032189.png


I think under-inflation was playing a roll here. There's only 23 miles of fuel in the tank and 40 is needed for the test, changing fuels so can't re-run with proper inflation to see what changes. 93 e0 has more energy and will likely show increase in efficiency, combined with proper inflation the results will no longer be like-for-like. This is the best repeatable test I could run with identical variables (wheels are same, just different colors). Hopefully this informs someone in the future of what to expect. These are on the light side of LT tires and have the factory tread width of 275mm.

two.jpg


@Administrator added images of wheels / tires to replace generic

one.jpg
Those are some great numbers!
Sponsored

 
 




Top