BajaNomad

General Tire Grabber AT2

John M - 12-8-2011 at 06:06 PM

Has this tire been around long enough to establish suitability for Baja dirt roads?

Secondly has anyone switched from BFG KO AT tires to these Generals?

Mileage, sidewall strength, and on highway noise comparisons would be a good starting point.

Looks as though they are fifty bucks less expensive, per tire.

John M

p.s. I've had many sets of BFGs so you do not need to sing their praises excessively.

J.P. - 12-8-2011 at 07:04 PM

TIRES there are as many opinions about tires as their is Brands. My personal choice is Cooper I run the Cooper ATR on my Suburban 4x4 tow rig and started buying them in 1985 I had a 300Z and at the time it was the only replacement tire I could find

David K - 12-8-2011 at 07:19 PM

I am so happy with the Hankook Dynapro ATm tires... I would suggest them too... They are available in a LT/ E rated, or the P rated, as I use.

Here they are with 12,000 miles on them, by the mud caves in Borrego (Arroyo Tapiado) on Oct. 15:





They are quiet on the highway, great in sand, mud and snow... and wearing well... I went with them after reading so many good reports from Tacoma owners across the country... otherwise, I would have never given them a thought. I have on my last Tacoma had Toyo Open Country AT and Cooper Discoverer ATRs, and they were fine tires.

Oh NO!

John M - 12-8-2011 at 07:39 PM

Thanks guys, but.....

I had specifically inquired about these General tires not Hankook nor Cooper nor Goodyear nor .........

Just seeking an answer from those with experience with the Generals

If not the Generals I'll stick with BFG

John

David K - 12-8-2011 at 07:45 PM

I have heard nothing bad about the General AT2, they have them where I got the Hankook's, and were pretty pricey... very close to BFG All Terrains, but less than the Grabber off road racing look alike tire... which still isn't available in the stock Tacoma size...

Why are you so hard core on those two brands? Just wondering...

Not too hard core

John M - 12-8-2011 at 09:14 PM

Thanks for asking David

I've had nothing but success with the BFG AT & Mud T/As

In all the years and sets of tires I have not yet had an issue with them failing. A repairable flat from time to time off road & on road but the Safety Seal kit came to the rescue every time.

The mileage has been (for my money) very good on both styles of BFGs. We've plugged side wall punctures as well as tread punctures. They are not noisy for me, but then my hearing isn't what it used to be.

I simply won't switch from the BFG loyalty unless the General is better. I have recently noticed the increasing number of racers using Generals and suppose that their racing tire technology may migrate to their non-race off road tires.

John

bajabass - 12-9-2011 at 07:41 AM

All tire makers "help out" a certain amount of racers. If the help is gone at BFG, who's next. Free tires, or a steep discount has a lot to do with it.

Pacifico - 12-9-2011 at 09:06 AM

John,

The Generals appear to be great tires. There are a bunch of us in my circle of friends that are considering giving them a try on our buggies as they are about $100 a tire cheaper than what we currently run. I figure what's the worst that could happen....I might try a set, and if I don't like like them then I'll go back to the BFG's.

My guess is they are comparable to the BFG's...

Go for it!

Bob H - 12-9-2011 at 10:15 AM

Here is a picture of the AT2 tire

http://general.tiremedia.com/model/grabber-at2.html

GC - 12-9-2011 at 10:37 AM

There is a test of the General Grabber tire write-up in the Dec Off-Road Adventure"Magazine done by 4-Wheel Parts. You can get a free on-line version of the Magazine.

TMW - 12-9-2011 at 11:20 AM

Interesting price difference between the 265/75R16 and 285/75R16 series of the Hankook ATM and Grabber AT2. At Big Brand Tires the 265 Hankook ATM is $139. The Grabber AT2 is $188 and the BFG AT/KO is $206. In the 285 series The Hankook ATM is $199. The Grabber AT2 is $199 and the BFG AT/KO is $215. The Hankook is a P series and the Grabber and BFG at LT series. The Hankook details the tire as an all terrain light truck tire for off road and on road use.

Barry A. - 12-9-2011 at 11:48 AM

I am under the impression that the "P-Metric" tires are not as tough as the "LT" tires---------it that a correct assumption???

Barry

mtgoat666 - 12-9-2011 at 12:02 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
I am under the impression that the "P-Metric" tires are not as tough as the "LT" tires---------it that a correct assumption???

Barry


define tough? are you wanting to compare puncture resistance? are you asking about comparing blunt or sharp objects?

Barry A. - 12-9-2011 at 12:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by mtgoat666
Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
I am under the impression that the "P-Metric" tires are not as tough as the "LT" tires---------it that a correct assumption???

Barry


define tough? are you wanting to compare puncture resistance? are you asking about comparing blunt or sharp objects?


You know, TOUGH!!! as in rugged for OFF ROAD use.

Yes, are LT tires more resistant to both "blunt" and "sharp" objects than P-Metric tires?

Do LT tires have stiffer more puncture resistant side walls than P-Metric???

Do P-Metric tires ride more comfortably than LT tires of the same size and with the same air pressure?

Barry

Trueheart - 12-9-2011 at 12:38 PM

I am running with Grabber A/T's on my Ridgeline. Original tires were Michelin, and they were great ... 60K+, but when I went for replacement tires, the cost of M's was significantly higher than a lot of alternatives. I went searching for info and found a lot of users recommending the Grabber A/T's. I use my truck on a variety of surfaces and conditions, but mostly on dry pavement. These tires are quite acceptable in snow/ice conditions for my wintertime use, as well as doing dirt washboard roads in Baja on my trips there.

I went the Grabber A/T direction, and I have not been disappointed thus far. I did get a 60K warranty. Total price was around $750, installed, with free R&B in future, plus TPMS kit done at install.

Time will tell. I recently put a set on my daughters Xterra.

choyero - 12-9-2011 at 12:49 PM

Something to consideration when deciding on buying new tires and using them in baja is:

Are the tires available for purchase in baja? In the case that you destroy a tire in baja, are you going to be able to find a matching replacement. If you buy generals or similar most likely you'll be driving home on 3 generals and 1 bfg. BFG's are readily available is darn most everytown. I would not use anything but BFG. I currently have 6 vehicles parked out side with bfg AT'S or KM2. I've run BFG's in baja full time for the last 10yrs. I've had one fail, when I put a jagged rock through the sidewall on a 4 yr old all terrain.

I'd recommend the KM2's, they are awesome tires and extremely tough, while at the same time relatively quiet.

David K - 12-9-2011 at 03:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
I am under the impression that the "P-Metric" tires are not as tough as the "LT" tires---------it that a correct assumption???

Barry


Hi Barry, our trucks come from the factory with P Metric rated tires... They are rated for typical truck use.

LT tires are more expensive, have a stiffer sidewall, ride harder, but last longer... for heavy duty or camper applications.

The 285 Hankook only comes in an LT, that is why it is higher priced, I read somewhere. A 285 tire will not fit on a stock suspension Tacoma, without a lift or body cutting. The biggest tire that won't rub is a 265/75-16, which is 1" taller tire than stock (265/70-16) on the Off Road TRD Tacoma. That is what I did, got the tallest tire... nice because the speedometer is now accurate... It read too fast with the stock tires!

Barry A. - 12-9-2011 at 03:05 PM

Thanks, David-----that is helpful, and confirms what I thought was the case, but you expanded my understanding.

Barry

David K - 12-9-2011 at 03:15 PM

No worries... and let me modify what I said above... 'typical truck use' as it is for me as a daily driver, light to medium loads... rarely have a ton on it (just during big Baja camping trips). If you are going to put a heavy pop up like Neal Johns has on his Tacoma, then the LT tire is a better bet.

TMW - 12-9-2011 at 04:02 PM

I'm also looking at new tires for my 04 Tacoma. I'm debating as to the 265 vs the 285. I have the lift installed already but if I use the stock rims I need spacers for the front which I have on hand. Also a 285 won't fit in the spare tire slot without modifications. Cost is also a consideration. I can get 5 of DKs Hankook tires for the price of 4 Grabbers and 6 (2nd spare) for almost the price of the BFGs. Decisions, decisions, decisions.

comitan - 12-9-2011 at 04:11 PM

Tires, Tires I have a problem I have 6.5" rims on my pickup the tire rack say maximum 245/75/16 but I would like to put 265's I'm talking about load rating E
The reason I want to change is I would increase load rating for a heavy camper.

David K - 12-9-2011 at 04:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TW
I'm also looking at new tires for my 04 Tacoma. I'm debating as to the 265 vs the 285. I have the lift installed already but if I use the stock rims I need spacers for the front which I have on hand. Also a 285 won't fit in the spare tire slot without modifications. Cost is also a consideration. I can get 5 of DKs Hankook tires for the price of 4 Grabbers and 6 (2nd spare) for almost the price of the BFGs. Decisions, decisions, decisions.


There is a TON of info at http://www.TacomaWorld.com it is about 10 times more active than Baja Nomad's forums!

General AT 2 Tires

jaymtb - 12-10-2011 at 12:37 AM

Hi,
I have been using this tire in LT for several years, both in
27x8.5 x14 for 2wd tacoma and 16" size for 4wd taco with good results in both Colorado snow& ice, off-road, and in Baja and Sinaloa back roads. No problems w/ rock cuts, punctures, uneven wear, or noise on hard surfaces. The are a bit firmer riding than P rated tires, but they hold up.
They also give good wear, traction, dry road handling, and seem to resist hydro planing in rain well. They are available at a good price point at discount and online suppliers.

Cheers,
Jay

Hook - 12-10-2011 at 06:17 AM

Surprised no one has mentioned simply going to the tirerack.com site and looking at the reviews. Appears there are 106 of them. Most all of them glowing. I could save about 200.00 on a set of four, compared to my Michelin LTX-MS2 tires. That's something to think about................as TW says, like a free tire. I should EVENTUALLY replace my spare. :o



[Edited on 12-10-2011 by Hook]

Opinions are pretty high on these tires

John M - 12-11-2011 at 04:07 PM

I went through many of the reviews from Tire Rack that were posted on their website. Although a number of the vehicles with these tires are full size pickups, and larger, like crew cabs the ratings were predominatly very good. I didn't see any comments relating to very soft sand, silt, and one or two said ok on beach sand. None that I saw posted spoke about lowering air pressure so I took that to mean most evaluations were at street pressure. Didn't seem to be many of the more serious "off-road" reports there. That is why I asked here on the Baja Board.

Pricewise I only compared Tire Rack advertised prices for the size tire I'd use. My current tires are BFG KO 265-75-16 listed for $232 each/$926 for four.

General Grabber A2 - 265-75-16 for $149 each/$596 for four.

I guess Tire Rack excludes mounting & balancing which would be the same regardless which brand.

Quite a price difference although I paid substantially less at Discount Tire for my last set of BFGs a couple of years ago.

Still like to see & hear some Baja Proven stories on the Grabbers.

John M

David K - 12-12-2011 at 09:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by John M
I went through many of the reviews from Tire Rack that were posted on their website. Although a number of the vehicles with these tires are full size pickups, and larger, like crew cabs the ratings were predominatly very good. I didn't see any comments relating to very soft sand, silt, and one or two said ok on beach sand. None that I saw posted spoke about lowering air pressure so I took that to mean most evaluations were at street pressure. Didn't seem to be many of the more serious "off-road" reports there. That is why I asked here on the Baja Board.

Pricewise I only compared Tire Rack advertised prices for the size tire I'd use. My current tires are BFG KO 265-75-16 listed for $232 each/$926 for four.

General Grabber A2 - 265-75-16 for $149 each/$596 for four.

I guess Tire Rack excludes mounting & balancing which would be the same regardless which brand.

Quite a price difference although I paid substantially less at Discount Tire for my last set of BFGs a couple of years ago.

Still like to see & hear some Baja Proven stories on the Grabbers.

John M


John, not sure if you looked yet, but the reviews of the AT2 are good on Tacoma World, as well... (as are the reviews of the ATm I now have)... The tread pattern of the Genera AT2 is very close to the All Terrain TA BFGs, so if that tread worked for you, then should be good.

I liked the self cleaning ability of the Dynapros... had to be the best of any tire I had... perhaps why they work so well in mud and snow?




[Edited on 12-12-2011 by David K]

bonanza bucko - 12-12-2011 at 09:45 AM

I am on my fifth set of BFG TAs...three on my Toyota Tundra and two now on my F150. I love them. I trust them...3 ply side walls the biggest reason....never had one problem on THAT ROAD south of Puertecitos where other tires got chewed up.

But!! My F150 has the normal...and historic...Ford trouble with the truth about such stuff as gas mileage. The sticker on my 2010 F150 advertised "18 MPG road and 14 MPG city." I am a numbers freak and I don't trust the Ford built in calculator which is always about 2 MPG high...so I calculate my mileage. In 49K miles since new my F150 has gotten 13.6 MPG!!

Now...is that due to Ford fibbing?... I think it is. But maybe...just maybe..part of it may be due to the BFG TAs which are not included in Ford's "suggested" tires for the truck.

What do you think?

BB:-)

TMW - 12-12-2011 at 10:22 AM

18 hwy and 14 city is a pretty standard rating for a full size truck. My 91 chevy 4x4 was listed at 13 and 17. My 04 GMC Z71 was listed at 14 and 18 as your Ford was. City driving was more in the 12 to 13 range but hwy was more in the 15-16 range. However that was driving mostly 75mph a lot. Your speed on the hwy has a lot to do with it as does the tire pressure. My 07 Tacoma work gets 21-22 hwy with the 4L V6 as does my 04 Tacoma with the 3.4L V6. Keep your hwy speed below 60 and that Ford will probably get 18mpg hwy.

J.P. - 12-12-2011 at 10:46 AM

I have followed those Ford test trucks across Arizona I 40 They are virtual rolling labratory's I really doubt if a individual could duplicate the driving situtaions they are able to create:wow::wow:

[Edited on 12-12-2011 by J.P.]

Hook - 12-12-2011 at 11:01 AM

I'm also not sure I would call some of the recently produced F-150s a full sized truck. In the mid-late 90s, they moved away from the same box and chassis size as the 250s and 350s.

Now, they SEEM to have gotten bigger again with the craze for four doors and a short, short bed.

Speed

wessongroup - 12-12-2011 at 11:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by TW
18 hwy and 14 city is a pretty standard rating for a full size truck. My 91 chevy 4x4 was listed at 13 and 17. My 04 GMC Z71 was listed at 14 and 18 as your Ford was. City driving was more in the 12 to 13 range but hwy was more in the 15-16 range. However that was driving mostly 75mph a lot. Your speed on the hwy has a lot to do with it as does the tire pressure. My 07 Tacoma work gets 21-22 hwy with the 4L V6 as does my 04 Tacoma with the 3.4L V6. Keep your hwy speed below 60 and that Ford will probably get 18mpg hwy.


I couldn't believe the mileage difference, between doing 50-55 and 70-80... 21-23 mpg and 15-16 respectively .. 86 Bronco , V8 302 .. I just putt along ... f'em I'm old ... and stay in the right lane..

Thanks to all .... one of the better benefits of reading BN's... IMHO

[Edited on 12-12-2011 by wessongroup]

[Edited on 12-12-2011 by wessongroup]

David K - 12-12-2011 at 12:41 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TW
My 07 Tacoma work gets 21-22 hwy with the 4L V6 as does my 04 Tacoma with the 3.4L V6. Keep your hwy speed below 60 and that Ford will probably get 18mpg hwy.


I wish I know how you got that much? Secret gas, flat driving? In my area, all three of my Tacomas all got about the same... 16 mpg avearge daily driving (15-19 range). I have the 4.0 V-6 automatic 4 door 4WD, last two... and even Toyota gave it a mileage rating of 16 mpg city/ 20 mpg hwy. Nice that you exceeded the factory figures.

My 2001 was a 2 door extra cab with the 3.4 V-6, but it also was 16-17 mpg for me... At least with the bigger 2nd generation trucks and bigger engine, the mileage didn't go down!

bonanza bucko - 12-12-2011 at 05:48 PM

I had a new Ford Explorer several years ago with the then new on board computer system. We took it on a trip to North Dakota from San Diego. I believed the computer's mileage and range data because I didn't know any better. We passed a sign in ND that said "next gas 130 miles." My range computer said I had 160 in the tank. We barely made it...fumes.

So for the rest of our trip....about 5000 miles to Illiniois, Wisconsin, Missouri etc and all the way home I kept a log of miles driven and gas consumed. The actual data were about 14 MPG but the computer reported about 17....20% error. So when I got home I went to the dealer about that. He said. "It's an average MPG." I said, "How's 5000 miles with a 20% error?" We went round and round and after many, many phone calls I finally go a woman in Ford in Detroit HQ who called me say the following, (paraphrased)..."We know it's wrong and we are not going to fix it...this is the last contact you will have with Ford Motor Company about this."

So I fired Ford after about 20 years of customer hood. I bought Toyota Tundras and loved them until Toyota decided to try to emulate a Dodge Ram 2500 and then to make the bigger truck weigh the same as the old one with lotsa plastic and thin sheet metal. I bought a 2010 F150 which is a very fine machine indeed!....it performs on THAT ROAD just as well or better than the Tundra did and that is saying something.

But the F150 has the same Ford Fib in the onboard computer. I just know about it now.

Still peees me off!

BB

mtgoat666 - 12-12-2011 at 06:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by bonanza bucko
I had a new Ford Explorer several years ago with the then new on board computer system. We took it on a trip to North Dakota from San Diego. I believed the computer's mileage and range data because I didn't know any better. We passed a sign in ND that said "next gas 130 miles." My range computer said I had 160 in the tank. We barely made it...fumes.

So for the rest of our trip....about 5000 miles to Illiniois, Wisconsin, Missouri etc and all the way home I kept a log of miles driven and gas consumed. The actual data were about 14 MPG but the computer reported about 17....20% error. So when I got home I went to the dealer about that. He said. "It's an average MPG." I said, "How's 5000 miles with a 20% error?" We went round and round and after many, many phone calls I finally go a woman in Ford in Detroit HQ who called me say the following, (paraphrased)..."We know it's wrong and we are not going to fix it...this is the last contact you will have with Ford Motor Company about this."

So I fired Ford after about 20 years of customer hood. I bought Toyota Tundras and loved them until Toyota decided to try to emulate a Dodge Ram 2500 and then to make the bigger truck weigh the same as the old one with lotsa plastic and thin sheet metal. I bought a 2010 F150 which is a very fine machine indeed!....it performs on THAT ROAD just as well or better than the Tundra did and that is saying something.

But the F150 has the same Ford Fib in the onboard computer. I just know about it now.

Still peees me off!

BB


i am not sure your complaint is fair. your method of measuring fuel consumed is via pump reading at point of purchase. your cars' trip computer essentially measures fuel consumed by measuring length of time fuel injector is open and assuming a constant fuel pressure. they are 2 very different methods of measuring fuel consumed, and one shouldn't be surprised by 20% discrepancy, and perhaps 20% difference is very good result. any engineers want to opine?

David K - 12-12-2011 at 07:12 PM

If you top your tank, drive 200 miles then fill it again... and put 10 gallons in, you just got 20 MPG. (period)... The onboard computer can tell you the sky is green and sea levels are rising... but the FACTS are right in your face when you pay for 10 gallons after driving 200 miles.

Bucko, there are a lot of guys on the Tacoma forum aspousing some pretty fantastic mileage numbers... and they too are using on board computers! It seems that the public education system is so busy showing algore's global warming movie to scare kids, they didn't have time to teach basic division!!! :lol:

some reviews from JeepForum.com

Ken Cooke - 12-12-2011 at 07:13 PM

link: http://www.jeepforum.com/forum/f211/general-grabber-at2-7702...

Price: $160.00
Pros: Very aggressive tread pattern. Offroad abilities are great. Very quiet going down the highway, and not just for an agressive tire. These are quiet for any tire!!
Cons: Feel unstable driving on road right away... only have them a short while so not sure if that will improve.
Recommended? Yes

Comments: I really am happy with these tires. They look great, and perform amazing offroad. They are very quiet going down the highway, i can hardly hear them at all. They do seem to be unstable driving on road tho. It almost like u can feel the tread shifting slightly so it makes the jeep wobble almost. This "wobble" is not that bad tho, and no its not anything like death wobble.
Overall they are a great tire and given the chance i would still purchase these tmrw if i needed.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $140.00
Pros: aggressive tread. great price
Cons: none noticed
Recommended? Yes

Comments: I got 5 of these in 31" for 140 installed with nitro. They are great for basic AT driving. Since this is my daily driver, they are also good on the highway. They get bogged down in heavy mud, but are good if you aren't going deep mudding.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $750.00
Pros: A cheaper alternative to BFG's, these tires are great! These have great grip for snow and ice, are fun to slide in rain, and not too bad in mud if you gas it to clean the treads.
Cons: 255/70/16's took a full week to get shipped to OH from the factory in CA
Recommended? Yes

Comments: I got them a month ago, and I haven't had any problems with them yet. They always seem to have solid grip and road noise isn't very bad for an AT tire. In mud and soft ground i would just say to make sure to throttle enough to clean them out. I would definitely recommend these over a BFG All Terrain T/A because my tire installer wanted 160 more than the grabbers for nearly the same tire in my opinion. Good luck in your tire decision

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $148.00
Pros: 60K Milage Warrenty Lower road noise than BFGs Supposed to be better in snow
Cons: none yet
Recommended? Yes

Comments: These tires were at the right price for me, and the 60K warranty was a big plus because my XJ is also my DD. I ordered the tires online from tirerack, they had the best price. They are a little quieter than my old BFG ATs and other reviews said they performed well in snow. It hasn't snowed here yet so I will update later.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $155.00
Pros: great looking tire
Cons: none so far
Recommended? Yes

Comments: just put the tires on my GC. they are a great looking AT tire and the price is very nice compared to other similar tires.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $130.00
Pros: great tread pattern, low price, nice quality
Cons: None
Recommended? Yes

Comments: It seems these tires are just like BFG A/T's.
The only thing was that the tread was a bit un-true, so balancing was near impossible.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $831.00
Pros: Nice aggressive tread - good traction off road - quiet ride on road
Cons: Heavier than stock - gas mileage went down to 17.5 mpg
Recommended? Yes

Comments: I bought a set of General Grabber AT2, 285-75-16 from Big 10. Went to 16's from my original 17's. Paired the tires with a set of Mamba M-5's. The tires have a nice aggressive tread pattern for an all terrain tire. Price for purchase, installation of new wheels and tires, life-time rotation and balance, and installing Jeep valve-stems was $831 out the door. I have had the tires for two weeks now and have driven them about 500 miles. The biggest difference between these and stock are the ride on the road. They are not a noisy tire at all. They provide a much more comfortable ride than the stock tires did. Off the pavement they performed well for what I wanted them for. I do not climb rocks but once in awhile do come across some nasty mud looking for the right fishing spot. The tires handled mud just fine. The one thing I was the most pleased with was an area where we fish has a hill that is about 45 degrees and rather high (part of the dam). The stock tires would spin so I would have to take the hill on an angle. The new General Tires went staight up, no spinning. Do not expect your gas mileage to go up with these tires. My mileage went down about 1 - 1.5mpg. I would definitely recommend these tires.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Price: $150.00
Pros: Seem to be very similar to bfg a/t, if so then ill have no complaints
Cons: None just yet...
Recommended? Yes

Comments: The tires were very reasonably prices, and appear to have very similar characteristics to the BFG A/T. I have used BFG's in the past and they were great, but the Generals had a better price tag and I figured I would give them a shot. So far they have been great.

bonanza bucko - 12-12-2011 at 07:56 PM

I agree with David K....5000 miles of miles driven divided by gallons pumped into the thing equals Miles Per Gallon! Period.

I don't give a Mexican rat's scruffy butt for any trick, factory, gumming, advertising department BS to the contrary.

BB:-)

Ken's tire reply

John M - 12-12-2011 at 08:02 PM

Hey, who hijacked this Grabber thread into a pick up mileage contest? Heck, not one of the mileage reports mentioned General Grabbers.

Thank you Ken for seeking out additional reports on the General tires.

John

Ken Cooke - 12-12-2011 at 08:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by John M
Thank you Ken for seeking out additional reports on the General tires.

John


I'm trying to keep the thread on-topic, that's all. I have seen Interco IROK tires packed with mud, so any tire can pack in mud if the conditions are right.

I haven't had the greatest experience with BFG All-Terrain tires - I completely shredded one on a Jeep run in the Old Dale Mining Dist. of Joshua Tree - in front of the Rubicon Owners Club.

I am willing to give the KM2 tires an opportunity on my Jeep, though. But, I'm pretty tough on tires.:bounce: