BFGoodrich AT KO

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Aug 31, 2005 3:51 pm

Just some of my observations of the BFGoodrich AT KO 33x9.50-15

Aggressive shoulder design. Large actual diameter 32.75". 3 ply sidewall. Amazingly light weight. Very big rim protector, it actually extends over the rim of the wheel 1/8 inch. No way mud is getting in there.
They are surprisingly well mannered in the corners. Quiet and smoother. Comparing them to the Geolandar AT+II, I would say the handling is comparable , to better.

The Geolandar's are a tough tire to beat. If they came in the right size I'd still be running them. So far the BFG's are meeting expectations.

I'll add more as the testing continues

quickbiker · Post by **quickbiker** » Thu Sep 01, 2005 4:34 am

BFG's rock. Been using them for for over 10 years now. They have never let me down. The KO's came out about 5-6 years ago. Excellent tires, either in the AT or Mud variety.

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 4:05 am

These tires seem to be slightly quieter and smoother than the Geolandar AT+II's.

The side lugs are definitely more aggressive. Since they are a narrow tire , they tend to dig. You have to be easier on the throttle to avoid digging holes.

At speed there seems to be a little "push". More than the wider tires had. The rear takes a little more to break loose.
These should work really well for snow. I hope we get some this year.

Mileage has been average so far. It will take another tank or two do decide my fate there though.

Post by **Walt** » Wed Sep 14, 2005 6:06 am

I do enjoy the small hum they produce. It's not very noticable until I start stopping.

Post by **HenryJ** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 1:10 pm

Wet traction is not what the Geolandars were. At least not on wet pavement. These things spin pretty easily and howl like a big dog

I left a light somewhat "spiritedly" and broke the rear loose enough to get a loud "RROAERCH!" from the tires. surprised me

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Sat Oct 08, 2005 2:22 pm

:

HenryJ wrote:.........I left a light somewhat "spiritedly" and broke the rear loose enough to get a loud "RROAERCH!" from the tires. surprised me

I know that some members will not understand that such behavior can be embarrassing at moments. At least you can blend in at times

I try to find a hole to slink into

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:27 pm

These tires deserve the snowflake that resides on the sidewall. They handle the snow very well.

We received a little snow today, 6 1/2 inches. The tires cut right through , hooked well and handled great. I can see why they received the snow rating.

I have been very pleased with them thus far.

Steve2003 · Post by **Steve2003** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 6:52 pm

I am have been looking at this tire as well as the mud terrain. I like the agressive look of the mud terrain but I am not so sure how it will do as a tire for a daily driver. I know they make this tire in a 33x10.50 That's an option I am thinking of since I have 8" rims. I know some guys are putting the 33x12.50's on their 8" rims but the manufacturer suggest the 33X10.50 on the 8" rims. A friend of mine has these same tires on his truck and we have been offroading a few times and he was real happy with them. He has not yet had them in the snow. This is good info to hear that they do well in the snow.

Thanks

Steve

Post by **HenryJ** » Thu Dec 01, 2005 7:36 pm

For daily driving the AT will be a much better tire. If you see lots of mud they will not be very good.
The very same design that makes them a good snow tire hurts the performance in mud.
Somewhere I saw a quote that referred to the need for a good snow tire to trap the snow and use it for traction. A mud tire needs to "clean out".

The Geolander AT+II's have properties of both and are fairly unique in that respect.

The AT KO's have other advantages as can be seen in the exceptional snow performance.

Now to width. I like tall narrow tires. There is a whole thread on the benefits, and performance. Wide tires have their place, but for mileage and my terrain, tall and narrow excel.

Ideally the tread width and rim width should be about the same. Slightly narrower rim width is acceptable, but for a daily driver you do not want a wide tire on a skinny rim. The center will wear out unless the pressure is kept low and that really affects the mileage.

Personally I think that the 33x10.5's look really good!

Post by **Walt** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 6:53 am

Yea...I can also vouch for their mud performance. Not the best in the world. Weekend before last I helped a friend move 3 hours north of my in the MS delta. They call the mud there Gumbo. Kind of a stupid name, but it's appropriate. It's really sticky. My buddy's mobile home is on an acre of land that was basically cut out of a cotton field and levelled, so it's fairly soft ground. And it had rained the night before. Getting to his back door was a fun task. I had to drive around the mobile home, about 50 feet from the gravel driveway, through mud. By the time I got to the back door, my tires were so big they were scrapping the front and back of my fenders (all of them)--with the flares on. Things would've been different if I had given it some gas, but I was trying to rut the place up as little as possible.

jeff024 · Post by **jeff024** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 2:29 pm

I have run the bfgs through the cords before on my toyota

adrenalnjunky · Post by **adrenalnjunky** » Fri Dec 02, 2005 3:36 pm

Mine are holding up great - just took a good looka t them while wasking the truck - I'd guess I'ma t 7/8ths tread with over 20K on them - I am usually unable to milk more than about 35K out of any tires I ever owned in the past. These look like they might be with me for at least 45K or so.

TexasBlaZeR2 · Post by **TexasBlaZeR2** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:02 pm

I had BFG long trails on my 2000 from the factory. I got about 75K out of them and there was still tread on them when I sold it this summer. Last winter I ran BFG ATs and put the long trails on in the spring again.

Unfortunately, my 2005 has General Ameritracs...I miss the long trails.

Does anyone have pics of the difference between the older BFG AT and a BFG AT KO?

What are the differences in performance?

jeff024 · Post by **jeff024** » Sat Dec 03, 2005 6:23 pm

im not certain but I think the tread is the same just a diffrent compound and maybe the plys

chumley · Post by **chumley** » Sun Dec 04, 2005 5:04 am

The KO's also have sidewall lugs to them where the old AT's didn't. I'm not sure but I think the tread pattern may be slightly different also.

kermit · Post by **kermit** » Tue Dec 06, 2005 2:08 pm

excellent tire. they don't lie when they say 60k mile tire! i've been running them for at least 50k and have almost 1/4" of tread left.

Post by **HenryJ** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:54 am

Specifications wrote:Size 33X9.5 QR15
Service Description 113Q
Load Rating C
Max Load 2535 lbs.
Max. Inflation Press. 50 psi
Tread Depth 16/32"
Tire Weight 39 lbs.
Rim Width Range 6.5-8.5"
Meas. Tread Width 7.5"
Sect. Width 9.5"
Overall Diam. 32.7"
Revs Per Mile 636

I now have 14 months on these tires and approximately 14,000 miles. The tread depth is currently 13/32".

Road manners have been very good. They are smooth offroad. No appreciable change in noise , handling or mileage.

Rotated twice to this point and one alignment. I am due for an alignment and noticed a slight inside feather on the left front tire.

I am really happy with them so far.

Post by **Walt** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:16 am

Same here. I'm up to 25K.

ludwis · Post by **ludwis** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:33 pm

How frequently should you have an alignment done? I don't remember seeing it on the regular service schedule.

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 4:44 pm

My rule of thumb is to have it done if, you notice irregular wear when you rotate on a regular basis, when you have new tires put on and always after a TB crank

I am sure Steve and Brule will have other suggestions.

Something to think about is that BFG has a newer generation out, which is the ones that I have. I do not believe Walt or Brule have the latest ones. 3 out of 5 of mine are fine but, I have to replace 2 that BFG will reimburse me for.

killian96ss · Post by **killian96ss** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:31 pm

ludwis wrote:How frequently should you have an alignment done? I don't remember seeing it on the regular service schedule.

I like to have mine done every other year or about 2x during the life of 1 set of tires.

Steve

Post by **HenryJ** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:00 pm

ludwis wrote:How frequently should you have an alignment done? I don't remember seeing it on the regular service schedule.

My tire guru recommends annually or about every 20,000 miles. That would be about twice for a set of tires.
Some places will not charge for a check and only charge if changes need to be made. Others have a set-up charge.

f9k9 wrote:... BFG has a newer generation out, which is the ones that I have...

You may be referring to the "KO" That is the last revision that I am aware of. Mine are AT KO. As I understand it was a slight tread pattern change.

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 8:26 pm

HenryJ wrote:...........You may be referring to the "KO" That is the last revision that I am aware of. Mine are AT KO. As I understand it was a slight tread pattern change.

You may be correct. All I know is that when I tried to order the AT/KOs from Summit, I was told that they only had 2 of the older ones (they were $50) cheaper) in stock. With all of my email correspondence with BFG/Michelon I referred to my tires as the latest generation and they seemed to know what I was referring to. I do know that there was two AT/KOs out when I bought mine. Perhaps the rep at Summit was screwed up or something.

adrenalnjunky · Post by **adrenalnjunky** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:11 pm

I thinkt hat there have been some small changes to the A/T KO - but not enough to be really noticeable.

expeditions west mentions the changes made to their Tacoma for the Sema Show this year - that it is sporting "New BFG low glass, extreme snow rated AT/KO's (295/75)" http://www.expeditionswest.com/equipmen ... /index.htm

One of the major tire discounters also mentions that now most sizes of the KO are "Extreme Snow Rated".

I'm more interested in the "low glass" spec?

I just checked my year and a half old KO's - They do have the snowflake on a mountain icon on them - so the extreme snow rating isn't a new thing.

If BFG has made some minor changes and were to start really advertising the changes, that would leave tire stores stuck with older tires that customers may not want to buy, and instead wait for the new ones. Seems like it's mainly upgrades and marketing ploys.

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:52 pm

Fixed my first flat today. A 1.5" piece of sharp spring steel wire. Between the lugs at the shoulder. It did not go flat, but lost air after a couple days. It was very hard to find the leak. I had to put it in a dunk tank. Not sure where it came from. Probably a recently graded road that turned up some debris.

These tires are holding up very well. They are at 10/32 right now. That is a pretty consistent pattern of 3/32 wear annually. At that rate I have a couple more years left in them.

Rumor was that the 33x9.50-15 would be discontinued. I still see them available thus far.

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:51 pm

I have to endorse mine as well. The ones on my CC have done excellent in the 16 months that I have owned them, Zero problems thus far.

I have a set on my jeep that are 33/12.50s that I bought with under 2K miles on them. They have even impressed some crusty hardcore types on trail rides. I air them down to 13-14 lbs and they seem to hold up well, especially with the sidewall abuse. The Jeep set won't last long due to the welded rear diff but, they are putting up a good fight.

Country_Guy · Post by **Country_Guy** » Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:58 pm

I gotta say I have had BFGs (light A/T, like a stock replacement) on my truck for about 50,000 miles and am needing tire (I don't really need tires, I just want a more agressive tire) and have 100% no complaints. Driving out in the country especially late at night it is sometimes hard to avoid running over crap. I have only had a low tire so far it had a screw in it, I noticed it was low, so I checked it and took it to get fixed no problems sense. I recommend BFGs to everyone. The only reason I know about Coopers is my dad runs them and he also is satisfied with there tires and has not had a problem.

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:23 pm

Well, the BFG AT/KO 33x9.5-15s have been a great tire. Closest guess is that I have put about to 25,000 miles on them since September of 2005.
The shallowest tread is now at 8/32. That is half of the new tread depth. I am one of those who likes to travel long distances on the top half, and an opportunity has presented itself to sell these for half the price of a new set.
The new set has been ordered. It is a little sooner than I had planned, but I have to strike while the time is right.

I had some concern that this size would not be available , but I found the availability very good. Better than the 33x10.5 which was a surprise.

I had considered other tread designs, and a different size, but these really have been doing great. I will start with another new set and continue to watch the life left on the old set.

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:39 pm

HenryJ wrote:......The new set has been ordered.........................

Locally or online? If, from online then I hope you have better luck than me. I hadn't even thought of waterfowl for months until I read the above post

Post by **HenryJ** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:54 pm

I have not had any problems with ordering them online. I have bought six sets of tires this way. This time a friend at a local tire shop found a good price on a set. TireRack.com price was 5% better, but keeping the sale local is just good business.

F9K9 · Post by **F9K9** » Wed Apr 09, 2008 8:57 pm

Chances are you would have a local shop that is in business with TireRack. Probably the best way to go after my 6 month fight with local BFG dealers. The place where I finally got satisfaction from was a Tirerack approved store. I have experienced good service from TireRack dating back to the 70s. I always enjoyed their ads in the Car and Driver rags way back when. That is a good compromise after experiencing my debacle.

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 3:31 pm

I've been well satisfied with my KO's. (235x75x15) They have about 20K on them and are at about 50% tread. If I can manage this summer I may buy new ones and keep these for spares etc unless someone local really wants them badly. I like having "extras" on hand just in case. I bought mine locally but may go online if price is significantly better. I'm even running 27x850x14 KO's on the front wheel drive Buick mail car. Works great.

Does tend to throw extra stones though.

They seem to resist flats better and if you do pick up a nail just a slow leak not an immediate flat.

border man · Post by **border man** » Thu Apr 10, 2008 5:09 pm

To add to the post, my 30x9.50 15s are now about years old with over 40,000 miles on them. The other day while washing my truck, I noticed that I had a rather significant cut on one of my sidewalls. It was pretty deep, but the tire was still holding air. I took the tire back to the nearest Discount Tire

(170 miles away in Lubbock). Anyways, the tire still had 10/32nds of treadlife left

. They prorated the tire under warranty and $65 later, I had a new tire....

roadrunner · Post by **roadrunner** » Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:23 pm

border man wrote:The other day while washing my truck, I noticed that I had a rather significant cut on one of my sidewalls. They prorated the tire under warranty and $65 later, I had a new tire....

Did you buy road hazard when you bought the tires? Everyone around here says no to road hazard except maybe Sears and then only if you pay an extra 10-15 bucks per tire.

border man · Post by **border man** » Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:06 pm

I have road hazard warranty. They get pro-rated just as well. Besides, I was already outside BFGs 40,000 warranty. "Note" my tires are now 3 years old. Yesterday, I noticed that my other front tire had also developed a cut on the sidewall. It almost looked like cracking all the way through to the belts. Another 65 plus install, and I now have two brand new front tires.