33" or 35"
Thread Starter
|
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
33" or 35"
I have a 2001 dodge ram 3.9L v6
i currently have 33/1250/17 tires and have pretty good accerlation. Im trying to decide if when the 33" mud grapplers wear out i should go to 35/1250/17 mudd grapplers. To me the 33"s are too small and I want to go bigger and the room isnt a concern. I just dont know how bad these tires would affect mpg, accerlation etc. I rather not change gears either. Also I have a hard time finiding the weight of these tires so if anyone knows the weight specs on these two tires id be happy to hear them. Thanks
i currently have 33/1250/17 tires and have pretty good accerlation. Im trying to decide if when the 33" mud grapplers wear out i should go to 35/1250/17 mudd grapplers. To me the 33"s are too small and I want to go bigger and the room isnt a concern. I just dont know how bad these tires would affect mpg, accerlation etc. I rather not change gears either. Also I have a hard time finiding the weight of these tires so if anyone knows the weight specs on these two tires id be happy to hear them. Thanks
Grand Champion
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,099
Likes: 6
From: Colorado
Most 35's weigh in the range of 70-85 lbs per tire depending on the type of tread, load rating, etc...
With just a v6, I wouldn't run 35's without a gear change. When I first went to 35's with my 5.2 powered Ram (not stock either), I had 4.10 gears, and it sucked. I can't even image what it would have been like if I had a v6 and stock gears.
If you decide to go to 35's, expect a significant loss in both performance and mpg's.
With just a v6, I wouldn't run 35's without a gear change. When I first went to 35's with my 5.2 powered Ram (not stock either), I had 4.10 gears, and it sucked. I can't even image what it would have been like if I had a v6 and stock gears.
If you decide to go to 35's, expect a significant loss in both performance and mpg's.
