Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Differant size tires fornt and rear

Discussion in '1973-1991 K5 Blazer | Truck | Suburban' started by four_by_ken, Oct 24, 2001.

  1. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    Any of you guys that rrun the mud know anyone personally that runs skinnies up front and wide tires in the rear?

    I am thinking about 39.5x18 rears and 38.5x11 fronts.

    Ken H.

    '85 K5 in process
     
  2. 84_Chevy_K10

    84_Chevy_K10 Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Posts:
    17,669
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IL, USA
    I've seen it for dirt drags, but not mud bogs. Your tires need to be closer in height if you're going to run the same gear ratio.

    Tim
    '84 Chevy K10, lifted, loud, fast, and 3/4 ton axles
     
  3. 84_Chevy_K10

    84_Chevy_K10 Banned

    Joined:
    May 30, 2001
    Posts:
    17,669
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    IL, USA
    I've seen it for dirt drags, but not mud bogs. Your tires need to be closer in height if you're going to run the same gear ratio.

    Tim
    '84 Chevy K10, lifted, loud, fast, and 3/4 ton axles
     
  4. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    I seem to disagree here. With only a 1 inch differance in actualy height, I would be fine with the differant size tires. I run mud and trails. There is plenty of slip that it would not cause it to bind up. I dont drive around in 4 wheel unless I am needing it. So, it wouldnt be a problem at all. If I drove it on pavement with this combination, it wouldnt be a good idea.

    Ken H.


    '85 K5 in process
     
  5. txbartman

    txbartman 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2001
    Posts:
    1,975
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Plano, TX
    I guess I can't really see the benefit. Same track and same width tires allow the front to clear the path in mud and allow the rear tires better grip. I guess narrower fronts would split the difference of clearing a path between the fronts and rears, but is that really an advantage? Plus, narrower tires sink faster and easier. Wider would give you better flotation. If you get into a quandry, your wider rear tires with better grip and flotation could end up digging your front tires into a dilemma. I guess narrower front tires would prevent rubbing on turning, but is that the only benefit?

    I guess I would look at it this way... (1) why do you need that wide of a tire in the rear at that height? (2) if you have good justification for question #1, why wouldn't it apply to the front itres as well? (3) what is the real benefit of running a variance in your tires like that that also keeps you from being able to rotate the tires and forces you to carry 2 spares? (4) does it really all make sense?

    Brian
    Check out <a target="_blank" href=http://tx85gmcguy.alloffroad.com>My Jimmy</a> with all her projects!
     
  6. Greg72

    Greg72 "Might As Well..." Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2001
    Posts:
    15,683
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    642 Days to BB2018
    The recent FourWheeler had the results of the TTC, and there WAS a vehicle that used a completely different wheel size up front. Ferris McCollum has that raspberry colored 30's Hot Rod thing....and I remember reading that the front and rear tire sizes are WAY different, and he also has different gearsets front and rear to compensate.

    I think the rule of thumb is to keep the "overall" front and rear ratios within 1% of each other. Anything more than that is going to create a lot of wear on the driveline.

    That's all I know.... [​IMG]

    -Greg72
     
  7. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    There are a lot of guys that do this in the bogs. Front tires cut through while the rears provide the forward momentum. This not anything new and crazy I am thinking about.

    Probably wont do it though. Since I do more trail riding than mud boggin anyways.

    Ken H.


    '85 K5 in process
     
  8. laketex

    laketex 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    6,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    North Texas
    My friend's girlfriends brother's mailman was talking about this very thing the other day with that one wheeler guy in Maine that takes his dog to the ice hole. He says that it rocka and you should do it...

    Is that what you meant by personally??? [​IMG]

    Sherman, Tx
    <font color=red>The blazer's almost on the road....anyone got tree fiddy?</font color=red>
     
  9. shaggyk5

    shaggyk5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    1,610
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    SE pennsylvania
    th epink hot rod runs 38's up front and 42's out back, in the magazine it said his reason was because " all hotrods have little tires in the front and big ones in the back." Pretty funny if you ask me. [​IMG]

    --matt
    <font color=blue>86, 350 crate, 33's.</font color=blue>
    <font color=red>Lop Sop Doi Off-Roader</font color=red>
     
  10. MaxCrack

    MaxCrack 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2001
    Posts:
    895
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Mt View, CA
    If the rear tires are taller than the front, they cover more distance than the fronts, and may push the rear faster than front and get you a little squirly in the mud. If the fronts are taller they will tend to pull the front end and keep you straight.

    But that's just a theory I thought up on the spot, I have no actual data or experience to back it up, since my tires are all the same size.

    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing.
    <a target="_blank" href=http://photos.yahoo.com/dana60manual>http://photos.yahoo.com/dana60manual</a>
     
  11. Hossbaby50

    Hossbaby50 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2001
    Posts:
    8,972
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Peoria, AZ
    I have heard of this before. The front tires would spin a little faster then the rears, so the help drag the truck. Also being narrower then the rears the the rears have some mud left that way you get better forward bite. I would only run this on a dedicated mud truck though. I saw this scenario in a 4x4 mag a couple years back. The theory makes sense.

    My Chevy isn't broken, its just out of gas.
     
  12. zakk

    zakk 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2001
    Posts:
    4,762
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Jose CA
    that is what i thought too. Larger rears will spin slower. with a dedicated mud bog racer i would think 38.5's in the front with 42's in the rear...the width seems abour right. maybe 38.5x11 front and 42x18 boggers in the rear ( i think that was a size)[​IMG]
    nice to dream...i wish there were mud bog races in Callie[​IMG]

    -Zakk
    '77 K5 SB 400 TH350 NP203 p/t 6" Lift D60 14BFF 4.10's 36"Wrangler II's

    [​IMG] CK5's MOAB 2002 OR BUST!! [​IMG]
     

Share This Page