|
|
11-25-2005, 09:47 AM
|
#21
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
|
I'm convinced trailer tires take a higher stress load when cornering, especially backing into or turning into a tight site. Those tandem axles are close together and you can see the tires scrubbing. On pavement you can see the black tire marks from the turn. I'm still convinced the ST tire is a good thing but that's just my opinion. When we replace these it's possible we'll go with an LT tire but they'll be a higher rating than if we go with ST tires. Just an opinion. Not an educated one, just based on our experience.
The Montanas have alternately come with ST and LT tires. Our 2001 and this 2003 both came with ST tires. We've seen LT on later models.
|
|
|
11-25-2005, 01:21 PM
|
#22
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: King George
Posts: 688
M.O.C. #345
|
Steve. Saw your picture of your Marathon tire. Ours on our 2003 Montana did the same thing. Fortunately, we were able to have it changed before it blew. I took it to the Goodyear dealer and it was now the size of a football. It blew in the rear of the truck while I was inside with the dealer. They replaced it with another Marathon. I always thought that the softer ride made the Montana bounce. Our 2005 came with the Tacoma 235/85R16 Es. It doesn't bounce as much.
|
|
|
11-25-2005, 03:21 PM
|
#23
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,568
M.O.C. #4890
|
Well just for friendly argument, I think the front tires of any vehicle can be turned while the vehicle is stopped and you see a lot of people burning rubber on the rear wheels of hot trucks.
The full torque of these stump pulling diesels is applied to LT tires. I bet the junky trailer tires we have on our Montanas would not live very long under that type of stress.
Take care and difference of opinion is what makes the world go around. I still have much respect for people that don't agree with me and I have been wrong about things more than I would like to admit but on this tire issue I feel very strongly that LT tires are a better choice.
|
|
|
11-26-2005, 05:48 AM
|
#24
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,568
M.O.C. #4890
|
Well it is time for me to eat a little humble pie. I just brought my leaky Mission tire in to a very good tire shop I trust and they have been in business for 30 years. The guy says that they are not a bad tire at all. He said what we all know, every thing is made in China now days.
I asked him if LT tires would be a better choice and he said no. In fact he claims that in some states it is illegal to run LT tires on a trailer and he has heard of people that were forced to park thier rigs and get trailer tire put on. Has anyone ever heard this before. This is new to me and my utility box trailer came from the manufacturer with LT tires but I live in Canada.
Anyway we found my Mission 235/80 16 inch load range E 10 ply rating tire had a big repair plug
in it and you can see a bulge around the plug so he said there is cord damage and the tire should be replaced which I am sure my Dealer will do for me.
One other annoying thing I discovered. I am a millwright by trade which is an industrial mechanic so I pull wrenches for a living and the wheel I removed took about 160 Footpounds of torque to remove each wheel nut. I could tell they were over tight and I put my Torquewrench on them . I will check the other 3 wheels before I tow. They are supposed to be 120 Ft LB
I am guessing the contract hauler that pulled the unit out from Indiana, got a flat, got it repaired and overtightened . Anyway it is not good that a dealer would send out a damaged tire on an overtightened wheel on a brand new unit and they will hear about it, I assure you.
Last but not least the aluminum wheel on my 06 looks very sturdy and well made.
|
|
|
02-08-2006, 08:49 AM
|
#25
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,045
M.O.C. #5329
|
For what it's worth, I just ordered a new 2955 from Beaudry in Tucson. The tires on the rigs I looked at were Chinese trailer rated tires with an E rating. i told the salesperson that I would not accept those junk Chinese tires, and Beaudry agree to swap the Michelins from my old 5er to the new unit. Cost me $300.00, but it's well worth the peace of mind to me. I have have had several blowouts with the chinese (Carlisle) tires that came with my previous 5er, and it's just not worth the hassle and worry anymore. From now on, it's Michelin LT tires for me.
As an aside, I notice that a lot of trailer manufacturers are using LT tires on their units now.
|
|
|
02-10-2006, 10:54 AM
|
#26
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
|
I have had such outstanding service from every set of BF Goodrich tires I've had on my trucks, including this one, that I'm going with the BF Goodrich Commercial tire in LT235/85R16E. They'll be installed the day before we leave here. I like Michelins, too, but have heard of a number of blowouts with them, too. Also with the Goodyear Marathons currently on this trailer. So, I'll try the BFG Commercials and see how they do. I also like the price - $426 and change (plus tax) for our tires, mounting, new high pressure stems, balancing, and road hazard. If they are as good as the tires on this truck I'll be thrilled.
|
|
|
02-10-2006, 08:33 PM
|
#27
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Morgan City
Posts: 642
M.O.C. #2773
|
Wrenchtraveller, if you ever hear of someone that has happened to(forced by the police to downgrade the tires) see if you can find out the name of the -uncle,brother,cousin,sister-in-law,etc,of the cop that owns the tire shop so we can all stay away from that area.
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 01:49 AM
|
#28
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ore City Texas
Posts: 1,648
M.O.C. #2224
|
I may be wrong, of course, but I have not considered putting ST tires on my Montana as "downgrading". I have just replaced ST tires (Maxxis) with exactly the same ST tires (Maxxis) because I have had such good service for 40,000 miles. Remember, I said I could be wrong.
These tires came as original equipment on my 2002 Montana 2955RL.
I did replace the tires a bit early (four years), but that just shows what a careful and cautious fellow I am.
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 03:46 AM
|
#29
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,568
M.O.C. #4890
|
I was surfing the Keystone website and they have all the lines and specs going back to 99.
In 05 the Challenger line was still using LT tires in all their models. In 06 they are going to the ST tires and you really have to wonder why the different divisions of Keystone can't even agree what tire choice is the safest. Anybody out there interested in a set of Mission TR 235/80
10 ply tires with only 60 miles on them?
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 05:11 AM
|
#31
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Morgan City
Posts: 642
M.O.C. #2773
|
That is two seperate web pages,,,sorry
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 07:33 AM
|
#32
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: North Ridgeville
Posts: 20,229
M.O.C. #2839
|
Tire guys I have a question...On the door of My F-350 Ford the tag says LT245/75/17 Tires. GVWR 12,600lbs. Front 4550LBs, Rear 9000lbs at 60PSI cold. However on the tire it says....LT 245/75/17 3195lbs at 80PSI cold Single and 2970 Dual wheel .
None of those numbers make sense..9000 rear and 4550 Front =13,550 that is more than 12,600.Why would a single tire be rated at 3195 but if you have two of them on the same side only 2970???Note that 4X 3195=12,780..thats more tha 12,600lbs and 4x2970=11,880 which is less than 12,6000....HELP////
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 10:43 AM
|
#33
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Fort Myers
Posts: 5,933
M.O.C. #4282
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Wrenchtraveller
I was surfing the Keystone website and they have all the lines and specs going back to 99.
In 05 the Challenger line was still using LT tires in all their models. In 06 they are going to the ST tires and you really have to wonder why the different divisions of Keystone can't even agree what tire choice is the safest. Anybody out there interested in a set of Mission TR 235/80
10 ply tires with only 60 miles on them?
|
It was explained to me that each individual division has extensive autonomy. What Montana uses for their tire brand has absolutely nothing to do with any other division's decision. There is NO cross information shared. Montana, Cougar, Everest, etc, all make their own indepenent decisions on all parts/accessories.
That's how it was explained to me, anyway. Everest is still using the remote thermostat, for instance. Their salesman at a show says they have received NO negative feed back, so they are still including it on all floorplans. That was a month or so ago... could have changed by now, maybe...
|
|
|
02-11-2006, 12:48 PM
|
#34
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location:
Posts: 1,568
M.O.C. #4890
|
Go up in the Improvement Forum to read my latest lengthy post on Mission TR(ash) tires.
|
|
|
02-17-2006, 01:32 PM
|
#35
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Oceanside
Posts: 20,028
M.O.C. #20
|
Our 2001 2880RL came with ST tires. Our 2003 3295RK came with ST tires. Keystone used LT in some periods of time and ST the rest of the time.
Richfaa, the GVWR is what the truck can handle, total weight. The 9000 and 4550 are the max for each axle. You could, for example, exceed the GAWR for the rear axle without exceeding the overall GVWR. You could do that by dropping a few thousand pounds in the bed just over or aft of the axle. Say your truck weighs 2000 on the front axle and 5000 on the rear. Put 5000 in the bed, directly over the axle. Your truck now weighs 12,000 lbs. That's under your GVWR. The weight on the axle is 10,000, which exceeds that axle's rating. The front axle weight either has not changed or changed very little. It may be less since the new weight probably dropped the rearend a bit, shifting weight from the front to the rear.
I do not know why the rating differs on duallies. My F250 has LT265/75R17 tires (load range E) and is rated about that same 3195 at 80 psi. I'd have to go out in the dark to look to get the exact number but am not going to do that right now. 3195 is probably the same as mine.
|
|
|
02-20-2006, 04:03 PM
|
#36
|
Montana Master
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Royse City
Posts: 520
M.O.C. #2959
|
Rich,
Single tires are rated higher (load rating) because there is adequate space for the extra weight to safely allow the tire to squat more - widen some as the extra weight is applied.
This is not the case with dually's. If the dually's squat to the point that the tires (on a single side) come in contact with each other, significant friction and heat is generated on the sidewalls. This will quickly deteriorate the tire sidewalls and cause premature failure.
Of course, the engineers could increase the separation between the dually tires thus widening the rear portion of the truck. Then you could haul more weight, but there would be more places you couldn't fit through. Ah, trade offs.
|
|
|
03-08-2006, 12:27 PM
|
#37
|
Montana Fan
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Palm Bay
Posts: 423
M.O.C. #4308
|
I have Tacoma tires on my 2005 2955RL, they look great and the lettering on the side says "Made in the USA".
|
|
|
03-25-2006, 10:05 AM
|
#38
|
Established Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Newberry Springs
Posts: 46
M.O.C. #104
|
The Tacoma tire is a Cooper product sold by Parish Tire Co.in Winston-Salem,NC 1 800 849-8473. Don't get too happy. They are no longer made.
Hope this helps. I have them on my 2003 2955RL. They have been wearing irregularly even after the axles were re-aligned. Nope, the trailer is 1500 lbs. under max. cap. Go figure!
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
» Recent Threads |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|