Subaru Outback Forums banner

REJOICE: T/A KO2 in 225-65-17!

209K views 179 replies 37 participants last post by  MiddleAgeSubie 
#1 ·
#3 ·
225-65-17 is plenty good enough for pretty much anywhere the OB can go w/o a full (like 1.5") lift.

Of course, on your generation that means stock clearance, which means a lot less than 8.7" in real life. But 235-65-17 is an easy upgrade for a V gen to a fairly wide range of AT tires, all of which would be suitable for the kind of use I can imagine east of Denver (been wrong before, occasionally :) ).

For a IV gen with a little lift, 235-65-17 is out of the question. On an OB lift hinders rather than helps with larger tires, LOL.
 
#4 ·
If they offered it in 235/60/17 I might try it but at a "by the numbers" 0.9" taller than the stock 225/60/17 I would be a little concerned about maintaining highway cruising speed without the CVT revving higher than normal (and giving a significant mpg hit) with the 2.5.


The BFG All-Terrain T/A KO has been a highly rated tire for years and I always wanted to try them. I didn't want to spend the high price premium versus other tires that were rated almost as good as the T/A's. I found a used set of OEM wheels for the Avalanche a couple of years ago with A/T KO's with about 70% tread for a reasonable price so I bought them. I just got rid of them because I didn't care for them. Traction, both on pavement and off pavement, didn't impress me and they were noisy for an A/T tire. I know the KO2 is a different tread design so maybe they would be better.
 
#5 ·
I can easily see how the KO2, which is listed at 39 lb compared to 24 for the stock and 31 for normal AT tires plus the extra size can hurt the pre-2015 H4 CVT.

As for myself, I have been running 225-65-17 Geolander AT-S since last summer.

They were 28.3 tall installed. They are 27.6 tall right now, 10 months later. Normal sidewall bulging took away about 0.25" of clearance, maybe a bit more, and a bit premature treadwear did the rest (alignment). So, what I have now is the equivalent of a brand new stock tire, which I feel in regained performance.

The mpg did not change in any way I can feel at any time during this (yet another, sigh) learning about tires ('cause you did not when you were 20) process...

My hope is that the KO would, among the obvious,

-feature stiffer sidewalls and maintain height better than either of my AT-S sets has been able to,
-feature a tread that lasts a lot longer.

I am still new to the cars game, LOL, and though I have learned a lot over the last couple of years I am still not sure how actual unpaved mileage affects tires. It seems to wear them a lot faster than pavement. The KO 2 is supposed to be a lot better at that than the original version (or the AT-S).

Before this showed up, my favorite for next set was the 235-60-17 Cooper Discoverer AT 3. Foz owners rave about it and it gets great marks for on-road comfort, too, as well as very good marks on treadwear.

Maybe you can get a deal on those Coopers with lighter but strong enough wheels to partly compensate for the 7 lb penalty per tire?

EDIT: Btw, unfortunately, the Cooper Discoverer AT 3 are just as overpriced in 235-60-17 as are all tires in the sizes that could do for us (235-65-17 is more of a theoretical than feasible fitment, especially for off-road use, even though at least one member did offroad, I do not know how much, an H4 with 235-65-17 tires).
 
#8 ·
Sounds like you definitely know what you're doing.

Just FYI, I'm running a set of 215/70R16 BFG A/T KOs on my 2013 Outback. I'm running them at 44/42 psi front/rear. Seems to be about right as the wear pattern is consistent across the width. I do rotate them every 3,000 miles.

The 44/42 matches up loadwise per tire with the original P metric's 32/30. Lower gives a little softer ride, but increased road noise and reduced milage.

I don't notice any traction problems, though the Outback's great AWD might mask any.

Had them on wet highway and street. Country gravel roads. Been 20 miles down Padre Island National Seashore in very soft and deep sand several times (aired down to 18 psi). No traction problems evident.

I'll probably not ever get a chance to try them in snow, and little chance for mud. I hear mud is their weak showing.

Big Bend rocky trails next. That's why I really bought them, toughness and rugged sidewall.

Definitely looking at the KO2 for replacement, though it'll probably be a while, as the KOs aren't showing much wear.
 
#10 ·
There are bound to be legitimate outliers.

In addition, the KO2 is said to be superior off-road and far superior on road to its predecessor.
 
#16 ·
It was there the last time I looked BUT NOT ANYMORE.

So, @grantwilson 's skepticism was spot on. TireRack had listed it as "back-order," which means they must have had some reason to do so. But, it matters no more!

Personally, I had moved on from "rejoicing" about it, but the lack of that option is certainly not a good thing.
 
#17 ·
maybe @Discount Tire a forum supporting vendor could shed some better light on the subject. ....as Tire Rack is not working out :smile2:
 
#20 ·
Fits the 2015+. Unfortunately, we in the 2010-14 group cannot benefit from anything over 28.5" unless you consider the super-tight fit of 29" tires ok (and that requires either a fully stock car or one with a rear subframe kit that puts it right at stock height in back. I have 0.5" spacers, no kit, and cannot fit 29" without rubbing).

The information we have received shows the BFG All Terrain TA KO2 225/65R-17 107S has a release date of October 2015.

Here is a link to the current tires we have in 225/60R-17.

Let us know if we can be of assistance.
Thanks! So, it will be available, after all?

I would rather sell the excellent car than go for Geolander AT-S in the stock size again, this being the only AT tire in that size. I run 225-65-17 AT-S at present on my 2013.

There is a chance I might get a Method 17" + 235-60-17 Cooper AT3 from Discount Tire in the near future. I had a good offer from you in spring, but I am still trying to figure certain things out before I go for it.
 
#21 ·
I wonder why they don't sell these to north America ? Talk about size options. Thee is a zillion of em.


SIZEtooltip DIAMETERtooltip WIDTHtooltip ASPECTtooltip SPEEDtooltip LOADtooltip PRICEtooltip
30X9.5R15 15" 9.5" S(180 km/h) 104 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
31X10.5R15 15" 10.5" S(180 km/h) 109 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
205/70R15 15" 205mm 70 S(180 km/h) 96 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/75R15 15" 225mm 75 S(180 km/h) 110 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
235/75R15 15" 235mm 75 S(180 km/h) 110 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
255/70R15 15" 255mm 70 S(180 km/h) 112 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
265/70R15 15" 265mm 70 T(190 km/h) 112 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
215/65R16 16" 215mm 65 S(180 km/h) 106 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
215/70R16 16" 215mm 70 S(180 km/h) 100 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/70R16 16" 225mm 70 S(180 km/h) 103 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/75R16 16" 225mm 75 R(170 km/h) 115 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
235/60R16 16" 235mm 60 H(210 km/h) 100 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
235/70R16 16" 235mm 70 S(180 km/h) 110 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
235/85R16 16" 235mm 85 R(170 km/h) 120 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
245/70R16 16" 245mm 70 S(180 km/h) 113 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
245/70R16 16" 245mm 70 R(170 km/h) 118 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
245/75R16 16" 245mm 75 S(180 km/h) 114 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
255/70R16 16" 255mm 70 S(180 km/h) 115 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
265/70R16 16" 265mm 70 S(180 km/h) 117 $256.00 ea BOOK
SHORTLIST
265/75R16 16" 265mm 75 R(170 km/h) 123 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
275/70R16 16" 275mm 70 S(180 km/h) 119 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
285/75R16 16" 285mm 75 R(170 km/h) 122 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
215/60R17 17" 215mm 60 S(180 km/h) 96 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/60R17 17" 225mm 60 H(210 km/h) 99 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/65R17 17" 225mm 65 S(180 km/h) 102 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
225/70R17 17" 225mm 70 S(180 km/h) 110 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
235/65R17 17" 235mm 65 T(190 km/h) 108 Extra Load Capacity GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
245/65R17 17" 245mm 65 R(170 km/h) 117 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
245/70R17 17" 245mm 70 S(180 km/h) 114 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
255/65R17 17" 255mm 65 S(180 km/h) 114 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
265/65R17 17" 265mm 65 S(180 km/h) 116 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
265/70R17 17" 265mm 70 S(180 km/h) 118 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
275/65R17 17" 275mm 65 S(180 km/h) 118 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
285/65R17 17" 285mm 65 S(180 km/h) 120 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
285/70R17 17" 285mm 70 S(180 km/h) 121 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
265/60R18 18" 265mm 60 S(180 km/h) 114 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
285/60R18 18" 285mm 60 S(180 km/h) 118 GET QUOTE
SHORTLIST
PRODUCT DETAILS Dueler A/T 697
Dueler A/T 697
Bridgestone
The ultimate 4WD all terrain tyre, designed and tested to withstand Australia’s harshest outback conditions. Its proven superior wear life and better resistance to cutting and chipping make it the number one choice for all terrain adventuring. Dueler is tough enough to bring you back.

•Longer wear life on and off road

•Tougher construction for superior puncture resistance

•Quiet, comfortable ride on any terrain

GET QUOTE
All tyre prices include fitting,
balance, tubeless valves, GST & tyre disposal. Excludes Tyre Pressure Monitoring Systems.
 
#23 ·
I don't know about 235/65/r17

however 225/65/R17's are perfect for me I suppose on my Gen4. I got a 2.5i the larger diameter tire would affect my gear ratio too much I think. Need all the low range I can get outa this CVT. Just a modest bit of a lift to get me through sand cuttings.
 
#24 ·
Yeah I'm really hoping to get just a little wider tire on this thing with a little more sidewall. Though I may have to go down to a 16" wheel to get that desired outcome. Slightly wider and a bit larger diameter would be perfect.
 
#26 ·
The KO2 is harder of a tire than its predecessor, so it might be a bit rough on the ride compared to the old KO. If you are gravel roading it, the KO2 will live longer than the KO.

Funny thing about those BFG AT T/A tires - that tread design is over 25 years old. It may fundamentally work, but there have been a LOT of advances in tread design to give you traction while keeping a quieter and smoother ride. A good example is BFG's own Rugged Terrain T/A. The tread on the KO2 has a lot less openness for shedding than the Rugged Terrain does.

Basically the KO tires are running on their reputation, having been basically the first all terrain tire sold for real consumer, roadworthy use.
235-65-17 is supposed to be the max for a car with stock rear geometry whether stock or lifted/dropped. However, if the car is an H4, I would not do it. Even on the H6 I would not run it in town. The main advantage of this tire size in the US is not its size per se but the availability of options in that size and the lower prices.

As for the TA KO 2, what will be unique for us if offered is its LT construction. All other AT tires in our sizes are P tires. So, here we go with 3-ply sidewall, high highway pressures, and regularly airing down.

I have been flip flopping on this. But since I would not run it as a primary tire,the financials work squarely against it.
 
#25 ·
The KO2 is harder of a tire than its predecessor, so it might be a bit rough on the ride compared to the old KO. If you are gravel roading it, the KO2 will live longer than the KO.

Funny thing about those BFG AT T/A tires - that tread design is over 25 years old. It may fundamentally work, but there have been a LOT of advances in tread design to give you traction while keeping a quieter and smoother ride. A good example is BFG's own Rugged Terrain T/A. The tread on the KO2 has a lot less openness for shedding than the Rugged Terrain does.

Basically the KO tires are running on their reputation, having been basically the first all terrain tire sold for real consumer, roadworthy use.
 
#28 ·
Another thing I'd like to point out to be careful of when getting these tires, is that some sizes may come in only one load rating - and if that is load range E, that's 10 ply. It would make a car have a much rougher ride, due to sidewall stiffness. Whenever possible, get load range C or D (6 or 8 ply). I'll try to get a chance to look at the load ratings of the sizes posted of the given tires and post about them here.
 
#30 ·
Ah...thought you were commenting about the size genetically, not specifically the KO tire.

Do you think the 235/65 would fit with 1.5" lift & PRSS? How about on the OEM suspension? I'm thinking 17x8" MR501s. I'd like the lesser offset of the 502, but they're too Mad Max for me.

My use is primarily deep sand, so the extra height and width are both helpful. The lighter sidewall of the AT3 is actually preferred, for ride & economy as well as aired-down balloon.
 
This post has been deleted
#33 ·
Called Big O in Phoenix (Bell Road) today they said KO2 is available in 225 65 17

I called Big O in Phoenix (Bell Road) today and they said the BFG KO2 is available in 225 65 17 load range D. The are $179.95 each. You have to special order them. It takes 3 to 5 days for the order. The tire weighs 39.5 lbs. That is a 13.5 pound difference between the stock 26lb. tire and the KO2. I have 2016 outback 3.6r on order but I'm concerned about the weight of the tire. In the past I put BFG KO'S on a Toyota Tacoma 4.0 L V6 4 x 4. I had rugged trails in P Metric Size which weighed 38 lbs. the KO's Load Range D weighed 49 lbs an 11lb increase. That 11 lbs. took away 2.5 to 3 miles per gallon in local driving. Highway mileage was about the same as the lighter tire as long as you do not stop the vehicle. The rugged trails were slippery (dangerous slippery) in the rain and fair off road. The BFG KO were excellent in all conditions and wore very well +40,000 miles. One problem in putting on a heavier tire than the stock weight tire on a car or truck is the shock absorbers/struts. The heavier tire can make the oil in the shock foam. The foaming will result in significant or total loss loss of dampening if there is rapid repetitive movement of the damper in offroad conditions. I think the KO2's would be good to have on an extra set of wheels and change to those wheels when you want to go offroad and switch back to the street wheel/tire when you return from the offroad trip.
Let's hear from everyone else what they think.
 
#36 ·
The 'largest 235' is a bit of a misnomer, because 235 is the width of the tire in millimeters. The next number is the 'series', which is the sidewall height as a percentage of the tread width. So, a 235/50-16 has a 117.5mm sidewall, or a 4.6" sidewall. A 235/60-16 has a 141mm sidewall, 5.5" sidewall. To find your total tire height (not accounting for compression at the contact patch) you multiply that by 2, add your wheel diameter. The 235/50-16 is thus a 25.25" tall tire, and the 235/60-16 is a 27.1" tall tire. They both should fit on the same width rim. Its only if you already have a bit of taper of sidewall seating the bead that you'll have issues changing tire series. The shorter sidewall will sit slightly more flat, but the difference in height will make up for that.

Looking at the stock wheel that is listed for the 4th Gen. in 16", that'd be a steel wheel with a wheel cover, which is 6.5" wide. The stock tire for that would be a 215/70-16, which is ~8.5" wide. That's already a 1" step inward per side, evident when you see them. That's a 27.9" tall tire. If you want to run that wider 235mm tread and run the same height for good clearance (less chance of rubbing), you'll want a 65 series tire, which would be 28" tall. So, the correct fit of '235' tire on a 16" rim is 235/65-16. That's almost an inch wider tread, but enough sidewall that the deflection due to tread width to rim width shouldn't be an issue. Not sure if a tire that wide will rub, as the OEM tire on the 17" rim is 225/60-17, which is a 8.9" wide tire. The 235mm tread is 9.25" wide, which is a big difference on a passenger vehicle. A 225/65-16 might be a better choice. However, we run into the next issue...

Neither size is available in the KO2. The nearest size in a 16" is 235/70-16, which is 29" tall. That's a solid inch taller, along with being an inch wider tread. You might experience some clearance issues. The OEM 4th Gen. 17" tire size is also not offered in the KO2, but alas it IS offered in the Yokohama Geolandar A/T-S - hence a good reason it was such a sweetheart of the 4th Gen. Outback owners.
 
#37 ·
Neither size is available in the KO2. The nearest size in a 16" is 235/70-16, which is 29" tall. That's a solid inch taller, along with being an inch wider tread. You might experience some clearance issues. The OEM 4th Gen. 17" tire size is also not offered in the KO2, but alas it IS offered in the Yokohama Geolandar A/T-S - hence a good reason it was such a sweetheart of the 4th Gen. Outback owners.
29" is universally regarded as the most the IV can fit. In fact, I have had 29" tires tested even with my 0.5" spacers pushing the rear wheels forward. It is extremely tight with the spacers but should be just fine without.

I see no reason for 235-70-16 not to fit on a car with stock rear geometry. Whether that is the best possible size is in the eye of the beholder.

If I had 16"s, I would definitely try the 235-70-16 Cooper AT3 because it is listed at just under 28.9" and thus on the "safe" side. By contrast, the 235-65-17 AT 3 is 29.2. These are laughable differences, but unfortunately everything comes into play on a Subie.

The whole point of this thread is that the TA KO2 was/is supposed to become available in 225-65-17. It is listed on the BigOTire site and per DT October is supposed to be the release date.
 
#38 ·
October it is, then, per Tire Rack and Discount Tire alike.

Here are some weight combos:

17" generic steel wheel and the oem street tire: 52-54 lb. Same wheel and a typical P-metric AT = 61-62 lb.

2010-12 stock wheel and tire: 48+ lb. 2013-4 wheel and tire: 46- lb.

2010-12 wheel or Method MR 501/2 wheel and a regular AT tire in 225-60-17, 235-60-17, or 225-65-17: 55-56 lb.
2013-14 wheel and a regular AT tire in the above sizes, 53- lb. This is my current setup.

For 235-65-17, add two pounds as both the Toyo AT II and the Cooper AT 3, which would be my top choices in that size, are 34. So, 56- (2013-4), 58+ (2010-12).

2010-12 wheel or Method rally wheel and the TA KO 2 in 225-65-17: 63+ lb. With a 2013-4 wheel: 61- .

Lightweight race/rally wheel + TA KO2 = 54-58, depending on how light you dare go. I am aiming at an 18 lb wheel, thus 57 lb.

Therefore, when used with a lightweight wheel, the TA KO2 will not make the wheel/tire combo all that heavy.

The worst offenders are a generic steel wheel plus a regular AT tire and a 2010-2 stock or Method wheel plus TA KO 2, getting over 60 lb per corner. Of course, one can also beat that by going steel plus KO2 for a whopping 69 lb/corner!

Bottom line: tire/wheel combos of 55 give or take a couple pounds is where most of us who go unpaved are, one way or the other.

By going KO2 on lighter wheels, I will experience a bump of 4 lb per corner; had I gone AT 3 and Methods when DT made me a good offer, I would have gone up 3 lb/corner anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hoppyjr
#40 ·
So, the BFG TA KO2 in 225-65-17 is real, lol.

I guess I got some of the very first produced. I only made it to fitting one rear wheel and it clears, if barely, even at full droop (I have 0.5 spacers, so it is probably like 235-65-17s fit on stock cars).

It will be a while until I take these tires out; I got them now because of the RP03 wheels clearance. The sidewall...is a sight to behold.

Since this is a D-rated LT tire, it comes with the 3-ply sidewall. I noticed that many of the 15"-16" tires are C with 2-ply sidewall.
 
#68 ·
Some thoughts on tire pressure selection.

1. How to use a load table to determine what load capacity the stock tire is, when inflated to factory spec.
Assume stock inflation spec is 32f 30r with a tire size A. (Enter numeric value for A). Look up tire size A on a load table, read across until you get to the 32psi column, and write down what load capacity the table says 32psi inflation produces.

Here is a load table
https://toyotires2-1524598101.netdn...ication_of_Load_Inflation_Tables_20151020.pdf

2. Enter the size of the proposed new tire B, look it up on the load tables, and determine what inflation most closely matches the load capacity of Tire A.

Example:
Tire A: P225-60-17 Max load 1709lbs @ 44psi. At 32psi, load capacity is 1587 pounds


Tire B LT225-70-17 Max load 2150lbs @ 65psi. 1640 pounds load capacity is at 40psi


So, the BFG TA KO2 in 225-65-17 is real,
thanks for sharing your impressions. I could not find 225-65-17 size in the load table, but it is also D rated and 2150 lbs max load at 65max psi.

So I can say with reasonable confidence, that for your new 225-65-17 Light Truck tire, 40psi front has an approximately equivalent load capacity to 32psi front when using a 225-60-17 Passenger tire. (IF your stock tire was not 225-60-17 then I need more accurate info.)

For driving on dirt I recommend 2/3 of street pressure, so from 40psi, I would air down to 27psi offroad on dirt. For extremely dry deep sand with no rocks, I use 1/3 of street pressure, so 13psi.
 
#42 ·
Eh, pics.

I tried rear and front and everything seems fine. The TA KO2 installed is definitely not larger than a brand new 225-65-17 Geolander AT-S installed. Might actually even be just a bit smaller, not sure.

I did not buy these wheels for looks (and I like the fact that they do not scream "look at me!"), but I must acknowledge that the RP03 do improve the overall looks of the vehicle, not to mention that while I take care of the car's body and even tires, I never really clean specifically the stock wheels (just auto wash)--and it shows. With the RP03 and the TA KO2 it just looks...I do not know...more athletic? Does that make any sense? It looks better in person than on the Tire Rack simulation. With the color of the car still looking like new and wheels that look/are new, the whole vehicle suddenly looks almost like new again (if one ignores the front bumper's lower section and the brush marks on the right hand side of the car, LOL; I won't worry about the bumper, but I do need to take care of the marks, doh).

I cannot go anywhere till Christmas, so I am not going to put all four for now and test them around either (so as not to get rid of the protective chemicals). I will not have any impressions for a while.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top