Symmetric vs asymmetric tread

[Blmpkn]

About the hubs, you could do this then use newer wheels? They are 2" thick.
Hub Centric 5x4.5 to 6x5.5 Wheel Adapter 2inch, (Pair of 2) (performancewheeladapters.com)

Not saying I'd do it, just, it's possible, right? If the backspacing works out.

That would work yes. Then you could snag yourself a set of new ranger/Bronco/taco take-offs for barely over scrap price and be set.

Those 17" take-offs I bought for my cadillac are off a jeep gladiator.. they have the same 5x5 pattern but the Cadillac offset is +6 and the jeep wheels are around +55 or so. Gonna snag a set of 2" spacers and everything should be wavy gravy until I wanna drop 800$ on the wheels I REALLY want to run.

 

[sgtsandman]

I understand that thought, BUT, ALL of the current FX4 packages ( F-150, Ranger, & Maverick ) come with 17" rims/tires.

To get the FX4 package on the Ranger, you have to get the STX package with the 17” rims. At least with the XL models. I don’t think the brakes change from one Ranger to the other.

The base XL Ranger comes with 16” steelies. I believe that includes the 4X4 model.

The 17” tire is also a larger diameter than the 16” tire. The 18” rims come with a lower profile tire. I can’t remember if they are taller over all than the 17” tires but I’m thinking not since there isn’t a lot of extra room between the ORM bash bars.

For the OP’s Ranger, they probably could go with a 17” but due to the wheel well limitations compared to the 2019+, I think he would take too much of a side wall penalty going with 17” tires.

In my opinion, 15” or 16” would be the best match even if options are starting to dwindle.

 

[sgtsandman]

In the land of ginormous disk brakes they don't always work anymore.

We just put brakes on a Tahoe the other day that had 16.25" diameter ROTORS.

The base XL Ranger comes with 16” rims. I believe the 4X4 model is the same. The bigger rims are forced on the buyer because they have to not only buy the FX4 package but the STX package that includes the 17” wheels.

 

[sgtsandman]

I just confirmed on the build and price, the 2019+ 4X4 Rangers come with and fit 16" wheels. So, it's a styling preference and not a necessity to clear the brakes. The F150 and other models mentioned may need 17" to clear the brakes.

@James Morse I would recommend you either stick the the 15" or go with 16" max for what you are looking to do with your truck. I think you would lose to much sidewall with a 17" tire given the limits of the wheel well opening and not going with a lift. 31" tires on my 2011 have minor rubbing at full lock. 265/65R17 would get you close at 30.5" and 265/70R17 at 31.6". I think the 265/70R17 would rub too much and might require some wheel well liner trimming, though the sidewall height is fairly decent. 265/65/17" would make you lose 1/2" in diameter and the sidewall is thinner than I'd like. You could probably get by but not optimal. Then there is finding wheels in the right bolt pattern that don't cost a mint to fit them.

 

[James Morse]

What was stock tire on yours @sgtsandman? I'm asking because I'm surprised you have rubbing with the 31x10.5R15 because that would be the stock tire for my truck so it shouldn't rub. I mean, stock is 265/75R15, but that is the same as 31x10.5R15 as I see it, maybe plus/minus a tenth inch or something, depending on the exact tire and tread. I'll check sidewall comparison, should be basically the same.

I guess I can check lock/lock each side and see how much room is there to the sidewall, but I should be on pretty sol-d ground with the 31". There is 2" lift compared to base model it looks like to me, I see blocks in back.

I really didn't pay much attention to sidewall's width, that's a good point, I don't want something that rubs. 31" shouldn't....

Seems to be tons of room in the wheel wells right now of course that is with springs not compressed. As to not extending outwards past the fenders, seems to be all kinds of room in back but not lots in front.

Interestingly I measured the 235/75R15's that are on there and they are diameter 27" measuring top to bottom. I believe what's happening there is you have about 1" of "squish", because if I measure from the floor to the center of the hub (front), it's 13", but there's 14" above it. That makes sense because the contact patch is flat. So, tires were say 28.7" new, and have quite a bit of wear, so 28" (unloaded) is about right.

So if I put 31" tire, under weight, it's really 30", I bet. Probably 14-1/2" under the hub center, and 15-1/2" above. So it adds about 1-1/2" height relative to what is on there now, and adds 1" if you were comparing them to new 235/75R15's. Which makes sense, as the 31" are, about, 2" bigger diameter new.

Not sure what that has to do with the price of eggs, I just thought it interesting that the tires don't set round but they would have to be not round otherwise you'd have about zero contact.

At any rate, it would give me some additional clearance to the underbody, which I want, and would look better because there's an awful lot of open space in the wheel wells, and surely would perform better compared to what's on there. If I can find 265/75R15 in a decent tire I'd probably go that route, but you don't see lots of them.

 

[sgtsandman]

What was stock tire on yours @sgtsandman? I'm asking because I'm surprised you have rubbing with the 31x10.5R15 because that would be the stock tire for my truck so it shouldn't rub. I mean, stock is 265/75R15, but that is the same as 31x10.5R15 as I see it, maybe plus/minus a tenth inch or something, depending on the exact tire and tread. I'll check sidewall comparison, should be basically the same.

I guess I can check lock/lock each side and see how much room is there to the sidewall, but I should be on pretty sol-d ground with the 31". There is 2" lift compared to base model it looks like to me, I see blocks in back.

I really didn't pay much attention to sidewall's width, that's a good point, I don't want something that rubs. 31" shouldn't....

Seems to be tons of room in the wheel wells right now of course that is with springs not compressed. As to not extending outwards past the fenders, seems to be all kinds of room in back but not lots in front.

Interestingly I measured the 235/75R15's that are on there and they are diameter 27" measuring top to bottom. I believe what's happening there is you have about 1" of "squish", because if I measure from the floor to the center of the hub (front), it's 13", but there's 14" above it. That makes sense because the contact patch is flat. So, tires were say 28.7" new, and have quite a bit of wear, so 28" (unloaded) is about right.

So if I put 31" tire, under weight, it's really 30", I bet. Probably 14-1/2" under the hub center, and 15-1/2" above. So it adds about 1-1/2" height relative to what is on there now, and adds 1" if you were comparing them to new 235/75R15's. Which makes sense, as the 31" are, about, 2" bigger diameter new.

Not sure what that has to do with the price of eggs, I just thought it interesting that the tires don't set round but they would have to be not round otherwise you'd have about zero contact.

At any rate, it would give me some additional clearance to the underbody, which I want, and would look better because there's an awful lot of open space in the wheel wells, and surely would perform better compared to what's on there. If I can find 265/75R15 in a decent tire I'd probably go that route, but you don't see lots of them.

The stock size for my 2011 is 235/75R15 (29"). The Rangers that came with the 16" rims were around 30" in diameter but I forget the exact size numbers. With the stock setup on the 2010 & 2011, the 30" tire would be pretty much dead on when it comes to the speedometer reading but that is a digressing side note.

The rubbing I get now that the truck sits at the pre-2008 height instead of the height set from the factory after 2007 fixed some of the rubbing I was having but I still have some at full lock. Mostly on the sway bar where it come out of the frame mount and bends back toward the lower control arm. The tread on the passenger side also catches a little bit on the rubber splash guard in the front side of the wheel well that covers the gap between the frame and the wheel well to protect the engine but not enough to damage it in anyway. It also hasn't hurt the tires any.

Now, keep in mind, I have the BFG KO2s that have a fairly aggressive tread on the sidewall to help with mud traction. Whatever tire you pick might not have that and might be a non-issue for you. Also, your truck has the higher height of the pre-2008 Rangers and the suspension setup is different. So, you might not have any rubbing at all.

Part of the rubbing I had before I did the "lift" was on the portions of the wheel well tub the juts out to clear something behind it and do not provide a smooth contour to the tub. Some of it was rubbing on the lower, rear lip of the tub on the driver's side. All of that went away when I raised the truck height up. All probably nothing that pertains to your particular truck anyway.

As far as the measurements for the lower half of the tire vs the measurements of the upper half of the tire, you can pretty much discount the lower part since there is generally no clearance issues to worry about there. Just the top part where nothing is distorted by the tire having to support the weight of the truck. Everything that is going to possibly come into contact would be on the undistorted/round part of the tire at the frame level or higher.

The other part that contributes to the rubbing is that the 31" tire is about an inch wider that the 235/75R15 tire. You can get 30" tires in about the same width but I have not seen any 31" tires narrower than 10.5" Half of that width juts inward toward the frame and suspension and the other half outwards away from it all. You might be able to find something narrower with the metric size you are focusing on but there is nothing with the inch size. Again, since your front suspension is different, it may be a non-issue.