"C" load rated tires

I'm thinking about switching over to a Toyo LT "C"load tires. The most I tow is around 6500 pounds but I'm looking for a little better ride when not towing and better gas mileage.

Anyone running C and towing? Or anyone in general running C load tires?

 

I just switched to BFG All Terrain load C tires after running E's for a long time. Changed tire size too so hard to say as far as an improvement in road feel it is definitely not worse. Also glad to save a little weight. I sometimes pull a 4x8 wood trailer or fill my bed with firewood... Haven't done either yet. I think I'm happy with the switch since firewood runs only happen a few times a year and I'm saving (maybe minimal but still saving) mpg every day.

 

Running toyo AT3. Much improved ride over the E.

 

Run at3 in E load. Wanted the extra protection off road. Ride is great on/off road, but never ran a C or D

 

I'm literally in the same exact predicament. I'm running Cooper AT3 XLT in E load because I tow a 6500lb camper 4-6 times a year. They're great towing but ride a little rough when not towing. I also noticed a loss in power and mpg's because of the weight. To try and lose rotational mass, I picked up a set of lighter Rock Warrior wheels and am debating BFG All Terrain's in load C. I figure to lose roughly 10 lbs per corner. I'll update when it happens. I'm interested to hear what other folks have to say.

 

From what I have been reading C rated will be ok as ling as they are LT tires. Supposedly the P rated that come stock can handle more weight then our Tundras are rated for.

 

Stock P tires have more load capacity than the truck does - 2365 lb per tire, 4730 per axle. Axles are rated at a hair over 4000 lbs each for a 2nd gen, you would exceed axle ratings before exceeding the load capacity of the tires. You would typically also exceed the gross vehicle weight rating before you went over an axle capacity unless you have the truck loaded extremely unevenly.

A load C, LT tire in the stock size will be around 2500 lb per tire.

A load E, LT tire in the stock size will be around 3400 lb per tire.

If you're running larger than stock tires, load capacities will be even higher.

A load C tire is more than enough tire for the truck and will keep as close to the stock ride quality as possible. A load E is extreme overkill from a load capacity standpoint, they're also very heavy and ride quality will suffer.

One thing you can't argue with is superior puncture resistance and sidewall stability of a load E tire. The tire will flex less in turns and when towing or hauling heavy and makes the truck feel more confident and stable in these situations. They're also a good choice if you go off-road and air down a lot.

I am personally looking at the General Grabber APT in load range C next because I've burned through enough load E tires and am tired of my truck riding like a covered wagon. I don't tow or off-road enough to warrant a load E tire, I barely make it to a gravel road any more. I would wear out the side lugs and the tires would get extremely loud from running too low pressures to make the truck ride better.

 

GoodYear Wrangler a/t with kevlar c load.

 

Was thinking about the C rated Toyo ATIIIs. Weight is pretty much the same as the E load (ATIII c= 51lbs, E=52lbs). Still notice a good difference between ride and gas mileage? Wish the C’s were significantly lighter than the E’s. The SL are 42lbs. Trying to figure out if the C is even any better if it’s only 1lb lighter. Thanks.

 

that’s unfortunate, IMO definitely not worth the 1 lb savings in getting C over E.

 

That was my thought. 52 is a decent weight for E rating. Wildpeaks are like 62 so not too bad. Still, I’m looking to not take a huge hit on gas. Might just risk the SL. I do drive on a camp road a few times a year and my range club roads are all dirt and rocks. I’d just feel better with extra coverage in those areas. Quite the predicament!

 

I haven’t had any issues on my C’s. Fire roads, some 4x4, lots of rocky stuff for sure. Price , availability, MPG were all factors. Not saying I’ll stay with them next round , but no issues so far.

 

Gotcha. What were you on before the C’s? Just trying to figure out if I should just go with the E’s if they are only a pound heavier.

 

I ran load E on my Tacoma for years thinking I NEEDED the extra puncture resistance for CO trails. And my ride quality suffered because of it. Then I swapped to 33" load C's and ride quality improved greatly. No issues off-roading in CO for 2 years. Now 1 year in running 37" Load C's on my JK and no issues even on a few Hard rated trails, Elephant Hill in Empire, CO. Never going back to load e's

 

The C load tire only has a load rating of 113, whereas the stock p rated tire has a load rating of 116. Granted, the p rated tire is derated by 11% when used on a light truck, but I still would not run a tire with a lower load rating than is spec’d by Toyota for the truck. Even though the the amount of weight you should carry on the tire is derated, the tire carcass itself still carries a higher load rating, if that makes sense.

The factory tire may have had a 114 load rating, but I honestly don’t remember. I’ve run e rated tires for better towing and hauling performance, as well as tread depth and durability.

 

The stock tundra Michelins on mine now are 114 SL. I know I want the Wildpeaks or Toyo ATIII. They seem to perform the best with rain and winter weather (a norm for where I am). The E for the Wildpeaks are like 62 lbs. I don’t want that gas and ride hit for the amount I go off-road. I also rarely tow. Falkens don’t make a load C in the stock size or one size up. So I’d have to go with SL. The ATIII make SL, C and E. I’m just trying to figure out why anyone would get the C’s if they are only 1lbs less than the E? Is the ride even better? Seems gas milage hit would be the same. I just get paranoid about getting a flat easier with an SL. But don’t want the milage hit of an E. I was hoping C would be a nice middle ground. Sorry for the rambling. Tires get mind boggling.

 

Ain't that the truth...

The WildPeaks are HEAVY in all it's iterations so if weight is a concern, those won't fit the bill. I think the SL 275/65R18's are 48 lbs or some such while the E rated Falkens are 61 lbs? Your stock Michelins are 42 lbs for comparison. I haven't noticed more than 1, maybe 2 MPG difference with an E rated tire, but that's not really correct since I'm comparing my stock empty vehicle MPG at 75 mph to my truck that now weighs 7K+ with an 80 MPH speed limit.

The Toyo ATIII's are light and ride smooth; I had some E rated Toyo's in the stock size for a month or so before they drove me crazy with a buzz they made and I swapped the for another set of Cooper AT3's. The Toyo's definitely rode smoother even though they had the same load rating. I think the lightest E rated tires I've found are Firestone XT's and Nokian Outpost AT's (which are NLA anywhere until they retool their new plant). The Toyo's are pretty close.

I don't see much reason to run a C rated tire over a P rated tire if you are looking for a good tradeoff between load and durability with an emphasis on ride comfort, especially since the weight is so much more than P rated and not much less than an E rated tire. Remember that the ply rating (4 ply, 6 ply, 10 ply, etc) is just a rating now and doesn't indicate the actual number of plies in the tire. The reason I bring that up is because it means a modern E rated 10 ply can ride much better than the 10 ply tires of yesteryear.

 

Gotcha. Thank you for the info. I have noticed that sometimes the SL versions look different. They don’t have as aggressive a look. I’ll probably go with the E haha. I loved the Wildpeaks on my Tacoma. They were awesome in the snow and rain. I think the ATIII should be similar. Hopefully I don’t get that noise you complained about.

 

I was on E’s before that came with the truck(20” methods +Falkens) went with Toyo’s and stock rock warriors(17’s). Saved quite a bit of weight but the biggest change was definitely a nicer ride. I’m not taking it on the Rubicon. I did however find a website with tire info and purchased an equivalent size cheaper spare for the 18” spare wheel, just in case I needed to get out of somewhere desolate. Haven’t used it yet. My biggest fear was sidewalls. I guess if you’re airing down with weight (which I’m admitttedly borderline) I’d stay with E’s. But for hitting fire roads to lakes for camping and fly fishing I haven’t needed it. I may swap out to different wheels / suspension upgrade next round and if it’s the same ballpark cost for 18” E’s I’ll probably lean that way.

 

Load Cs will have the same tread pattern and depth as the load d/e equivalent which can be quite a bit more than a SL/XL at the same price. Often a A/T load C will have 18/32nds tread vs the SL version 14 or 15/32nds. Load Cs are so uncommon now likely a moot point, much more common in 16 or 17” rim sizes, same for Load D.

 

I did a few trails with SL on my tacoma years ago. Never had issue.

Have E on Tundra now only because almost everything in size i use is an E.

 

I wheel on C tires except my Mickey Thompson XS Pro have 4 ply sidewalls vs E tires with 3 ply. Basically getting more sidewall protection with a softer ride - although definitely not smoother with the crazy knobs these tires have

 

What LT tires are available now in load C ? Ko2 are hard to find other than ko3s .

 

They're so rare only way to really know is get on Discount Tire or Tire Rack and using the Load filters to see the C options in various sizes. Open Country AT3 is fairly common in C.

 

Toyo is making the AT3 in an SL 275/70/18 for EV’s. Weight is showing 43 lbs and still looks like a typical AT3. Be interesting how this would work on a Tundra.

 

Are KO3 s load C tires ?

 

KO3's don't have a lot of options yet in load C. If you look at their sizing pdf, a lot more KO3 options will be in Load C by 2026, a few more sizing options releasing this year