Outpost NAT... BOO! Ultraterrain AT... Boo! What's next?

A little background...

I recently took a nail to the sidewall of my Nokian Outpost NAT tires; unrepairable and no new tires available from Nokian in the same size LT275/65R18, leaving me with three good tires and no option but to run the spare or buy new tires. The spare is the original (yup, needs to be replaced) but, more importantly, is still a p rated tire and not an option for the hauling and towing that I do. I contacted Nokian but they just contacted DT to verify what we already learned. The Nokians come with a free road hazard warranty that covers the replacement tire, but it does me no good if they don't have a replacement tire available for several months. Reminds me of the sage words, "I can take a dump in a box and slap a guarantee on it, but at the end of the day, I just sold you a guaranteed pieces of..." Wait, maybe it's gotta be your bull... Ok, ok, maybe I'm being overly critical, but why not inject a little humor in to the frustration.

So I purchased a set of LT275/70R18 Goodyear Ultraterrain AT's from Discount Tire as I needed to get back on the road ASAP and that's what they had in stock. In short, they don't meet my needs. Might as well call them the Goodyear UltraSquirmyHowlers. My exhaust got much quieter, my radio lost half it's frequency response below half volume, and my head is still buzzing from the last couple hundred road miles (and not the @Azblue kinda buzzing that some of you guys are so fond of... haha). Steering is a guess and check affair: point the wheel in the direction you hope you want to go, then wait a second to see if the truck goes that direction. If not, just rinse and repeat until you are headed the desired direction. Oh, and did I mention that the tires are LOUD?

Anyways, I'm plan on taking up DT on their satisfaction guarantee and will be swapping them out for something different. There are several new, intriguing offerings from other tire MFG's and figured I'd solicit some advice from the peanut gallery. I've run 275/70R18's in the past in a Cooper AT3XLT flavor and appreciated the increased tire carcass air volume to improve the ride, but might just go back to the stock size LT275/65R18. Most of the tires below are available in both sizes - some even in P rated or XL 275/70R18, which still probably won't need my weight and handling needs. The contestants are as follows with pertinent specs for LT275/65R18:

Yokohama Geolander AT4



Pros:
- 18/32" tread depth
- 52 lbs each
- middle of the road aggressive tread
- 3d sipes
-65k treadwear warranty

I ran some Geolander AT2's years ago on an explorer; traction was great but they wore funny and go kinda loud with a stiffer ride. Otherwise, I was satified with them.


Bridgestone Dueler A/T Ascent




- 16/32's tread depth
- Lightest of the bunch at 49.1 lbs
- Full depth 3d Sipes
- Appears to have lots of siping

I haven't run Bridgestones before so I don't know what to expect form them in a general sense.




Nitto Terragrappler G3




- low 15/32's tread depth
- light at 51.3 lbs
- full depth sipes

I have no experience with Nitto's. I drooled over Ridge Grapples when they came out but decided they weren't for me. Most folks I talked to said they were great except in icy/snowy roads where they were just ok.



Falken Wildpeak AT4W



- 18/32's tread depth
- heavy 57.1 lbs
- 3 ply sidewall
- 3d sipes and silica enhanced compound (silica is good, but been around for a while)
- includes Falken Road Hazard Protection

I don't have personal experience with Falkens but from friends I've spoken with, they are heavy and get loud around the 1/2 tread mark.



Cooper Discoverer Stronghold AT



- 17/32" tread depth
- 54 lbs
- Appear more aggressive than the outgoing AT3's, but with less siping

I've run several Cooper tires including two sets of AT3's (one set in XLT, on in LT) and some made-by-cooper-Big O AT's from about 10 years ago on the tundra. They have generally treated me well and done everything I've asked them to. Snow and water traction started to deteriorate around 7/32's, though. Also, with Goodyear's recent acquisition of Cooper tire in 2021, I don't know if they are Cooper tires, or Goodyear tires with a Cooper label.


BFG KO3



- 16/32's tread depth
- 55 lbs
- Temperature-adaptive silica compound for better cold weather traction
- RFID symbol on sidewall to track my tires...??

Marketing relies heavily on previous KO name and recognition. Previous K02 excelled in wintery traction for about 20k miles, then turned to greased mud and were worn out by 30k miles, according to one of my tire sources. My only experience with BFG was the Rugged Fails that came stock on my '13 TRD; those were the worst tires I've ever run. No traction anywhere, picked up nails like they were made from magnets, and were toast shortly after 20k miles.


All the tires listed are 3PMSF rated. My use is daily hauling and towing in inclement weather ranging from -30 to 110F in terrains ranging from snowy/icy/slushy roads with several feet of snow, to rutted, rocky, gravelly, poofy-dirt roads. I spend a lot of time on road but need decent off-highway performance.

Priorities are: traction including wintry mucky roads, stability for towing and hauling, handling on not-straight roads (part of stability), smooth and quietish ride, durability and longevity. I don't really care about tread ware warranties other than a gauge for what I should expect. Most tires don't last more than two years for me, which I'm ok with. I won't run tires down to 3/32's to meet the warranty requirements for another discounted set.

The Nokians met all of those priorities in spades, but if I can't get the gosh-darned tires when I need them, they are useless to me. I considered looking for another set of Nokians (or a new set, in general) in a 275/70R18 or a 285/65r18, but pricing for the latter are even more ridiculous than pricing for the current and former sizes.

So after all of that blathering, what thinkest thou?

 

Well, a little update. I reached out to Nokian via email and they came through for me and found an extra tire sitting in the warehouse somewhere, so I'm back on the Nokians. BUT... I already purchased a new set of tires so I've still got to choose something. After rolling around on the Goodyear Ultraterrains for a week or two, then going back to the Nokians, I realized how good of a tire the Outpost nAT really is. So I've basically narrowed it down to the Bridgestone Dueler A/T Ascent and a another set of Nokians.

VS

'But wait, you said were done with the Nokians for now?!'

Yep, I did. But after I thought about it for a minute (and was reminded how much I like the Outpost tires), I figured I could get another set of Nokians in 285/65R18, use the new tire as my spare (which is still the original on the truck..), throw another one of the tires on my wife's sequoia as the spare (also prolly the original), and have two tires left over as spares. The 285/65R18 tire is close enough to the stock 275/65R18 tire that I don't think I would have a problem with running the spare for a bit if I got in to the same situation.

What it boils down to is:

The Bridgestones are new and unproven, but should be a technologically advanced tire. They appear to excel on icy/snowy roads and be quiet and comfortable. They are also lightweight - around 4 or 5 lbs lighter than the already light Nokians.

The Nokians, on the other hand, have proven themselves to me. They handle exceptionally well, they excel in crummy weather, snow, and ice, they find traction virtually everywhere, and they are reasonably quiet. But the tires are harder to get..

Leaning toward another set of Nokians.

 

Any update. Debating between outposts and the ascent for my next tire. I mostly drive on road daily. Do some very light off roading, and tow my camper and horse. Just want an aggressive look while staying as comfortable as possible. Don’t care about winter performance as I have dedicated winters. I was set on outposts, but just came across the ascent and I really like that they are lighter, and advertised to be super quiet and comfortable.

 

ive got the previous gen Nokians....Outpost AT. Best all around AT tire Ive ever run!

 

Nokian really got their ass handed to them with Russia Ukraine war. It forced them to divest of a significant investment - their Russian factories. Likely the reason for the difficulty in finding a replacement tire.

Anyway, excellent tires, been on their snows since the early 90’s.

 

Some truth here. They used to be built in Russia. The tire I have, previous version- Nokian AT was built in russia. When crap broke out Nokian got out of there in a rush, didnt even get to take the tire molds. So, it was a couple years before they came out with a replacement, the Nat tire.

Ive run a ton of different AT and MT tires from many brands and the Nokians are very light but strong, rubber compound is beefy but pliable. The rubber stays much cleaner than some other brands Ive used and they ride much better, not as harsh as others I have had in E load. Saving some unsprung weight has huge impacts. I get better performance and MPG with 285/75-18 34.8 tall Nokians than when I had 275/70-18 33 tall Wildpeaks.

 

so in theory, the ascents are 5lbs lighter a tire, should perform and give better mileage than the outposts.

 

Ascent? by Bridgestone? Those look to have same 60k mileage rating so warranty is same.

I ran bridgestone tires once in my life. Hands down was the worst tire I have ever tried. It was a long while ago, MT version, tread chunked off, uneven wear even though I am anal about rotation and pressure and they only lasted about 20k miles before they got loud and slick. Id run the BFG before Bridgestone. Maybe their new stuff is better, but Ill never know, not a brand I would consider now. Too many other great and proven options available.

 

I ordered another set Nokians. The Ascents looked promising but I KNOW the Nokians deliver. They also look much better, IMO, but that’s further down the list than performance. So a set of LT285/65r18’s are sitting at the tire shop right now waiting for my appointment to come up.

100%. I’ve had to wait for the tires to go in to production on each set I ordered, and then the most recent issue with sourcing a replacement. But I expected as much with the initial purchase.

My original thread about the DT price matching the Outposts were Russian production Outpost AT’s which disappeared before they could even order them. Had to wait a good long while for production to shift stateside. Fortuitous for Nokian that new Dayton plant had just opened or was about to open up.

 

How are the Outposts in mud?

 

Much better than expected. I’ve been in muddy fields deep enough to make a third track dragging the pumpkin and it just churned through it without issue.

For reference, my friends duramax in the same field..

 

Nokian has been a sponsor at Copper Mountain for years. I had no idea they made an AT tire. If you find their tire on the mountain, you get a free set or something like that.

285/75/18 is light and not bad looking.

 

That would be way to go! SimpleTire had a deal on them a few times this year - a couple times at 10 or 15%, once at 30% but I missed that one. I almost ordered a set from them but I had DT price match the set I put on the sequoia instead. Unfortunately, SimpleTire changed the way they display prices and you have to start the checkout process instead of just seeing the price in cart. It threw one of the kids at DT for a loop but they got it figured out.

My truck is at DT right now waiting to get some 285/65R18's mounted up in place of the 275/65R18's I've been running. Poor guys are gonna be there til midnight with their backlog. I offered to bring the truck back tomorrow but the guy helping me out insisted he get them mounted up for me today.

I did have to pay a little more on the 285's (that are replacing the Ultraterrains) but he gave me discount on them - around 10 or 15%, methinks. So I won't complain.

Hopefully I will have enough of these tires to last my truck at least another few years...

 

No kidding? That would be pretty sweet. I'd love to ski some of the resorts in Colorado someday. Or snowboard if it's a good powder day

 

Any winter/snow driving updates? I thought about the Outposts this morning as I slid sideways on my KO2s taking my kid to the bus. I think I'm getting the 285/75/18s.

 

Interested in hearing as well. I have the Nokians on my work F150 but haven't hit Icee/snow yet. So far in wet they're awesome.

I did hit some ice in my Tundra with 3 years old Terra Grappler G2's last week and found myself drifting across 2 lanes of luckily no traffic. Time for new tires there...

 

We had about 4 inches of snow in VA this week and lots of ice. I have the previous gen Nokian- outpost AT, not the new NAT. NAT tread is a hair wider. Tires handled everything great, stayed in 2wd, no spin no slip

 

I can recommend Vredestein Pinza AT. Had their Quatrac all seasons on my AWD car, was so impressed with the deep snow and ice performance that got rid of the dedicated winter tires set. Wife's car got Quatrac 5 and she was happy, too. See a lot of Quatracs around, in fact.

Pinza AT is even better in snow, that's what I have now. They have it in P and LT, sizes up to 33". Wife's Sequoia will be getting them next when her factory stock Michelins wear out.

 

I’ve run the outpost AT and nAT tires for a few years now between a Silverado and now Tundra, they’re not cheap but are the best tires I have found. Pretty good in the snow and little road noise plus they look pretty good. I haven’t tried many others so my points may be unreliable but I have always been able to stay in 2wd during snow storms. Another plus is they last a fairly long time I had them on my Silverado for over 50k and they still had some lift in them which offsets the cost.

 

Freaking phenomenal in snow and ice.

Two weeks before Christmas, this is what my week looked like. 1200 miles - 600 of which were in snowy, icy, wintry muck roads. Trailer in tow for 400 of those wintry roads. I ended up doing 100 of some of the worst miles in 2wd because I had some ice buildup around the front driveshaft and thought I killed the front diff. Unplowed roads with snow deep enough to use my trailer as a plow in some spots; had to step on the gas just to maintain speed going DOWN a 8-10% grade…

20-30mph crosswinds (no trailer that day) turned roads from mostly clear to wet to pure ice back to mostly clear in 1/4 mile stretches.



Wind mostly died down, but snow started falling.



Unplowed the entirety of this stretch. Snapped a pic of the truck and trailer when snowfall abated for a section.





Snow was so packed under my truck when I got home that there was almost 8” of buildup on the bumper and my spare tire had a yeti nest in it.

 

I called DT to ask about availability and the guy had no idea Nokian made an AT tire. I'm deciding between 285/75/r18 and 35/12.5/r18. Thanks for the photos @blenton.

285/75/r18 is 3lbs lighter, skinnier, an E, and 34.8. Outpost 35 is 34.5 and a F. Any thoughts? Seems like 285/75/r18 is the way to go.

 

you need to think about F rating on a half ton pickup....they would have to ride like wagon wheels- so stiff.

Love the 285s, taller than 35x1250s, but lighter and more compact tread patch =better MPG and Performance. Get the benefit of larger tires without some of the usual drawbacks.

 

Are they pretty heavy comparing with stock tires? The Nokian Outpost NAT tires?

 

Here are weights for NAT tires at or close to OEM stock size. I am not sure how much the usual stock tires weigh. I think Michelin at2, SL version in 275/65 are around 40-42

265/65 R 18 114H - 41.9
275/65 R 18 116T 45.2

But once you move into LT versions and or E load, they do weigh less than many of the popular brands.

Here is the spec sheets
https://nokiantyres.studio.crasman....n_Tyres_Outpost_nAT_Info_Sheet_April_2024.pdf

 

The 285/75r18 will fit better without clearance issues on stock or moderate offset wheels. Aggressive offset will/can run with even just 275/70r18’s. The 35x12.5 is a little wider and according to other user experiences on the site, will rub with just about any offset wheel.

I’d go with the 285/75r18 personally.

I went from stock p rated Michelins on the sequoia to p rated Nokians. They are about 3 or 4 lbs heavier, but deeper tread depth when new. No noticeable depreciation in mileage or power.

I run load range e tires on the tundra so they are 11 or 13 lbs heavier. There is a smal difference in mileage and power, but it’s a trade off I’m willing to make. Mileage, though, didn’t really change when I went back to p rated Michelins for a year, so I can’t really say that there was an appreciable change there.

Either way, they aren’t as heavy as lost comparable AT tires, especially with the additional tread depth. My coopers had 16/32’s, the Nokians are 18/32’s and weigh the same.

 

What rating should I consider for this Nokian Outpost NAT? I am in Texas, constantly hot and the drive is mostly freeway, very rare off roading. It does rain some so it needs good rain handling. I consider these mostly for the aggressive look

I also have some 20" rims that I want to use but 18" will work as well.