As much as I hate to say this

[rockstate45]

As much as I hate to say this, I think I got a set of, well, defective BFGs.

The strengths outweigh the weaknesses:

-They're extremely durable
-They're great in all conditions

However,
-They are wearing very poorly (even with docile driving habits )
-They CANNOT be balanced. The first time I got 'em on the truck they'd shake from 30+. Now at 60+ they just wobble back and forth. Must be an INCH in play at those speeds in the steering wheel. It's always been like this and they've been balanced probably 4-5 times (probably abotu every other time they've been rotated in other words).

I have 25K miles on 'em and they'll be toast at 35 I think. Maybeeee 40 if I do some highway drivin' (got 3600 miles in highway coming up) by January.

ALSO, on a sidenote, I think our trucks have a personal bubble of 5 feet all the way around the truck. I got a niceee 3" scratch down to the white base coat from a creeper {not a perv, but the dolly [and not the one with the big (.)(.)]}.

-rockstate

[MacCTD]

They are not defective, that is just how they are, 20 years ago they were great, but they have not changed much since then, there are a lot better tires out there. BFG puts all thier money into advertising not making a better product.

[stevencrosbie]

All of my friends who have these tires are experiencing the same exact things. They used to be good tires....there are better tires now on the market.

My Goodyear Silent Armors took almost no weight to balance. As for wear, we will see, but at least they are not loosing lugs on the highway like some of my friends and their BFG ATs.

Good luck with them. Their advertising is hard to look over and I can understand why people put them on their trucks.

[jeepnuts311]

I had a set of BFG mud terrains in the 35x12.50/15 flavor on my jeep. I had one that required 21.5 ounces of weight to get it driveable.

There were clip weighs running about 9" on the lip of the outside of the rim, about 7" on the inside of the rim, and twp strips of tape weights side by side with another strip taped on top of them inside the rim.

It was rediculous. They rode ok for a jeep with 35"s locked front and rear. I loved those tires though. they performed well at 8psi in the rocks. I put about 30K miles on them before I sold the jeep and they had tons of life left. My jeep weighed about 3200lbs, though.

-Tim

[mendonsy]

Originally Posted by rockstate45

The 305/65/18 in the KO is a great conservative choice.

You made a fine choice in tires that will get you anywhere you want to go and back again.

Treat 'em well and they'll treat you well too.

-rockstate

Hmmmm...

[08SalsaMax]

WOW !!! Good info on the BFGs.... never would have thought... They're off my list.

[rockstate45]

Yeah, old school post right there.

They are a great tire but they do not balance on my application. Doesn't seem like anybody with the 305/65/18s have these issues. I knwo one other person with the 285/65/18s and his are the same way and wear fast as well.

I will be goign to a Michelin LTX M/S 2 next time around, or the Duratrac. Those things look BA.

-rockstate

[TundraBay]

Maybe smaller is better, in some cases. My 265/65/18 tires balanced with one or maybe two tiny weights each, never wobble, get great grip in almost all conditions (not soft sand, though; I learned that the hard way), and with 45,000 Miles still have 9/32" left on all corners. I rotated them ONCE at 30,000 miles. I tow a very big and heavy trailer for about 2,500 miles a year, I drive on logging roads with rocks etc, and I have a 40 mile commute the rest of the time. I don't know why I'd choose a different tire. I have heard good things about the silent armors, but I'm not sure on their off road capabilities.

[rockstate45]

TB, reviews like yours are why I chose to buy these tires.

Their off-road traction (traction in general) is excellent in almost all cases (adn the soft sand is still better than stock, but you're rolling on narrower tires...). The longevity is why I bought 'em, expecting to get at lesat 60K at the worst case.

I'm down to about 4/32s in the middle of the fronts and probably 6/32s in the rear.

-rockstate

[OntheRox]

I warned you about those tires Barney!

[mxsjw]

Sorry to hear it.
My experience is completely reversed. I've had nothing but great luck with the BFG ATs. Had them twice on my previous truck, both sets went more than 70k with no issues. The current set on my Tundra have been great, are at 40k, and look like they'll go another 30 to 40.
I've looked up reviews and they mostly get top scores, sounds like a bad set to me.

[wildbill129]

Rockstate, where did you have them balanced? Were the balanced with the Hawke lug centric adapter?

[tsolomon]

Sorry to hear that too. That's the brand of tire I have. Now that you mention it, I do have quite a bit of weight on these guys? Hmmm?

I read about a year ago that tires have a manufacture date on them and you should not buy tires that are more than, what is that number, 5 or was it 10 years old? Man, sorry I can't remember but you got me thinking about it again and I'm curious where on the tire the production date is listed. Maybe that would help you know if the compound is dated, hence wearing faster. Maybe it was in a Consumer Reports magazine I read that info on tires, I think?

Who'd a thunk that you need a "fresh" set of tires? Crazy huh?

[bilztrd]

They work great in sand but you must air down. Just this weekend I saw people pulling 10k plus trailers in soft sand with the BFGs down at 12psi. I pulled mine in with 18 psi, but got stuck on the way out pulling 8k with 35 psi. I had aired up to go into town and forgot to take'm down. Alot of people use them in the soft stuff. The truck handles so much better than with the rugged trails.

[RamItOne]

BFG is crap, that TA KO design is far obsolete. Michelin closed their bfg plant in bama.
Check out the bridgestone dueler at revo... Planning on buying a 275 65 20 LT for the deer lease.