37 KO2 narrower than stock '35' KO2?

Checking out some specs on some future 37's. From The Rack it shows that the 37"
KO2 has a .2" smaller section width than the 35.

This is surprising as I would not want to diminish the footprint when going to a taller tire.

LT315/70R17
113/110S C
Ford
None 2,535 lbs. 45 psi 15/32" 65 lbs. (rim)8-11" 9.5" (section width)12.7" (tread width)10.6" 34.4" (revs/mile)604

37X12.5R17LT
124R D
None 3,525 lbs. 50 psi 15/32" 71 lbs. (rim)8.5-11" 10" (section width)12.5" (tread width)10.5" 36.5" (revs/mile)569

Any astute tire people out there think this is a typo or was the 35" KO2 for the Raptor made so specifically that the tread was increased?

Section width is the fattest part of the tire mounted and inflated. Notice the 35" tire is a load range C and the 37" is a D. The D range sidewall does not bulge as much as the C. The tread width is only .1" difference.

K. So the side walls on the 35" are not as ridged as the 37". And this is why the 35" may bulge out .2" more than the 37" on the sidewalls. Got it now.

But the part that counts, tread on road is only .1" difference. I can get with this and take tread width in higher regards than section width. Call me retentive, but I still think the .1" tread increase should be on the 37". That extra 25mm contact on the road may be beneficial in some weather conditions and it shouldn't be lost for the gain of ground clearance.

Just an opinion for my search..

My understanding is the 35" KO2 are a specialty tire for the Raptor, this is why the "C" rating. This is probably why it is a little wider.

Sent from my SM-T710 using Tapatalk

CSJr said:

K. So the side walls on the 35" are not as ridged as the 37". And this is why the 35" may bulge out .2" more than the 37" on the sidewalls. Got it now.

But the part that counts, tread on road is only .1" difference. I can get with this and take tread width in higher regards than section width. Call me retentive, but I still think the .1" tread increase should be on the 37". That extra 25mm contact on the road may be beneficial in some weather conditions and it shouldn't be lost for the gain of ground clearance.

Just an opinion for my search..

Click to expand...

0.1" is 2.5mm not 25mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

the 37 will still have a larger contact patch even if its not quite as wide because the contact patch will be longer especially when aired down

CFIT said:

0.1" is 2.5mm not 25mm.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Would you believe me if I said I accidently left out the decimal?

CSJr said:

Would you believe me if I said I accidently left out the decimal?

Click to expand...

Lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CSJr said:

Would you believe me if I said I accidently left out the decimal?

Click to expand...

No. lol

Truckzor said:

No. lol

Click to expand...

Well, there goes all hope for humanity.. Not trusting what a complete stranger tells you on the internet. It spells doom for our society. You are probably just mad that my 35L ecoboost displaces more than your .62 L ! A difference of 1meter/pound of cubic centijoules!

And yeah, still going to overlook the 37 BFG because due to the coefficient of sliding friction. Don't let me have to break down those numbers