BF Goodrich KO2 vs KO3 ?

[DHW]

Bfg is telling me they should start adding sizes this spring.

I couldn't wait any longer. I went ahead and got a set of MT Baja Boss ATs in 35. I can finally take a corner in wet weather!

Plus I got them for $341 a tire. Best price I'd ever seen for them.

Sponsored

 

[LCW]

This guy does a good job explaining the construction and tread differences… no driving impressions though…

 

[Ratbert]

This guy does a good job explaining the construction and tread differences… no driving impressions though…

Great comparison. He neglected to mention, however, that the KO3 is narrower.

 

[Chupacabra]

Got my 285/70/17 KO3s on this morning. When I left the right front TPMS was reading 56 pounds, guess they forgot to air it down after beading it . I dropped them all to about 36 when I got home, I'll re-adjust in the morning when they are overnight cold.

So far so good, I had the Dueller 245/45/17s that the Sports all come with so the Jeep does feel like it's higher, even though I know it's about 3/4 of an inch at best. Definitely drives different with the taller fatter tire. Surprisingly the ride is pretty good even though these are load range C tires.

I am happy with the look of them, makes my Sport not look so wimpy with those 245s it came with . I am hopeful that these do better in the rain than my Dueller's did with 30K miles on them as well.

I set my wheel diameter to 32.75" with JSCAN, my speedometer and GPS speedometer are spot on at that setting. My speedometer was about 3MPH slow at 60MPH before I changed it.

 

[ormandj]

Another recent data point that's leaning me toward the KO3. This article is comparing them to the Wildpeak AT4W, which does better in the wet. Fortunately (?) it rarely rains here. The focus of the new KO3 seems to match my needs.

https://tiredriver.com/bf-goodrich-ko3-vs-falken-wildpeak-at4w/

I would be very apprehensive of the reviews coming from this site. I’ve asked for him to post his actual test data he claims (track times, stopping tests, etc) and he doesn’t respond. He always references them but never posts any details. It’s also wild how many reviews he is supposedly doing of all these tires with actual driving experience, yet all the pictures are always random vehicles.

Much like the YouTube reviews lately, it just feels like someone looking at the tread and making comments, or worse, autogenerated AI pseudoscience. All the YT reviews so far basically parrot the same thing while looking at the tread; it’ll be interesting to see actual on-road reviews now that the tires are hitting the road in limited amounts.

 

[Ratbert]

@Discount Tire, according to the release date chart that's been floating around the 37s will be 315/70R17F. From what I understand, that F says they're run flats. Seriously? Wouldn't that have significant implications for how their sidewalls flex when aired down?

 

[The Last Cowboy]

I wouldn't even consider for a second buying a tire designed to run flat. Bad ride in most cases, and almost never can a run flat be repaired, especially if it was driven flat for any considerable distance.

 

[ColoradoMike]

I currently have 35" KO2s with about 25-30k miles on them and they are so slick in the rain I won't let anyone else drive the Jeep in wet weather.

Are you specifically concerned about accelerated deterioration of wet handling? You mentioned that in your post. What AT or other LT tires that aren't first and foremost road-focused handle better in wet?

My main gripe is the KO2 is slippery when tread is below half life. Not a good thing at all.

For what it is worth, I live in Western Washington where roads are wet a significant amount of the year. Wet handling is an important consideration to me (though so is mud). Also why I am curious.

I'm definitely willing to give up wear for better rock crawling and snow/ice characteristics.
I'd prefer not to have to winch myself over obstacles. I'd also love to be able to get down my driveway in the snow. I've got about a 20' drop off that's not fun to feel yourself sliding uncontrollably towards.

We all have experienced similar dilemmas, so I will share my recent experience. My KO2s (315/70/r17) were always slick in rain and snow, but that got MUCH worse as they wore. At 24,000 miles, I was hating them. After MUCH reading and fretting, I decided to go with the Mickey Thompson Baja Boss ATs in same size; 315/70/r17.
My Jeep IMMEDIATELY felt more glued to the road, better traction in wet AND dry.
Then I took it to Moab. I honestly can't tell if they're better and grippier for rock crawling or not. I had a much better run up Mirror Gulch on Metal Masher with the Mickeys than I did the KO2s--almost zero slip with the Mickeys where as I totally burned rubber trying the same obstacle with the KO2s. But it might have just been a better line, and there were other ledges where the Mickeys slipped and spun when I wasn't expecting them to.
Also, the Mickeys are substantially heavier than the KO2s in the same size, and going to the Mickeys cost me fully two miles per gallon, which was a much bigger hit to MPG than I was expecting, and it's big enough that I MIGHT regret my decision... but the on-road traction is so much better. Of course, I will have to compare it when the Mickeys have 24k on them as the KO2s did.

 

[azwjowner]

Also, the Mickeys are substantially heavier than the KO2s in the same size

I know to many it's not as cool, but the 255/85/17 pizza cutters would help that weight issue while preserving the 35" size.

 

[Discount Tire]

@Discount Tire, according to the release date chart that's been floating around the 37s will be 315/70R17F. From what I understand, that F says they're run flats. Seriously? Wouldn't that have significant implications for how their sidewalls flex when aired down?

The F designation means that the tire is a Load Range F. BF Goodrich (and others) are designing the tires that way to accommodate the load carrying capacity of the new generation of light trucks that are coming to market.

 

[ColoradoMike]

I know to many it's not as cool, but the 255/85/17 pizza cutters would help that weight issue while preserving the 35" size.

I just can't make myself believe that narrower tires would NOT be a detriment in rock crawling situations. It would have to be. And that's a compromise I won't make.

 

[Ratbert]

I just can't make myself believe that narrower tires would NOT be a detriment in rock crawling situations. It would have to be. And that's a compromise I won't make.

I've seen videos where they end up with basically the same area of tire patch. That kind of makes sense since you can theoretically calculate the vehicle's weight by using tire patch surface area and tire pressure.

The shape of that patch will be different, which could have implications for rock crawling. And, of course, for most of us pizza cutters look pretty stupid, but to each their own.

 

[Ratbert]

The F designation means that the tire is a Load Range F. BF Goodrich (and others) are designing the tires that way to accommodate the load carrying capacity of the new generation of light trucks that are coming to market.

Does a load range F imply an incredibly stiff sidewall? Those have a max PSI of 95!?!

Any idea if they're planning on releasing 37s that are marked as 37s?

 

[Discount Tire]

Does a load range F imply an incredibly stiff sidewall? Those have a max PSI of 95!?!

Any idea if they're planning on releasing 37s that are marked as 37s?

It does imply a stiffer sidewall. Remember, it's a 12 ply rated tire. There are not 12 actual plies. It may be stiffer, but a reinforced sidewall and other components will help with puncture resistance in off road scenarios.

BF Goodrich will be releasing the LT 37X12.50R 17 KO 3 in May of 2026. The spec sheet shows it measuring out at 36.5" OD.

 

[DaltonGang]

It does imply a stiffer sidewall. Remember, it's a 12 ply rated tire. There are not 12 actual plies. It may be stiffer, but a reinforced sidewall and other components will help with puncture resistance in off road scenarios.

BF Goodrich will be releasing the LT 37X12.50R 17 KO 3 in May of 2026. The spec sheet shows it measuring out at 36.5" OD.

Has the rubber compound of the KO3 changed from KO2? Has there been a notable improvement in wet handling?
If you have read, many of us have an issue with the KO2, and its poor wet road handling.

Sponsored