I’ve got about 6,000 miles on the Nokian nAT on the Tundra. Stock size is 275/55R20. I installed 275/60R20 Nokian nAT.
I’ve done a few road trips, driven around town, and I like them. The previous tires were Michelin LTX in 275/55R20. A very different tire noted for long wear and quiet ride. I have had the nAT in a wide variety of conditions but no off road. Nokian built these for off road, with large voids, aggressive tread, and puncture-resistant sidewalls.
Here are my initial impressions.
- The nATs are a bit louder. Not objectionable, but they are an AT tread vs. a highway tread. I do hear them on the highway, where I heard nothing from the Michelins.
- The nAT ride a bit softer. This might be from the sidewall height. The nAT have an extra sidewall ply over the Michelins, so, you would think that they would be stiffer, but they’re not.
- The nAT handle snow quite well. Yes, I know where I live, but here’s the truck three days after I parked it in a blizzard in Newark. I grew up in snow country, I know snow. The Michelins handled snow surprisingly well, and both tires are extensively siped for icy/mix conditions. The Nokian did great in the blizzard.
- There is no difference in MPG. I thought that there might be a decrease from the more aggressive tread, but I can’t see any. The truck gets lousy MPG anyway, so perhaps the difference is masked by that.
- There is a slight loss in steering precision vs. the Michelins. To be expected with an AT vs. a highway tire. It’s not big, but it’s there. I don’t think this is a Nokian problem, but an AT vs. HIghway tire issue.
My recommendation - I would buy them again. For an AT tire, they are smooth, relatively quiet and handle a variety of conditions well.
I like ‘em.
View attachment 337288