Review of BF Goodrich KO2 A/T Tires (37x12.5x17)

Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
9,791
Posted this on the Wrangler forum and thought some may find it useful here:

Vehicle = 2019 JLUR with 3.6L, ZF8, & 5.13 Gearing
Empty Weight = 5700 pounds
Lift = 3.5" MC Game Changer
Shocks = 2.5" Fox DSC
Wheels = Icon Alpha; 17x8.5 with 0 offset/4.75" backspace

Tire = BF Goodrich KO2 A/T
Size = 37x12.50x17
Load Range = C
Inflated diameter (Unloaded) = 35.75" (@31 PSI)
Inflated diameter (Loaded) = 35.375" (@31 PSI)
Tread Depth = 15/32" (0 miles)
Tread Depth = 12/32" (35K miles)
Maintenance = 5 tire rotation and balance every 5K miles (more frequent balancing needed as they wear)

Experience:

On-Road (Good--when new):


- They will not stay balanced as they wear (at least not for long), more and more weight is needed to balance them and they do not stay balanced as long as other tires have. Rebalancing has been needed between rotations (Discount Tire - Road Force)
- They begin to lose their grip in the rain and snow after about 20-25K miles. I had to drive from Denver to Colorado Springs during the last big snowstorm (speed was greatly reduced due to the conditions) and they are all over the place. They have a 3 peak snow rating, but as they wear effectiveness is reduced on the highway and they will slide in the rain much faster than other tires.
- They are quiet; probably the quietest tire I have had except for Michelin LTX AT2's on my trucks.

Off-road (Jack of all trades and master of none--except maybe powdery snow):

- They work reasonably well in the snow, I have gone through really deep powdery snow and they handled it just fine.
- Loose, deep dry sand will typically find you close to stuck more often than not, wet sand is managed reasonably well.
- Thick clay based mud will find you stuck and flexing your winch muscles. The tread design does not clear sticky mud and you will find they become 4 slicks with zero grip in short order.
- Watery mud is cleared reasonably well, but they are no match for a true M/T.
- They handle rocks "ok", but they will slip and drag you out of your line on side angled inclines and declines.

Noise = 10 (even after 35K miles)
Wear = 9 (even with the weight of my JLUR)
Ride = 7 (9 at first; 4 after 35K miles)
Dry = 9 (even after 35K miles)
Wet = 6 (7 new; 4 after 35K miles)
Snow = 6 (8 off-road--even after 35K miles; 4 on-road after 35K miles)
Mud = 4 (2 in clay/heavy mud; 5 in all other mud)
Sand = 6 (4 in deep dry sand; 8 in wet sand)
Trail = 6 (they can slip in rocks on inclines and declines)
Look = 5 (nothing aggressive or sexy here)
Overall = 6.8
Would I buy again? = No (as a jack of all trades and master of none (except noise and perhaps wear) they are too expensive for what you are getting)
 
I tried and tried to like the K02's but despite their 3 peak rating, they were marginal at best in the snow, even new, for me. Solid highway tire though. Great review, especially Jack of all trades, master of none. That fits them perfectly!
 
I’ve never owned a set of BFG AT’s, I guess I never bought into the hype. I’ve had friends swear by them even as newer designs have come into the market. One thing I do like about them is that I could still get a load range C tire, where most of the tires available are all E’s.
 
I have ran several generations of the KO on SUV’s and pickups (midsize only).

When you get off the beaten path they are excellent. Never had a complaint in rough conditions and deep snow.

However in the rain, light snow, and ice they are inaccurately rated as being good. They are NOT imho especially as they age and accumulate mileage. Yes they are tough but simply are not a good street tire or even an inclement weather street tire.

In general I am finding that AT tires as a whole don’t perform that well in rain and such. But many of the other AT tires I have used (Nitto Terra Grapplers/Goodyear Durotracs/Michelin AT2) were hands down better than the KO’s in many categories UNTIL you go off-road.

Take the Michelin AT2, it has very mediocre reviews across the web however they are the best AT I have used in the rain…no surprises and no real complaints with them on my 1/2 ton. I may go with another set when they wear out if I don’t go with the Defender LTX which is an anomaly in the tire world…for my use anyhow.
 
Nice thorough test. I've had a couple sets and the 35x12.5r17 are the best all around tire I've had in this size. They stay balanced and ride nice on the road even near the end of life. I had balance issues with the original KO version. Pro Comp were terrible as they wore and Toyo M/T got really loud and rough as they aged but much better than Pro Comp. They test and advertise the BFG A/T for the baja desert, it is not shocking that snow performance is lacking. Surprised they even rate them for that. I use them on the highway and in the dry SW desert 🏜 and they are perfect for that. I'll be replacing them with the same when they age out because they don't wear fast enough for how much I use my truck.
 
I have ran several generations of the KO on SUV’s and pickups (midsize only).

When you get off the beaten path they are excellent. Never had a complaint in rough conditions and deep snow.

However in the rain, light snow, and ice they are inaccurately rated as being good. They are NOT imho especially as they age and accumulate mileage. Yes they are tough but simply are not a good street tire or even an inclement weather street tire.

In general I am finding that AT tires as a whole don’t perform that well in rain and such. But many of the other AT tires I have used (Nitto Terra Grapplers/Goodyear Durotracs/Michelin AT2) were hands down better than the KO’s in many categories UNTIL you go off-road.

Take the Michelin AT2, it has very mediocre reviews across the web however they are the best AT I have used in the rain…no surprises and no real complaints with them on my 1/2 ton. I may go with another set when they wear out if I don’t go with the Defender LTX which is an anomaly in the tire world…for my use anyhow.
Off the beaten path in snow, I would agree, but not in sand/rocks/mud--they are not good, close to terrible in fact. I also agree with your thoughts about age--this is what I experienced as well. They begin to circle the drain after about 20K miles and the balancing part is a joke given the cost of these tires.
 
I’ve never owned a set of BFG AT’s, I guess I never bought into the hype. I’ve had friends swear by them even as newer designs have come into the market. One thing I do like about them is that I could still get a load range C tire, where most of the tires available are all E’s.
For 17" tires, there are a number of brands that have them available in Load Range D. I went for the Load Range C for weight, but to be honest, it is not that much of a difference and I have always been concerned about LRC sidewalls in the rocks. BFG made the LRC (37's) for the Ford Raptor which is a different use case than what I do in my Jeep.

My next tires will likely be LRE and I will just air them down off-road as do today with the LRC.
 
Interesting. I'm thinking of going from Load Range E to LR C for better ride. The BFG Baja t/a race tires are LR C and are meant to be used harder than anything I will ever do. Also I try to get the lightest weight tire. The difference is huge when you start comparing.
 
3 sets of BFG All Terrains on my '96 Cherokee, very happy with them. The only thing I don't like is wet traction on pavement, having an open diff means it just spins like crazy.

C29DB68E-1497-4FAF-8284-80A159F52146.jpeg
 
It seems like most truck A/T tires, even the "light A/T's," display a significant drop in on-road wet traction once they see some wear. This is unfortunate since folks seeing wet conditions will often have to toss these tires with plenty of legal life remaining.
 
Interesting. I'm thinking of going from Load Range E to LR C for better ride. The BFG Baja t/a race tires are LR C and are meant to be used harder than anything I will ever do. Also I try to get the lightest weight tire. The difference is huge when you start comparing.
It can depend on a number of things not the least of which is the brand. LRC vs. LRD can be a small increase (which is what I was referring to), but LRE vs. LRC does not have to be a huge weight increase; but LRC will always be lighter (note the 37's are the BFG LRC I have now).

Compare the 33" LRC tires to 35" LRE, I had on my Jeep a few years ago:

33 vs 35 vs 37 - Marked Up.png
 
It can depend on a number of things not the least of which is the brand. LRC vs. LRD can be a small increase (which is what I was referring to), but LRE vs. LRC does not have to be a huge weight increase; but LRC will always be lighter (note the 37's are the BFG LRC I have now).

Compare the 33" LRC tires to 35" LRE, I had on my Jeep a few years ago:

View attachment 136413
You proved my point that weights vary widely. Falken are usually shockingly heavy.
 
You proved my point that weights vary widely. Falken are usually shockingly heavy.
It definitely can--check the sheets below for the comparisons that I did for 35", 37", and 40" tires.

Falkens "want to be" top tier and have made their pricing that way, but the tires themselves are not top tier (low to mid at best).

35" -

37" -

40" -
 
Interesting. I'm thinking of going from Load Range E to LR C for better ride. The BFG Baja t/a race tires are LR C and are meant to be used harder than anything I will ever do. Also I try to get the lightest weight tire. The difference is huge when you start comparing.
Yeah, I currently have Toyo MT’s in size 255/80-17 and LR E and they are heavy and stiff as all get out. I will likely go to a wider 285/70-17 next time to get a LR C for better ride like you.

5CABAC1E-303B-4D12-BE9C-DC840DD716C0.jpeg
 
Falkens "want to be" top tier and have made their pricing that way, but the tires themselves are not top tier (low to mid at best).
I am curious your thoughts on why Falken is a low/mid tire. I do not put Falken and Michelin on the same level but prefer a Falken on my truck (WILDPEAK A/T3W) to a Michelin. Michelin does not play in the offroad space much.

Now let's talk summer tires. I prefer Michelin to Falken on my Corvette. Michelin plays very well in the sportscar tire category and is hard to beat if you are not looking at price. Falken does have some great offers though, the AZENIS RT615K+ is a very good performer.

I have used Falken for 20+ years on and off track and they have served me well.

IMG_9474.jpg
 
I am curious your thoughts on why Falken is a low/mid tire. I do not put Falken and Michelin on the same level but prefer a Falken on my truck (WILDPEAK A/T3W) to a Michelin. Michelin does not play in the offroad space much.

Now let's talk summer tires. I prefer Michelin to Falken on my Corvette. Michelin plays very well in the sportscar tire category and is hard to beat if you are not looking at price. Falken does have some great offers though, the AZENIS RT615K+ is a very good performer.

I have used Falken for 20+ years on and off track and they have served me well.

View attachment 136864
From my perspective, Falken has always been a lower tiered tire versus the likes of BFG, Firestone, Bridgestone, Michelin, Goodyear, etc. for a multitude of reasons--ride, wear, handling, etc. With that said, I think they are decent tires, but (for me), they are not the same as the aforementioned, yet within the past year or so, they have raised the prices to that of the top tier--those two attributes cannot go hand in hand.

Why would I pay the same price for Falken as any of the others?
 
Last edited:
Why would I pay the same price for Falken as any of the others?
Because Falken has earned it otherwise people would not pay the price.

Things change. Let's talk Firestone. This brand at one time was avoided at all costs. Now with parent Bridgestone they deliver IMO one of the best value tires on the market, the Indy 500.

IMG_6137.JPG


Conti is a very good brand IMO, they have very good street offerings with decent AT offerings. The DWS06 is a solid four season tire and the TerrainContact A/T is a very good mild mannered AT. Used both. DWS on a E55 and GTI and the TerrainContact A/T on an Escalade.

IMG_4283.JPG

IMG_1828.JPG

IMG_4020.JPG


Michelin. Without using price/value is IMO one of the best, if not the best tire brand on the market. With my time around Corvettes on track I gained appreciation for Michelin for a solid tire. My street driven Corvette does not see a track but gets a Michelin tire.

IMG_9128 (1).jpg


Winter for the GTI

IMG_7445.JPG


BFG. The G-FORCE COMP-2 A/S were OK but nothing I was writing home about. I did like the BFG ATs on my Superduty but would not put them ahead of my Falkens.

Comp-2

IMG_2520.JPG


BFG ATs
MyCars (49).jpg


Goodyear? I have not found one model I have any interest in.
 
BFG haven't let me down. I can't talk myself into Falkens for almost no savings.
 

Attachments

  • 20221224_124708.jpg
    20221224_124708.jpg
    190.8 KB · Views: 5
  • Screenshot_20230123_205144_Gallery.jpg
    Screenshot_20230123_205144_Gallery.jpg
    207.6 KB · Views: 5
Because Falken has earned it otherwise people would not pay the price.

Things change. Let's talk Firestone. This brand at one time was avoided at all costs. Now with parent Bridgestone they deliver IMO one of the best value tires on the market, the Indy 500.

View attachment 136926

Conti is a very good brand IMO, they have very good street offerings with decent AT offerings. The DWS06 is a solid four season tire and the TerrainContact A/T is a very good mild mannered AT. Used both. DWS on a E55 and GTI and the TerrainContact A/T on an Escalade.

View attachment 136927
View attachment 136932
View attachment 136928

Michelin. Without using price/value is IMO one of the best, if not the best tire brand on the market. With my time around Corvettes on track I gained appreciation for Michelin for a solid tire. My street driven Corvette does not see a track but gets a Michelin tire.

View attachment 136929

Winter for the GTI

View attachment 136933

BFG. The G-FORCE COMP-2 A/S were OK but nothing I was writing home about. I did like the BFG ATs on my Superduty but would not put them ahead of my Falkens.

Comp-2

View attachment 136934

BFG ATs
View attachment 136935

Goodyear? I have not found one model I have any interest in.
None of that substantiates the reason that Falkens cost as much (or more) as all the rest and times have not changed that much since 2019 from my experience with them.

Additionally, for clarity I am only talking about tires that are for off-road (AT or MT) use and 35" and larger, not street car type tires--which appear to be the majority of your examples.

My Wrangler came with Falken tires--they were okay, but nothing spectacular and they wore a lot faster than other tires which are comparable.

I suspect we have different use cases and therefore different grading criteria. But, it's all good.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top