Jeep Wrangler Forum banner

315/70/17 KO2 vs 35/12.50x17 KO2

26685 Views 10 Replies 8 Participants Last post by  rgreen65
Both E rated, side by side pics.
I was at DT this morning doing the upgrade from 285/70/17 KO2, i wasn't aware of a side by side comparison between both versions, so i asked my local DT store to put them together for a couple of pics.

I went with the 315/70/17 given it's a couple of bucks cheaper, and a little lighter too.

The one in the left(shoe in pic), is the 35x12.50x17, the one in the right is the 315/70/17, they're both KO2
315/70/17 weights 62 lbs, 35x12.5x17 weights 66lbs, other than that, they're pretty much the same height and width unmounted, at least to the naked eye.

Width, not the best angle, but the 315 is just a smidge wider, though you can't see the diffence because the camera angle, difference 1/8" or less if any
20160220_093928 by SilverFJ RSM, on Flickr

Height, the 35x12.5 is perhaps 1/8" taller
20160220_093914 by SilverFJ RSM, on Flickr
  • Like
Reactions: generalclortho
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Yep I did that yesterday soon after they were on. 33.5" mounted on 17x9 wheels.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
348 Posts
Glad someone noticed the "Lack" of difference between 35 and 315. Knowing this, getting 315's is a no-brainer now when I get an upgrade this summer.

Im just worried about Discount Tire saying that they "Cant" install a 315 on the stock rubicon wheels. :mooning:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
I had inquired of BFG re the differences a while back. Per BFG: First, the 315 has a slightly different angle on the mounting edge to allow for a narrower rim. Second the 315 has 4 lbs less rubber in the perimeter. Third the 315 can be used in dual tire applications, such as a dually truck.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
566 Posts
I know this is an old thread but using the Tire Size Comparison tool located here it appears that the first post (shoe pic) has the sizes backwards. The tire size comparison tool shows the 35 as having a taller profile....is the calculator wrong?


<D>
 

· Retired Moderator
2016 JKU Back Country
Joined
·
8,972 Posts
The 35s should be slightly taller, and that is shown in the second pic as well as the verbage where it says "Height, the 35x12.5 is perhaps 1/8" taller".
I think the first picture is showing you width, not height.
But I could be wrong.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,071 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
It's the angle of the pic (1st pic) that makes the 35 appear wider :) The 315 is a little wider, the 35 is a smidge taller. Once you get them mounted you won't be able to tell the difference between the two. The 315 is lighter weight wise and a tad cheaper. I've been running the 315/70/17 size for years now. I have the C rated 315 KO2's in my truk and E rated 315's in the Jeep.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
10,690 Posts
Using the specs as provided by DT on their website, the 35x12.50R17 is a whopping 0.12" taller than the 315/70R17. There are actually three KO2s in that approximate size on the DT site as the 315/70R17 is available in both LR C and LR E. I used the specs on the LR E as the 35x12.50R17 is only available as LR E. The weights have changed from what is stated in Post #1 with the 35x12.50R17 listed at 69# (vs 66 in the original post) and the 315/70R17 listed at 64# (vs 62 in the original post). But then tires do change a bit over the years.

The two tires are so close I think you would have to check the size on the sidewall to tell the difference. You can change the height of a tire 12/100th of an inch with just air pressure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsmwrangler
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top