Toyo M-55
- Thread starter rusty_tlc
- Start date
EricRichards
New member
I have close to 48K on the M55's and have no complaints at all. My truck is 9k unloaded so a E rated tire is a requirement.
What I can tell you about them,
-Best wear you will ever see in a tire used on a heavy truck, friends that have all the brand MT/AT brands replace at around 25K. I have another 15K easy in mine.
-Road noise is not bad at all, my diesel truck is quieter than my car.
-They are tough! I have yet to have a nail flat and I drive over them all the time at work.
-They may use alittle more weight to balance, but run and wear true.
-Cost a tad more than others but you won't be replacing them often.
-In soft sand roads, I do not air down and they pull great. Light mud, clean extremely well but they are not true mud tires.
I do not think you can find a better heavy truck tire period! Thats why I have the next set already in storage.
What I can tell you about them,
-Best wear you will ever see in a tire used on a heavy truck, friends that have all the brand MT/AT brands replace at around 25K. I have another 15K easy in mine.
-Road noise is not bad at all, my diesel truck is quieter than my car.
-They are tough! I have yet to have a nail flat and I drive over them all the time at work.
-They may use alittle more weight to balance, but run and wear true.
-Cost a tad more than others but you won't be replacing them often.
-In soft sand roads, I do not air down and they pull great. Light mud, clean extremely well but they are not true mud tires.
I do not think you can find a better heavy truck tire period! Thats why I have the next set already in storage.
ersatzknarf
lost, but making time
Great endorsement !
Regcabguy
Oil eater.
That sounds like a good fix if you're using a stock ss or other brand. If I was running the big Toyo MT's in a 35" or 37" I'd want to use a Fox or Bilstein ss along with a steering gear brace to minimize wear to the suspension parts. I've been using the Carli highmount Bilstein,but removed it to take pics of the corrosion I'm seeing.Hopefully Bilstein will step up to the plate and replace the shock. Running the smallish 285-75-17 Toyo AT's,I had to drop the pressure in the Bilstein unit a bunch to cure the drift. Zero drift with the stock Mopar that goes with the '09 steering upgrade.
jeeperaz
Observer
Glad I found this thread.
I run Toyo MT 285/16's on my GMC2500. I don't have much over 20k miles on them and they are toast. I admit to never rotating... an expensive mistake I won't make again. I do tow a 10k lb toyhauler quite frequently so I know not to expect many miles from an MT tire... still, 20k hurts when they are $300 a pop.
Going to check into the M55's next week. Anyone in Phx now of a shop besides Discount that might be able to get them?
I run Toyo MT 285/16's on my GMC2500. I don't have much over 20k miles on them and they are toast. I admit to never rotating... an expensive mistake I won't make again. I do tow a 10k lb toyhauler quite frequently so I know not to expect many miles from an MT tire... still, 20k hurts when they are $300 a pop.
Going to check into the M55's next week. Anyone in Phx now of a shop besides Discount that might be able to get them?
shredwagon
Observer
IMHO, based on driving mine roads in the Arctic made out of razor blades for 4months and ice for 8, Goodyear MTR Kevlar's beat the M55's in every respect hands down. We ran M55's on all the F350's as they are THE standard tire in mines up here, then switched. Cheaper too.....
I bought Duratracs though for my HDJ81 because I cant handle those white billboard letters! Real happy with them so far.
I bought Duratracs though for my HDJ81 because I cant handle those white billboard letters! Real happy with them so far.
Mike S
Sponsor - AutoHomeUSA
Second set of M55s
I have a set of M55s on my Ford SD and have liked the performance and they have shown very little wear over the past 30K+ miles, so I just bought a second set of M55s to replace the Revos on my 80. The Revos were 285/75/R16s and the M55s are 255/85/R16s. This just happened a couple days ago, but here are my first impressions...
The 255/85s are definitely taller and the truck feels a bit higher - about 1", maybe more.
These are an E rated tire, the Revos were D rated, and I have been manipulating air pressure to get the tires flat to the road and optimize ride. My 80 has a lot of extra gear bolted on, and with the 44 gallon aux tank full it puts a lot of weight on the rear tires - 35 PSI. was not enough, I went to 45 PSI and it seems like I might need to drop a couple of PSI to get it perfect.
The new tires actually track pretty well and feel 'lighter' than the Revos. I beleive that this is due to the longer, narrower footprint.
Increased ride height has some effect on handling - it is minimal, but noticeable in a side wind. I am going to play with inflation, top loading, and rear OME suspension to see if I can optimize. If I can't get some improvement, I will swap tires between the TLC and the Ford F350 and see if the smaller, slightly wider tires serve better.
Noise - at current inflation levels the noise is somewhat less than the noise from the Revos. I was expecting more noise, and noticed that as I increased pressure in the rear tires, the singing increased slightly. I was surprised at the noise reduction.
Overall I believe that these are outstanding tires and will fix the problems I had - shoulder perforations and more than expected wear - from the Revos.
I have a set of M55s on my Ford SD and have liked the performance and they have shown very little wear over the past 30K+ miles, so I just bought a second set of M55s to replace the Revos on my 80. The Revos were 285/75/R16s and the M55s are 255/85/R16s. This just happened a couple days ago, but here are my first impressions...
The 255/85s are definitely taller and the truck feels a bit higher - about 1", maybe more.
These are an E rated tire, the Revos were D rated, and I have been manipulating air pressure to get the tires flat to the road and optimize ride. My 80 has a lot of extra gear bolted on, and with the 44 gallon aux tank full it puts a lot of weight on the rear tires - 35 PSI. was not enough, I went to 45 PSI and it seems like I might need to drop a couple of PSI to get it perfect.
The new tires actually track pretty well and feel 'lighter' than the Revos. I beleive that this is due to the longer, narrower footprint.
Increased ride height has some effect on handling - it is minimal, but noticeable in a side wind. I am going to play with inflation, top loading, and rear OME suspension to see if I can optimize. If I can't get some improvement, I will swap tires between the TLC and the Ford F350 and see if the smaller, slightly wider tires serve better.
Noise - at current inflation levels the noise is somewhat less than the noise from the Revos. I was expecting more noise, and noticed that as I increased pressure in the rear tires, the singing increased slightly. I was surprised at the noise reduction.
Overall I believe that these are outstanding tires and will fix the problems I had - shoulder perforations and more than expected wear - from the Revos.
ashooter
Adventurer
Well, I'm finally getting around to replacing my Toyo M/T's, and got the "typical" story from my tire guy's wholesaler: "Toyo is discontinuing the M55 in this size... blahblahblah."
Bull-hockey.
I emailed Toyo today and this is the response I got:
"Thank you for contacting Toyo Tires USA. Toyo Tires is not
discontinuing our M55 in size LT255/85R16 132/120M E/10. Toyo did
produce this same size in an 8 ply but, we no longer offer the 8 ply as
we went to a 10 ply.
We appreciate you choosing Toyo Tires and if you need anything further
please let us know.
Sincerely,
Toyo Tires USA
800-442-8696
www.toyotires.com"
Give me a couple of weeks and I'll have a preliminary review posted here.
:smiley_drive:
Bull-hockey.
I emailed Toyo today and this is the response I got:
"Thank you for contacting Toyo Tires USA. Toyo Tires is not
discontinuing our M55 in size LT255/85R16 132/120M E/10. Toyo did
produce this same size in an 8 ply but, we no longer offer the 8 ply as
we went to a 10 ply.
We appreciate you choosing Toyo Tires and if you need anything further
please let us know.
Sincerely,
Toyo Tires USA
800-442-8696
www.toyotires.com"
Give me a couple of weeks and I'll have a preliminary review posted here.
:smiley_drive:
Last edited:
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
Yup 
I think when retailers are unfamiliar with a certain tire or size, or availability is poor because they are not 'popular' for the masses, you hear that bull about a tire being discontinued.
The M55 is an older design (but not the LR E 255/85) and may not be the highest seller, but I think Les Schwab Tires out here in the West still sells a few sets of them for Toyo and I'd be surprised if they are leaving us soon.
If you buy M55s in 255/85, it will be very interesting to see how the performance and wear compares to that of your Toyo M/Ts on the same 80, if they are used similarly.
I think when retailers are unfamiliar with a certain tire or size, or availability is poor because they are not 'popular' for the masses, you hear that bull about a tire being discontinued.
The M55 is an older design (but not the LR E 255/85) and may not be the highest seller, but I think Les Schwab Tires out here in the West still sells a few sets of them for Toyo and I'd be surprised if they are leaving us soon.
If you buy M55s in 255/85, it will be very interesting to see how the performance and wear compares to that of your Toyo M/Ts on the same 80, if they are used similarly.
Last edited:
ashooter
Adventurer
M/T to M-55
Back in August of 2008 I bought a set of Toyo M/T’s, size LT255/85R16. I had them installed with 8 oz. of “Offroad” Dyna-Beads in each tire. I did 5-tire rotations about every 3,000 miles. At about 12,000 miles the tires have 0.36” tread depth remaining. Tread wear has been nice and even, though there has been some chipping of the lugs. Tread depth was 19/32” new, so tread wear has been about 0.02” per thousand miles. I thought I had a little more mileage on them, and I thought the treads were worn down a little more than they actually are, but my maintenance book and calipers don’t lie.
Even with 0.36” of tread remaining, they are a bit chewed.
I’m not unhappy about “only” getting 12,000 miles out of this set of tires. Keep in mind that close to 5,000 of those miles were on sharp rocks and “gravel” like you see here:
In my opinion the M/T’s held up surprisingly well!
Before I bought the M/T’s, I was almost at the coin-flipping stage to decide between M/T’s and M-55’s. Redline, 24HOURSOFNEVADA and others here helped me narrow it down to that point, but the final reason I decided on M/T’s was because the owner of the local tire shop told me that the seismograph crews out here were routinely destroying BFG’s, but seemed to vanish from the tire shop after they switched all their trucks to Toyo M/T’s. The only flat I had in the 2+ years I’ve had these tires was from a 1/4” diameter nail that punched through one of the tread blocks.
Bottom line is that I have nothing at all to complain about regarding the M/T’s… I could probably squeeze another year and a full 20,000 miles out of these tires, but I’m ready for something new.
…
During the time I used up the M/T’s, a coworker used up a set of Toyo M-55’s in size LT285/75R16 on a ¾ ton Chevy pickup that carries both a 4-wheeler and about 300 lbs of land surveying equipment on a daily basis. He got about 45,000 miles on the M-55’s before the tread wore down to the point where the raised “rock guard” in the middle of the tread was almost one solid line of tread. This guy is pretty hard on tires, so a fairly aggressive tire giving him that many miles (with no flats) is impressive! He’s about 15,000 miles into his second set of M-55’s with zero complaints, so I decided I just HAVE to give the M-55 a try. (edited to add: His 285's may have worn down the middle faster than "normal" because he's running them on what I think are 7" wide wheels.)
Tire size? I considered downsizing to a LT235/85R16 on the FJ80, since I only have “stock height” OME springs, 6-inch wide wheels, and 235’s would look the part on my Africanized cruiser. But after considering pros and cons while bumping around the boonies for a couple of months thinking about tires, I decided to stick with 255’s if for no other reason than the fact that I can run them at around 40 psi continually on this truck. 40 psi(+/-) combined with the 255’s taller (more flexible) sidewall, gives a MUCH smoother/softer ride than the 65 psi I’ve been running in the 235’s on my surveying truck. I use the FJ80 for showing rural property in my real estate brokerage, so I don’t want to mess around with airing down/up with customers in the truck.
A few pics:
I know it’s old vs. new, but you can see the difference in tread void.
I went with “Off Road” Dyna Beads again - 8 oz per tire is the smallest bag they sell… They worked GREAT with the M/T’s!
New shoes!
I’ll update the thread as I get some wear on these. For now, all I can say is that driving around town at 30 mph, the M-55’s are noticeably quieter, smoother, and softer at 42 psi. Also, I don’t feel the lugs hitting the ground when coming to a stop. I have to do about 50 miles off the pavement tomorrow, so I’ll have a lot better feel for them after that.
:smiley_drive:
Back in August of 2008 I bought a set of Toyo M/T’s, size LT255/85R16. I had them installed with 8 oz. of “Offroad” Dyna-Beads in each tire. I did 5-tire rotations about every 3,000 miles. At about 12,000 miles the tires have 0.36” tread depth remaining. Tread wear has been nice and even, though there has been some chipping of the lugs. Tread depth was 19/32” new, so tread wear has been about 0.02” per thousand miles. I thought I had a little more mileage on them, and I thought the treads were worn down a little more than they actually are, but my maintenance book and calipers don’t lie.
Even with 0.36” of tread remaining, they are a bit chewed.
I’m not unhappy about “only” getting 12,000 miles out of this set of tires. Keep in mind that close to 5,000 of those miles were on sharp rocks and “gravel” like you see here:
In my opinion the M/T’s held up surprisingly well!
Before I bought the M/T’s, I was almost at the coin-flipping stage to decide between M/T’s and M-55’s. Redline, 24HOURSOFNEVADA and others here helped me narrow it down to that point, but the final reason I decided on M/T’s was because the owner of the local tire shop told me that the seismograph crews out here were routinely destroying BFG’s, but seemed to vanish from the tire shop after they switched all their trucks to Toyo M/T’s. The only flat I had in the 2+ years I’ve had these tires was from a 1/4” diameter nail that punched through one of the tread blocks.
Bottom line is that I have nothing at all to complain about regarding the M/T’s… I could probably squeeze another year and a full 20,000 miles out of these tires, but I’m ready for something new.
…
During the time I used up the M/T’s, a coworker used up a set of Toyo M-55’s in size LT285/75R16 on a ¾ ton Chevy pickup that carries both a 4-wheeler and about 300 lbs of land surveying equipment on a daily basis. He got about 45,000 miles on the M-55’s before the tread wore down to the point where the raised “rock guard” in the middle of the tread was almost one solid line of tread. This guy is pretty hard on tires, so a fairly aggressive tire giving him that many miles (with no flats) is impressive! He’s about 15,000 miles into his second set of M-55’s with zero complaints, so I decided I just HAVE to give the M-55 a try. (edited to add: His 285's may have worn down the middle faster than "normal" because he's running them on what I think are 7" wide wheels.)
Tire size? I considered downsizing to a LT235/85R16 on the FJ80, since I only have “stock height” OME springs, 6-inch wide wheels, and 235’s would look the part on my Africanized cruiser. But after considering pros and cons while bumping around the boonies for a couple of months thinking about tires, I decided to stick with 255’s if for no other reason than the fact that I can run them at around 40 psi continually on this truck. 40 psi(+/-) combined with the 255’s taller (more flexible) sidewall, gives a MUCH smoother/softer ride than the 65 psi I’ve been running in the 235’s on my surveying truck. I use the FJ80 for showing rural property in my real estate brokerage, so I don’t want to mess around with airing down/up with customers in the truck.
A few pics:
I know it’s old vs. new, but you can see the difference in tread void.
I went with “Off Road” Dyna Beads again - 8 oz per tire is the smallest bag they sell… They worked GREAT with the M/T’s!
New shoes!
I’ll update the thread as I get some wear on these. For now, all I can say is that driving around town at 30 mph, the M-55’s are noticeably quieter, smoother, and softer at 42 psi. Also, I don’t feel the lugs hitting the ground when coming to a stop. I have to do about 50 miles off the pavement tomorrow, so I’ll have a lot better feel for them after that.
:smiley_drive:
Last edited:
ersatzknarf
lost, but making time
Congrats ! ! ! :sombrero:
Really looking forward to hearing how you like them. :coffeedrink:
Very glad you kept the 255/85R16 size ! :ylsmoke:
Really looking forward to hearing how you like them. :coffeedrink:
Very glad you kept the 255/85R16 size ! :ylsmoke:
ashooter
Adventurer
Got 'em dirty today...
Initial impressions/observations after driving 47 miles on rocks/gravel and about 30 miles on the highway today:
- The M-55's throw smaller rocks. Instead of hearing "thunk" I hear "click".
- The M-55's are much quieter than the M/T's were. I didn't really notice the M/T's were noisy until they were gone.
- The truck feels "lighter" - hard to explain, but steering seems easier, pavement seems smoother, and bumps seem softer. I was running the M/T's with 40psi and these have 42psi, so the difference is purely related to tire construction.
Of course, no snow, ice, wet pavement, etc, but I can't imagine these things won't be better than M/T's for those applications. If they are even close to being as tough as the M/T's, I'm VERY happy with the switch!
:wings:
Initial impressions/observations after driving 47 miles on rocks/gravel and about 30 miles on the highway today:
- The M-55's throw smaller rocks. Instead of hearing "thunk" I hear "click".
- The M-55's are much quieter than the M/T's were. I didn't really notice the M/T's were noisy until they were gone.
- The truck feels "lighter" - hard to explain, but steering seems easier, pavement seems smoother, and bumps seem softer. I was running the M/T's with 40psi and these have 42psi, so the difference is purely related to tire construction.
Of course, no snow, ice, wet pavement, etc, but I can't imagine these things won't be better than M/T's for those applications. If they are even close to being as tough as the M/T's, I'm VERY happy with the switch!
:wings:
Regcabguy
Oil eater.
I purchased some 285-75-16 BFG AT KO's for my '98.5 Dodge CTD. A terrible vibration began and ended with the mounting and dismounting of those tires. Neither BFG nor Discount Tire would help me,blaming the vibes on the truck. "They zero out dude!" Next move was the Toyo M-55's. Results: zero vibration and a much nicer ride despite their e-rating and off the chart load rating. They do sing at 45-65 mph,which I could hardly hear over The Rattler. A bunch of us have signed a petition on one of the diesel forums for a larger M-55 in the 17" size but I don't think it's going to happen. Looks like I'm going with the Toyo MT's in a 285-75-17 next.
Redline
Likes to Drive and Ride
ashooter,
I’m glad to see that you are giving the M55s a try. As I detailed in an earlier post, if my 4Runner would tolerate the Toyo casings I would probably be running a set of M55s now instead of the Cepek FCII.
Toyo MT
Your mixture of fractions and decimals made me pull calipers, a tape measure and a tire tread gauge from my shop so I could convert to something I understand... Feel free to correct me if I’ve got the numbers wrong ☺
I’m going to use thirty-seconds as that’s the traditional tire tread measurement in the U.S. (though lately I’ve been giving thought to using millimeters).
New Toyo MT 255/85 = 19/32”
At replacement 0.36 = 12/32”
7/32” of tread consumed in 12,000-mi of travel = 1,714-miles per 1/32” of tread.
This is about the same rate of wear (maybe less) that I was getting from my (much less expensive) Maxxis Bighorns.
If you ran the Toyos down to minimum legal depth of 2/32” they would go about 29k in your use. I just documented a friend’s switch from a 35” Toyo M/T to a 35” Cepek FCII on a 6.0L Power Stroke, he got about 33k out of his Toyos and they were close to the wear bars (3/32” or so). So your wear is substantial, but I’m not sure uncharacteristic for this tire, particularly considering your off-highway use. All the cutting/chipping makes the tires look worse than they are. I’m aware of a few people that are not happy with the wear of their Toyo A/T and M/T tires (the A/Ts might be worse?).
Taller Sidewalls, Yes Please
I agree with your statements about the taller 85% sidewalls of the 255s. With a couple different sets of tires that I've run in both 265/75R16 and 285/75R16, the taller sidewalls on the taller tires rode better on and off-highway at a given pressure (you pick the PSI). Some people don’t like/want taller sidewalls (on-highway loaded flex or the tall wheel craze ‘look’) but for my light-truck use I much prefer having some sidewall to work for me and my suspension. Another reason to go with the 255/85 is just that ‘you can’ in this case, as the M55 is one of the few tires made in this size.
I’m looking forward to your experiences with the 255/85R16E M55s.
The Tire Meister
I’m glad to see that you are giving the M55s a try. As I detailed in an earlier post, if my 4Runner would tolerate the Toyo casings I would probably be running a set of M55s now instead of the Cepek FCII.
Toyo MT
Your mixture of fractions and decimals made me pull calipers, a tape measure and a tire tread gauge from my shop so I could convert to something I understand... Feel free to correct me if I’ve got the numbers wrong ☺
I’m going to use thirty-seconds as that’s the traditional tire tread measurement in the U.S. (though lately I’ve been giving thought to using millimeters).
New Toyo MT 255/85 = 19/32”
At replacement 0.36 = 12/32”
7/32” of tread consumed in 12,000-mi of travel = 1,714-miles per 1/32” of tread.
This is about the same rate of wear (maybe less) that I was getting from my (much less expensive) Maxxis Bighorns.
If you ran the Toyos down to minimum legal depth of 2/32” they would go about 29k in your use. I just documented a friend’s switch from a 35” Toyo M/T to a 35” Cepek FCII on a 6.0L Power Stroke, he got about 33k out of his Toyos and they were close to the wear bars (3/32” or so). So your wear is substantial, but I’m not sure uncharacteristic for this tire, particularly considering your off-highway use. All the cutting/chipping makes the tires look worse than they are. I’m aware of a few people that are not happy with the wear of their Toyo A/T and M/T tires (the A/Ts might be worse?).
Taller Sidewalls, Yes Please
I agree with your statements about the taller 85% sidewalls of the 255s. With a couple different sets of tires that I've run in both 265/75R16 and 285/75R16, the taller sidewalls on the taller tires rode better on and off-highway at a given pressure (you pick the PSI). Some people don’t like/want taller sidewalls (on-highway loaded flex or the tall wheel craze ‘look’) but for my light-truck use I much prefer having some sidewall to work for me and my suspension. Another reason to go with the 255/85 is just that ‘you can’ in this case, as the M55 is one of the few tires made in this size.
I’m looking forward to your experiences with the 255/85R16E M55s.
The Tire Meister
ashooter
Adventurer
80% of my Monday-Friday job is land surveying, so I'm usually dealing with tenths and hundredths of "US survey feet"... But I restrained myself here, and just used calipers. :ylsmoke:
I'm glad somebody could figure out the math! I decided the caliper measurement was accurate, so rather than screw it up trying to convert to 32nds, I just left it alone.