We have Michelin LTX MS/2 and it seems to make the Excursion wander, We bought the X with 160k and when test driving had Coopers on it but were ready to need replacement, drove fine but the dealer put the new Mich's on it and now it is all over the place and noisy. I love Cooper tires and have them on my 79 Bronco and when this set of Mich's are ready yo be replaced its Coopers for me.

 

Robert his previous tires were Pirelli Scorpions and he had some wandering but not like he does now. Like stated above I think air pressure plays a major role in the wandering issue. He may have to air down the fronts to 50psi.

 

Michelin makes both the BFG and the Michelin. For my money I would want the superior materials and quality of the Michelin versus the very good materials and quality of BFG.

Go with load range E if you want longevity.

 

When I bought my used Ex, the first three things that I scheduled were complete oil/lube, Michelin LTX tires, and front-end work. (In that order.)

It turned out the the ball joints were junk (as is common with the original, factory installed ball joints) so I had the uppers and lowers replaced and the front-end aligned. (About a grand....)

I've still got to swap out the sway bar bushings, but the new ball joints and LTX tires are a winning combination. There is a slight play in the steering that I need to adjust, but there is very little walk or wander in the front end. She tracks true and runs straight.

 

BassFantisizer, are those the newer version of LTX's? LTX MS/2 or original LTX M&S?

Elmo154, I don't think Michelin quality is any better than BFG's in my past experience. I have had zero issues with all the BFG's I have been running for many years and think that Michelin has ensured they are of high quality as well.
Both are very good tires in most cases.

I think the thing here we are trying to validate is if Michelin has made a problem for some of us that have the heavy duty line of vehicles in trying to make the compound harder to get lower rolling resistance, thus the green rating and to compensate, softened the corner tread with longer sipes which is usually used to stabilize the sway. Now that the sipes are all the way out to the sidewall on that last block of side tread, they easily can cause more wandering. That is why I want to get this information first hand from those with experience.
Check out some of the reviews on Tirerack and you will see what I mean. Yes, lots of good ratings, but if you view only those that are not so good, you filter out the smaller vehicles that are ok and view only those that are Heavy Duty and are having issues.

From a PSI perspective, they are wanting us to move from "D" rated tires on the X to the "E" rated tires. Now that I am towing 10K, I will definately move to the "E" rated. I expect a slightly harsher ride and more road feel, but do not expect more wandering. One thing we can't handle when towing a heavy load it wandering. Especially in an emergency maneuver.

At this point with a couple of folks confirming the same phenomenon with the new tire design, I am looking to move back to the BFG's.

 

Hi Robert,

Since it was this past February, they'd be the MS/2.

I've had a few sets of BFGs over the years, and even ran the T/As on my boat trailer most of the past 20 years. (Not recommended, but I did it for the aesthetics.)

Almost all quality tires feel good when they're new. I find that the Michelin's wear a lot deeper before they pick up a radial pull or start to feel worn. The BFGs start to be no fun to drive once they get about 2/3 through the tread life.

 

I have the LTX M/S 2 in 265/75/16 on my EX. I have only put about 5000 miles on them so far but I have towed 7-8000 pound loads with them a few times. I have had no problems with wandering, noise, or anything. I think they are great tires. I run 75 psi front/70 psi rear when towing and 65 front/60 rear when not towing. I think the wandering that some people experience is more because of old steering/suspension components rather than the tires. I would recommend these tires.

 

Thanks Studawg !

Bassfantisizer, not had the experience with other BFG's than the All Terrain TA K/O series. I can say even down to near no tread, they were excellent.
Last year, on my pickup the tread was just under the wear indicators, and still this truck went through the snow without issue. Did not want to go another year though on these as they were very old and would not pass inspection, so time for new on the PU.

They are built for Baja racing, so think they have a near perfect record for that model tire. Have heard others in past state the BFG's not as good for some of their other tires.

Don't know anyone that has been unhappy with the KO series tires other than shorter life. But, 40 K is not bad for me and now that Michelin took over and reformulated the rubber, they claim longer wear. Just hope that did not screw up the traction!

 

have had both....

got 90k out of the BFG's before I changed over to Mich's.....

Only reason I changed mfg's is that I tried 285's and was not happy with the change.... went back to change and they didn't have the BFG's in 265's again.....

but have had good performance out of the Mich's for a while...

one thing you will notice with ANY new tire is that a well worn tire has rounded edges and will miss the 'side' pull due to the rounded corners...
whereas the new tires are more 'square' and will tend to 'follow' the road until broken in a bit...

just a change to get used to ....

 

read the above post about the wandering, checked the tires (only had it a few weeks) the tire pressue was off the scale, my guage goes to 80psi and it far exceeded it. lowed down to 55 all around and now the wander is greatly reduced, i guess I shouldnt have assumed the dealer had checked it...I still am not a fan of the Mich's but they ride ok now, still a bit noisy and rough due to E rated but with lower PSI it is not as jarring to the truck and passengers..... want to go back to Cooper AT's

 

A little off topic here but was wondering if anyone has run the 235-85-16's on their X's. I know they came standard on the bare bones 250 SD's but am not sure which engine. I'm trying to squeeze a little more MPG's out of the X and really not concerned about the looks. I was concerned about the amount of rubber on the road in case of emergency stop. Any other pros and cons you can come up with would be great. Also do you think that a tire 1.5" narrower would increase MPG's. This tire is the exact height as the 265-75-16 and is two pounds lighter.

 

I don't know how much it will help fuel mileage to go to the narrower tire, but keep in mind that when you get in the Ex and fill the gas tank it will weigh a minimum of 4 tons. If you ever have to hit the brakes and you lose traction, you're not getting it back until you're stopped. And there's a good chance that that will be where another vehicle was just seconds earlier.

 

Not to mention losing stability....Would not want to see the X do a roll

 

MPG is affected by rolling resistance, so sidewall, flex tread flex, I would think a wider tire would be better plus proper inflation. On my 18 wheeler mpgs change .50 from old tires to new tires same make and model, just 18/32 difference in tread depth.

 

That 18/32" addition tread on the tire means that the circumference of the tire is actually about 3.5" greater. That's where the change in mileage comes from. You don't see it on the speedometer, which will show a steady (e.g. 70MPG @ 2,400 RPM) no matter what size tire you have, but when each revolution of the tire moves you an extra 3.5", that adds up over enough miles.