When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Interesting that the 285s overshot your speedometer a little. The 235/85 are interesting to me too, I imagine they would be a tiny bit better for mileage than my current 265s and I can add about 1/4” of height to possibly make my odometer a little more accurate. I had the same thought about snow but it doesn’t make much of a difference to me either being in Texas
On my truck the fuel milage is about the same, but the tires seem to last longer. (no towing or hauling)
I would not go back to the 265's personally. But the 235/85/16 seem interesting. I did not check but guess the 265/85/16 are not a common size. I don't drive in snow but wonder if the narrow tires would be better in the snow. (My truck never has been in winter conditions as I live in FL and rarely drive out of state.)
The 235/85R16 are just a hair taller than the 265/75R16 but about an inch narrower. They are the old school F250/350 size. Common through the 80's and 90's, and probably earlier than that. Personally I prefer the tall skinny look but also think they may help mpg. Narrower tread pattern means less contact area, means less rolling resistance. At least that's how I play it in my head. I imagine an argument could be made they would wear faster, putting the same load/stress/miles on to a smaller area causing faster wear. I'm sure tread composition is really the major factor in tread life though. I currently have a set of commercial Falken GI388 7.50R16 14ply radials on my truck. These are the narrowest I have ever run and am seeing the best wear patterns and tread life of any tire I've tried yet. My truck is a heavy ol' girl though, a E99 F250 4x4 auto ext. long flat bed loaded down w/ tools, torch, small welder and compressor. Her normal rolling around wt. is 10k.