I’d like to go the same route as yours. 275/70r18 with a westcott lift. So far, I’ve only seen people with either 34s or 35s that already have the lift installed but can’t find anyone with 33’s. Do you have any pictures to share? I need to know if the lift would look good with 33s.
275/70/18 Fuel Economy
- Thread starter Skidaddl
- Start date
Here is the “old” photo of OK3 275/70 R18 (33”) with Kings lifted.
Suspension upgrade is not just for bigger tires (larger than 33”), but for better performance on-road and off-road. So even staying 33” OK3, upgraded suspension will smooth out your ride…on-road, also provide more room in wheel well for extensive travel
After this…I have 35” now
For those of you running 275/70/18’s, anyone using +25 offset wheels? Any rubbing issues?
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #104
I am not using +25, but I am using +30. No issues whatsoever.
Thanks for the reply. How are you liking the Toyo EV tires? Did you go SL load? How’s the performance and gas mileage hit? Please share some pics if you got some. Thanks!
I'm running 275/70-18 on stock wheels with no rubbing issues. No clue what offset those wheels have. They were "free" with the LC.
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #107
Here ya go. +30 Offset w/pics
I went SL and find them smooth as silk. Fuel economy essentially unchanged from stock. So far very happy. Will be interesting what kind of life I get out of them as the SL's have shallower tread depth. That said, the ride as compared to my E-rate Falken Wildpeaks on my Tundra is night and day better.
Same feedback on mpg - was averaging 20 before and after.
Road noise is average, about what you’d expect from knobbly tires, increases at about 45mph.
I only notice when I think about it, so it’s background noise vs disruptive.
Road noise is average, about what you’d expect from knobbly tires, increases at about 45mph.
I only notice when I think about it, so it’s background noise vs disruptive.
Never understood the look of a tire fetish. Again, dedicated rims with offroad rubber for those events. Stock rubber for the other 90% of the time. Only thing more annoying than harleys is the howl of off road tires going up state highway . Damn some of them are loud!!! The real kicker is how many of those vehicles are FAR too pristine to have ever seen even a dirt road.
Last edited:
Yeah, and another dirty (pun intended) little secret is that tall skinny tires are superior in many off road settings to the big fat knobbies. They can also have quieter road noise, longer tread life, better fuel economy, and cost less.
The clod hoppers certainly look better from a masculine aesthetic but to me the things that look good are the ones that work the best
The clod hoppers certainly look better from a masculine aesthetic but to me the things that look good are the ones that work the best
Stock wheel, 2” lift - 19-19.5mpg on 275/70r18 Generals (really disliked that tire)
Mix of Hwy/City, and only in Normal mode.
Just switch to BBS TRD Pros w/Toyo AT3 285/70/18’s - we will see what happens
Mix of Hwy/City, and only in Normal mode.
Just switch to BBS TRD Pros w/Toyo AT3 285/70/18’s - we will see what happens
Last edited:
How are you liking the switch?
Pretty crazy, you get better gas mileage on 35’s than I do, and I’m running 33” SL load tires. And I’m driving to see how high I can get haha.
That is nuts. We drove from Cincy to WV panhandle for Thanksgiving -I ran cruise as much as possible set to 77, and it averaged 18.3.
I’m about to put a tune and roof rack/lights on it, so it won’t be 18.3 for long!
I’m about to put a tune and roof rack/lights on it, so it won’t be 18.3 for long!
My wife was playing around with the Land Cruiser when she was driving it and changed the MPG calculator from average across all trips to per trip.
In doing so, the per trip is 21mpg with heavy E load tires.
I didn't buy the vehicle for fuel efficiency nor sporty driving, but even with the stock tires, I never got anywhere near the stated MPG.
I now wonder if the reason I never got close to the stated MPG is because it was set to average overall vs. average per trip.
In doing so, the per trip is 21mpg with heavy E load tires.
I didn't buy the vehicle for fuel efficiency nor sporty driving, but even with the stock tires, I never got anywhere near the stated MPG.
I now wonder if the reason I never got close to the stated MPG is because it was set to average overall vs. average per trip.
I also knew what I was getting into with regards to the LC mileage/efficiency, so I’m not really surprised or disappointed in that department. Like others though, the smallish tank has taken some getting used to.
I’m pretty sure mine is set to per trip, but once I get done shoveling snow (new experience for me being from GA lol) I’ll double check because now I’m curious.
I’m pretty sure mine is set to per trip, but once I get done shoveling snow (new experience for me being from GA lol) I’ll double check because now I’m curious.
For an almost 6,000-pound vehicle, I am quite happy to report my LC 250 MPG update.
After traveling 2,963 miles in my daily driver, I have an average fuel economy of 21.9 MPG.
This average is combined rural/city driving, on the factory upgrade wheels with Yokohama 20" 265's.
City and highway driving is smooth and responsive. The off-road driving on the gravel/rock roads at my North Texas wildlife management property has provided me with satisfactory handling in both dry and wet conditions.
After traveling 2,963 miles in my daily driver, I have an average fuel economy of 21.9 MPG.
This average is combined rural/city driving, on the factory upgrade wheels with Yokohama 20" 265's.
City and highway driving is smooth and responsive. The off-road driving on the gravel/rock roads at my North Texas wildlife management property has provided me with satisfactory handling in both dry and wet conditions.
Attachments
My 2026 LC 1958 came from the factory with little 245/70 18 Geolandar street tires. We put new 18" TRD wheels and 285/70 18 Nitto Ridge Grapplers on when we picked it up (dealer option). We're showing 16.3 mpg over the first few hundred miles. My 2012 F250 Super Duty pickup with 33s gets over 20 mpg diesel. It's amazing to me that a 2.4L turbo charged 4 cylinder hybrid gets such horrible mileage. It seems the extreme weight of the hybrid system is killing the mpg, which makes no sense at all. I would kill for the diesel LC.
I was also shocked (pun intended) to see the water level limit for the hybrid system. I guess we won't need snorkel kits in the US. Owners Manual page 578:
"When the water level exceeds the floor and time has passed, the electrical equipment will get damaged, the power windows will not operate, the engine and motor will stop, and the vehicle may not be able to get moving."
Page 525:
"When washing the vehicle. Do not apply water to the inside of the engine compartment. Doing so may cause the electrical components, etc. to catch fire."
Again, I would kill for an LC diesel.
I was also shocked (pun intended) to see the water level limit for the hybrid system. I guess we won't need snorkel kits in the US. Owners Manual page 578:
"When the water level exceeds the floor and time has passed, the electrical equipment will get damaged, the power windows will not operate, the engine and motor will stop, and the vehicle may not be able to get moving."
Page 525:
"When washing the vehicle. Do not apply water to the inside of the engine compartment. Doing so may cause the electrical components, etc. to catch fire."
Again, I would kill for an LC diesel.
Last edited:
- Jul 7, 2025
- 1,809
- Media
- 242
- 2,747
- Vehicles
- '25 LC 1958 || '25 Sequoia LTD TRD || '05 TJR || '24 Polaris Ranger 1000 Crew
They optioned 285s? Was that with or without a lift? I'm not doubting you, but it does surprise me that a dealership would offer that option. Less surprised if they honored that request, but still a little surprised if so. I have Ridge graps on my 1958 and I like them overall, even though they are terrible in rain.
Similar threads
