Big tires or little tires

JAWS · May 20, 2010

With just a big tires or little tires. In your own peronal opion whitch one does more damage to the trails?

MarcW · May 20, 2010

depends 100% on the driver.

Dude · May 20, 2010

It's not the tire size. it's the idiot drivers, but idiot drivers with big tires will do more damage than idiot drivers with little tires.

BTW: you CAN use a winch for more than just getting unstuck. :awesomework: shocker??

end of thread, carry on. :haha:

Money Mark · May 20, 2010

Driver.......

Damnyankee · May 20, 2010

Money Mark said:
Driver.......

with small tires
Why?

most new wheelers drive like idiots, cause they don't know better. most new wheelers havn't progressed to bigger tires.

ergo, you will find more small tired rigs doing more damage to the trail than large tires simply because of volume

Money Mark · May 20, 2010

Nope.

I have big tires and **** **** up.....:cheer:

zukkev · May 20, 2010

It's the driver behind the wheel---tire size alone doesn't make up all the damage;
In some cases, bigger tires with an intelligent driver can have the potential for less damage, while in other cases/situations smaller tires with an idiot behind the wheel have the potential for more damage than the scenario mentioned prior given the same trail conditions/obstacles...

TreeClimber · May 20, 2010

Driver.

That typed. A big tired rig unequivically has the CAPACITY to do more damage than a similarly equipped small tire vehicle.

I guarantee, that my 37s CAN do more damage than my 33s ever thought about doing.

But it's all about the DRIVER. Because as an experienced driver, I can go places with my 37s without ever spinning a tire, that my 33s would have had to throttle up. Ergo, in that case, the 33s would have done more damage. However, if I had throttled up the 37s in the same situation, they would have done more damage. So it goes right back to DRIVER.

Damnyankee · May 20, 2010

Money Mark said:
Nope.

I have big tires and **** **** up.....:cheer:

at least your honest.:awesomework:

I don't have enough horse power to **** **** up..:redneck:

Damnyankee · May 20, 2010

TreeClimber said:
Driver.

That typed. A big tired rig unequivically has the CAPACITY to do more damage than a similarly equipped small tire vehicle.

I guarantee, that my 37s CAN do more damage than my 33s ever thought about doing.

But it's all about the DRIVER. Because as an experienced driver, I can go places with my 37s without ever spinning a tire, that my 33s would have had to throttle up. Ergo, in that case, the 33s would have done more damage. However, if I had throttled up the 37s in the same situation, they would have done more damage. So it goes right back to DRIVER.

ok, just being the devil advocate, why would say a 38 x 12.5 swamper do more damage than a 33x 12.5 swamper?
same width, similar tread depth, same patern..:stirpot:

TreeClimber · May 20, 2010

Damnyankee said:
ok, just being the devil advocate, why would say a 38 x 12.5 swamper do more damage than a 33x 12.5 swamper?
same width, similar tread depth, same patern..:stirpot:

Because it can dig a (2.5") deeper hole.

Money Mark · May 20, 2010

I'm not agueing with you.

TreeClimber said:
.......without ever spinning a tire......

Why have you (and many others) equated "damage" to the amount of earth one moves in a single maneuver? TRUE......your point about the capacity is undeniable. But one must use the capacity. Damage = Driver.

The direction and placement of the trail is MUCH more at blame to said damage than the tire traversing the terrain.:awesomework:

bobbed_84_toy · May 20, 2010

Damnyankee said:
ok, just being the devil advocate, why would say a 38 x 12.5 swamper do more damage than a 33x 12.5 swamper?
same width, similar tread depth, same patern..:stirpot:

It can dig deeper

Edit: much too slow

Money Mark · May 20, 2010

bobbed_84_toy said:
It can dig deeper

What (who) is the catalyst to make it (the tire) dig deeper?

The driver.:awesomework:

bobbed_84_toy · May 20, 2010

Money Mark said:
What (who) is the catalyst to make it (the tire) dig deeper?

The driver.:awesomework:

Fully agree

TreeClimber · May 20, 2010

Money Mark said:
Why have you (and many others) equated "damage" to the amount of earth one moves in a single maneuver? TRUE......your point about the capacity is undeniable. But one must use the capacity. Damage = Driver.

The direction and placement of the trail is MUCH more at blame to said damage than the tire traversing the terrain.:awesomework:

I don't. There's been many a rocky ledge that the 37s simply contour up and over. However the 33s would have had to bounce up, which often can cause rocks to kick out, thereby changing (or damaging) the trail for the next vehicle.

Now it can be argued that the evolution of a trail is NOT damage, but rather simple evolution, whether that makes it easier or harder (which are both also OK) So I suppose the real question was how to define what the OP meant by the word "damage".