# What do you think of these tires for my Frontier...



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

Kumho Touring A/S 795

I like the size, ratings, specs, warranty, and price, but there are two things about them that concern me:

They're listed as Standard Touring while the *truck *tires seem to be listed as Highway Touring
They're white-wall

But, while they're not listed as truck tires per-se, I was looking at the specs and they're rated for 2194 lbs. @ 41 psi. That's more than the stock Generals.

And, I was thinking I could put the white-walls in and use Tire-Black (if that is still sold) or something similar on them.

What do ya'll think?


----------



## Gerald (May 23, 2005)

I am not an expert on tires so my opinion is just that, my opinion for whatever it is worth. I haul a lot of things in my truck and some of them pretty heavy.

In looking at the tread pattern on this tire it would not seem as well suited for my purposes as what is oem on our
trucks.

OkieScot


----------



## inyourface1650 (Oct 6, 2005)

The Touring A/S 795 is Kumho's Standard Touring All-Season tire developed to meet the needs of the drivers of *coupes, sedans and minivans* by blending long mileage and comfort with dry, wet and year-round traction, even in light snow. The Touring A/S 795 tires are intended to be one of Kumho's best values.

I dunno man, while the tires may be capable of handling that weight, they may not be designed to handle a big load for an extended period of time, like truck tires. That tread also loooks even less agressive then what my grabbers have stock...


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

inyourface1650 said:


> The Touring A/S 795 is Kumho's Standard Touring All-Season tire developed to meet the needs of the drivers of *coupes, sedans and minivans* by blending long mileage and comfort with dry, wet and year-round traction, even in light snow. The Touring A/S 795 tires are intended to be one of Kumho's best values.
> 
> I dunno man, while the tires may be capable of handling that weight, they may not be designed to handle a big load for an extended period of time, like truck tires. That tread also loooks even less agressive then what my grabbers have stock...


I finally sent an email to tirerack to get their opinions, but yeah, I am a little concerned about the Standard Touring thing too. As far as the tread goes, I'm looking more at the Survey Results than anything else. The results on the Generals suck and the Kuhmos rate really well in Dry/Wet/Snow traction.

I've been looking at these too. They're a "Highway Touring, light truck" tire that's only a couple of more pounds than the 795s. I don't want to add too much to the rolling mass 'cause I don't want to hurt my MPG.


----------



## 56cbr600rr (May 16, 2005)

I had these exact tires on my 2000 Frontier and they are great tires! I went up a size or soo too. They are a great value too. 

Impressed enough to put kumhos on the 350z also!


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

56cbr600rr said:


> I had these exact tires on my 2000 Frontier and they are great tires! I went up a size or soo too. They are a great value too.
> 
> Impressed enough to put kumhos on the 350z also!


Which ones did you use, the *795*s or the *HT*s?

If it was the 795s, what did you do with the white-wall (or did you have black-wall)?

I've just about settled on the *Venture HT 105S SL* rated at 2028# @ 35PSI.


----------



## Marcus (Mar 28, 2004)

I used to have the Kumho 795's on my 1995 Nissan pickup. When I bought the truck used from a local dealer they were already on the truck. They worked really well for me. I hauled stuff with them all loaded up and they worked great. I don't think I ever rotated them and they lasted me about 60k miles. Mine weren't white walled, just black.


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

FWIW, I got the Kuhmo Road Venture HT 105S Standard Load (2028# @ 35PSI). They definitely feel different. They've definitely affected my speedo/odo meters. I may post again after I've lived with them for a while, but I think I'm going to like them. If they live up to what they're rated on TireRack.com, I know I'll like them. Anyway, thanks for all the input. Here they are...


----------



## abmobil (Nov 22, 2004)

How many miles did you get out of the factory generals?


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

abmobil said:


> How many miles did you get out of the factory generals?


The Generals were wearing pretty well. They only had 16k on them and looked good. My main motivation in changing was that I wanted a little bigger and "better" tire. I say better based solely on TireRack.com's customer review of the Generals and the new Kuhmo's. I ran the Generals for 15 months and saw some heavy rain, light snow, and some packed down (almost to ice) snow on the highway. I broke loose a couple of times in the snow & ice and I'd break loose in heavy rain with cruise on but, luckily, without incident. I'm hoping the Kuhmos will do a good deal better in all of those conditions. Time will tell.


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

Those tires definetly give the truck a different look. I like them. I'm going to have to get some whilte letters once my grabber wear out. 

How much has it changed your speedo and odometer? Is there anyway to calibrate it for the slightly bigger tires? I'm curious to see what affect it has on your gas mileage. I would like to go slightly bigger also.


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

mitchell35758 said:


> Those tires definetly give the truck a different look. I like them. I'm going to have to get some whilte letters once my grabber wear out.
> 
> How much has it changed your speedo and odometer? Is there anyway to calibrate it for the slightly bigger tires? I'm curious to see what affect it has on your gas mileage. I would like to go slightly bigger also.


I'm surprised they're still selling OWLs & RWLs. Seems like the current "fashion" is to put them on the inside. I guess I'm so old I think they can still look good mounted out. I thought I would have liked blackwalls better, but I like the OWL.

My MPG will definitely be interesting. I checked the odo against our highway mile markers and it looked like I was about 3% or so on the low side. That sounds reasonable to me because before the new tires I thought I was about 2-3% too high and the new tires are supposed to cause a 5% decrease in odo reading. So, my current MPG average (27) should be about 2-3% too high; making the real MPG no less than a little over 26. If everything else remains the same (and part of my choice for these tires was that they were only 30# each versus the 28# Generals), I guess I should see the total 5% decrease to around 25.5. Hopefully, I've applied those percentages correctly.

According to my local Nissan service dept., there is no modifying the speed seen by the ECU, so I'm stuck with those numbers. The shop didn't seem too shook up about it and didn't seem too surprised when I told them I thought I was 2-3% high with the Generals. I guess they get a lot of that. Anyway, I guess it'll take 15 months of running on the low side for my mileage to balance out after 15 months running on the high side.


----------



## Evi|Chicken (Jun 14, 2004)

I got rid of my generals in about 500 miles... the traction was not to my liking. Went for BFG All Terrain KO's...Gottta Love em


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

Hey Jerry
Its been a while now, and I am still curious how the slightly larger tires are doing for you.
I'm going to start planning for new tires at the end of this year, and want to get an idea of what I will be buying now, so I wanted to ask you if you regret the new slightly larger tires at all.

thanks


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

mitchell35758 said:


> Hey Jerry
> Its been a while now, and I am still curious how the slightly larger tires are doing for you.
> I'm going to start planning for new tires at the end of this year, and want to get an idea of what I will be buying now, so I wanted to ask you if you regret the new slightly larger tires at all.
> 
> thanks


It's a tough call. I just ran the numbers on the MPG. If my "corrected" mileage is correct, then the MPG is virtually unchanged. With 19 observations on the 225/70s and 13 observations on the 235/75s, the MPG is 26.3 and 26.1 respectively. With all of the other factors (testing 89 versus 87 full petroleum fuel versus 87 E10, winter driving, summer driving, hauling, etc.) it's tough to say what effect, if any, tire size had. Of course, the illusion of higher MPG with the smaller tires was nicer.

All that said, I think I'm happy with the size. If "fits" the truck better. The wheel wells are filled just a bit more and it feels more like a truck (that might be a bad thing for some people).

Who knows, if I keep the truck as long as I think I will (and I never get my boat), then maybe someday I'll go to a more "street" look. But as it stands right now, I have no intention of replacing these tires until they fail inspection.

Did that answer your question


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

sure did

so how are the Kumhos holding up? Excessive wear, balance issues, etc. 

I already have a set picked out, but they are a little on the expensive side for the size and will be considering other brands as the time comes closer...

Oh, and I agree with you about them fitting the truck better, thats the only reason why I am looking forward to new tires, my stock tires were slightly smaller than your stock tires because of those stock 15x6 steel wheels I had


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

mitchell35758 said:


> sure did
> 
> so how are the Kumhos holding up? Excessive wear, balance issues, etc.
> 
> ...


They've got about 9k miles on them with no signs of wear (but then again, the Generals looked really good at 10k).

No alignment, balance, rubbing or any other issues.

As I stated, even though they're only a couple of pounds heavier than the Generals (at least according to the specs), they "feel" heavier. I've gotten used to it, but it's still there.

Bottom line: No Regrets.


----------



## jerryp58 (Jan 6, 2005)

Hey, I noticed that I didn't comment on the tire performance yet (I thought I had done that  )

Anyway, dry pavement traction is the same as far as I can tell. Wet pavement has *improved tremendously*. A couple of rainstorms with the Generals left me feeling pretty uncomfortable. The Kuhmos have been through much worse storms and have showed no signs of hydroplaning or slipping (which I felt witht he Generals). I guess I've got to wait a while to see if light/heavy snow is any better. The Generals did OK with that (just a little slipping/sliding) considering it's a 2wd truck. I don't do any off-road to speak of.


----------



## MrMorphine (Jul 15, 2005)

I'm running Forteras on my truck. had to go with a smaller sidewall (the lady at sam's club was really surprised when i said i was ASE certified) then tuned speedo cable accordingly at my local shop.


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

I'm glad to hear that there are some tires out there that will handle the wet conditions then the Generals. I've kinda just gotten used to the fact that they break loose when I am trying to make a right turn while acclearting. But it is slowly getting anoying. 

MrMorphine, 
Did your frontier have the digital odometer? I would love to put bigger tires on my truck, but I really don't want to deal with the speedo and odometer being off.


----------



## MrMorphine (Jul 15, 2005)

First:Yes. 

Second,The sidewall profile of the tires i have is about 3cm smaller than the ones i had previous (firestone wilderness HT,i think. they were so bald when i got rid of them they had cords showing)

Third,Find an aftermarket shop (Speedshop) that does hondas and such and they will probably be able to help. (look at the camber on the cars outside the shop. this is a good indicator.)

Also,Mitchell:If you have a bed with the organizer in the liner do what i did. there is a placement for flat boards foward and to the rear of the fenders. Drop a pair in there and Sandbag. (i used 50lb bags of play sand) The weight should be situated right above the axle (which is ideal,you know.) That'll help avoid that funny little dukes of hazzard slide around corners. I'll make schematics for my sandbag enclosure (it's not hard to make,provided you can use common sense and a hammer) and put them up on this site. It'll fit the older (98-04 bedstyle) but i assume someone can do the dirty deed and adjust the measurements for the newer chassis? i don't have a bed laying around for it.


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

Hey, thanks man. 
I built a bike holder deal(whatever its called, holds the front wheel in place so the bike can stand straight up), I might be able to move it over the axle when not in use as a sand bag holder. For sure though, post the schematics, as if I don't use them, someone will definetly benefit from them. 
Thanks MrMorphine


----------

