Introduction & Another Tire Size Thread

I think there are some helpful and perfectly reasonable low-risk modifications. The good folks here suggested I upgrade in this order.

1. A good set of AT tires in load C. Load E if you must, and can deal with the harsher ride. I’ve had no problems with load C. And they flex much nicer than E’s when aired down, which can improve traction.

2. Sliders. Get them. Get steel. You’ll use them. The ones with a kickout are nice. Top plates are not necessary, and wont really help ingress anyway, and look crappy once you start getting rust. Don’t worry about the finish. Rattle cans are easiest, and a brush to touch up rock rash. If you're on gravel and deal with rod salt, they’ll all look like shit soon enough.

3. Lift: plenty of quality options. I’m very pleased with dobinson IMS. All I did was coils and dampers. Standard travel. Yes I took some rake out, but my frame does go into squat angles with a weekend camping load. This, along with topping out, is why I want to go from 2.5 to closer to 2 in the front.

Rebuildable shocks are nice, but only if you can put your 4runner out of service for the time it takes to have them rebuilt.

4.Armor: I’ve resisted getting armor until now. But last year I slipped off a rock and came straight down on my control arm mount. Thankfully I didnt bend it. Then a couple of weeks ago I slipped off another rock and bashed my mid-skid pretty good. It did it’s job, but, I think it’s time.

I ordered the 4xinnovations skid set that goes all the way to the exhaust crossover at the Transfer case. Reason being, it’s the only armor option that properly protects the control arm mounts at the frame.

However, I feel like this skid set might be at the ragged edge of of good compromise. It will make driveline greasing a weekend job, instead of a half-hour job. It may make transmission temps hotter because it’s full coverage, and it weighs 176lbs according to the manufacturer (2 skids are 1/4 in thick, and the other two are 3/16).
Yes, I’ll be able to drive over roadside IED’s now, but it will come at a cost. Let’s see if I regret them.

I’m with 285s and the increased weight of the skids, I may be poised on the edge of diminishing returns…we shall see!

 

I have the feeling that some may disagree, but sliders and armor are not my first priority. I agree they are good and necessary sometimes. And I probably will invest in them at some point, but it will be later on. I just see too many guys load up their trucks with all kinds of armor when they probably don't wheel hard enough to justify it, or again, just do it to look cool. All that steel in the bumpers and sliders and skid plates and roof racks just adds a ton of weight. These trucks are already sluggish and chug gasoline as it is. What's worse is the step-ups, or whatever they're called. They don't look good and I would break them off my first time out on the rocks with them. In all the wheeling I did with my jeep, which essentially had no armor on it, I had no major damages. Well.... let me correct that, I did have mechanical failures, but not due to a lack of armor. I'll put my tires where they're supposed to go and take my time and it won't be a problem. Plus, I kind of want to keep the stock body look as much as possible. There's something elegant in minimalism and simplicity, and it will retain it's value better.

Same reason I'm not going to install those big bulky heavy steel bumpers. It's an instagram fad. I like the simplistic ones made out of tube steel as opposed to sheet metal, and that don't have a bull bar and a thousand lights on them.

And I don't need no rooftop tent. I'll sleep on the ground lol. (I know you didn't mention this. I just think its funny when guys immediately buy all this stuff for their truck so they can get instagram likes. Like the multiple gas cans mounted on the back. Like... dude... when are you and your Birkenstocks gonna get far enough from civilization to need extra gas?)

 

Bravo!

Well said.

 

Ah, I see. I suggested the sliders based only on the initial use-case you presented. I still suggest them because body damage at the rocker panels is expensive, and painful to look at. I’ve gotten over feeling horrible over pinstripes, but the rocker panels getting bashed would make me feel horrible.

Sliders are a low cost, low drawback mod…besides the increased maintainance with the painting. But, they open up a world of options if your intended route gets hairy. I was a complete off-road noob when I bought my 4runner, and I didnt think I would need them. Now,I’m still a noob, but sometimes I’m surprised to see deep scrapes on the sliders and absolutely not recall where that happened lol, probably because I was having fun!

Like I said, the advice I got to do stock size AT tires, lift, and sliders, in that order, was perfect for me. No regerts whatsover with those mods. That said, if I was mall crawling, then yeah they would be mildly poser-ish. And THAT said, it’s also ok for somebody to want their 4runner to look cool.

Skidplates however are a lower priority in my mind, especially if you do a mild lift for greater clearance. The stock skids will take a few hits just fine, as long as you take care with your lines so you don’t fall on your control arm mounts or tear out your exhaust crossover behind the TC. Once you bash them up, you’ll know if upgraded armor is worth it.

Regarding steel bumpers, most do the mid section bumpers, mostly for the purposes of mounting a winch…which is another consideration if you’re going on the trail less traveled.

edit:to clarify on sliders, if you’re worried about breaking off the steps, you’re not thinking of sliders. Those are just body mounted step rails. Sliders are frame mounted, don’t have protruding steps, and are heavy steel tube capable of supporting the weight of the vehicle, or pushing the vehichle off a rock if you cut a curve too close on a trail.

 

You and everyone have given great advice. I really don’t disagree with anything you or anyone has said to me so far. I just think some things are more important than others depending on personal preference. And I’m also prioritizing what I think is most important to me first cause I can’t afford to buy all this shit at once.

And trust me I want my 4Runner to look cool too, as long as it makes sense. For example I don’t like the look of bigger tires without having a slightly wider stance. Has to be proportional. And it also makes sense to do that since you’re raising the center of mass. Widening the stance counteracts the increased moment from raising the truck. Some will say it’s negligible but it’s a real thing and simple math. If you’re on the tipping point it does matter. And I wouldn’t do it with wheel spacers either. I’d get wheels with more negative offset (spacers = more parts = higher probability of failure). Anyway that was a long tangent but the point is that I too want to look at my 4Runner and think “damn baby you fine” but I have to justify it in my mind like the above. I know. I’m a weirdo. At least 4runner people don’t put angry eyes on the front of their car.

Out of all the things you mentioned, I will agree that the sliders are the most crucial. That is a vulnerable part of the vehicle. But most of the time I can look at something and say “yeah I don’t need to go through that cause I’m gonna hit”. Also the approach/exit angle on the 4runner sucks and I’ve been thinking about what I want to do about that. The “viper cuts” are actually a viable option (bet you didn’t expect that from me), but I’m not sure if I want to go cutting up my bumper like that. I’ll eventually probably go to something like the c4 hybrid on the front with no bull bar or any of the other extra stuff. For the back, my favorite one I’ve seen is the one from nguyenworks. Really low profile and super high clearance. It involves deleting the hitch crossmember but I don’t care.

Pains me to admit it after just having ranted about not needing armor, but I have already had to replace the little valence panel that extends off the rear bumper on the newer TRD OR. Came off a ledge that was a bit too high at night time.

 

You are now one of us. I now formally greet you with the super secret official 4runners.com handshake greeting.

 

Oh yeah, the nguyenworks bumper looks epic, but I wouldn’t want to cut off the rear crossmember. That would essentially total your vehicle when it come to resale, since you’ve removed a huge part of the frame, only to replace it by what looks to be 1x3 square tube, probably mild steel. The stock crossmember most definitely is not mild steel. And the larger dimensions of stock crossmember makes it much stronger as well. They do make a version that retains the crossmember. Once you start having some real traveling fun with your 4runner, a little rash on plastic isnt a big deal. Ultimately it can be easily replaced if you sell it.

 

I went with a 275 70 17 (32.5"), removed mud flaps, pushed the liner forward an inch, and no rubbing. I found these guys on youtube, Overland pacific northwest and aired_down_overland, 2 brothers with 5th gens, they go over mods and etc. After a fair amount of reading i think im going to go with a 34. Even a 33 looks decent. 35s are a gateway for supporting mods, one thing leads to the next, to the next, and etc.

 

That's exactly my thoughts on it and glad to hear someone say the same. The 34 is a good number. Bigger than the 285/70R17 that everyone runs (nothing wrong with that, I just want to go a little bigger), but not as big and heavy and not as much rubbing as 35. 34 meaning 285/75R17 or 305/70R17. 295/70R17 is even a possibility but it's a little smaller. I know, I know, all these sizes are so close it seems it wouldn't matter. But still, 34 seems like a good number. And gear to 4.56. Or at least 4.56 is the one most people talk about. If there was something close to 4.10 that would be ideal.

 

That channel showed the difference in fitment 34 vs 35, it made a difference. One brother has 34s the other 35s, so its interesting to see their take on it.

 

I'll have to check it out. I was hoping more people on here had 34's and could share their experience with rubbing and off road performance. A couple of pictures got shared of 4Runners with tires in that size range, but again, I'm more interested in how it works than how it looks.

As far as how it looks, I think it's perfect with a little bit of an offset wheel. Nothing crazy, -12 mm or something like that. And a 2.5/1.5 or 3/2 lift.

 

It’s really a great topic. IFS makes it comfortable on road, but complicated and expensive to fit bigger tires. I’ve heard that 34s, while seemingly harmless are actually a gateway tire!

I’ll add one thing to McSpazatron’s post. It’s more efficient to use a money gun. Costly? Sure, but I think it’s worth it

Welcome to the club!

 

Then through the gateway I shall go!

And thanks!

 

-the 4runner frame is more level than it actually looks. When people go for that “visually level” look, the rear is actually squatting a bit when referenced off the frame. This makes a big difference in road feel, especially when you load up the back for camping, and squat even more.

True ↑
The slight rake to the front actually is level, frame's level. And if you look close, rear fenders sit higher on the body than the front fenders, adding to the illusion. That's why the common centre of hub to bottom of fender measurement is so much larger in rear.

Honestly, 285/75R17 or 295/70R17 are as big as one may want to go with 5th gen Runners. Even those sizes with good caster UCA's, perhaps forward adjusted LCA's, will rub quite a bit on multiple things. Add negative offset or spacers and rub increases. Too high positive offset can rub UCAs or resovoirs. I read ppl saying all the time, like up above a few comments, they have no rub with these sizes and did BMC and minor trimming. I don't believe these people are flexing hard, it will rub, I hear from wheelers there almost nothing you can do with these 5th Gens if you're flexing 34-35's.
With that said, perhaps no rub with perfect setup of UCA's, LCA's, BMC, zero offset - less than 9" wide wheels

 

35x12.5 will rub on the front sway bar, among many other areas.

 

So if I'm understanding you correctly you're saying the frame is level but the body is raked. I mean you can just look at the roof line and tell it's raked, but the difference in wheel wells makes it worse. This would mean the only way to get both the body and frame level is somehow putting a body lift on just the front. Which probably isn't possible and even if it was I wouldn't want to. What this also means is with the 2.5/1.5 or 3/2 lifts, or with a "leveling kit", the frame is actually squatted. Might be best to just lift it 2.5 all around.

Hmmmm sounds like I have a lot more research to do. If that's really true then I would just go with the 285/70. I would want bigger tires to benefit me, not hinder. You'd be able to get more places with the smaller tire that is functioning properly.

I figured the reason most people go with 285/70 is cause its the easiest and cheapest option. No problems fitting it and you can get away without re-gearing (although theoretically you shouldn't do that in my opinion, but most people are just fine). NOTHING wrong with going the easy, cheap option. I'm just saying I'm willing to go the extra mile and do the BMC and other trimming and re-gear if it means I can run a bigger tire. On the flip side, if bigger tires are gonna mess with the other components like steering and what not, then I'd rather not mess with it and just go 285/70.

There really wouldn't be a great gearing option with the 285/70 though. 4.56 is too low for highway driving at that point, and I don't hear talk of anything between 3.73 and 4.56 for the 5th gen.

 

1 . Ya man, well I think you kind of understand and somewhat don't at the same time haha. A 2.5/1.5 or 3/2 lift is a level lift, and doesn't squat the rear. You want to retain a little body rake forward, it's natural, and means frame is level. When there's no rake, your frame is actually leaning back but your wheel wells appear even and level. I admit I like the look of even space between tire and fender, front and rear, but it's that's negative rake.
2 . On a 5th gen Runner, many probably agree, running 285/70R17's properly isn't what everyone would call cheap and easy. Certainly if you actually flex, 285's require trimming. Also, 285's themselves ARE hard on your components, you may be forced to 'mess' with the consequences lol. I haven't regeared, but if I go bigger I'd invest.
Check out these beauty photos, if I go to 35's I can't help but worry bearings, bushings, lca joints may join the party hahah

 

That doesn't make any sense. You're saying the frame is level and the body is raked, which makes sense. But if that is the case, then if you lift the front more than the rear (like you do for a 2.5/1.5), the frame would be squatted even if the body looks level. Lifting 2.5 all around would not affect the levelness of the frame, nor would it affect the rake of the body. It would just lift everything straight up by the same amount.

 

I'm no.expert, I may be off on one comment about frame - I googled stock 4runner and frame apparently comes level with ground. But I'm correct when I say the body "looks" raked because offset fenders give that illusion. Google says when stock SR5 4R is 1.5" raked to front. Not sure how it's raked 1.5" but also frame level with ground stock. Maybe someone can explain further lol. But. After my suspension lift more in the front than the rear, and after added weight to the front, my frame is pretty level but rake decreased (not fully)

 

Check this out @ForrestTh4R, it might help with visualizing the optical illusions built into the bodylines which give the impression of forward rake when it’s stock. These bodylines were probably designed this way to hide actual squat when the rear is loaded heavy.

Anyways, these pictures were leveled using my editing tool. On these pictures, the level was referenced off of the lower door lines, which are level to the frame. My sliders are also level to frame, since it’s mounted to it directly.

This first picture has a grid line running across the top of the front wheel arch. When the level line reaches the rear wheel well, it’s apparent the rear arch opening is higher, despite the frame being perfectly rotated to level in this picture. This is one of the visual cues that gives the impression of forward rake.








The picture below has level grid lines that start at the top of the front door. While the door line appears level on first impression, it is not. That’s the second visual cue that gives the impression of rake.


I believe the frame itself, as it sits stock, does indeed have some forward rake, but not as much as the body lines suggest. This explains why when people try to hide rake by lifting the front more than the rear, the frame itself can end up with zero or negative rake. To be safe, you could lift equally in the front and back, or at least keep the difference to an inch or less.

 

I also did a little articulation test with my new 285/70-17 on stock off road wheels. Looks like with stock offset, it will not rub. Link to my post:
https://www.4runners.com/threads/wh...h-gen-4runner-today.2261/page-855#post-473814

 

@McSpazatron - ok so I went through a process that I believe gives the exact rake on a stock 2022 TRD Off Road Premium (or mine at least).

Took a trip to Harbor Freight and bought a digital level that measures to 0.1 degree. Parked the 4Runner in the parking garage, decently flat and smooth surface. I had some stuff in the truck but nothing of significant weight. I took a bunch of different measurements, about 30 data points for each of three angles - angle of the ground in the direction the Runner was parked, angle of the frame (with the same zero as used on the ground), and angle of the body (again, same zero). I then took the averages of these data points. The angle of rake, defined as a positive angle for a forward rake, is the difference between the angle of the ground and the angle of the body (or frame, depending on which you are measuring). I did all of this on the passenger side only.

The ground and the frame were straightforward, but they body I had to get a little creative with. I looked for lines that the eyes are naturally drawn to running the length of the body. Roof line (which is actually ever so slightly curved so the angle is different depending on where you measure), door frames, horizontal window edges, top of wheel wells, plastic trim on bottom, pinch weld underneath.

Here's what I found:

Average angle of the ground = -0.24 degree
Average angle of the frame = 0.60 degree
Average angle of the body = 0.70 degree

Angle of frame rake = 0.60 - (-0.24) = 0.84 degree
Angle of body rake = 0.70 - (-0.24) = 0.94 degree

Once you have these angles, its easy to get the rake in inches. The wheelbase on the 5th gen 4Runner is 109.8 inches, and I measured that to verify.

Frame rake = 109.8*tan(0.84) = 1.62 in.
Body rake = 109.8*tan(0.94) = 1.80 in.

I also took some measurements on the wheel wells.

Distance from ground to top of front wheel well opening = 34.56 in.
Distance from ground to top of rear wheel well opening = 36.81 in.

Total difference in wheel well opening height = 36.81 - 34.56 = 2.25 in.

That's the TOTAL wheel well opening height difference. 1.80 in. of that 2.25 in. is due to the body rake. The remaining 0.45 in. is the difference in the wheel well dimension itself.

In conclusion, the frame and body are raked by 1.62 in. and 1.80 in., respectively. To add to that, it looks even more raked because the top of the rear wheel well opening is 0.45 in. higher than that of the front wheel well, when referenced off of some other point on the body.

So yeah, the 2.5/1.5 or 3/2 lift would make sense. The frame and body will still have a rake, but it will be way less obvious. It's good to have a bit of rake remaining for when the back of the 4Runner is weighed down.

 

Thanks for that Homeric effort.

 

Well f*cking done my man

 

@Jasonst4r thank you for recommending Aired-Down Overland. The video linked below told me everything I wanted to know. I thought the 34" tire was a perfect choice on paper, but the video really helped to confirm that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4ciRvkz5Rs

And to all the others that recommended the Tinkerer's Adventures videos, thank you very much for that recommendation as well. I watched almost all of them and they were excellent. The two videos I enjoyed the most (ironically not about lift height or tire size) were the ones about diff drops and sway bars, both topics under heavy debate in the Toyota community. In my opinion, he put both of them to rest.

After these videos and some more of my own research and deliberation, I've concluded that 35" tires are really way more trouble than they are worth, and even after you go through all that trouble and make them fit, they will still continue to cause problems. I think, FOR NOW, I'll get some 265/70R17 AT's and keep everything stock. My main apprehension with wheeling with the stock tires is the fact that they are street tires that I'm worried will get cut on the rocks and I have been afraid to air them down because they just seem flimsy. Once I get some AT's, air down a bit and remove the front sway bar, there will be a much better ride off road, and as some of you have said, these things are actually pretty capable stock. When I upgrade, I'll go to the 34" tire, 2 - 2.5" lift, re-gear to 4.56, and lock the front. I've accepted that I'm going to have to get another TJ as a side project for the really intense rock crawling stuff, as the 4Runner simply is not the tool.

Speaking of these trucks being capable stock, you guys should check out the stock Kia Sorento (stock except sway bar removed) go up Hells Gate in Moab Utah in the video below (at 0:21). I'd be interested to hear stories/see pictures of any of you doing some intense stuff on stock suspension and 265/70R17.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcgKbUTQJy8

Again, thanks everyone. This has been very helpful.

 

Way to go great to hear! My brother in law is on my ass every time I'm at his property, since my Runners been new, saying don't you understand these things are badass stock

 

Wow, that's a lot of analytics for a zero inch bigger tire!

 

Is that the standard OME lift with yellow shocks or a more expensive one like the BP-51?

I only see a 0mm offset option for the 704, so that must be what you have. What is the stance like? Do the tires sit flush with the fenders, inside, or outside?

Good looking setup. 295/70 or 285/75 seem like great options.

 

This is the standard Nitro-Charger lift (yellow shocks). The BP-51's are awesome but they are just overkill for me. This one gets the job done and I am very happy with it. If

You are correct on the wheels. As far as the stance they sit pretty much flush with the fender. The picture below is not the best, but it gives you an idea.

I love this tire size (295/70/17). It's just big enough without the headache of all the modifications needed to fit a 35'.

 

keep in mind with these Runners, 295/70's will cause you headaches and not many less than 35's will. OP, 8.5-9" wide -12mm offset wheels with 295's could rub on multiple things especially without nice UCA's