In my continuing efforts to understand this whole traction/ slide-off-the-road-in-a-panic debacle, I posit this question: I am cognizant that the MTs do not perform as well as the ATs in regard to wet-weather traction and handling; however, is the MT a "lawsuit waiting to happen" such as the GY RTS, or does it perform only slightly less in the skid, instability, women and children first category of the BFG AT?

Any comments, suggestions, or general blandishments are welcomed.

------------------
'99 XLT 4x4

 

I had the BFG MTs on my Ranger and I found them to be excellent tires. I had no problems with wet weather traction. I now have the ATs on my F-150. The ATs handle a little better than the MTs (plus they are smoother and quieter), but that does not imply that the MTs are as bad as goodyears.

I assume that you want MTs because you see a lot of mud (or sand), and the MTs are excellent for that. As for highway wet traction, I will say that they are above average when compared to other mud tires.

 

actually an article was done in 4wheel and offroad not too long ago that compared the mt's and at's from bfg.
the only difference was that the mt's were a little better in the rocks and the at's were very slightly better in the snow.
they did say that they would recommend either tire and that either would be fine for street use. although the mt's are slightly louder and don't last quite as long.
i myself have had both on trucks at one time or another and liked them both very well. i had no trouble in the rain or snow with either tire.