Nokian Outpost AT

This is from Nokian...I'm dubious.

 

Holy crap!

@Solduios . Can you weigh one of yours?

 

Something's off...
Look at 265/70/16 vs 265/75/16.

 

They have different load indexes?

 

Definitely something odd. That one might be a typo for an XL.

 

Those load indexes are pretty typical for those sizes in a euro-metric tire.
I was referring to weight.

70 series is 37.5 lbs.
75 series is 28.6 lbs.

I could believe 38.6 lbs for the 75 series. But still; only 1.1 lbs more?

 

Those look great, I'm interested to see how they hold up. They don't seem to common at the big tire retailers yet.

 

Looking at replacing my KO2s with these in P265/75R16. $220ea in Canada.

I'm tired of the 54lb 10 ply KO2s. Might as well be running a 285 MT.

 

Something is definitely off on their weights 265/70r17 30.6lbs no way is that right.

 

For most people Nokia associated with cell phones (in the past)
Main specialization of the company is chemicals, cabling products and tires (wiki can tell you more)
In Europe, Nokian winter tires always tested on the ice of Inari lake and Ivalo lake, with really low temperatures and harsh conditions.
However, Nokia makes nice summer tires as well.
But...
The reputation in Europe is "reasonable quality for poor people". Truth 100%
Quality is reasonable and STABLE, but not the best.
Period.
So makes me smiling when I see how (here in Canada, at least) our marketologists trying to advertise Nokians like premium brand (and overpricing).

 

There is a least one Nokian dealer in Denver that advertises the tires. I may check them out when the time is needed
https://www.tires4denver.com/Shop-F...pagenumber=1&sidewall=-1&promo=-1&view=single

 

I'm actually interested in these tires. They look pretty solid and are cheap...like $850 for a set of 285/70/17s. Will keep my eyes on this thread some more...

 

Since I'm really focused on better winter ability, these have moved to the top of my list.

 

On my shipping package it says 184 pounds but I got stock size since it's a untested tire and didn't want to risk anything.


The picture of the sticker on the tire doesn't say. 184 pounds seems like it is too heavy. I just brought them upstairs in my apartment they come in a package of two. Lifting them I would say maybe 30-40 pounds each. I will try to find more information.

 

Shipping weights are often an estimate. 184lb / 4 = 46lb. @splitbolt 's chart shows 37.5lb for your particular tire. So, it would be nice if you could actually weigh just one of them? NBD though.

I don't have experience with those EU designations, but the D grade for wet traction is a bummer. We'd need to compare to other known ATs to know for sure though.

 

I will try to get around to weighing the tire. Not sure how the European rating are done. I am can only guess based off my older Rotiva AT.

My guess based off tread design that it's sacrificing a little bit of wet traction as it is more agressive tread pattern than the older Rotiva.

Rotiva AT tread




Outpost AT



Judging from the new pattern it won't collect gravel as much as the older ones. I should be getting them mounted this Friday.

Just as a reference the tires I replaced with the Rotiva AT was factory Wrangler SRA and they were light years better.

Edit Rotiva AT had the same wet rating. So EU might just have much higher standards for tires?
All I know is that the were much better than the Wrangler SR-A in the wet and light years better in the snow/slush.

 

Like I said, there are no other knowns here to judge against. It may not be a big deal and have great wet traction compared to other AT?

 

Wet braking; not necessarily wet traction.