will 2" lift clear 33's?

A: What's the best way to do it?
285/70R17 or 255/80R17?

The last one = "tall skinnies" to give it a Land Rover look which is kind of cool
but the Falken Wildpeak AT3W's I'm looking to try next might not even come with that size option (hopefully there are some sales soon)
Thinner profile might = less rolling resistance = better MPG
probably load range C

285 70 17 just seems excessive width; that's the same back tire size (width mm) as a C6 Corvette needing to put 400hp to the ground (Tacoma has 220)

B: Would 2" lift even clear it? ie AAL 1.5-2" in the rear, and 2" taller front springs (OME 883X, Bilstein 5100 set to 0)

RokBlokz mudflaps (more clearance than OEM)
Or would they still rub in certain situations like full lock offroad while compressed?
I've heard at 2", chopping things is required and that it rubs/knocks off mud flaps (maybe OEM?)

If that is the case maybe I'll just replace current worn 31's with another new set of 31's for now and just wait until later to go 33"
Such as if getting a higher lift
(aftermarket UCA, Icon RXT rear leafpack, taller front springs, etc.)

 

2" lift is enough if you remove your splash guards and beat back your inner fenders and pinch weld and remove your mud flaps, yes your aftermarket ones too.

You may have to trim your bumper and flares ad well.

You will still need to do the cab mount chop and have better backspacing wheels and upper control arms to run anything wider than a 265 irreguardless of height.

So in your case stay 31's until you're ready to replace everything up front.

 

255s will clear without all the goobering of your fenders, pinch weld and CMC.

Well, that's what this place says anyway.

 

Yeah Juise is correct you can run a 255 75 17 it's a skinny almost 32" I ran that size on 5100'a with stock springs on 3rd notch for a little bit.

 

Also, tire weight is the biggest factor in power loss and MPG. Rolling resistance does vary, but it isn't the biggest factor. Dick Cepek Extreme Country 255/85r16s are like 49lbs if you want a 33" MT and care about MPG. Falkens are generally very heavy.

 

Ah, I was thinking 255/85r16 or 255/80r17. I just re-read your post and thought I should clarify.

 

It might have been 80 I honestly don't remember, metric "32's" not "skinny 33s," but I thought 75, they were stock jeep take offs whatever size they actually were.