Does anybody have any examples of how many miles there getting out of their BFG KM and KM2's? Is it better to get the A/T or is there much of a difference? Ive heard good things about the KM's as far as mileage but just want some opinions........thanks

 

The KM2's may get 30-40k if you rotate and balance often. My AT's have over 32k miles and look like they can go 90k miles. I can't wear them out, plus I think they are better for everyday use. I've got to admit the KM2's are some nice looking tires.http://

 

yea the at's wear like iron. if you want a good set of tires for all around use, you can't go wrong with the AT's. if you want a more rugged tire, in the mud alot, go for the km2's. as far as i know 07silverfx4 was the first guy to have km2's and he did a report on them a while back. the last set of bfg's i had i sold them with a 1/3 tread and the guy put another 20k on them, i had over 50k on them. a great tire, that's why there so popular.

 

You can easily get 60,000 miles out of the AT KO's.

 

I got right next to 60K out of my AT's on a 2000 f150. I won't buy a different kind of tire, period...unless they are bfg mt's.

 

I guess thats why the A/T KOs are so damn expensive. For my next set of tires ( 285/65/18s ) I want them, but the price tag of $280 each really kills, but if they last, i'm sure its more than worth it.

 

I only have a little over 2000 miles on my AT's and i havent seen any wear yet. I've heard it depends on tire pressure?

 

thanks for the responses...but if i wanted the more aggressive look like the km or km2's what king of mileage could i expect out of them...thanks in advance

 

KM2 replaced the KM. If you have someone with a set of KM mudders they are old stock.
Mileage is a variable based on what you do, and how well you take care of them, air pressure, what you haul, off road or on road. You could probably assume 50k and be ok.