Different tire size on front and back

I would. Slight tire diameter mis-match is going to be even less important on low-traction surfaces.



Thousands of years ago, I was in high school and then trade school. Drove full-sized Chevy cars--'66 Biscayne, and later a '69 Impala. I put studded snow tires on all four corners. I figure it's as important to stop and turn as it is to "go".

Keep in mind that without a locking differential, a "2WD" vehicle is ONE wheel drive on low-traction surfaces. A "4WD" vehicle is TWO wheel drive (one front, one rear) on low-traction surfaces.

A locking or limited-slip differential provides much more traction up to the point where both wheels on that axle are spinning--and then you have poor directional control.

Look at the revolutions per mile. That’s 1 mile x hundreds or thousands. Also, look at various speeds. Maybe imperceptible to us, but I’m not a transfer case.

If you really want to blow peoples minds, run 4.10 gears in the back with 37" tires and 3.42 gears in the front with 30.5" tires. And tire chains on all 4 corners.

The tire diameter difference is negligible. If that is your only concern, then go for it. As other have said, I would be more concerned about traction differences than diameter differences, so I always run the same tire type on all four. But to your specific question about diameter difference causing a t-case problem, I see no cause for concern.

RichLo said:

If you really want to blow peoples minds, run 4.10 gears in the back with 37" tires and 3.42 gears in the front with 30.5" tires. And tire chains on all 4 corners.

You must be registered for see images attach

Click to expand...

Your mirror is droopy - that's the first thing I noticed...

.

Just run a couple lbs less pressure in the taller tires and send it!

Schurkey said:

Keep in mind that without a locking differential, a "2WD" vehicle is ONE wheel drive on low-traction surfaces. A "4WD" vehicle is TWO wheel drive (one front, one rear) on low-traction surfaces.

A locking or limited-slip differential provides much more traction up to the point where both wheels on that axle are spinning--and then you have poor directional control.

Click to expand...

I feel that this is the problem with the 2500HD. Historically, if i am driving down the highway and I feel a little wiggle in the rear end (insert adolescent joke here), if I take my foot off of the gas, the vehicle will correct itself. My 95 GMC works that way. But the 2500HD RCLB doesn't. I think that when I take my foot off of the gas, the engine, even at idle, is still sending a lot of torque to the rear wheels which in turn causes them to lock and then move sideways. That combined with the heavy front and light rear end causes loss of control. The 95 doesn't send enough torque to the rear wheels to keep them spinning hard.(it does have the G80).
That's my theory and i'm sticking too it, until someone proves me to be a crackpot. I have been driving in winter conditions for 40 years and this 2500HD is the only vehicle that has tried to kill me.......twice.

@Schurkey I've been on this forum for a while now, and I've always wondered....what the hell is that in your profile pic?

I think that is an Aragon 4004 amplifier

Your theoretical size difference is smaller than the size difference between manufacturers. Skip to 3 minutes in where I measure the tread width on 4 different brand 225/75-16s. So long as the actual tire sizes are close, I'd run it in 4wd without worry. I haven't heard of anyone blowing up their transfer case because they had a tire low - and that would cause a bigger size difference than your theoretical .1%.