We was curious of deciding the best between Yokohama Geolandar X-AT Vs BFGoodrich KO2/ This is an all-terrain tire that provides capable off-road traction and a predictable and responsive off-road ride.
X-AT’s void ratio and tread depth are higher than those of KO2, making it the right choice for off-road use.
These are both all-terrain tires that provide capable off-road traction as well as a responsive and predictable off-road ride. X-AT’s void ratio and tread depth are higher than those of KO2, making it an ideal choice for off-road use.
Table of Contents
Comparison of Firestone Destination AT and BFG KO2
This tire is molded into an aggressive symmetric pattern that has Five Pitch Block Variation with a higher void ratio, which gives it less area to connect with the road, giving it superior off-road traction.
With a higher void ratio, there are wider grooves, which, along with deeper grooves, increases hydroplaning resistance as well. Wider grooves make it easier to remove soft snow and mud.
The thick sidewall protector shoulder protects the tire from impacts and punctures. The higher build quality increases durability and mileage as well as its resistance to treadwear.
KO2 has a relatively closed tread pattern, narrower grooves, and larger tread blocks. Tires with a larger contact patch provide better traction on roads.
With its deep sipes, this tire enables it to move confidently on wet surfaces, as the sipes wipe away water and help the tire to maintain its grip. Rock traction is protected by sidewall armor.
The KO2 tire is also branded with the three-peak mountain snowflake (3PMSF). Having narrow grooves gives this tire a great advantage over on-road driving because it produces less noise.
Comparison of on-road traction:
Due to its higher void ratio, X-AT has a smaller contact patch, making it less attractive for on-road traction.
This is because the smaller contact patch decreases its on-road traction. In wet conditions, the wide grooves and deep sipes allow water to easily pass through, providing better traction.
With KO2, the lower void ratio allows decent contact between the blocks and the road. With maximum contact with the road surface, it has a great advantage on-road, making it a more road-friendly tire.
The narrow grooves and the decent depth of sipes give this tire excellent water drainage, but they are not efficient enough to withstand extreme wet conditions.
Comparison of off-road traction:
Because X-AT tires have wide grooves, mud particles are easily thrown back, clearing the path and improving traction. Also, the aggressive shoulder design with varying lengths helps to evacuate mud and provide a better cornering experience.
In addition to helping to throw heavy mud particles backwards, the wider grooves also increase tire grip, giving it an edge on muddy terrain.
However, KO2 has a lower void ratio than X-AT, making it less effective in mud. Due to the small space between the tread blocks, the mud easily gets stuck in the narrow grooves, resulting in a lower gripping capability. The shoulder design of the KO2 is less effective at mud traction than the X-AT.
The Snow terrain:
The wide grooves on the X-AT make it easy to navigate through snow. As a result of the wide grooves, soft snow is thrown backward, giving the vehicle a great grip and improving its traction. As a result of the smaller contact area, the tire lacks ice traction.
With KO2, the void ratio is not that high, so the tire lacks soft snow traction.
The narrow grooves do throw soft snow backward efficiently, which is necessary for maintaining grip, so the X-AT tire is less effective on snow than this tire due to its lack of self-cleaning ability. Due to its larger contact patch, the tire has a much better ice traction performance than its counterpart, making it an attractive option on icy roads.
The Rock Terrain:
X-AT’s wide grooves and aggressive shoulder lugs with varying lengths improve the biting ability of the tyres so the vehicle can easily crawl over rough terrain.
X-AT’s stone ejectors are very effective at preventing stones from getting trapped inside treads. A thick sidewall protector shoulder protects the tire from punctures while providing a more comfortable ride.
KO2 has a lower void ratio, so it has less grip on rocks for tricky angles. Stone ejectors are not quite as large as those in X-AT, which makes the system less effective at preventing stones from getting stuck in grooves.
Additionally, the built-in quality is not superior to X-AT on rocky terrain. As a result, X-AT is better suited for rock traction than KO2.
Level of comfort:
Since X-AT’s grooves are wider, more air particles are trapped and bounce back and forth against its walls, creating noise on-road. While off-roading, wider grooves act as shock absorbers, making the ride more comfortable.
X-AT tires do not provide adequate comfort due to their wider grooves, which cause a greater number of air particles to be trapped inside the grooves, causing noise when driving at high speeds, thus decreasing their on-road comfort. The wider grooves provide extra suspension against shocks, making it better for off-road use.
Treadwear and Durability:
Since the X-AT has the lowest contact patch, the tire’s rolling resistance, which is the force needed to keep it rolling, is the lowest.
Low rolling resistance also means low treadwear, resulting in higher mileage and durability. An elliptical contact is created by wrapping three polyester body piles around a strong, hexagonal bead, forming the tire’s casing.
KO2 has a larger contact patch, which leads to increased rolling resistance. As a result of higher rolling resistance, the treadwear is higher, which is indirectly related to durability and mileage. It is made from tough materials that enable it to handle rough terrain and make it puncture-resistant.
Final Thoughts on Yokohama Geolandar X-AT Vs BFGoodrich KO2
- The KO2 has better on-road traction than the X-AT.
- The X-AT is superior at off-roading.
- X-AT’s performance in snow and mud is superior to KO2’s.
- The X-AT is much more durable.
- X-AT is more expensive.
Video Comparison of Yokohama Geolandar X-AT Vs BFGoodrich KO2
References and Resources: