An expensive digital gauge...
An expensive digital gauge was used to set the pressure at exactly 12.5 psi on each tire. In reality, the pressure ended up being slightly lower (for all tires) as the drop was done after some pavement driving, which had warmed the tires up. On the other hand, there were times when we drove on pavement for a few miles at "12.5," and consequently increased the pressure by building heat. Still, all tires were subjected to this equally, so there should've been no difference between them.
Our Observations
Finally cutting to the chase, we feel that on pavement and most dirt and dirt/rock trails, you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the Hankook Dynapro ATm and the Toyo Open Country A/T. Most every obstacle and test trail resulted in a tie in our notes, and that's probably exactly what Hankook wanted to achieve: To prove that their lesser-known tire is completely comparable with one traditionally held in high esteem. And if there was a discernible difference, it was usually in the RF10's favor. If Hankook somehow cheated, we have yet to figure out how.
Alright, you may not even care about how those two tires did, but you do want to know how your favorite All-Terrain fared in comparison. Largely, and predictably so, there was no real difference in about two-thirds of the test. But in the cases that really pushed traction and performance to the limit, the BFG stood out. As mentioned, in deep sand, the wider and more conformable tread of the T/A excelled. The same could be said for a particularly twisted-up test hill with loose dirt on top of a fairly firm base-but here the margin was much, much smaller. In a lateral (sidehill) test, the BFG's sharp shoulder should've helped a lot, we thought, but not so. Perhaps a function of contact pressure, the T/A slid a lot more than the others. On a loose, rocky slope, the BFG surprised us by coming in dead last with its wider tread. Again, probably a matter of contact pressure, but these Rovers were pretty damn heavy already.
Lastly, and this is a part of the test we didn't get to witness (although the video is available to see on 4x4tirereview.com, and the tests were monitored by a third party), the road manners of the T/A were nowhere near as good as the other tires. Of course, not everybody does slalom courses and skidpad driving with their four-by, but some of us do have to take an unplanned evasive action at times, and then the cornering abilities of a tire can be crucial. After seeing the slalom video we now know what the "KO" moniker on the T/A stands for-poor video camera.
 All three tires had a sharp...  All three tires had a sharp shoulder edge, which helps with lateral grip on dirt. But so does contact pressure, and perhaps that's why the narrower Hankook and Toyo tires slipped less on this 30-something-degree sidehill. |  Far harder to drive up than...  Far harder to drive up than it looks, this slope of loose rock really surprised us when the wider, more conformable and more aggressive BFG ended up half a car length behind the Toyo, which was right behind the Dynapro RF10. Not exactly what we'd expected. |  While there were quite a few...  While there were quite a few surprising results in this test, the one that perhaps puzzled us the most didn't become apparent until later when gathering the data for this story, looking up the prices at a tire store that sells all three. Expect to pay about $190 for a BFG, $10 less for a Toyo, and another $10 less for a Hankook. Yep, the premium imports can be less expensive. |
If it sounds like we're picking on the BFG All-Terrain, rest assured that we were just as surprised as you probably are to find the Dynapro and Open Country coming out ahead so frequently. And why was this? We've mentioned it in the past and it becomes more and more true as time goes by; tires are very user-need-specific these days. The BFG All-Terrain just wasn't the ideal tire for this test.
If we had to come up with a reason for why the RF10 seemed to have a slight edge over the Open Country every now and then, the answer would be "time." The younger Dynapro design has the advantage of even more sophisticated tread compounds. Either way, we think that for Hankook to meet or beat the chosen competition is an achievement to be proud of.
Specifications
Hankook Dynapro ATm RF10
Size: 265/75R16
Type: Radial
Load range: E
Max load (lb @ psi): 3,415 @ 80
Sidewall plies: Two polyester
Tread plies: Two poly, two steel, two nylon
Approved rim width (in): 7-8
Tread depth (in):16.5/32
Tread width (in): 8.1
Section width (in):10.5
Overall diameter (in): 31.7
Static loaded radius (in): 14.7 (claimed)
Revolutions per mile: 653
Weight (lb): 51.5
Warranty: 50,000-mile tread wear, and road hazard
Test vehicle: Range Rover
Toyo Open Country A/T
Size: 265/75R16
Type: Radial
Load range: E
Max load (lb @ psi): 3,415 @ 80
Sidewall plies: Two poly
Tread plies: Two poly, two steel, two nylon
Approved rim width (in): 7-8
Tread depth (in): 16/32
Tread width (in): 8.25 (measured)
Section width (in): 10.5
Overall diameter (in): 31.7
Static loaded radius (in): 14.1 (claimed)
Revolutions per mile: 659
Weight (lb): 49
Warranty: 40,000 miles, limited tread wear
Test vehicle: Land Rover Discovery
BFGoodrich All-Terrain T/A KO
Size: 265/75R16
Type: Radial
Load range: E
Max load (lb @ psi): 3,414 @ 80
Sidewall plies: Three polyester
Tread plies: Three poly, two steel, one nylon
Approved rim width (in): 7-8
Tread depth (in): 15/32
Tread width (in): 8.5
Section width (in): 10.5
Overall diameter (in): 31.8
Static loaded radius (in): 14.7
Revolutions per mile: 654
Weight (lb): 53
Warranty: 6 years workmanship and materials, prorated
Test vehicle: Land Rover Discovery