Nokian Outpost nAT Size?

[dmc94]

I need Rivian Forums help to decide my next set of tires. I have 32k on my 20" Pirellis and I have about 5k-7k worth of tread remaining. I drive hard on my tires with off-road trips bi-weekly, multiple drag strip visits, and a lead foot, but they have worn very evenly because I NEVER use Conserve mode & I rotate every 5,000-6,000 miles for free at Discount Tire. I have only started to hear droning in the last 2,000 miles or so.

My Pirelli efficiency is 1.8 mi/kWh but this is because I have an 18" Xtrusion rack and RTT that so my actual efficiency without these is about 2.2 mi/kWh (I have done loads testing and data show a 18-20% average loss with my set up).

I want to replace them with the Nokian Outpost nAT (although I'm slightly considering the Toyo Open Country A/T III EV if someone can give me a really good reason why I should).

The problem is deciding which size. There are three to choose from:

• 275/60/20 115H (SL) = $281 ea @ 46 lbs
• LT275/60/20 123/120 (E) = $318 @ 56 lbs
• LT275/65/20 126/123 (E) = $381 ea @ 57 lbs

The 115H is very close to the Pirelli specs of a 116 SL rating and only have a difference of about 300 lbs total payload capacity which is okay with me. My only concern with the 115 is will they be strong enough off-road? If we believe Nokian marketing, then they should be stronger than Pirelli and fine for my use (mix of forest roads and very rocky trails).

Why I'm hesitant to get either LT tire is the extra 10 lbs per tire and the loss in efficiency. RivianTrackr showed a 1.95 efficiency on the Nokian LT 275/65 with zero accessories. Another friend has them and he averaged 2.10 over 3,200 miles on Trip 1, then 2.04 over 1,454 miles on Trip 2. Honestly, these efficiency numbers aren't great it shows the Nokian LT's have a 7-12% loss over the Pirellis. I will accept 5%, but not anywhere close to 10%.

Efficiency is the biggest reason why I am leaning towards the 115H - but are they good enough off-road in the opinion of this Forum? Any input is appreciated!

Sponsored

 

[richpike]

We put the nAT 275/65R20 on our R1S after the Pirellis were done. 500 miles in and couldn’t be happier. Quiet, aggressive, overall excellent tire. Only drawback is exactly what you’ve said - we dropped from 2.14 mi/kWh to 1.94. Less than 10%. IMHO, an excellent trade off for a far more aggressive tire, with ~50% more tread (18/32”). I didn’t want 33” tires, so I didn’t even consider the 115 version.

-Rich

 

[Ohm Boy]

Nokian Tyres are absolutely the best in the world. We have a set of studded Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV my wife’s R1S for winter. We had them for our Teslas before we de-Musk-fied.

 

[dmc94]

We put the nAT 275/65R20 on our R1S after the Pirellis were done. 500 miles in and couldn’t be happier. Quiet, aggressive, overall excellent tire. Only drawback is exactly what you’ve said - we dropped from 2.14 mi/kWh to 1.94. Less than 10%. IMHO, an excellent trade off for a far more aggressive tire, with ~50% more tread (18/32”). I didn’t want 33” tires, so I didn’t even consider the 115 version.

-Rich

Thanks for the input and good to hear about the noise. RivianTrackr did send me a message and said it took about 1,000 miles to break in, but he's now at 8,000 miles on his Nokian's and is at 2.29 mi/kWh, up from 2.25 on his Pirellis. I was a little surprised to hear it was higher, but if it's anywhere close on the LTs then that is excellent. It still doesn't explain the other friend who was getting around the 2's on his road trip... Maybe more mountainous terrain.

Maybe you will start to see an improvement as well in another 500 miles!

 

[WattsUp]

More info from the friend mentioned above:

My R1T has never achieved the efficiency the DMC 94 has seen, or others for that matter, so my numbers may not be a good comparison as my R1T is not as efficient . (VIN low 8000) I swapped my tires to the Nokian at 20,000 miles due to excessive noise and cupping and in anticipation of an upcoming cross country trip.

The numbers above were for the most part in ECO mode. From my comparisons I am seeing the same EFF as the Pirelli’s. I have never reached 2.2 in any mode or tire.

Richpike- what pressure are you running (i’m at 70)

 

[richpike]

Richpike- what pressure are you running (i’m at 70)

I’ve played around a bit. 58 cold and 61-62 warm seem to be the sweet spot. I’ve chalk tested and 60 warm was perfect for that, but that’s about 56 cold and I know it seems crazy to say 2psi matters (although from my autocross days I can say it really does matter), but they felt a little squirrelly at 56 cold on the highway until they warmed up. 58 seemed to fix that. Interestingly, it rides great at anything I’ve tested (48-65). They’re just really comfortable tires.

-Rich

 

[j-Thrice]

For another data point.

I'm up to 3400miles on my nATs. LT275/65/20. Mix of hwy/city commute for the most part except a trip out to the WA Coast and some beach fun, and that ECRC trip up to Lonesome Lake. Keep mine 54/55 psi cold.

Reset my trip computer the day I put them on and have kept it since I was curious about the efficiency difference my truck had vs OEM Pirellis. Reading 2.20kw.

 

[richpike]

For another data point.

I'm up to 3400miles on my nATs. LT275/65/20. Mix of hwy/city commute for the most part except a trip out to the WA Coast and some beach fun, and that ECRC trip up to Lonesome Lake. Keep mine 54/55 psi cold.

Reset my trip computer the day I put them on and have kept it since I was curious about the difference my truck had vs OEM Pirellis. Reading 2.20kw.

Wow! I hope I get there. But even on the OEM Pirellis I never averaged 2.20 . Lead foot.

-Rich

 

[j-Thrice]

Lifetime efficiency for the Pirellis for me was 2.17 before we tossed them at 32000 miles. Honestly, I'm surprised too. But not driving any different, and dont really drive like a grandma. 70 on the hwys.

Maybe because of Summer temps and not having a winter to drag down efficiency yet.

 

[richpike]

Lifetime efficiency for the Pirellis for me was 2.17 before we tossed them at 32000 miles. Honestly, I'm surprised too. But not driving any different, and dont really drive like a grandma. 70 on the hwys.

Yeah - 80+ on the highways for me. Damn square of velocity

-Rich

 

[dmc94]

More info from the friend mentioned above:

My R1T has never achieved the efficiency the DMC 94 has seen, or others for that matter, so my numbers may not be a good comparison as my R1T is not as efficient . (VIN low 8000) I swapped my tires to the Nokian at 20,000 miles due to excessive noise and cupping and in anticipation of an upcoming cross country trip.

The numbers above were for the most part in ECO mode. From my comparisons I am seeing the same EFF as the Pirelli’s. I have never reached 2.2 in any mode or tire.

Richpike- what pressure are you running (i’m at 70)

Hi friend! haha. That's good to know you didn't normally reach that efficiency so it wasn't a big drop.

 

[Kryptonlogic]

Over 8,000 miles on my Nokian Outpost nAT and couldn’t love them more! I’m averaging 2.29 mi/kWh which I find to be great.

 

[mcclajb]

Wow! I hope I get there. But even on the OEM Pirellis I never averaged 2.20 . Lead foot.

-Rich

Please let us know how the next 500 to 1000 miles play out for you with efficiency. The Nokians are on my short list of replacement options. I am currently at 30k miles on the OEM Pirellis, so I may not be far off.

 

[EVTrukHog]

any of you R1T guys have photos of the 20" nATS?

 

[j-Thrice]

any of you R1T guys have photos of the 20" nATS?

This was the day that I had them installed.

Sponsored