ramtd02

depends on how you feel. I personally dont go with weight rating. Simply because a 10 ply tire (E) with a rating of 3195 (stock) will handle the same weight as a 8 ply (D) alot better. The sidewalls are stiffer, so the tire doesnt flex as much. Just my personal opinon!

nsxt

State's rules on safety inspections are obviously State dependent. Some States (like PA) say that the tire must be 'load rated' equivalent or higher than the OEM spec, so a D cannot be used where an E was originally, even if the D is a stronger tire with a higher actual weight capacity.

The reason why PA does it this way is to reduce the burden on inspectors. Confirming 'load rating' is easier than actually reading and summing up the tire carrying capacities then comparing back to GAWR to verify suitablility, which is the procedure described in FMVSS 120. This is a big hole in the PA law since tire size is no longer dictated. For example, a lower carrying capacity 'E' rated 235/80/17 could be used to replace a 265/70/17 'E' tire, and be perfectly legal under PA rules.

Other States have inspection rules that say the tire's weight capacity must be equal to or greater than OEM, thereby allowing any tire which has greater carrying capacity. A P-metic passenger tire could even be subsituted, but if replacing an LT with a P, the P must have 10% higher than OEM spec weight carrying capacity. Many other States just recite FMVSS 120, where cumulative tire weight capacity must be at least GAWR.

djcheez

you should of failed him just for driving a ford. And 235's? Should failed for those bologne skins also, i think they put those tires on go carts