Mickey Thompson STZ's???

Howdy all,

I've been doing some research on AT's to replace the standard Contitrac's on my stock '08 D40. I originally had a preference for Mickey Thompson 5 ribs, however with the closest available being a 265/75/16 (which I believe is illegal on a Nav), I thought I'd narrowed it down to BFG AT's or Bridgy D694's. However......

It seems Mickey Thompson have recently released a new tyre, the STZ. If you've not heard/seen them, here's a link:

Mickey Thompson Tires - Baja Radial STZ

Whilst there's no sizes on the Mickey Thompson site, I did find a list on the Lindsays Tyres site in Vic:

Lindsays Tyres: Mickey Thompson - Mickey Thompson Baja STZ

I believe a 265/70/16 is legal on a Nav (please correct me if I'm wrong), which = WIN.

Has anyone run these yet (in any size), and if so, any impressions on the following:

- Wet road handling
- Dry road handling
- Offroad performance

Many ta's

I'm looking for some new tyres for my D40 as well and have narrowed it down to the Pirelli Scorpions or MT STZ's so i'll be interested to hear of anyone who has these to. The Dunlops that come on the Navaras are scary in the rain so hopefully either of these 2 will be better in that regard and also look the part.

i have stuck this question up in the tyre chat and had no replies.. from what i have heard on the MT STZ's is that they are a much better ride then the old design. better handling, lower noise, holds in the wet, is pretty good in the sand and something to do with the new deign u dont get any tread movement on the road. mickey t im pretty sure garauntee 80000-90000kms out of them but with conditions. im pretty sure they are u have to get the aligned and balanced at a mickey t preferred dealer ever 5000 or 10000kms. 10000kms i would do but every 5000 is b***s***.

i have heard nothing else on them except the $325 price tag i have been given by 2 dealers 1x Tyrepower and other is a GT Radial Dealer.

goodluck
Rusty

A mate was the first in SA to secure the new STZs for his Pardo. Had them for around 2 months now and is very impressed.

I'm done reading thousands of reviews and hearing varying opinions on tyres so i think i'm just going to bite the bullet and get some of these. I rang 1 place today and the 265/70/16 were $340 ech which i think is quite expensive but we only have a few tyre shops in town...

Think im gonna bite the same bullet but look for a cheaper price. But I know ill end up changing my mind Hehe. My bro in law just got bridgestone 694 on his escape and days they are good so I'm sussing those out now aswell. Cooper and mickey t are the only real 2 brands that garaunte mileage.

I just put STZs on and so far they are great. I think the road noise is the same as the bridgestones I had I've been on a couple of tracks and have been really impressed and on the beach I found they had more control and steering than i have ever had before. I'm sure they won't be the perfect mud tire but if you want to stay legal i don't think you can do better.

I've got them on my nav, had them for 2000k's and are great. Can keep up off road against my bro in-laws MTZs (haven't done real slick mud yet), and are perfect on road. I'll get them again for sure.

Thanks for the replies folks; I thought this post had died!!!

Great to hear from the guys who have bought them; thankyou.

Despite my original post, I eventually managed to narrow the choice down to Coopers AT3's and the STZ's. I got quotes for both from around the Goulburn/Queanbeyan/ACT area and the AT3's seem to retail for between $329-$350 each, while the STZ's retail for around $350 each (except for one joker in the ACT who wanted $375).
In reading reviews on both tyres, I found a couple of negative reports on the AT3's wet whether handling and some other reports which seemed to indicate occasional reliability issues with Coopers (including from a friend who's currently running them on his truck and had to fight to have one replaced under warranty). That doesn't make for authoritative data on the Coopers product, but in contrast, all of the posts/write-ups I found from folks with STZ's were positive, indicating they're good on wet tar, handle quite well on dry tar and are also good off-road.
So, the truck will be booked in this week for 5 new boots on Saturday.

I'll post an update to the thread to give a report on how they go.

Well, shelled out for some STZ's last weekend and have done all of about 150km's on them so far. Remembering I was coming from the factory fitted Continental Contitrac's (in a 255/70/16) here's my first impressions of the STZ's (in a 265/70/16):

- Not quite the gain in ground clearance I was expecting compared to the Conti's. On paper the Conti's are 722mm rolling diameter, while the STZ's are 779; so there should be a ground clearance gain of somewhere in the region of 28mm....or a bit over an inch. However, sitting a deflated Conti next to one of the new STZ's, it looks more like 15mm. I'll need to get out of level and a rule on the weekend to be sure. Anyway, no biggie.

- The STZ's have a slightly harsher ride compared to the Conti's, which I presume is a result of running an LT vs passenger construction. Its not made the truck uncomfortable, but you do seem to notice the bumps in the road a little more.

- Out of the box, I'd say there's no more road noise to the STZ's compared to the Conti's. Both tyres were easily drowned out by the engine, radio or a passenger. Even with no background noise, still can't notice them.

- Dry tarmac grip is down on the Conti's , which is to be expected given the big tread blocks and largely unsupported pattern. I used to be able to hook the Nav through round abouts quite nimbly, but the STZ's wander all over the place on the tread. Again, to be expected from a chunky all terrain tyre.

- There's only been one damp day since I purchased them and they seem pretty reasonable on a greasy road (no real standing water, more just damp tar). Probably not a lot to choose from between the STZ and the Conti.....I guess the Conti was a little better, however the STZ's offer up a reasonable level of grip and handle quite predictably. Will be interesting to see what they're like with more standing water.

I've not had a chance to run them on the dirt yet; that comes this weekend.

Overall, very happy with the purchase. As I expected, they're not exactly a tyre I'd stick on my race car, but for an all-terrain tyre, they're definitely better than I expected. Looking forward to giving them a run off road where its an fair prediction that they'll blow the Conti's out of the water.

I'll post another update once I've hit the dirt and then after a few thousand k's (assuming I remember the thread is here).

Just a quick note for STZ owners.

I sent the MT Australia distributors a mail, requesting recommended tyre pressures for STZ's on a D40. I was after a ball park on road pressures, off road pressures and minimum operating pressure. Below is the response:

Thank you for your enquiry on Mickey Thompson Tires. Given that the Navara can carry a heavy load and that the Mickey STZ is a ‘light truck’ construction, we would recommend a starting pressure of 32-34psi. If you are towing or carrying a heavy load then we would recommend the rear tyres to be approximately 40psi and the fronts adjusted if necessary. When travelling off-road the tyre pressures can go as low as 18-20psi but is not needed in most situations. We would recommend a pressure of 24-26psi when off-road. Given that the Mickey Thompson STZ is a light truck construction, the tyre has a stronger internal carcass than most other tyres and therefore has a better resistance to impact damage and puncture repairs. I hope this has been of some assistance and if you have any more questions please reply.

Thanks very much for that I have been running 40 in the rear and about 37 in the front for around 2000km now I do always have a load in the back of about 300kg and so far have seen no wear what so ever.

No problem. The STZ's are my first set of all-terrains and experience with race tyres taught me its worth talking to the manufacturer (or distributor) to get the low down on the best pressures.

So, there it is for posterity in the event anyone else buys them and wants to know.

Good to know.
I still haven't got these yet as a tyre shop has recomended me the Hankook RF10 for what i need and alot of what he told me made sense and they are nearly $100 p/tyre cheaper. How do you find the look of the MT STZ, is it agressive in real life? Any pics of them on your ute?

Yeah, they don't look as agressive as say an ATZ or a muddie, they're a hell of an improvement on the Conti's. I'll take some shots this weekend and get some posted up.

That will be good, thanks

Alrighty, two shots from yesterday, taken while re-inflating after a bit of a drive:

Ye they are definately not as aggresive looking as i thought they would be. Do they have the white lettering on them or was that an option or you got that facing inwards?
Anything else you have found after driving on them some more?

Has your speedo changed any with the differant size of the STZ,s that you put on

NUTSACK said:

Ye they are definately not as aggresive looking as i thought they would be. Do they have the white lettering on them or was that an option or you got that facing inwards?
Anything else you have found after driving on them some more?

Click to expand...

They have lettering which has a bluish kind of paint to it, however its not as obvious as on some other boots out there. The tyre shop put it inwards, though I'd have asked them to anyway had I thought about it ahead of time.

Yeah, a few more observations:

- They definitely lack ultimate grip on dry tarmac when compared to the Contitracs; probably down by 10-15%. This isn't in any way surprising given both the tread pattern and the size of the blocks (they're very tall). If you decide to hussle the truck through a roundabout, you can definately feel it walking around on the tread blocks and it doesn't stick like it did with the Contitrac's (where it stuck surprisingly well). I should make it clear that in daily driving they're fine. I've just had a longtime connection with motorsport and so like to find the limits of such things.

- In wet weather they're definitely better than the Contitracs (which weren't bad). Haven't driven in torrential rain or with huge amounts of standing water, but certainly on a normally wet road, they're very good; plenty of grip, plenty of warning before they let go and very predictable once they've let go. This was a win in my books, as I'd heard some AT's tend to be quite skatey in the wet.

- I've not done a HUGE amount of off road work, but we did probably 100K's on them yesterday on terrain varying from normally logging roads, to smooth but steep climbs, steep descents on a mixture of loose rock and gravel, to a climb on loose rock with a soft dirt base. This last climb was a good benchmark, as the last time we did it with road tyres, it was pretty hairy and it was touch and go whether we'd make the summit. Conditions had changed somewhat, but I feel that the STZ's made a big improvement on the trucks ability to make the climb. In terms of the configuration, I had the pressures at 26 psi as suggested by the MT distributor. The effect was that it made the truck fairly rolly on the tar (as you'd expect) but gave a fabulous ride off road and it probably gave the Nav more grip than it actually needed. You could definitely feel the strength of the sidewalls when compared to the Contitrac's at the same pressure; the truck just rode a LOT better. Next drive (next weekend all going well), I'll only drop them to 30psi (from my 37psi road pressure), as I don't think they needed to be as low as we had them.

- Noise level has increased ever so slight, but still nothing that I'd consider significant. Its generally most obvious on tight corners, but is no way intrusive.

That's about all I can think of at the moment.