Yokohama Geolandar X-AT vs BFGoodrich KO2

Both are all terrain tires that provide capable off-road traction combined with a responsive and predictable off-road ride. Void ratio and tread depth of Geolandar is higher than KO2, making it a better choice for off-roading.

While BFG KO2’s tread depth and the void ratio are comparatively lower which allows higher contact area with surface, improving its on-road traction.

The built-in quality and design of Geolandar X-AT are specifically made for off-road rides.

Yokohama Geolandar vs BFG KO2 – Overview:

Yokohama Geolandar X-AT

Vs

BFG KO2

The Yokohama Geolandar design is very similar to that of Falken AT3W.

Geolandar’s innovative compound is molded into the aggressive symmetric pattern that features “Five Pitch Block Variation” along with a higher void ratio, giving this tire less area to connect with the road, making its off-road traction superior.

The higher void ratio means wider grooves which along with deeper helps to wipe water easily and increase the hydroplaning resistance as well.

The wider grooves help to remove soft snow and mud easily.

The thick sidewall protector shoulder protects the tire against impacts and punctures.

The higher built quality not only increases its strength against treadwear but also improves its durability and mileage.

On the other side the BFG KO2 has a comparatively closed tread pattern, the grooves are narrower and tread blocks are larger.

The higher contact patch enables the tire to provide higher traction on road.

This tire has deep sipes that help it to move confidently on wet surfaces as sipes wipe away the water, helping the tire to maintain grip.

Sidewall armor protects this tire from cuts during rock traction.

KO2 tire is also branded with the three-peak mountain snowflake (3PMSF) symbol.

Narrow grooves give this tire a great advantage over on-road driving because it produces less noise.

On-Road traction comparison:

Geolandar Yokohama X at
Yokohama X AT

The higher void ratio present in Yokohama X-AT decreases its contact patch, making it less attractive for on-road traction.

Because the lower contact patch decreases its on-road traction.

On wet roads, the wide grooves along with deep sipes allow water to easily pass through them, providing improved traction that allows great on-road wet traction.

In the case of KO2, the lower void ratio allows decent contact between the blocks and the road.

Due to maximum contact with the surface, it has a great advantage on-road, making it a more on-road-friendly tire.

The Narrow grooves and the decent depth of sipes give this tire great capacity to let water pass through but are not efficient enough to handle extreme wet conditions.

Side Note: For better on road traction than BFG KO2, we recommend The Cooper AT3 and a hybrid tire, the Nitto Ridge Grappler.

For off road consider, Toyo AT3 and the famous Goodyear DuraTrac. They both are again better than KO2 in off-roading.

You can compare them both as well: Toyo AT3 vs Goodyear Duratrac.

Traction on Mud:

Yokohama XAT off road
Yokohama X-AT off road

As Yokohama Geolandar X-AT has wide grooves so mud particles are easily thrown back, clearing the path and improving traction.

The aggressive shoulder design with varying lengths also helps to evacuate mud and provide better cornering experience.

The wider grooves not only help to throw heavy mud particles backwards, easily but also increase its gripping strength, giving the tire a great edge over muddy terrain.

On the other hand, KO2 has a lower void ratio compared to X-AT, making the tire lesser effective in mud.

KO2 off roading in mud
KO2 off roading in mud

The narrow grooves hinder the navigation through the mud due to lower space between its tread blocks, the mud easily gets stuck inside, making its gripping capability lower.

The shoulder design of KO2 is lesser effective at mud traction as compared to X-AT.

Snow terrain Performance:

The wider grooves of X-AT allow it to navigate through snow easily. The wide grooves throw soft snow backward, giving the vehicle a great grip during the ride, therefore, improving its traction. The tire lacks ice traction due to the smaller contact area which is not sufficient to provide the necessary grip.

In the case of KO2, the void ratio is not that higher which makes the tire lack the soft snow traction.

The narrow grooves do throw soft snow backward efficiently, which is necessary to maintain the grip, therefore, the self-cleaning ability of this tire lacks in comparison with the X-AT which makes it less effective on snow.  Whereas the ice traction capabilities of the tire are much superior to its counterpart due to its higher contact patch, making it an attractive choice on icy roads.

Rockt Terrain Performance:

X-AT has wide grooves and aggressive shoulder lugs with varying lengths, this improves the biting ability of tire and so the vehicle is able to easily crawl on rocky terrain. Stone ejectors of X-AT are also superb at effectively avoiding the stones from getting trapped inside the tread. Thick sidewall protector shoulder guard the tire against punctures and gives a more comfortable ride.

The KO2 has a lower void ratio hence the grip for tricky angles is not great on rocks. Stone ejectors are not quite large as that of X-AT, which makes it lesser effective against avoiding the stones from getting stuck into the grooves. The built-in quality is also not superior to X-AT for rocky terrain. This makes X-AT more suitable than KO2 for rock traction.

Comfort level:

X-AT has wider grooves which cause more particles of air to be entrapped and bounce back and forth against its walls, making noise on-road. But during off-roading wider grooves act as shock absorbers making the ride more comfortable during the off-road journey.

The comfort level of the X-AT tire is not satisfactory due to wider grooves compared to other tire, which causes greater number of air particles to be stuck inside the grooves, creating noise while moving at high speed, hence, decreasing its on-road comfort level. It is better at off-road comfort due to its wider grooves providing extra suspension against shocks.

Durability and treadwear:

X-AT has the lower contact patch making the tire’s rolling resistance minimum, which is the force required to keep the tire rolling. Due to low rolling resistance, the treadwear is also low, making its durability and mileage higher. X-AT internal construction includes three polyester body piles wrapped around a strong, hexagonal bead to form the tire’s casing and create an elliptical contact.

In the case of KO2, the contact patch is higher increasing rolling resistance. Due to higher rolling resistance, the treadwear is high which is indirectly proportional to durability and mileage. Ut is made up of tough material to tackle rough terrains and this quality also makes it puncture resistant.

Summary:

  • In terms of on road traction, KO2 performs better than X-AT.
  • X-AT is more superior at off roading.
  • X-AT performance is way better in snow and mud as compared to that of KO2.
  • X-AT is way better in terms of durability.
  • In terms of price, X-AT costs more.