Come on, it's all about fun, is it?
I'll stick with the ATs since the tires do a lot to burn more or less fuel. But if someone likes the MT look, why not.
Because they perform like crap in pretty much every condition other than mud.
1. Heavier, so worse fuel economy.
2. Heavier, so worse acceleration.
3. Heavier, so longer braking distance - making them less safe for you and those around you.
4. Terrible traction on-road in all winter conditions (snow, ice) - so less safe for you and those around you.
5. Terrible traction on wet pavement - so less safe for you and those around you.
My comments about increased weight are most relevant to the larger tire sizes: 35s and 37s - which are common here in the American West.
A 35-inch Nitto MT tire weighs 81 pounds (just the tire - not including the wheel); a 37-inch MT weighs 88 pounds.
In contrast, a 35-inch BFG KO2 weighs 68 pounds. That is a
huge difference in un-sprung weight and rotational mass. Most people putting on big tires make no upgrades to their axles or brakes. I prefer not to be in front of these guys coming down a steep winding canyon...
All these downsides are a lot to sacrifice to "look cool". But I never said people
couldn't run MTs, I just said it was nuts - unless the benefits outweigh the costs. As I wrote in the previous post, nothing really works in deep mud - except an MT, and MTs are also better in the rocks.
This is from Discount Tire, if you happen to think I'm smoking crack:
Mud terrain tire pros
Unrivaled off-road and mud traction
Reinforced sidewalls are tough enough to withstand sharp or jagged rocks off-road
Reliable for off-roading excursions in the summer, spring or fall
Mud terrain tire cons
Noisy on paved roads
Less traction in the rain than other off-road tires
Shorter tread life
More expensive than other off-road tire options
Not effective in cold weather
Less fuel efficient than other tires
Usually don’t include a manufacturer warranty
Source: