Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

IROKS

Discussion in 'The Garage' started by leadfoot067, Jul 31, 2003.

  1. leadfoot067

    leadfoot067 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Posts:
    1,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    puyallup, washington
    anybody got the 39,s yet?? they seem awful cheep /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif..wondered if they are any good /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
     
  2. Silver84k5

    Silver84k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Posts:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hillsboro Oregon
    the price of them caught my eye too... im still waiting to hear how the perform.... but it seems like the tread is fairly shallow.
     
  3. mudhog

    mudhog THEGAME Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2000
    Posts:
    17,899
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    portland oregon
    i plan on getting the new 39.5x13x16's as my next set of tires /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  4. Paxx

    Paxx 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2003
    Posts:
    1,405
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    All Over Western Canada
    What is the price on em?
     
  5. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,188
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    About 40 bones cheaper than TSL's (each)...but then again the IROK's have 6/32 less tread depth and are 2 inches narrower. I'm going with the TSL's myself.

    Rene
     
  6. mudhog

    mudhog THEGAME Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2000
    Posts:
    17,899
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    portland oregon
    they have not listed a price for the 39.5x13x16in ones yet /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif
     
  7. mudhog

    mudhog THEGAME Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2000
    Posts:
    17,899
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    portland oregon
    [ QUOTE ]
    About 40 bones cheaper than TSL's (each)...but then again the IROK's have 6/32 less tread depth and are 2 inches narrower. I'm going with the TSL's myself.

    Rene

    [/ QUOTE ]
    i would to but they dont offer anything bigger than a 38in tsl in 16in rim size and only a 38.5x11x16in bogger /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif
     
  8. wayne

    wayne 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2001
    Posts:
    6,178
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Carlisle, Pa
    Here is what I have heard on them: They are to soft for a daily driver. They will ware out quick on the street. As far as traction they are great on the rocks. Have not heard much on how well they are in the mud.
     
  9. yunit

    yunit 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2000
    Posts:
    3,068
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Oakland, NJ
    Plus, I think the tread pattern is too open. I will be satisfied once I grove my 42's.
     
  10. Mudzer

    Mudzer 1/2 ton status Author

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    3,639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    I've got the first set of 40's that came off the mold. I have one good wheeling trip on them and really can't form an opinion just yet, but heres what I learned so far.

    They worked real good on muddy trails here in Missouri. There were several uphill climbs I did as well as theBigdaddyof2 with his comparable 40" swampers. I would have to say, they went everywhere his did. One noteable difference was the Irok seemed to clean out better in the sticky stuff without wheelspin. Prolly from the larger voids. Our trucks are so similar its a very even comparo. His 40"s appear wider, but are actually the same sectional width. Tread width is narrower on the Irok. Tread depth issue is a mute point in my book. Most of you drive around with tires with less tread than my new Irok's have and never complain of performance until they are bald. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif It is important for tread life though - so I get your point. I did trails mostly with loose rock - so no accurate rock data at the moment either. All I can say is - I wheeled all weekend and did not even think about my tires. They performed perfectly and never let me down. With the scooped outer lugs, they <font color="brown">Fling Poo</font> nicely! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

    I drive mine to and from the trails - mounted on beadlocks with zero balance weight. For being a Bias tire, they ride pretty good compared to my 38" TrXus Radials. They are lighter than comparable tires of size by at least 20 pounds. I dont have accurate data on weights - I was in too big of a hurry when installing them.

    [​IMG]

    Scooped lugs:

    [​IMG]

    So, in summary - If you want a tire that will go as good as a swamper in a lighter package, GO For it! /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  11. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,188
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    [ QUOTE ]
    i would to but they dont offer anything bigger than a 38in tsl in 16in rim size and only a 38.5x11x16in bogger

    [/ QUOTE ]

    So run 15's...it ain't a big deal. 16" is the absolute last rim size I'd ever run. No good sizes of anything available...

    Rene
     
  12. leadfoot067

    leadfoot067 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Posts:
    1,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    puyallup, washington
    well i have 36sx swampers now...i went with the sx for the extra sidewall thickness..so it would seem reasonable to think with the irok lighter weight the sidewalls will be thinner?? and that i dont like /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif i already had to patch and tube one sidewall hole in my sx...
     
  13. Mudzer

    Mudzer 1/2 ton status Author

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    3,639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    [ QUOTE ]
    well i have 36sx swampers now...i went with the sx for the extra sidewall thickness..so it would seem reasonable to think with the irok lighter weight the sidewalls will be thinner?? and that i dont like /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif i already had to patch and tube one sidewall hole in my sx...

    [/ QUOTE ]

    That's an assumption - the sidewalls are as thick as any other Swamper. The IROK is a 6 and 8 ply rated tire where your SX is 4 and 6. So, it would be reasonable to assume your tire will cut easier than mine. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif Maybe, thats why you had to patch them.
     
  14. leadfoot067

    leadfoot067 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Posts:
    1,563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    puyallup, washington
    yes it is an assumption...figured they had to take weight of from somewhere..i dunno guess i need to go check them out in person /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  15. mudhog

    mudhog THEGAME Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2000
    Posts:
    17,899
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    portland oregon
    ya but then i have to buy new rims /forums/images/graemlins/eek.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif /forums/images/graemlins/rotfl.gif
     
  16. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,188
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    You could sell the old ones and not have to spend much at all. Rock Crawlers are pretty cheap.

    Rene
     
  17. sled_dog

    sled_dog 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2002
    Posts:
    16,870
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I'd say they lost the weight in the less tread. THere are bigger gaps in between tread lugs vs a super swamper sx. I saw them first hand at Bloomsburg and the tread doesn't look too shallow in person like it does in pictures. I still look at pictures and say it looks like nothing but having seen it in person I know thats not true. They look like pretty much every used super swamper I've seen in my life, tread depth wise that is.
     
  18. TrcksR4ME

    TrcksR4ME 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2002
    Posts:
    2,482
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle, WA 98103
    I am assuming these were designed more for rocks than other types of wheeling? If so I would guess that there is less tread depth because rock crawler types dont run their tires until they are bald, don't they (heard this somewhere) get rid of them when the edges are rounded off?? Maybe this is wrong or f'd up info, but based on that you wouldn't need as much tread depth if you aren't gettin use out of it /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif
     
  19. Mudzer

    Mudzer 1/2 ton status Author

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    3,639
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Missouri
    I just talked to Interco and found out some real good information concerning the tread depth.

    This tire is a Primary Service Application meaning, its intended to be used for RockCrawling but of course, Interco seems to "grab" other terrain types when a new design is molded. It's like the Bogger - "the Bogger is like a Drag tire for Mud". By design, the Bogger is made for forward momentium in Mud and lateral traction is not of concern. It just worked out that these tires also worked in other types of terrain, but you still have to use "Common Sense" when using a tire in terrain other than what it was designed for. You would not dive into a mud pit with your all terrains and expect the same performance as a Bogger would you? Common sense tells me I would not get very far with low void, non cleaning tires in the goo.

    Natually Interco progresses with each new design. The "borrow" the ideas that work from other designs in the past and adapt them to their new design. They also listen to the public, heres an example.

    About the IROK and its shallower tread depth. Some of the competitors in the Rockcrawling world said they needed the "lightest tire available". Although Interco had a different philosophy on this design, you have to listen to these competitors - they usually know what they need. Where they saved weight? They created higher voids in the tread pattern. They also shallowed up the tread a bit. What did this do? It provided a lighter tire and the open voids allow the tread to grip and find traction better than a tire with lesser voids. Another way they saved weight all the while adding a traction aid - they added side wall lugs, but hollowed them out to save weight. The reason the larger lugs on the sidewalls are curved is so they grip rock better and hold onto it. A straight lug on the side, doesn't tend to grip a rock - they slide off.

    Why are the IROK's cheaper than traditional Swampers? When you have higher voids and shallower tread depth, it also makes the price come down. Rubber costs just like a pound of hamburger. The more you get, the more it costs you.

    This tire is a bias design, so you will not get that torque split like traditional radials either.

    This is information from the source, so take it however you want. /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  20. Silver84k5

    Silver84k5 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Posts:
    3,769
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hillsboro Oregon
    good info, Thx....

    How soft are they compared to a bogger?

    i assume with the less tread depth, these tires wont chunk as bad as boggers.
     

Share This Page