IROK 42's vs 39.5 Picts!

[FrankenRover]

We have two new sets of IROKs in the shop and I thought I would post some comparo picts of them together.

This is a pict of (L to R):

1. Mounted 42x17" IROK (with about 2 psi on a WE beadlock)
2. Mounted 12.5R20 Michelin XL (on a mog rim)
3. Unmounted 39.5x20" IROK
4. Unmounted 42x17"

Hope this is worthwhile to someone.

Billster

[FrankenRover]

Unmounted 42x17" and 39.5x20" side by side.

The lugs on the 42 are much bigger and deeper. The tread pattern is much flatter as well. The side lugs are especially larger than the 39.5's. Interestingly the sidewalls of the 39.5's are much thicker than the 42's (although the 20" version may have something to do with that).

Billster

[FrankenRover]

The lugs side by side (right is the 42)

Billster

[FrankenRover]

Side profiles (39.5x20 on left)

Billster

[FrankenRover]

Pirate salute from KC.

Billster

[103"cj5]

Awsome pics!
i was just bebating with myself which tire to go with, and you made up my mind!
cheers!
(And happy new year)!

but, you think that the thinner sidewall is just something to do with the 20" rim? maybee the 16.5 will be better i hope.
thanks again.

[FrankenRover]

Last one with the 39.5's on Puffdragon's 404.

Billster

[BrettM]

so do the 39.5s measure big or the 42s measure small, cause that is not 2.5" difference

[wngrog]

Originally Posted by BrettM

so do the 39.5s measure big or the 42s measure small, cause that is not 2.5" difference

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showt...highlight=irok

Here is more on the subject. The 39.5's are big and teh 42s are the same as TSLs.......at trail pressure mine are 40's.

[pmaddy]

I am confused the pictures at the begining of this thread vs. the ones in this link. The link below makes the difference between the 42 and the 39.5 look fairly big while in the pictures above they look to be within an inch of eachother.

http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/show...&highlight=irok

Does anyone have a true measurment comparison between the 42x14x17 and the 39.5x13.50x17?

I am trying to decide between the 42 and the 39.5?

[Jare]

Can someone give info how the 39,5" IROKs handle if they sees slippery mud/clay? Do they pack up badly from the center lugs or clean up quite good? I've heard lot of good things about them on rocks and on slippery rocks too, but sometimes our track might go trough clay or mud and would be good to know how they work in that too.

Any videos available of this kind of situation?????

[Stinger124]

Whats the weight difference between the two??? And, whats the price difference ??

[ole' manche']

Originally Posted by Jare

Can someone give info how the 39,5" IROKs handle if they sees slippery mud/clay? Do they pack up badly from the center lugs or clean up quite good? I've heard lot of good things about them on rocks and on slippery rocks too, but sometimes our track might go trough clay or mud and would be good to know how they work in that too.

Any videos available of this kind of situation?????

I run the 39.5s on my rig and here in Alaska the majority of the trails are dirt covered roots/rocks/mud. When we get rain, or in the spring there is a layer of slop on the trails. I was skeptical when I first got my IROKs because there wasnt much tread depth.

I am impressed with their cleaning ability and I think that is because of the large voids in the tread.

Another advantage that I found was that when my buddys rig with 39.5 boggers got stock (especially going up hill) the boggers would dig down quickly where as the Iroks (obviously less agressive) wouldnt dig to china as quickly.

My next set will be the 42's because of the deeper tread and hair bit more width.

I would recommend the 39s though for a trail only rig.

Good snow tire to.

[dotrappe]

KC, did you do your hair up for that picture?

The 39.5's look right at home on the 404, but the 42's just look nasty next to bill's ride!

See ya friday sucka!

[pmaddy]

What is the exact height measurement of your 39.5's

Originally Posted by ole' manche'

I run the 39.5s on my rig and here in Alaska the majority of the trails are dirt covered roots/rocks/mud. When we get rain, or in the spring there is a layer of slop on the trails. I was skeptical when I first got my IROKs because there wasnt much tread depth.

I am impressed with their cleaning ability and I think that is because of the large voids in the tread.

Another advantage that I found was that when my buddys rig with 39.5 boggers got stock (especially going up hill) the boggers would dig down quickly where as the Iroks (obviously less agressive) wouldnt dig to china as quickly.

My next set will be the 42's because of the deeper tread and hair bit more width.

I would recommend the 39s though for a trail only rig.

Good snow tire to.

[ole' manche']

My 39.5 x 13.5 x 16 on 16 x 10 black steels, 4kish rig, 5 pounds in them measure 38.5 inches tall. 90% tread.

My spare which is new, mounted on the same rim, with 15 pounds or so in it measures closer to 39.5 (no weight of the rig obviously).

[Red Ibex]

So can the Michelins stand proud in that company - or are they out-classed ?
Here is the UK the Mchelins are available, sometimes 2nd hand, but the Irok's are way too spendy.
I'm looking to upgrade from 10.5R20 to 12.5R20's when the right deal smacks me in the face :-)

Andy
http://www.marshallsay.com/MogLite

[osmtdi2000]

That's an AWESOME thread!

My friends run 39.5 radial iroks for the snow and I'm looking at getting some 42's. The pics are great to show how square the 42's are. How do they bag mounted? Does the sidewall wrinkle?

[tacoma73]

Awesome enough to bring it back from the dead eh?

[94stepsideford]

Originally Posted by tacoma73

Awesome enough to bring it back from the dead eh?

apparently, but while we're here, I should have gotten 42's. They make my 39.5's look stoopid.