Outer Limits 4x4 Board

Hey all

I know theyre pretty dissimilar, but i'm trying to choose my next tyre and im stuck between these two... I'll be getting the swamper in a 32x9.5-15 or the Trep in 31x10.5r15 - so small sizes really, they're going on my sierra.

Basically i want an allrounder as in winter i like to hit clay/mud but in summer it all dries out and becomes rocks over hard clay and granite rock.

Previously ive had cooper stt's - great on rocks, terrible in mud - currently running simex ET's which are the complete opposite - great in mud, terrible on rock!

Obviously the treps are more rock oriented and the TSL more mud oriented - but im after some direct comparisons so i can make a more informed decision. So, whats your thoughts? =)

The only Treps worth getting are the Comp based ones, but they start at a 37

For that size i would go the TSL, as the smaller Treps are fairly average from what i've seen

these two are also total opposites
the swamper is a bais ply and the trep is radial in that size.

imo you cant even compare the two for performance in that size as the treps are almost a road tyre in the smaller radials

Is your fourby going to be street driven? If so treps I have them on my lux and love them.

ajsr wrote:these two are also total opposites

Yup... hence my dilemma =) haha

I know a bias is going to be better, but then the tread pattern still plays a large part.

There is a tyre topic about the Trepador and they guy who wrote the original post was using 31s on a Zook, he reported that they were great. I have bought myself some TSLs in that size for my Jeep but have yet to fit them and take them out for a spin.

Im running baby treps (31in ) on my ifs lux and they are great!!
Even on the road, in the wet, they hang onto the road better than standard muddies which I have had before, ie mtr's & bfgs mud terrains.
They are not as noisey as you would expect them to be, even after a few kms.
Brand new you can barely hear them on the road!
I live them and would difenately buy another set when I have finished with these ones.
I only use them for trips away though, just so I dont use them up on the black stuff.

If you can't decide just run both Treps on the front and TSLs on the rear

SIM79 wrote:If you can't decide just run both Treps on the front and TSLs on the rear

LOL nice =) rotational sizes would be so far out.... hahaha

Thanks for the help - Dexter - be interested to see your thoughts on the TSLs being most of this is regarding treps.

Thanks guys =)

If they are going to be your only set and you drive it every day or big distances then buy the 31in treps.
If you only drive it once a week or have another set of road tyres then buy the TSLs.

I think that's sound (2 sets and swapping), but that being the case, I wouldn't buy a swamper in 9/32 - the party starts with 9/34's.

Daily driving on dedicated off road tyres sucks, but expecting swamper like off road performance from a radial road tyre (and trashing them in the process) isn't a great idea either.

Just my 2c.

Sierras and 9/34's were made for each other: (These are 34 9.5 15's on 15X6" beadlocked rims. Car ran a flat SPOA with no BL.



Steve.

hey steve - i would if i could... but like i said, im engineered and geared for 31s... and its my daily... lol

So even steve, the biggest TSL pimper in the world thinks the trep would be better in the smaller size of 31x10.5 over the TSL in 32x9.5???

No I don't. I think a 31" trep is a road tyre and a 32" swamper is too small for its own good. I think you would be disappointed (possibly in either tyre)

It's irrelevant what size tyre you are geared and engineered for. With swampers on it of any size it's illegal and you're technically uninsured, so if you are willing to take that risk you might as well get them in a useful size.

If you were serious about 32X9 swampers, just get some aggressive mine service type 7.50 R 16's - 80% of the performance for 40% of the money.

Swampers are partially cool because of the cool sizes you can get them in and how specialised they are. Once you compare like size to size ( and a common, cheap size at that) and throw in road/daily use, it's hard to recommend them.

Steve.

fair enough... i understand exactly what you're saying. Still, i've had STT's (road tyres) and they were great on rocks... and i've currently got Simex ETs (offroad tyre) and theyre great in mud. I'm happy with the size of my tyre 31/32" for what i drive and how i drive it - i'm just trying to find the best compromise in tread patterns between mud and rock, so having a taller, skinnier tyre with more ground pressure (the TSL) with a more mud oriented pattern, or alternatively a wider smaller tyre (the Trep) with a more rock oriented pattern...

It does seem though that more people favour the treps - even speaking to some people outside of forums they believe the Trep pattern and compoundo to be superior - but this is all in sizes of 35-37"... nothing in smaller sizes =/

Why have you narrowed it to these 2 tyres??

Treps are a GREAT TYRE......But not in anything under comp size (37) they are average in mud (don't clean well) mediocre on rock (don't bag and grip very well @ 12-18psi) BUT they are not to bad on the black stuff....

Swappers are a sweet tyre.....but not to have as a daily....they will be gone before you know it

If your wanting to have a tyre that is good in mud,rock,clay and on the blacktop, i personally would lean toward something completly different like bighorn,MTZ or similar.

I have had both the tyres you want on a few different cars with the same results....then i bought the bighorns and would never go back as a daily tyre and part/full time play toy

Thats just my 2c, but the price ya pay for tyres these days, no point in spending your money twice.

thanks mate.

i'd narrowed it down to the Trep through everyone raving about them - however like everyones said - only in 35"+ sizes...

I've got no probs about the tyres wearing down quickly, as i only drive 10km to work and back each day (20km round trip) - so while i say its daily driven, its not doing a lot of KM... most of my KM are going to and from tracks =)

I don't mind the look of the bighorn but i can't help think its not aggressive enough? But i've not really seen them in person in a 31 either.

alien wrote:thanks mate.

i'd narrowed it down to the Trep through everyone raving about them - however like everyones said - only in 35"+ sizes...

I've got no probs about the tyres wearing down quickly, as i only drive 10km to work and back each day (20km round trip) - so while i say its daily driven, its not doing a lot of KM... most of my KM are going to and from tracks =)

I don't mind the look of the bighorn but i can't help think its not aggressive enough? But i've not really seen them in person in a 31 either.

I used to have a zook on 31's and now have a cruiser ute with 33's so a slight weight difference and the bighorn works a treat on both...

I was out a few weeks ago and it had been wet for a week or so and heaps of mud and slush and the bighorns were awsome...the only spot they out driven by other tyres was a very deep bog hole and large step up into deep ruts and the only tyre that drove the hole was ET2's, so it was to be expected. But yeah, they have great traction and cleaning ability.

Just another option to look at.

is any one dissing the treps in the smaller sizes?

Zeyphly wrote:is any one dissing the treps in the smaller sizes?

Yep i think they are crap in the smaller sizes
the bighorns or km2's kill them in 31's or under.
the tead is too closed and they clog badly in the clay, they are a great road going muddy however.

Hi , I have been in the tyre industry for years and the same comparasion is above, MTR v's BFG both are mud tyres both are 31, 33,35,37, 205,235 etc but the MTR is better on rock and the BFG is better in mud. This is not due to the tread pattern but the compond, the hard compond is also harder to stop in the wet. Some people say that you get less klms on soft compond tyres than hard componds but in fact the right tyre compond and tread pattern versus the use, pressure and maintance has a large role. The BF is alsume in mud and general 4x4 tracks as you are in the bush in dirt and water, but the mtr is fine in mud and great over the rocks. Where do you drive? BFG, GT radial, TSL, and simex are made of hard componds and are all good in mud over softer componds, where Goodyear, maxxis, hankook, and brigestone are better on rocks as there made of soft componds.

Stated above is that 32" tyres on a suk is a little lame, I have owned and ran allmost every size tyre in radial and bias, And agree that 34"-35" tyres would be good for a well set up suk. But to run bias tyres on road is not to good (done that to) if your only doing small runns on the black stuff, bias will be ok.

I consider that if you run two sets of tyres go with a 235/85 R16 AT and a 34"-35" TSL or simex for mud train and 35" maxxis creepy for rock / mud, a 34" simex will measure the same as a 35" maxxis. The reason for the 235 is infact that it measures the same as a 33" tyre.

If you drive a few klms a week and can only afford one set go a set 255/85 R16 (same measurement as 34-35" tyre) mud terrain in maxxis, hankook, goodyear, etc good all rounder soft compond which on a suk will be better than any hard compond anyway.

wow maxtrax - nice writeup.

Interesting you say simex are a hard compound though? Mine are incredibly soft? well, to the touch... and after a drive theyre very sticky to touch.

The whole argument i should run larger than a 31/32 is still redundant though as im engineered to run that size tyre and it suits my needs just fine - im not going to go a larger size, full stop.

My search still continues =) On another forum it was suggested that a TSL with home-made siping goes great on rocks, i'm kinda swaying towards this given the tread pattern is similar to the simex i currently run and am happy with other than rock traction.

alien wrote:
The whole argument i should run larger than a 31/32 is still redundant though as im engineered to run that size tyre and it suits my needs just fine - im not going to go a larger size, full stop.

If you are worried about staying legal then the Swamper won't work for you anyway as it isn't speed rated here so you could still have problems if you are pulled over.

Most 31's measure smaller than 31" (30.5" or less) but if you want the tallest 31" then the Simex ET is it as they measure around 32".

yeah i know... but a tyre thats not speed rated here doesnt mean its not 'safe' so to speak... i'd sooner have a non-rated tyre fitted than one thats way too big for both my gearing and engineers cert. I'd be more likely to get pinged for larger tyres than speed rated ones.

As stated in the OP - i'm currently running simex ETs in 31x10.5 - i like them on everything except rock where they suck really badly - thats why i started this thread, to see what other options i had (after i'd narrowed it down to my own top 2 based on reviews etc)

255 85 16's are very cool. Shame there aren't more patterns available in that size.

Alien - it doesn't matter that swampers are "unsafe" or not - in fact they are speed and load rated under the DOT system- as are the tyres you have now - they are just not speed rated under our ADR. That's not a safety issue, it's a legality.

Theoretically, if you run up the back of a Ferrari with swampers on and total it, you are 100% uninsured. Your car will be assessed as unroadworthy. Your insurer walks away. You are liable.

It's crap, but that's the rules.

Sure, if you are engineered for a 31 and run a 31 swamper, you might get away with it forever (Dad and I have run swampers since 1992) but if the question is asked, there's no satisfactory answer.

What's the lowest pressure you have run your ET's at? There might be more rock performance in them yet?

Steve.

Steve, i'm actually thinking along those lines... after overlaying the 2 tread patterns over each other (ET and TSL) theres really not that much difference in the real pattern of the tread...

I usually take my simex down to 8psi - i've had more success on my last few trips at 8psi than previously at 15 (of course).

I do run tubes as well, seeing as the simex bead tends to get a LOT of debris embedded in it which constantly gives a slow leak somewhere - im yet to roll the tyre off the rim so thats a plus.

I've also spoken to a few tyre retailers about the TSL and most state that theres a huge shortage right now, one said the production is being moved to china, another said they wont see supply till early next year. This obviously would also affect a decision, if availability isnt until say february, then waiting 3 months for a shipment (given Australia is low on the priorities list thats most likely optimistic).

The more i consider it i think maybe the simex et in 32x9.5-15 with some custom siping might just be more effective, and reliable - and i just accept theres no 'all rounder' that suits my needs.

i was actually tempted to start a TSL vs. ET thread after comparing the two right on top of each other. But i think i'll avoid the confusion =)

So if you are 'LEGAL' by engineer report to run 31-32" tyres you should state that in your topic, and if you are so concerned about this matter then you should also state this in your topic, and you will understand what I am about to say.

A engineers certificate should state speed rating as per tyre enlargement, as suks have 205 R15 standard. Is your car 'Carby S 180 klm' or 'Injected H 210 klm'. The bias TSL you are referring to is not DOT rated but there is a radial on the market that I assure you is not like the bias tyre tread pattern, as in any tyre, along with the trepador radial 31" compared to the sticky. The maxxis in 37 and 40" is in fact a comp spec compound, to say you can (with a finger) move a simex tread is true but a maxxis sticky you can bend, twist etc.

As per aust standards and 'DOT' rated, Nov, 2003: RTA nsw 'any above mentioned remoulded or re-grooved tyres ( as you yourself said) (and is a breach of 'TM' or 'Copy right' trade mark of a manufacturer), must not be fitted to cars, panel vans, or station wagons. Generally re grooved tyres are acceptable on heavy vehicles' and is indicated on the side wall of the tyre as per 'DOT' and aust standards.

'Outer limits4x4.com' is in fact a off road community and generally full of extreme off roaders Australia wide. To slam any member or me, for our suggestions is unfair and morally incorrect (you are asking for info), As compared to other 4x4 sites. Go to them for small, little 4x4 talk. If you require experience, competition proven facts and as the site says 'Outer limits 4X4' not your garden variety in the 4Wd world than ask any one on this site.

The Suki that won 'TUFF TRUCK' 2010 is in fact old friends off mine and they run a minimum of 40" sticky maxxis. And I have ran 37", 38" 40" stickies myself, and as many other people on 'Outer limits'.

Rodifided Suki (SWB sierra 2.6L rodeo motor) in 2003 Nissan trials ran 35" R15 boggers. EXTREME 4X4 WHEELERS here. And a black Holden drover (Suki) ran 44" boggers in 2005 Nissan trials, A blue vitara in TTC 2006 ran 39" Iroc's and a sierra with 46" micky thompsons.

Explain your inquiry a little more to get a more realistic answer.

And I can see that your needs are more tame than others, and you will may be say that 31's are your limits. But some people engineer there cars and have body lifts, larger tyres, turbos, etc other then there engineers report.

alien wrote:

The more i consider it i think maybe the simex et in 32x9.5-15 with some custom siping might just be more effective, and reliable - and i just accept theres no 'all rounder' that suits my needs.

I don't get it, you talk about being engineered for 31's and wanting to stay to that but then you talk about running 32's. If you are going to run a tyre outside of your Engineers report, the reality is it doesn't matter what size or speed rating it has as it is still not on the report if you get checked so just run the best tyre for the job. A little outside or a big outside is still outside your Engineers report and the consequences are the same.

Why don't you run beadlocks and lower pressures and see what the tyres can really do?


Maxtrax, I thought 235/85R16's were equivalent to a 32" and 255/85R16's were equivalent to a 33"

maxtrax wrote:...lots of text....

Whoa, dude i never slammed or shut down anyone... and i thanked you for your reply.

cj: 31/32 isnt too big of a difference and won't affect my gearing. I know thres no difference legally in 32 or 40" but i'd like to keep it close. I've considered beadlocks MANY times, but having mechanical ones is just cop bait so i could only run internals - and i've not heard solid good reviews on them to risk running them.

My internals have worked fine.

On the Suzuki with bias tyres it seems that really low pressures work well on the technical stuff and by that I mean lower than 8psi which is why you need to look at beadlocks to get the most out of your tyre. At 15psi you weren't far off road pressure.