This MT Tread Pattern is Everywhere: Discuss - Page 2 - JeepForum.com
Search  
Sign Up   Today's Posts
User: Pass: Remember?
Advertise Here
Jeep Home Jeep Forum Jeep Classifieds Jeep Registry JeepSpace Jeep Reviews Jeep Gallery Jeep Clubs Jeep Groups Jeep Videos Jeep Events Jeep Articles
Go Back JeepForum.com > General Technical Discussions > Tires & Wheels > This MT Tread Pattern is Everywhere: Discuss

NEW Smittybilt Gen 2 9.5 winch at JeepHut.comEnd of Summer Sale, 20% OFF!FS: Wrangler RGB Multicolor Fog Light LEDs: Awesome Effect

Reply
Unread 08-24-2013, 06:36 PM   #16
tjkj2002
Registered User
2002 KJ Liberty 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschi772 View Post
MT/Rs are still classified as MT tires. They're not highway tires; they're not touring tires; they're not street performance tires; they're not winter/snow tires; they're not AT tires; they are MT tires.
MT/R's are not mud terrians,there extreme terrian tires and originally designed for the military.

Maximum Traction / Reinforced is what MT/R stands for.Same concept as the new MT/R Kevlars.

__________________
'02 Liberty sitting on 35" tires,HP44,RockJock60,and AtlasII t-case
tjkj2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-24-2013, 08:14 PM   #17
Anticanman
Follow me
 
Anticanman's Avatar
1994 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ripon, California
Posts: 19,229
If we could be civil, that would be greeeeat!
__________________
Luck Favours The Prepared
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Anticanman is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:01 AM   #18
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLADE View Post
You'll have to excuse mschi772, he doesn't like people participating in a discussion when he is trying to lecture the forum. You have to understand that he is smarter than everyone else and there is nothing you or anybody else has to add that is on his level.

Just tell him how smart he is and that you'll never be on a level high enough to participate in his threads.
That's uncalled for.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:02 AM   #19
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anticanman View Post
If we could be civil, that would be greeeeat!
Right on.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:21 AM   #20
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
I've seen MT used to mean maximum traction, and many more times used to mean mud terrain. Why argue about it? Just because one tire company uses it to mean one thing, and another uses it to mean another, doesn't seem that important to me. We know what people at forums mean when they say MT.

Some tire companies say aggressive all terrain, and some say hybrid, when referring to an intermediate level of aggressiveness.

Who cares about semantics when we all know what we mean?

===

As others have said, tire companies some times buy or sell designs, or copy them. In addition to that, consider the history/evolution of MTs.

If you look at the old military treads, they were MT (whichever use of MT you prefer) with outer treads at right angle to tire rotation, and inner tread parrallel to rotation.

IMO the next logical design was to angle the treads to help on road noise and a smoother ride. That is 4 rows angled. So almost all MT are 4 rows angled. First they angled the center treads. Later designs also angled the outer treads. Angled tread is more highway friendly and still works off roads fairly well.

IMO the next logical step was to add a little siping, and/or to play with tread shapes.

That includes alternating the lengths of outer treadblocks because this reduces noise (especially if 3 different lengths) and increases mud traction and self cleaning (especially if 3 different lengths). Even just 2 different lengths helps.

At some point, with computer designs, the tread block sizes became alternating 2 different sizes. Recent designs 3 different sizes. This reduces highway noise.

Most MT still are 4 treads wide because that is the most treads wide that fits if the treadblocks are large. The Hankook MT has 6 (smaller) tread blocks wide. So it, and some others, have departed from the traditional 4 blocks wide.

Personally, I prefer 5 or 6 (smaller) treadblocks wide (the more the better). So if I bought an MT, it'd be Hankook MT or some other with 5+ tread blocks wide. Though when more than 4 tread blocks wide, one could question if it's an MT or a hybid (aka aggressive all terrain).

The more blocks wide, the better the lateral traction on all terrains, and better the Winter traction. Also, more blocks means smaller tread blocks, which is more highway friendly, gives more Winter traction, and is closer to being a hybrid/aggressive AT, or is a hybrid/aggressive AT.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 06:53 AM   #21
mschi772
Web Wheeler
 
mschi772's Avatar
1997 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 2,068
Nice little rundown, Charley. As you know, I'm more of a mild & street guy instead of an MT guy, but I've scrutinized mountain bike tire options for years. I know that's a very different animal (narrow, very different functions in the front/rear, much smaller forces to deal with, rotation is a non-issue, directional or non directional patterns equally easy to use), but what I know from that does make me feel like more, smaller tread blocks reduces mud effectiveness (assuming smaller gaps between the blocks as well). I don't know squat about the Hankook, but whenever I've seen it, that has been my thought (also that they must be loud on the road). Maybe auto tires don't follow the same rules; heck, even some bike tires like to defy logic for better or for worse. Kumho's MT, and the red-letter General Grabber come to mind as tires that really stand-out as well.

As you and Dave have done to an extent, maybe the key to understanding some of this is to understand the reasons for the little differences within these tires or to look at why the other tires (MTR K, Kumho, Hankook, etc) do it their way instead.

I'm glad you brought-up road noise. That makes a lot of sense in a lot of places on these tires, and I hadn't really given it much thought because my personal thinking when designing an MT tire wouldn't give road noise much attention since I feel that anyone buying an MT tire wouldn't be spending a bunch of time on the street and would be more concerned with their off-road performance. There are a lot of people who DD on their MTs, and there are a lot of "posers" out there, so I can see how road noise is still a priority here.
__________________
My 96 XJ is for sale in the event you want something to restore or build into a wheeling rig. Sale ad is HERE.
mschi772 is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 09:52 AM   #22
Jerry Bransford
Do it right or not at all
 
Jerry Bransford's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Escondido, California, California
Posts: 60,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschi772 View Post
I may be wrong, but my understanding of tire categories is that MT = Maximum Traction (as opposed to AT = All Terrain).
MT has stood for mud terrain since time began. The maximum traction term came around when Goodyear introduced the MT/R where their letters stood for Maximum Traction/Reinforced. Goodyear's first generation of MT/R wasn't even all that good in mud, their second generation MT/R which is now kevlar reinforced is better in mud. I'm on my third set of MT/Rs, two of the first generation & now on the kevlar version.
__________________
Getting Savvy...

Coolest offroad magazine ever! CRAWL Magazine

When you have a choice, buy American.

Jerry Bransford is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 09:55 AM   #23
SLADE
Registered User
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: 26537
Posts: 1,799
The center of the tire is laid out for on road comfort and performance, The outside lugs are for offroad traction. There are variations ranging from A/T tires all the way to Super Swamper TSLs.

Goodyear MT/R Kevlar is based on the same principles only in an asymmetrical layout.
__________________
2014 Wrangler JKU
2013 Wrangler JK
2004 Wrangler TJ on LEAFS
2001 Dodge Ram 2500
SLADE is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:14 PM   #24
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Bransford View Post
MT has stood for mud terrain since time began. The maximum traction term came around when Goodyear introduced the MT/R where their letters stood for Maximum Traction/Reinforced. Goodyear's first generation of MT/R wasn't even all that good in mud, their second generation MT/R which is now kevlar reinforced is better in mud. I'm on my third set of MT/Rs, two of the first generation & now on the kevlar version.
I totally 100% agree with you.

Goodyear is the original source of MT meaning Max Traction. Now I've seen some other brands copycating that. But traditionally MT means Mud Tire, and most brands still use MT to mean Mud Tire.

In addition to how terms are used by tire company ad execs, I'd argue that terms used by people at JF and other forums matters as much or more.

In a similar story, the term "hybrid" was used by JF members and people at other forums long before Goodyear ad execs invented the phrase "aggressive AT" to mean the same thing. Cooper and some other brands use the term "hybrid" in their descriptions of commerial traction tires.

What annoys me is that whenever Goodyear ad execs invent new marketing phrases, soon the newer, younger forum members are telling the older veterens they're using the wrong word because Goodyear uses some other word, or that GY uses the same word to mean something else.

Although I may be somewhat new to this forum, I have been around 4x4 forums for many years, which is why I have that perspective.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:24 PM   #25
KKiowaTJ
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 3,456
Most of the tires listed, Are made by the same company. The MTZ was the first non traditional m/t that came out and had great results. My first three sets lasted well over 40k and my last set netted 46k.

The STT came out around the time of the toyo, They both are harder compound, Strong and heavy. They are the two that look the same out of all listed.

But as it is, Cooper tire in ohio makes all L/T tires for M/T, Pro Comp, And a few more on you're list along with its own 'STT'.

Cooper, Toyo, Nitto, Goodyear make most of what you have listed and its mainly the Cooper and Goodyear that sell and have the most knock-offs, off brand, House brand etc.

When M/T sold out to cooper, The STT came out not too long after and they ran with that pattern.

But they are all made to said company spec's, Just funny how most are made under the same roof. Toyo has a plant in Atlanta so they can make their house brand as well. Not sure about Nitto, But good tires non the less.
__________________
YJ, TJ, XJ, ZJ..... Too many Jeeps!
KKiowaTJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 12:31 PM   #26
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschi772 View Post
Nice little rundown, Charley. As you know, I'm more of a mild & street guy instead of an MT guy, but I've scrutinized mountain bike tire options for years. I know that's a very different animal (narrow, very different functions in the front/rear, much smaller forces to deal with, rotation is a non-issue, directional or non directional patterns equally easy to use), but what I know from that does make me feel like more, smaller tread blocks reduces mud effectiveness (assuming smaller gaps between the blocks as well). I don't know squat about the Hankook, but whenever I've seen it, that has been my thought (also that they must be loud on the road). Maybe auto tires don't follow the same rules; heck, even some bike tires like to defy logic for better or for worse. Kumho's MT, and the red-letter General Grabber come to mind as tires that really stand-out as well.

As you and Dave have done to an extent, maybe the key to understanding some of this is to understand the reasons for the little differences within these tires or to look at why the other tires (MTR K, Kumho, Hankook, etc) do it their way instead.

I'm glad you brought-up road noise. That makes a lot of sense in a lot of places on these tires, and I hadn't really given it much thought because my personal thinking when designing an MT tire wouldn't give road noise much attention since I feel that anyone buying an MT tire wouldn't be spending a bunch of time on the street and would be more concerned with their off-road performance. There are a lot of people who DD on their MTs, and there are a lot of "posers" out there, so I can see how road noise is still a priority here.
As a general rule, larger tread blocks means larger voids, which is better in/on mud.

With larger tread blocks, there's only room for 4 blocks wide. IMO

However, larger tread blocks means less edges, which means less traction on wet pavement, packed snow, and ice. Hence MT are traditionally not ideal on those surfaces. To try to improve this, some add sipes, some add silica to tread rubber, some make the treadblocks smaller and more of them.

If you do enough of those improvements, at some point it's no longer an MT, and has become a hybrid tire (or aggressive AT if you prefer that term).

Once the design has changed enough to be a hybrid (instead of MT), it has lost some mud ability, but gained traction in those other areas, and become more street friendly to.

If you did even more changes to a hybrid to make it even more street friendly, it'd be an AT.

My point is that we think of tire types and categories as being black and white. In reality, there are many shades of grey where categories overlap. Then add in use of terms, which differs between companies and people, and things get murky.

===

Road noise matters for MT. Not just for mall crawler pavement posers. Guys who go in mud still like to have less noise on road so they can have a conversation with a passenger, hear tbeir cell phone, hear the radio, or just not have a head ache on the freeway.

Alternating tread block sizes (inner and outer lugs) reduces road noise without losing any traction.

Alternating outer tread block length reduces road noise and increases traction by increasing digging and self cleaning.

Sipes have obvious benefits for traction, and they make tread quieter too. I'm surprised most MTs don't have more sipes, but if they did they might be called hybrid tires.

===

This has nothing to do with road noise, but is important to mud traction.

The little ridges between treads (on some tires) are called stone ejectors (or other names) and are there to protect tire from stones and reduce stone retention between treads. However, they have the addtional benefits of increasing self cleaning of mud and snow by helping break the suction that prevents self cleaning.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 01:09 PM   #27
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Part of it is simple, IMO.

How many different tread patterns can you have if you limit yourself to 4 big tread blocks wide?

Wouldn't they have to look somewhat similar?
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 04:18 PM   #28
Jerry Bransford
Do it right or not at all
 
Jerry Bransford's Avatar
2004 TJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Escondido, California, California
Posts: 60,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by KKiowaTJ View Post
But as it is, Cooper tire in ohio makes all L/T tires for M/T, Pro Comp, And a few more on you're list along with its own 'STT'.
I used to work for ProComp's parent company who had Cooper as a manufacturer for ProComp's tires. Many of Cooper's tires are actually made in China, not in Ohio.
__________________
Getting Savvy...

Coolest offroad magazine ever! CRAWL Magazine

When you have a choice, buy American.

Jerry Bransford is online now   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 06:29 PM   #29
KKiowaTJ
Registered User
1995 YJ Wrangler 
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Iowa
Posts: 3,456
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry Bransford View Post
I used to work for ProComp's parent company who had Cooper as a manufacturer for ProComp's tires. Many of Cooper's tires are actually made in China, not in Ohio.


That's why I mentioned LT/light truck tires. They are all made here in the states. I have made sure of that many times and will continue. I don't want china tires if I can get an American tire for the same +/-.
__________________
YJ, TJ, XJ, ZJ..... Too many Jeeps!
KKiowaTJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 08-25-2013, 11:06 PM   #30
Charley3
Web Wheeler
1999 XJ Cherokee 
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 3,618
Interesting and informative info.

Thanks Jerry and Kiowa.
__________________
Warning: Sometimes I edit a post a few times to get it how I want it.
Charley3 is offline   Reply With Quote




Jeep, Wrangler, Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and other models are copyrighted and trademarked to Jeep/Chrysler Corporation. JeepForum.com is not in any way associated with Jeep or the Chrysler Corp.