Seems crazy that the XR Beadlocks are not DOT approved

[MrGoodByte]

This doesn't exist

Hutchinson and Icon have DOT approved beadlocks

Sponsored

 

[mllcb42]

They both have very interesting, functional products that do bead retention, but neither are really traditional beadlocks, at least in the context of how most people think of them. Hence both companies calling them something a bit different ("interlocks" and "internal beadlocks").

They come across to me as a different method of retaining the bead than a beadlock, but that could be a pointless semantics argument.

 

[Remorseless]

Hutchinson and Icon have DOT approved beadlocks

AEV does as well - https://www.aev-conversions.com/product/jl-borah/#color

Ran those on my JK (though in the non-beadlock config).

Beadlocks do require additional maintenance (keep a constant eye on the torque of those bolts, make sure you use antisieze to prevent steel bolts from galling while in an aluminum wheel, etc). I plan on running the AEVs in the beadlock config on my JL when time comes for 37s. IMO, there's a lot of Internet hearsay and conspiracy around beadlocks and legality. Truth is, unless your state has a law specifically outlawing multi-piece wheels (remember, beadlocks used to be wheels that got cut up and re-welded and that's where a lot of the "bad name" came from) then you'll be fine if you do your maintenance. Generally recommend looking at a high quality vendor for the beadlocks to ensure it's something that they've worked to make sure doesn't have weird issues with road driving, but really that's it.

 

[JABCAT]

Wanna bet?

https://iconvehicledynamics.com/innerlock/

" The ICON Alloys Rebound PRO with patented InnerLock technology offers the best of both worlds by using a robust bead retention system to keep the tire bead secured to the wheel while also being fully DOT compliant. "

AEV does as well - https://www.aev-conversions.com/product/jl-borah/#color

“DOT Compliant” & DOT “approved” don’t necessarily mean the same thing. And of course the companies put their “for off-road use only” disclaimer on there.

 

[Remorseless]

“DOT Compliant” & DOT “approved” don’t necessarily mean the same thing. And of course the companies put their “for off-road use only” disclaimer on there.

Not exactly accurate:

"DOT does not approve any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment items as complying with all applicable FMVSS. That is instead the responsibility of the vehicle or equipment item's original manufacturer. For motor vehicles, the certification is provided in the form of a label that is permanently affixed to the vehicle by its original manufacturer, stating that the vehicle complies with all applicable FMVSS in effect on its date of manufacture. For vehicles other than motorcycles or trailers, the label must be affixed to either the hinge pillar, the door latch post, or the door edge that meets the door-latch post, next to the driver's seating position. For motor cycles and motor driven cycles, the label must be affixed to a permanent member of the vehicle, as close as is practicable to the intersection of the steering post with the handlebars, so that it is easily readable without moving any part of the vehicle except for the steering system. For trailers, the label must be affixed to a location on the forward half of the left side of the vehicle, so that it can be easily read without moving any part of the vehicle."

Source: https://www.nhtsa.gov/importing-vehicle/importation-and-certification-faqs

Effectively, if a company makes a motor vehicle product that they have validated meets the DOT requirements, they can put a DOT approved/compliant label on the product. DOT sets the standards, manufacturers make sure it meets the standards, and if it does, they label it as such. DOT regulated items (wheels, lights, safety equipment, etc) are "DOT regulated" meaning that they are items that are not motor vehicles that have DOT rules around them that must be adhered too. DOT does not inspect or test equipment for adherence to these regulations - that is on the manufacturer of the equipment, as stated above.

 

[proptied]

I run the Rebound Pro's. If you find your existing setup won't air down low enough for the terrain you wheel, maybe then consider bead locks. Instead, try something with a better bead "grip", like from the Method Trail series.

CONS:
- Typical tire shops (like Discount Tire) won't mount them. If the tire needs to be rotated on the rim, they won't do that either. You'll need to find an off-road shop.
- Mud/water seeps into the pin to rim interface and after you clean them, that mud/water goes flying everywhere. (First world problems. :D )
- Only one style of rim with one specific backspacing/offset.
- No rock / bash ring.

PROS:
- They can get low. I haven't needed to go lower than ~6-8psi though. Will be trying some Michigan sand dunes soon enough.
- The single style of wheel fits my taste and requirements.
- The lip is supposedly really thick, negating the need for a rock / bash ring. I just deal with the gouges.
- They're pretty light, comparatively.

 

[TX_Ovrlnd]

Hutchinsons are the only DOT approved beadlock wheel. Icons are not a true beadlock at all, not even in the slightest. They can market as DOT compliant because it's just a regular wheel that has bolts holding the bead against the rim from the inside. AEV's video on their website is very misleading, they market it as a simple change from normal on-road wheel, to rash ring change, to true beadlock. It is not that easy as going to beadlock requires unseating the bead and pulling the tire out of the rim to sandwich it with the beadlock ring. They get away with the "compliant" part probably because they tested it using the rash ring to beadlock change without unseating the bead (that would be my guess).

There are third parties testing some of these wheels for DOT compliance, we know DOT does not test themselves but establishes guidelines. Compliance vs approved looks like legalese to me, I do not really care to go in an in-depth discussion about the difference...but you do you.

Edited because words are hard.

 

[IdahoJOAT]

When we were getting the 4xe I really wanted the mopar beadlock capables, then learned that

1. They weren't beadlocks, but needed the additional ring
2. Normal tire shops won't touch them with said ring

That took away my want for them. I might still pickup the wheels at some point because I like them.

 

[2manyhobbies]

Bead locks on any tires that you plan to run 8-10psi or higher are a waste, in my opinion. I wheeled a set of 35” tires for years on my JK running 10psi and 8psi in the front and rear, and never had a problem with breaking a bead. The wheels were 8” wide, and the tires would give amazing traction. There would be times that the tires would compress, and either touch or come close to touching the tread. I didn’t think that running any lower would benefit me.

Marketing has convinced people to buy many things that are just not needed. Anyone can spend their hard earned money however they want. But I would argue they are not needed in 99 out of 100 cases.

 

[MrGoodByte]

Hutchinsons are the only DOT approved beadlock wheel. Icons are not a true beadlock at all, not even in the slightest. They can market as DOT compliant because it's just a regular wheel that has bolts holding the bead against the rim from the inside. AEV's video on their website is very misleading, they market it as a simple change from normal on-road wheel, to rash ring change, to true beadlock. It is not that easy as going to beadlock requires unseating the bead and pulling the tire out of the rim to sandwich it with the beadlock ring. They get away with the "compliant" part probably because they submitted it using the rash ring to beadlock change without unseating the bead (that would be my guess).

So the stamp on the Hutchinsons that says DOT T is bs?

 

[JABCAT]

Not exactly accurate:

"DOT does not approve any motor vehicles or motor vehicle equipment items as complying with all applicable FMVSS. That is instead the responsibility of the vehicle or equipment item's original manufacturer… DOT does not inspect or test equipment for adherence to these regulations - that is on the manufacturer of the equipment, as stated above.

We’re saying the same thing. “DOT approved” would mean DOT reviewed, tested, etc. the item and approved it. DOT “compliant” just means the manufacturer states it meets DOT criteria.

 

[TX_Ovrlnd]

So the stamp on the Hutchinsons that says DOT T is bs?

I said they are the only one actually DOT approved, even bolded and underlined.

 

[Remorseless]

Hutchinsons are the only DOT approved beadlock wheel. Icons are not a true beadlock at all, not even in the slightest. They can market as DOT compliant because it's just a regular wheel that has bolts holding the bead against the rim from the inside. AEV's video on their website is very misleading, they market it as a simple change from normal on-road wheel, to rash ring change, to true beadlock. It is not that easy as going to beadlock requires unseating the bead and pulling the tire out of the rim to sandwich it with the beadlock ring. They get away with the "compliant" part probably because they submitted it using the rash ring to beadlock change without unseating the bead (that would be my guess).

The DOT doesn't actually actively approve anything though. Anything that says DOT "approved" is misleading in and of itself - DOT doesn't test anything wheel related, let alone niche off roading wheels. They publish regulations that manufacturers do or don't adhere to. Hutchinson's wheels would more accurately be described as DOT compliant - they were tested against DOT (and hopefully SAE) standards while in their beadlock configuration. This is where most beadlocks fall down - they're converted from other wheels and then not tested against the standards while in their new beadlock config. Hutchinsons look to be tested while a beadlock, which is good, but there's functionally no difference between DOT approved and DOT compliant - the DOT plays the same role in either case, simply publishing the regulations.

 

[Remorseless]

So the stamp on the Hutchinsons that says DOT T is bs?

Not strictly BS, they're DOT compliant, which is a good thing. It means they bothered to test them in the beadlock config. However the language they use is inaccurate. There is absolutely no active approval process the DOT itself uses for vehicle rims.

We’re saying the same thing. “DOT approved” would mean DOT reviewed, tested, etc. the item and approved it. DOT “compliant” just means the manufacturer states it meets DOT criteria.

DOT "approved" doesn't actually exist, despite companies using the terminology. DOT is completely passive in motor vehicle wheel compliance testing. There is zero active testing done by the DOT. If a company puts "DOT Approved" on their product, it is simply a marketing term. They are factually DOT compliant and nothing more or less. Compliant just doesn't sound as good when convincing people to buy your product.

 

[MrGoodByte]

So I guess the main gist is traditional deadlocks are not DOT recommended, but theirs no teeth in their bite, unless the jurisdiction you live/travel to has a law against it.

There are alternate solutions that are "beadlock retention" solutions that are compliant, but the only one with the stamp as of today, is Hutchinson.

No matter what solution you go for, there's a level of maintenance and a shortage of shops that will service them so do your homework before so you can get the proper support.

Most don't see a need for deadlocks unless you are going below 8-10psi (which I'm not sure yet as a newb if that's necessary). I plan on playing on the beaches and do some crawling. I have plenty of time to figure it out.

Thanks for the input

Sponsored