Ironman warranty replacements, your vote requested


11 replies to this topic

Poll: Have you ever had an Ironman sprocket replaced under the one year wear guarantee (20 member(s) have cast votes)

Have you ever had an Ironman sprocket replaced under the one year wear guarantee

  1. Yes replaced free according to the warranty (4 votes [20.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 20.00%

  2. Mine did not wear out within the first year, no need to replace (15 votes [75.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 75.00%

  3. No because I lost my proof of purchase (1 votes [5.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.00%

  4. No but I feel it should have been replaced free (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote
  • sirthumpalot

Posted January 13, 2005 - 08:03 PM

#1

Have you ever worn out an Ironman sprocket during the one year warranty period? If so, please vote above/below (my first pole, not sure where it will end up?). NO DOUBLE VOTING please!

  • Indy_WR450

Posted January 13, 2005 - 09:28 PM

#2

I cant answer your poll. :cry: The rear sprockets lasts me 6 months of riding every weekend. The fronts last about 3 months before hooking so I replace it to extend the chain life. I put a new chain & sprockets every 5 to 6 months.
I have never bothered to try to claim them under warranty because for the average rider it will last a year. For me I am happy they last as well as they do and I feel I get my monies worth. I bet Ironman thinks I have about 5 bikes the way I order sprockets!:cry:

  • ncmountainman

Posted January 14, 2005 - 06:46 AM

#3

the first one i ordered was defective (alot of slag from the cutting process) they sent a pick up order and sent the new one before i even sent the bad one back. thats pretty good service if you ask me.:cry:

  • yzwiley

Posted January 14, 2005 - 10:00 AM

#4

I put a lot of time and miles on my bikes and have yet to wear one out in a year. Before running the Ironman products I was a loyal Renthal customer. On average I'd get three months out of a set of Renthals. I have a rear Ironman that I've got over a year and a half on right now. IMO, incredible product.

  • mx_crash

Posted January 15, 2005 - 03:46 AM

#5

yzwiley, that's what I wanted to hear, I wacked a renthal on my 450 before I even started it up, the thing lasted 3 months, so just fitted an Ironman hoping to get 1 year out of it

  • DigilubeJay

Posted January 19, 2005 - 07:57 PM

#6

If you pay three times what a quality sprocket should cost, should you get three times the value? I would think so.
Super hard sprockets will trick you into thinking your chain drive is doing just fine, due to the fact that you don't see your teeth wearing. Most folks who run these hard sprockets will claim them to be the bomb, but they feel that their chains are lacking. When in reality it is the hardness of the sprocket that accelerates the wear on the chain.
If you run an aluminum sprocket, it will definately show you when your chain has elongated from wear past the point of replacement. A hard steel sprocket will not. The hard teeth of the sprocket resist any sort of deformation, even though the chains pitch is such that it SHOULD deform the teeth. So, this mis-match of pitch creates energy that has to be released somewhere, and that somewhere is your chain pins and bushings. In a perfect world, folks should measure and know when their chain elongates past spec. so they can change it out before any sprocket wear occurs, but that rarely happens. Folks simply don't take the time to measure their chains. So when their chain grows in pitch, it is a fast downhill slide becasue the super hard sprocket eats it away fast.

Same goes for the front sprockets. Ironman claims to be using die steel for their sprockets. They also tout that they are through hardened. If you read their advertizing they state that other sprockets are only case hardened, and they elude that this is a bad thing.
Well, a top shelf sprocket is case hardened for a reason. Case, or surface, hardening allows a tooth with a hard working face, yet allows for a soft core that will absorb a high shock load.
A sprocket that is made from super hard die steel, or a NI-CO-CR-MO Super Alloy steel, and through hardened, doesn't allow for resilliant absorbsion of shock loads. So, when a shock load is presented, the energy created is not absorbed by the sprocket as it should be, but is passed on to the working surfaces of the chain and other components. Which, as stated before, accelerates the wear of the chain itself. Sure the sprocket keeps it's integrity, but at the expense of your chain and bearings.

Ironman knows that their sprockets are hard enough to keep themselves intact even with rough service. And they also charge enough to be able to make a 1 year replacement promise without it hurting them. I mean, heck...folks are paying three times or more the amount of a good quality sprocket, why not make the warranty?
The only folks who are going to wear one of these super hard sprockets out in a year are probably in danger of running chains that are way past spec length anyway, or not aligned or tensioned properly. Dangerous prospects all.

Is it a value to have sprockets that accelerate the wear on a high-dollar chain and other bike components, especially when you pay three times the price for the sprockets?

I'm simply bringing some facts to light here, and am not slandering the company one bit. In fact, I welcome debate on the subject with any of the DirtTricks engineers. However, I'll refrain from arguments with dealers and less than knowlegable distributors.

Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • sirthumpalot

Posted January 20, 2005 - 04:17 AM

#7

Dude, give it up, your posts are becoming comical. From your claims that non-sealed chains outlast sealed chains, to your claims that Ironman won't abide by their warranty (which the poll above CLEARLY shows that they do), now you are claiming that steel sprockets will wear a chain faster!? Let me sum it up for you. On average people using steel sprockets and quality sealed chains do not replace their sprockets, and do no replace their chains for a long long time, period. End of story. Just look at how many people above did not have to replace sprockets for over a year! I'm done debating the details, my point has been made. I think I will ignore your posts on this topic from this point forward. Have a good weekend and ride safe!

  • DigilubeJay

Posted January 20, 2005 - 06:11 AM

#8

Sir,
Your poll shows that 4 people had their Ironman sprockets replaced under warranty. Not much data to go by there. Did you also conduct the recent presidential exit polling too?

Like I stated, I will not argue with the less than knowlegable. If you want to discuss the issue in an intelligent manner, and bring more than your feelings and ego to the table, then we can. Otherwise you should heed what I say, because it is fact. But unlike some here, I am willing to concede that I'm wrong if I'm proven wrong.
And if you bring an anecdotal instance to the table as some sort of proof, realise that there are usually easily proven reasons why folks see bad service from their equipment, and more times than not it is not the fault of the equipment itself, but rather something the rider or mechanic did wrong or didn't know to begin with.

  • yzwiley

Posted January 20, 2005 - 08:20 AM

#9

If you pay three times what a quality sprocket should cost, should you get three times the value? I would think so.
Super hard sprockets will trick you into thinking your chain drive is doing just fine, due to the fact that you don't see your teeth wearing. Most folks who run these hard sprockets will claim them to be the bomb, but they feel that their chains are lacking.


From ThumperTalk's store the retail price of a Renthal rear sprocket is $64.95.
From DirtTricks website the retail price of an Ironman rear sprocket is $106.00.

64.95 * 3 = 194.85

Here's the first example of how your logic is askew. And for another:

Let us use economics to help describe why Ironman's products are of value. If we are to change out the drive system upon symptoms of excessive wear then that means for a rider like myself will be changing the sprockets and chain every three months when using aluminum sprockets. That cost roughly comes to $800 a year ($200 a pop, four times a year, cost includes a quality o-ring chain).

Now if I use Ironman's products I only have to incur the cost once a year (approx $250). Even though the chain might show excessive wear, yet the sprockets are okay, thus not illustrating any real danger of me DNFing a race, I need only incur the cost once in a year.

So, I can either incur an expense of $800 or $250. What's the smarter option here for the ever so economically minded motorcycle owner?

DigilubeJay, I don't doubt your engineering logic and I do find your thoughts interesting, but the bottom line is financial costs are often the motivation for an enthusiast's purchasing decisions.

...and no one made any claims of having issues with their chains.

  • ncmountainman

Posted January 20, 2005 - 09:41 AM

#10

i did. i posted a while back that my new x-ring DID wore almost twice as fast with the ironman sprckets (both were new,same conditions and maintenance)as when i had my last set of sunstar reg.steel ,and new chain. i also noticed more harshness in the drivetrain. i believe i'll be trying something else next time. yo digi would the new setup of an outer tool steel ring and the aluminum center absorb the impact any better??(sidewinder) i believe sprocket specialists offer a reg. steel ring on thier version ,that might be the way to go. and as far as a well maintained non o-ring chain vs. o-ring i really notice no "chainlife" differences just convenience. :cry:

  • cgaluter

Posted January 20, 2005 - 10:31 AM

#11

I bought the Ironman front sprocket but have not installed yet. As of now I am still using the stock sprockets and chain. I ride every weekend on both days. The stock chain stretch the first few rides and then I started cleaning it every ride. It has been about 7 months now and the chain is holding up. I do have to agree with Digilube about the mismatch of material hardness. The chain will absorb the wear more than the Ironman sprocket. This is why I didn't buy the rear Ironman sprocket. I realize that no chain will outlast the Ironman because the way chains are designed. Having a mismatch of drive gear creates an illusion that the whole set is not wearing out at all. But in fact the chain is absorbing all of the abuse rather than distributing evenly between the sprockets and the chain. Once the chain and/or the sprockets wear out, replace it as a set. However, I am happy that the Ironman makers are striving to make a better product. It is just too "pricey" for a consumable item. Increase production so the price goes down below competition. People will buy them. Racers won't buy it because they change their drive set every race and most of them are sponsored anyway, so they don't care. For racers, weight savings are important. These sprockets are a rotating mass so the lighter the better. The difference of weight in ounces in static case is a difference in pounds dynamically. Rotational inertia increases exponentially. Case hardening and heat treatment process should not have too much of a price difference once volume is increased.

My .02 cents.

  • DigilubeJay

Posted January 20, 2005 - 03:52 PM

#12

yzwiley,
For one thing...I would be willing to bet big money that if you would follow a proper chain/sprocket maintenance regiment that you would get FAR more wear from a quality set than 3 months. You have to be doing something wrong.
Secondly...64.95 for an aluminum sprocket...I have no comment other than "yikes". If comparing the Ironman to other sprockets, it should probably be compared to a case hardened steel sprocket and not a 7075-T6 aluminum.
Approx cost of standard steel: $28.00 standard aluminum: $38.00

Stealth sprockets were once carried by Sprocket Specialists but no longer.
To me, they would be comparable to an Ironman. However these sprockets have now went the way of they uber pricey and are no longer a value. The hiking of the price was to offer a similar replacement warranty as Ironman. A marketing mistake IMO.
JFYI, I used to offer the Stealth for $55 American. Call Sidewinder and see what they cost now. Again...."yikes".





Related Content

 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.