I am trying to make a big decision on which frame to keep as my around town fixed gear bike.
I have an IRO Angus frame that i have commuted on for years. It is fairly light, steel and good geometry. However, something about it always felt a little sluggish, probably that it does not have a fork with the exactly right rake, i dont know.

My other frame is a Blue TR250. I raced track on it for years and since i moved to boston, it no longer has a home on a track. The paint is a little nicked up and I had to have the seatmast collar repaired (small crack), so i wouldn't say it is worth much anymore. It is way lighter and stiffer (it is aluminum) than the IRO and has more aggressive geometry. I would need to buy a new fork because it is not drilled for a front brake. Probably not as comfortable on the street and screams "steal me." BUt, it is a rocketship, when you put some power into it, it responds well.

Im only keeping one frame to make way for another bike, and I am going back and forth on which to keep.

IRO

Blue:

Personally, I'd keep the IRO. More practical for the city. Less likely to be stolen. Get a different fork if you don't like that one. Retrogression has some good ones to choose from.

Keep the IRO and get some bullhorns.

Keep the IRO and get a good carbon fork for it.

Another problem is the IRO uses a 1" fork (comes with a threaded/quill setup). Carbon forks in 1" are hard to find, at least at a decent price.

That's not a problem! That's a good thing. A carbon fork would look silly on that bike, since the bike tubing is thinner, and most carbon forks are quite "fat". (these are my opinions, of course).

just looked at the IRO website, the Angus fork has a 43mm rake, which is really a road fork rake and a little easier to find. But I agree with T13, a cabon fork on a steel track bike looks silly!

I would ride the hell out of that Blue and sell the IRO. That is just me though, and that bike looks like it would fit in with my two similar style fixed gear bikes.

Check These out, both 41's.... I have the straight blade fork on another bike, and its really nice.

curved-blade lugged track fork | Retrogression

straight-blade lugged fork | Retrogression

the straight blade retrogression fork is what I have on there now.

oh gotcha. Maybe the steel bike just feels slow to you, compared to the pop can. And it may be. The geometry doesn't look that far off, to me. But in terms of practicality regarding city riding/parts you might need from a bike shop etc etc, the IRO would be more practical. I mean, I doubt any shop is gonna have a seatpost for that if you need one(like if someone steals it)...Also, you might want to put fenders on at some point, unless you like riding in 40 degrees and rain and getting yer feet soaked, haha...In which case the Blue bike wouldn't work(i think)...

I dont like the look of the Blue, IRO gets my vote

the IRO is a much more versatile/practical bike if you are only going to keep one. If it were me I would keep both and get another bike.

Can't you just keep both?

IRO
and if you wanted to get a cheaper carbon fork in 1 inch, go with the nashbar 1" threaded road fork (it is also 43mm).
Nashbar Carbon 1-in Threaded Road Fork

The curved fork you suggested is not threaded steerer and would require the op to replace the headset, stem.
The 2nd one would be a good option.

I am in the IRO camp. Steel is real, aluminum is not easily rhyme-able and the ride isn't as good on the streets.

Off topic here, but what bars are on that Blue?

Not a problem, just look for a used 1" reynolds ouzo, kestrel EMS, alpha Q, or wound up.
Be careful buying used alpha Q's as the internal shim required for starnut installation is epoxied by end user and not reusable. Pretty much limiting you to a no-cut situation as far as fitting it to another sized frame goes.