Mikko
:clap: Nice guy as I am, I translated the latest, yearly mega-comparision of winter tires from Swedish into English. I take it you don't get all that many good reviews over in USA and Canada. You can see some graphs in the review that compare the tires, braking distance, time around a track, driving in circle, all sorts of surfaces. Blue is studded, and red is studless. You better be able to read Swedish for that though.

http://www.aftonbladet.se/bil/0310/18/dacktest.pdf



Nokian "Hakkapeliitta 4" (studded)
5/5 Stars

The new Hakka-tire has a stable foundation, excellent thread pattern for all surfaces, and the new unique, squared studs give a superior bite on ice. On the winter road the tire is secure. It is also excellent in slush and stable on pavement.

+ Innovative and best on all winter roads.
- Nothing



Michelin "Ivalo" (studded)
3/5 Stars

Good reputation, high reliability and long lasting lets Michelin stay in the top sales. The tires grip has a long way to go to reach up with the best tires. When it starts skidding it is hard to regain the grip. Fortunately, the tires tell you before it happens and sometimes smoothes over the drivers mistakes.

+ Snowgrip
- Easily loses grip on slush



Continental "Winter Viking 1" (studded)
4/5 Stars

The Swedish tire-monger Allan Ostrowskis Winter Viking tops the tire tests year after year. It is a well balanced tire for both winter roads and bare-pavement. Perhaps the grip on snow could be a bit better, but the basic-security is still large.

+ Ice-grip and stability on pavement.
- Nothing



Kumho "KW 11 Izen Stud" (studded)
Disqualified

A lousy tire in which the grip suddenly disappears, and not even the most skilled test drivers managed to stop the skids before the cars hit the snow barriers. This judgement unfortunately applies to both ice, snow and pavement! Disqualified from the test.

+ Noise levels
- Grip and performance on all surfaces



Goodyear "UG500" (studded)
4/5 Stars

Very optimized for winter driving at the cost of stability on direct pavement. The extreme ability on slippery surfaces makes it a bit nervous on tracked pavement (you know, where there are two depressions in the ground from so many cars driving in the same place).

Best used on snow and ice.

+ Grip when slippery
- Nervous and somewhat unstable on pavement



Pirelli "Winter Carving" (Studded)
4/5

A completely fresh tire from Pirelli. But does anyone recognize the thread pattern? Right! It's an exact copy of Gislaved Nord Frost 3. Brilliant on snow, excellent on ice. A safe choice on any surface.

+ Top tire in most situations
- Somewhat slow reacting



Uniroyal "MS Plus Nordic" (studded)
4/5 Stars

Another "Allan-Ostrowskis-Tire", the design being a couple of years old, but still in the top. Safe but slightly too long, yet easily controlled, skids on winter roads. Quiet and very stable on pavement.

+ No weaknesses, low noise.
- Nothing



Gislaved "Nord Frost 3" (studded)
4/5 Stars

Has no particular weakness, the ability to find grip in snow-slush is, for example, still top-rated, but on snow the skids can become a bit long. The tire is no longer manufactured by Gislaved which causes its popularity to drop.

+ Grip on ice and slush
- Nothing



Bridgestone "Noranza" (studded)
3/5 Stars

Bridgestone creates a brand-image through F1 tires, but nordic winter roads demand more than image. The winter tire is a clear disappointment. It is vague and in certain situations dangerously oversteering (the rear end comes sliding) on ice. On bare-pavement it is uncomfortably unstable.

+ Grip on ice (despite the occational oversteering)
- Snowgrip



Michelin "260" (7 years old but unused - studded)
Disqualified

Many only drive a little in the winter and hardly wear down their tires at all. They drive on year after year and think they have a good grip. Our brand new 7-year old Michelin 260 prove the opposite. It skidded wildly and fell behind in almost all tests.

+ Grip in slush
- Ice and snow grip



Michelin "Maxi Ice" (non-studded)
1/5 Stars

The dense thread is an exciting attempt to make a good stud-less tire while not sacrificing stability on pavement. It almost succeeds. The pavement performance is brilliant. On snow and ice it barely keeps up.

+ Pavement
- Mobility and braking on ice (very crappy), and poor grip on slush



Bridgestone "Blizzak WS-50" (non-studded)
Disqualified

Dangerous! Blizzak is so dangerous on pavement that it is disqualified from the test. The skids during an avoidance manuever are so difficult to stop that it is an outright traffic danger. Blizzak has been one of the big sellers for many years. The winter-abilities (snow, ice and slush) are mediocre at best.

+ Grip on Snow and Ice (for a studless tire)
- Pavement



Bridgestone "Blizzak MZ-01" (7 years old but unused. non-studded)
Disqualified

Blizzak had a very good grip on ice when it was introduced at the end of the 1980's and became an instant big seller. Since then the tire has been developed in cycles. Our seven year old tire is hard to drive on winter-roads. The skids on ice are hopeless, and snow grip is nervous.

+ Nothing
- Poor grip on all surfaces



Pirelli "Icesport" (non-studded)
1/5 Stars

Maybe it is time to copy the northern tire-makers to get a reasonable stud-less tire? Icesport is engineered for middle Europe and is a tire you don't want to have on our winter roads. Ice grip is non-existant, and on pavement you can get treacherous skids.

+ Nothing
- Grip on snow and ice



Continental "Conti Viking Contact 3" (non-studded)
2/5 Stars

Allan Ostrowskis had time to construct two studless winners for Continential before he resigned. On snow the tire goes as if on rails, on ice it is reasonable and the skids, that can come quite unexpectedly, are after all something one can handle.

+ Snowgrip and noise
- Nothing



Gislaved "Soft Frost 2" (non-studded)
2/5 Stars

Better than Viking Contact on snow and ice. Risk of getting treacherous skids on pavement. On snow the skids are easy to control. On ice, the tire can oversteer but is still easy to control. The best studless tire for those who drive mostly on pavement.

+ Grip and performance on snow and ice.
- Easy skidding on pavement



Nokian "Hakkapeliitta Q" (non-studded)
2/5 Stars

The ice grip is excellent for a studless tire. On snow the grip is calm and nice, and the skids almost correct themselves. It is very slippery on wet pavement and skids wildly on dry pavement.

+ Grip on winter surfaces, performance on snow and ice.
- Grip and performance on pavement.

littledan
thanks for taking the time to post... good stuff man.

rage2
Too bad most of those tires aren't available here :).

Mikko
I heard you can get Gislaved and some others through Volvo/Saab dealers. Might be worth checking out.

"Fountain Tire", Phone #: 2522228, will sell you, fit (on rims you bring) and balance, then mount 4 x "Goodyear UG500" for $544. The size for that price is 185 / 60 / 15.

OK Tires - 255-5592 - sells Pirelli's. But I am unsure of the price.

SaskS14
I just picked up a set of used (1 month last year) Nokian Hakkapeliitta Q's last night from a buddy in town here. I am pretty sure he said he purchased them from KalTire.

I have done quite a few searches on them and they are either always #1 or #2 in European studless tests.

If I recall correctly not many places in Canada actually allow studded tires so most of that list doesn't even matter to us.

Anyone know the laws regarding studded tires in Alberta/Saskatchewan?

alloroc
From consumer reports.
note the graphics have been removed and the number on the left is the price per tire in US dollars. Some info is conflicting with the above reports, personally I trust CR.




_____________________________
Consumer Reports
November 2002
Ratings Winter tires

THE TESTS BEHIND THE RATINGS


Overall score is based on 14 tests, with braking, emergency handling, hydroplaning, and winter performance weighted most heavily. Snow traction reflects how far the test vehicle had to travel to accelerate from 5 to 20 mph on flat, moderately packed snow. Ice braking is done from 10 mph on an ice rink. Dry braking is done from 60 mph, and wet braking, from 40 mph. Most braking scores shown are with the antilock brake system (ABS) engaged (ABS was disengaged for touring-performance ice braking); instances where turning ABS off significantly affected the score are noted above. Handling includes how well tires did in an avoidance maneuver that involved a swerve to the left, right, then left again, as well as wet and dry cornering performance and steering feel. Hydroplaning reflects the speed tires reached before they began to skim over water on our course. We also judged tire noise and ride comfort on the road, and measured rolling resistance for touring-performance tires with a dynamometer. Price is approximate retail for sizes tested. Most winter tires are Q- and H-rated; others are noted below.




Winter tires
By type, in performance order




H-RATED WINTER TIRES Designed for speeds of up to 130 mph--and better performance at lower speeds.
Click to see photos
Goodyear Eagle Ultra Grip GW-2
$132
An excellent all-around choice. Best dry and wet braking among H-rated tires. Best ice braking without ABS.

Dunlop SP Winter Sport M2
126
An excellent all-around choice, with responsive handling.

Pirelli Winter 210 SnowSport
155
An excellent all-around choice, but pricey. Best dry cornering.

Bridgestone Blizzak LM-22
130
An excellent all-around choice. Best emergency handling.

Nokian Hakkapeliitta NRW
157
A fine choice for snow, though not ideal for wet weather. Least capable in wet cornering.

Michelin Pilot Alpin
116
Best suited to areas where snow is less severe. Quiet ride.

Q-RATED WINTER TIRES Designed for speeds of up to 99 mph; test group includes tires rated S (112 mph) and T (118 mph).
Click to see photos
Kumho I'zen Stud KW-11
50
An excellent choice where snow is less severe. Best dry and wet braking among this group. Studdable. T-rated in size tested.

Michelin Arctic Alpin
85
An excellent choice where snow is less severe. Excellent cornering.

Dunlop Graspic
DS-1
55
A top winter performer, although only fair emergency handling.

Gislaved NordFrost II
75
A very good choice where snow is less severe. Studdable.

Nokian Hakkapeliitta Q
85
A very good all-around tire.

BFGoodrich Winter Slalom
60
A very good all-around tire, though slightly less capable than the Nokian in winter driving. Studdable.

Goodyear Ultra Grip Ice
77
A fine choice for snow and wet weather, but only fair handling.

Bridgestone Blizzak WS-50
72
A very good all-around tire, though less capable in emergency handling than top-rated models. Stiff ride.

Yokohama Guardex F720
75
Most susceptible to hydroplaning.

Firestone Winterfire
53
Unimpressive ice braking compromises an otherwise fine, economical choice. Studdable.
S-rated in size tested.

Cooper Weather-Master XGR
52
Long dry stops and only fair emergency handling.

SaskS14
Well answering my own question, I guess I was wrong. :)

bart
the dangerous part about the blizzaks ws-50s is BS! i had them going 210 when i went skiing once, the limit is like 160. and i'm still here arent i???

max_boost
I'm not sure I believe the results on the Blizzaks......I've had great experiences with those tires

Mikko
The Swedish traffic magazine (Biggest motor show here) did their own test on Nokian Q's, studless. Unfortunately, it finished last out of all the non-studded tires.

In the other comparision here, it recieved 2/5 stars.

Keep in mind that central and western Europe gets far less severe snow and ice conditions than Scandinavia, and thus tires are judged differently there.

Calgary is about the same as general Scandinavia when it comes to climate.

I don't think they said anything about how fast it is rated to travel. They said that it has lousy lateral grip during avoidance maneuvers and is generally blah on pavement. You could probably take up any tires to 210 if you want, they just roll.

The test I posted had several more tests, and very very extensive testing with several skilled test drivers.

When I saw the Traffic magazine test drivers (not this test I posted) drive on the iced lake, on a circuit they made, they were powersliding and other things, everything to measure how quickly one could possibly get around a circuit using a certain tire.

link785
:bullshit: Blizzak's rock, never have a problem with them, and never have they been "dangerous" on dry pavement. Total bullshit.

Mikko
Full ABS braking on smooth ice. From 50km/h to stop.

1st place - Goodyear UG500
Distance - 38,5 meters.

16th place - Blizzak WS-50
Distance - 61 meters.


Acceleration on smooth ice. From 5-30km/h, full throttle, letting the traction control deal with the slippage.

1st place - Nokian Hakka 4.
Time - 8,9 seconds.

15th place - Blizzak WS-50.
Time - 13,5 seconds.


A circle with 60 meters in diameter, with rough ice, driving as fast as one can (like a skidpad).

1st place - Goodyear UG500
Laptime - 20,1 seconds.

15th place - Blizzak WS-50
Laptime - 23,4 seconds.



Ice-circuit, different turns and straights, going as fast as the tires allow.

1st place - Nokian Hakka 4.
Laptime - 80,1 seconds.

13th place - Blizzak WS-50.
Laptime - 91,5 seconds.



ABS-braking on snow. Unspecified.

1st - Pirelli UG500.
Distance - 49,5 meters.

6th place - Blizzak WS-50.
Distance - 53,5 meters.


ABS-braking from 60km/h on wet pavement.

1st place - Michelin 240 (the old one!)
Distance - 21,5 meters.

12t place - Blizzak WS-50
Distance - 23,5 meters.


Acceleration on snow. 5-30km/h.

1st place - Pirelli Icesport.
Time - 4,1 seconds.

8th place - Blizzak WS-50.
Time - 4,4 seconds.



Snow-circuit, with compact snow.

1st place - Gislaved Soft Frost 2.
Time - 84,5 seconds.

9th place - Blizzak WS-50.
Time - 86,2 seconds.


Slushplanning. Paved road covered with slush. Measures speed when it starts to slushplan.

1st place - Gislaved Nord Frost 3.
Speed - 50km/h

12th place - Blizzak WS-50
Speed - 48km/h


In the point scoring, Blizzak fell most short on ice and scored the entire tests worst score on "Stability on pavement" - the elk test, with a 4/10. The test winner Nokian Hakka 4, scored 7 in the elk test.

The difference is that the Blizzaks don't seem to have much stability and lateral grip on pavement compared to any new or old tire. Even the 7 year old blizzaks performed better - with a 5/10, on the elk test.

hjr
the blizzaks seem ok because you are used to them. there are better tires out there for bad conditions. Mikko's tests seem to prove this.

alloroc
If you read the consumer reports page they were not too happy with the blizzak's lateral performance either.

The tire that shows the most disparity between the tests was the Kumho. One set of test show exceptional braking although it had mediocre performance in the snow the Kumho still performed well enough to take top spot in the class, while the other test disqualified the tire for poor braking performance.

What I find shameful is that there is no 'Canadian' (country) tire performance comparison. Canadian Tire (store) does have it's own brand of tires and I would like to see their two snow tires (built by BF goodrich to canadian tire specs) stacked up against the rest.

shadowz
Are Arctic Apline's any good?

Mikko
The studded Kumho tire Izen recieved:

58 meters in braking on ICE (38.5 being the best tire)
12,3 seconds acceleration on ice (8.9 being best)
59,5 meters braking on snow (49,5 being best)
24 meters braking on wet pavement (best being 21,5)

It rated among the worst 7 tires, out of 18, in most testing, and being a studded tire, that is a disaster.

To get these results, they tried every tire, and every test, around 50 times, without the test drivers knowing what tire they are using to avoid bias.

Ben
I just put the Kumhos on my car, love them. I rarely trust some review by a magazine, I listen to real people that I know, respect and can appreciate.


Thanks E36S50B32, You should feel good that I value what you say over some magazine trash.

Ben
Whoever says the Kumhos suck, is wrong.

Mikko
Suck is subjective, isn't it? Either way, Kumho love you longh time :) har har

Ben

haha, well I was giving them a trial tonight on some rather tricky terrain and they performed very well to my standards and expectations.

kenny
The thing everyone has to realize is that the test really brings out the performance of a certain tire because they are driving way harder than you do. How often do you go WOT on ice from a stop? Who does skidpads out there on ice? Probably not too many people, even the people who are out doing donuts in an empty parking lot aren't pushing their cars 100%.

alloroc

You get your's studded?

lint

Which Kumho's do you have?I could only find two tires with the right size for m car, the Kumho Powergrip 749 and the Blizzak WS15. Both being discontinued. I've had Blizzak's before, and I thought they worked great, just wondering how the Kumho's would compare.

Ben
WS 11 Izen Stud.

grassy_fields
I'm wondering if Mikko is still on the boards and if he would be willing to devote his time as generously to translate this year's winter tire test results from Sweden. This is the link to the Oct. 17, 2004 article. The pdf of the test results is a link with that article (which needs some password, maybe paid, to access - I couldn't figure it out in Swedish!).

I'm especially interested in whether there is data on the Nokian RSI, as I do a lot of driving between Montreal and Mont-Tremblant, which is mostly highway driving, but with some curves, and often early morning or late night when snow/ice clearance may not be the best, and with some smaller hilly roads at the end, so I'm wondering whether these new Nokian RSI studless tires begin to approach the studded tires more. The VW dealership is offering both the Nokian RSI and the Pirelli Carving (and the Nokia AK2 - what is that?). How much do winter tire testers look at wet/dry pavement performance (as opposed to ice/snow), since this would seem to be where the studless may have an advantage that could be quantitated for more effective comparison.

Khyron
When the test consists of simply driving at a fixed speed then slamming the brakes, how can you really dispute that?

Full ABS braking on smooth ice. From 50km/h to stop.

Goodyear UG500 - 38.5 meters.
Khumo : 58 meters

I'm sure you could find guys with those tires that say they are great, but that's kind of like arguing with crash tests isn't it?

Good thread (even if it's old).

Khyron

Mikko

- Hey :) Glad you found that to be useful. This years tests are for members only so far, but is highly likely to be 'unlocked' for regular joes in a while. I might do another translation.

As for pavement, due to studless tires needing the rubber a bit softer and cut into many many small slits to find ANY grip on ice, they usually perform worse on pavement than studded tires. No gain there, sorry (unless they are pavement tires, in which case they have no grip on ice to speak of).

grassy_fields
Hi Mikko! Welcome back!

I found the testing a very clear way to try to compare tires. I printed out last year's Swedish pdf file from your link, and then printed out your translations (Oct 29 and 30) to help me navigate through the data.

As for this year, I guess we'll wait, unless you can translate and tell us how much the membership costs, and maybe enough of us are interested (at this time of the year) to together contribute to a membership to get this year's test results right away.

As for studless winter tires doing better on wet/dry pavement compared to studded, that seemed to have been a generally agreed upon statement in various messages I was reading, but since you questioned it, with some explanations of why not (and since generally agreed upon statements are certainly not always true), I did a quick search and found an old study of the original Blizzaks from Jan. 1995 (almost a decade ago!) that is available at this site.

They tested the studless Blizzak winter tire against both studded winter tires and studless all-season tires, on compacts, sedans, pickups, and a van, on packed snow, glare ice, icy pavement, and bare pavement, for stopping, starting, cornering, and hill climbing.

For stopping on glare ice from 25 mph, the studded did best taking 106 feet to stop, with Blizzaks at 118, and the all-seasons at 128.

On icy pavement, on the other hand, from 40 mph, the Blizzaks actually were best, taking 121 feet to stop, compared to the studded at 141 and the all-season at 179.

On bare pavement, the advantage of the Blizzaks over the studded was ranged from 2 to 35 or even 40%. On some tests, the all-seasons were marginally superior to the Blizzaks.

Finally, on packed snow, the Blizzaks were the best by slight margins, except for pickups where it did worse.

More details, and data for starting tests can be found at the link. Surprisingly, they found no differences between tires for cornering and hill climbing!

Of course, this is a very old study, and technology for both studded and studless tires is much more advanced (note how the Blizzaks did on last year's Swedish tests!). So I'm still wondering about the studded vs studless tradeoffs. If I drive long highway stretches with some curves (the max speed goes from 90 km/hr to 75 km/hr, with the traffic often going respectively 120-130 km/hr and 100 km/hr during summer), during times when snow and ice may still be present, and at the ends some smaller roads up and down hills for a bit of time, shouldn't I get a studded tire like the Pirelli Carver, or is the risk on the highway pavement so high and the improvement on ice of the new studless Nokian RSI so much that I should get the latter? And so, I'll do some more searching for published tests/reviews, but I'd be happy to hear of the knowledge and experience that any of you can share. Thanks!

CMSbob
No Single tire is the only one to use. Every different driver, car, road surface, temperature fluctations, etc, etc, etc, will all have an effect on the tires, and how a driver percieves them. You just need to find someone you trust who actually knows what they are talking about, and spends some time asking questions that will help evaluate what tire will best suit your own individual preferences and needs...

Again, no matter what winter tire you use, even the biggest POS winter tire going, will still be far better in true winter conditions than any all season tire you can get...

Xtrema

the rating doesn't mean you can't go pass 160. It just mean it passes test @ 160. Beyond that speed would be very unpredictible what the tire would do.

It's like overclocking a processor. You get lucky, it'll work all year long, if not, it burns out in a month or two.

And if you're doing 210 on winter condition and live to tell about it, thank god not the tires.

CMSbob

The speed rating is one of the most understood discriptions...

All the speed rating says (like a Q rated at 160kph for example) is that the tire can roll at that speed (properly inflated and not overloaded) consistently all day long, without any tire deformation. It has "NOTHING" to do with indicating the tires handling ability whatsoever.

There are many tires that have the same speed ratings, but massively different handling abilities. Do not assume that because the speed rating is 160kph that it means the tire is made to handle like it is on rails cuz it just ain't so...

Blur911
Hi Guys, I'm new here, first post.
Unfortunately the Swedish test doesn't mean much over here in Canada as we don't have the same tires. Most of the tires can't be found here as the manufacturers market different models. Plus, in most of the country, we can't use studs.

For my use, which includes a lot of bare pavement highway, and the occasional winter rally I've had good luck with Goodyear Eagle GW-2 and GW-3, they can handle the snow and ice without giving up all pavement performance. YMMV

rio_rex
Any reviews on the new michilin X-Ice?

Mikko

- I think the member fee is ridiculously small, maybe 5 dollars or so. But the hassle measured in money is large. :p No point in bothering, they will make it public sooner or later.

- The studs themselves don't in any way deterioate tarmac grip. Therefore the explanation on why studded (hardcore) winter tires perform better should rule our judgement. ;)

- What type of tires? How hardcore were they? The continential ones sold in Germany are made for mild winters with nearly everything put to tarmac. So basically a tarmac tire that works in colder temperatures. No ice grip to speak of and the snow grip is nasty.

Not to mention, there are and were plenty of lousy studded winter tires, too.

- That might tell you something of the quality of the test. Anyway, it is nine years old, a lot of things happened since then.

In the Aftonbladet tests, they have test tracks, several test drivers, who all use the same car but are at no point aware of what tire they are really using. This is for the subjective handling tests, btw. They just know them as Tire A, Tire X, etc and they write down their opinions. When everyone agrees that a certain tire behaves a certain way, they find that grounds enough to publish in their review. Such as being nearly impossible to stop skidding, etc.

- If you require hardcore winter tire ice/slush/snow grip, then there is no 'compromise' to choose one of the best studded ones. Well, except for a bit more road noise and marginally higher fuel consumption due to roll resistance.

Personally I don't see any particular reason to choose the lesser of two tires. There's nothing to be gained, except the said noise and tiny fuel difference.

- It is a logical choice to surrender some tarmac grip - because the grip is so large to begin with (as long as it is stable and not very flimsy), to gain a lot of ice grip.

Ice and similar counditions are absolutely critical. Grip MUST be had. It is said that dry tarmac is 100% traction, gravel is 60%, compressed snow is 20% and ice is 1%. To be left with a huge huge weakness when things are the most critical is irrational. Tarmac grip is still great even if it's 80% of a tarmac geared winter tire.

- I'm not entirely sure I agree with that. In those winter tire tests, some tires appear from time to time that behave almost like summer tires. The most lousy grip on anything winter related but do decently on tarmac. So the same behaviour as a poor all season tire then? :)

The quality range is huge.

- Really? I recall directing some people over there to some of the tires sold. I think Volvo/Saab dealers actually stock Nokian and other tires sometimes.. and some tire firms import them.

- I haven't heard of any, but I doubt things have changed much over the course of just one year.

benyl

If you look further up in this thread, you will see that in Alberta, we can use studded tires all year round. They are only banned in Ontario, the rest of the country can use them in at least the winter months.

CMSbob
[Quote]
CMSbob wrote:

No Single tire is the only one to use. Every different driver, car, road surface, temperature fluctations, etc, etc, etc, will all have an effect on the tires, and how a driver percieves them.
- It is a logical choice to surrender some tarmac grip - because the grip is so large to begin with (as long as it is stable and not very flimsy), to gain a lot of ice grip.

Ice and similar counditions are absolutely critical. Grip MUST be had. It is said that dry tarmac is 100% traction, gravel is 60%, compressed snow is 20% and ice is 1%. To be left with a huge huge weakness when things are the most critical is irrational. Tarmac grip is still great even if it's 80% of a tarmac geared winter tire.

Quote
CMSbob wrote:

no matter what winter tire you use, even the biggest POS winter tire going, will still be far better in true winter conditions than any all season tire you can get...
- I'm not entirely sure I agree with that. In those winter tire tests, some tires appear from time to time that behave almost like summer tires. The most lousy grip on anything winter related but do decently on tarmac. So the same behaviour as a poor all season tire then?

The quality range is huge.[Quote]

As we live in Canada, and conditions vary dramatically across the country, what I am saying is that circumstances are different and needs are different, so you must address your own individual needs if you want a tire that is going to do what you need it to do.

For example, if you live in Vancouver where winter generally means maybe a few snow days a year that generally melts extremely quickly, and all your driving is local city and higher speed freeway driving, you will probably be more safe using a winter tire that is oriented more to providing better handling and wear, instead of using a pure ice traction tire like the Blizzak WS50 that provides heightened ice traction at the sacrifice of emergency manueverability on bare and wet pavement.

Conversely, if you live in northern Quebec, and 90% of your driving is on ice and compact snow covered roads for a massive part of the winter season, than going to a hardcore ice/snow traction tire will be the main priority as you probably aren't going to be doing the higher speeds and will not need the bare road performance handling as much as the ice traction...

Now as for any true winter tires being better than all seasons in regards to severe winter abilities, this is a fact. Transport Canada requires certain testing to be done before a tire can be branded with the specific "severe winter condition" symbol of a snowflake within a mountain, which is what differentiates an all season from a winter tire. An tire branded all season, does "not" have to go through any testing procedure before it can be called all season, and that is why the new severe winter condition procedure was created. All season is a marketing strategy and not an indicator of the tires abilities...

Mikko
Well yeah, you are right about the Vancouver comment :) But that isn't even winter conditions is it? It's a sub-tropical zone (the city).

All-season = no-season tire.

CMSbob

Exactly my point... Different drivers + different conditions + different cars = different needs.

I used the Vancouver (As you pointed out has virtually no winter at all the lucky bastids!) and Quebec examples because I have lived and worked continually for many, many years in the tire industry in both of these areas, as well as running an internet tire business dealing with customers and shipping goods all over North America, before moving to Calgary, and it is interesting how the tires that seem to be preferred in the different areas, are never the same. Especially over the last 10 years or so, as the technology has advanced sooooo much over this time period that the choices are even more wide and varied than ever...

Blur911

Oops, you're right, I misinterpreted the map and thought studs were not allowed in more provinces.

But I will stick by my statement that we get a different mix of tires in North America than in Europe. Take a look at the Goodyear website and you'll see that we don't get the UG500, we have a different Ultra-Grip Ice, we don't have the UG5 or the UG6 either. We do get the GW2 and GW3 though, also, we do get the Eagle M+S and Ultra Grip not available in Europe

I also don't recognize any of the Michelins in the survey, we don't get the Nokian Hakka 4, and the Hakka Q is being discontinued. We don't get either of the Continentals listed either. I haven't bothered checking the other manufacturers, but most of the products listed are unfamiliar to me.
:dunno:

grassy_fields

So, I looked over the 2003 Aftonbladet tests again. There was one test looking at braking on wet pavement, and in fact, the tires that were usually best in the other tests (on ice and snow, all studded, like the Nokian Hakka 4, the Goodyear UG500 and the Pirelli Carving) were all midrange for the wet pavement, and the best for the wet pavement included some studless tires. However, the difference was minimal, whereas the difference between the best and the midrange in the other tests was often quite substantial.

I guess initially I was worried that the implications of losing control on highway pavement going at higher speeds with more traffic including trailer trucks and risks of dropping off a cliff if not holding a curve were much worse than losing control on icy village roads at low speed on small hills. But, as you are suggesting, it looks like there is much more to gain using studded tires and minimal loss.

I would have liked to have seen tests done on the new studless Nokian RSI with its new technology, but I suppose it's hard to imagine that it will be better than the studded Pirelli Carving that I will likely get now. By the way, what is the Nokian AK2? (Note that the three tires I have mentioned in this paragraph are available in the VW dealership in St. Jerome, Quebec, about half way between Mont-Tremblant and Montreal, probably more expensive than elsewhere, though I haven't checked yet if they are available elsewhere).

As for the noise, maybe it will help to warn away deer (what a fright while going on a curve to suddenly see a deer appear in the blackness of night just ahead at highway speeds!!), though I doubt it's that loud.

Thanks, Mikko, for your input.

PAnderso
Mikko, I just read your review or rather slam on the Blizzak WS-50 tires. I also noticed it was an old message. Do you have any more recent info on this tire?
I recently bought these tires & so far have been delighted with their performance. I was just curious if they may have perfected the tire since your review. Thank you!
PAnderso

Mikko

- No update, sorry. I don't think they would change anything about the tire anyway. Look for new releases of the same 'blizzak' name I guess.

The tire was mediocre fine overall, exept for the pavement. On the cold pavement, the grip when doing accident avoidance (thus, not regular driving), such as to avoid another car, deer, etc, it was horrible.

it is a tire that severely compromises tarmac performance in return for reasonable ice and snow grip.

I'm sure you will be fine. But just keep that in mind, that your maneuvering abilities on tarmac are nothing like how good they could be. Defensive driving!

CBRComet
It is a somewhat subjective opinion when people buy a new set of blizzaks or kumho or whatever and say that they are delighted with their performance. This is probably compared to the POS old tires they had or when you go from summer/all-seasons to winters. They probably are decent performers on their own.

This does not negate the fact that they may be inferior to higher performing tires from another manufacturer. Kumhos and other less expensive tires can be decent performers, but I don't think they are going to be OE on any Ferraris or Porsches anytime soon.

googe
any new updates?

CalgarySupra
WS-50 are the best that i know of

what is this disqualified bs?

even just having two in a real wheel drive car like supra/bmw you have near summer time control

googe
^:rofl: :rolleyes:

fast95pony
One thing I'd like to add ref the Blizzak WS-50 .

There are, I understand, 2 types : 40 series directional and 50 series non-directional WS-50 tires

I have 215/45-17 WS-50 (directional) on the Focus (all 4 tires )and I love them.This is my second year on the same set. I find them good on dry pavement and great in the snow/ice.

fast95pony

:bullshit:

Having just two snow tires is dangerous .

AcuraTl
have four arctic alpines on the odyssey (sp?) havent even put them on yet :( will do so asap...great tires ! four thumbs up :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Moe Man
nokians can only be purchased from kal tire, and they spank any winter tire out there, i have 4 cars and they all have nokians, never will i buy anything else

QuasarCav
Blizzak LM22 directional performance winter tire 195/55/15:

I chose these because I make alot of highway trips and needed the long life of a harder compound tire. They have alot of deep sipes and chunky treadblocks. The sidewall is only a bit softer than my Kumho 712's and the dry pavement ride is amazing. They are a little noisier than most but nothing offensive.

They are expensive at about 160ish per tire new but unlike the softer WS series they trade some ice/snow grip for treadlife and handling. They look pretty good with a lower profile and an aggresive tread pattern.

On the highway in on the dry roads it was hard to tell they were winter tires.

Their first test in snow was yesterday in Edmonton. They did handle well but were not exceptional. If you were easy of the gas and made slow turns they held up fine. On the highway in on the dry roads it was hard to tell they were winter tires.

I would buy a set again.

:thumbsup:

googe

i have a set of these on my car. not impressed at all. wouldnt recommend them, especially for the price. there is much better.

Brewmaster

Studded tires ARE allowed in every Province and Territory in Canada although some provinces have a limitation to what months you can use them. In others there's no law that prevents you from using them 12 months of the year if you were silly enough to do it.

Most of these tires can be found in every major city in Canada but you would actually have to make a phone call or two to find them.

Kelvin

ExtraSlow
Nice ancient thread bump.

Twin_Cam_Turbo
4 years for one lousy comment.