Topic: Feature: Winter Tires vs. All-Season Tires

[dirtyjeffer]

i had my first set of WS70s on last winter...they were great.

[Travel360]

Had Nokia Rsi on my 04 Sienna for many winters.Very happy with them. Last winter I  purchased the Goodyear Ultra Grip Winter-thinking I'll have another 2 years and I'm done with minivans -15 years!  I still regret going with the Goodyears since they are no better than the worn out RSi  !

[dkaz]

Yea I'm done with using these unproven winter tires. I'm going with WS-70s, Xi-3s, or R2s this year.

[tpl]

My local tire guy will be a happy camper.

 I have to buy 8 new tires and 8 new wheels this year.

4 15"   (175-70/15) for the Fit and 4 17"(205-50/17) ( or possibly 16"  205-55/16) for the M-B.
The Fit has all-seasons on it and the M-B has real summers.  FWIW neither car has a spare as automatic Fits come with goop and a pump and the B has runflats.  Both cars have roadside assistance tho'.  Since I retired ( no pun intended) I haven't HAD  to go anywhere on bad winter days so far but this year may be an exception.
It is a bit tempting to garage the M-B for the winter.


So I'll have to decide on which brand of tires.     Like Dkaz I'll probably stick to one of the top 3 names.

[Arctic_White]

There is an 'all weather' tire now....not 'all season'. Not good enough I suppose...has the snowflake I heard though.

I had the Nokian WR-G2 on the Camry and used it for one entire season.

It is a decent winter tire, sucks in slush (no wonder DKaz got rid of it!), but is absolutely amazing in wet.  It had better wet traction than the Bridgestone Potenza RE-960's that I was running in the Civic Si!

Yea I'm done with using these unproven winter tires. I'm going with WS-70s, Xi-3s, or R2s this year.

Agreed!  Though I'm more leaning towards the Michelin and the Hakka R2s over the WS-70 based on this: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=W&VT=C

I spoke with several tire dealers and they said even though Michelin claims 60K kms warranty, that's based on 2/32rd treadwear.  All of them recommended to replace Michelin tires at 4/32rd.  This means that actual mileage that one could get out of Michelin would be ~45,000 kms and not 60,000 kms as Michelin has guaranteed.

[Arctic_White]

I'm a Blizzak slappy because they've given me amazing winter service over very difficult winter mountain roads.  The new WS-70's are on our Forester and Corolla, and they're superb.

I wouldn't be taking my car up to any mountains in the winter.  As you know, Edmonton's roads are cleared 99% of the time.  Therefore, I'm leaning more towards the Michelin as they provide better dry-weather handling than the WS-70.

[Angry Chicken]

Do they have Yokohama W*Drives in your size?  They're worth a look and they were especially an improvement on the Chinese brand winters which I previously had on the TT.

[rrocket]

I'm the opposite of JonX.  I'm an X-Ice slappy.  Have had them since the X-Ice.  Will be getting the X-Ice3 this year.  It's the only winter tire I've bought for the last several years, and has performed superbly and beyond expectations.  I did try a Bridgestone WS the one time...but it wore quite quickly.  The X-ice wear is much, much better.

Am currently shopping for some 16" GS300 wheels to be used on the GS400, and IQ will need new winter tires too, as her X-Ice2's are nearly worn.  So we'll be buyng 2 sets this year.  Although if I could get a dynamite price, I's look at the Nokia WR2/3  But a good price from KalTire is a rarity.

[dirtyjeffer]

I'm the opposite of JonX.  I'm an X-Ice slappy.  Have had them since the X-Ice.  Will be getting the X-Ice3 this year.  It's the only winter tire I've bought for the last several years, and has performed superbly and beyond expectations.  I did try a Bridgestone WS the one time...but it wore quite quickly.  The X-ice wear is much, much better.

i have a set of XI2s on the ET and a set of WS-70s on the Rio5...the Michelin's are great, but the WS70s were also excellent...the WS70s are much improved from earlier Blizzak models in terms of wear.

[rrocket]

^^Yes, I've heard that.  But so are the X-Ice.  Our X-Ice 2 have had incredible wear.

Either way...both great tires IMO.

[Black Hatch]

I'm a Blizzak slappy because they've given me amazing winter service over very difficult winter mountain roads.  The new WS-70's are on our Forester and Corolla, and they're superb.

I wouldn't be taking my car up to any mountains in the winter.  As you know, Edmonton's roads are cleared 99% of the time.  Therefore, I'm leaning more towards the Michelin as they provide better dry-weather handling than the WS-70.

I wouldn't say 99% of the time.... more like 90% of the time.
They didn't clear residential streets until very late.

[johngenx]

And that 10% can be BRUTAL.  Take sporadic terrible city roads with my need to drive roads like the Icefields Parkway during or after a storm ('cause I have mad pow disease!) and I want awesome winter tires.

[Snowman]

I don't care if I only use winter tires ability 1% of the time, worth every penny when road conditions deteriorate to that level.

[dkaz]

Agreed!  Though I'm more leaning towards the Michelin and the Hakka R2s over the WS-70 based on this: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=W&VT=C

I spoke with several tire dealers and they said even though Michelin claims 60K kms warranty, that's based on 2/32rd treadwear.  All of them recommended to replace Michelin tires at 4/32rd.  This means that actual mileage that one could get out of Michelin would be ~45,000 kms and not 60,000 kms as Michelin has guaranteed.

I'm also leaning towards the Michelins or Nokians. It'd be nice to do a little bit of spirited driving the odd time the roads are dry, which is almost never here in the winter. 10% dry, 83% wet, 5% icy, 2% snowy. My Toyo Observe G02+ lasted four seasons, about 40,000km. Actually they still have 7/32nds of tread on them minimum, but I'm done with them.

They weren't that great to begin with brand new and they were marginal this winter.

I wouldn't be taking my car up to any mountains in the winter.  As you know, Edmonton's roads are cleared 99% of the time.  Therefore, I'm leaning more towards the Michelin as they provide better dry-weather handling than the WS-70.

I was in Edmonton last November for 5 days, you guys had snow on the road the entire time. You guys got such a huge dump of snow when I arrived that they never managed to clear any of the roads. My G02+s embarrassed me a couple of times. ;(

I don't care if I only use winter tires ability 1% of the time, worth every penny when road conditions deteriorate to that level.

I also like being that guy who is unstoppable in the snow. I remember a CRV failing to get up a somewhat steep hill in 2008 when Vancouver got that massive dump of snow and had to pull aside to let my Corolla with Yokohama iceGuard iG20s ascend that hill with absolutely no issues. That guy's Real Time 4WD system sure worked well for him...

The iG20s were great, but it burned through 2/32" of tread in 10,000km, were a bit unpredictable taking turns, and wandered too much on the highway especially at over 115km/h. But they could stop on a dime on snow and ice and accelerated up snow packed hills like they were flat.

[mixmanmash]

Agreed!  Though I'm more leaning towards the Michelin and the Hakka R2s over the WS-70 based on this: http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/surveydisplay.jsp?type=W&VT=C

I spoke with several tire dealers and they said even though Michelin claims 60K kms warranty, that's based on 2/32rd treadwear.  All of them recommended to replace Michelin tires at 4/32rd.  This means that actual mileage that one could get out of Michelin would be ~45,000 kms and not 60,000 kms as Michelin has guaranteed.

I'm also leaning towards the Michelins or Nokians. It'd be nice to do a little bit of spirited driving the odd time the roads are dry, which is almost never here in the winter. 10% dry, 83% wet, 5% icy, 2% snowy. My Toyo Observe G02+ lasted four seasons, about 40,000km. Actually they still have 7/32nds of tread on them minimum, but I'm done with them.

They weren't that great to begin with brand new and they were marginal this winter.

I wouldn't be taking my car up to any mountains in the winter.  As you know, Edmonton's roads are cleared 99% of the time.  Therefore, I'm leaning more towards the Michelin as they provide better dry-weather handling than the WS-70.

I was in Edmonton last November for 5 days, you guys had snow on the road the entire time. You guys got such a huge dump of snow when I arrived that they never managed to clear any of the roads. My G02+s embarrassed me a couple of times. ;(

I don't care if I only use winter tires ability 1% of the time, worth every penny when road conditions deteriorate to that level.

I also like being that guy who is unstoppable in the snow. I remember a CRV failing to get up a somewhat steep hill in 2008 when Vancouver got that massive dump of snow and had to pull aside to let my Corolla with Yokohama iceGuard iG20s ascend that hill with absolutely no issues. That guy's Real Time 4WD system sure worked well for him...

The iG20s were great, but it burned through 2/32" of tread in 10,000km, were a bit unpredictable taking turns, and wandered too much on the highway especially at over 115km/h. But they could stop on a dime on snow and ice and accelerated up snow packed hills like they were flat.

I know the 5 days in November.  That week was hell for driving.  All in a day, it started with rain and as it got colder, it turned into freezing rain, then wet snow and then normal snow.  It basically froze onto the streets.  I wouldn't feel bad about being embarrassed by your winter tires.  Most people with winter tires had issues stopping.  I was a little better with my studded Nokian Hakka 7s, but still challenging.  I couldn't imagine driving on all seasons through those roads.

As for the guy with the CRV, I vote that he had all-seasons with 3/32" tread.

[Patrick_D1]

I live in the GTA, but often travel to northern Ontario. These days I tend to lean toward high-performance winter tires. While I give up a bit of deep-snow traction to tires like the X-Ice Xi3, I get respectable snow/ice performance without appalling dry-road performance.

I'm currently running a set of Hankook I*Cept EVO and have been very impressed with them (this coming from someone who grew up driving in the snow).

[dkaz]

One performance winter tire I'm highly considering is the Dunlop Wintersport 4D. It was highly rated at Autoexpress UK in this year's test against other winter tires. A pre production model was also featured in last year's test against other all weather tires.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/wheels-and-tyres/60715/dunlop-sp-winter-sport-4d

[Arctic_White]

I don't care if I only use winter tires ability 1% of the time, worth every penny when road conditions deteriorate to that level.

Agreed.  I'm with you 100% on that one.

But being a devil's advocate, bare with me please:

Assuming that WS-70's are rated at 10/10 for deep snow, X-ice 3's are rated at least 9/10.

And if the dry handling and steering response for X-ice is 10/10, then WS-70's is only at 7/10.

From multiple reviews, they both perform equally well in icy situations with Bridgestones being better in first year and not so much thereafter, but Michelins retaining their ice-handling qualities until they is 5/32 treadwear remaining. 

With that said, isn't it better to choose the Michelins?

And that 10% can be BRUTAL.  Take sporadic terrible city roads with my need to drive roads like the Icefields Parkway during or after a storm ('cause I have mad pow disease!) and I want awesome winter tires.

If that's the case then why not go with Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2's?  They are arguably better in severe weather conditions than either the Michelins or Bridgestone with the added benefit of being excellent in cold dry weather.

[dirtyjeffer]

With that said, isn't it better to choose the Michelins?

i think both tires are pretty comparable.

i was going to get XI3s when i bought my WS70s, but the Bridgestone's were on sale when it was time to buy tires and were also a little less expensive...XI3s would have been about $75/tire more than the WS70s...while i don't mind paying more for a better tire, i don't think the XI3s are $300 better than the WS70s.

[dkaz]

I'm also leaning towards the R2s for that reason. Seems well worth the extra $13 per corner.