Which flavor tires this year

Last few winters I've been running 225/55/17 Dunlop Wintersport M3's.

I want to do something different this year.

I've narrowed it down to Dunlop SP Wintersport 3D's or Bridgeston Blizzak WS60's. I'm also considering going with a skinnier 215/55/17.

The Firestone Winterforce looks mean, but I think it will be to squishy on the road. For that same reason, I think I would do the wintersports in 225 or the blizzaks in 215.

any input?

I have a 28 mile commute to work (one way) mostly highway. But on the weekends I work at the ski area. My main concern with the blizzaks is that I'll wear them down too fast.

Why not the Michelin X-ice Xi2? 215/55/17....

Didn't really look at them because in that category, the blizzak is a known performer. I don't know much about the X-ice's, but from what I gather, they will perform better on dry road than the blizzak, and almost as good on ice/snow

^ According to this year's CR Winter Tire Test, that's reversed. As a generalization, the WS60 does better in the clear and wet, but trails the Xi2 in terms of ice and snow. And before you say that TireRack says differently, note that outahere and I already discussed this - http://www.legacygt.com/forums/showthread.php?t=122359&page=3, posts 34, 36, and 41, note what Luke of TireRack had to say, after we'd pointed out the CR results.

It doesn't really surprise me that the Xi2s are ranked higher than the WS60s, given that the Xi2s were introduced after the WS60, and moreover, specifically targeted the WS60.

The Xi2 supposedly also wears better than the WS60 - but I'd put that aside. Instead, my concern would focus on the fact that although tread depth/wear is an unavoidable part of the equation, the Xi2s don't suffer the dual-bogey of also having the top-layer proprietary compound literally "go away," as the WS60s do, upon wear through the first ~50% of its tread-depth.

The Winterforces may look mean, but they rank consistently at the bottom of tests when comparing within the genre of "Studless Ice & Snows." Versus either the WS60 or the Xi2, unless you want to stud the Winterforce (which, by the other thread, you definitely seem to not want to do), I'd say to drop this tire out of contention, completely.

Like outahere said, mweiner, you've really got to narrow down exactly what it is that you want, from your tires.

You stated earlier that you're worried about the tires feeling too squishy - if that's the case, then you shouldn't go the way of "Studless Ice & Snows," at all, and should completely drop the Xi2 and the WS60 out of your potentials pool, and should focus specifically on "Performance Winters." It's not really the width that's the problem, but rather, both the taller tread blocks as well as the compounding.

If you want to stay with "Performance Winters" - be it another set of M3s or the 3Ds - cutting treadwidth by the 10mm may make the car feel more connected in snow, but I honestly doubt it. If you're really looking for that edge, I'd go with 205s, but expect your clear-road performance to suffer a little, for simple lack-of-rubber. It's a compromise that you'll have to make, for yourself.

If you're looking at the "Studless Ice & Snow," the drop to a 215 sizing from the 225 again probably wouldn't really play-out to any type of real-world noticeable differences in terms of how well the tire digs through the white stuff. Furthermore, simply having stepped to the "Studless Ice & Snow" category from the "Performance Winter" category, the differences in tread design as well as compounding will highlight an instantaneous advantage to the former, in particularly deeper snow as well as on icier surfaces, even if you just kept things at 225-width.

Trust me. My Legacy is on 225/45/17 3Ds, and Sara's WRX (4EAT sedan) and now '09 FXT has been on Xi2s, 215/50/17.

The difference is just as outahere highlighted, and it's a decision you should base upon your desired compromises.

What would I do, in your shoes?

If you wanted more aggressive snow/ice performance, I'd go with the Xi2 or the WS60.

If you wanted to play around a bit by switching brands, but staying within the "Performance Winter" sector, I'd try the Bridgestone Blizzak LM60, Continental TS810, or the Michelin Pilot Alpin PA3 - or if you're looking to blow some cash, the comparable Pirelli Sottozero offering.

about width.... keep in mind I have an outback, not a legacy. My summer tire is a 245, so I wouldn't want to go less than a 215.

the LM60 doesn't come in 215/55-17, unfortunately. There are no tires available in 205/60-17

I don't have anything against studded tires... just the people that drive around on them way too early/late in the season or keep them on year round. That and the fact that 90% of the people that have them don't need them.

Dont do the Ice Bears. The first year I had them they were spectacular, the second winter, just crap. They are sitting in storage with 3/4 of their original tread left. There was no way I was going to run them for another winter.

As TSI said, the Xi2's are a little squishy in warmer temps, but as of late in colder temps (40 and below) the tires have firmed up. So far I am pretty impressed with them

about width.... keep in mind I have an outback, not a legacy. My summer tire is a 245, so I wouldn't want to go less than a 215.

 

the LM60 doesn't come in 215/55-17, unfortunately. There are no tires available in 205/60-17

 

 

I don't have anything against studded tires... just the people that drive around on them way too early/late in the season or keep them on year round. That and the fact that 90% of the people that have them don't need them.

^ I don't mind that you have your opinions about studded tires at all, don't misunderstand. That's just fine - everyone's got their own opinions, and they're all valid.

The only thing that didn't make sense, from what you said in the other thread, were the claims you made, which outahere proved (or rather, I should say, the many different recognized and respected tests/sources proved, and outahere "simly" cited) just did not hold, with quantitative data brought in to cross-examine them.

But that's secondary. Let's get back to *your* current decision -

It wouldn't matter if your summer tires are 285-width.

The truth of the matter is simply that you're not going to be able to discern much of a difference between 215 and 225 widths.

Is there going to be a noticeable difference from, say, comparing X "winter" tire, in 245-width, compared to the same X "winter" tire, in 225 width, when applied to our BL/BPs? Certainly. But in debating between a 225 versus a 215? that's nearly moot.

Just shop for what's available and/or fits your budget the best - my point is simply that to make the comparison valid, from behind the wheel, you'll need to drop down to 205, before anything really will become all that apparent, versus the 225. Changing the tire width by 10mm is not something that any of us will readily notice - and Luke of TireRack has gone so far as to jokingly suggest that it's something that you'll be able to discern only if your last name happens to be Andretti or Schumacher - in all honesty, you'd see more of an effect on traction just by having slacked off on tire-pressure maintenance for two or three weeks or with a drastic weather swing.

The way I see your current decision isn't in terms of tire width, rather, it should be focused FIRST and foremost on what "genre" of tire you want to run - "Studless Ice & Snow" versus "Performance Winter."

That's the first and most critical branch-point in your decision tree, and without being able to decide what you want to do, there, you won't be able to go any further in terms of your decisions, downstream. It simply makes absolutely no sense in your comparison poll to have even grouped a 215-width "Studless Ice & Snow" with a 225-width "Performance Winter" - that's exactly how my family's winter tire setup goes, and it's literally a night-and-day performance difference, across-the-board.

If you're looking to maintain some level of fun in the clear, as compared to your 245 summer setup, go with a wider "Performance Winters." It doesn't really even matter much what brand/make you choose, as long as it's one of the top-runners.

If you're looking, instead, to be more sure-footed in the most awful of wintry weather, go with narrower "Studless Ice & Snows." Again, specific brand/model would be secondary.

^ I think you'll be happy, if increased winter-weather traction is what you're looking for.

Just don't expect the tire to do what your outgoing M3s did, in the clear - both wet and dry - in terms of performance and fun factor. They're no "Performance Winter," and the first time you get aggressive with them in the clear (remember, no matter how you want to assess the tires, that first 300-500 miles, it's going to be noticeably more "slippery," due to the mold-release, so wait until after the tires "break-in"), you'll see that, right off the bat.

If you're like me - that you like to get a feel for the tire's capabilities in a deserted parking lot - be careful...you can get up to scary-fast speeds with the Xi2, in deep snowpile or on hardpack, before they'll start to drift/slide like the M3s will. Work up your assessment gradually.

If you're going with a local mom-and-pop, be sure that they're giving you the Xi2, and not the previous X-Ice iteration. With the tires being only a season old (they were introduced last year), I don't think you'll need to check the DOT week-of-manufacture stamping, but there is a significant difference between the outgoing X-Ice and the newer Xi2.

Since your Outback's weight, distribution, and your tire sizing will be different from mine, I won't be able to give you much guidance on fill pressure. On Sara's WRX, I ran the 215/50/17 (on my stocker LGT 5-spokes) at 37/35 PSI, F/R, cold. Currently, they're 38/36, F/R, cold, on her '09 FXT, on the same rims (yes, I lose about a quarter to half-inch of ground clearance with these tires, compared to stock - that doesn't bother me, as the '09 FXT's stock height is nearly 9-inches...since Sara never had any trouble with her '05 WRX at stock height, I honestly doubt that the modification will create any troubles for her, and I saved a nice bundle of cash).

I have a 28 mile commute to work (one way) mostly highway. But on the weekends I work at the ski area. My main concern with the blizzaks is that I'll wear them down too fast.......

Then the Xi2 is the next best choice. Michelin claims much longer tread life compared to the Blizzak WS60, and Bridgestone has not challenged that claim.

.........If you're looking to maintain some level of fun in the clear, as compared to your 245 summer setup, go with a wider "Performance Winters." It doesn't really even matter much what brand/make you choose, as long as it's one of the top-runners.

 

If you're looking, instead, to be more sure-footed in the most awful of wintry weather, go with narrower "Studless Ice & Snows." Again, specific brand/model would be secondary.

This highlights a fundamental choice winter tire buyers need to make. Do you want a tire that will meet the challenges of the worst winter conditions you will encounter (e.g. deep snow or ice) or do you want a tire that will meet the "challenges" of the best winter conditions you will encounter (e.g cold dry pavement).

supposedly micheln XiceXi2 doesnt have good slush and/or snow performance but it excels for driving on ice

i dont run into ice as often as i would with snow and slush so i went with Hankook iPikes W409's and they have pretty good grip, although i can say anything about treadwear yet since they are brand new

supposedly micheln XiceXi2 doesnt have good slush and/or snow performance but it excels for driving on ice

Depending on which tests you read, the ice traction comparison data seems to vary.

I honestly don't know if this is due to the highly variable testing surface that "ice" presents, or if this is due to ancillary considerations (i.e. how one vehicle responds to a certain set of tires, inflation pressures, etc.)?

In terms of snow/slush, though, it's pretty consistent that the Xi2s beat-out the WS60s, but I'd suspect that the margin is going to be small enough that it's only visible under testing situations, and is all but transparent in real-world situations, with the increased variables and other "unaccountables" present.

Where the Xi2 is weak - and this seems to be, again, something that's been consistently pointed out - is in the wet, on clear roadways.

In all honesty, at this point, with what's likely to be limited availability of sizing, since we're so far into the season already, I'd just get the fitment that's available - or throw a coin up in the air and flip between the WS60 and the Xi2. I'd be happy with either.

Or (assuming that one's only willing to stay within the confines of choices offered by TireRack) I'd take a peek at the Dunlop Graspic DS-3 or the ContiExtremeWinterContact. Both are new this season, and since tire-technology stands still for no-man, I'd be interested in how these newcomers fare, with relation to the benchmarks from the last two seasons.

---

This highlights a fundamental choice winter tire buyers need to make. Do you want a tire that will meet the challenges of the worst winter conditions you will encounter (e.g. deep snow or ice) or do you want a tire that will meet the "challenges" of the best winter conditions you will encounter (e.g cold dry pavement).

^ Yep.

I got my 3Ds because I wanted to keep some semblance of clear-highway and also clear secondary-streets fun value - the 3Ds offer that, at the expense of wintry-weather traction, but I was willing to make that trade-off.

Meanwhile, for my wife, who doesn't do "fun" driving, I wanted simply a set of tires that would get her through the worst of the winter stuff - our occasional "Lake Effect" blizzards and/or the once-per-season ice-storm - and guaranty that she'd be safe, traveling, sometimes at non-peak hours, to see her patients.

The end-user should keep, as you so well said, the fundamental difference in-mind, and then go from there.

.........Where the Xi2 is weak - and this seems to be, again, something that's been consistently pointed out - is in the wet, on clear roadways. ..........

This seems to be a weak point with many of the studless ice&snow tires. To get good ice performance from the tread design and rubber formulation, they sacrifice wet performance. With studs, lesser compromises are required to get good ice traction, and better wet traction can be designed in.

Depending on which tests you read, the ice traction comparison data seems to vary.

 

I honestly don't know if this is due to the highly variable testing surface that "ice" presents, or if this is due to ancillary considerations (i.e. how one vehicle responds to a certain set of tires, inflation pressures, etc.)?.........

Yeah, TR says the WS60 has best traction on ice, and CR says the Xi2 has best traction on ice. Temperature must have something to do with it.

And as you say, the test ice surface also has a bearing. Snow is also a variable surface. You drive over it once, and it is now a different surface. But I would think that by now the people who run these Artic test facilities have the consistency problem figured out, and can groom the ice and snow test surfaces to get a consistent surface.

RE: lackluster performance of "Studless Ice & Snow" genre, in the wet -

This seems to be a weak point with many of the studless ice&snow tires. To get good ice performance from the tread design and rubber formulation, they sacrifice wet performance. With studs, lesser compromises are required to get good ice traction, and better wet traction can be designed in.

^ That certainly seems logical.

RE: ice testing -

But I would think that by now the people who run these Artic test facilities have the consistency problem figured out, and can groom the ice and snow test surfaces to get a consistent surface.

^ Agreed.

Maybe it is just now a matter of getting "everyone" standardized, on the exact condition of the ice?

One bit that's been lost here is mweiner2's combination of daily commutes (into Denver, it appears by the mileage) and weekend trips to a job at a ski area (Eldora? Loveland?). There's really no reason for performance tires on the commute, and there are lots of severe winter conditions he's encountering on the trips up the hill.

I lived north of town in Boulder County (great view of Haystack to the south of our house) for several years, and commuted into CU and spent almost each weekend skiing, using an Audi A4 with studded Gislavads. The tires were wasted on the commute, but I always -- always -- was happy to have them on the weekend trips.

So it goes back to outahere's comment about what conditions you're preparing for: the worst, or the most common. If it's the latter, winter on the Front Range calls for all-seasons about 75% of the time. But that other 25% can be dicey.

Ultimately, I decided the studs were too much for my needs and went with performance winter tires -- it was an earlier version of the Dunlops at the time. HPH

One bit that's been lost here is mweiner2's combination of daily commutes (into Denver, it appears by the mileage) and weekend trips to a job at a ski area (Eldora? Loveland?). There's really no reason for performance tires on the commute, and there are lots of severe winter conditions he's encountering on the trips up the hill.

 

I lived north of town in Boulder County (great view of Haystack to the south of our house) for several years, and commuted into CU and spent almost each weekend skiing, using an Audi A4 with studded Gislavads. The tires were wasted on the commute, but I always -- always -- was happy to have them on the weekend trips.

 

So it goes back to outahere's comment about what conditions you're preparing for: the worst, or the most common. If it's the latter, winter on the Front Range calls for all-seasons about 75% of the time. But that other 25% can be dicey.

 

Ultimately, I decided the studs were too much for my needs and went with performance winter tires -- it was an earlier version of the Dunlops at the time. HPH

I don't think mweiner's usage needs is lost, at all. Instead, as with your post, I think that's what many of us are trying to make mweiner focus on - that most critical and fundamental difference, to help him decide what tires would be right for him.