When to Change to Winter Tires

Here is what the VP of R&D at Continental says about this topic:

 

"............Our studies suggest that winter tires should be mounted at the first signs of cooling air below 45°F, not just at the first snowfall.......................

 

But below 45°F, the harder tread compounds of these all-season tires become increasingly stiff and brittle, a condition that worsens as temperatures decline.

 

The hardness of these tires at lower temperatures means they no longer conform to the surface of the road. This leads directly to reduced grip on the road and a much-reduced overall performance – mileage, braking distances, cornering, handling, etc. – ranging from 20% to 25%. In fact, stopping distances can double if you are not using a winter tire as temperatures decline.

 

..........Additionally, even in those areas that don’t see dozens of inches of snow each year, winter tires outperform all-season treads in wet traction and braking..............

 

.........Slush-covered roads pose a dangerous situation for standard all-season tires, but the softer compounds and added gripping edges of winter patterns deliver greater driving reliability.............

 

http://www.tirereview.com/Article/78010/help_customers_know_when_to_change_over_to_winter_tires.aspx

^ Very interesting -

 

You know, we keep reading things like that, and to be truthful, I'm on the cautious side, too (I tend to switch to winter tires, whether there's the white stuff in the forecast or not, by the last week of October, as long as temperatures are low), but as I'm sure you'll remember, the Car & Driver 2009 Michelin tire comparo data would suggest different:

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q4/2009_winter_tire_test-comparison_tests

 

I know that the temperature thing threw us both for a loop, but looking at the data, without snow on the ground, one would think that the MXM4 was the better performer.

 

Do you know of any other data that cross-compares winter-tire sub-genres?

I was hoping you would post that C&D link. Interesting how the C&D data contradicts what the Continental VP says. The Michelin winter tires clearly had longer braking distances than the Michelin all seasons on wet and dry surface. Pretty surprising result, given the 23 degF temperatures. But C&D did not specify whether the test surface was concrete or asphalt. That could be a factor.

 

Too bad they didn't do any ice testing. I think we would see that as ice traction improves, wet and dry braking deteriorates. If you design with studs, you do not have to depend solely on rubber formulation and tread design for ice traction, and that latitude allows some improved wet/dry braking to be designed into the tire.

 

Do you know of any other data that cross-compares winter-tire sub-genres?

 

Haven't seen any, but it would be nice to see some more tests of this type. That could give a better picture of what we are sacrificing on dry and wet pavement to get better ice and snow traction.

 

I have seen a few vehicles in my neighborhood that run Michelin and Blizzak winter tires even in the summer when it is 90 degF. Would hate to see the braking distance on those vehicles!

I was hoping you would post that C&D link. Interesting how the C&D data contradicts what the Continental VP says. The Michelin winter tires clearly had longer braking distances than the Michelin all seasons on wet and dry surface. Pretty surprising result, given the 23 degF temperatures. But C&D did not specify whether the test surface was concrete or asphalt. That could be a factor.

 

Good points, all-around.

 

I almost wonder if the general "tire mongers'" claim that 45-deg. F. is the switch-over point isn't both a conservative estimate (based not only solely on safety, but also on the likely swing in the weather at those times of year: i.e. when it gets down to 45, reliably, here, it's just as possible to snow a little or have an ice-storm, if the conditions are right, it's the typical unpredictability of the transition seasons) as well as have a monetary/fiscal motive.

 

Too bad they didn't do any ice testing. I think we would see that as ice traction improves, wet and dry braking deteriorates. If you design with studs, you do not have to depend solely on rubber formulation and tread design for ice traction, and that latitude allows some improved wet/dry braking to be designed into the tire.

 

^ Agreed, it would have been very interesting to see that.

 

RE: cross sub-genre testing -

Haven't seen any, but it would be nice to see some more tests of this type. That could give a better picture of what we are sacrificing on dry and wet pavement to get better ice and snow traction.

 

+1.

 

I think not only would the nuts, like guys and gals like the two of us, benefit from such data, but also it would demonstrate much more clearly to the average layman what these compromises mean.

 

That article in C&D really helps me talk to people like my sister-in-law's mom, who has no inherent understanding of the fact that tires are compromises.

 

I have seen a few vehicles in my neighborhood that run Michelin and Blizzak winter tires even in the summer when it is 90 degF. Would hate to see the braking distance on those vehicles!

 

Yeah, we get people who "run down" their last-season's worth of use sets, too.

 

I just hope that they realize they've gotta be more careful!

I remembered another similar test:

http://www.insideline.com/features/tire-test-all-season-vs-snow-vs-summer.html

 

Michelin Pilot HX MXM4 all-season tires vs Michelin Pilot Exalto PE2 high-performance summer tires vs Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3, all in size 215/45R17.

Tested in snow (in MN), in the dry (in CA), and in the wet (in AZ).

 

Wet testing:

 

"Things are much the same when braking from 60 mph [in the wet]. The summer tire's 157-foot stop is the shortest, the snow tires come up 2nd at 181 feet and the all-season tires lag further behind in a flurry of ABS activity on the way to a distance of 215 feet, some 58 feet longer than the summer tire." [surprising that the Alpin PA3 outbraked the MXM4 in warm temperatures!]

 

"On the wet skid pad the summer tire smokes them once more, even delivering a little tire squeal as it churns out 0.81g — a figure many car-tire combinations can't match on dry pavement. The winter tire trails with a 0.71g run characterized by noticeable squirm, presumably from the side loads acting on the numerous sipes in its snow-biased tread pattern. That said, it still bests our all-season tire, which once again brings up the rear with a disappointing 0.65g showing."

 

Dry testing:

 

 

"The summer tires (actually you could also think of them as three-season tires) top the charts in acceleration (8.7 seconds), stopping distance (120 feet) and lateral acceleration (0.86g). ................

 

Our all-season tire ties for top honors in the 0-60 test with another 8.7-second run, but its stopping distance and lateral grip figures sag in comparison to the summer tire, with marks of 131 feet and 0.84g, respectively.............

 

Pity the poor snow tires, as they are well and truly out of their element here. They manage a competitive 8.9-second acceleration pass to 60 mph, but the 155-foot braking runs and 0.81g lateral acceleration laps take a visible toll on the tread,................"

 

Based on these tests:

 

When it is wet and warm, the Primacy Alpin PA3 can outbrake the all-season MXM4. Seems bass ackwards. (Note that C&D tested the Pilot Alpin PA3, not the lower speed rated Primacy Alpin PA3)

 

When it is dry and warm, the MXM4 outbrakes the Primacy Alpin PA3, as expected.

 

Snow testing yielded no surprises.

I remembered another similar test:

http://www.insideline.com/features/tire-test-all-season-vs-snow-vs-summer.html

 

^ That's right, I remember you cited that earlier, now!

 

When it is wet and warm, the Primacy Alpin PA3 can outbrake the all-season MXM4. Seems bass ackwards.

 

^ They said that it took a visible toll on the tread...does that mean that it was literally leaving chunks of itself behind?

Here is Bridgestone's view, in an article by John Mahler:

 

"................Traction (that is, the tire's grip of the road) is determined by the tire's construction, materials and tread pattern, says Bill VandeWater, Bridgestone Tire's director of consumer products. The all-season tire, he points out, "is the jack of all trades and the master of none. There is no season where the all-season tire has better traction than a summer tire or a winter tire.

 

"On snow, the winter tire has better traction at -40C than an all-season tire has at 4C."

 

Lest you think he's biased, I have found similar results in my own testing. Remove the snow from the pavement and the winter tire still is the grip winner. In serious below-freezing temperatures, the winter tire can have as much as 50 per cent more traction and when it really gets into the big minus degree numbers, expect the all-season tire to have just 15 per cent of the traction of the winter tire.........."

 

http://www.wheels.ca/Tire%20Talk/article/167045

^ Certainly interesting - I just wish they provided some true comparative data.

 

I seem to remember reading that, some time ago. - I don't think my reaction to it then is as strong as it is, now, though: now, I think that many of the statements are more generalizations (i.e. "There is no season where the all-season tire has better traction than a summer tire or a winter tire.").

 

Hopefully, as North-American interests in winter tires continues to grow, we'll see more cross-sub-genre testing.

And here is CR's take on the issue:

 

"............We did some testing a few years ago to see if the dry and wet grip improves in cold temperatures for winter tires and found no conclusive improvement in grip.

 

All season tires are designed to perform reasonably well in most conditions. They generally have better dry and wet grip in cooler temperatures in the range of 40 to 50 F, compared to warmer conditions, like 80 to 100 F. It’s been documented, and we see it in our testing.

 

Our all weather testing at temperatures between 20 to 30F show that some all season tires grip as well as some winter tires on ice and snow, but we do not have data that directly compares dry stops in extremely cold temperature (less than 25F) and of course wet becomes an icy surface in these temperatures...."

 

http://discussions.consumerreports.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=cr-tiretalk&tid=2666

 

I am beginning to believe that the tire manufacturer's ideas that you need winter tires where temps are below 45 degF, even if you rarely see snow or ice, is more about increasing sales of winter tires (as opposed to snow tires), than about customer safety. Clearly, some all season tires can have very good grip on dry or wet pavement in cold temperatures, but they sacrifice warm temperature grip for that winter performance.

Sometimes I wonder about CR!

 

"Some additional detail on winter tires. All winter tire ratings are without studs installed in the stud-able models. We did test some studded and un-studded tires on ice. In our test, the better stud-less models provided comparable grip on ice as the studded models with studs installed. On average the studded tires stopped on ice about 25% shorter than their non-studded counterparts........"

 

The studded tires stopped 25% shorter than the studless tires, and yet they conclude that the performance on ice yields "comparable grip". :spin:

Lol, greedy manufacturers, want stupid consumers to buy more. Very little resembling truth in this. It's a common misconception that having winter tires costs more. You summer tires will last longer, and on average you'll end up buying tires just as often. They just want their consumers to live longer, so that they buy more tires just because of that.

 

The number of people, who do not realize that no-season tires suck on the dry hwy when it's cold, will never cease to amaze me.

The number of people, who do not realize that no-season tires suck on the dry hwy when it's cold, will never cease to amaze me.

 

^ That's part of what we're debating here, though - just how cold is cold, and where the margin lies (no pun intended ).

 

Current data seems to suggest that the 45-deg. F. change-over point may not be as true of a picture as the manufacturers and retailers are painting (see below).

 

 

----

 

 

And here is CR's take on the issue:

 

<snipped>

 

 

^ I have not seen that before, thank you.

 

I am beginning to believe that the tire manufacturer's ideas that you need winter tires where temps are below 45 degF, even if you rarely see snow or ice, is more about increasing sales of winter tires (as opposed to snow tires), than about customer safety. Clearly, some all season tires can have very good grip on dry or wet pavement in cold temperatures, but they sacrifice warm temperature grip for that winter performance.

 

^ That's what I was wondering - because the data either barely supports such claims of a 45-deg. F. switch-over point, or, alternatively, directly counters it.

 

But as you know, I'm not the type to think maliciously of anyone , so the other part of me wonders if it is either a leftover relic from the earlier days of "snow tires" or, alternatively, simply depends on how the tires are tested/compared (i.e. specific tire).

 

It's frustrating that we're left with nearly "sweeping" generalities, in terms of the tire-makers and tire-retailers' claims - and that there's so little true data.

 

 

----

 

 

Sometimes I wonder about CR!

 

"Some additional detail on winter tires. All winter tire ratings are without studs installed in the stud-able models. We did test some studded and un-studded tires on ice. In our test, the better stud-less models provided comparable grip on ice as the studded models with studs installed. On average the studded tires stopped on ice about 25% shorter than their non-studded counterparts........"

 

The studded tires stopped 25% shorter than the studless tires, and yet they conclude that the performance on ice yields "comparable grip". :spin:

 

 

:lol:

Or they could simply be wanting consumers to switch over below 45* to wear out their tires faster...lol Sure some all-season/summer tires may not handle as well as a dedicated snow tire below 45*, but personally I wait until the temps are at the highest 40-45 degrees during the day. We usually have a month or more of that before any snowfall, and certainly any accumulation. Id rather drive home slowly one evening on summers if it starts to snow than change over early when temps are dipping to 45*(which they have been for a week here...), and then drive around on winters for a month on dry pavement with daytime temps in the 50's. Of course, thats just me trying to squeak maximum life out of the uber-soft WS-60's...lol

Sometimes I wonder about CR!

 

"Some additional detail on winter tires. All winter tire ratings are without studs installed in the stud-able models. We did test some studded and un-studded tires on ice. In our test, the better stud-less models provided comparable grip on ice as the studded models with studs installed. On average the studded tires stopped on ice about 25% shorter than their non-studded counterparts........"

 

The studded tires stopped 25% shorter than the studless tires, and yet they conclude that the performance on ice yields "comparable grip". :spin:

 

This is what bothers me about CR's published test results. The little black and red circles per category of performance or safety are only vaguely quantifiable, since there is no hard data associated with them. The above example perfectly supports my uneasiness. When two tires have the same kind of little circle, what really does it mean? But I have to assume that the composite overall score is based on the composite raw data for all the categories combined, and that numeric score is more meaningful. So when the CR rating for the Xi2 is 7.7% higher than the Generals and the Nokian, 10.5% higher than the PA3, and 13.5% higher than the EWCs that is something--especially when combined with the NAF testing that gave the Xi2 the #1 spot by a 'surprising margin' (or however they said it).

Lol, greedy manufacturers, want stupid consumers to buy more. Very little resembling truth in this. It's a common misconception that having winter tires costs more. You summer tires will last longer, and on average you'll end up buying tires just as often. They just want their consumers to live longer, so that they buy more tires just because of that.

 

The number of people, who do not realize that no-season tires suck on the dry hwy when it's cold, will never cease to amaze me.

 

This leaves me wondering as to what valid reason anyone living in 'northern climes' with a serious winter would have to use AS tires during the winter. I live in Massachusetts and decided to go with the Conti EC DWS for our LGT. I hope we're not sorry! I suppose we can always use the Accord and the EWC on really cold days...

 

.......It's frustrating that we're left with nearly "sweeping" generalities, in terms of the tire-makers and tire-retailers' claims - and that there's so little true data.

.....

 

The VP of Continental R&D began his article (linked earlier) with the sentence

"Tiremakers all have different positions on when a driver should change to winter tires."

 

To me this implies there is not a tire industry consensus on the 45 degF change over to winter tires.

Or they could simply be wanting consumers to switch over below 45* to wear out their tires faster...lol Sure some all-season/summer tires may not handle as well as a dedicated snow tire below 45*, but personally I wait until the temps are at the highest 40-45 degrees during the day. We usually have a month or more of that before any snowfall, and certainly any accumulation. Id rather drive home slowly one evening on summers if it starts to snow than change over early when temps are dipping to 45*(which they have been for a week here...), and then drive around on winters for a month on dry pavement with daytime temps in the 50's. Of course, thats just me trying to squeak maximum life out of the uber-soft WS-60's...lol

 

^ Exactly - we all have different priorities. There's really nothing, per-se, right or wrong: I truly believe that as all tires are a compromise - at least, so far - as long as we're aware of the trade-offs we've made.

 

 

---

 

 

This leaves me wondering as to what valid reason anyone living in 'northern climes' with a serious winter would have to use AS tires during the winter.

 

That's a very good question - and one reason I can see, living here in NE-Ohio in the "Snow Belt," is this:

 

In many metro areas, snow removal is both efficient and timely. If your commute is during peak hours, you can almost be assured of cleared roadways, unless it's really, really coming down or there's an unexpected fall.

 

Under such specific conditions, looking at the Car & Driver data (as well as surmising from that CR said), there are definitely times when a good all-season tire can make its case against any winter tire.

 

But then, what happens when you are caught-out? That's another story, right?

 

So, it then goes back to this:

 

What are you preparing for - the worst, or the most common? And are you willing to make the sacrifices and compromises that comes with that decision, or do you need to re-evaluate?

 

There's no right or wrong answer in an absolute sense. But the decision can be right or wrong, relative to your specific end-goals/needs.

 

And I again cite these two most insightful posts:

 

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).

 

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.

The VP of Continental R&D began his article (linked earlier) with the sentence

"Tiremakers all have different positions on when a driver should change to winter tires."

 

To me this implies there is not a tire industry consensus on the 45 degF change over to winter tires.

 

^ That's a very good point that I had not picked up on.

 

I blame my ESL. Like my wife (and my now nearly 5-year-old) daughter love to point out, "Daddy doesn't speak English."

 

I missed that subtle - and likely very carefully made - choice of words.

But then, what happens when you are caught-out? That's another story, right?

 

So, it then goes back to this:

 

What are you preparing for - the worst, or the most common? And are you willing to make the sacrifices and compromises that comes with that decision, or do you need to re-evaluate?

 

There's no right or wrong answer in an absolute sense. But the decision can be right or wrong, relative to your specific end-goals/needs.

 

There are two other significant factors that can go into this decision:

 

1) How necessary is it for you to get on the road in any and all situations? If you HAVE to get to work (or somewhere) with little or no leeway due to weather, then you damn better prepare yourself for the worst. If (like with us) there is not that do-or-die (excuse the expression) pressure, then perhaps you can weight your choice to more common driving conditions, and;

 

2) Do you have the choice of an alternative vehicle with tires that can deal with worse/worst-case scenarios? One reason I decided to go with the AS Conti EC DWS for our LGT is that I've gotten the Conti EWC winters for the Honda and the Xi2 for the bimmer (not that I ever plan to drive the BMW through heavy snow/icy conditions, but I would take her out on dry roads in very cold weather). So we always have at least one vehicle that's properly shod for poor conditions. It would be a rare-to-never occurrence when we'd both have to leave the house in severe conditions using separate cars.

 

Given these two conditions I felt that it was proper to give our Subie a little more year-round driving pleasure with AS rubber rather than have to do yet a third spring/fall wheel swap every year.

Cleveland has timely snow removal? Ok, maybe, but a few times I drove through it during winter it was always snowing via lake-effect and pretty messy on the on/off ramps.

 

And a second thing to keep in mind - with teh economy the way it is there might be a lot less snow removal this winter.

Cleveland has timely snow removal? Ok, maybe, but a few times I drove through it during winter it was always snowing via lake-effect and pretty messy on the on/off ramps.

 

 

It's probably a combination of exactly where you were at the time, plus the freak-timing nature of true Lake Effect.

 

Where I live and commute, the snow removal is truly timely and efficient, and the only exceptions to that rule are during earlier or off-hours, and also when it's just coming down like crazy (4+ inches per hour; but note that in some other counties, it takes up to 8+ inches per hour before their municipal crews are no longer able to keep up).

 

Since our local streets are maintained by the municipal crews, the city/township's economic status has a lot to do with what's cleared and how well its cleared.

 

This is why when someone local to me asks about winter tire recommendations, one of my first requirements is that he/she details precisely their route requirements: it truly can make a huge difference, even moreso when you overlay the burden that living in the true primary Lake Effect Snow Belt can add to the unpredictability of events (note that although most people think of Cleveland as being affected by Lake Effect, the truth is that depending on where you live, precisely, you may get pommeled each and every time, or you may not see any true Lake Effect at all: this is again why knowing the precise route requirements is necessary, for those who live here).

 

Now, in my previous example, I took some liberties in order to make a point. You rightfully called me out for it, and I do appreciate that little pull back to reality. But here's a very real example, one I see *every* winter, and one for which I have 6 years of intimate experience:

 

Harvard Road, traversing the four townships of Warrensville Heights, Highland Hills, Beachwood and Orange.

 

Warrensville Heights makes a good attempt to maintain this road, particularly when viewed versus their township's budget. Cross over into Highland Hills, and it's a nightmare: you can literally go from being comfortable, at reduced speeds, to becoming nearly stuck in snowbanks. Get through that stretch and reach Beachwood and Orange? The roads could be so cleared that they're *dry*.

 

And a second thing to keep in mind - with teh economy the way it is there might be a lot less snow removal this winter.

 

^ Very, very true.

 

This was actually a part of the reason why I chose a more aggressively winterized tire for Sara (more below) - as of two winters ago, many townships had already started cutting back on plowing schedules for secondary streets. Even for somewhere as money-loaded as Orange Township, for example, knowing that they're in hard-times and taking proactive steps to address potential concerns has meant that even such relatively wealthy townships have had to cut back services.

 

 

----

 

 

There are two other significant factors that can go into this decision:

 

1) How necessary is it for you to get on the road in any and all situations? If you HAVE to get to work (or somewhere) with little or no leeway due to weather, then you damn better prepare yourself for the worst. If (like with us) there is not that do-or-die (excuse the expression) pressure, then perhaps you can weight your choice to more common driving conditions, and;

 

Exactly.

 

This is again something that I've routinely brought up for examination. In that same thread from which I've brought over outahere and DrCloud's great "truth serum" fundamental-decision-making-tree quotes, I also made reference to this very factor you speak of here, stevehecht

- illustrating the point with my wife's needs (based on her profession) versus mine.

 

In going back to the very last part of what I wrote to dmanaenk above, that fact that side streets are often less well maintained, in the recent years, has factored into the winter tire purchase decision I made for Sara's setup: she's a physician, and as-such, she either doesn't get the day off or can, if conditions demand, specifically get called-in to work, so having tires that will get her there was an important factor in where I chose to compromise. Me? My animals, though diabetic, can survive well enough for an additional day or two - so my needs aren't nearly as bad as hers (and heck, if-necessary, we could always commute, together, as we work on the same university/hospital campus).

 

Focusing on unique driver needs, to me, is a very important part of the winter-tire decision making process.

 

2) Do you have the choice of an alternative vehicle with tires that can deal with worse/worst-case scenarios? One reason I decided to go with the AS Conti EC DWS for our LGT is that I've gotten the Conti EWC winters for the Honda and the Xi2 for the bimmer (not that I ever plan to drive the BMW through heavy snow/icy conditions, but I would take her out on dry roads in very cold weather). So we always have at least one vehicle that's properly shod for poor conditions. It would be a rare-to-never occurrence when we'd both have to leave the house in severe conditions using separate cars.

 

Given these two conditions I felt that it was proper to give our Subie a little more year-round driving pleasure with AS rubber rather than have to do yet a third spring/fall wheel swap every year.

 

Exactly - yet again a most excellent point, one I don't believe has been highlighted nearly enough in the past.

 

We're lucky, in this respect, with the daily-driver vehicles in our household. Sara's '09 FXT and my '05 LGT are able to "share" tire/rim combos, as long as I keep sizing restrictions on my end in-mind.

 

Yes, in doing so, her vehicle loses some ground clearance, but it still puts her at over 8 inches.

 

So even if the snowplow guy doesn't come, we can definitely still get out of our driveway.

One problem I have found living in "snowiest city" (by pop.) is that drivers who only use AS tires is their overconfidence in the tires. Many NE folks claim "I've been driving in snow my whole life" and end up rear ending someone or sliding off the roads. While I know that accidents happen, I also feel that many drivers read reviews and expect miracle performance that AS just won't give you in the snow.

 

I also like to plan for the worst since no matter how good our plows may or may not be we get far too much snow for the roads to always be clear. And for many of us here in Syracuse, not coming in due to snow is not really an option, only because employers and schools expect you to "deal" with the snow as a fact of living here. A good example is that we had over 100" last season, and only one snow day for schools, and none for the college.

 

I know that when our weather man says lake effect that (everyday) that I am going to need to leave early, because the roads are bad and crowded. Also like most people I know, we don't have the option of taking another vehicle, so it's better to plan for the worst than be stuck at work/school and have 12" fall in a few hours from a storm that was only suppossed to be a light coating (happened last year with re92s) and not feel on the safe for the drive home. That being said I have been thinking that in a few more weeks when the weather stays cold I will be making the switch, since we have recorded over 2" on Oct 3rd before and I commute my daughters to day care and want them to be as safe as possible.

^ That's all very well considered.

 

One problem I have found living in "snowiest city" (by pop.) is that drivers who only use AS tires is their overconfidence in the tires. Many NE folks claim "I've been driving in snow my whole life" and end up rear ending someone or sliding off the roads. While I know that accidents happen, I also feel that many drivers read reviews and expect miracle performance that AS just won't give you in the snow.

 

Agreed.

 

But not only that - I find even people with winter tires and/or AWD/4WD can get overconfident: especially at that first good snowfall of the season.

 

The Click and Clack "Tappet Brothers" are fond of citing "Subris." I, for one, do not want to be such an example.

 

I also like to plan for the worst since no matter how good our plows may or may not be we get far too much snow for the roads to always be clear. And for many of us here in Syracuse, not coming in due to snow is not really an option, only because employers and schools expect you to "deal" with the snow as a fact of living here. A good example is that we had over 100" last season, and only one snow day for schools, and none for the college.

 

I know that when our weather man says lake effect that (everyday) that I am going to need to leave early, because the roads are bad and crowded. Also like most people I know, we don't have the option of taking another vehicle, so it's better to plan for the worst than be stuck at work/school and have 12" fall in a few hours from a storm that was only suppossed to be a light coating (happened last year with re92s) and not feel on the safe for the drive home.

This is a perfect illustration of an end-user biasing their purchase decision to factor-in what's important for them.

 

There's no absolute right or wrong, but there *is* a "better," a decision which better-suits your specific situation - your unique needs/wants - better than it may suit someone elses. This is precisely the kind of critical thinking and decision-making that I hope everyone here will undertake.

 

In knowing that tires are compromises, select the tire that's the right compromise for your real-world needs.

 

That being said I have been thinking that in a few more weeks when the weather stays cold I will be making the switch, since we have recorded over 2" on Oct 3rd before and I commute my daughters to day care and want them to be as safe as possible.

^ Again, a perfect example of how it should be done.

Oh, and in just now having seen your other thread, dubunderpar.

 

I'm, as many parents of school-age children, weather-obsessed, particularly when it comes to winter (since our lower schools and even secondary schools do close, when it gets to be more than the usual few inches)....

 

I tend to start paying attention to the forecast by the ending weeks of September, but usually, my summer tires don't come off until the latter half of October, particularly as my commute usually occurs in the warmer parts of the day.

 

Sara's FXT, equipped with all-seasons from the factory, I don't usually switch her over until we have first-snowfall in the forecast. This, of-course, is influenced by my own doubts in the "45-deg. F." mark.

 

Also, this winter will mark the first time I've had the luxury of having a set of studded tires to switch into. It's truly overkill for my local and my typical commute, and like one of my good locals said, I'm likely to really find their value/enjoyment for only minutes out of each season. This is a set that I will reserve for use only at the sign of the first major snowfall of the year, and will, at most, only be on the car from the latter half of December through the first half of February. Is it necessarily practical? No. But for a winter tire nut like me, I'm getting a kick out of just the thought of it.