Snow tires!!! X-Ice's, Blizzaks, SJ6's, and...?

Blizzaks are great. Had several sets. Nokia - had one set but will not get another.

Ok, I'm taking the van for a month of spring skiing (driving Bend to Bachelor often, past all the rolled over SUV's from Portland), followed by a month in the Canyon country of the SW.

What tire?

Is that the only trip they'll be used for? If so, then the Blizzack might not be the first choice. While there's many excellent suggestions here, maybe a quick call to the Tire Rack might be the most useful.

I've always found them to be extrmely helpful.

Studded tires are only legal Nov. 1 - Mar. 31 in most states that allow them. Anyway, they likely are overkill for a spring skiing trip.

Just my thoughts:
Any all-season quality tires should work well(with a set of good, right sized chains for any occasional surprises in mountain passes). Since you will be doing a lot of driving on your trip, traction in wet and dry conditions, quiet ride and comfort should probably be at the top of your list. All of the major manufacturers produce tires that will fit the bill. See what's on sale but buy a upper tier tire regardless of brand.

Sounds like a fun trip.

I should add: No way will I use all season tires or chains. They would require slowing down.

I guess what I'm wondering is which of the studdless modern grippy wonders has the best warm dry pavement wear.

I have a truck with unstudded mud/snow tires which I had siped to the extreme at Les Schwaab. With the the normal rubber the sipes are supposed to actually improve wear, and they have held up well, though they are not as good as the studs on ice, and I doubt they can match some of the new tires.

This is what I thought as well. But I just finished reading the links Ghost provided and in http://members.shaw.ca/trafficsource...dded_tires.htm there is a section titled The Friction of Studded Tires on Wet and Dry Pavement.
Does anyone know of any research done that would contradict the conclusion presented in that section of the article?

In that section there are no driving comparisons made between regular winter tires (M&S) which are typically wider, use different compounds and have different tread patterns and studded tires in non-winter conditions. The test seems to be between winter tires with stud holes unfilled and winter tires with the studs in place in winter driving conditions.

"The argument of reduced friction of studded tires with studs on dry pavements is somewhat amazing. Dry pavement is the driving situation where the friction level is the highest and the risk of insufficient grip is lowest... We have not carried out braking tests of studded winter tires with and without studs on dry pavement... Our assumption is that tire behaviour (of studded tires on dry pavement with and without studs) should be more or less similar to that on a wet surface." "We have carried out tests of our tires on wet asphalt with and without studs. Braking distance was shorter when the tires were equipped with studs." The improved friction is hardly surprising, when you consider that they were replacing the air in the stud hole with a tungsten carbide tipped stud that can scratch a concrete road surface..."


Italics and bolding are mine.
My hypothesis is that if you are tooling down the freeway at 60MPH+ and the road is either wet or dry, a quality regular tire or M&S tire (with no stud holes) will require a shorter stopping distance than a quality studded tire with studs in place or with stud holes. The article merely suggests that on dry pavement, the risk of inadequate friction is lowest relative to other driving conditions. No one would likely dispute that. The entire gist of the article seems to be to use the right tool for the job and that in icy winter conditions, studded tires work best. I personally agree.

The point of all that, of course, is that in the winter lower ultimate dry and wet grip are not a big deal for most. I'll trade a lot of that for better grip on snow and ice, even if I am driving on dry roads 90 percent of the time.

Couldn't aggree more. If your allowed with studs they're super, I had them both on my front weel Passat TDI and I have the Hakkapelitta 4 on my current Subaru and it's dam hard to the car to drift on winter roads :-)

That I don't know but Trotski's Consumer Reports article might help. I know there are tests out there somewhere that measure tire wear/grip of winter of non-studded tires. But if it's snowing in the pass at Mt. Hood for example, your van will have to chain up, have studs (between Nov 1-March 31) or risk a citation.:

Chain up? sometimes. Studs? No. Oregon is very anti-stud.

Oregon's chain law applies to all highways throughout the state. When you drive in winter conditions, you may see signs telling you to carry chains or traction tires
"Traction Tires" are tires that meet the Rubber Manufacturers Association definition as suitable for use in severe snow conditions, which are marked with a snowflake/mountain emblem on the sidewall:



In very bad winter road conditions all vehicles may be required to use chains regardless of the type of vehicle or type of tire being used. This is known as a conditional road closure.

Studded tires are legal in Oregon from November 1 to April 1. Because of the damage caused by studded tires, the Department of Transportation encourages motorists to use studded tires only when necessary. Delaying putting on studded tires or using other traction tires is helpful to the condition of the highways.


http://www.oregon.com/roadcams/chains.cfm

Actually, I would say Oregon is very pro-stud. When I lived in Portland, I would see tons of cars in Portland with studs on. Maybe all those people were driving up to Hood every weekend, but I doubt it. Despite the website "discouraging" people from using them, they're legal, so a lot of people put them on.

Also, I felt that OR is very quick to bring out the chain restrictions even if the roads aren't really that bad. That's one of the main reasons I got snow tires for my FWD car... it's really bad for the chains, roads and car (if you break a chain) to drive with chains on bare pavement, and sometimes up in Gov't Camp they'd have chain restrictions out when there really wasn't that much snow on the road.

Edit to add: Also, to respond to Lostboy's statement, and to clarify what newfydog posted, you do *not* need chains in OR if you have snow tires. They do have to be true snow tires (studded or studless) with the mountain and snowflake, not just M+S all season. It was nice that OR allowed snow tires instead of chains, I'm in WA now and they don't allow that, it's chains or AWD only (but I just moved here a month ago, so I don't know how often they put up the chain restrictions, or how bad the roads are up to the ski areas).

Which morons come up with these rules?

I love when New Mexico outright closes the interstate because...OMIGOD, its snowing!!1!!

I have the Winterforce tires. They were the cheapest tire I could find period. ~ $70ea. for my Silverado 265/70/17. They work fine, I didn't install the studs. If school is closed they don't plow our road. I haven't missed a day of work or skiing yet.

I wouldn't go that far. There has been a motion in the state house several times to put a special tax on studs. They actually banned selling the carbide ones for a year claiming the aluminum ones would work as well. I bought tires in Idaho that year.

They recently cut a month out of the legal period, but the cops in Bend ignore it.

When I lived in Colorado they did a study and found that heavy trucks did most of the road damage. Somehow Oregon, probably under the evil influence of Slider, did a similar study and blamed it all on studs.

Same here. I live near Portland, Oregon, probably at less than 1000 feet altitude. When I go skiing, it's a 50+ mile trip each way plus a 4000 to 5000 foot climb. During the trip, temperatures can drop 15F, and maybe more.

Having slipped off the road and into a ditch last season, I'm not too excited about repeating that feat. Once is enough. Cost a lot of $$$. Consequently, all seasons just won't cut it anymore.

Bought X-ice from Michelin and love them . A very positive feel and the grip on ice and packed snow is worth the expense. I bought mine at Costco and mounted them on some new wheels for the Subie. Who needs studs when you got these studs underfoot

I went to college in Burlington, Vermont and lived in Stowe for a few years after that and hadHakkapelitta's on my Subaru. They got through everything!

I would go with the Michelin X-ice

Dunlop's all the way!!! I got 3 NE winters out of my M3's(10K + /yr) and replaced them with the M3D's last season they are great as was the 1st set. Never had any problem. lots of ski trips, passing SUV's in the snow with no problem, hills are a breeze they just keep grabbing.

I have a front wheel drive VW GTI, VR6 with tons of torque and the tires just grip, snow ice what ever I throw at them. I can't even do e-brake turns they grip so well.

Echoing the above comments regarding the Toyo's I have a set on my car, Gf's car (same car) came with a set of Blizzak's got about half the life I did, and I drive harder. Difference in performance, nohing that I could find.

I prefer Craigslist. Whatever I can find on CL has worked well for the past couple of years.

From reading through this threads and others (I've used the "search" function to find many previous threads here at epicski), plus reading the reviews at www.1010tires.com and www.tirerack.com, there appears to be a lot of concern that the Blizzaks don't have much tread life. Unfortunate because it sounds like owners are generally pleased with their performance in winter conditions.

However, sounds like people are generally happy with Michelin and Toyo. There are other brands that people like, but unfortunately for me, they don't seem to have a tire that fits on my new subcompact SUV, which wants a 225/65-R17.

The Toyo is intriguing to me because I might be able to get it from Les Schwab. Les Schwab is a tire dealer in the northwest, and they have dealerships all over the place. Their service and support is excellent.

Likewise, Michelin is a good possibility, too, because of availability at Costco.

Thanks to Ghost for the articles he linked. It would be great to see tire manufacturers adopt the lighter weight studs in future tires.

Toyo Observes saved my life more than once. I drove them well into spring (stupidly) two years in a row and they still have tons of tread life. Just be sure you're a hardarse and haggle, haggle, haggle with the dealer.

The info in that link is very interesting. My very limited experience with the traction of studded tires on dry and wet roads is quite a few years old, and the traction was poor.

The concern about highway departments and wear on the roads vs. safer driving is well expressed in the article in that link. The total cost to all of us is safer with safer driving, even if that means studs and worn roads that need more maintenance, but everyone is worried about their budget.

Yes, do dicker hard on tire prices. Last week I was offered 4 Blizzaks for the price of 3 by the local Firestone store if I use a Firestone credit card to buy them during October. I'll take that offer to Discount Tire for a match if I decide on Dunlops instead.

M+S tires, so-called mud & snow, meets certain geometric requirements for the designation:
" 1. New tire treads shall have multiple pockets or slots in at least one tread edge that meet the following dimensional requirements based on mold dimensions:
a. Extend toward the tread center at least 1/2 inch from the footprint edge, measured perpendicularly to the tread centerline.
b. A minimum cross-sectional width of 1/16 inch.
c. Edges of pockets or slots at angles between 35 and 90 degrees from the direction of travel.

2. The new tire tread contact surface void area will be a minimum of 25 percent based on mold dimensions.

"The rough translation of this specification is that the tire must have a row of fairly big grooves that start at the edge of the tread and extend toward the center of the tire. Also, at least 25 percent of the surface area must be grooves."
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/tire3.htm

Modern real winter tires are different. They are actually tested on snow for traction. These have the recent Snowflake-on-Mountain symbol.
"In order to meet this standard, tires must be tested using an American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) testing procedure described in "RMA Definition for Passenger and Light Truck Tires for use in Severe Snow Conditions":

"Tires designed for use in severe snow conditions are recognized by manufacturers to attain a traction index equal to or greater than 110 compared to the ASTM E-1136 Standard Reference Test Tire when using the ASTM F-1805 snow traction test with equivalent percentage loads.

"These tires, in addition to meeting the geometrical requirements for an M/S designation, are tested on snow using a standardized test procedure.They have to do better than the standard reference tire in order to meet the requirements for Severe Snow Use. "
(link above)

With what we've seen here, if I lived in a place with frequent snows, or absolutely had to get out regardless of the road condition, I'd get modern studded tires, probably Nokians. That probably includes Bend and the Portland metro area with their periodic ice storms.

Haggle? Not a bad idea, but I'm not sure if I can negotiate with Les Schwab. Just got quoted about $750 for a set of 4 during my lunch hour. Price includes mounting, balancing, and sales tax.

My local tire dealer adds $10 per tire to the price of Tirerack.com - you can also get their ads in all the big car mags. I don't have to haggle, I just bring in my Tire Rack ad.

10 bucks over Tire Rack price would be nice. I've swung that kind of deal before but I'd love a tire dealer who made it a point to do that.

I got Nokian Hakkapeliitta 2's last season. I would have bought the 4's but they weren't out here yet. I love them and they are the best studded tires or winter tires I've had. I drive the infamous road to Big Mountain pretty much every day with no issues. Frankly, the reason I bought them was from reading stuff on here and on other forums about winter tires.

I just wish they were easier to spell!

Another vote for Nokian

Here's another vote for Nokian Hakkapellita RSi no doubt the best winter tyre bar none. Also Gislaved NordFrost 5 are worth looking into.

I've driven many cars on the ice of the Georgetown lake (by I-70) including Blizzaks WS-50 and X-Ice's and the Michelin's where the most disappointing of them all.