To stud or not to stud?

Status
Not open for further replies.

mva

Joined
Feb 9, 2008
Messages
775
Location
BC, Canada
I am in the market for a new set of winter tires for my Honda Accord. Winter conditions are severe where I live, with snow on the ground from December to mid-March. And, a wide range of temperatures and road conditions.

My last 2 sets have been Blizzaks that worked well.

Age old question, should I try a studded tire this time for even better traction?

I am thinking of trying Goodyear Nordic tires with studs:

http://www.canadiantire.ca/AST/browse/4/Auto/1/TiresRims/WinterTires/PRDOVR~0021471P/Goodyear%2BNordic.jsp
 
Originally Posted By: mva
I am in the market for a new set of winter tires for my Honda Accord. Winter conditions are severe where I live, with snow on the ground from December to mid-March. And, a wide range of temperatures and road conditions.

My last 2 sets have been Blizzaks that worked well.

Age old question, should I try a studded tire this time for even better traction?

I am thinking of trying Goodyear Nordic tires with studs:

http://www.canadiantire.ca/AST/browse/4/Auto/1/TiresRims/WinterTires/PRDOVR~0021471P/Goodyear%2BNordic.jsp


I bought the goodyear nordics with studs for my wife's Acura 3.2TL. The performance in snow and Ice is nothing short of shocking. Really really good. I was pulling away in little stop light races from AWD subarus with blizzaks fairly consistently. They have way more grip than the Blizzaks on my BMW.

We just got a mini van and my wife keeps nagging me that she wants the exact same tires and they have to be studded.

Just so you know, they are very noisy. I'm told the nordics are noisy to begin with, but at 80 KPH on dry pavement it sounds similar to travelling in a 737 when the plane is making its approach for landing.

My wife doesn't care about this, because she feels safe in all extreme conditions. Just know what you're getting yourself in for.
 
My road is shady and they just give up on plowing down to pavement. They just throw more sand on the hard pack snow & ice. I'm doing fine on unstudded "artic claws."

Dry road handling/sanity is better than when I used to have cooper weathermasters with studs. The studs weren't the magic on ice I was expecting either.

This doesn't come up much but I think the tire dealer gets the studs and uses the same ones on pretty much all the winter tires. Local regs might require aluminum studs for example that beat up the roads less so your studded brand X might not perform as well as another studded brand X you read about online.
 
In my book of driving way too many miles in snow and ice, Studs are not that great. Snow tires are good (but the REAL good M&S tires are getting close) and the best are chains. (and I like cable chains over real chains)

Studs work ok for the first few times, stink on dry or wet pavement and wear down to a point that they really don't offer anything over a good snow tire.

The biggest thing is just slow the #!$ down and take it easy. I've seen more 4x4/AWD in the ditch in a bad way than normal cars after a good snow storm.

I've been using Firestone Winterforce (I think that is what they are called) for the last 4 winters and they work great in a way too light Corolla.

I think if it weighed about 1000lbs more the car would do real well in the deep snow.

Take care, bill
 
I had the same decision.

I went with the new for 09 continental studless..
they were cheaper than studded winter tires and supposedly the only thing noticeably better is the ws-60 blizzacks.



My main priorities were black ice traction and ability to make it though 5-8" of rutted snow. Anything much deeper than 8" would tear my front bumper off anyway.

the fact that they are T rated and are better than blizzacks on wet and dry is a plus as I do probably 50% of my winter driving on dry/frosted roads.

hard to beat 71$ each the studded tires were 62+10 or 15 each tires for studs.

I've run studded they are great when new.. and great on packed
but have serious drawbacks on interstate highways and on dry/wet
 
Last edited:
Back in the day I had Uniroyal snows on my RWD car. Then, when they wore out I bought the exact same tire but with studs. I couldn't tell the difference AT ALL. Remember, exact same car and the exact same tires with and without studs.
 
I like my studs, so I'd recommend trying them. I don't find them to be loud on the highway with the tires I've used, nor do I believe they compromise dry and wet traction significantly (confirmed by the Swedish tire test below). You can always remove them if you dislike them, though that is a bit time-consuming. I have a lot of friends and family running studded tires and I doubt they'll ever buy a winter tire without studs again. It's unfortunate I've never seen any comparison tests of the same tire with and without studs. Studded tires dominated this Swedish tire test (which includes the well-rated Goodyear Nordic) from 2003:

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

Here's an older CBC article on the subject:

http://www.uniontire.ca/page3.htm

One thing I know for sure: if you'd done any winter cycling with and without studs, you'd go for the studs!
 
I run blizzak studless. I have also driven a van with studded tires. I saw no advantage to the studded. They suck horribly in the dry. If you live some place where the streets are always covered once the season gets underway, I could see using them. Otherwise, a good studless will do just fine.
 
Thanks for all the info. The swedish tests were interesting to compare studded verses non studded. They don't seem to like the Blizzaks very much over there.

I found some more good info on the Goodyear Nordic's from Norway:

http://www.canadiandriver.com/forum/index.php?topic=49166.40

The main benefit of studs is for icey conditions according to both these tests. Stopping and turning on very icey roads is, in my opinion, the most dangerous part of winter driving.

Seems like they are an excellent winter tire and even better with studs as long as you don't mind the tire noise.
 
the most important thing is having _Real_ winter tires. with or without studs. most of the grips is provided from the soft rubber compound and the special "slits" in the tread that both types have.

for example 4x4 tires with M+S on them usually are [censored] on a winter road, no more no less than a normal summer tire. at least here in sweden compared to proper stuff. i know having a Jeep Wrangler with it's poor winter-road holding. it needs all the help it can get; studded finish 235/75-15" Nokians Hakka 5s :)

and so, studs or no studs. well here in sweden this years tests are about the same as usual. big company = most expensive = best tires. on pure ice a studed tire stops in half the distance. in normal driving i personaly don't feel much difference though, but we don't get so much black ice here were i live. either dry road or dry snow. not so much in between...
 
of course that was 2 generations of blizzacks ago in 2003..tire test.
 
Last edited:
Grab yourself a set of Nokian Hak 5's, best studded winter tire available in North America. You will get several years of use without any noticable stud wear, the tread life is awesome too. The Finnish know thier tires. The technology used in the studless friction tires is very good and gets better every season, but the studded tires also get updates, and do indeed provide better traction. There's a comparison between studded and fritcion tires, they used a poor quality Cooper tire studded up, I believe some of the friction tires actually out performed the Coopers, but don't take that to heart, those junkers were outdated when they were released on the market.

Nokian Hak 5's, pricey yes, but you won't find better tires for the winter.
 
Last edited:
The Blizzacks I am replacing are MZ-02 type, October 2001 vintage. I ran them for 8 winters for a total of about 50,000 km. They were cross rotated each year. These tires were supposed to be optimized for ice performance and they did work well.

I have other experience with Blizzacks including a set of 2006 Blizzack WS-50's for my wife's van. And we purchased our first set of Blizzacks in 1995.

Over the years we have also tried many other types of all-season tires in winter conditions including Nokian NRW's (current Nokian W). I consider the NRW to be one of the better all-season tires but they are not a true winter tire. I would agree that in my area real winter tires are required.

So far I have not tried studs.

I will check out the Hakka 5's. I have a feeling that they are a bit pricey but I agree they are probably the best or one of the best available here.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately I have more questions than answers, as I'm also debating studs for my sport-package BMW this winter. I don't intend to thread-jack and I'm thinking about starting my own. Actually, a lot of my questions are specific to the Nokian Hakka lineup but I have a lot of unanswered questions about going studded.

My vehicle is a 1998 528i with sport package. I have a set of style-33 factory wheels which accept 225/55/16 which I use for snow tires. My wife drives our young kids around during the day, I drive on trips. I'm a sporting driver, my wife just needs to get where she's going safely. The car doesn't have a lot of ground clearance, so that's a major factor since all major snowfalls are heavy and we can only do so much regardless of the tires.

My first snows on this car were Michelin Arctic Alpins. Decent in the snow, quiet, but only Q-rated and felt unsafe over 100kph in the dry (very common driving pattern on "Interstates"). Even in their last season, with only 5/32nds left in the center of the rears I had enough deep snow grip to "beach" the car on our unplowed street (back to ride height). I could reverse and try another route.

My second, current set of snows are Dunlop WinterSport M3, H-rated. Very stable at speed and very highly rated, as are they're updated WinterSport 3D. I'm unhappy with these tires as they've always seemed odd. They are wearing great but I often have unacceptably low levels of traction in various conditions. The only time they really shine is when it's -15C or lower. Usually when temps are in that range it's dry in this area. All major snowfalls seem to be near freezing, and get salted into "putty" or slush. Snow frequently packs into ice at stop intersections. I could write a book but I won't. No chance of that deep snow beaching the Alpins could do.

My weather conditions vary all over, but snow usually occurs at "warmer" temperatures, meaning it is good packing snow. They often salt INSTEAD of plowing and a lot of driving is on sticky peanut butter putty snow. There's also lots of high speed driving in dry and wet clear roads.

I've read that studded tires really suffer in the dry and wet. Is this the fault of the studs, or is it the tires into which the studs are installed? For instance if you compared Hakka 5s with and without studs, would the studs significantly worsen wet/dry performance? (As opposed to comparing studded Hakka 5s with studless Hakka WRG2s) I don't want to think I'm buying the "ultimate" with studded Hakka 5s and have less traction in most circumstances than if I just got Hakka Rs.

How about noise? A friend of mine put Hakka 2s without studs onto his BMW and they were very noisy. I would guess that the little empty stud holes would contribute to the howl and they might be quieter WITH studs, albeit a different noise. Truth?

Speed rating and "solid" feel. I think I could live with T rating, but I'm nervous about R since I had a negative experience with Q. My Nokian dealer says that all of their line has stiff sidewalls (I confirm my size of Hakka RSi is load rated 99XL) but the soft compound only earns an R.

Braking? Every review I've seen indicates the Hakka lineup has braking issues. The Dunlops don't brake well either in any conditions. Is this enough of a factor I should steer to another brand?

What about snow/ice traction? Would a tire like Hakka 4s or 5s without studs still be better than a lower-range studless like the Hakka R or RSi? Or are you better to get a studless tire from the beginning if you aren't planning to stud?

I believe I have observed that BMWs (especially sport package ones) prematurely round off the sipes of snow tires. I have a photo of my M3s with only a couple thousand kms on them and the sipes are deep but lack sharp corners already. Since that's the only vehicle for "snow" traction, how are any tires supposed to stay effective? Is this in some way a Dunlop shortcoming and what is my best response to this? My vehicle is factory ride height, factory alignment and has no alignment or suspension issues.

Here's the picture:
IMG_2121.jpg


My "short" list:

  • Michelin X-Ice Xi2 (not available in my size or my search would be over!)
  • Hakka 5 w/ studs
  • Hakka 4 w/o studs (on sale)
  • Hakka R (none imported into Canada this year, selling left over RSis only)
  • Hakka RSi (on sale)
  • Hakka WRG2
  • Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3


I'm sorry for jumping in with more questions, and I'm happy to start my own thread, but there would be a lot of duplication with stud vs. non-stud information which is on topic for the original poster.

Thanks,
 
It sounds like you want a performance winter tire to me.

also what size do you normally run if you have some rims and run
a 40-45 series tire a 55inheritantly will have more give.
add in a q rated marshmallow and its definitely a different driving experience

I wouldnt get anything less than h rated.

the only non performance snow tires I would consider would be the

continential extremewinter contact (T rated)- similar performance to the xice xi2's

and

you can get the xice xi'2 by downsizing (narrow is good in winter) they are available in 215/60R16 and 215/55R16
(t rated)aprox 450+ shipping after rebate.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Michelin&tireModel=X-Ice+Xi2



for performance it depends on how much you want to spend

for performance snows these are all great and handle great
v-rated goodyear ultragrip performance
aprox 400+shipping after rebate.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?...romCompare1=yes

the brand new Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3 (h rating)
490+ship after rebate

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?...romCompare1=yes

If you want a studded snow the most "sporty"
Pirelli winter carving
550+60studding = 610+shipping after rebate.
http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?...romCompare1=yes


you should figure 60$ for mount and balance or 85-90$ for roadforce mount and balance.


NOTE: the LOAD RANGE XL are a beefier heavier tire and cost slightly more(10-15$) each tire.

just my opinion but that car is begging for performance snows.

that being said as long as its below 45F, a t-rated studless will be much improved over an R or Q rated.. as far as handling.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Rand
It sounds like you want a performance winter tire to me.

also what size do you normally run if you have some rims and run
a 40-45 series tire a 55inheritantly will have more give.
add in a q rated marshmallow and its definitely a different driving experience


Yes and no. I presently have performance snow tires and, except for being H-rated, they aren't very "performance" and they aren't very "snow" either, despite everyone else on the planet who has them scoring them highest among their peers. (I said I could write a book :) )

Over the last couple of years since I bought the M3s we've had two kids, my wife is now stay-at-home, we're doing fewer "Interstate" trips and I may be willing to accept that the winter driving priority is shifting. Some "scary" incidents of insufficient grip even with full snows with deep tread have led me to wonder if a performance snow is simply too much of a compromise and I would be better to shop for "worst conditions" rather than "typical conditions". A T-rated unit like the Xi2 shouldn't be that bad (?). This isn't a "fair weather" car, it's _the_ car. Sure, we try not to go anywhere in bad weather, but...

I run 235/45/17 on factory style 5s in the summer (Michelin PS2s) with the 225/55/16 on style 33 for the winter. Technically I could fit 15" over my brakes or I could buy 17s for the winter too. We get a lot of pavement break up in this area from the constant freeze-thaw and frankly I like a) going a little narrower with the factory 16s for winter grip , b) getting a little sidewall to protect the rest of the car from broken pavement and shallow potholes and c) having more types of tires to choose from.

I'm fine with the "give" of my M3s in 55 profile, I'm not so OK with the slip.

Quote:


I wouldnt get anything less than h rated.



In this size even most of the performance tires top out at H, or they might come in H or V and the dealers only get H.

Quote:

the only non performance snow tires I would consider would be the

continential extremewinter contact (T rated)- similar performance to the xice xi2's

and

you can get the xice xi'2 by downsizing (narrow is good in winter) they are available in 215/60R16 and 215/55R16
(t rated)aprox 450+ shipping after rebate.



I'll look into the Contis and spend some time with a tire size calculator to look into downsizing. Do you have any favourite links to reviews on the Contis? Any idea how much Gislaved technology is in those Contis?

Quote:

for performance it depends on how much you want to spend

the brand new Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3 (h rating)
490+ship after rebate


The PA3s are on my shortlist, but I'm curious if I'll just find them the same as my M3s. My dad has a similar car (an E39 540) and he has Pilot Alpin PA2s (and PA before that) that he's happy with, but he spends the two worst months of winter in Florida so it's not a significant data point.

I'm curious about my theory of German cars pounding sipe edges to nothing. No one seems to be able to discuss this at any level of detail. I'd expect some sipe designs or directionality to be able to withstand this better, but then I'd expect the "top rated" M3 and 3D to incorporate this design since they're Made in Germany and recommended by BMW dealers here in Canada. Perhaps the zig-zag sipe isn't the best.

Quote:

If you want a studded snow the most "sporty"
Pirelli winter carving
550+60studding = 610+shipping after rebate.


I hadn't looked at Pirelli, but I'd like to determine some of the pros and cons for studding on otherwise equal tires and the claims of dramatically reduced wet and dry traction.

My dad used a set of Pirelli Snowsport 210s (the standard dealer recommendation) for one year. They were the sportiest in the dry, but were lackluster in anything "winter". They also wore very poorly, requiring replacement in a season (perhaps two) where Michelins have gone 4 seasons on the same vehicle/alignment/pressures/driver. My friend with an E46 323i also got Snowsports. He got sideways a number of times he wasn't expecting either and bought some unstudded Hakka 2s instead which he was happy with but were dreadfully noisy.

Quote:

you should figure 60$ for mount and balance or 85-90$ for roadforce mount and balance.


My shop has a Hunter roadforce balancer and knows how to use it. That's why they're my shop. :)

Quote:

NOTE: the LOAD RANGE XL are a beefier heavier tire and cost slightly more(10-15$) each tire.


I don't require this load range, I only mentioned it as an indicator of sidewall strength. Of course that sometimes just equates to an uncomfortable ride and not good handling (just like runflats).

Quote:

just my opinion but that car is begging for performance snows.

that being said as long as its below 45F, a t-rated studless will be much improved over an R or Q rated.. as far as handling.


Sure, but I've spend enough time unable to go or unable to stop that maybe I'm ready to dial down the performance a little.

It's always below 45F, but the roads are salted and cleared in my area. Studs may be a little carried away but I found myself tippy-toeing through some really nasty, icy [censored] with the family where studs would have saved the day.

Frankly, I'd like to get a third set of tires - Hakka 5s with studs on 15" steelies - and keep them in the garage for storms. That's getting a little carried away though :D With the air tools, two jacks etc... I can change tires in ~10 minutes myself - summers, winters and storm tires. Voila :)

Thanks for you opinions, I'll definitely check into some of the things you've mentioned.
 
the continentials are new this year and are much better than their older tires.

I talked to luke@tirerack who tested them at an ice rink in september (along with 3 others)

I also purchased the conti's and they are on my car right now.

at 65degrees they had a good amount of tread squirm but were ok on highway at 75mph.

this morning at 33F they had lost most of their squirm and were much better.

I'm pretty sure these tires will be great i had dunlop m3 sports and these I can already tell will be much better

I got 4 tires on 15" steelies for 550$ including their road force balancing. Also have a 50$ visa rebate going in today.

they are great so far.
link to my thread here with pics
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1616517#Post1616517

they also balanced better and have much less vibration than nthe dunlop m3 sports

The michelins are great also.. you cant go wrong with those.
both stopped in about 15% less distance than studded snow tires.
 
Last edited:
This is all interesting discussion.

My theory for winter tires is that dry traction is not really a significant factor. I buy a winter tire for safety during extreme conditions. I do not typically explore the dry traction limits of any tire in my vehicles. Even wet traction is vastly better than traction on ice.

Extreme conditions include going from wet conditions to sheets of ice on a highway trip when temperatures are near 0C, stopping at ice covered intersections, sharp corners on ice, emergency accident avoidance on snow and ice and traction in deep snow. These are the sort of conditions that can be very scary with an all season tire. I don't like that heart in the throat feeling when I am sliding towards another vehicle or the edge of the road while pushing the brake pedal through the floor.

For the BMW - I would look to try to find as narrow a tire as possible that would fit those rims and still maintain the same overall diameter. I don't know about the speed rating but I noticed the Goodyear Nordics look narrower than other tires for a given size.

Also, I always cross rotated my snow tires to reverse the wear on the stipes. This is not possible for directional tires.

Back to my case. I hate to bring price and value into the discussion but I am seriously considering going a bit cheap and buying studded Nexen Winterguard tires from Walmart. Including studs they are $200 cheaper than the Goodyear Nordic and I havn't priced out the Hakka 5's yet.

What ever I decide - I will provide some feedback on how they work once winter arrives.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Rand
the continentials are new this year and are much better than their older tires.

This may be the Gislaved influence.
Quote:

I talked to luke@tirerack who tested them at an ice rink in september (along with 3 others)

I also purchased the conti's and they are on my car right now.

at 65degrees they had a good amount of tread squirm but were ok on highway at 75mph.

this morning at 33F they had lost most of their squirm and were much better.

I'm pretty sure these tires will be great i had dunlop m3 sports and these I can already tell will be much better

That's an interesting point, particularly since you had what I have now.
Quote:

they also balanced better and have much less vibration than nthe dunlop m3 sports

Yes, one of my M3s has high roadforce, and knowledgeable people seem to get vastly different roadforce readings from them every time they check. My current tire shop calls them "Dunflops"
Quote:

The michelins are great also.. you cant go wrong with those.
both stopped in about 15% less distance than studded snow tires.

The PA3s did?

Here's the thing.... There's lots of "you can't go wrong" but it appears I can. The M3s were head and shoulders ranked as the best, but there's something not right, and my car wears out all of the sipe edges which provide all of the winter traction. I believe the Snowsports held their sipe edges longer on my dad's E39 but they weren't great to begin with.

The trouble is without understanding the "problem" you can't forecast which tire will last. Then you just guess, buy something, and suffer. We only drive 5000-6000km per snow season - at those distance it's not acceptable to buy new snows every year or two. We also don't have nearly the number of rebates and sales available up here. A set of Hakka 5s mounted is $1200. A set of Hakka RSis on sale (lowest price of my shortlist) is $800.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top