Best snows Blizzak vs. Nokian

[c-bolt]

Honestly, a 255/50/19 or a 255/55/18 would work much better than the 275's you are thinking of. A wider tire is MUCH worse in snow and ice. By choosing a narrower tire, you are putting more weight on the contact patch, creating more traction. The wider tires will try to float a bit more in the snow and ice. If you go way too narrow, performance (and looks) will start to suffer.

Ive been driving in snow country for 19 years, the last 11 here in ALASKA! I usually average about 6 months of snow tire usage.

I have personally used Nokian Hakkapeliitta's on my non awd E30, had Blizzaks on my E39 528i and E46 325xi, and Dunlop Grandtrek WTM2's on our old E53 4.4i, and currently have studded Cooper Discoverer M/S for winter on my F250 Superduty.

I liked the Nokians, because they were studded on our old E30. Also on my truck, I choose studded. It really helps the tires grip the glare ice on the roads and where it builds up at the intersections for vehicles without modern traction control.

My wife says she has never felt more confident in the winter than in her old X5. One time, we had 24" of snow in our neighborhood and the Dunlops kept pulling. The narrower tire (we had about 1.5" narrower 18's than the stock 19's) kept the tire from floating and packing snow under them. Snow was litterally piling up and coming over the hood. Once we got out on the main streets, it was a sloppy mess. It was pretty cool to be out there with all the big trucks. We got quite a few looks...

In my opinion...The only time studs are really necessary are for glare ice. For most people, most of the time, a good non-studded winter tire will work great and provide the best all around performance. They will outperform an "all season" tire by a large margin. I would choose whichever you like best. I really like the directional ones, they seem to go through the slush better, but that is a pretty subjective comparison. Ive never switched brands in the middle of winter or tested two back to back.

All that being said...Ill probably order Blizzaks for the wifes X5d that is on order.

[JCL]

Originally Posted by c-bolt

Honestly, a 255/50/19 or a 255/55/18 would work much better than the 275's you are thinking of. A wider tire is MUCH worse in snow and ice. By choosing a narrower tire, you are putting more weight on the contact patch, creating more traction. The wider tires will try to float a bit more in the snow and ice. If you go way too narrow, performance (and looks) will start to suffer.

I fully agree with your comments on a narrower tire being somewhat better in deep snow, but it has nothing to do with the weight or the size of the contact patch. Since the vehicle weight is constant, I presume you meant more pressure on the contact patch, not weight. Any tire is going to have the same size contact patch, the contact patches will just be a different shape. A narrower tire will have a narrower leading edge to the contact patch, and the contact patch will be proportionally longer. The benefit with a narrower leading edge is that it is easier for it to climb up the snow when you are driving, as the snow 'wedge' in front of the contact patch is narrower.

This all matters less than it did years ago, as older winter tires drove more from the lugs on the side, and having a narrower tire meant more engagement from those lugs. Modern winter tires with advanced compounds drive more from the full contact patch, which is why we now see 20" winter tires.

[Gregory34]

Originally Posted by c-bolt

Honestly, a 255/50/19 or a 255/55/18 would work much better than the 275's you are thinking of. A wider tire is MUCH worse in snow and ice. By choosing a narrower tire, you are putting more weight on the contact patch, creating more traction. The wider tires will try to float a bit more in the snow and ice. If you go way too narrow, performance (and looks) will start to suffer.

Ive been driving in snow country for 19 years, the last 11 here in ALASKA! I usually average about 6 months of snow tire usage.

I have personally used Nokian Hakkapeliitta's on my non awd E30, had Blizzaks on my E39 528i and E46 325xi, and Dunlop Grandtrek WTM2's on our old E53 4.4i, and currently have studded Cooper Discoverer M/S for winter on my F250 Superduty.

I liked the Nokians, because they were studded on our old E30. Also on my truck, I choose studded. It really helps the tires grip the glare ice on the roads and where it builds up at the intersections for vehicles without modern traction control.

My wife says she has never felt more confident in the winter than in her old X5. One time, we had 24" of snow in our neighborhood and the Dunlops kept pulling. The narrower tire (we had about 1.5" narrower 18's than the stock 19's) kept the tire from floating and packing snow under them. Snow was litterally piling up and coming over the hood. Once we got out on the main streets, it was a sloppy mess. It was pretty cool to be out there with all the big trucks. We got quite a few looks...

In my opinion...The only time studs are really necessary are for glare ice. For most people, most of the time, a good non-studded winter tire will work great and provide the best all around performance. They will outperform an "all season" tire by a large margin. I would choose whichever you like best. I really like the directional ones, they seem to go through the slush better, but that is a pretty subjective comparison. Ive never switched brands in the middle of winter or tested two back to back.

All that being said...Ill probably order Blizzaks for the wifes X5d that is on order.

This is all acurate, however the x5 does not shy for weight by any means making the 'narrower is better' argument slightly less pertinent. Not less accurate, just less pertinent. Dozens of posters on this forum have the Pirelli's on 20s (myself included) and have raved about their performance. All three are quality tires - no bad choices here.