View Single Post
Old 08-31-2010, 10:45 AM   #916
LGT+WRX
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 91119
Join Date: Jul 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Cleveland/Shaker Hts., Ohio
Vehicle:
05/9 LGT-me/FXT-wife
ABP-me/SSM-wifey

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howl View Post
I think your blowing it all outta proportion.


How am I "blowing it all outta proportion?"

You're the one who said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Howl View Post
Studded tires are crap on dry pavement though. You ever walk across concrete with ice skates on?
^ And that, by the quantitative data detailed in the NAF testing, simply isn't true, and is a completely inaccurate analogy.

Quote:
When I say they are crap I mean crap like RE92's. They may "safe" but they are not good.
Did you actually review the NAF data?

Because that's not what the data shows, at all - and if you wanted to say that studded tires are "unsafe," you'll need to say the very same of the "Studless Ice & Snow" tires that you seem to think are so magical.

Once again, look at their quantitative data: ABS braking wet, ABS braking dry, critical maneuvering wet, and critical maneuvering dry.

Quote:
Studded tires are noisy,
This is undeniable, but it also is not a part of quantitative performance. Any driver using studded tires should already realize that this NVH compromise will be present, compared to non-studded tires.

Quote:
they loose studs at high speeds
Again, drivers who choose studded tires should know this fact. Stud-loss due to extreme tire spin/rotation is indeed a fact, but it again is not a factor of quantitative performance: nor is it a specific danger, as an early 70s paper by the NTSB proved.

Quote:
and they reduce your grip on hard surfaces when compared to the same model tire without studs (i.e. Hakka5 with studs vs. Hakka5 without studs).
But does this equate to the "skates on concrete" analogy you brought up earlier?

Yes, the quantitative data typically does show a gap between such performance factors between studded and non-studded variants of otherwise the same exact tire, but this difference can be overcome if one were more careful in their choice of specific tire selection. Again, go back to the NAF testing data. Look at how many studded tires were able to outperform "Studless Ice & Snows" in terms of the clear-road, wet or dry, performance parameters.

As with anything else, every specific tire will have its own strengths and weaknesses - and one's failure should not be the cause of a blanket statement which encompasses the entire category/sub-genre.

Quote:
Meanwhile the technology for Studless Ice & Snow tires has come a long way over the last five to ten years. If you look beyond what Tirerack carries you will find a number of tires using technology that elevates Studless Ice & Snow tires into the realm of Performance Winter tires on snow and dry pavement, while getting very close to studded tires on ice. Yes they are a compromise, but technology keeps making those compromises smaller.
Er.....

Tire-rack carries the Michelin X-Ice Xi2, which is recognized as one of the best - if not the best - "Studless Ice & Snow" tires that's out there, coming in first place in its category in virtually *every* recognized winter tire testing.

Just as technology has advanced for the "Studless Ice & Snow" sub-genre, it has also done so for every other sub-genre of "winter tires," and that includes those of the studded variety.

And just as there are compromises to be made - a performance gap - between the "Studless Ice & Snow" tires versus "Performance Winters," there is the same kind of gap between friction tires and studded.

To somehow think that modern premium studded tires are going to be like "crap" is to use the same kind of old thinking that have many who have never tried modern winter tires to say that they are "crap" as well - they're hung-up on what their parents or grandparents may have experienced as "winter tires."

Technology has come a long way - and it applies to all tires, and the hard data shows this.

And the data is what it is.

I'm a huge fan of "Studless Ice & Snows," for what they can do - and my choice of equipping my wife's vehicle with such tires speaks to my faith in them.

But if one were to make one's decision based on the data for/of such tires, then one cannot selectively choose to disregard the data, when speaking of another subset.

Are studded tires a compromise in terms of NVH? Certainly.

But are they "crap?"

That's not what the data says.


-----


Quote:
Originally Posted by mbakercad View Post
Since it won't be uncommon for us to see a 50 degree day here and there during the heart of winter, I suppose a Performance Winter tire would be the best bet. We can see sub zero temps, and black ice as Howl mentioned, but we see a fair share of decent days too. Since I have yet to find the money tree, I would like a tire with a decent treadwear too which I believe the performance winter does better than the other categories.

Based upon this do you have a recommendation?
The Dunlop SP WinterSport 3D, while no longer a front-runner in its category/sub-genre, is still a solid performer, if you look at the breakdown of last year's (and the year before) ADAC data, and it still ranks highly in tests of other national origin, in still retaining a "highly recommended" (or the like) ranking (i.e. 2009 Swedish testing).

One interesting thing is that despite a slide back down the scale, in terms of other performance factors, when compared with newer offerings, the 3Ds still maintain extremely high (if not highest) rankings in terms of ice traction. Nevertheless, as a direct user of these tires, I'll caution you - don't take such test rankings for-granted: yes, it may be best in its category, but it's no "Studless Ice & Snow," so on glare ice, you're still much more left to the mercy of physics and mother nature than not, and you *WILL* want to exercise the utmost care, when faced with the potential for such conditions. Compared against a leading "Studless Ice & Snow" like the Michelin Xi2, I can tell you from direct personal experience (as my wife's '09 FXT is shod with Xi2s) that when it's icy out, the two cars/tires present completely different driving experiences.

Based on input from other hobbyists/enthusiasts in my area, the Bridgestone LM-line of Blizzak tires as well as the Hankook Icebear W300 are worth looking into, too. The latter typically tends to place in the bottom half of quantitative comparisons, so I would cross-shop them with the Nokian WR or WRG2 - but as you can see, that will often highlight the nice price-point at which the Hankooks can be obtained.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
LGT+WRX is offline   Reply With Quote