Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday February 26, 2021
Home Forums Images WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
Click here to visit TireRack
Tire & Wheel Forum sponsored by The Tire Rack

Losing traction? Need new tires?
Click here to visit the NASIOC Upgrade Garage...
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Tire & Wheel

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.







* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. 
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-13-2014, 03:52 PM   #4926
GodWhomIsMike
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 102287
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Hawley, PA
Vehicle:
2019 GMC Canyon
Blue

Default

This is my typical winter driving. I deal with 15-20 miles of this each way all winter, unless it melts down after a few days of sunlight, and then the road is covered with cinder, dirt, and small ice patches.












After last winter, all-seasons, and the horrible AWD system that my old Kia had, I am getting dedicated snows this year. I am tired of white knuckle driving all winter.

Top choices are Bridgestone WS80 (got enough money set aside for this already), or the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2 SUV (which are about $200+ more than I intended on spending). I deal with hilly curvy icy roads.

Opinions?
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
GodWhomIsMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 10-13-2014, 04:05 PM   #4927
krzyss
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8365
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Vehicle:
2019 Mazda MX-5 RF
Machine Grey

Default

If these are your normal conditions I would say use studded tires.
Second best and more quiet on dry roads are studless.
There are 3 favorites: Xice xi3, WS80 and R2 (SUV or not).

I bet any of them would serve you well in such conditions, I suspect it is wet and dry handling that may differentiate them the most but I have no clue how they stack.

Krzys

PS If Nokian is 200 more for the set I would go with WS80 but check Xi3 too.
krzyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 04:43 PM   #4928
GodWhomIsMike
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 102287
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Hawley, PA
Vehicle:
2019 GMC Canyon
Blue

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krzyss View Post
If these are your normal conditions I would say use studded tires.
Second best and more quiet on dry roads are studless.
There are 3 favorites: Xice xi3, WS80 and R2 (SUV or not).

I bet any of them would serve you well in such conditions, I suspect it is wet and dry handling that may differentiate them the most but I have no clue how they stack.

Krzys

PS If Nokian is 200 more for the set I would go with WS80 but check Xi3 too.
Thanks. I do a lot of clear highway driving, which I rack up a lot of mileage on, which is why I was trying to steer away from studded.

I think the price of the WS80 was $109/per tire (tire rack) vs Nokian $154/per tire (tyresbyweb). Tire Rack charges $60 per steel wheel, where TyresByWeb charges $90. TyresByWeb charges $13 per tire for mounting and balances, but has free shipping/handling. TireRack would mount and balance for free, but changes about $114 for the shipping and handling.

I would prefer the Nokian, but the Bridgestone WS80 from Tire Rack is just far less money to get and includes Road Hazard coverage, unlike TyresByWeb.

I worked out both online and the cost difference is $786.60 (Blizzak WS80) vs $1148.00 (Nokian R2 SUV) (~$360) when all is said and done.
GodWhomIsMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 07:02 PM   #4929
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krzyss View Post
…………………………..
There are 3 favorites: Xice xi3, WS80 and R2 (SUV or not).

I bet any of them would serve you well in such conditions, I suspect it is wet and dry handling that may differentiate them the most but I have no clue how they stack.

Krzys……………...
I agree. A set of studded Nokian Hakka8 tires would be my top choice if ice traction was my #1 priority, and if I lived where winter temps are usually above 10-15 degF. But they are a lot more expensive than the R2s, and a heck of a lot noisier.

Because of a lack of independent comparative testing, the WS80 is a bit of an unknown. But IMO it is still a safe buy for snow and ice, because it improves on the strengths of the WS70. Its weakness will probably be in tread life and dry/wet handling.

In winter tire tests, the R2 is a strong performer on snow, slush, and ice, and is often praised for providing superior feedback on those surfaces. It's weakness is wet braking and wet handling.

The Xi3 is also strong on ice and snow, but it's weakness is resistance to slush planing, where it typically comes in last or next to last on slush tests.
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 07:10 PM   #4930
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodWhomIsMike View Post
……….I worked out both online and the cost difference is $786.60 (Blizzak WS80) vs $1148.00 (Nokian R2 SUV) (~$360) when all is said and done.
Have you checked at discount tire direct for availability/price on the R2?
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-13-2014, 08:10 PM   #4931
krzyss
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8365
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Vehicle:
2019 Mazda MX-5 RF
Machine Grey

Default

tireseasy.com has free shipping on Nokians too.
No wheels but check tire pricing.

Krzy***347;
krzyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 12:32 PM   #4932
94NDTA
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 122169
Join Date: Aug 2006
Default

I am on the fence right now between getting studded or non studded tires (specifically General Altimax Arctics).

I drive a 2011 2.5 outback, I live in North Dakota, where studs are legal. I live on the outskirts of town, and while my street gets plowed, it is usually last, and our streets are always hard packed snow/ice, rarely does it make it down to bare pavement. Our highways are genially clear, but often freeze over with ice as it gets so cold even ice removal methods sometimes don't work. I also use my subaru for upland hunting, which involves highway travel, and often traveling down unkept roads/dirt roads.

Most of the tire stores suggest studs, but I am worried they are biased. I also noticed, tire rack has conflicting views of studded tires. In this video, they say some of the newer compounds work much better than studs.
http://www.tirerack.com/videos/index.jsp?video=7

And then in this article, they state none of the studless tires can equal the traction of studded tires on all types of ice.
http://www.tirerack.com/winter/tech/...jsp?techid=151

[email protected], and others please weigh in on this!
94NDTA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 12:40 PM   #4933
krzyss
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8365
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Vehicle:
2019 Mazda MX-5 RF
Machine Grey

Default

If you want to be ready for ice near freezing point - studs are hard to be beaten.
If you are concerned with cold ice then studless tires are usually better.

Studable but not studded tires like General Altimax Arctics are designed with studs in mind (at least I would think so) for ice traction.
Ice - studded or studless, forget about studable.

Krzys

PS Just my opinion.

Last edited by krzyss; 10-14-2014 at 01:26 PM.
krzyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 12:43 PM   #4934
94NDTA
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 122169
Join Date: Aug 2006
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krzyss View Post
If you want to be ready for ice near freezing point - studs are hard to be beaten.
If you are concern with cold ice then studless tires are usually better.

Studable but not studded tires like General Altimax Arctics are designed with studs in mind (at least I would think so) for ice traction.
Ice - studded or studless, forget about studable.

Krzys

PS Just my opinion.
You bring up a good point. Once winter hits here, it usually doesn't go above freezing for 4 months straight, so ice at the freezing point is not a huge concern, ice at way below freezing is.
94NDTA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 12:55 PM   #4935
Timhatch14
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 389835
Join Date: May 2014
Vehicle:
2014 Wrx hatch
Plasma Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodWhomIsMike View Post
That's about 80 miles south of me... that's still considered NEPA?
Yeah not until you head west is it central pa. And we aren't really considered south east till towards the Allentown area so I guess that's why we still call it north east...

But anyway I ordered some steelies and winterforces from tire rack yesterday and they just showed up this morning.
Timhatch14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 01:25 PM   #4936
krzyss
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8365
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Vehicle:
2019 Mazda MX-5 RF
Machine Grey

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 94NDTA View Post
You bring up a good point. Once winter hits here, it usually doesn't go above freezing for 4 months straight, so ice at the freezing point is not a huge concern, ice at way below freezing is.
It seems that Russians thought about this as they tested both "cold" and "warm" ice.
Studless were better on cold ice (I think it was -15C) and studded were better in warmer temperature (-5, maybe -3 C, I do not recall it now).

Krzys
krzyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 07:02 PM   #4937
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krzyss View Post
It seems that Russians thought about this as they tested both "cold" and "warm" ice.
Studless were better on cold ice (I think it was -15C) and studded were better in warmer temperature (-5, maybe -3 C, I do not recall it now).

Krzys
hope this Russian link to Za Rulem shows up correctly:

http://www.zr.ru/images/articles/169...a/16906-128038

Last edited by SubLGT; 10-14-2014 at 07:17 PM.
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 07:13 PM   #4938
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 94NDTA View Post
You bring up a good point. Once winter hits here, it usually doesn't go above freezing for 4 months straight, so ice at the freezing point is not a huge concern, ice at way below freezing is.
If your typical winter temps are around the 5-10 degF range, or lower, then a premium studless tire (WS70/80, Xi3, R2, etc) can have ice traction equal to or better than a studded tire. I have seen this in several tests posted online from Russian and Scandinavian automotive magazines over the last 5 years.

But as temperatures warm up towards 32 degF, studless tires will experience a large degradation of ice traction, whereas a premium studded tire will experience only a small degradation.

For the best ice traction over the widest temperature range, a premium studded tire, like a Nokian Hakka8, is the tire to have.
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-2014, 11:53 PM   #4939
Mrsquirrel
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 377292
Join Date: Dec 2013
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: Buffalo, NY
Vehicle:
2014 Premium Hatch
Black

Default

Speaking of Russian. Well I assume it's Russian. Subaru for the win...although no idea what the tires.

http://youtu.be/9F5JJYC7s-g

Ok...continue
Mrsquirrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 02:58 AM   #4940
left footed whooten
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 44652
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Truckee, CA
Vehicle:
16 Colorado diesel
ATC Bobcat Pop-up

Default

Another thing with studs, check your local dates. Ours here make studs legal 11/1 to 6/1, and I have been pulled just for my studs on 6/2, resulting in an irritating ticket (my appt at the shop was for 6/3). Dont have to worry about this with studless. Also, the winter of 11-12 for instance, it was pounding well into the end of june, but technically, catch a cop on the wrong day and you could get a ticket for studs even during a snowstorm Your area may not have dates set though, check it out.
left footed whooten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 04:06 PM   #4941
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

The Finnish enthusiast magazine Tuulilasi has an interesting comparison in this years winter tire testing. A member of a Finnish BMW club posted the test results here:
http://www.btcf.fi/forum/showthread....01#post3407901

Tuulilasi tested two different sizes of the studless Nokian R2: 205/55R16 and 225/45R17. It's been 6 or 7 years since I have last seen a test of this type.

The advice you often read and hear about winter tires is to choose a size that is skinnier and taller. The data from Tuulilasi helps us see what we gain, or lose, by going to a skinnier, taller winter tire.

The results:

A. In acceleration on ice, the 205 tire was 1.2 sec slower to 20 km/hr than the 225 tire (15.5% slower).

B. In ice braking (20 km/hr down to 5 km/hr) the 205 tire required an additional distance of 2.1 meters (9.9% longer) compared to the 225 tire.

C. On the ice handling course, the lap time for the 205 tire was 3.7 sec longer than for the 225 tire (3.6% longer lap time).

D. In acceleration on snow, the 205 tire was 0.03 sec faster to 20 km/hr than the 225 tire (2.9% faster).

E. In snow braking (20 km/hr down to 5 km/hr) the 205 tire stopped 0.24 meters shorter than the 225 tire (6% shorter).

F. On the snow handling course, the lap time for the 205 tire was 0.9 sec shorter than for the 225 tire (2% shorter lap time).

G. In the slush planing test ( 2 tires on slush), the 205 tire can go 1.1 km/hr faster than the 225 tire before the onset of slush-planing (3.5% faster).

H. In wet braking (from 100 km/hr to 0 km/hr) the 205 tire stops 2.7m shorter than the 225 tire (3.8% shorter).

Conclusions: In terms of percentage, you can lose more in ice traction than you gain in snow traction, by going to a skinnier, taller tire. A difference in tread width of only 20mm had a bigger effect on ice traction than I was expecting to see. As expected, the skinnier tire is better at resisting slush-planing. The skinnier tire is substantially better at wet braking (I assume the test track was wet with standing water, and not just damp).

Other observations: Among the 10 tires tested, the single performance winter (Conti TS850) scored #1 in resistance to slush planing, consistent with what I have seen on other tests over the last 5 years: performance winters are better performers in slush than studded or studless winter tires. Unsurprisingly, the XIce Xi3 scored near the bottom in the slush test, coming in ninth place.

Last edited by SubLGT; 10-15-2014 at 07:04 PM. Reason: typo correction
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 04:17 PM   #4942
krzyss
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8365
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Massachusetts
Vehicle:
2019 Mazda MX-5 RF
Machine Grey

Default

That is probably the data why Continental guy said not to go narrower in winter.
Everthing is trade off, even in winter.

Krzys

PS Does slush resistance results match hydroplanning performance?
krzyss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 04:38 PM   #4943
[email protected]
Tire Rack Moderator
 
Member#: 1215
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Tire Rack
Vehicle:
800 -428-8355
ext. 4362

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SubLGT View Post
The Finnish enthusiast magazine Tuulilasi has an interesting comparison in this years winter tire testing. A member of a Finnish BMW club posted the test results here:
http://www.btcf.fi/forum/showthread....01#post3407901

Tuulilasi tested two different sizes of the studless Nokian R2: 205/55R16 and 225/45R17. It's been 6 or 7 years since I have last seen a test of this type.

The advice you often read and hear about winter tires is to choose a size that is skinnier and taller. The data from Tuulilasi helps us see what we gain, or lose, by going to a skinnier, taller winter tire.

The results:

A. In acceleration on ice, the 205 tire was 1.2 sec slower to 20 km/hr than the 225 tire (15.5% slower).

B. In ice braking (20 km/hr down to 5 km/hr) the 205 tire required an additional distance of 2.1 meters (9.9% longer) compared to the 225 tire.

C. On the ice handling course, the lap time for the 205 tire was 3.7 sec longer than for the 225 tire (3.6% longer lap time).

D. In acceleration on snow, the 205 tire was 0.03 sec faster to 20 km/hr than the 225 tire (2.9% faster).

E. In snow braking (20 km/hr down to 5 km/hr) the 205 tire stopped 0.24 meters shorter than the 225 tire (6% shorter).

F. On the snow handling course, the lap time for the 205 tire was 0.9 sec shorter than for the 225 tire (2% shorter lap time).

G. In the slush planing test ( 2 tires on slush), the 205 tire can go 1.1 km/hr faster than the 225 tire before the onset of slush-planing (3.5% faster).

H. In wet braking (from 100 km/hr to 0 km/hr) the 205 tire stops 2.7m shorter than the 225 tire (3.8% shorter).

Conclusions: In terms of percentage, you can lose more in ice traction than you gain in snow traction, by going to a skinnier, taller tire. A difference in tread width of only 20mm had a bigger effect on ice traction than I was expecting to see. As expected, the skinnier tire is better at resisting slush-planing. The skinner tire is substantially better at wet braking (I assume the test track was wet with standing water, and not just damp).

Other observations: Among the 10 tires tested, the single performance winter (Conti TS850) scored #1 in resistance to slush planing, consistent with what I have seen on other tests over the last 5 years: performance winters are better performers in slush than studded or studless winter tires. Unsurprisingly, the XIce Xi3 scored near the bottom in the slush test, coming in ninth place.

good info ....
Luke@tirerack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 06:42 PM   #4944
Radeon
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 105251
Join Date: Jan 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Vehicle:
old Wife's Impreza

Default

@Luke
Is there a way to exclude road hazard from the price of tires? Perhaps by a phone order?
Radeon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 07:01 PM   #4945
SubLGT
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207528
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Idaho
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by krzyss View Post
***8230;***8230;***8230;***8230;...PS Does slush resistance results match hydroplanning performance?
I am thinking it does, especially if the slush is not too deep or too viscous. But I have not seen any side by side testing. Perhaps some of the central European enthusiast magazines have done both hydroplaning and slush planing tests on performance winters?

Nokian says they do a lot of testing during tire development for slush-planing resistance. Last year Vi Bilagare tested the studless Nokian R2, the studded Nokian Hakka 8, and the Nokian WR D3 (performance winter). The WR D3 performed better than the R2 and Hakka 8 (and all the other tires in the test) in the slush test (with a slush depth of 35mm). The Michelin Xi3 came in last among the 10 tires tested.

http://www.vibilagare.se/test/dack/d...-friktionsdack

Last edited by SubLGT; 10-15-2014 at 07:09 PM.
SubLGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 08:33 PM   #4946
Strex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 400973
Join Date: Sep 2014
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Abu Dhabi, UAE
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GodWhomIsMike View Post

I would prefer the Nokian, but the Bridgestone WS80 from Tire Rack is just far less money to get and includes Road Hazard coverage, unlike TyresByWeb.

I worked out both online and the cost difference is $786.60 (Blizzak WS80) vs $1148.00 (Nokian R2 SUV) (~$360) when all is said and done.
I'd just point out to you Mike that I think given your highway driving the Nokians will last a lot longer. Only the first 50% of the Blizzaks tread is made from their special compound and then they become about equivalent to all seasons. Bet you get two winters out of them. The Nokians also have a very low rolling resistance so a bit better on fuel. I think if you look at cost of ownership over their lifetimes the Nokians will see that $360. Plus you get an overall better tire in varying conditions. Well worth the premium. I've used x-ice a lot to and the xi3 is supposed to be the best yet.

Why not save some money and see if you can source rims locally? You might even find somebody on kijiji selling stock crosstrek rims but you'll definately find something that will work. Also is there no good tire shops in your area? Skip the shipping and you have a place to go for free flat repairs and whatnot. Costco backs their tires the best but you get the Blizzaks (cough xi3 cough cough) if you go there. I'm sure you can find Nokian locally.

I was going to say to keep costs down (more defer them) get your winters mounted to your stock rims and buy new ones for your stock tires next spring. Or switch then again but I wouldn't do that.
Strex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 08:41 PM   #4947
RexNEffex2015
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 402976
Join Date: Oct 2014
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: New London county ct
Vehicle:
2015 WRX LIMITED
CWP

Default New wrx 2015

Just picked up some nexen winter guards for winter. Does anybody have any experience with these on wrx? Thanks
RexNEffex2015 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2014, 09:20 PM   #4948
left footed whooten
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 44652
Join Date: Oct 2003
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Truckee, CA
Vehicle:
16 Colorado diesel
ATC Bobcat Pop-up

Default

Nexen is a chinese tire. Generally not of high quality, but adequate im sure. Maybe someone has some experience.
left footed whooten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2014, 11:27 AM   #4949
[email protected]
Tire Rack Moderator
 
Member#: 1215
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: The Tire Rack
Vehicle:
800 -428-8355
ext. 4362

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radeon View Post
@Luke
Is there a way to exclude road hazard from the price of tires? Perhaps by a phone order?
why?

The road hazard protection is a "no charge" value add on to purchases.
Luke@tirerack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-16-2014, 04:39 PM   #4950
NemesisWRX
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 134413
Join Date: Dec 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
2015 WRX
WRB

Default

Vehicle: 15 WRX
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Tire or pkg: Tire only

I've been researching for a bit now and I'm stuck and would love some advice. I just bought 15 WRX after many winters with my 03 and am trying to get it ready for the winter. On my 03, I originally had the Dunlop Winter Sport 3D tires (205/55/16) and they were pretty good, but not great in my opinion in the winter. They also only lasted only 2 1/2 seasons which may have been due to the car itself, but at the end they were unusable in any adverse conditions. I replaced them halfway through last season with General GMax AS-03 tires and those were IMO really good in the wet snow we had later on in the winter. I am considering these tires for the 15, based on my good past experience and the fact that I now have TC/stability control which may help somewhat, but I am hesitant due to the fact that I never tested them in the dry snow we usually have early on in the winter. I also have read that they get really loud as they wear, but I sold the car before I had too many miles on them so I can't comment on this. Is this tire a good choice, or do you have a better/comparable (and similarly priced) recommendation?

Based on the relatively dry/small (<4") snowfall events and possibility of warmer days (50deg.F or higher) we typically get here in Pittsburgh it makes sense in my mind at least to go with a "performance" snow or all season instead of a dedicated snow. If we get a large snowfall or ice I'll just stay home or drive my wife's SUV, so I don't need to worry too much about that.

Please, any advice or comments would be helpful. I know time is running out and having been caught once a long time ago in a snowstorm with summer tires, I know I need something that is meant for this weather.

Thanks!
NemesisWRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This here is the Android OS thread. All phones, news, general info welcome. under pressure Off-Topic 10849 12-13-2011 11:10 PM
WTB: Winter wheels/ or All season tires on wheels, or just all season tires! Robstunner MWSOC Private Classifieds 0 10-29-2009 12:42 PM
Winter Tires vs. All Season Tires wrx425 Tire & Wheel 22 01-16-2009 12:34 AM
same tire thread all around for AWD? MystikalDawn Newbies & FAQs 6 10-15-2008 12:28 PM
Anybody get tired of all your mods and go back to stock or somewhere in between?? Farnsrocket Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 31 09-11-2007 11:06 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2021 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2019, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.