Arguably: The Best Snow Tire

Blizzak WS80’s are on sale. Close out. Bought WS90’s for my 2020 Prime. Bought them through tire rack and had them sent to tires plus. They came mounted and balanced and tires plus charged me $22 total to put them on and swap out my regular passenger tires. I bought a set of WS80s for my wife’s 2008 Prius. They are replacing a set of WS70s that are worn out on that vehicle.

lots of good snow tire choices out there. I appreciate this thread. We typically put ours on here in Minnesota when the average temperature dips below 50F and take them off when we reach 50F again in the spring.

 

Me too, in part because I wash'n wax the wheels coming off, and my cold tolerance has really dropped over the years.

 

I previously had a set of Nokian WR (G3) on my old Yaris, and they were amazing... great winter performance, and they get excellent reviews as winter tires you leave on the car year round. Will probably get a set for my new Prius Prime after a year or two of the factory set. (Or maybe I should now...)

 

I have just replaced the tires on my 2007 Prius with Nokian WR G4. They cost me $120/tire out the door (mounting, balancing, everything included in that price).

I bought the car in July 2017 with 175K miles and it had fairly new Firestone FR710. I put over 40K miles on the car since then and spent two New England winters with FR710 tires. To my surprise they were not that bad in the winter on the Prius. But this fall they needed to be replaced. They were down to the point where I did not feel comfortable spending another winter with them. So, Nokian WR G4 it was! The G4's carry an LRR moniker. I always thought LRR and winter service were competing requirements, but here we are. I have had the WR G4's on for a few weeks now and the fuel economy seems to not have changed noticeably. They are more quiet than Firestones, but I don't think it's fair to compare brand new tires to worn out tires, so take that with a grain of salt. Nokians are most definitely more grippy than Firestones and the car handles better with them. I have not had snow where I live yet, so winter performance has not been tested by me yet. But I have been using Nokian WR tires for over 15 years (starting with G1) and have always been very happy with their winter capabilities. I ran them on a rear wheel drive car with great success. I have a long steep driveway and when snow and ice hit, I need good tires to get out (as well as a good snow blower, which I also own). These tires are not "winter" tires. They are true four season tires. They work really well in snow and ice (designed and made in Finland) and are perfectly fine in the summer. They carry a 60K mile tread life.

 

If you can go with studded tires, go with Nokian Hakka 9, which is what I have.
And unlike the R2 (which I also tried and sold used), I have much better ice traction and I don’t worry about hydroplaning in a rainstorm at 40mph.

 

One would think so... but I've had the opposite experience contrasting Hakka R2 to Hakka 9 for two seasons each. I've had to push on the brake just a little harder on Hakka R2 than on Hakka 9 on identical road conditions, dry or wet. Perhaps that Nokian Hakka 9 studs are retractable has something to do with this contrast.

 

And oh, boy are they loud.

 

I was walking by a Kal Tire one day, two cars came rolling out, must have just got studded snow tires: you could definitely hear them coming.

 

I've always had the X-Ice. Love them. The Blizzaks when new are just about unbeatable on ice, but due to only the first 55% of the tread being the special multi cell compound, which tends to wear fast, I'm not the big fan. After that, they work much like all seasons. I prefer the more constant wear and traction of a single compound tire. If I had the $ to blow on Blizzaks every winter season or two that's the way I'd go, but instead, I get 5-6 winter seasons out of my X-Ice.

 

Gone back and forth on whether to follow-up:

Like I said, "unlike the R2 (which I also tried and sold used), I have much better ice traction and I don’t worry about hydroplaning in a rainstorm at 40mph."
And "I've had the opposite experience contrasting Hakka R2 to Hakka 9 for two seasons each. I've had to push on the brake just a little harder on Hakka R2 than on Hakka 9 on identical road conditions, dry or wet."
So, I still disagree with that article, because clearly the author(s) didn't compare Hakka R2 to Hakka 9 (which by the way, uses a two-type design with "braking" studs... I think only they and Gislaved are the only ones who have it), and I'm speaking from two seasons on each tire type.
Y'all disagree with me all you want... but who else here has actually done this comparison? Seriously, still prefer Hakka 9.