|
Author
|
Topic: Winter tires
|
John
unregistered
|
posted January 03, 2000 02:09 AM
 
Hello,
I live in Toronto and I need help on choosing winter tires. The recomended winter tire size is 195 65 15 Q speed rated. The BMW dealers are recommending H speed rated. Not too much highway driving is done.If I have to use H rated, I am deciding between Michelin Pilot Alpin and Pirelli Winter ice 210 Assymetrico. The tire reack rated a Q seed rated Pirelli ice above the pilot Alpin. Are they comparable? Any suggestion?
If I can use Q speed rated, I would like to get the Hakka 1 which is highly rated here. but all the Toronto dealers are out of stock.
I may have to choose between Michelin Arctic Alpin and Bridgestone Blizack new generation. Any advice from someone who has used these tires will be appreciated.
Thanks. IP: Logged |
Marc
unregistered
|
posted January 03, 2000 05:28 AM
First, I have to advise you that BMW Canada
recommand to use H-RATED winter tires on all
their cars (I have seen the service bulletin)
to maintain the road handling properties of
such automobiles. One thing I am sure of, do
not put Q-RATED tires on your vehicule, it is
to much of a speed rating changed compared to
the O.E tires.
Second, I would like to correct an information you posted in your question, Nokian Hakka 1 is not(Q-Rated, 160 km/h) but
(T-Rated, 190 km/h) wich is make a big difference.
In your tire selection, I suggest that you
consider two tires, first Nokian Hakka NRW-H
(H-Rated, 210 km/h) or second Nokian Hakka 1
(T-Rated, 190 km/h). To find them in the Toronto area you can call Dave At Steelcase
Tire & Rim in Markham, they'll find the tires
for you.IP: Logged |
John
unregistered
|
posted January 03, 2000 02:15 PM
Thanks for your advice, I called Steelcase last week and they told me no Nokian tires until next fall. What is the next best choice.
quote:
Originally posted by Marc:
First, I have to advise you that BMW Canada
recommand to use H-RATED winter tires on all
their cars (I have seen the service bulletin)
to maintain the road handling properties of
such automobiles. One thing I am sure of, do
not put Q-RATED tires on your vehicule, it is
to much of a speed rating changed compared to
the O.E tires.
Second, I would like to correct an information you posted in your question, Nokian Hakka 1 is not(Q-Rated, 160 km/h) but
(T-Rated, 190 km/h) wich is make a big difference.
In your tire selection, I suggest that you
consider two tires, first Nokian Hakka NRW-H
(H-Rated, 210 km/h) or second Nokian Hakka 1
(T-Rated, 190 km/h). To find them in the Toronto area you can call Dave At Steelcase
Tire & Rim in Markham, they'll find the tires
for you.
IP: Logged |
John
unregistered
|
posted January 03, 2000 02:33 PM
Thanks Marc for your advice.
I called Steelcase last week and they told me they do not have any Nokian tire in my size. They recommend Yokohama Guardex. Do you agree or should I stick with Pilot Alpin or Pirelli 210 ? IP: Logged |
Stan
unregistered
|
posted January 03, 2000 07:04 PM
I have a BMW 540I and I drove two winters on the Pirelli 210 asymetrical tires.I found that the traction on snow and ice was not great.The wheels spinned even with the ASC system on or off.The handling on dry pavement was very good,but I buy a winter tire for winter driving.I now have the Nokian Q tire and the traction on both snow and ice is very good.On dry pavement the car handles well,but not as good as the Pirelli's.I don't agree that you need a "H" rated tire on a BMW.I live in Montreal,Canada where the winters can have a lot of snow.IP: Logged |
Marc
unregistered
|
posted January 04, 2000 06:20 AM
Hi John, tell dave at Steelcase that you are
aware that some of Nokian's distributor in the province of Quebec still have that size available, he should be able to get them pretty easilly, beleave me!IP: Logged |
john
unregistered
|
posted January 05, 2000 12:04 AM
Thank you Stan, I agree with you since most winter tires were Q rated until recently.
Also winter driving should be slower and less agressive than summer. I think I will look into the Hakka Q since it looks like it is better on ice than the Hakka 1, i.e more sipes.
IP: Logged |
Jason
unregistered
|
posted January 05, 2000 07:47 AM
I live in the Toronto area also and I have used dedicated snow tires in the past few years, Bridgestone Blizzak, Nokian Hakka1 etc. They are wonderful in the snow but problem is I drive in urban areas most of the time and I encounter more wet roads than true snow covered roads, and snow/ice tires perform poorly in the wet. I find the braking distances are noticeably longer than even all seaons. I have since switched to Goodyear Ultragrip (H rated) this winter and they are a good compromise.
IP: Logged |
Gord
unregistered
|
posted January 06, 2000 10:58 PM
Stan, I also bought the Hakka Q for a BMW 323
and found them to be somewhat unstable when driving on dry highway at 100km/hr or changing lane not aggressively. They feel squirmish as if the car is supported by a phone book standing on its end. The treads on those tires look like sheets of rubber next to each other, hence the squirmish feel. Am I right or is it just my imagination? The braking is excellent though. I haven't had a chance to try them in snow or ice yet, but they look and feel like they will be very good. quote:
Originally posted by Stan:
I have a BMW 540I and I drove two winters on the Pirelli 210 asymetrical tires.I found that the traction on snow and ice was not great.The wheels spinned even with the ASC system on or off.The handling on dry pavement was very good,but I buy a winter tire for winter driving.I now have the Nokian Q tire and the traction on both snow and ice is very good.On dry pavement the car handles well,but not as good as the Pirelli's.I don't agree that you need a "H" rated tire on a BMW.I live in Montreal,Canada where the winters can have a lot of snow.
IP: Logged |
Stan
unregistered
|
posted January 08, 2000 09:29 AM
The Nokian Q do feel a little squemish on dry Pavement,but I have driven from Montreal to Ottawa twice(a distance of about 120 miles) on dry pavement and they handled OK,but not as good as the Pirelli 210 asymetrical.On the hand,it snowed yesterday and the handling,stopping and acceleration was much better with the Nokian Q than the Pirellis in the snow.IP: Logged |
Vin
unregistered
|
posted January 08, 2000 08:59 PM
I have nearly 2000 miles this season on my Hakka 1s (195/65R15). They too feel a bit 'squirmish'in lane changing maneuvers but that's to be expected with such deep treads. Overall, it is an excellent tire. Many trips between Erie & Pittsburgh (2 hours one way) at speeds of 75mph+ and they are stable and quiet. In the snow and slush they are phenomenal. I'm surprised I haven't damaged anything on my A4 yet. The tires will pull me through snow so deep, the front air dam gets packed solid with snow and I can hear the snow (painfully) dragging under the car on rutted streets. Hakka 1 and a light foot are unstoppable! =) On the highway, they tread water and slush very well. With lake effect weather here in Erie, we often see 2 feet of snow in a day or two along with freezing temps. Hakka 1 has been a great tire all around.IP: Logged |
Paul
unregistered
|
posted January 16, 2000 03:47 PM
Hi,
I was once one of the confused winter tire buyers looking for a real winter tire for my old, beaten-up 89 Civic Hatchb. I live in Ottawa, Ont. and we get enough snow and ice rain. After hours of web searching, in store looking and talking with many car enthusiasts I decided on Nokia(n)s 1. The size is 155/80 rather than the normal 175/70 so the tire behaves much better in snow (my brother uses 145/80 Hankooks insteat of 185/70 on his Nissan and they work amazingly well in deep snow).
I got my Nokias1 at Performance Motors in Ottawa, a Mazda dealer. The price was some $83Cdn. per tire plus taxes, and they had also NokiaQ (same price) and other Nokia tires in stock.
Reasons:
- Finland is a country where winter is really harsh, so they must know something about winter tire design (Nokia web page is the only one, which provided usefull info).
- highly rated by users (the choice as studed tire for ice racing)
- the tread seems to provide good snow and slash traction with good channeling to eliminate hydroplaning in wet conditions.
- Nokia states that they use different compounds than most winter tire manufacturers to maximaze tread's life and handling characteristics (more than 100.000km with proper rotation).Other tires I was about to buy.
- Blizzaks, my sis uses them in Pittsbourgh, she likes them on ice but they wear out at "in your eyes" rate.
- Pirreli, more of a "all season" soft compound winter tire rather than tire designed with special winter compound
- Good Year new snow/ice tire, damn expensive
- Michelin Arctics, they might be OK on ice, but the tread design doesn't seem like one that provides good snow/slash traction and low hydroplaning. Also some people say that the usefull tread disappears rather fast.
- they are also many such as BF Goodrich, Copper, Firestone, Toyo and Canadian Tire (BTW. the Wintertrack is BFG. Slalom, the Icetrack is some Michelin design and they seem to be good value, especially if on sale, for not v.demanding drivers).
I use the Nokias for about month and half, and I think they are really worth the price, especially in the snow/slash conditions. The hydroplaning is low in rain conditions, actually better than some all season tires. They appear to be squimish a bit but in dry weather they hold line in fast turns very well. The funny wind noise is not that bad(I actually like it). As for 'on ice' driving, well I'm not so sure if there is a tire that "sticks to ice", and I'm not pushing too much but they are much better than any all season tire. Now I want to try Nokia all season tires - they are that good. IP: Logged |
Tim H.
unregistered
|
posted January 17, 2000 08:05 AM
May I ask why you did not pick the Hakka Q. This is a newer design. As I understand it, the Hakka 1 is more of a snow tire and the Hakka Q is an ice tire. Is this why you went with the Hakka1. I am thinking of buying a new set of snow tires and for me, the choice is down to these two so I appreciate any advice you can give me.IP: Logged |
Tom Lengyel
Associate Member
|
posted January 17, 2000 09:24 AM
I disagree with the comment above about not switching to Q rated tires for the winter, if you have been using more performance oriented tires previously. On my 2000 Acura Integra Type R I went from V-rated Bridgestone RE 010's to Q-rated Michelin Artic Alpins. The Michelins have provided very good traction in snow and slush, and also in rain, here in Wisconsin. Their handling is moderately sloppy, compared to the Bridgestones, but not as sloppy as the Blizzaks we have on the '92 Accord and the '88 CRX Si. The primary constraint is that I cannot drive the car much above 100 mph with the Q-rated tires.IP: Logged |
Jeff
unregistered
|
posted January 17, 2000 02:15 PM
I too am a happy Hakka 1 customer. I can't speak for Pauls choice, but when I got my set (last Nov.) none of the local Nokian distributors knew much about the "Q". From what information I've gathered, they supposedly outlast any of other the "ice tires" which are on the market, but the treadlife isn't as long as the Hakka 1's. They are also only available in a Q speed rating, vs the 1's T speed rating (If this is what is important to you). I have had my 1's singing along at 140km/hr (dry road) and they behaved admirably, (a little bit suirmy on lane changes, but what do you expect from a tire with full depth siping and a 10mm tread depth!) However, a lack of deep pockets keeps me to wihtin a few km/hr of the posted limit for most of my driving. On snow and slush the grip is excellent, on ice maybe(?) not as good as the "Q". Wet traction is execellent also; head and shoulders above my O.E. "all season" Michelin XGT H4's. Most of my driving is around the city in a sea of snow and salty slush, so pure ice traction was not of primary importance to me. Add it all up at a price comparable to the Arctic Aplin, and this tire gets a definate "two thumbs up". IP: Logged | |
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
AutoPedia® Bulletin Board System
