Winter tires and driving

[Eyedaho]

Think about it, that doesn’t make sense, do crampons stop working at 0F? I can tell you for sure that my studs bite in the ice well down into the -30’s F. My garage is on the north side of my house and that side also faces the mountain. Basically I get no sun and end up with a 4-6” a solid ice glacier there every winter, obvious marks from my tire studs are seen in the ice. So yes Even at approaching -40F my studded tires obviously bite, so do my Salomon SpikeCross, my studded bike tires, and the metal edges on my skis.

I'm not sure and I'm not going to dig through the thread to find out, but I think this is the data:

http://depts.washington.edu/trac/bulkdisk/pdf/551.1.pdf

I'm not a data scientist, but I don't find the temperature component to be a very strong correlation, especially since the data is from the late nineties. At least one of the studies was based on an old fashioned rubber compound on the studded tires which gets harder at lower temperatures. Nothing in this data proves to me that studs don't work, but I'm certainly no journalist.

 

[stonepa]

I think that fuel economy is actually one of the things the 200 does well. We're currently getting 13mpg post-build. That's living in a state with 80 MPH speed limits, big mountains, and an awful, awful lot of dirt roads. Also turns out we have more animal strikes per miles travelled than anywhere else: 10 Worst States for Animal Collisions [2020 Study] Which also goes a long ways towards explaining the need for a big truck.

13 MPG might not sound great, but use any other vehicle in similar conditions and it's going to struggle to do the same. Both our other trucks return essentially the same number. There's a difference between the real world and a window sticker.

It's also funny how people latch so hard onto vehicles as they relate to personal carbon footprints. Our houses and our air travel generate an awful lot more than our vehicles do. Which is also why less of us adds up to such a reduction in hypothetical future pollution.

Amen. I had someone bad mouth me because my 200 only gets 13-14 while towing my tear drop trailer. Meanwhile, their older Subaru Outback with a rooftop box got 16.

 

[stonepa]

Think about it, that doesn’t make sense, do crampons stop working at 0F? I can tell you for sure that my studs bite in the ice well down into the -30’s F. My garage is on the north side of my house and that side also faces the mountain. Basically I get no sun and end up with a 4-6” a solid ice glacier there every winter, obvious marks from my tire studs are seen in the ice. So yes Even at approaching -40F my studded tires obviously bite, so do my Salomon SpikeCross, my studded bike tires, and the metal edges on my skis.

Ever feel like you might be an outlier? Almost no one has those kinds of conditions except for you. Not even here in The Last Frontier. I'm old enough to remember when the Anchorage road crews left a thick layer of packed snow and ice on the roads all winter but, based on what my cousin told me (he spent 25 years on the Greater Anchorage Borough road crew) that was mostly to protect the road from studded snow tires.

Studded tires, in my experience, are a one trick tire. Now that Blizzaks, Hakkas, etc are available and work so well I would never go back to studs. But, this is still America, so, given your local conditions, go for those studded tires.

 

[40Man]

Ever feel like you might be an outlier? Almost no one has those kinds of conditions except for you. Not even here in The Last Frontier. I'm old enough to remember when the Anchorage road crews left a thick layer of packed snow and ice on the roads all winter but, based on what my cousin told me (he spent 25 years on the Greater Anchorage Borough road crew) that was mostly to protect the road from studded snow tires.

Studded tires, in my experience, are a one trick tire. Now that Blizzaks, Hakkas, etc are available and work so well I would never go back to studs. But, this is still America, so, given your local conditions, go for those studded tires.

I like both studded and studless, but lean towards studs based on personal experience.

I run Blizzaks on my wife's 4Runner and have studs on my Cruiser. The Blizzaks "good" compound only lasts me between 2-3 seasons before it becomes a "regular" winter tire. I've dealt with enough ice storms in winter to like having studs on a rig. We get icy roads enough and I have steep hills on my average commute and the Blizzaks are great, but not nearly as good as studs on ice. My steep exit road meets up with a busy road. On many winter days studs have saved me from sliding into traffic. On icy days, my wife's rig with Blizzaks does fine, but she slides much longer than me and has had a few scary slides down the steep downhill in our hood , but even with a heavier weight the Cruiser handles much better. I think for her next set she'll probably go with studs.

We can watch out our back window as many cars struggle up our hill in winter, even 4x4 rigs. We never had issues with out studded and studless winters.


The decreased stopping distance on ice with studs is substantially better than the increased stopping distance (minimal) studs cause. Nokian also has very long lasting studs that are also designed to cause less road damage. The studless Blizzaks are great, but they are expensive and the advanced winter tread wears quickly.

 

[coleAK]

Ever feel like you might be an outlier? Almost no one has those kinds of conditions except for you. Not even here in The Last Frontier. I'm old enough to remember when the Anchorage road crews left a thick layer of packed snow and ice on the roads all winter but, based on what my cousin told me (he spent 25 years on the Greater Anchorage Borough road crew) that was mostly to protect the road from studded snow tires.

Studded tires, in my experience, are a one trick tire. Now that Blizzaks, Hakkas, etc are available and work so well I would never go back to studs. But, this is still America, so, given your local conditions, go for those studded tires.

For the record I run hakkas and most Hakkas are studded. The roads are like this in most intersections right now in Anchorage solid ice with dust on top and have been in my neighborhood for the most part of 6 weeks. My house is ~1500 ft above Anchorage. I feel like studded tires are more so needed up here on low snow winters like we’ve had probably 6 of the last 10 winters, then it’s the pattern of sub zero, 34 and raining then back to deep freeze. Back when we broke the all time snowfall record in 2011-2012 didn’t need studs since were almost always driving on fresh snow. Also there is no disadvantage of studs on fresh snow, heck Hakka 44’s come studded.

also everyones preference is different. For me I want the best possible handling in the worst conditions. Most winters I drive all over AK, NW territories, and into BC. My buddy that lives just down the street and is active on the 80 forum runs AT tires on his 80 year round, when the roads are bad he drives one of his 4 other vehicles. The point I was trying to make is studs don’t wear out after 1000 miles and modern studded tires like Hakka’s are completely designed winter tires not the old shoot studs in a MT tire.

I fully agree studded tires are probably not the best in most places outside of most of AK, ME, and mountains of VT, NH, probably parts of northern MN, MT, possibly Great Lakes areas, northern ID. If I still lived in Tahoe I’d run hakka R3.

 

[Leelanau]

I'm not sure and I'm not going to dig through the thread to find out, but I think this is the data:

http://depts.washington.edu/trac/bulkdisk/pdf/551.1.pdf

I'm not a data scientist, but I don't find the temperature component to be a very strong correlation, especially since the data is from the late nineties. At least one of the studies was based on an old fashioned rubber compound on the studded tires which gets harder at lower temperatures. Nothing in this data proves to me that studs don't work, but I'm certainly no journalist.

Haha! Especially not a narcissistic "journalist!'

 

[WesSiler]

I'm not a data scientist, but I don't find the temperature component to be a very strong correlation, especially since the data is from the late nineties.

Stud development since that time has focussed on making them lighter, and getting them to cause less road wear and to last longer. Studs have not been redesigned for purposes of traction improvement since that time.

There has been substantial development in winter tire rubber compounds, which are advancing year on year. Drive a studless tire from 1999 and one from 2020 and you will feel a remarkable difference. That studless tires were able to exceed the performance of studs, even way back in the mid-90s, should be pretty telling.

 

[WesSiler]

The Blizzaks "good" compound only lasts me between 2-3 seasons before it becomes a "regular" winter tire.

The studless Blizzaks are great, but they are expensive and the advanced winter tread wears quickly.

Yeah, that's definitely a downside. Other companies like Nokian have now copied this, but one of Bridgestone's innovations in the last two decades was adding tiny glass or ceramic particles to the rubber compound. These are only included in the first half of the tread depth. So your tires will only be halfway to their wear markers when you lose this advantage. I just replace mine every other season, if not once a year. Safety first and all that.

As a recap on how studless winter tires work, for folks who don't seem to be aware: winter rubber compounds do a couple of unique things. First, they remain flexible at low temperatures (all seasons start losing their ability to grip even dry pavement around 45 degrees), they include much more edge contact area through the use of siping, and they have open tread patterns designed to take big bites out of snow. But that's not what makes them special. The big innovation Bridgestone brought to the space when it introduced the first modern studless winter tire in the early '90s (that's why you see their products incorporated so heavily into studies, it was their innovation being studied) was a microporous structure that wicks water away from the tire's surface. Ice isn't slippery because it's smooth (ice has the texture of a rock, unless it's groomed), it's slippery because the weight of a vehicle melts the surface in the fraction of second its in contact with a given area. This water gets between the surface and the tire, reducing traction. So studless tires are able to grip ice by removing this water. This is able to happen in even very low temperatures, where studs begin losing grip. Then, more recently, adding those glass or ceramic particles to the compounds makes the tire act like sandpaper against the ice, increasing friction and grip.

These features aren't really visible to the naked eye, and aren't communicated well by the tire makers who use them. That's not a good combination for consumers, who don't tend to think of tires as anything more than something they want to save money on.

 

[WesSiler]

Think about it, that doesn’t make sense, do crampons stop working at 0F?

Studs aren't crampons. I know that visually the two may share some similarities (look, sharp metal!), but crampons are substantially larger, and focus the weight of the wearer entirely only a handful of very sharp protrusions. Studs only protrude about 1.1 millimeters (before you wear them down by driving on the bare pavement so common on American roads, even in winter), and have to share grip with the rubber compound.

FYI, if you're seeing grooves caused by studs spinning through the ice, your studs are failing to provide grip on that surface.

 

[Eyedaho]

Stud development since that time has focussed on making them lighter, and getting them to cause less road wear and to last longer. Studs have not been redesigned for purposes of traction improvement since that time.

There has been substantial development in winter tire rubber compounds, which are advancing year on year. Drive a studless tire from 1999 and one from 2020 and you will feel a remarkable difference. That studless tires were able to exceed the performance of studs, even way back in the mid-90s, should be pretty telling.

I guess the bottom line is you should drive whatever tires make you happy. I will certainly continue to do the same, based on my research and observations.

 

[coleAK]

Studs aren't crampons. I know that visually the two may share some similarities (look, sharp metal!), but crampons are substantially larger, and focus the weight of the wearer entirely only a handful of very sharp protrusions. Studs only protrude about 1.1 millimeters (before you wear them down by driving on the bare pavement so common on American roads, even in winter), and have to share grip with the rubber compound.

FYI, if you're seeing grooves caused by studs spinning through the ice, your studs are failing to provide grip on that surface.

Don’t make assumptions, I see the holes in the ice created by the studs not grooves from spinning. It’s been snowing for the last few days but if you really like I’ll take a picture. Also as the studs wear down so does the rubber... also studs don’t entirely act in the function of grip (like crampons). They also act to break up ice and create a crystalline layer between the ice and the rubber compound to add traction that way, so yes spinning studded tires on ice does help. Attached is a picture of my old Hakka 5 (after 9 winters) I took off this fall (saving them for my daughters back yard archery range) Like I said lots of miles, many on pavement, fully intact protruding studs. Also it’s not like studs are stilts that hold the rubber off the ground. Nokian uses a lot of technology in their studded tires, read about the Hakka 9. Nokian Tyres launches new flagship product Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9: New stud technology provides a naturally safe performance in the worst winter conditions / Nokian Tires

and yes I know how crampons work, Highly Experienced mountaineer and ice climber.

I also ice raced for years. Ice as in on frozen lakes. I fore ran the Big lake race last winter in our Tesla, on studded tires.

 

[40Man]

Stud development since that time has focussed on making them lighter, and getting them to cause less road wear and to last longer. Studs have not been redesigned for purposes of traction improvement since that time.

There has been substantial development in winter tire rubber compounds, which are advancing year on year. Drive a studless tire from 1999 and one from 2020 and you will feel a remarkable difference. That studless tires were able to exceed the performance of studs, even way back in the mid-90s, should be pretty telling.

That is inaccurate. Nokian has been improving studs for both grip, longevity, noise, and tread placement for years (and recent changes to tread placement has greatly improved the grip performance of their studded tires). And now they have studded tires with glass beads, etc. in them, that provide some of the benefits from the Bridgestones, with the advantage of studs. They have studs with air type cushions developed in the past four years designed to improve grip and lower road noise, and have also changed the metal and shape of their stud for better ice traction and longevity.

One of the coolest things Nokian has done is created a hybrid tire (not distributed for consumer use) that can activate or deactivate the studs remotely. Not sure if it will every come to market due to likely cost, but Nokian is constantly trying to improve their stud technology.

As I said, I run both studded and studless, and both are great. I've only run studs since I moved to EA WA with regular trips to the ID panhandle and MT for skiing, etc. And those trips are usually with the studded tires, as I have found them to perform better. If I lived in most of the lower 48, I wouldn't get studs.

I never used to run them until my wife had a horrible experience with KO2s on ice. I figure if I was stacking and storing winters for her, may as well do the same for my rigs.



I think a lot of people confuse old school studs with modern studded tires. Adding studs to some winter tires will not give you the performance of prestudded Nokians.

One thing that amazes me with people and tires, is how so many people get on a soapbox for a certain brand or tire type without having run many other brands. One of these in particular is KO2s. Horrible winter tire, but many people think they are amazing (yet haven't run others to compare)...

I've pushed Falkens on here regularly, after being one of the few people that have run a large number of other ATs (off the top of my head I've owned KO, KO2, LTX, Duratrac, AT3, AT/3s, Discoverer M+S, and ST MAXX (I only owned the ST Maxx on a rig I sold quickly after installing, so not a lot of personal data), Blizzaks, Nokian Hakkas and others. I hear good things about a few other tires, but don't chime in because I don't have experience. Of all these, the Falkens are probably the best for the buck, and have the best winter traction of ATs other than maybe Duratrac.

Unless you have personally run newer Nokians and have seen how well they perform, how much can your opinion be worth?

 

[kevinfoutch]

Added some Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT3 LT275/70R18 E 125/122Q aired up to 41psi. (also posted with pics here)

This thread had some helpful comments on selection of snow tires - ready for some backcountry ski trips while observing COVID distancing protocols.

 

[WesSiler]

And now they have studded tires with glass beads, etc. in them, that provide some of the benefits from the Bridgestones, with the advantage of studs.

One thing that amazes me with people and tires, is how so many people get on a soapbox for a certain brand or tire type without having run many other brands. One of these in particular is KO2s. Horrible winter tire, but many people think they are amazing (yet haven't run others to compare)...

I've pushed Falkens on here regularly, after being one of the few people that have run a large number of other ATs.

- It's definitely reality that Nokian has added winter rubber compounds, and all the other tricks to their studded tires. A lot of the rest of the stuff they talk about with stud location/retraction pockets etc is largely marketing fluff. Don't get me wrong, they're very good tires, they're just better without the studs, in my experience. A little less grip on bare ice between zero and 32 degrees, but better driving dynamics there, and on bare pavement/rain/slush too.

- Hate to blow my own horn. I used to get paid to do this stuff, and still dabble a little here and there. Can no longer realistically say I've driven everything out there, and can no longer claim more training than some, but I had a good run.

- And yeah, don't get me started on K02s. They're fantastic when new, but wear so fast. Had a set on the Ranger that I just took off (I wanted the 34x10.5 size). In 15k miles, they got unbelievably noisy, and lost all their snow performance. Awful ice tire even when new. Just more evidence that 3PMSF is utterly pointless.

- The Falken AT3Ws were the best all-round all-terrain I'd used, until I tried the new Toyos. The ATIII is even better on the road, especially in the wet, and can't seem to find a situation that upsets them off-road at all. Plus, they're typically a bit lighter than the Falken in a given size, and we all know how important unsprung is. I've already got a set on 200 wheels, but will switch both the other trucks over the ATIIIs in the spring as well.

Anyways, I guess my overall point here is that I hate seeing inappropriate products recommended to inexperienced buyers. That frustration comes more from the shocking state of most publications these days than it does forum threads, but I still really like helping people along a bit by making sure they're directed towards the right purchases.

 

[04UZJ100]

- It's definitely reality that Nokian has added winter rubber compounds, and all the other tricks to their studded tires. A lot of the rest of the stuff they talk about with stud location/retraction pockets etc is largely marketing fluff. Don't get me wrong, they're very good tires, they're just better without the studs, in my experience. A little less grip on bare ice between zero and 32 degrees, but better driving dynamics there, and on bare pavement/rain/slush too.

- Hate to blow my own horn. I used to get paid to do this stuff, and still dabble a little here and there. Can no longer realistically say I've driven everything out there, and can no longer claim more training than some, but I had a good run.

- And yeah, don't get me started on K02s. They're fantastic when new, but wear so fast. Had a set on the Ranger that I just took off (I wanted the 34x10.5 size). In 15k miles, they got unbelievably noisy, and lost all their snow performance. Awful ice tire even when new. Just more evidence that 3PMSF is utterly pointless.

- The Falken AT3Ws were the best all-round all-terrain I'd used, until I tried the new Toyos. The ATIII is even better on the road, especially in the wet, and can't seem to find a situation that upsets them off-road at all. Plus, they're typically a bit lighter than the Falken in a given size, and we all know how important unsprung is. I've already got a set on 200 wheels, but will switch both the other trucks over the ATIIIs in the spring as well.

Anyways, I guess my overall point here is that I hate seeing inappropriate products recommended to inexperienced buyers. That frustration comes more from the shocking state of most publications these days than it does forum threads, but I still really like helping people along a bit by making sure they're directed towards the right purchases.

Again. Here are Nokians after 15k miles. Majority of which is stop and go in Anchorage on bare roads.

Imperceptible wear on the studs and rubber. These handled 5,000 miles on the Alcan in the dead of winter which is mixed packed snow, fresh snow, ice, and slush. This was done at -40F at 80mph. I felt more than confident in their performance in all situations.

Your claims of poor snow performance, poor stud life, and poor rubber compounds are flat out wrong.

I will happily wear away black asphalt to keep my family safe, just as I will drive 3 extremely inefficient and heavy SUVs around town for similar reasons.

 

[WesSiler]

Those are totally the tires I'd run on the Alcan. But dailying them is like daily driving a mud terrain—something that involve trade offs. If that balance works for you, great. It's not appropriate for most drivers.

I could show you a picture of these 15k-mile K02s as well. They look barely worn, yet their dynamics are significantly compromised. If I take a picture of the DM-V2s when they come off our 200 in the spring, they'll look pretty good, yet they're destined for the trash in favor of a fresh set, so we retain that first half of the tread that has the fancy ceramic particles in it.

Do you have a point?

 

[40Man]

- It's definitely reality that Nokian has added winter rubber compounds, and all the other tricks to their studded tires. A lot of the rest of the stuff they talk about with stud location/retraction pockets etc is largely marketing fluff. Don't get me wrong, they're very good tires, they're just better without the studs, in my experience. A little less grip on bare ice between zero and 32 degrees, but better driving dynamics there, and on bare pavement/rain/slush too.

- Hate to blow my own horn. I used to get paid to do this stuff, and still dabble a little here and there. Can no longer realistically say I've driven everything out there, and can no longer claim more training than some, but I had a good run.

- And yeah, don't get me started on K02s. They're fantastic when new, but wear so fast. Had a set on the Ranger that I just took off (I wanted the 34x10.5 size). In 15k miles, they got unbelievably noisy, and lost all their snow performance. Awful ice tire even when new. Just more evidence that 3PMSF is utterly pointless.

- The Falken AT3Ws were the best all-round all-terrain I'd used, until I tried the new Toyos. The ATIII is even better on the road, especially in the wet, and can't seem to find a situation that upsets them off-road at all. Plus, they're typically a bit lighter than the Falken in a given size, and we all know how important unsprung is. I've already got a set on 200 wheels, but will switch both the other trucks over the ATIIIs in the spring as well.

Anyways, I guess my overall point here is that I hate seeing inappropriate products recommended to inexperienced buyers. That frustration comes more from the shocking state of most publications these days than it does forum threads, but I still really like helping people along a bit by making sure they're directed towards the right purchases.

I think what you are missing, or at least your posts are misconstruing is that studded tires don't also have the advantages of new compounds that studless also have. The Nokians do a great job, and many of their tires working amazing without studs, but are also optional to come with studs.

And while I agree that studded tires perform worse in wet above freezing or dry conditions, you don't mention that the difference is miniscule. So if you live somewhere with icy conditions, why not get a Nokian that can provide the best of both worlds? Throwing out year old tires is probably worse for the environment that running eco studs for 3+ winters.

And feel free to blow your own horn. I'm not that flexible.

 

[300blk]

I think what you are missing, or at least your posts are misconstruing is that studded tires don't also have the advantages of new compounds that studless also have. The Nokians do a great job, and many of their tires working amazing without studs, but are also optional to come with studs.

And while I agree that studded tires perform worse in wet above freezing or dry conditions, you don't mention that the difference is miniscule. So if you live somewhere with icy conditions, why not get a Nokian that can provide the best of both worlds? Throwing out year old tires is probably worse for the environment that running eco studs for 3+ winters.

And feel free to blow your own horn. I'm not that flexible.

My biggest minus against studs was that I lived in Colorado which had just about every kind of snow condition with ice mixed in and then LONG periods of warm, dry weather where your snow and stud tires were essentially useless and the cold weather compounds and studs were wearing down... fast.

My compromise eventually was non-studded Nokians which had the perfect blend of cold weather, snow, and ice performance but still weren't brutal on the 70 degree days between snowstorms. Probably if I lived in the mountains or where there is no summer interspersed with winter, I'd get studded winter tires (not studded MTs, which suck all around).

 

[40Man]

My biggest minus against studs was that I lived in Colorado which had just about every kind of snow condition with ice mixed in and then LONG periods of warm, dry weather where your snow and stud tires were essentially useless and the cold weather compounds and studs were wearing down... fast.

My compromise eventually was non-studded Nokians which had the perfect blend of cold weather, snow, and ice performance but still weren't brutal on the 70 degree days between snowstorms. Probably if I lived in the mountains or where there is no summer interspersed with winter, I'd get studded winter tires (not studded MTs, which suck all around).

I run the studded all winter, and outside of driving through my parking garage and the extra noise on cement, the studs don't make my rig drive with any noticeable difference on warm days. The tires wear fast when it warms up, so I tend not to drive on winter tires on those days if I can avoid it. I find the winter compound on my Blizzaks wears down faster than the Nokian winter compound or their studs.

I really like my studless Blizzaks, but the cost with the fast wear makes me hesitant to keep using them. Again, if I wasn't in Eastern WA with regular trips through the ID panhandle and MT skiing, I probably wouldn't even run winter tires. The Falkens do pretty well in winter, but I've been in enough treacherous conditions that I appreciate the extra grip true winter tires provide, and I feel more connected on black ice conditions with Nokians with studs.

If I lived in CO, with the dry snow with less likelihood of really icy conditions, I'd stick with the Falkens. I lived in Utah for years, and we'd get ice from time to time, but that dry powder makes the roads much easier to deal with. In Utah they did an amazing job sanding roads. Not so much in EA WA/ID.

 

[stonepa]

Again. Here are Nokians after 15k miles. Majority of which is stop and go in Anchorage on bare roads.

Imperceptible wear on the studs and rubber. These handled 5,000 miles on the Alcan in the dead of winter which is mixed packed snow, fresh snow, ice, and slush. This was done at -40F at 80mph. I felt more than confident in their performance in all situations.

Your claims of poor snow performance, poor stud life, and poor rubber compounds are flat out wrong.

I will happily wear away black asphalt to keep my family safe, just as I will drive 3 extremely inefficient and heavy SUVs around town for similar reasons.

View attachment 2521124

View attachment 2521125

Wait, are you saying the studs have no wear on them? The studs look worn down to me. What am I missing since my last set of studded tires, where the studs actually extended beyond the rubber?