Topic: Yokohama W.drive (watchout Nokian)

[UmroAyyar]

'All Weather Tire' by Yokohama to rival Nokian's WR.
http://www.wdrive.info/en/index.html

Same formula, a performance winter tire that will survive the summer just fine.

Yokohama W.Drive.


Nokian WR G2.



A review in Wheels.ca
http://wheels.ca/article/254328
The author forgot about Nokians though and the W.drive is available in the same size and speed range as Nokian WR, both H and V speed rating.

[initial_D]

A P225/50R17 lists for $400, but Revolution Tire in Barrie discounts it to $280.

Pricey ... should be popular in Quebec.

[xviper]

What's gonna happen when some provinces make it mandatory to run "winter" tires in winter?  I've driven several cars with winter "performance" tires.  They're "OK", but will never out perform a dedicated winter tire in the real ugly stuff we get around here.
Now, would this "all weather" tire be considered an "all season" tire or a "winter" tire?  Will those provinces allow it when winter tires become mandatory?  I believe all season tires won't cut it by definition.

[UmroAyyar]

For that to happen, Winter Performance Tires would have to be eliminated or their designation changed, take away the snow emblem. V-rated winter tires would always be performance winters.

These two are just Winter Performance tires and don't melt away or wear excessively in summer heat.

[morty]

Quebec has made winter tires mandatory as of this coming winter.

[xviper]

Quebec has made winter tires mandatory as of this coming winter.

I kinda thought so.  So, would the 2 tires in the pictures above be considered "winter" tires?  Personally, I don't like the performance winter tires.  They don't perform well enough for me in the most adverse conditions and they're too much of a compromise in summer, too.  I have dedicated winters and high performance summers.

[UmroAyyar]

http://www.canadiandriver.com/winter/tires/snow_tires.htm

Tires marked with the pictograph of a peaked mountain with a snowflake meet specific snow traction performance requirements, and have been designed specifically for use in severe snow conditions.


Nokian WR G2 has that emblem, certified as a winter tire.
http://www.nokiantires.com/en/tire_wrg2.aspx?season=winter


Yokohama W.Drive
http://www.yokohama.ca/en//tires/tire-page.php?tire_name=w.drive

[xviper]

Tires marked with the pictograph of a peaked mountain with a snowflake meet specific snow traction performance requirements, and have been designed specifically for use in severe snow conditions.

I think tire manufacturers use some "poetic licence" when they put that symbol on their tires.  Let me give you an example.  The Bridgestone Blizzak LM-22 is marketted as a performance winter tire and has this symbol.  It is by NO means suitable for "severe" snow conditions.  A few of my S2000 friends have used these tires for winter duty.  When the conditions get really bad, they just get by.  I've driven on both the Blizzak MZ-01 and the Michelin Alpin and in the bad stuff, I drive rings around them, especially with the MZ-01 (which have been replaced by the WS-60 today).  I can out drag them, out turn them and out stop them by a very large margin.  If you want to see what I'm talking about, here is a drag race with LM-22's, MZ-01s and Alpins.  I'm in the lead car with the MZs.  The second place car (black one) runs the Alpins (which I now have) and the 2 trailing behind have the winter performance LMs.

http://good-times.webshots.com/video/3051522620025981935cbAGZZ

Nevertheless, since the tires in your post has the symbol, they will be acceptable for Quebec's new law and that's what my point was.  They look like really good tires.  A bit on the expensive side for me, though.

[blur911]

Tires marked with the pictograph of a peaked mountain with a snowflake meet specific snow traction performance requirements, and have been designed specifically for use in severe snow conditions.

I think tire manufacturers use some "poetic licence" when they put that symbol on their tires. 

Tire manufacturers don't decide which tires are good enough, they have to pass testing developed by the ASTM in "real-world snow conditions".  There are of course tires which perform better in certain aspects than others, but tire manufacturers don't make the call about which tires qualify for the mountain snowflake.

[weebl]

Either way, that specification sets out a certain level of performance in ice and snow, measured by various tests providing numerical results.  Some tires will barely meet them, others will exceed them by a wide margin.

I've found the Nokian WRs to be very pricey, and suspect the Yokos will be too.  My current plans for the Golf, which now sees limited city use, is to wear/age out the OEM Good-Years in the summer, likely summer '09 being the last summer (unless I have an irreparable puncture on one before then), then wear/age out the Blizzak WS-50 set I have using them year-round, likely up to the fall of '11 or fall of '12.  Assuming no major changes to the tire offerings from now to then, I plan on replacing both sets at that point with a set of Hankook Ice-Bear W300s, to be used year-round.  Much more reasonably priced!  I've heard of others doing that with H and higher rated winters, since essentially, the Nokian WRs and the Yokos are high speed winter tires marketed as all-weather.

[morty]

There are definitely some winters that are more suited for extreme conditions, but this does not mean that the performance winters are any less of a winter tire. It is all about application. There are many that would complain about the Q and R Rated winter being too soft and unstable at higher speeds. It is all about choosing a tire that fits your vehicle and suits your driving requirements.