Primacy MXV4 vs. Nokian WR G2

[hightech]

I have a 09 Civic EX-L and want to find out which of these 2 tires is better. I live in Toronto and we do get some Snow/Ice conditions.

According to Consumer Reports, the Primacy MXV4 scored better in ice grip then the Nokian. 

Is the Primacy a better tire to go with?  From the tread design, I would think the Nokian would do better in slushy, snowy, icy roads.

[Nathan@1010tires]

If you are concerned with ice, snow and slush, you really should use a winter tire.
 
Personally I think neither is enough of an upgrade over your factory tires in terms of winter traction to even worry about changing... Go into a full winter tire if you are going to spend the money.

[DKaz]

Neither. I expected better from CR.

[hightech]

I am looking for a 1 tire alternative and don't want to get winter tires.

The car is driven on the weekends only so I don't want to get winter tires.

Again, I ask which of these 2 are better in snow and ice?

[DKaz]

Go for the WR G2s then, they were pretty decent on ice and slush when I drove them, not that great in snow but it braked pretty well in snow, awesome in wet weather did not hydroplane no matter how deep of a puddle there was on a highway when I was going pretty fast.

You could also look at the Hankook Optimo 4S, available at OK Tire.

I wouldn't run the MXV4s.

[HeliDriver]

It doesn't snow on weekends in Toronto? 

[hightech]

It does!

I have 2 cars and one of them has dedicated snow tires on it.  On bad weather days, I can take that car if needed.  Other times the Civic will be in use.

In either case, I DO NOT want to get winter tires so lets just focus on these 2 tires for winter capabilities, or other all season/all weather tires for that matter.

Thank you.

[HeliDriver]

You already have a CR test that says the Michelins are better than the Nokians.

You also have an expert opinion that neither will be a worthwhile improvement over what you currently have.

Saying you're concerned about snow and ice performance in one sentence, then in the next saying you don't want winter tires because you won't be driving the car in bad weather seems a little cuckoo to me.

Good luck with the decision.

[DKaz]

The thing is with CR... a very good test rating on ice for the all season is NOT the same as a very good test rating on ice for the winter category. Very misleading. The Nokian WR G2s are a no brainer, it has a 100,000km warranty and carries the mountain and snowflake symbol for severe winter service so if you happen to be driving your Civic and it suddenly turns ugly, you're not going to be stuck in a rut literally. If you have another vehicle that has dedicated winters, great. That's what I recommend to people, you don't need both vehicles to have winters. The WR G2s have great performance in dry and wet, they're H rated, they're pretty quiet too. What's not to like about them?

[HeliDriver]

The thing is with CR... a very good test rating on ice for the all season is NOT the same as a very good test rating on ice for the winter category. Very misleading.

Yes, but this comparison is between all-season tires. The Michelins scored Very Good in ice braking, while the Nokians only scored Good. For whatever CR's test is worth, the results are at least comparable.

Another thought for the OP: Yokohama has a new tire called the W.drive. I don't know much about it, except that it's marketed as an "all weather" tire you can drive year-round. Kind of like the Nokian WRs.

Also, if the car isn't driven a lot, it might be worth looking into buying a performance winter tire and running it year round. I seem to recall that a few west-coast folks here ran the Hankook Ice Bear W300 as an all-season tire. Might be an option if you don't do a lot of highway driving in the summer.

[DKaz]

I was going to recommend the Yokohama w.drives but there is no treadwear or UTQG rating.

[HeliDriver]

Winter tires don't carry treadwear or UTQG ratings, so I guess Yokohama is selling this as a "real" winter tire that you can also drive in the summer.

Does the Nokian WR G2 have treadwear and UTQG ratings?

I wonder if it's all just marketing, or if there are technical standards that dictate whether a tire must undergo the UTQG testing? I suspect it's the former.

[Andy@1010tires]

The Nokian WRG2 tires are winter tires. Only in North America are they labled as "All-Weather", everywhere else in the word they are Winter tires.

[Nathan@1010tires]

Winter tires don't carry treadwear or UTQG ratings, so I guess Yokohama is selling this as a "real" winter tire that you can also drive in the summer.

Does the Nokian WR G2 have treadwear and UTQG ratings?

I wonder if it's all just marketing, or if there are technical standards that dictate whether a tire must undergo the UTQG testing? I suspect it's the former.

90% of it is marketing.

The only thing that is tested to a standard in the UTQG ratings is the traction, and the only thing that is tested is wet braking. The treadwear ratings really don't mean much, since there is no standard and each manufacturer can use a different scale. To compare a 300 Bridgestone to a 400 Michelin really serves no purpose.

There is a standardised test for the "snowflake on mountain" symbol which all real snow tires have. There are some all seasons that pass the test as well, such as the Nokian mentioned, and the GoodYear Triple Tred is another example. What you don't know is by how far did they pass the test?

[rrocket]

It does!

I have 2 cars and one of them has dedicated snow tires on it.  On bad weather days, I can take that car if needed.  Other times the Civic will be in use.

In either case, I DO NOT want to get winter tires so lets just focus on these 2 tires for winter capabilities, or other all season/all weather tires for that matter.

Thank you.

I had the Falken Ziex 512s and they were very good.  Looks like the 912 are even better.  Especially when considering price!!

[Altair 4]

Does the Nokian WR G2 have treadwear and UTQG ratings?

Yes, the Nokian WRG2's that I have on my Passat have treadwear and UTQG ratings.  If you look at Nokian's North American site, they are marketing this tire more as an "ultimate for slush performance" than snow or ice. 

[blur911]

There is a standardised test for the "snowflake on mountain" symbol which all real snow tires have. There are some all seasons that pass the test as well, such as the Nokian mentioned, and the GoodYear Triple Tred is another example. What you don't know is by how far did they pass the test?

Only the Goodyear Fortera Tripletred passed the testing.  The Assurance Tripletred  doesn't have the Mountain/snowflake.  That said, I ran the Assurance Tripletred on the Subaru last winter and they are the best all-season I've ever used in winter. 

[safristi]

...FLAKES & MOUNTAINS wotta COMBO....................

[Robert~AWD]

Both these tires are fine choices for all season tires with winter capability. The Michelin Primacy MXV4 consistently gets top reviews in testing of grand touring all season tires. TireRack.com testing is similar to CR in that it uses the same vehicle, same road conditions, different tires. Something you and me can't afford to do. However, user feedback has is merits. It will tell you how long the tires last, whether there are quality control issues, if they flat spot, that kind of thing. Here again, User feedback has put the Michelins at the top of those ratings even describing them as excellent in snow and ice traction. I own them on my sedan and they are indeed great tires.

The Nokians are less represented in published tests which is unfortunate as one should not put all their faith in consumer reports tests. But the Nokians have one thing that the Primacy does not. They have the Mountain Snowflake symbol on their sidewall which  means that the tire has passed a standard performance based test to earn it. The Michelins have the M+S or mud and snow label but all that means is that the tread geometry is theoretically suitable for driving in the snow. If they could perform as well in snow, wouldn't Michelin get that emblem on their tire to compete? Considering that the CR test results show a difference of only one grade between the two, I would wonder if this were a random error in the results. It is far more logical to believe that the Nokians would outperform the michelins in snow and ice conditions. CR, as scientific as they claim to be has several times dissappointed me. Don't get me started on car waxes!

Car and Driver this month published an article "snow shoes" which compares all season vs performance winter vs winter tires. You can get an idea of the performance hits you get from going from one type to the other. Also TireRack has just come back from Sweden where they tested a group of various tires which should include some of the best all seasons they previously tested in the wet/dry track. The results should be published soon.

[rrocket]

I think the Nokians are a great tire.  They supposedly wear very well, have the severe weather rating, are classified as Low Rolling Resistance (LRR) and are made with less noxious chemicals and receive some green manufacturing stamp to boot.  Maybe it's a bad stereotype, but I think a country that gets the amount of snow that Finland does knows how to make a great snow tire.  IIRC they were also the first country to make a winter tire..

If I only could run one tear year round, it would be this one...