Topic: Product Review: Bridgestone Blizzak WS70

[Autos_Editor]

After a gruelling winter in Winnipeg, Haney Louka reports on the performance of the latest Bridgestone Blizzaks.

Read More...

[theonlydt]

I put Nokian Hakkapeliittas on my wife's car this winter and were astounded. She'd just come off Firestone Winterforce (sipes etc didn't go whole tread depth, squishy warm pavement response) and the change was immediate:

- 0.5l per 100lkm less fuel consumption. Only 0.1 above our all seasons
- The only tire I've driven that actually seems designed to work in slush
- Exceptional on glare ice
- Progressive breakaway
- Tracks true on highway even when one wheel is on bare pavement and the other hits snow/slush

I could try the Blizzaks, but hear of low life expectancy and performance degrading in the third season of driving (below that 60%). I'm sticking with Nokians - my car's getting them for next winter.

[Winterpeg]

I'm still waiting for the end review for the Sailun Ice Blazer WSTi tires before I commit either way...eh.   

[kfish]

I've tried Blizzaks in friends' cars over the years.  Was never overly impressed -- they were decent (at best) in the winter stuff but horrific on dry pavement, taking "sloppy" to new levels.  Same with Michelin -- not really impressed.  I've had two different models and while they were good (for a winter tire) on dry pavement, they were only marginal at best on snow/ice.

Then I bought some Hakkapallitas (sp?) for our Murano.  That was 6 (yes, 6) years ago.  Unfortunately, they've felt like they're on their last legs this past winter but I have to give them the highest raves and for a set of winter shoes, they don't owe me anything at this point.  Even now, the tread is still decent but I think the rubber is starting to harden with age.  We loved the Hakkas so much that we put a set of true four season Nokian WRs on our Nissan Frontier a few years ago.  Granted, they're of course not as good as dedicated winter rubber but being able to forego the annual tire swaps, especially given how little we drive the Frontier (it's used as a truck, vice a daily driver) and still have some degree of capability in the winter has been excellent.

I for one won't buy anything but Nokians from now on.  I'm sure there are others out there that are almost as good but then I'd be going in on blind faith......again.  Why bother?  Incredible traction + long life = no brainer.  Sure, they're expensive, typically more so than any other brand, but when I look at what they've given me, it's an easy decision.

[Spheric]

Once you have a good experience with a brand of winter tire it takes a leap of faith to go elsewhere. Same with my current set of Gislaved Nordfrost 5 tires - on my 3rd winter with them, and they've been great in snow, and surprisingly good as a high speed cruiser on dry cold days too.

[CAS]

I've tried Dunlop Graspicsfor 3 winters.  Very good on ice and snow but poor on dry.  I now have been using the first gen X-ice for 5 winters but found that they're not as good as the Dunlops, however they last and fuel economy is about the same as with 3-season tires.  Consumer Reports always seems to rate the Michelins highest, but I question this.

[dirtyjeffer]

a lot has changed in tires in the last 5 years...if you are basing your experiences from the past, they likely don't apply to current tires...we have X-Ice IIs on the ET (5th winter) and they still look in great shape...just finishing my first winter on a set of WS-70s...they were great too.

[SaskSpecV]

I concur with Haney's assertion that the WS-70s are better on glare ice than the WS-60s.  I was REALLY impressed with WS-50s (Spec V), less so with WS-60s (Focus) - mostly because it wasn't as good on ice as the WS-50 (or so it seemed, but on a different vehicle so hard to compare directly).  I was about to try the Continental winter tire for the Elantra Touring but went with the WS-70 and have been very happy with them.  Also have DM-V1s on the F150, very happy with those as well. 

We haven't had the poor tread life problem with Blizzaks, but maybe that's because it's so bloody cold on the prairies , the tires never see temps above +5...

[Spec5]

I concur with Haney's assertion that the WS-70s are better on glare ice than the WS-60s.  I was REALLY impressed with WS-50s (Spec V), less so with WS-60s (Focus) - mostly because it wasn't as good on ice as the WS-50 (or so it seemed, but on a different vehicle so hard to compare directly).  I was about to try the Continental winter tire for the Elantra Touring but went with the WS-70 and have been very happy with them.  Also have DM-V1s on the F150, very happy with those as well. 

We haven't had the poor tread life problem with Blizzaks, but maybe that's because it's so bloody cold on the prairies , the tires never see temps above +5...

^^ +1 that - I had WS50s on my Spec V as well - I think the LSD in the Spec V helped more so than anything - I know I was devastated with the performance of our 2WD Tucson with Pirelli Scorpion Ice and Snow tires. My Spec V was a mountain goat compared to that thing. My dad put WS60s on his Sentra XE and he noted that my WS50s were quite a bit better in icy conditions (he'd often take my car if it happened to be behind his when I was home). The WS50s though were pretty well renowned for lasting only 3 max 4 seasons though. Wasn't really an issue for me as I didn't have great distances to drive in winter months and like Sask its so bloody cold up here the rubber stays pretty hard anyway When he bought his new Altima (2012) he switched to XIce 3s and has been very happy with those.

For our Ody I  switched back to Blizzaks - WS70s and have been impressed. Noticeably better traction than the Pirelli's but of course much different vehicle too - still with traction control disabled on both I'd easily recommend the WS70s over the Pirelli's. I've chosen to just swap the all seasons for the snows so they're the same tire size - they're very quiet for a snow and don't seem to move much more laterally than the stock tires do. The Pirelli's on the other hand were noticeably "squishier" vs stock - different rims but still the same size tire.

MIL has XIce 2s on her Sentra - now in their 4th winter I believe and they're still a solid tire. Her Sentra does not have TC. My wife's old GAGT had the XIce 2s on it as well they were excellent on that car. Even with no LSD it was pretty close in acceleration with my Spec V on the WS50s.

I've heard very good things about the Nokian's too - I believe the new ones you can even get them studded. I was VERY close to picking them over the WS70s but I had already gambled once with the Pirelli's (which were rated #1 back then for SUV tires) and wanted a safer bet. Also the WS70s were about 10-15 cheaper per tire - I think the secret is out about the Hakkas. I recommend to all my friends either the XIce, Blizzak or the Hakka's - whichever you can get for the best price.

As for Sailun, I had a buddy looking snows for this TBSS (19s I think) and did some research for him - apparently they're not bad but their quality control is nowhere near the the front runners so there are some people who end up with tire defects. At least thats what I found in my research. I believe they're Chinese.

[roundupready]

I have the WS70s on the Yaris and the Hakka Rs on the Legacy.  I can't tell you whether one is superior than the other since the cars are so different.

During the 2nd last big winter storms not long ago in T.O., we took the Legacy out at lunch time to get something to eat.  The side streets weren't plowed and almost axle deep, the car just plow through it with no problem whatsoever.  It was so easy going through the deep snow.  I guess the Hakkas worked?

Didn't think of trying with the Yaris at the time. Should've tried and check out the Bridgestones.  Missed the opportunity.  Oh well, maybe next winter. 

Still not sure if the price of the Hakka is justified ($1,500 a set of 17"s)?

[Northernridge]

Good article and nice to see that it's based on a Winnipeg experience.

[Hammy]

I've got ws-70s on the Optima and have not had a single hitch all winter, and we have fairly bad winters with slush, snow, ice repeat.... The  thing I am most interested will be the tire wear at the end of the winter, I am hoping to get 3 winters out of them.

Check out my tire comparo at:

http://nlcarblog.blogspot.ca/2012/09/winter-tires-michelin-vs-bridgestone.html

Thanks!

[rrocket]

I've got ws-70s on the Optima and have not had a single hitch all winter, and we have fairly bad winters with slush, snow, ice repeat.... The  thing I am most interested will be the tire wear at the end of the winter, I am hoping to get 3 winters out of them.

Check out my tire comparo at:

http://nlcarblog.blogspot.ca/2012/09/winter-tires-michelin-vs-bridgestone.html

Thanks!

Man...you sure got ripped for pricing.  At Tirerack, it's only $20 more per set for the Michelins.

[Solstice2006]

Nice review, I miss your reviews, if I am not mistaken you had a Mazda6 wagon.  Do you miss it?  How many clicks on the TDI?  When I sold my Mazda6 sport, I put the Continental Extreme Weather Contact tires on the Mazda5 (3rd season just finished, still feel like new), quiet tire, good sense of traction, good wear so far.  So when my Mazda5 Sport needed new all season tires (they OEM Toyos were garbage after 35k) no traction, lousy ride, and non existent cornering.  I decided to go with Continental again, and get the DWS, pricey in Canada, so I bought and installed them in the US at $135 at tire vs $199 in Canada.  Boy was I impressed, quiet, good ride, and grippy.  We will see how wear goes...

[irREV]

I've tried Blizzaks in friends' cars over the years.  Was never overly impressed -- they were decent (at best) in the winter stuff but horrific on dry pavement, taking "sloppy" to new levels.  Same with Michelin -- not really impressed.  I've had two different models and while they were good (for a winter tire) on dry pavement, they were only marginal at best on snow/ice.

Then I bought some Hakkapallitas (sp?) for our Murano.  That was 6 (yes, 6) years ago.  Unfortunately, they've felt like they're on their last legs this past winter but I have to give them the highest raves and for a set of winter shoes, they don't owe me anything at this point.  Even now, the tread is still decent but I think the rubber is starting to harden with age.  We loved the Hakkas so much that we put a set of true four season Nokian WRs on our Nissan Frontier a few years ago.  Granted, they're of course not as good as dedicated winter rubber but being able to forego the annual tire swaps, especially given how little we drive the Frontier (it's used as a truck, vice a daily driver) and still have some degree of capability in the winter has been excellent.

I for one won't buy anything but Nokians from now on.  I'm sure there are others out there that are almost as good but then I'd be going in on blind faith......again.  Why bother?  Incredible traction + long life = no brainer.  Sure, they're expensive, typically more so than any other brand, but when I look at what they've given me, it's an easy decision.

X 2 on the Hakkas...put them on our VW Tiguan this fall, and they are AWESOME...quiet, grippy in ALL conditions (even decent in nasty slush), handle great, and they maintain every bit of the Tig's excellent steering response...can't say enough good about them.  Plus, we got them at an excellent price locally here in Muskoka....$157 each, balanced & installed, for 215/65R16's (I downsized from the stock 17" Continental all-seasons, on slightly larger winter wheels.)

When I was tire shopping last fall, I considered the Blizzak WS-70's...but the reviews I read weren't quite as good as the Hakkas, and they were going to cost a bit more.  So, as it turned out, I am very glad I went Hakkapellita.

As for Michelin, I have X-Ice on my truck for the winter.  I just finished my 5th winter on them, and quite contrary to the "average at best" experiences of some others in this thread, I have found them to be very good in all conditions except nasty slush...plus, to be fair, they are noticeably noisier than the Hakkas.  I often tow snowmobiles in winter...the X-Ice have never given me any anxious moments, in a wide variety of nasty winter road conditions.

But when the X-Ice are done, I'll be going to Hakkas on the truck too, if I can find the right size to suit.

[johngenx]

I can't buy Hakkas as they're only sold through Kal-Tire and their prices are insane.  Just don't see the value.  Also, every time I've been to a Kal-Tire the salesperson ignores what I say and tries to push something I don't want on me.  Hate the place.

We have two sets of the WS-70s right now, one on the Corolla and one on the Forester.  On either vehicle, they've been outstanding.  Better than the WS-60s in all respects AND much slower wearing.  Cake, eating it too.

As for the comment that the last 40% of tread depth is not the multi-cell compound, who cares?  People that drive their snow tires below 5/32 are wasting their time trying to squeak time out of tires.  No snow tire offers decent performance below that depth anyway.  Heck, I pitch summer tires at 4/32.  Does anyone concerned with their tires really drive down to the wear bars?

[Solstice2006]

I can't buy Hakkas as they're only sold through Kal-Tire and their prices are insane.  Just don't see the value.  Also, every time I've been to a Kal-Tire the salesperson ignores what I say and tries to push something I don't want on me.  Hate the place.

We have two sets of the WS-70s right now, one on the Corolla and one on the Forester.  On either vehicle, they've been outstanding.  Better than the WS-60s in all respects AND much slower wearing.  Cake, eating it too.

As for the comment that the last 40% of tread depth is not the multi-cell compound, who cares?  People that drive their snow tires below 5/32 are wasting their time trying to squeak time out of tires.  No snow tire offers decent performance below that depth anyway.  Heck, I pitch summer tires at 4/32.  Does anyone concerned with their tires really drive down to the wear bars?

Good point, I have not measured the tire wear on the cars.  Take out when it's raining, if the grip is not good, or similar to how they were a year ago, then they get replaced.  Same with rotors, I never turn rotors, they're never good as new, and for the price of the part, better just to replace. 

[nlm]

People that drive their snow tires below 5/32 are wasting their time trying to squeak time out of tires.  No snow tire offers decent performance below that depth anyway.  Heck, I pitch summer tires at 4/32.  Does anyone concerned with their tires really drive down to the wear bars?

Michelin claims otherwise:
"According to Michelin engineers, even when worn to the 4/32 depth, the X-ICE Xi3′s overall effectiveness on the road was only reduced by 15 per cent. This was evident during the test, with the Michelin tire continuing to provide confident starts, stops and turns throughout the circuit."

http://www.autos.ca/auto-product-reviews/tire-review-michelin-x-ice-xi3/

I don't have the Xi3's but the article seems to corroborate Michelin's claim in the back to back comparisons of the worn samples using eyeballs and seat of pants measurements.

[Arctic_White]

John, how do the WS-70 perform in the slushie conditions that Edmonton faces during the months of October, early November, and late March?

I'm having a difficult time deciding between the WS-70, X-ice3, or the new Hakka R2, and your opinion would be much helpful.  Thanks!

[Fobroader]

After a gruelling winter in Winnipeg, Haney Louka reports on the performance of the latest Bridgestone Blizzaks.

Read More...

Someone with a  proper name to test winter tires!! Sound like a top Finnish driver from the WRC