Topic: English guy needs snow driving advice

[JoshD]

Would you all mind if an English guy popped into your forum to ask some advice?

The thing is when we have say an inch of snow over here, the trains stop working, the schools are all closed, and the news is full of multicar pile ups. I'm told that they sometimes rebroadcast this sort of news over there as the "And finally" amusing feature on the evening news to provide a bit of light relief (Is that true?).  So i reckon you guys are the ones to ask ....

So here's my situation: I've just retired and I'm heading over the Alps this winter for the season (4 months) and will be staying fairly high up on a steep partly paved track.  There'll be lots of snow ... I hope! And when there's a particularly heavy dump I want to do the minimum amount of digging out and the maximum amount of arriving early at the lifts and making fresh tracks.

I'm taking a Land Rover Defender 110 currently fitted with Conti Cross Contact AT 235/85R16.  They're marked M+S, but no snowflake symbol. The legal situation where I'm going (France, probably a bit in Italy) is that winter tyres are not mandatory, but chains are (I think studded tyres are exempt).

I don't know if there's a wider choice over there but when I search for winter tyres over here in my size I can find only two: the Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT2 spikeable and the Kumho PorTrans CW51.

In the reviews I've read the Kumho seems to come out pretty low down, and doesn't seem to be an inspiring choice.  Question: would they be an improvement on the Conti ATs I currently have?

The Nokians seem great from the reviews, but I think that's when the spikes are screwed in.  Questions: would they be good without the spikes? I've got to drive 600 miles on ordinary roads to get to the mountains, so don't want spikes on the drive out or drive back.  Question: can I take the spikes out for the drive home in the spring?

Basically my choice is
1) Conti ATs with snow chains
2) Kumhos with snow chains
3) Nokians with snow chains and no studs
4) Nokians with studs (but if I do this I'll either have to try and remove the studs in the spring or drive out with my summer tyres on the roof and switch to them for the drive home).

Any advice on all of this (and on choice of chains) gratefully received!

JoshD

[Fobroader]

A set of good winter tires like the Nokians or Bridgestone Blizzaks, sans studs, and a set of chains should get you through most anything you would see. Studs are great on ice but doing 1200 miles on them will be hell, plus they are no good on anything but ice. You cannot remove and reinstall the spikes on your own.

[HeliDriver]

I've got those Hakka LT2s with the studs, and they're great. In the area where I live, I'd say at least half of my winter driving is on perfectly bare roads, and the studs aren't bad at all on bare pavement.

Nokian installs the studs at the factory, and the tire is designed with a bunch of new technology around the studs, so they're not at all like the old-school studs that people are familiar with over here.

Given the two choices, I'd 100% go with the Hakkas. I'm sure they're fine without studs, but they're pretty darned impressive with the studs. I've done long highway trips with mine (2,000 km, 90% of which was bare pavement) and they're perfectly fine for that.

[JoshD]

Fobroader, Helidriver, thanks for the advice, much appreciated. You both agree that the Hakka LT2s are the way to go, which is actually very helpful.  I'd like to understand if they only work with studs or whether there is the option of using them unstudded, and, if so, what the performance impact is.

Fobroader, the Blizzaks were my first choice based on reading reviews, but don't seem to be available in 235/85R16.

[Fobroader]

I just had a look at tirerack.com , you can get the W965 in the 235/85 16 size. Thats a really weird size, so tall and narrow.

[HeliDriver]

I've never tried the Hakkas without the studs, so can't really comment on that. But my sense is that it's still a truck tire, so probably doesn't have the same super-soft winter tread compounds that the best car/SUV tires have. I expect they'd be good, but not great without the studs. For sure better than your all-season Contis, and very likely better than those Kumhos.

I can say that the snow/ice performance of my studded Hakka LT2s is about on par with the unstudded Blizzak DM-V1s I had on my previous vehicle.

One thing I know is that there's no way I'd want to be screwing around with chains on a winter ski vacation. I want to be skiing first tracks, not crawling around in the snow, in the dark, putting on chains.    But maybe it would be tolerable if you're not driving far once you get there and you can just leave them on all time. But again, I'd have no qualms at all about doing your highway drive on the studded LT2s. 

[HeliDriver]

I've driven on the W965s and thought they were okay, but not great. Again, it's a truck tire, so not going to have the fancy rubber that's on the best car/SUV tires.

And it doesn't look like Bridgestone has updated that tire in decades. For sure the name is the same as it was 10 years ago when I last tried them, but maybe they've quietly updated the design without changing the name. Seems unusual, but you never know.

[JoshD]

Thanks both!

Fobrider, searching the web shows the Blizzaks available in my size in N America, but not in UK.  In UK not only do dealers not have them but they're also missing from bridgestone.co.uk website.  Not worth importing them so Blizzaks are out of the picture.

Really that just leaves Hakka LT2s, and of course Helidriver is right, it makes sense to use studs and not have to worry about chains; but on further investigation it seems studded tyres are illegal in UK and possibly France (more googling required), so it looks like either Kumhos or studless Hakkas ....

[rrocket]

Thanks both!

Fobrider, searching the web shows the Blizzaks available in my size in N America, but not in UK.  In UK not only do dealers not have them but they're also missing from bridgestone.co.uk website.  Not worth importing them so Blizzaks are out of the picture.

Really that just leaves Hakka LT2s, and of course Helidriver is right, it makes sense to use studs and not have to worry about chains; but on further investigation it seems studded tyres are illegal in UK and possibly France (more googling required), so it looks like either Kumhos or studless Hakkas ....

There are a great many number of easily added traction devices for when the going gets roughs.....Something like these or similar:  http://flextrax.mysite101.net/

There are hard-core versions for when you're REALLY stuck too.

[JoshD]

OK, some further research:

I emailed the supplier and now have confirmation that the Hakka LT2 is illegal in UK and France, so that's a complete deadend.

So in 235/85R16 that leaves the Kumho CW51s, the Kumho CW51s or the Kumho CW51s.

I've toyed with the idea of going down to the 235/70R16: then the choice widens substantially and I could get the Blizzaks, but friends advise against using the smaller tyre (gearing changes, speedo overreads).

So I'm now looking into chains or other traction aids to augment the Kumhos when it's really deep/slippy.

rrocket, have you used the flextrax snoclaws yourself? There are quite a few wildly enthusiastic reviews out there, but a lot of them seem to be linked to the inventor/supplier in some way.  It's harder to find stuff that looks both positive and independent.

I don't rule out the snoclaws and am continuing to research.

On the more traditional chains front, I'm planning for chains on all four tyres.  That rules out some of the absolutely top spec chains (ie, Spider Spikes) on cost.  At the top of my list at the moment are the Thule/Konig XG12 (look fiddly to fit, but seem to be high quality product) and the Pewag SNOX SXV (look supereasy to fit, almost like magic, but are they robust enough?).

[rrocket]

According to my research on the Land Rover Discover forums 2 tire sizes are popular on the factory 16 wheels. The size you have and 265/75/16....these were also a factory size in the early 90s. There are no winter tires in the second size. However, there are multiple tires available in 265/70/16...well within an acceptable size with minimal speedo error.

Have you pursued that angle?

Are you on stock rims? What's the width?

As far as the rubberized "chains", there are a wide variety of them. I just chose one. Do a search for others.

[JoshD]

rrocket, that's a great idea.  I'm on a pretty standard alloy wheel (ie, I haven't changed it, it has Land Rover logo on hub) which I believe is 7x16.  I say "believe" because 235 seems quite a wide tyre to put on a 7".  But I haven't bought rims yet for winter tyres and there's no reason why they have to be the same, except that I'd like the wheel diameter not to change much. I've done the same maths you have and 265/75 bang on matches 235/85, and I agree 265/70 shouldn't be a problem with gearing and speedo.  But I'm on a Defender not a Discovery and I need to check that the fatter wheel+tyre wouldn't foul anything (it already seems a bit tight on the inside of the wheel).

[rrocket]

rrocket, that's a great idea.  I'm on a pretty standard alloy wheel (ie, I haven't changed it, it has Land Rover logo on hub) which I believe is 7x16.  I say "believe" because 235 seems quite a wide tyre to put on a 7".  But I haven't bought rims yet for winter tyres and there's no reason why they have to be the same, except that I'd like the wheel diameter not to change much. I've done the same maths you have and 265/75 bang on matches 235/85, and I agree 265/70 shouldn't be a problem with gearing and speedo.  But I'm on a Defender not a Discovery and I need to check that the fatter wheel+tyre wouldn't foul anything (it already seems a bit tight on the inside of the wheel).

I meant Defender.

From some of the posts "running 265/75R16s on both my 110 and my 90, stock rims and suspension on both. they just touch the roll bar on full lock, but you can adjust the bump stops to avoid that..."

"Will fit no problem, I'm running mine on 265/75/16 Hankook Muds."

The only negative I see is you have to "rotate the spare tire carrier". Not sure what that means.

Another popular size seems to be 245/75/16 on stock wheels. No idea about tire selection.

Keep at it..I think you're on the right track!

[JoshD]

Just spoke to the specialist Land Rover firm that sold me the Defender.  His view was that unless winter tyres were a legal requirement he would prefer the Conti ATs to the Kumhos.  He was not in favour of going up to 265s because you have reduced steering lock range (reduced further if you add chains).  His advice was to get good chains.

[HeliDriver]

If you’re stuck with chains regardless, may as well keep the Contis you have now. Although I guess it depends on what the driving conditions are like where you’ll be going. Winter tires are always good to have in actual winter.

But I’m a little surprised you can’t get the Hakka LT2s without studs. When I bought mine 5 years ago (in North America) they were available both ways - studded at the factory, or without studs. Maybe that’s not the case anymore, but I’d be surprised.

Edit: Not that it does you any good over there, but I just checked and my local dealer sells them both ways - studded and unstudded. Seems very odd that in a country where studs aren’t even legal that Nokian would only sell the studded version.

[JoshD]

Helidriver, possibly that dealer may have been talking rubbish.  I'll try another ...

[JoshD]

Helidriver, you were right! first dealer was talking garbage.  So LT2's it is then (and probably Konig XS16 chains for all four wheels)

[HeliDriver]

Land Rover Defender, good winter tires, and chains for backup. Sounds like a solid plan. That thing should be unstoppable!

I'm more than a little jealous of your winter to be spent skiing in the Alps, but I'll console myself with my winter to be spent skiing in the Canadian Rockies. Have fun!

[ktm525]

Don't be jealous. I've skied both and would take the Rockies every time. Too many people in Europe. Crazy packed. I would take Revy, Fernie, Red, Castle mid week with nary a soul on the slopes.

[HeliDriver]

A change of scenery is always nice. I wouldn’t want to go to a major Euro resort over the Xmas holidays, but surely there are excellent places off the beaten track that would be deserted on a midweek day in January or February? I don’t go skiing here on weekends or over the holidays either.

I skied Zermatt a couple of times in the ‘80s. It was during our spring break, and I don’t remember it being all that crowded, but of course that was thirty years ago (and possibly our spring break didn’t match up with Euro holidays). I was too young then to down a bottle of wine with my mid-mountain gourmet lunch, but even so I loved the experience.

True though, my wife and I visited Zermatt in the summer fifteen years ago and I couldn’t believe how much it had changed, even then. It was sort of the same place, but way busier. Probably a nightmare now.