Shopping for winter tires, I've come across a question I've not found a clear answer for. When not running studs, which type of tire will perform better? A studdable winter tire (again, without studs, something like the General Altimax Arctic or the Hankook iPike) or a dedicated studless tire (Conti Vikingcontact 7)?
Looking at the tread blocks, the ones with the stud holes have less sipes than the studless. Would that make a noticeable difference in traction?
When I was researching my Conti VikingContact7s, there was a Scandinavian magazine (I think) test comparing it to studded tires. I believe the studded were on average a little better on ice than the Contis. I'd surmise from that without studs those tires are worse. Generally speaking, the best hardcore winter tires available in North America are Nokian, Blizzaks, X-Ice, VikingContact7.
My personal bias is to non studdable tires, just because it seems like studdable tires sacrifice some unstudded grip on ice because they can get that with studs. I don't want to run studs for various reasons, so I prefer to get tires engineered to work without them.
Or, if you want studs, get studdable tires, if you want to run no studs, get non studdable tires.
If you aren't gonna run studs I don't see any reason to get tires that are studdable.
Personally studs are stupendously better for what I drive in and always recommend them
In reply to Antihero (Forum Supporter) :
I actually say the exact opposite, with respect for your thoughts. Studs were invented in the 40s when tires were made of stuff that was helpless in cold weather. But to assume that steel nubs are better at traction than soft rubber is something that died in the 70s. Good sharp studs are helpful on solid ice only, but after 500 miles of driving, they're no longer sharp studs. They're polished steel domes that do next to nothing in 99% of winter situations.
I'll never forget the look on my father-in-law's face when I stole his minivan, took it to the tire shop, and had them remove the studded tires and I put on a set of Blizzaks. I tried for years to get him to stop using studded tires in the winter and he refused. I was so sure he would love the Blizzaks, so I stole his keys and did it without his permission.
He will never buy a set of studded tires again. I've been divorced from his daughter for 8 years, and every single year he texts me a picture of when he puts the Blizzaks on. He doesn't text me on Christmas or my birthday, but he wants me to know how I changed his life with tires.
Good snow tires have an F32 compound that actually gets softer below freezing. They also have millions of little sipes. Snow tires work only partly because of the compound. They work on the snowball principle. The sipes fill with packed snow, and the snow in the sipes gets packed to the snow on the ground. You get traction because the trapped snow sticks to the ground snow. Big treadblocks and big voids don't work as well because there is too much force spread out over a larger surface and it doesn't generate enough pressure to adequately pack the snow. Dividing it up among millions of wee little voids makes it more like velcro.
Studs are for ice racing. Snow tires are for winter driving.
I found this article online, if you have the time feel free to read it:
https://www.lesschwab.com/article/how-to-choose-snow-tires.html
In reply to Curtis73 (Forum Supporter) :
Everything you are saying is sensible but studded work best for me.
The problem here is what you get is either many inches of snow or snow that is compacted to ice with very little in between. The plows aren't always able to get to it before the ice stage. I guess the last stage is a buttload of deicer and a wet road though.
Studs aren't sharp even to start with though, ice racing ones are but studs they put on standard tires are just steel nubs. They do wear down over time but it's roughly about the same time the tires age out or wear out. They are still providing traction to that point.
I live very deep in the woods and there are times I absolutely have to be able to get somewhere no matter what. I have literally driven in 18 inches of slush with snowplows off the road before. Icy roads are probably 75 percent of what I drive in.
I totally get the theory behind siping being a suction cup and snow sticking to other snow well but the end result is still significantly less than metal spikes pounding their way into the road surface.
I even use studded mud terrians because 3/4 of the roads are dirt anyway and they are handy in deep snow.
I'm not saying you are wrong or the science isn't there, just that it's wrong for me and wrong for a lot of people in the same location.
I would not shy away from the Altimax Arctics just because they're studdable. I've had a couple sets of them and was always impressed. I felt they were just as good as Blizzaks (which I currently have), but they lasted much longer.
The question you should be asking yourself is what type of winter driving conditions do you see the most, or, what is the most difficult set of conditions will you encounter. Studded tires in an area that rarely sees ice are pointless, as ice traction is their reason to be. If you get lots of compact snow and ice, or need to get out of a steep, icy driveway or road, then by all means, get studded. If you mostly need to worry about big dumps of snow that get plowed and salted or melt, then get something lore geared towards that. I don't think anything does spectacularly well in deep slushy snow though.
Some winter tires are more focused on ice traction, others, with larger voids do better in pure snow. Look for test data (Kal Tire and Canadian Tire test and rank snow tires) and make a decision based on that.
Generally if you're not going with studs, you'll probably get better performance with a studless tire.
Sidewayze said:Generally if you're not going with studs, you'll probably get better performance with a studless tire.
Agreed. Studdable tires have some advantage in deep, fresh snow due to a more open tread pattern. So they rely on studs for ice traction, while studless tires have a tighter tread pattern that isn't as good in deep stuff, but doesn't need studs for grip on ice and polished hardpack. In general, it's a studs or no studs question, there are very limited use cases where a studdable tire without studs makes sense in my mind.
Thanks for all the feedback. I ended up going with the Conti Vikingcontact7's, so a studdless tire.
I definitely see the point of studs, and know many who need them. I live in a city in a snowy region, but rarely encounter the sort of heavy snow, or more extreme situations like isolated rural locales where studs and AWD/4WD are more necessary. My FWD Transit Connect should stay pretty planted on the Conti's, and they weren't that much more $ than the Hankooks this time around.
You'll need to log in to post.
