"All weather" tires in place of winter tires

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shorty_J

After a couple/few seasons with the canadian tire full winter tires on my 1/2 tonne, I decided to size down my wheels from 20" to 17" and get all weather tires to avoid having to change them.

I bought Kumho Road Venture AT51 tires from 1010tires.com for a little over $600 Canadian including shipping.

My subjective opinion is that they are just as good as the old full winters I had... in that they still slide a little on glare ice but everywhere else they're very confidence inspiring and I feel just as comfortable with them as my previous winters.

I also add over $300 pounds of weight directly over the rear axle until about April to help with rear wheel traction.

Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk

---

I think it was that 300lbs... Or your old winter tires sucked ass. These at51s do not compare to any snow tire I've driven in any slippery winter conditions.

At51 are not any better than all seasons imho.

Goodyear wrangler silent armors are waaaaaaay better all arounder at that handles winter conditions. I got the at51 for the forerunner because they were cheaper than gysa we had previously. regrets, will replace them with GYSA as the summer/fall at tire once the at51 wear out.

I know guys who just drive around small town narthern BC not very much milage so they just run the same tires all year round but its snow tire they run all year

I just shelled out < 1800$ for new steel rims and 10ply LT3 Haks cuz they are simply zee best, at my current tire usage I won't be buying tires for 10 yrs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

I know guys who just drive around small town narthern BC not very much milage so they just run the same tires all year round but its snow tire they run all year

I just shelled out < 1800$ for new steel rims and 10ply LT3 Haks cuz they are simply zee best, at my current tire usage I won't be buying tires for 10 yrs

---

My last rig (older Xterra) got snow tires shortly after I bought it and then I never bothered buying summer tires because I've also got a motorcycle. Living at 5,000 feet and playing at 7-11k in Montana, that worked pretty well (when I really didn't want to ride the bike, the snow tires usually weren't a bad thing).

Sent from my SM-G892A using TGR Forums mobile app

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

I think it was that 300lbs... Or your old winter tires sucked ass. These at51s do not compare to any snow tire I've driven in any slippery winter conditions.

At51 are not any better than all seasons imho.

Goodyear wrangler silent armors are waaaaaaay better all arounder at that handles winter conditions. I got the at51 for the forerunner because they were cheaper than gysa we had previously. regrets, will replace them with GYSA as the summer/fall at tire once the at51 wear out.

---

I had the weight in the back with the old tires too.

Maybe they sucked... not sure.

Sent from my SM-A505W using Tapatalk

I like the Nokian All-Weather & they have handled summer fine. They are good at picking up screws & nails but expect a soft tire would. The real test is whether they have the same grip as last winter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXX-er

I know guys who just drive around small town narthern BC not very much milage so they just run the same tires all year round but its snow tire they run all year

I just shelled out < 1800$ for new steel rims and 10ply LT3 Haks cuz they are simply zee best, at my current tire usage I won't be buying tires for 10 yrs

---

What size LT3's? And what vehicle are you putting them on? I've been looked at the non studded version of those, but there isn't a lot of info out there.

And to think it takes me 30-40 minutes to switch tires.

https://youtu.be/aHSUp7msCIE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by galibier_numero_un

And to think it takes me 30-40 minutes to switch tires.

https://youtu.be/aHSUp7msCIE

---

Pretty sure my old tires are better on snow than their new tires..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

What size LT3's? And what vehicle are you putting them on? I've been looked at the non studded version of those, but there isn't a lot of info out there.

---

245/75R16 on a new Tacoma, I think they come studded, I been driving to the top of the Chair and there seems to be lots of traction

Nice, thanks. Think I'll pull the trigger on a set. They're available in factory studded and non-studded versions, at least here in the US. If I was going studded I would look at the Hakk 9's, since they have the little air cushion thing and are supposed to be quiet/handle well on dry pavement for a studded tire. Definitely don't need the studded LT3's where I currently reside.

Last season I ordered a pair of unstuded Haka LTs, but they showed up with studs. I knew that I would need snow tires after the Studded tires April 15th ban. However, I decided to just run the studs, and I was super happy with them.

In April I bought a set of Mazama Open Range A/Ts with a mountain snowflake. They have been a good tire on spring snow, logging roads, and towing all summer.

I bet the Mazama Open Range would be good for year-around with the occasional need to chain-up. With the Hakas I only need chains if towing. Also, it was nice towing with the Hakas when making a Christmas RV trip and driving over roads with a bit of ice/snow/frost but never enough to need for chains

How was the noise level with the studded ones?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

How was the noise level with the studded ones?

---

Plenty quieter than my pretty quiet diesel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

How was the noise level with the studded ones?

---

IMO, with my LT2s, it's noticeable but I don't tend to find it obnoxious until I get a couple of warm April afternoons that I'm driving home from skiing with the windows open. It is more noise than my AT tires, but with the windows closed and radio on, I have to listen for it to hear it.

Thanks for the input. I was primarily curious but I do too much wet, cold driving (i.e. 32-42ish degrees F and raining) to justify the hit to wet road braking and handling that comes with studs.

I've never run studded tires, but I can always hear a car on studded tires coming from about 2 miles away. Bet they're noisier from outside the car than within.

Also, sorry for the hijack: this is the 3PMSF all season thread, not the thread to discuss what is probably the most capable snow tire on the market.

IDK.. A studded all season tire would be totally bad ass! Maybe make the studs out of diamonds so they bite asphalt and concrete like crazy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

Thanks for the input. I was primarily curious but I do too much wet, cold driving (i.e. 32-42ish degrees F and raining) to justify the hit to wet road braking and handling that comes with studs.

I've never run studded tires, but I can always hear a car on studded tires coming from about 2 miles away. Bet they're noisier from outside the car than within.

Also, sorry for the hijack: this is the 3PMSF all season thread, not the thread to discuss what is probably the most capable snow tire on the market.

---

For the driving you describe, Blizzak DMV2 or Hakka R3 are the ultimate in performance.

If you rarely have exposed pavement and are always driving on ice and hardpack between fresh snows, that is when studded is worth it over stud-less (which truly do have comparable performance on hardpack/ice). I'd choose a Hakka studded for top studded performance.

Mich Xi3 is the preferred long life studdless snow. Hankooks seems to be the budget choice.

Whatever you get: narrow your section width by 10-20mm, so if you were a 265/65/17, a 245/75/17 will give you much more performance because in deeper stuff, instead of planing or getting pushed around, you will cut through slush and get the tire on the road surface. Narrowing the section width also offers the opportunity to lower the tire height which gives you less snow tire squirlies on the corners and a lower center of gravity. Dropping your ride height can be a good idea unless you frequently are encountering snow that is near or above your car's clearance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Summit

For the driving you describe, Blizzak DMV2 or Hakka R3 are the ultimate in performance.

If you rarely have exposed pavement and are always driving on ice and hardpack between fresh snows, that is when studded is worth it over stud-less (which truly do have comparable performance on hardpack/ice). I'd choose a Hakka studded for top studded performance.

Mich Xi3 is the preferred long life studdless snow. Hankooks seems to be the budget choice.

Whatever you get: narrow your section width by 10-20mm, so if you were a 265/65/17, a 245/75/17 will give you much more performance because in deeper stuff, instead of planing or getting pushed around, you will cut through slush and get the tire on the road surface. Narrowing the section width also offers the opportunity to lower the tire height which gives you less snow tire squirlies on the corners and a lower center of gravity. Dropping your ride height can be a good idea unless you frequently are encountering snow that is near or above your car's clearance.

---

This. Well said and put together.
I experienced this first hand when I moved from Eastern WA to Western. Although it was kinda fun to side-slide/power-spin through wet concrete curves with worn Hankook studded. Not fun knowing that traction wouldn’t be there if needed in an evasive manuever.

Well said, Summit. Although the real reason that you feel a shorter tire biting more in slick conditions has to do with the LENGTH of the contact patch, not the width. The tread width difference between a 265 and 245 are negligible when they're mounted on a vehicle, but that smaller diameter tire will have a substantially shorter contact patch. This is also the reason that tall, skinny tires are preferred for off-roading pretty much everywhere in the world except this country, where morons are obsessed with running the widest tire they can possibly shoehorn under a truck. Don't get me started on negative offset wheels...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

Well said, Summit. Although the real reason that you feel a shorter tire biting more in slick conditions has to do with the LENGTH of the contact patch, not the width. The tread width difference between a 265 and 245 are negligible when they're mounted on a vehicle, but that smaller diameter tire will have a substantially shorter contact patch. This is also the reason that tall, skinny tires are preferred for off-roading pretty much everywhere in the world except this country, where morons are obsessed with running the widest tire they can possibly shoehorn under a truck.

---

That makes sense! Although I can say that when I'm cutting through slush piles, say chaging lanes, I feel less pushed around. Maybe that is surface area pushing through, or maybe its the contact patch? Or both probably.

Fat tires make sense for flotation and grip in the loose: sand, deep snow, etc. I put 275 AT51s on the 4Runner for summer, wasn't feeling the need to mod for extra width. Next set might be stock 265s GYSAs.

Just ordered up a set of studded Hakk 8's for the milf mobile ( XC60 T6 ). Went through the last couple of winters on unstudded IPikes that were meh. We ran studded IPikes on a previous RX350 (sucky AWD) and XC90 and XC70 (awesome AWD) which we liked better. Let's see how these do.

Tires Easy had a great deal, $94 each and free shipping.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SumJongGuy

IDK.. A studded all season tire would be totally bad ass! Maybe make the studs out of diamonds so they bite asphalt and concrete like crazy

---

Some AT tires are studdable (I think the Duratrac is, General Grabber AT, and maybe the KO2?). I've also heard of studding MT tires, which sounds like an interesting idea for deep-snow driving or just keeping your bro-dozer from sliding off the road.

I'm currently considering options for the wife's XV. She doesn't think she needs snow tires, but the all-seasons on it are worn enough that I'd disagree, but not worn enough to be trash. Putting an all-weather tire on still sounds appealing from a "not needing to swap in the spring" perspective, as she wants to replace the car soon enough that I'm not convinced buying a set of wheels is worth the effort.

Just a reminder that weight and pressure determine contact patch area. I don't think a slight change in diameter you would see from, say the next size up or down that would still work on the same vehicle is going to have much of an effect on shape though. Clearly, if I make my tire 20mm narrower, the patch will need to be 20mm longer. But what change would I see from going like 1/2" shorter in diameter?

In addition to a narrower tread having some benefit in looser stuff, deep snow, slush (rally cars use hilariously narrow tires in the winter btw), the other part if it has to do with what's called slip angle. When you corner, there's a difference between where the wheel is pointed and where the car is actually going. Part of this slip angle comes from deflection of the tire casing, some comes from deflection of the tread, and some comes from parts of the tread slipping in relation to the road. More slip angle, more cornering force, more cornering force, more slip angle. On pavement, a lower slip angle is preferable, so low profile, wide, stiff tires. Makes the car more responsive and keeps tire temps lower. On ice and snow and low grip situations however, softer, taller, narrower tires mean higher slip angles and more feedback to what's happening between the tire and the road before you are fully sliding out of control. A tall, skinny snow tire being pushed on pavement might get up to over 10 degrees, where a low profile high performance tire would only be at like 2 degrees of slip at the same cornering force.

The downside there being more floating and squirming around on the dry pavement but you get used to that and it works better in the snow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glademaster

How was the noise level with the studded ones?

---

studded Haks on the Ranger were noisy but studded Haks on the Taco are not that noisy, you hear the tic tic but the rest of the road noise gets filtered out, I suppose the old ranger was an old and noisey design

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jamal

Just a reminder that weight and pressure determine contact patch area. I don't think a slight change in diameter you would see from, say the next size up or down that would still work on the same vehicle is going to have much of an effect on shape though. Clearly, if I make my tire 20mm narrower, the patch will need to be 20mm longer. But what change would I see from going like 1/2" shorter in diameter?

In addition to a narrower tread having some benefit in looser stuff, deep snow, slush (rally cars us hilariously narrow tires in the winter btw), the other part if it has to do with what's called slip angle. When you corner, there's a difference between where the wheel is pointed and where the car is actually going. Part of this slip angle comes from deflection of the tire casing, some comes from deflection of the tread, and some comes from parts of the tread slipping in relation to the road. More slip angle, more cornering force, more cornering force, more slip angle. On pavement, a lower slip angle is preferable, so low profile, wide, stiff tires. Makes the car more responsive and keeps tire temps lower. On ice and snow and low grip situations however, softer, taller, narrower tires mean higher slip angles and more feedback to what's happening between the tire and the road before you are fully sliding out of control.

The downside there being more floating and squirming around on the dry pavement but you get used to that and it works better in the snow.

---

Good post!