We’ve been on the X-ice, w/3 cars, for the last few winters, and need new for this season, so I just checked to compare with the newest Hakka’s. All the rating show that they’re essentially equal, yet the Hakka’s are ~$100 more/tire. I agree also that the this newest version of the X-ice is indeed better.
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
X-ice snow is a totally different tire than X-ice.
focus.
Have loved the X-Ice, sounds like the new X-Ice Snow is even better. We bought a new Toyota Grand Highlander AWD Hybrid last spring and scored a set of OEM wheels on Marketplace for $100 each. Could not find the X-Ice in 255-55-20, nobody had that size. I was hoping that as we got closer to fall they would show up but no dice, everyone including Tire Rack did not have them. I always use Costco for tires but they talked to Michelin and they said it was unlikely that size would be available any time soon. Last month on a whim I was driving past a Discount Tire and stopped. They searched around and found three in Seattle and another in Northern California, YIPEE!. Had to buy new TPMS, by the time I was done it was $1600 but we got what we wanted.
I think if I was buying studless, I'd be hard pressed not to pick X-Ice because it is nearly as good, or as good, as anything else while being MUCH longer lived. True snow tire with a treadwear guarantee? Amaze!
Originally Posted by blurred
Yes/no
A lot of people say how awesome X-Ice are on the ice (I thought they were just OK), not even comparable to studs. X-Ice also lacked in deep snow, IMO
This new X-Ice Snow has me intrigued. The lack of open side lugs on the X-Ice is what had me recommend Blizzaks to my son
The Blizzaks performed as good as X-Ice on the ice for us
I laughed when I saw it. When I had Hakka studs, there were plenty of times I was so happy to have studs. But when the studs wear, they get kind of rounded and drive kind of weird, and they’re just not at all that great on rain pavement…so everything‘s a compromise.
If I only drove in the great white north where it never got warm. Oh, I’m going studs.
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
Yeah - on "real" ice I'm still going to drive cautiously even with the X-Ice. With studded I'd probably drive like a moran.
Drove back to Denver last evening from Copper Mountain and had a variety of shitty conditions, including deep slush from Idaho Springs to town, and I have to say, these new Michelins are *very* good in slush, which wasn't so much the case with the previous ones we had.
Mostly due to my local shop's recommendation (and what they carry) I went with a Toyo GSI Observe 6 last winter, not studded I thought they we a great winter option at a fair price. They replace a set of Hakka studded and I felt we made a good decision. Those melted in our wildfire this summer so back to the shop I went, slightly different needs this winter with more ice and snow cover highway travel on a consistent basis (Icefields Parkway) I went GSI 3 Ice studded. So far so good, we shall see what a winter on those is like.
Just a nod to aesthetics…because shut up that you don’t care. Michelin look great as car tires. Clean corners and sidewalls. Blizzaks look great as truck/suv tires with blocky corners and busy sidewalls. The inverse looks weird.
/musings after installing new Blizzaks on my wife’s Atlas.
focus.
That’s funny. It’s kind of true. I’m pretty sure there’s a bunch of BMW folks who get those Perelli high-performance snow tires cause they look good.
This is from a couple years ago. he might’ve done a newer review, but this is just fun background info while I watch football.
https://youtu.be/YNjVsdbD998
Last edited by plugboots; 11-09-2024 at 01:35 PM.
Well maybe I'm the faggot America
I'm not a part of a redneck agenda
Test showing Conti>Nokian>Michelin:
https://www.tire-reviews.com/Article...s-for-2024.htm
But what it really shows is that we’re missing out by not getting the newest Viking 8 in North America.
Also nice that this test directly compares studded and non-studded tires.
Jonathan does lots of performance, track day, etc, tire reviews as well, and the BMW forums eat it up. He definitely has skills, and knows what he's talking about (and definitely has his biases), but my one gripe is that he's always drifting. And tires that drift well aren't necessarily the best for everything else.
I really really enjoy his work and have watched most of his vids over the years.
But I disagree with your conclusion. You weight how you want, but what the test shows is:
Hakka 10 is the best WINTER tire in existence beating Conti while have 10% better resistance to aquaplaning than the studless Conti Viking 8. I find this accurate and have driven the Viking 8 back to back with the Hakka 10 both on Outbacks. That said, the Viking 8 is sweet.
Originally Posted by blurred
That one wasn’t his, he was just providing the results of a Swedish test.
I knew I wasn’t being clear enough. Was just referring to the non-studded tire order.
Also, are you sure you were on Viking 8 not 7? As far as I can tell they’re not available in the US, and just became available in Canada (correction from my previous post that said not available in NA).
Those VikingContact 8s looks a bit better than the 7s, hopefully they fixed the issues I had with the 7s I picked up last winter. I found the Viking7s have horrible traction on snow and ice when the tires aren't parallel the direction of travel. They are great when going straight then get super loose until they are turned 45 degrees. It makes sense looking at the tread design, there are no blocks, edges or sipes parallel to the sidewall. Eventually I learned to rely on countersteer and trust that if the tires slide laterally they will bite again at a certain angle. First snow/winter tire I've regretted buying (I've had Blizzak WS90s, X-Ices, Toyo Observes).
Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know
Bookmarks