Blizzak LM-25 vs LM-60
10-17-2009, 07:06 AM
#31
Michelin swept the top spots in all four categories of Consumer Reports’ annual test of all-season and winter tires.
Presented in CR’s November 2009 issue, the independent testing considers a range of performance characteristics, including dry braking, wet braking, handling, hydroplaning resistance, snow traction, ice braking, ride comfort, road noise, rolling resistance and tread life.
The testing considered four tire types: standard all-season tires, performance all-season tires, UHP all-season tires and pure winter tires.
In the standard all-season category, the Michelin HydroEdge received an overall score of 84, followed by Hankook Optimo H727 (82), Pirelli P4 Four Seasons (80), Goodyear Assurance TripleTred (80), Pirelli Cinturato P5 (78), Kumho Solus KR21 (78), Maxxis Escapade MA-T1 (76), Toyo Extensa A/S (76), Toyo Versado LX (76), and the BFGoodrich Traction T/A (74). The Michelin, Hankook and Goodyear tires received CR’s “recommended” status.
The performance all-season tire category was topped by the Michelin Primacy MXV4 with an overall rating of 84, followed by Falken Ziex ZE912 (80), Nokian WR G2 (80), Yokohama Avid H4s (78), Kuhmo Solus KH16 (76), Continental ContiProContact (76), Cooper CS4 Touring (72), and the General Altimax HP (70). The Michelin and Nokian tires received CR’s “recommended” status.
The Michelin Pilot Exalto A/S topped the UHP all-season category with an overall score of 84, followed by Firestone Firehawk GTv (82), Bridgestone Turanza Serenity (80), Dunlop Signature (80), Toyo Versado LX (78), General Altimax HP (78), Yokohama Avid V4s (76), Continental ContiPRoContact (76), Goodyear Eagle GT (76), and the Bridgestone Potenza G019 Grid (74). The Michelin and Dunlop tires received CR’s “recommended” label.
The winter tire category was topped by the Michelin X-Ice XI2 with an overall score of 84, followed by General Altimax Arctic (78), Nokian Hakkapeliitta 5 (78), Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3 (76), Nokian Hakkapeliitta R (74), Continental ExtremeWinterContact (74), Bridgestone Blizzak WS60 (72), Pirelli Sottozero 210 Series II (70), Dunlop Graspic DS-2 (70), and the Hankook Winter i-Pike (70). Receiving “recommended” status from CR were the top three entries – Michelin, General and Nokian.
how about that? that work for ya
Presented in CR’s November 2009 issue, the independent testing considers a range of performance characteristics, including dry braking, wet braking, handling, hydroplaning resistance, snow traction, ice braking, ride comfort, road noise, rolling resistance and tread life.
The testing considered four tire types: standard all-season tires, performance all-season tires, UHP all-season tires and pure winter tires.
In the standard all-season category, the Michelin HydroEdge received an overall score of 84, followed by Hankook Optimo H727 (82), Pirelli P4 Four Seasons (80), Goodyear Assurance TripleTred (80), Pirelli Cinturato P5 (78), Kumho Solus KR21 (78), Maxxis Escapade MA-T1 (76), Toyo Extensa A/S (76), Toyo Versado LX (76), and the BFGoodrich Traction T/A (74). The Michelin, Hankook and Goodyear tires received CR’s “recommended” status.
The performance all-season tire category was topped by the Michelin Primacy MXV4 with an overall rating of 84, followed by Falken Ziex ZE912 (80), Nokian WR G2 (80), Yokohama Avid H4s (78), Kuhmo Solus KH16 (76), Continental ContiProContact (76), Cooper CS4 Touring (72), and the General Altimax HP (70). The Michelin and Nokian tires received CR’s “recommended” status.
The Michelin Pilot Exalto A/S topped the UHP all-season category with an overall score of 84, followed by Firestone Firehawk GTv (82), Bridgestone Turanza Serenity (80), Dunlop Signature (80), Toyo Versado LX (78), General Altimax HP (78), Yokohama Avid V4s (76), Continental ContiPRoContact (76), Goodyear Eagle GT (76), and the Bridgestone Potenza G019 Grid (74). The Michelin and Dunlop tires received CR’s “recommended” label.
The winter tire category was topped by the Michelin X-Ice XI2 with an overall score of 84, followed by General Altimax Arctic (78), Nokian Hakkapeliitta 5 (78), Michelin Primacy Alpin PA3 (76), Nokian Hakkapeliitta R (74), Continental ExtremeWinterContact (74), Bridgestone Blizzak WS60 (72), Pirelli Sottozero 210 Series II (70), Dunlop Graspic DS-2 (70), and the Hankook Winter i-Pike (70). Receiving “recommended” status from CR were the top three entries – Michelin, General and Nokian.
how about that? that work for ya
10-17-2009, 08:04 AM
#33
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are painting a biased opinion here because you are leaving out relevant info. You are correct for regular passenger car tires but for performance winter tires and SUV winter tires the Blizzaks either are rated ABOVE the Michelins or practically equal. CR rates the LM-25 higher than the Michelins in its test. Also, for SUV tires, the Michelins and the Blizzaks are recommended and within a couple of points in their scoring (for practical purposes, lets call it a tie 
).
I'm not trying to argue what is a somewhat subjective topic but it isn't correct to make blanket comments like Michelin winter tires are 100% better than Blizzaks, etc. Michelin is absolutely a great tire company (I actually have connections to Michelin so if anything I should be biased in their favour) but Bridgestone also makes great winter tires. IMO, the LM-25 was not their best effort (regardless of what CR says) but I would bet the LM-60s perform on a comparable level or even better than the Michelin performance" winters. Do I KNOW this? Nope. Do you know that they won't? Nope. Only this winter season and independant testing will tell.
Blizzaks are great winter tires... as are Michelins. Some models are better than others for each manufacturer. Many people would argue neither perform the best and many non-subjective European tests (Motor Magazine I think did one) also suggest that there are better non-performance winter tires out there. What people also need to keep in mind is that when a company introduces a new tire, it SHOULD be better than the competition. I would bet the WS-60 performed better than the old x-ice. Then, the new x-ice2 was introduced, and it was the better performer. Sometimes who has most recently introduced new products also plays a role in performance rankings. Also, it is important to note that the differences in performance are NOT significant between the top rated tires in a category. Yes there are differences but we are talking incremental differences here. Anyway, just trying to keep this as unbiased as possible.
I understand you LOVE the Michelins and believe they are superior and that's fine... they are great tires. But your comments with respect to Blizzak tires as a whole are not accurate or fair. Unless you have driven the same car with the newest Michelin and Blizzak winters (in the same performance category) back to back in the same conditions, it is difficult to compare. Part of the reason I likely feel as though the LM-25s on the G37 are not so great is that I am running 245s in the rear... less than ideal. Having said, I don't doubt the Michelins could be superior based on your experiences but I also know that as a rule, the Michelins are not ALWAYS the better tire. I have run the older x-ice, the Blizzak WS-60, the Blizzak LM-25 and the Continental Contiviking Contact 3. IMO, the Contiviking was clearly the best. But even that assessment is difficult as the tires were on different cars that could impact my opinion. But if I were to rank them for snow and ice performance on a completely subjective and unsupported basis it would be 1. Contiviking, 2. WS-60, 3. older x-ice, 4. LM-25. I'm not a fanboy of any brand or any tire... just want to point out no manufacturer is the best across the board, all of the time IMO.
Here is the most recent comparison of performance winter tires on CRs.
).I'm not trying to argue what is a somewhat subjective topic but it isn't correct to make blanket comments like Michelin winter tires are 100% better than Blizzaks, etc. Michelin is absolutely a great tire company (I actually have connections to Michelin so if anything I should be biased in their favour) but Bridgestone also makes great winter tires. IMO, the LM-25 was not their best effort (regardless of what CR says) but I would bet the LM-60s perform on a comparable level or even better than the Michelin performance" winters. Do I KNOW this? Nope. Do you know that they won't? Nope. Only this winter season and independant testing will tell.
Blizzaks are great winter tires... as are Michelins. Some models are better than others for each manufacturer. Many people would argue neither perform the best and many non-subjective European tests (Motor Magazine I think did one) also suggest that there are better non-performance winter tires out there. What people also need to keep in mind is that when a company introduces a new tire, it SHOULD be better than the competition. I would bet the WS-60 performed better than the old x-ice. Then, the new x-ice2 was introduced, and it was the better performer. Sometimes who has most recently introduced new products also plays a role in performance rankings. Also, it is important to note that the differences in performance are NOT significant between the top rated tires in a category. Yes there are differences but we are talking incremental differences here. Anyway, just trying to keep this as unbiased as possible.
I understand you LOVE the Michelins and believe they are superior and that's fine... they are great tires. But your comments with respect to Blizzak tires as a whole are not accurate or fair. Unless you have driven the same car with the newest Michelin and Blizzak winters (in the same performance category) back to back in the same conditions, it is difficult to compare. Part of the reason I likely feel as though the LM-25s on the G37 are not so great is that I am running 245s in the rear... less than ideal. Having said, I don't doubt the Michelins could be superior based on your experiences but I also know that as a rule, the Michelins are not ALWAYS the better tire. I have run the older x-ice, the Blizzak WS-60, the Blizzak LM-25 and the Continental Contiviking Contact 3. IMO, the Contiviking was clearly the best. But even that assessment is difficult as the tires were on different cars that could impact my opinion. But if I were to rank them for snow and ice performance on a completely subjective and unsupported basis it would be 1. Contiviking, 2. WS-60, 3. older x-ice, 4. LM-25. I'm not a fanboy of any brand or any tire... just want to point out no manufacturer is the best across the board, all of the time IMO.
Here is the most recent comparison of performance winter tires on CRs.
Last edited by gthal; 10-17-2009 at 08:53 AM.
10-17-2009, 08:55 AM
#35
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 317
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aboslutely correct... that's why I was saying that whoever releases the most recent "technology" has the current advantage (potentially). If Michelin released the PA3 in stock 19" size, I would definitely try them based on your recommendation.
I don't agree with CR that the LM-25 should be top of the list given my experience with it... I expect (and hope) the LM-60s are better.
I didn't intend to turn this into a big debate... I just hate blanket statements that some manufacturer is necessarily better than another all of the time. But you are right... no point in continuing to debate.
I don't agree with CR that the LM-25 should be top of the list given my experience with it... I expect (and hope) the LM-60s are better.
I didn't intend to turn this into a big debate... I just hate blanket statements that some manufacturer is necessarily better than another all of the time. But you are right... no point in continuing to debate.
10-17-2009, 09:34 AM
#36
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UP Of Michigan
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Take note that the Blizzak outperforms the Michelin in light snow, deep snow, and ice traction in this particular survey posted earlier.
Consumer Survey Results By Category
Also note that only 200K people have evaluated this Michelin tire versus 1.5 million for the LM-25
(I used P265/60QR-18 DM-Z3's on my FX for the last 5 winters--looking to sell them, now)
Blizzak was among the first to go with a soft compound outer layer, and have been in the game ever since.
You will notice I haven't berated the Michelin or any other tire.
There are several good soft compound tires on the market today.
The Dunlop Winter Sport M3 is a favorite among FX owners, and I'm sure is a fine tire-----------as I'm sure the Michelin is, also.
I express my opinion, and let others make up their own mind.
However:
It's very unfortunate that having a discussion such as this on the quality of winter tires causes someone with limited lifetime driving experience overall, and more than likely, little to no snow and ice driving experience, to throw out comments calling the Blizzak garbage, and how he's going to stick a knife in the sidewall and trash it is completely ludicrous!
Then someone else jumps on and says they agree, and I look up to see how much snow they get, and it's a ridiculous 48" for the yr.
Give me a break!
It completely takes the discussion off track, and for someone trying to get accurate information, does them a huge disservice!
Consumer Survey Results By Category
Also note that only 200K people have evaluated this Michelin tire versus 1.5 million for the LM-25
(I used P265/60QR-18 DM-Z3's on my FX for the last 5 winters--looking to sell them, now)
Blizzak was among the first to go with a soft compound outer layer, and have been in the game ever since.
You will notice I haven't berated the Michelin or any other tire.
There are several good soft compound tires on the market today.
The Dunlop Winter Sport M3 is a favorite among FX owners, and I'm sure is a fine tire-----------as I'm sure the Michelin is, also.
I express my opinion, and let others make up their own mind.
However:
It's very unfortunate that having a discussion such as this on the quality of winter tires causes someone with limited lifetime driving experience overall, and more than likely, little to no snow and ice driving experience, to throw out comments calling the Blizzak garbage, and how he's going to stick a knife in the sidewall and trash it is completely ludicrous!
Then someone else jumps on and says they agree, and I look up to see how much snow they get, and it's a ridiculous 48" for the yr.
Give me a break!
It completely takes the discussion off track, and for someone trying to get accurate information, does them a huge disservice!
Last edited by wireboltman; 10-17-2009 at 10:05 AM.
10-17-2009, 10:35 AM
#37
ahahaha an age joke. love it. i like limited experiance. should i get my 90 year old grandfather on here to say you have limited experiance? get a life man. you are the same type of person that probally will not take advice from someone younger. just because you are old don't make you wise.
10-17-2009, 10:55 AM
#38
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UP Of Michigan
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ahahaha an age joke. love it. i like limited experiance. should i get my 90 year old grandfather on here to say you have limited experiance? get a life man. you are the same type of person that probally will not take advice from someone younger. just because you are old don't make you wise.
I'll take advice from anyone, young, old, or anywhere in between.
Just not from someone who makes ridiculous blanket statements which are completely out of the range of logic and reason.
That would be you.
At the tender age of 29, you've only been driving for 12-13 yrs.
Where does all this "experience" you speak of come from??
Where do you live?
How much snow do you get there to make you the qualified guru to make all-encompassing statements about a tire that's been proven to be one of the best on the market for yrs and yrs-
My experience comes from off roading with 4 Jeeps and a few FWD cars, autocrossing, track racing, and basically driving on ice and in snow for 4-5 months of the yr for the last 41 yrs.
That's the experience from which I speak.
Unfortunately, you can't say the same-
10-17-2009, 11:17 AM
#39
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sherwood Park, Alberta
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry I was gone for so long...had to work.
Shumby the winter mats are awesome by the way, thanks again. Tire size that I went with were the 235/45 R18. They fit well and look not too bad on the car.
I feel like I've been left out of the fight. I'm not going to quote all the tech stuff just my personal opinion because lets face it, that what everyone wants to know anyways right? Personally I wish that Nokian made a winter tire that would fit because bar none they have been the best and if they were in this conversation there won't be any question.
Once again just my two bits. Play nice.
Shumby the winter mats are awesome by the way, thanks again. Tire size that I went with were the 235/45 R18. They fit well and look not too bad on the car.
I feel like I've been left out of the fight. I'm not going to quote all the tech stuff just my personal opinion because lets face it, that what everyone wants to know anyways right? Personally I wish that Nokian made a winter tire that would fit because bar none they have been the best and if they were in this conversation there won't be any question.
Once again just my two bits. Play nice.
10-17-2009, 12:32 PM
#40
It's no joke.
I'll take advice from anyone, young, old, or anywhere in between.
Just not from someone who makes ridiculous blanket statements which are completely out of the range of logic and reason.
That would be you.
At the tender age of 29, you've only been driving for 12-13 yrs.
Where does all this "experience" you speak of come from??
Where do you live?
How much snow do you get there to make you the qualified guru to make all-encompassing statements about a tire that's been proven to be one of the best on the market for yrs and yrs-
My experience comes from off roading with 4 Jeeps and a few FWD cars, autocrossing, track racing, and basically driving on ice and in snow for 4-5 months of the yr for the last 41 yrs.
That's the experience from which I speak.
Unfortunately, you can't say the same-
I'll take advice from anyone, young, old, or anywhere in between.
Just not from someone who makes ridiculous blanket statements which are completely out of the range of logic and reason.
That would be you.
At the tender age of 29, you've only been driving for 12-13 yrs.
Where does all this "experience" you speak of come from??
Where do you live?
How much snow do you get there to make you the qualified guru to make all-encompassing statements about a tire that's been proven to be one of the best on the market for yrs and yrs-
My experience comes from off roading with 4 Jeeps and a few FWD cars, autocrossing, track racing, and basically driving on ice and in snow for 4-5 months of the yr for the last 41 yrs.
That's the experience from which I speak.
Unfortunately, you can't say the same-
ok I will take your opinion seriously when you can tell me the last time you actuall built a tire, because I have.. lots of snow here in the rockies oh and I grew up in nova scotia. but I don't expect and old american to know when anything is on a map not even their own home town. Game set and match.
10-17-2009, 01:08 PM
#41
Registered User
I know the link I posted was a survey for owners. But when shopping for any product or service I like to to look at official test results from reputable sources and customer experiences.
But I still would like to what alternate tires sizes I can use???
I saw in another thread where Neil recommended a 235-50-18 but I'm worried about rubbing. Like I said earlier according to the Miata Tire calculator a 205-55-18 is almost the same size as the stock 225-50-18. Unless the tire calculator is wrong.
Tire size calculator
I know I didn't start this thread but the day I came accross it i was getting ready to start a similar one.
Thanks.
Oh and please what other alternate sizes can I use instead of 225-50-18???
But I still would like to what alternate tires sizes I can use???
I saw in another thread where Neil recommended a 235-50-18 but I'm worried about rubbing. Like I said earlier according to the Miata Tire calculator a 205-55-18 is almost the same size as the stock 225-50-18. Unless the tire calculator is wrong.
Tire size calculator
I know I didn't start this thread but the day I came accross it i was getting ready to start a similar one.
Thanks.
Oh and please what other alternate sizes can I use instead of 225-50-18???
10-17-2009, 01:36 PM
#43
Registered User
Here's the link to the tire calculator.
Tire size calculator
Oh and my G is a sedan not a coupe.
Last edited by gugarci; 10-17-2009 at 01:52 PM. Reason: Added Content
10-17-2009, 02:03 PM
#44
i got the wife to check the crappy blizzacks in the gar age and they are 235-45 so ya it will work.
what worries you about the 45 series? scared of wheel damage?. if so don't be the wife drove thoses all last winter 130km+ each way to the school she teaches at with no issues and the roads are full of potholes. but my wheels are rock picked to hell. but that is from the portion of dirt road she travels on and the "sand " they use on the roads in alberta ta is the size of the end of your little finger.
what worries you about the 45 series? scared of wheel damage?. if so don't be the wife drove thoses all last winter 130km+ each way to the school she teaches at with no issues and the roads are full of potholes. but my wheels are rock picked to hell. but that is from the portion of dirt road she travels on and the "sand " they use on the roads in alberta ta is the size of the end of your little finger.