It is a thread difference, smaller tires have the benefit of going through deeper snow ( much less power is needed ) You might have frosty snow ( it is painful to break icy patch with wider tires)
@@apocalypse487 depends of Snow condition. If it is powder. Doesn't matter. If it is packed or iced or in un even surfaces. Can help you get going ( the length of tire is matters not width) the more length you have the more acct as track.
I'm really disagree with your statement about the size of winter tyres! Coming from a country were we have 4 season's, mildly hot summer's and winter that lasts at least 4 months and were winter tyres are obligated by law in winter months. Winter tyres should always be two sizes narrower then summer tyres (225 in summer/205 in winter) the reason is simple, half of the time you won't get just ice or nice pressed snow surface as in your test track. Half of the time there will be melting snow slush, mixed salt/gravel and snow slush, fresh snowing snow and good luck getting any kind of grip in a 245 wide tyre, doesn't matter what brand it is,it will just float. Winter tyres are about safety on the road.
In my experience, in northern Minnesota people are much less concerned about turning and braking quickly than they are about getting stuck. I really wish you would do deep snow testing as a result. I’m sure it is difficult to find spots to get a consistent surface with 6-12 inch snow, but that is what matters to most people who have to go to work before the side roads and driveways get plowed. That is where the narrow tire would show the greatest advantage as well. I still appreciate all the in depth reviews! The best tire reviews on the planet currently.
Growing up in eastern Montana where snow plowing was iffy and rare tall narrow blocky snow tires were the bomb. Especially on ranch pickups. Deep to "deep" snow on paths and "roads" with no packed snow was the norm. Moving to northern Minnesota plowing was more reliable but we still had the problem with getting around in virgin snow before the plows hit (along with the problem of steep hills). Rear drive, rear engined or front wheel drive and front engined cars had real advantages. Again, tall narrow tires were preferred as the conventional wisdom that the tire wouldn't float but dig down to the road surface where the traction was. This test didn't answer that question; however, the packed snow conditions probably covered the conditions most folks will find today. But if this test could be replicated in deep virgin snow it would test the extreme boundary conditions. And who doesn't like testing snow tires?! :D
Grew up in WI and ND and second this stongly. Braking performance is a luxury of those who aren't stuck and are actually moving. For many of us, we can coast to a stop on rolling/plowing resistance alone in 6" of overnight snow.
In Winterpeg, Manitoba, narrowest that meets the load requirements for wind blown hard deep snow drifts, smallest diameter possible for the spring pot holes
- [06:52] ❄ Narrow tires perform better in both snow and ice traction tests. - [05:36] 🚗 Narrow tires offer better acceleration in snow but perform worse in snow braking compared to wider tires. - [08:10] 🚘 Tire width has a minimal impact on handling and performance; tire quality matters more. - [09:28] 🚙 Consider fitting narrower winter tires for practical reasons, like protecting larger alloy wheels, but focus on choosing a high-quality winter tire rather than worrying about width. - [03:44] 🌧 Differences in handling and performance between narrow and wide tires are extremely small, with width making little difference in most cases.
@@bernhardleopold6702 I would say that "slushplaining" protection is about a car staying on the road or ending up in the ditch or in the opposite line. But interesting results in breaking.
But the point he makes in the end makes total sense. People looking to narrowing or widening their tires are probably only going to go one size up or down. No one is going to go from 265 to 205. In which case, the differences are negligible anyway.
@@bernhardleopold6702 yea but with a 60 cm difference going from 4x 205 trying to stop to 2x 255 and 2x 275 trying to stop i'd say it's super not worth it, basic takeaway find what size is cheapest to fit on your car and go. my car came with aftermarket rims 17" 215/45 tyre's which were a kewl 215 bucks a tyre lowest price/crappiest tyre i could find, replaced it with 15" rims 195/60R15 tyre for 62.50 a tyre yea i literally replaced my rims and tyre's with brand new stuff for what it would have cost me to put new rubber on the aftermarket rims >.< but same rule applies whatever size fits and is cheap/good go for it :P sure it's not as sporty as it was but the confort went from a 2 to a ...6.5? vast improvement in that area :P probably shoulda gone 16" for looks but worked out to 42.50 more a tyre and the rims i liked were a x2 in price over what i got :P
This test was performed in a very cold place where the snow is basically ice-gravel. My intuition is that you'd see more differences between the widths if you tested on fresher, wetter, deeper snow. For me, my main motivation for winter tires is to not get stuck in fresh snow, especially when climbing hills. I'm not all that concerned about braking and handling differences because where I live, any time there's snow on the ground you're driving slowly anyway.
Full agreed its verry important i was 225 hankook kinergy 2s) car weight 1370kg now its 195 on winter and im shock how good grip car is now.. sorry for my english. I cant believe this test how 255 its same grip on 205.. its fake or really verry ice/snow cold not wet not difference.
Absolutely. My city in Canada is avg. 0 to -10c in winter, lots of slush and fresh snow days. See lots of cars getting stuck on our steep hills and trucks with wide tires crawling on the highway as they're slushing all over the road. My van with 205/85 will go anywhere, no problem.. and they're not even snow tires, just All-Season AT. My buddy spun his 4runner into the ditch on 265/70 on packed highway and fully admits it was the tires; he went and bought narrow winters after that.
@@furieux6742 I got 225 kingergy 2s as well on my model 3, and while i was parked on grass, 5-7cm of snow almost got me stuck. Dunno what i think about that, as i got no comparison. Luckily it barely snow here anymore, thats why I went the allseason way.
@@laurg17 by deep snow I mean 3 or 4 inches of fresh fallen snow on a flat parking lot. Ideally you'd have two identical cars side by side instead of taking the time to switch out the wheels on one test vehicle.
Definitely think the conclusions on this video was wrong, long-time viewer here and love your videos but as someone who's grown up in northern Sweden you definitely see a big difference between narrow and wide tires. On wide tires you will essentially "aquaplane" on the snow and slush.
I live in a similar climate and can confirm that there is a sweet spot for tyre width that depends on the car (weight and its distribution is a factor) and the surface type. We mostly use studded tyres although studless are gaining popularity especially among people who mostly drive on heavily salted city roads. Studs are essential out of town where there is often sheet ice under snow. On the whole a narrower high-profile tyre is better all round with more grip, but the higher breakaway point means that when it starts to slide you're probably in big trouble. A wider tyre tends to slip more predictably and you quickly learn to keep within its limits.
Try testing in deeper snow, so you can see how they would handle on an unplowed road, that's where the narrower tire will cut through the snow VS the wider tire riding on top of the snow. This is when you will really notice the difference (usually during a snowstorm in an urban setting the snow turns to deep slick slush and the narrower tire find's much better traction than a wider tire).
This. Compacted snow is quite rare imo in Finnish winter at least. It's like 80% of driving in "solid" surface like tarmac, ice or snow which is easy to control. But the the critical condition is the last 20% and that is like really deep snow and slush and these are the conditions where winter tyre performance is counted. Narrow tire indeed "sinks" better into hard base. Wide tyre can easily "hydroplane" on heavy snow or slush. My preference is high sidewall tyre to increase comfort and narrow to just easier to push through the surface as mentioned.
This is clear as day. Narrover is a game changer in slush and most of the time when there is slush there are cars in the ditch. I would like to see tire reviews test this. Also car Weight is probably a big factor. Wider tire on a 2000kg car is not as bad as 1400kg car.
@@IV-A For sure. I had one light car that had really wide tyres for it's weight and it was downright scary in certain situations. It got much better with original tyres.
The narrow tall profile tire actually does exactly the opposite. It has a slightly narrower tread, combined with lower inflation pressures, produces a significantly longer patch (around square shape) that gradually packs, paves, and climbs over the snowpack formed by the leading edge. It is the low profile tire, with rigid reinforced sidewalls and higher inflation pressures and a very short contact patch that is incapable of engaging with the standing snow in a manner that packs and paves a path over it. The short contact patch of a low profile tire winds up "falling" through, digging its own grave, and getting stuck in a hole that it can't pack and climb its way out of.
@@mdocod not that much, cause outer diameter doesn't change that much in tires anyway, except for extreme cases. Low profile = bigger rim. High profile = smaller rim. End result doesn't change vastly on conventional tire sizes. But comfort does change. We're talking really small contact patch changes.
I've always got the smallest option as that's what I figured made the most sense. From the looks of it, the difference is negligible, but the smaller tire options are often less expensive too. I guess you could look at this way; save some money and buy the smallest option, but use some of that savings to ensure you put it towards a quality tire. That way, you are getting the best of both worlds.
You shouldn't be buying the smallest option, you should be buying the tallest skinny tire on the smallest rim possible. This gives you the option to run lower air pressure and produce a longer and larger contact patch than OE. What's your OE tire/wheel size, what winter rim size do you run? I'll provide an example...
If safety is important, it's difficult to choose something else than the test winner. If the same brand wins the tests year after year, how difficult is it then to choose a "good" tire?
@@mdocod yes, by "smallest", that's what I meant. I no longer run winter tires due to the hassle and cost. I put a set of Michelin Cross Climate 2 tires on my Venza and they've been excellent. Not far off from a good winter tire.
Take a second and google winter race cars, or winter rally drivers cars, take a look at ALL of their wheels. One thing remains the same among all of them. Narrow Tires. Studded or not, depending where its legal (in the ARA / Rally America Studded tires are not legal) they are always narrow. These guys drive at the limit, in multiple million dollar cars with million dollar race teams. If there was some performance to be gained with a wider tire on the snowy tracks/courses, Dont you think they would have done it?
There are more potholes in the winter, so I always go for a smaller winter wheel rim with a taller side-walled tyre so that rim damage is less likely and for more comfort on rougher winter roads. I never deviate from the manufacturers list of approved wheel and tyre combo's for that vehicle though, I just move between the recommended sizes depending upon the season.
Totally agree. I always try to get the smallest wheel diameter / largest tire sidewall as possible as our roads are horrible. Pot holes don’t get fixed for months - well into the warmer months.
Yeah I’m with you, even in summer. On a 20” wheel, you have to go to at least a 33” tire to have enough sidewall for comfort and protection. Of course I’m talking SUVs and trucks.
Swiss guy responding there. We always try, when possible, to opt for smaller winter wheels. This allows more sidewall and is beneficial to find this little bit of traction. Also, never over-inflate winter tires, always opt for lower recommended pressures, as it will allow the tire to flex.
@@boboutelama5748 Very often a taller profile tire on a smaller rim will also have higher load ratings, allowing the winter tire/wheel setup to carry the vehicle with lower pressures safely, which produces an even longer contact patch, which makes the whole driving experience even more predictable, and more capable in deep snow.
High side wall gives you piece of mind - curbs you don't see and the comfort. Additionally if you have 2 sets of wheel you can opt for better/more expensive tyres (my BMW needs every bit of help)
Having done several years of Ice Racing in the CASC Ice Racing Championships combined with running our Winter Driving schools for over 20 years at our iced facility and having conducted numerous tire tests, we did notice that a narrower tire has advantages in deeper snow/slush conditions. What is important to note though is any winter tire will out perform any all season tire in winter conditions. Get yourself a good quality set of winter tires. ILR Car Control School
The advantage / disadvantage actually depends on vehicle weight compared to tire size. Personal experience from winter service while driving stuff between 400-3000 kg (small plows to heavy cars). This is especially true for the deeper snow / slush part. Doing the Physics would agree, the additional pressure allows the dig into harder snow/slush deeper down.
All season tires are kind of stupid because they are very mediocre in summer and also very mediocre in winter. Now if you're like my 78 year old mom who basically just drives to the grocery store all year round and has the freedom to not drive when it snows or when conditions are bad - get all season tires and save some money. But for everyone else, don't do it.
@@maximilianmustermann5763 We did tire testing for Goodyear and couple of years ago and we tested their All Weather tires (not All Season) and they performed better in all seasons than an All Season but still not as well as a Winter tire in winter conditions. We would recommend the All Weather tire for someone who doesn't have storage or driver very little instead of the All Season tire. That Goodyear tire we tested is their Assurance WeatherReady tire. We liked it better than the all season in spring, summer and fall.
A narrower tire will feel less resistance when moving through thick slush or snow at speed. This could help prevent you from getting pulled in further off the road. Going one size narrower could also save you some money on a set of tires. In my recent case, the difference was about $100 on a set of 4 from a 225 to a 215.
I’d be interested in comparing tire pressure effect on traction, both dry and wet pavement AND snow and ice, to what vehicle manufacturers want vs what the tire manufactures want for static loaded radius. If a change that can be made for free affects performance I’m sure many would want to know.
The tire pressures are defined by regulations through the ETRTO (european tire and rim organisation). Multiple factors and formulas define the lowest pressure for the specific tire dimension, vehicle mass, maximum car velocity, camber angles etc. Going lower that this exact pressure might be performance enhancing but not street legal as the tire supplier does not guarantee a longterm durability anymore and therefore no insurance will cover you in case of an accident.
@@lars_hbm While perhaps true in Canada I’ll take the smoother ride and longer tire wear, the two things I know I get, on 275/60R20 equipped Ford F-150 two person glorified grocery hauler. Take axle mass, 1600f, 1200r kg, divide by 10 for SLR proper. 160/120 kpa. Door sticker 235 kpa I believe but don’t care. Keep in mind, pressure set by very accurate digital gauge on a cold soaked vehicle @ +15°, 20 kpa added for winter as tires cool and therefore lower pressure when actually running. Very accurate and consistent 4 tire vehicle pressure readings really help research.
@@donboles54 Vehicle tire pressures are set at max vehicle rated weight, for most cars that dosnt matter as 4 people and the trunk full is only about 1000lb diffrence vs empty+ driver, but trucks have a much bigger weight diferential between loaded and unloaded, especially on the rear axel. My silverado 2500hd for example wants 65psi in the front and 85psi in the rear, but if i do that the rears go bald in the middle from over inflation because that pressure is designed for 5000+lbs in the bed. i've been running 55psi in the front and 45 in the rear when daily driving and then airing up to recomended when i'm actually hauling loads.
Super interesting test. Some things to consider : 1. A lot of cold areas will see a mix of conditions, sometimes snow, ice, slush, rain, wet and dry pavement. In some areas a driver can experience a combination of any of those in winter, in a single trip! 2. Though it’d be a lot of work to do all this additional testing on 4 different sets, it’d bring additional considerations for finding the best overall width for a well-rounded winter experience. 3. Without much doubt the wider tire would do better on dry and wet than narrower tires; maybe not so much in the rain (hydroplaning). 4. I’d be curious to see how studs would influence the results. Do wider tires have more studs overall? It probably varies from a model to the next depending on the design choices the manufacturers made. But if a particular model has more studs on the wider sizes, then that could very positively improve results on ice. Thank you for all the hard work 👌
I know it's hard to test, but I would have liked to see tests in loose snow and slush. Living in Finland I've opted for a narrower winter tyre for behaviour. With patches of ice/snow/slush between tarmac the transition from sliding a bit to not sliding is much smoother with a narrower and higher tyre. The narrower tyre might have a bit more traction in the slippery but more significantly it is not so sharp when you either loose grip or get it back.
No one ever does these tests on real world applications of wet roads with slush and black ice in patches, throw in some rain as well. They either have dry snow (which grips awesome) on a track or straight up ice which just isn't the case for everywhere.
Not only the best tires review in the world he also describes the feeling/feedback from the tires and you can tell he really likes to drive like an entusiast. This is very important for dynamic reviews.
If you drive in a gated area, you can slide around. That's why they make tracks on the lakes in the wintertime!. The 2x rally world champion, Kalle Rovanperä, was sliding around on ice tracks with a Toyota Starlet when he was 8 years old!
@@stefankarlsson8215 I always looked for inspiring driving cars. I followed Swedish tire recommendations for 3 seasons and every time i get a boring driving car. I switched to german and other continental recommendations and suddenly all my cars was funny to drive again. No more understeer and the feedback from the road come back to life. So mr Hahaha I think you are stuck in the boring Trafikmagasinet era. Sorry for that last one ;)
Great insights. So, in a Central European setting, with maybe 10-20% time driving the winter tyres in snow, wider/larger tyres are better, as they will perform better in dry/rain.
In cases where its snowslush on asphalt roads, which is pretty common here i definitely prefer narrow tyres for traction up hills , or just slushplaning at speed (if i can call it that :)) etc, specially in a lighter car. Great test anyway!
as you mentioned near the end, going with as small a diameter wheel for your winter tires makes sense, since roads are going to be be in poorer shape overall, leading to a higher probability of damaging a large diameter wheel. also, the tires should be a bit cheaper as well, potentially even the cost of one entire tire cheaper.
For most people that live in winter climate the reality is that snowy roads eventually get plowed. I would say more than 80% of the time we are on asphalt or partially covered asphalt, extremely cold asphalt but nevertheless it would have been nice to cover the handling on asphalt as well. Or it would be nice to see a video comparing efficiency of different type of tires on -20c asphalt. Just a suggestion, love your videos keep up the good work.
@@mdocod I'm buying winter tires for the types of situations that I will mostly encounter in winter. That's not "average conditions", it's based on experience in my area. I usually encounter cold, wet roads. Sometimes a little slushy, sometimes a little icy, but 95% it's going to be cold and wet (and salty...). So if one winter tire is great in deep snow and packed snow but average on wet roads, it's not going to be my first choice. You have to make some compromises, no ordinary person can have 4 different sets of wheels at home and quickly change to the other set when there's unusual conditions like 1 day of the year.
@@maximilianmustermann5763 The point, is that you could pick the worst performing tire in the wet of all tires on the market, and you'll still have more traction in the wet than you will on ice with the best performing ice tire available. If you're buying a set of tires for year-round use, then it's going to be a compromise no matter what, but compromising dry and wet performance is not as big of a deal as compromising ice performance, because ice is the situation that a bad tire choice will actually put you in the ditch wrong side up, whereas a lousy choice for any of those other conditions isn't going to cause that unless you're driving way over the speed limit recklessly.
I’d love to see a test of winter tires in fresh deep snow (6-12 inches). I know it’d likely be hard to set up, but I think it would provide useful information. If you are able to make it happen then it’d be cool to add in a narrow vs wide tire into that testing pool. I feel like it’ll have more of a difference in that environment.
In my experience, driving in Vermont and Utah winter here in the USA, width does not matter much. I’ve run from 235 to a 275 on my truck always Blizzaks. The big variable in the real world is the snow temperature, snow depth, road surface under the snow, etc. Any difference from the width is washed out by how bloody variable winter conditions are. I knew a mechanic who’s family raced in an ice league in Vermont (on frozen lakes) and he told me that “surface pressure” only mattered for the deep spiked tires. Modern studless winter tires are so good that you just don’t notice much difference through the noise of “that bit of road had some salt thrown on it” versus “that bit was in the shade and was 5 degrees colder”.
This is nice to know. That said I will always favor narrower and more side wall option for winters (within reason) because of trivial situations when there are slushy and non-plowed roads. There cutting the layer is important, as well as all the traction you can get to keep you moving! There is a reason why rally cars use very narrow tyres for soft surfaces like gravel and snow! :) +narrower tyres are way cheaper in winters! Greets from Finland
One major thing to consider is that most days are not snowy nor icy suring the winter, at least where I live in Canada. So you end up driving on cold tarmac, which I imagine would favor a wider tire. I guess not going to the extremes is the way to go
I have been reading a couple of tests on winter tires recently. I live in Germany and most of the time in winter we'll have cold, wet roads. Sometimes salty slush, sometimes a little ice. There's just like two times in the last 15 years or so where I can remember actually driving on a bed of fresh snow. So the tests here also focus a lot on cold, wet roads. Some winter tires are fantastic on snow, but they are just very mediocre at braking on wet roads. Others are the opposite. I ended up buying a Continental Winter Contact which is supposed to be really good on cold, wet roads and pretty good on snow as well.
Yes, you did it again! Nice job. You are absolutely correct, for the regular road there is no difference in perfect conditions. But, when the roads are bad, when there are a lot of pot holes, and you can't see the curb then the bigger sidewall makes a difference.
Take this test with a grain of salt as its in very specific conditions that most places don't get. The real test should be on ashphalt - wet, slush mix, occassional black ice. That is the most normal and most dangerous type of conditions in winter almost everywhere. Dry snow is extremely grippy.
This test compares an UNDERSIZED skinny tire (smaller diameter), with no load index advantages to the low profile tires, so it has to be operated at the same pressure, which means it has the same contact patch size as the other tires, so not much advantage. A 205/65R16 or 215/60R16 at 30PSI would be the appropriate tire sizes (and pressures) for this test, not the 205/60R16 @ 35PSI.
I just love how it came down to the conclusion I had after driving Hankook in winter and switching to Kleber.. I got my E46 320D Touring for 14 years now, drove Hankook 205/55r16 through several winters, but Kleber had a slightly cheaper option in 2019. Well as the Krisalp HP3 only works really well in under 0 Celsius it really shows its age after being 3 years old, and last winter (January 2024) in deep snow it was nearly undriveable.. Whereas Hankook I used throughout the 6-7 years of it's lifetime without any hiccups..
Also better for peace of mind. I damaged my 1 year old around 10k km CC2 205/40 17 a week ago in pothole, tyre got bump on sidewall, rim lost paint in impact zone and get little dent i think. Tomorrow I'm going to replace the tire and check the rim
I'm a bit confused. Are you talking about racing in the snow? Lap times drifting around a hard packed track? This is nothing like winter driving we see around here. Where's the slush, the deep snow drifts, the ice patches, the pot holes, the plow piles, the lane ruts, the ice ledges? Narrow tires let you dig in and cut through, wide tires let you float over, but what you're testing on is just dry packed level road. Any tire with some tread left is fine for that. Personally I always go with aggressive wide mud tires. They work for me on everything but smooth ice, but nothing works well there.
Should run a similar test in Deep Snow conditions. 12" or more of Snow depth. and add some hill climbs / grades were you start from standstill. Use a car that allows you turn off all the Traction and Stability controls. What is better for getting up the Hill. All the Aids on, or All the Aids off? I think you will find that Narrow "pizza cutter" tires do better in deep snow with the driving aids turned off.
It feels to me that the difference between the lateral acceleration and braking test might have been affected by the 2 wheel drive force on acceleration and 4 wheel braking force on deacceleration. To get a base line an all wheel drive test would be a create addition to this test. Either way I love these experiments / reviews and it's super easy for arm chair pundits to point stuff out afterward!
Just like driving in sand, under braking a certain amount of snow is pushed up in front of the tire. With a wider tire the amount of snow pushed up in front of the tire also increases, helping the car to slow down. Under acceleration there is no build up. Hence the narrow tire performs better due to the higher pressure delivering more bite and the wider tire have better break performance due to the broader heap in front of the tire
Imho opposite result of traction vs braking might be from rally-ish building up small snow packed snow in front of tire on braking .. which is wider on wider tire (even with ABS deblocking from time to time), but it isn't a case for traction, where actual grip of narrower tire may work a bit better.
In my experience driving and ice racing in Canada the narrow tire definitely performs better in deep snow..and this video confirms the ice performance 👌🏾
But... Does it matter if you have studded tires? Not sure of the rules, but I believe the amount of studs is the same on a narrow or wide tire. Would they dig in better if pressure is higher (narrower tire)?
I've always been one for smaller rings size and larger side wall for winters which normally means a slightly narrower tyre too. Mainly for protecting the wheel and if you really need to you can lower the psi to give a bigger contact patch if needed and have more supple side walls. Have you thought about doing this test but using different psi settings on the same tyres?
the reason why the small tire did worse in braking honestly is probably the tire pattern, the way it's angled pushes snow/water etc. out while accelerating (it had good results in this field) but during braking might, it might essentially pile up the snow to the middle, kind of like mounting the tire in reverse, thats my thoughts atleast
Wished I had these results three weeks ago when I ordered new wheels and tires for winter season in the Alps - would have prevented sleepless nights. Finally decided for broad tires on 19" for sake of style. But I was really worried that they might be much worse than smaller tires on 17". Thanks for this great test like always.
Great test Jonathan, well done for doing this one! I have always tended to fit narrower tyres, mainly to have a higher sidewall for general winter use and better performance in slush. I use the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 in 225 width on all four wheels of my BMW, and they are an extemely good winter tyre - and one of the few winters with an ‘A’ wet weather rating. I have driven them extensively on snow-covered roads in Scotland and in the Alps. The other benefit of a narrower winter tyre, is actually better aquaplaning performance on rain-soaked motorways.
This may be an ad for Hankook, but I took his recommendation last year and currently, there's no better overall winter shoe for any car than the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 Other considerations should also be the weights of the tire (and wheels) and how much of that weight is coming from the tread too.
Rally on snow stages happen exclusively on narrow tyres as far as I'm concerned. If narrow is picked in winter motorsports then that's all I need to know.
WRC tires are almost more studs than rubber. Much bigger studs too as they don't care about road damage. Completely different design, application and requirements. Obviously, they have their reasons for going narrow, but I don't think we can just assume that under normal driving with consumer tires that narrow is always better. This video being proof of that.
@@RicHSAD2 you can install studs in any tyre. Would be interesting to hear why they went narrow. Probably it has nothing to do with the traction aids, but that's just my two cents. My guess would be that when the car hits a snow bank or a deeper area, the narrower it is the less drag the car will see that could upset it or spin it.
Went from 205 to 195 on my mom's Corolla for the winter setup, the 195 is OE on the base trim below hers so I was able to buy factory steel wheels one size narrower. I had a 02 Legacy with 205/55/16 which was narrow for a OE size for how heavy those cars are, and it was incredible in snow with cheap all season tires. Keeping in mind car weight and tire width I feel is very important when considering snow traction.
Agreed. Its soo much important. 185 its fine to 1200kg. 195 its fine to 1200-1350 205 1350-1500- 215 1550-1700- 225 1650-1800 about. I drive a bus 195 2.2tons and crazy how grip it is... better small tire than other
Excellent review! I had that question, but you came with the right answer: it's not about the wide of the tire but instead what is important its the good traction of the tire.
@@HetwordtweerzomerIn many areas, you may end up driving on fresh powder before the snow plows come through. It’s happened to me many times. As long as it’s only a few inches deep, I’ve actually found it to be much easier to drive on than the plowed roads… which I think lends credibility to doing the tests on a packed / plowed surface, as that is more slippery.
@@Hetwordtweerzomer First snowfall or when snow melts during the day and then accumulates over night. Or when you try driving on some road nobody else drove on yet since it snowed.
Well to explain the smoother transition into oversteer on the 275, staggered setups always reduce oversteer. And inconsistency with braking on 205 is simply that it's a different tire. Could that it be all there is to it? You definitely proved that this factor hardly matters. I was really excited to see this kind of test pop up in my subs!
That is interesting results. I would have imagined the narrower would have had a large margin of success compared to wider counterparts. As always good info!
Excellent advice as always. My view has always been that the quality of tyre fitted would be more beneficial than worrying about actual wheel size. No difference whether summer or winter just get a really good bit of rubber on all corners of the car and you won’t go wrong,
Very thorough testing! (and not that surprising results except for a few tings). But what i think people should keep in mind is that if they aren't driving on snow there are other differences too: In the dry, the wider tyre will be better in traction and braking and cornering, and in the wet it most likely will too. But the narrower tyre will be better in hydroplaning and in slush. And here 20mm in width per tyre can make quite the difference. And lastely the narrower tyre will cost less. (sadly, something people often are more concerned than with performance, even though hitting something and the repair afterwards cost more than a set of premium tyres.) So someone could buy a good winter tyre in a smaller dimension for equal money as if buying a shitty tyre in a bigger dimension.
Another great review. My summer tyres are 235/40/R18 on a Focus ST. My bias for winter tyres is towards a narrower taller fitment on one size smaller rim diameter, and same circumference as the stock tyres. These are cheaper than the full sized alternative, but that's a side benefit. The best argument I can muster for this setup is that the taller side-walls provide better compliance for the tread and better grip in that uneven surface situation which what you get with hard packed snow on Calgary streets where I drive. Hard packed snow and snow with ice underneath are the conditions that concern me most.
We generally don't get so much ice in Calgary. It's normally either very cold packed snow, fresh looser snow, or just plain salted standing water. There may be ice on the residential streets but I'm sure you know if you go fast enough for that to be a risk you've successfully halved the life of your struts. Having said that yes, for two of those any good set of tires helps.
Fascinating! My takeaway here is that, since tyre sizes vary in terms of popularity and price, it makes sense to shop around to get the best tyre you can afford in any size that fits your car. Example: My old BMW 1 series came with 205/50R17, but I'm on 205/55R16 (also within spec) in the winter (cheaper -- €140 vs €190 per one Michelin X-ice North 4) and either 215/45R17 or 225/45R17 (neither size recommended by BMW for the front axle) in the summer (better selection, including one or two UUHP options, none of which were available in my size last I checked; also wildly cheaper -- €97 vs €173 per one Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6).
The 205 size they tested was under-size diameter wise and had no advantage in load index compared to the 255, so had to run the same pressures to hold the weight of the car safely. Had they tested a proper 215/60R16 or 205/65R16 aired down about 5PSI below the door sticker, the skinny tires would have run away with all of these tests AND provides the car far more real-world advantages in deep snow and slush, as the tires contact patch acts more like a track, able to climb the problem rather than dig out a perfect little grave for itself.
I think it depends on what surface you drive on. Rather than the hard pack you are testing on here, I drive on pavement that gets snowed on. Some times the plows get it taken care of before I need to be in the road but most of the time they dont. I prefer a narrower tire to punch through the couple inches if fresh snow and get down to the pavement vs the wider tire that would want to float on top. I think your hard pack tests are totally different than how mow people drive.
I went for a more narrow tire for winter because it gives me more sidewall and thus more comfort and relaxing driving, which improves safety in a non-obvious way. And yeah, no potholes or just holes are dangerous enough while driving pleasure I can get with far better summer.
Need help. Does anyone from Europe heard or use 16" winter tires from brands like Altenzo, Belshina, Apollo, Comforser, Cordiant, Kelly, Kingstar, Laufen, Linglong, Petlas, Rockblade, Sailun, Starfire, Starmax, Triangle, Viking ??? Something very strange on the tire market that i wasn't aware until this year. There is not a single test or review of those brands. Prices from A brands are now very expensive from 80-110 euros but those brands are now flood the market with almost the same prices 50-55 euros for 205 55 R16 size. Any advice?
I used to be convinced narrower tires were a must for winter. But when I got my current car with 225/40/18 in the front and 255/35/18 in the back I decided to just get winters and stick with the same set of wheels until I find a good second pair. I got Michelin Pilot Alpin 4's and my subjective feeling was that width made no significant difference. Great to see it backed up with actual testing.
Yeah, I used to love the extra comfort going down a size (in width and sidewall height) but it also meant more mushy turn in and less grip on dry and wet roads. Nowadays I stick to the same size so the handling changes much less (although I am on a sporty winter tire -michelin pilot alpin- and a much less sporty summer tire -michelin primacy 4-)
@@helldogbe4077 Pretty much the same for me. I also found I prefer to keep the sportier feeling vs the extra comfort of the thicker sidewall. And actually in a similar situation with my tire setup. I was on hankook s1 evo 3's for summers and pilot alpins for winters. Whilst the hankook is technically a more sporty tire than your primacy I can't really call it a UHP tire at least not on subjective feel. It has loads of grip but steering feel isnt great. So I also see little to no change from summers to winters. But I'm due for new summers next year and planning to try the f1 assymetrics
Other people have already made my point. The missing test, and most valuable in my opinion, would have been in fresh snow or slush, not on impacted snow. Keep up the good work!
06:40 and after. If you used speedo in car for this test, no surprise the narrow tire (also smallest diameter) will win, when speedo reads more than actual car speed, thus taking shorter time. With the widest (more important biggest diameter) tyre, speedo will show less than actual speed, thus taking longer for the speedo to reach for example 60... Its hard to explain in a comment ...
To say it better, if you don’t recalibrate the speedometer before each test if the diameter of the tire changes and your using the speedometer as your speed reference, the data will be inaccurate. The more accurate way would be to use a gps or other speedometer style that is not dependent on tire size.
this is my limited and 100% uncientiffic view on the winter tire matter. on a hard packed snow surface is there very little difference between a wide and narrow winter tire, I personally feel a little bit safer with a narrower tire because it feels like it gives me as the driver a little bit more time to react but all in all, a very small difference. the big difference comes when there is a layer of loose snow on the ground, the narrower tire really cuts through the snow and finds grip in the hard packed below in a way the wider tire doesn't. I personally feel like a 225 tire is about the best size for a winter tire, it is a bit wider so it is better on roads without snow on them whilst also cutting through the soft snow fairly well. and the optimal rim size in my eyes and on my cars are 17" both summer and winter. it offeres a nice direct feel without starting to become punishing on long rides, this is especially true for my lowered hatchback on performance coilovers. 16" wich is the smallest that fit around my brakes are a bit too vague when it comes to turn in, 17" are really direct but still with compliance and 18" takes my already not that comfortable car and makes it a whole difference level on the uncomfortability scale without offering that much more direct steering feel.
Great test, I like your methodology and analysis, but what this is really missing is deep snow. If width makes a significant difference, I expect it to be in much deeper snow than this.
Great video! I would really like to see a test that compares tire efficiency on the dry street for different widths. Does a narrow tire automatically mean better efficiency?
Narrower tyres also have less aerodynamic resistance, less (unsprung) weight, are better at hydroplaning and in slush and cost less. They are a little"worse" in dry and wet performance though than the same tyre in a wider format.
Brilliant video again. I just bought smaller 17" wheels with winters on to replace the summer 19" ultra low profile tyres. Good to know that width doesn't make a massive difference, but as you said, the key idea is to protect the wheels and have that extra side wall there for the potholes, mud and what not that a British B-Road throw at us every winter!
For my Porsche Cayenne S, I followed the OEM sizes of 285/40/22 Front and 315/25-22 Rear. I figured the ultimate ice and snow traction might be lower than going with a narrower setup, but the trade off would be better handling in the dry/wet where the car will spend the majority of it's time anyway. After seeing this review, it seems even the ice/snow handling won't be very different anyway, so I'm very happy with my choice now!
Ever been stuck on dry pavement? Are you driving around corners so fast in the dry on public roads that you need that much lateral grip in the dry? Anything you could do that would find the limit of traction on those tires on dry pavement would be a spend-the-night-in-jail sort of traffic offense. On the other hand, I see sport SUV's with low profile's stuck all the time in the heavy slushy stuff. They dig their own grave with no sidewall flex to climb out of compacted slush. A tiny bit of wheel spin and they are locked into these cute little perfect dishes in the compacted slush shaped just like the perfectly round tires/wheels with no flex. This test is actually very flawed, as it fails to take into account HOW to employ a skinny tire setup properly. By choosing an undersized skinny tire (Smaller diameter than the rest) they did not gain any load carrying capacity compared to the other tires, so they had to run the same pressure, so they did not get any additional contact patch. They should have run a 205/65R16 or 215/60R16, and dropped the tire pressure by 5PSI (same load carrying capacity here)... and then added a real world unplowed heavy snow test.
Very interesting as usual. Another area where width (or rather aspect ratio) is hotly debated is on camper forums - people wondering if a wide tyre is more comfortable than a narrow on their VW t5/6. Looking at the pressure charts is something folk do with the wider tyres generally (not always) happy with lower pressures. But then there are discussipns around air volume and sidewall height. One owner did a video showing a road ride with the usual 205/60R16 vs 235/55 R17 but there are more variations VW Transporters/Californias can take. We need VW to lend you a California for a bit so you can test all the variations and settle this. VW campers are a huge market with keen owners groups and myself (and others) do mention you @tyrereviews in the forums sometimes 😊
That track is essiantially the best condition possible. Try to drive in half melted slush that suddently wants to make your car go straight. I have a feeling that narrower tire will be better.
I live in Ontario, Canada. Snow tires are there first to keep you from getting stuck. If conditions are bad enough that thats a concern, you have no business driving fast enough to be worried about turn in, etc. Braking is of course very important, but again in snow and ice, you need to be going slow, and braking gently and well in advance of your summer approach. One last point: if you attempt "spirited" driving on snow and ice on a regular basis, you will either wind up upside down in the ditch, or wrapped around a telephone pole.
on my tiny hatchback I went from 175s to big 205s which is the smallest in this video and in the case of small cars, the wider tire helps traction a lot compared to the tiny pizza cutters they come with.
Thanks. I'm in Norway and I go with thinner winter tires. Mainly because of the higher sidewalls and therefore more rubber. Makes for a more comfortable ride in winter, when there is a lot of bumps in the road due to ice.
Interesting. I think the theory about narrow tires is the largest benefit driving through deeper snow. The theory being that there will be less floatation with the narrow tire. Floatation when driving down a snow accumulated highway is bad news. The only time I ever left the road was driving through an unexpected snow storm driving to visit family for the holidays. Snow removal was not keeping up with accumulation, and soon the car was disconnected and floating, even driving 30 MPH on a 60 MPH highway... Though it is more difficult to test scenario, than a snow packed track. Also I can think of a benefit to snow braking with a wider tire, provided ABS doesn't interfere too much. You get the best snow braking from building up a wedge of snow in front of the tire. Wider tire = wider wedge... I'd probably do what I've always done, go to smaller steel wheels, with taller sidewall, and maybe one step reduction in width. This ends up being less expensive, than wider aspect tires anyway.
Actually a properly set up skinny tire provides more floatation than the wide tire when appropriately selected and aired... This may seem counterintuitive but this is desirable. In this test, they ran an UNDERSIZED skinny tire with the same load rating as the wide tire, so required the same air pressure to carry the load safely. No sane person would go with a smaller diameter tire for their winter tire. It's best to oversize on the diameter while stepping down on the width and wheel sizes to get the LONGEST tread patch possible. By stepping down to a smaller rim, and sizing up the diameter, we can get more load index, which generally buys about a 3-8PSI advantage in load carrying, allowing the tires to be operated at lower pressure and a larger contact patch. The tire size they SHOULD have run for this test, is a 205/65R16 or 215/60R16, which can both carry the BMW tested at 30PSI rather than the 35PSI on the door. A 255/35R19, has very poor floatation as its contact patch is very wide and short, so it "squeezes out" the snow/slush in front of the tire rather than climb the snow and gradually pack it down. A 205/65R16, operating at reduced air pressure for the same load, has fantastic floatation, as its contact patch is closer to a perfect square, and the weight transfers gradually as the tire climbs up on top and packs down a track that it can hold a grip on and continue to climb through. My OE tire size on car is a 235/40R18 XL @ 38PSI for full load and/or for high speeds, 33PSI for comfort with lower load/speeds. I run 215/60R16 @ 33-35PSI for daily driving in good weather, and air down to 30PSI front and 26PSI rear for ice/snow. On my SUV, the 315/75R16's are aired down as low as 8-10PSI for ultra deep snow, which produces a contact patch that is about 10" wide X15" long. This "climbs" on top of deep snow rather than dig down and high center.
@@mdocod While Floatation may be desirable driving low speed, in deep snow offroad, I don't think it's what you want operating on road, at higher speed. You want to squish snow out of the way and get down to the road surface. Look what Rally Drivers use for Winter Stages. They use ultra skinny pizza cutters, with width as low as 145mm!
@@peterscott2662 The rally tires aren't trying to float, they have spikes on them, they are trying to bite. Very different approach than a studdless road going tire.
@@mdocod Road drivers aren't trying to float either. It's the same thing. On the highway, you want to bite down to the road surface. Only 4x4 drivers with big fat tires going relatively slow of the beaten track, should be looking for floatation. When you are driving down a highway and hit a patch of blown snow. You want a tire that bites down, not floats, which is like hydroplaning, but on snow.
@@peterscott2662 No, it's not the same thing. A studdless tire in ANY of the sizes up for consideration here is NOT going to "bite" down to anything except when conditions are basically standing water and slush. They are all just going to interact with packed snow and ice of various types... If a 30T plow truck running on tires at 110PSI can't "bite down" to the road on packed snow how do you think a sedan is going to?
The same section width doesn't always mean equivalent tread width either - my winters have -10 mm narrower tread than my summers in the same section width - so some tires are designed narrower for different uses even if you spec the same size
Tyre width will have less effect on hard packed ice and snow. As you perfectly demonstrated. You will find more differences on slush or/and wet asphalt. Also a simular test to this only with nordic winter tyres would ve apreciated. Keep up the great content :)
Great video, a few things I'd like to see though - what pressures did you run each tyre at, and how does the performance change when you adjust the pressure? The reason tyres with tall sidewalls are popular/better offroad/snow etc is because you can run them at lower pressures than a tyre on a larger wheel with a low profile / small sidewall. And the reason skinny is better than wide when accelerating is becasue the longer footprint means the tyre "clears" its own path more effectively - say for example if the first cm or inch or whatever of the tyres footprint hasnt got optimal grip because its squishing or displacing the snow, the remaining fraction of the tyre is greater for the narrow tyre than the wide tyre. As for braking - the wider tyre is going to create more of a "bow wave", i.e. its pushing against more snow, which creates more resistance (which also makes it worse at accelerating). Another interesting point, on sand, vehicles without ABS stop better than vehicles with ABS, because of the bow wave effect mentioned earlier. It would be interesting to see if the same is true on deep snow.
I used to have a VW Fox. That thing had the skinniest tyres. When trying to climb through snow slowly preventing getting stuck it would go around half ton trucks and much larger vehicles. Was astounding how well it ran in the snow and never seems to get stuck. Lol.
Yes, light cars are a cheat for critical snow. I moved lots of time over swiss mountain roads in winter. And the old Mitsubishi colts where goats, when BMW X3's and other volvo XC's where coming back at you because they where sliddering all over the place. I guess very light weight and the engine exactly where the traction is generated, is the best way to move around.
Awesome research. I went with 225/45R17 Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5's on 7.5" wide rims for our 2019 VW GTI vs. the narrower 205/50R17 tires. I agree that getting the best tire is most important, I preferred the extra rim protection and the dry pavement handling that you will still have plenty of during winter.
It would be interesting to test the same tires on dry and wet surfaces, as many people use them 99% in these circumstances instead of on snow or ice. I personally have had smaller and narrower winter tires in the past, but nowadays I prefer sticking to the same 18" 245mm size with a performance oriented winter tire. That way I don't give up too much handling in the dry and wet compared to my summer tires.
Where I live in Maine, we get a lot of slush ridges on the roads and highways. From my personal experience, a tire that is more narrow (205 to 225) will slice through the ridge instead of be deflected or try to ride over it like a 255 or 275 would. The tire width also depends on vehicle weight as well. This experience I speak of was in a Jeep Liberty which comes with a 225 from the factory. I lifted it and put some 265 wide tires on it and the difference was very noticeable.
Nicely done! Now this was a dry conditions test in New England More often than not the roads are wet snow and slush. In these conditions you're not relying on snow on snow traction but instead on displacing wet slush and in my experience the narrower the tire the better.
this testing fits my subjective experience so well. i have narrow all seasons on my volvo and wide nokian winter tires. i felt my accelation was worse than expected for a winter tire but the handling was noticeably sharper than my narrow (and thicker sidewall) all seasons (I'm talking about dry warm conditions)
The theory of a narrow tire is so it can dig through loose snow/slush and get in contact with the pavement, where as the wide tire would float above the loose stuff and have less grip. You're basically testing on packed snow, might as well be testing on pavement and will probably have similar results.
I have 17 inch 225 summer tyres and 16 inch 205 winter tyres. I was thinking I should get 225s for winter too but now I'm sure I definitely don't need those. Thanks for the great video!
Living in Canada here, driving a RWD car, 08 Magnum with the 3.5L to be precise, wider for the win! running 235/55/18 toyo GSI5 from 2015(the best I've ever had and still with a lot of tread left, i'm about 70% worn and no crack) instead of 215/65/17, did not choose the 18" wheel but I run 235/60/17 in summer. Wider for many reason: - road are cleared and it's not snowing every hours, even if it's snowing all day long with 20cm thick fresh snow it's nothing - if it's icy, wider tire give more stability - It's better to ride over the snow than cutting through like a knife so the underneath of the car will not hit the snow and make the car floating and draging - When braking wider tire help making that buldge in the front tire to make it slow even more, one thing I do is not hammering the brake for the ABS kick in, it's even worse. I slow the tire until it barely kick in then reduce pressure until it stop then reapply just before it pulse that where the most braking happen, with experience you can hear the snow packing in front of the tire it make a special sound. Over time you know the grip you have just by hear and feel. last year the ABS did not kick in much. Ice is trickier, glass ice is the worst to judge. I have never been stuck/crash in the 8 years I own that car, driving ESP/TC off on snow bellow 50km/h and keeping around 2000RPM from 1st to 3rd, over 50 I reactivate ESP, it save me once on black ice under a bridge. I have been through a lot with it from snow storm to ice rain where my miror became horizontal ice spike to the door handle for hours of driving, my wipers arms were 5cm thick, hood was about 2cm, the windshield spray nozzle were submerge in it..
My son and I have been fitting snow tires to the family cars for roughly sixteen years. We follow the old school rule of minus one for winter tires and plus one for summer tires. In the beginning most all of the tires were mounted on steel rims, midway along most everyone had alloy summer rims and steel winter rims, but now most of us have alloy rims for both sets of tires. We have been running Nokians for our winter tires and Continentals for summer tires, Preferably DWS 06 Plus if they are available. By the way we live in Western New York.
there is probably a reason the wrc cars have super skinny snow tires. but also they have mutch worse/varrying conditions and the skinny tires probably does goes through thick snow instead of going over. great video really informational.
This is so wrong in real life, but works fine on a groomed course. With deep wet or slushy snow, wide snow tires are a handful. Drive both all winter long, in a variety of conditions and you will see the difference.
In the end any winter tire as long as its not worn out below its effectiveness will outperform any all season or summer only tire. Buy proper winter tires even the less expensive ones and put them on instead if navigating winter driving with all season or worse summer performance tires.
Nice summary. Wondering if it made a difference whether or not you allowed traction control to make a difference? I've been living in snow country for over 5 decades. The toughest roads to drive safely on are packed snow at the point where the temps have warmed to freezing or slightly above that. Sometimes water sitting on top of the compacted snow/ice. Without going into studded versus unstudded winter tires, those conditions allow me to see the biggest differences. I choose to go with a slightly narrower tire. When possible, driving a bit back and forth to utilize the areas that show a slightly better grip makes much more of a difference. Where I see the most accidents are with inconsistent surface types. A couple of well packed snow areas next to the berms of slushy or less packed snow. Crossing lanes throws in so many different forces that someone who is afraid to hit the accelerator to have the car pull you through is not obvious. I'd like to see testing done in those conditions. It would not be simple. Best wishes.
I'm running 225/45-R17 Michelin Crossclimate2 tires on my Corolla in Toronto. Previously I was using 205/55-R16 Michelin X-Ice. Here are my observations. X-Ice is slightly better on ice but snow performance is about the same (likely due to the extra floatation of the 225s). Crossclimate2 is amazing in wet conditions and pumps water and slush amazingly well giving it very good wet grip. X-Ice has ok wet grip but is still prone to hydroplaning. Dry grip is also better with the Crossclimate2s because it doesn't have much siping which can make a tire feel a bit floaty with the sipes moving about. I made the switch because I found I was only encountering severe winter weather 3-4 times a year where the X-Ice was actually useful. Every other day, traction was just ok as most of the time during winter the roads are dry or slush with some decent snowfall here and there. So I opted for the the Crossclimate2 which performs better for the majority of conditions I actually encounter and gets me through severe conditions as well (even the crazy freak storms we have once or twice a year). Wider tires are generally better for braking and cornering performance which is why opted for a slightly larger contact patch and also to compensate for the reduced siping of the Crossclimate2. So far I am very pleased with the results. I also don't have a lot of storage space so not having two sets of tires is fantastic, as is not needing to swap out twice a year. My point is, you really need to evaluate your driving conditions for the best tire for you. Just going straight to a hardcore winter tire doesn't necessarily make the most sense because they are suited for very specific road conditions (lots of snow and ice). They are not particularly amazing when road conditions are fair and clear. If you rarely see severe snow and ice and the only thing you encounter the majority of the time is dry or wet in cold temps, getting a winter rated tire with more solid/stable tread blocks (like the Crossclimate2 or another comparable tire) might actually be the safer choice overall.
Yo! Don't forget to be a tire hero and go review your tires over at www.tyrereviews.com 💖💖💖💖💖💖
It is a thread difference, smaller tires have the benefit of going through deeper snow ( much less power is needed ) You might have frosty snow ( it is painful to break icy patch with wider tires)
Rally Cars use narrower studded tyres for snow conditions. It's already a proven design.
Does tire pressure make a difference?
@@apocalypse487 depends of Snow condition. If it is powder. Doesn't matter. If it is packed or iced or in un even surfaces. Can help you get going ( the length of tire is matters not width) the more length you have the more acct as track.
I'm really disagree with your statement about the size of winter tyres! Coming from a country were we have 4 season's, mildly hot summer's and winter that lasts at least 4 months and were winter tyres are obligated by law in winter months. Winter tyres should always be two sizes narrower then summer tyres (225 in summer/205 in winter) the reason is simple, half of the time you won't get just ice or nice pressed snow surface as in your test track. Half of the time there will be melting snow slush, mixed salt/gravel and snow slush, fresh snowing snow and good luck getting any kind of grip in a 245 wide tyre, doesn't matter what brand it is,it will just float. Winter tyres are about safety on the road.
In my experience, in northern Minnesota people are much less concerned about turning and braking quickly than they are about getting stuck. I really wish you would do deep snow testing as a result. I’m sure it is difficult to find spots to get a consistent surface with 6-12 inch snow, but that is what matters to most people who have to go to work before the side roads and driveways get plowed. That is where the narrow tire would show the greatest advantage as well. I still appreciate all the in depth reviews! The best tire reviews on the planet currently.
Growing up in eastern Montana where snow plowing was iffy and rare tall narrow blocky snow tires were the bomb. Especially on ranch pickups. Deep to "deep" snow on paths and "roads" with no packed snow was the norm. Moving to northern Minnesota plowing was more reliable but we still had the problem with getting around in virgin snow before the plows hit (along with the problem of steep hills). Rear drive, rear engined or front wheel drive and front engined cars had real advantages. Again, tall narrow tires were preferred as the conventional wisdom that the tire wouldn't float but dig down to the road surface where the traction was.
This test didn't answer that question; however, the packed snow conditions probably covered the conditions most folks will find today. But if this test could be replicated in deep virgin snow it would test the extreme boundary conditions. And who doesn't like testing snow tires?! :D
Grew up in WI and ND and second this stongly. Braking performance is a luxury of those who aren't stuck and are actually moving. For many of us, we can coast to a stop on rolling/plowing resistance alone in 6" of overnight snow.
@@ronboe6325 ok so from what you are saing 125/85r13, would be better than 225/35r18? Similar wheel diameter higher sidewall?
From Montreal. Yes, smaller better in real world.😊
In Winterpeg, Manitoba, narrowest that meets the load requirements for wind blown hard deep snow drifts, smallest diameter possible for the spring pot holes
- [06:52] ❄ Narrow tires perform better in both snow and ice traction tests.
- [05:36] 🚗 Narrow tires offer better acceleration in snow but perform worse in snow braking compared to wider tires.
- [08:10] 🚘 Tire width has a minimal impact on handling and performance; tire quality matters more.
- [09:28] 🚙 Consider fitting narrower winter tires for practical reasons, like protecting larger alloy wheels, but focus on choosing a high-quality winter tire rather than worrying about width.
- [03:44] 🌧 Differences in handling and performance between narrow and wide tires are extremely small, with width making little difference in most cases.
Bro saved me 10 min, Thanks 👍
Thank you ❤
Tomas, you are a saint.
Cheers.
Doing gods work! Thanks friend
Awesome, Thank you !!
The advantages of a narrow tire show up more in "slush planing" and pushing through deeper snow.
Which helps with acceleration, but during braking actually it helps to displace more snow with the wider tires.
@@bernhardleopold6702 I would say that "slushplaining" protection is about a car staying on the road or ending up in the ditch or in the opposite line. But interesting results in breaking.
But the point he makes in the end makes total sense. People looking to narrowing or widening their tires are probably only going to go one size up or down. No one is going to go from 265 to 205.
In which case, the differences are negligible anyway.
In slush and hydroplaning 20mm width difference per tyre make a quite noticable difference.
(in my personal experience)
@@bernhardleopold6702 yea but with a 60 cm difference going from 4x 205 trying to stop to 2x 255 and 2x 275 trying to stop i'd say it's super not worth it, basic takeaway find what size is cheapest to fit on your car and go.
my car came with aftermarket rims 17" 215/45 tyre's which were a kewl 215 bucks a tyre lowest price/crappiest tyre i could find, replaced it with 15" rims 195/60R15 tyre for 62.50 a tyre yea i literally replaced my rims and tyre's with brand new stuff for what it would have cost me to put new rubber on the aftermarket rims >.< but same rule applies whatever size fits and is cheap/good go for it :P sure it's not as sporty as it was but the confort went from a 2 to a ...6.5? vast improvement in that area :P probably shoulda gone 16" for looks but worked out to 42.50 more a tyre and the rims i liked were a x2 in price over what i got :P
This test was performed in a very cold place where the snow is basically ice-gravel. My intuition is that you'd see more differences between the widths if you tested on fresher, wetter, deeper snow. For me, my main motivation for winter tires is to not get stuck in fresh snow, especially when climbing hills. I'm not all that concerned about braking and handling differences because where I live, any time there's snow on the ground you're driving slowly anyway.
Full agreed its verry important i was 225 hankook kinergy 2s) car weight 1370kg now its 195 on winter and im shock how good grip car is now.. sorry for my english. I cant believe this test how 255 its same grip on 205.. its fake or really verry ice/snow cold not wet not difference.
Absolutely. My city in Canada is avg. 0 to -10c in winter, lots of slush and fresh snow days. See lots of cars getting stuck on our steep hills and trucks with wide tires crawling on the highway as they're slushing all over the road. My van with 205/85 will go anywhere, no problem.. and they're not even snow tires, just All-Season AT. My buddy spun his 4runner into the ditch on 265/70 on packed highway and fully admits it was the tires; he went and bought narrow winters after that.
@@furieux6742 I got 225 kingergy 2s as well on my model 3, and while i was parked on grass, 5-7cm of snow almost got me stuck. Dunno what i think about that, as i got no comparison. Luckily it barely snow here anymore, thats why I went the allseason way.
Testing in deep snow is impossible : the surface is too inconsistant.
@@laurg17 by deep snow I mean 3 or 4 inches of fresh fallen snow on a flat parking lot. Ideally you'd have two identical cars side by side instead of taking the time to switch out the wheels on one test vehicle.
Definitely think the conclusions on this video was wrong, long-time viewer here and love your videos but as someone who's grown up in northern Sweden you definitely see a big difference between narrow and wide tires. On wide tires you will essentially "aquaplane" on the snow and slush.
Fair comment for sure! I wish we could test slush
@@tyrereviews Snow is most slippery near the freezing point - that's the better temperature area to target.
I live in a similar climate and can confirm that there is a sweet spot for tyre width that depends on the car (weight and its distribution is a factor) and the surface type. We mostly use studded tyres although studless are gaining popularity especially among people who mostly drive on heavily salted city roads. Studs are essential out of town where there is often sheet ice under snow.
On the whole a narrower high-profile tyre is better all round with more grip, but the higher breakaway point means that when it starts to slide you're probably in big trouble. A wider tyre tends to slip more predictably and you quickly learn to keep within its limits.
Same in Canada! but we add Deep snow, and minus temps into the minus 50's. No slushy surfaces here. just wind polished black ice.
So what tyre width are going for? Still within manufacturer recommended size or even narrower?
Thanks for doing this. Very much appreciated.
Try testing in deeper snow, so you can see how they would handle on an unplowed road, that's where the narrower tire will cut through the snow VS the wider tire riding on top of the snow. This is when you will really notice the difference (usually during a snowstorm in an urban setting the snow turns to deep slick slush and the narrower tire find's much better traction than a wider tire).
This. Compacted snow is quite rare imo in Finnish winter at least. It's like 80% of driving in "solid" surface like tarmac, ice or snow which is easy to control. But the the critical condition is the last 20% and that is like really deep snow and slush and these are the conditions where winter tyre performance is counted. Narrow tire indeed "sinks" better into hard base. Wide tyre can easily "hydroplane" on heavy snow or slush. My preference is high sidewall tyre to increase comfort and narrow to just easier to push through the surface as mentioned.
This is clear as day.
Narrover is a game changer in slush and most of the time when there is slush there are cars in the ditch.
I would like to see tire reviews test this. Also car Weight is probably a big factor.
Wider tire on a 2000kg car is not as bad as 1400kg car.
@@IV-A For sure. I had one light car that had really wide tyres for it's weight and it was downright scary in certain situations. It got much better with original tyres.
The narrow tall profile tire actually does exactly the opposite. It has a slightly narrower tread, combined with lower inflation pressures, produces a significantly longer patch (around square shape) that gradually packs, paves, and climbs over the snowpack formed by the leading edge. It is the low profile tire, with rigid reinforced sidewalls and higher inflation pressures and a very short contact patch that is incapable of engaging with the standing snow in a manner that packs and paves a path over it. The short contact patch of a low profile tire winds up "falling" through, digging its own grave, and getting stuck in a hole that it can't pack and climb its way out of.
@@mdocod not that much, cause outer diameter doesn't change that much in tires anyway, except for extreme cases. Low profile = bigger rim. High profile = smaller rim. End result doesn't change vastly on conventional tire sizes. But comfort does change. We're talking really small contact patch changes.
I've always got the smallest option as that's what I figured made the most sense. From the looks of it, the difference is negligible, but the smaller tire options are often less expensive too. I guess you could look at this way; save some money and buy the smallest option, but use some of that savings to ensure you put it towards a quality tire. That way, you are getting the best of both worlds.
Yes. Assuming, of course, that you have rims to mount them on. If not, it will equate to roughly the same or slightly more to downsize.
You shouldn't be buying the smallest option, you should be buying the tallest skinny tire on the smallest rim possible. This gives you the option to run lower air pressure and produce a longer and larger contact patch than OE. What's your OE tire/wheel size, what winter rim size do you run? I'll provide an example...
If safety is important, it's difficult to choose something else than the test winner. If the same brand wins the tests year after year, how difficult is it then to choose a "good" tire?
@@mdocod yes, by "smallest", that's what I meant. I no longer run winter tires due to the hassle and cost. I put a set of Michelin Cross Climate 2 tires on my Venza and they've been excellent. Not far off from a good winter tire.
Take a second and google winter race cars, or winter rally drivers cars, take a look at ALL of their wheels. One thing remains the same among all of them. Narrow Tires. Studded or not, depending where its legal (in the ARA / Rally America Studded tires are not legal) they are always narrow. These guys drive at the limit, in multiple million dollar cars with million dollar race teams. If there was some performance to be gained with a wider tire on the snowy tracks/courses, Dont you think they would have done it?
There are more potholes in the winter, so I always go for a smaller winter wheel rim with a taller side-walled tyre so that rim damage is less likely and for more comfort on rougher winter roads. I never deviate from the manufacturers list of approved wheel and tyre combo's for that vehicle though, I just move between the recommended sizes depending upon the season.
Totally agree. I always try to get the smallest wheel diameter / largest tire sidewall as possible as our roads are horrible. Pot holes don’t get fixed for months - well into the warmer months.
Yeah I’m with you, even in summer. On a 20” wheel, you have to go to at least a 33” tire to have enough sidewall for comfort and protection. Of course I’m talking SUVs and trucks.
Swiss guy responding there.
We always try, when possible, to opt for smaller winter wheels. This allows more sidewall and is beneficial to find this little bit of traction. Also, never over-inflate winter tires, always opt for lower recommended pressures, as it will allow the tire to flex.
@@boboutelama5748 Very often a taller profile tire on a smaller rim will also have higher load ratings, allowing the winter tire/wheel setup to carry the vehicle with lower pressures safely, which produces an even longer contact patch, which makes the whole driving experience even more predictable, and more capable in deep snow.
High side wall gives you piece of mind - curbs you don't see and the comfort. Additionally if you have 2 sets of wheel you can opt for better/more expensive tyres (my BMW needs every bit of help)
Having done several years of Ice Racing in the CASC Ice Racing Championships combined with running our Winter Driving schools for over 20 years at our iced facility and having conducted numerous tire tests, we did notice that a narrower tire has advantages in deeper snow/slush conditions. What is important to note though is any winter tire will out perform any all season tire in winter conditions. Get yourself a good quality set of winter tires. ILR Car Control School
The advantage / disadvantage actually depends on vehicle weight compared to tire size.
Personal experience from winter service while driving stuff between 400-3000 kg (small plows to heavy cars). This is especially true for the deeper snow / slush part.
Doing the Physics would agree, the additional pressure allows the dig into harder snow/slush deeper down.
All season tires are kind of stupid because they are very mediocre in summer and also very mediocre in winter. Now if you're like my 78 year old mom who basically just drives to the grocery store all year round and has the freedom to not drive when it snows or when conditions are bad - get all season tires and save some money. But for everyone else, don't do it.
@@maximilianmustermann5763 We did tire testing for Goodyear and couple of years ago and we tested their All Weather tires (not All Season) and they performed better in all seasons than an All Season but still not as well as a Winter tire in winter conditions. We would recommend the All Weather tire for someone who doesn't have storage or driver very little instead of the All Season tire. That Goodyear tire we tested is their Assurance WeatherReady tire. We liked it better than the all season in spring, summer and fall.
A narrower tire will feel less resistance when moving through thick slush or snow at speed. This could help prevent you from getting pulled in further off the road.
Going one size narrower could also save you some money on a set of tires. In my recent case, the difference was about $100 on a set of 4 from a 225 to a 215.
Weel said
I’d be interested in comparing tire pressure effect on traction, both dry and wet pavement AND snow and ice, to what vehicle manufacturers want vs what the tire manufactures want for static loaded radius. If a change that can be made for free affects performance I’m sure many would want to know.
The tire pressures are defined by regulations through the ETRTO (european tire and rim organisation). Multiple factors and formulas define the lowest pressure for the specific tire dimension, vehicle mass, maximum car velocity, camber angles etc.
Going lower that this exact pressure might be performance enhancing but not street legal as the tire supplier does not guarantee a longterm durability anymore and therefore no insurance will cover you in case of an accident.
It's on the list, I tried once on snow actually but the results were inconclusive!
@@lars_hbm While perhaps true in Canada I’ll take the smoother ride and longer tire wear, the two things I know I get, on 275/60R20 equipped Ford F-150 two person glorified grocery hauler. Take axle mass, 1600f, 1200r kg, divide by 10 for SLR proper. 160/120 kpa. Door sticker 235 kpa I believe but don’t care.
Keep in mind, pressure set by very accurate digital gauge on a cold soaked vehicle @ +15°, 20 kpa added for winter as tires cool and therefore lower pressure when actually running. Very accurate and consistent 4 tire vehicle pressure readings really help research.
@@tyrereviewsExcellent, at least it wasn’t disastrous requiring no further research lol!
@@donboles54 Vehicle tire pressures are set at max vehicle rated weight, for most cars that dosnt matter as 4 people and the trunk full is only about 1000lb diffrence vs empty+ driver, but trucks have a much bigger weight diferential between loaded and unloaded, especially on the rear axel.
My silverado 2500hd for example wants 65psi in the front and 85psi in the rear, but if i do that the rears go bald in the middle from over inflation because that pressure is designed for 5000+lbs in the bed. i've been running 55psi in the front and 45 in the rear when daily driving and then airing up to recomended when i'm actually hauling loads.
Super interesting test. Some things to consider :
1. A lot of cold areas will see a mix of conditions, sometimes snow, ice, slush, rain, wet and dry pavement. In some areas a driver can experience a combination of any of those in winter, in a single trip!
2. Though it’d be a lot of work to do all this additional testing on 4 different sets, it’d bring additional considerations for finding the best overall width for a well-rounded winter experience.
3. Without much doubt the wider tire would do better on dry and wet than narrower tires; maybe not so much in the rain (hydroplaning).
4. I’d be curious to see how studs would influence the results. Do wider tires have more studs overall? It probably varies from a model to the next depending on the design choices the manufacturers made. But if a particular model has more studs on the wider sizes, then that could very positively improve results on ice.
Thank you for all the hard work 👌
I know it's hard to test, but I would have liked to see tests in loose snow and slush.
Living in Finland I've opted for a narrower winter tyre for behaviour. With patches of ice/snow/slush between tarmac the transition from sliding a bit to not sliding is much smoother with a narrower and higher tyre. The narrower tyre might have a bit more traction in the slippery but more significantly it is not so sharp when you either loose grip or get it back.
No one ever does these tests on real world applications of wet roads with slush and black ice in patches, throw in some rain as well. They either have dry snow (which grips awesome) on a track or straight up ice which just isn't the case for everywhere.
As a Canadian I agree. If anyone knows winter tires it’s the Finns…
Then there are studded winter tyres vs just winter grip tires debate haha
Also for winter tyres 205 is not what I would call narrow. 185 would have been much more interesting, but seems like they are out of fashion.
@@LaLLi80 it's all changing. In the 80's 185 would have been considered a wide tyre.
I changed from a 265/75 R16 to a 235/85 R16, Though mainly it allowed me to open up the bump stops a little for some more steering.
Not only the best tires review in the world he also describes the feeling/feedback from the tires and you can tell he really likes to drive like an entusiast. This is very important for dynamic reviews.
If you drive in a gated area, you can slide around. That's why they make tracks on the lakes in the wintertime!.
The 2x rally world champion, Kalle Rovanperä, was sliding around on ice tracks with a Toyota Starlet when he was 8 years old!
No it's not the best! Swedish car magazines do much better tests.
@@stefankarlsson8215 I can tell you for sure they are one of the worst recommendations. I live in Sweden ;)
Haha!ha You're so wrong!
@@stefankarlsson8215 I always looked for inspiring driving cars. I followed Swedish tire recommendations for 3 seasons and every time i get a boring driving car. I switched to german and other continental recommendations and suddenly all my cars was funny to drive again. No more understeer and the feedback from the road come back to life. So mr Hahaha I think you are stuck in the boring Trafikmagasinet era. Sorry for that last one ;)
Great insights. So, in a Central European setting, with maybe 10-20% time driving the winter tyres in snow, wider/larger tyres are better, as they will perform better in dry/rain.
In cases where its snowslush on asphalt roads, which is pretty common here i definitely prefer narrow tyres for traction up hills , or just slushplaning at speed (if i can call it that :)) etc, specially in a lighter car. Great test anyway!
as you mentioned near the end, going with as small a diameter wheel for your winter tires makes sense, since roads are going to be be in poorer shape overall, leading to a higher probability of damaging a large diameter wheel. also, the tires should be a bit cheaper as well, potentially even the cost of one entire tire cheaper.
And, as someone above said, you could use that financial saving to buy better tyres.
For most people that live in winter climate the reality is that snowy roads eventually get plowed. I would say more than 80% of the time we are on asphalt or partially covered asphalt, extremely cold asphalt but nevertheless it would have been nice to cover the handling on asphalt as well. Or it would be nice to see a video comparing efficiency of different type of tires on -20c asphalt. Just a suggestion, love your videos keep up the good work.
Really good point!
If you're buying tires for the best case or average conditions, then you're missing the point.
@@mdocod I'm buying winter tires for the types of situations that I will mostly encounter in winter. That's not "average conditions", it's based on experience in my area. I usually encounter cold, wet roads. Sometimes a little slushy, sometimes a little icy, but 95% it's going to be cold and wet (and salty...). So if one winter tire is great in deep snow and packed snow but average on wet roads, it's not going to be my first choice. You have to make some compromises, no ordinary person can have 4 different sets of wheels at home and quickly change to the other set when there's unusual conditions like 1 day of the year.
@@maximilianmustermann5763 The point, is that you could pick the worst performing tire in the wet of all tires on the market, and you'll still have more traction in the wet than you will on ice with the best performing ice tire available. If you're buying a set of tires for year-round use, then it's going to be a compromise no matter what, but compromising dry and wet performance is not as big of a deal as compromising ice performance, because ice is the situation that a bad tire choice will actually put you in the ditch wrong side up, whereas a lousy choice for any of those other conditions isn't going to cause that unless you're driving way over the speed limit recklessly.
I’d love to see a test of winter tires in fresh deep snow (6-12 inches). I know it’d likely be hard to set up, but I think it would provide useful information. If you are able to make it happen then it’d be cool to add in a narrow vs wide tire into that testing pool. I feel like it’ll have more of a difference in that environment.
I would guess that AT tires wins that test.
@@dubious6718an AT tire will ALWAYS lose to a dedicated winter tire in any winter condition. aT tires are garbage in snow.
Any tire with big studs/tread will give you an advantage in deep snow. That's obvious.
In my experience, driving in Vermont and Utah winter here in the USA, width does not matter much. I’ve run from 235 to a 275 on my truck always Blizzaks. The big variable in the real world is the snow temperature, snow depth, road surface under the snow, etc. Any difference from the width is washed out by how bloody variable winter conditions are. I knew a mechanic who’s family raced in an ice league in Vermont (on frozen lakes) and he told me that “surface pressure” only mattered for the deep spiked tires. Modern studless winter tires are so good that you just don’t notice much difference through the noise of “that bit of road had some salt thrown on it” versus “that bit was in the shade and was 5 degrees colder”.
This is nice to know. That said I will always favor narrower and more side wall option for winters (within reason) because of trivial situations when there are slushy and non-plowed roads. There cutting the layer is important, as well as all the traction you can get to keep you moving! There is a reason why rally cars use very narrow tyres for soft surfaces like gravel and snow! :) +narrower tyres are way cheaper in winters! Greets from Finland
One major thing to consider is that most days are not snowy nor icy suring the winter, at least where I live in Canada. So you end up driving on cold tarmac, which I imagine would favor a wider tire. I guess not going to the extremes is the way to go
Driving sensibly solves 95% of issues on the road.
I have been reading a couple of tests on winter tires recently. I live in Germany and most of the time in winter we'll have cold, wet roads. Sometimes salty slush, sometimes a little ice. There's just like two times in the last 15 years or so where I can remember actually driving on a bed of fresh snow. So the tests here also focus a lot on cold, wet roads. Some winter tires are fantastic on snow, but they are just very mediocre at braking on wet roads. Others are the opposite. I ended up buying a Continental Winter Contact which is supposed to be really good on cold, wet roads and pretty good on snow as well.
I also live in Canada and can say that you are a complete dilettante in driving. as black ice appears and a bunch of cars lie in the ditches.
Yes, you did it again! Nice job.
You are absolutely correct, for the regular road there is no difference in perfect conditions.
But, when the roads are bad, when there are a lot of pot holes, and you can't see the curb then the bigger sidewall makes a difference.
I always thought the more narrow tire was significantly better for driving in snow. I've been educated now lol. Love these videos.
Take this test with a grain of salt as its in very specific conditions that most places don't get. The real test should be on ashphalt - wet, slush mix, occassional black ice. That is the most normal and most dangerous type of conditions in winter almost everywhere. Dry snow is extremely grippy.
This test compares an UNDERSIZED skinny tire (smaller diameter), with no load index advantages to the low profile tires, so it has to be operated at the same pressure, which means it has the same contact patch size as the other tires, so not much advantage. A 205/65R16 or 215/60R16 at 30PSI would be the appropriate tire sizes (and pressures) for this test, not the 205/60R16 @ 35PSI.
I just love how it came down to the conclusion I had after driving Hankook in winter and switching to Kleber.. I got my E46 320D Touring for 14 years now, drove Hankook 205/55r16 through several winters, but Kleber had a slightly cheaper option in 2019. Well as the Krisalp HP3 only works really well in under 0 Celsius it really shows its age after being 3 years old, and last winter (January 2024) in deep snow it was nearly undriveable.. Whereas Hankook I used throughout the 6-7 years of it's lifetime without any hiccups..
Big sidewalls are just great for comfort and better fuel economy
..and less likely to have snow inside your rims, which unbalances them.
Also better for peace of mind. I damaged my 1 year old around 10k km CC2 205/40 17 a week ago in pothole, tyre got bump on sidewall, rim lost paint in impact zone and get little dent i think. Tomorrow I'm going to replace the tire and check the rim
@jamakasis18 yes I remember that back in 2011 or 2012, big wheels of snow
@Foton410 councils might have the money for repairs but don't have capacity for road repairs anymore.
I'm a bit confused. Are you talking about racing in the snow? Lap times drifting around a hard packed track?
This is nothing like winter driving we see around here. Where's the slush, the deep snow drifts, the ice patches, the pot holes, the plow piles, the lane ruts, the ice ledges?
Narrow tires let you dig in and cut through, wide tires let you float over, but what you're testing on is just dry packed level road. Any tire with some tread left is fine for that.
Personally I always go with aggressive wide mud tires. They work for me on everything but smooth ice, but nothing works well there.
Test in deep snow could tell much more about the width
We have been spoiled by Tyre Review's consistent excellence. Another very fine review!
Great test conclusion! The data and test you provide here are outstanding! Thank you for your Work Jonathan!
Should run a similar test in Deep Snow conditions. 12" or more of Snow depth. and add some hill climbs / grades were you start from standstill.
Use a car that allows you turn off all the Traction and Stability controls.
What is better for getting up the Hill. All the Aids on, or All the Aids off?
I think you will find that Narrow "pizza cutter" tires do better in deep snow with the driving aids turned off.
It feels to me that the difference between the lateral acceleration and braking test might have been affected by the 2 wheel drive force on acceleration and 4 wheel braking force on deacceleration. To get a base line an all wheel drive test would be a create addition to this test. Either way I love these experiments / reviews and it's super easy for arm chair pundits to point stuff out afterward!
True, but my RWD car isn't helped by AWD testing for the same reason. This was very helpful to me. (Sorry)
Just like driving in sand, under braking a certain amount of snow is pushed up in front of the tire. With a wider tire the amount of snow pushed up in front of the tire also increases, helping the car to slow down. Under acceleration there is no build up. Hence the narrow tire performs better due to the higher pressure delivering more bite and the wider tire have better break performance due to the broader heap in front of the tire
@@afrikees I think you were spot on. I was thinking the same thing and went looking for a comment were someone else pointed this out first.
Imho opposite result of traction vs braking might be from rally-ish building up small snow packed snow in front of tire on braking .. which is wider on wider tire (even with ABS deblocking from time to time), but it isn't a case for traction, where actual grip of narrower tire may work a bit better.
I wish I'd tried without abs to test that!
In my experience driving and ice racing in Canada the narrow tire definitely performs better in deep snow..and this video confirms the ice performance 👌🏾
naturally - a wide board will float on the snow much longer than a very narrow one
But... Does it matter if you have studded tires? Not sure of the rules, but I believe the amount of studs is the same on a narrow or wide tire. Would they dig in better if pressure is higher (narrower tire)?
I've always been one for smaller rings size and larger side wall for winters which normally means a slightly narrower tyre too.
Mainly for protecting the wheel and if you really need to you can lower the psi to give a bigger contact patch if needed and have more supple side walls.
Have you thought about doing this test but using different psi settings on the same tyres?
the reason why the small tire did worse in braking honestly is probably the tire pattern, the way it's angled pushes snow/water etc. out while accelerating (it had good results in this field) but during braking might, it might essentially pile up the snow to the middle, kind of like mounting the tire in reverse, thats my thoughts atleast
I wonder, if the results for acceleration and braking for 205mm will reverse with backwards mounted wheels (incorrectly). 🤔
Damn I should have tried that
I bought these Winter tires for my Porsche. 265/40/21 R, 295/35/21 F - Great video, can't wait to try them in the snow!
This is a great test that confirms my experience with having winter tires that are exactly the same size as the summer tires.
Wished I had these results three weeks ago when I ordered new wheels and tires for winter season in the Alps - would have prevented sleepless nights. Finally decided for broad tires on 19" for sake of style. But I was really worried that they might be much worse than smaller tires on 17". Thanks for this great test like always.
Great test Jonathan, well done for doing this one! I have always tended to fit narrower tyres, mainly to have a higher sidewall for general winter use and better performance in slush. I use the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 in 225 width on all four wheels of my BMW, and they are an extemely good winter tyre - and one of the few winters with an ‘A’ wet weather rating. I have driven them extensively on snow-covered roads in Scotland and in the Alps. The other benefit of a narrower winter tyre, is actually better aquaplaning performance on rain-soaked motorways.
This may be an ad for Hankook, but I took his recommendation last year and currently, there's no better overall winter shoe for any car than the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
Other considerations should also be the weights of the tire (and wheels) and how much of that weight is coming from the tread too.
Rally on snow stages happen exclusively on narrow tyres as far as I'm concerned. If narrow is picked in winter motorsports then that's all I need to know.
WRC tires are almost more studs than rubber. Much bigger studs too as they don't care about road damage. Completely different design, application and requirements. Obviously, they have their reasons for going narrow, but I don't think we can just assume that under normal driving with consumer tires that narrow is always better. This video being proof of that.
@@RicHSAD2 you can install studs in any tyre. Would be interesting to hear why they went narrow. Probably it has nothing to do with the traction aids, but that's just my two cents.
My guess would be that when the car hits a snow bank or a deeper area, the narrower it is the less drag the car will see that could upset it or spin it.
Went from 205 to 195 on my mom's Corolla for the winter setup, the 195 is OE on the base trim below hers so I was able to buy factory steel wheels one size narrower. I had a 02 Legacy with 205/55/16 which was narrow for a OE size for how heavy those cars are, and it was incredible in snow with cheap all season tires. Keeping in mind car weight and tire width I feel is very important when considering snow traction.
Agreed. Its soo much important. 185 its fine to 1200kg. 195 its fine to 1200-1350 205 1350-1500- 215 1550-1700- 225 1650-1800 about. I drive a bus 195 2.2tons and crazy how grip it is... better small tire than other
Great video, I always thought narrower was better, interesting that tire quality is the bigger choice.
Excellent review! I had that question, but you came with the right answer: it's not about the wide of the tire but instead what is important its the good traction of the tire.
I wonder how much of the narrower tire's braking advantage was just lower inertia from reduced weight vs actual grip improvement.
ooo interesting point
In winter, it is always wise to choose a narrow tire. Today's cars have winter tires that are far too wide.
The problem with this test is that it was done on packed snow and ice. Narrower tires should be better in loose snow.
How many times do most cars drive in loose snow?
@@HetwordtweerzomerIn many areas, you may end up driving on fresh powder before the snow plows come through. It’s happened to me many times. As long as it’s only a few inches deep, I’ve actually found it to be much easier to drive on than the plowed roads… which I think lends credibility to doing the tests on a packed / plowed surface, as that is more slippery.
@@Hetwordtweerzomer First snowfall or when snow melts during the day and then accumulates over night. Or when you try driving on some road nobody else drove on yet since it snowed.
What difference does running a square vs staggered tire setup do in winter????
I'm strangely interested in this. Seeing all those WRC cars on these small tires going all out on snow stages.
They've got spikes and a very different use case. They also have a regulation width limit (as well as regulations on spikes per cm of circumference).
Yeah wrc cars are not a great example to follow - their tires are extremely studded.
Well to explain the smoother transition into oversteer on the 275, staggered setups always reduce oversteer. And inconsistency with braking on 205 is simply that it's a different tire. Could that it be all there is to it? You definitely proved that this factor hardly matters. I was really excited to see this kind of test pop up in my subs!
That is interesting results. I would have imagined the narrower would have had a large margin of success compared to wider counterparts. As always good info!
Excellent advice as always. My view has always been that the quality of tyre fitted would be more beneficial than worrying about actual wheel size. No difference whether summer or winter just get a really good bit of rubber on all corners of the car and you won’t go wrong,
Very thorough testing! (and not that surprising results except for a few tings).
But what i think people should keep in mind is that if they aren't driving on snow there are other differences too:
In the dry, the wider tyre will be better in traction and braking and cornering, and in the wet it most likely will too.
But the narrower tyre will be better in hydroplaning and in slush. And here 20mm in width per tyre can make quite the difference.
And lastely the narrower tyre will cost less.
(sadly, something people often are more concerned than with performance, even though hitting something and the repair afterwards cost more than a set of premium tyres.)
So someone could buy a good winter tyre in a smaller dimension for equal money as if buying a shitty tyre in a bigger dimension.
Another great review. My summer tyres are 235/40/R18 on a Focus ST. My bias for winter tyres is towards a narrower taller fitment on one size smaller rim diameter, and same circumference as the stock tyres. These are cheaper than the full sized alternative, but that's a side benefit. The best argument I can muster for this setup is that the taller side-walls provide better compliance for the tread and better grip in that uneven surface situation which what you get with hard packed snow on Calgary streets where I drive. Hard packed snow and snow with ice underneath are the conditions that concern me most.
We generally don't get so much ice in Calgary. It's normally either very cold packed snow, fresh looser snow, or just plain salted standing water. There may be ice on the residential streets but I'm sure you know if you go fast enough for that to be a risk you've successfully halved the life of your struts. Having said that yes, for two of those any good set of tires helps.
Fascinating! My takeaway here is that, since tyre sizes vary in terms of popularity and price, it makes sense to shop around to get the best tyre you can afford in any size that fits your car. Example: My old BMW 1 series came with 205/50R17, but I'm on 205/55R16 (also within spec) in the winter (cheaper -- €140 vs €190 per one Michelin X-ice North 4) and either 215/45R17 or 225/45R17 (neither size recommended by BMW for the front axle) in the summer (better selection, including one or two UUHP options, none of which were available in my size last I checked; also wildly cheaper -- €97 vs €173 per one Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6).
The 205 size they tested was under-size diameter wise and had no advantage in load index compared to the 255, so had to run the same pressures to hold the weight of the car safely. Had they tested a proper 215/60R16 or 205/65R16 aired down about 5PSI below the door sticker, the skinny tires would have run away with all of these tests AND provides the car far more real-world advantages in deep snow and slush, as the tires contact patch acts more like a track, able to climb the problem rather than dig out a perfect little grave for itself.
@@mdocod Sorry, what exactly in my comment are you responding to?
I think it depends on what surface you drive on. Rather than the hard pack you are testing on here, I drive on pavement that gets snowed on. Some times the plows get it taken care of before I need to be in the road but most of the time they dont. I prefer a narrower tire to punch through the couple inches if fresh snow and get down to the pavement vs the wider tire that would want to float on top. I think your hard pack tests are totally different than how mow people drive.
I went for a more narrow tire for winter because it gives me more sidewall and thus more comfort and relaxing driving, which improves safety in a non-obvious way. And yeah, no potholes or just holes are dangerous enough while driving pleasure I can get with far better summer.
Need help.
Does anyone from Europe heard or use 16" winter tires from brands like Altenzo, Belshina, Apollo, Comforser, Cordiant, Kelly, Kingstar, Laufen, Linglong, Petlas, Rockblade, Sailun, Starfire, Starmax, Triangle, Viking ???
Something very strange on the tire market that i wasn't aware until this year. There is not a single test or review of those brands.
Prices from A brands are now very expensive from 80-110 euros but those brands are now flood the market with almost the same prices 50-55 euros for 205 55 R16 size.
Any advice?
I used to be convinced narrower tires were a must for winter. But when I got my current car with 225/40/18 in the front and 255/35/18 in the back I decided to just get winters and stick with the same set of wheels until I find a good second pair. I got Michelin Pilot Alpin 4's and my subjective feeling was that width made no significant difference. Great to see it backed up with actual testing.
Glad we match :)
Yeah, I used to love the extra comfort going down a size (in width and sidewall height) but it also meant more mushy turn in and less grip on dry and wet roads.
Nowadays I stick to the same size so the handling changes much less (although I am on a sporty winter tire -michelin pilot alpin- and a much less sporty summer tire -michelin primacy 4-)
@@helldogbe4077 Pretty much the same for me. I also found I prefer to keep the sportier feeling vs the extra comfort of the thicker sidewall. And actually in a similar situation with my tire setup. I was on hankook s1 evo 3's for summers and pilot alpins for winters. Whilst the hankook is technically a more sporty tire than your primacy I can't really call it a UHP tire at least not on subjective feel. It has loads of grip but steering feel isnt great. So I also see little to no change from summers to winters. But I'm due for new summers next year and planning to try the f1 assymetrics
Other people have already made my point. The missing test, and most valuable in my opinion, would have been in fresh snow or slush, not on impacted snow.
Keep up the good work!
06:40 and after. If you used speedo in car for this test, no surprise the narrow tire (also smallest diameter) will win, when speedo reads more than actual car speed, thus taking shorter time. With the widest (more important biggest diameter) tyre, speedo will show less than actual speed, thus taking longer for the speedo to reach for example 60... Its hard to explain in a comment ...
To say it better, if you don’t recalibrate the speedometer before each test if the diameter of the tire changes and your using the speedometer as your speed reference, the data will be inaccurate. The more accurate way would be to use a gps or other speedometer style that is not dependent on tire size.
@@byronhaley1566yes, thanks.
this is my limited and 100% uncientiffic view on the winter tire matter.
on a hard packed snow surface is there very little difference between a wide and narrow winter tire, I personally feel a little bit safer with a narrower tire because it feels like it gives me as the driver a little bit more time to react but all in all, a very small difference.
the big difference comes when there is a layer of loose snow on the ground, the narrower tire really cuts through the snow and finds grip in the hard packed below in a way the wider tire doesn't. I personally feel like a 225 tire is about the best size for a winter tire, it is a bit wider so it is better on roads without snow on them whilst also cutting through the soft snow fairly well.
and the optimal rim size in my eyes and on my cars are 17" both summer and winter. it offeres a nice direct feel without starting to become punishing on long rides, this is especially true for my lowered hatchback on performance coilovers. 16" wich is the smallest that fit around my brakes are a bit too vague when it comes to turn in, 17" are really direct but still with compliance and 18" takes my already not that comfortable car and makes it a whole difference level on the uncomfortability scale without offering that much more direct steering feel.
Great test, I like your methodology and analysis, but what this is really missing is deep snow. If width makes a significant difference, I expect it to be in much deeper snow than this.
Good to know thinner tires can cut through snow easier and I also get the smallest rims possibly for the protection against potholes.
Great video! I would really like to see a test that compares tire efficiency on the dry street for different widths. Does a narrow tire automatically mean better efficiency?
Yes less rolling resistance... But also less grip so more dangerous
Narrower tyres also have less aerodynamic resistance, less (unsprung) weight, are better at hydroplaning and in slush and cost less.
They are a little"worse" in dry and wet performance though than the same tyre in a wider format.
Brilliant video again. I just bought smaller 17" wheels with winters on to replace the summer 19" ultra low profile tyres. Good to know that width doesn't make a massive difference, but as you said, the key idea is to protect the wheels and have that extra side wall there for the potholes, mud and what not that a British B-Road throw at us every winter!
For my Porsche Cayenne S, I followed the OEM sizes of 285/40/22 Front and 315/25-22 Rear. I figured the ultimate ice and snow traction might be lower than going with a narrower setup, but the trade off would be better handling in the dry/wet where the car will spend the majority of it's time anyway. After seeing this review, it seems even the ice/snow handling won't be very different anyway, so I'm very happy with my choice now!
Ever been stuck on dry pavement? Are you driving around corners so fast in the dry on public roads that you need that much lateral grip in the dry? Anything you could do that would find the limit of traction on those tires on dry pavement would be a spend-the-night-in-jail sort of traffic offense.
On the other hand, I see sport SUV's with low profile's stuck all the time in the heavy slushy stuff. They dig their own grave with no sidewall flex to climb out of compacted slush. A tiny bit of wheel spin and they are locked into these cute little perfect dishes in the compacted slush shaped just like the perfectly round tires/wheels with no flex.
This test is actually very flawed, as it fails to take into account HOW to employ a skinny tire setup properly. By choosing an undersized skinny tire (Smaller diameter than the rest) they did not gain any load carrying capacity compared to the other tires, so they had to run the same pressure, so they did not get any additional contact patch. They should have run a 205/65R16 or 215/60R16, and dropped the tire pressure by 5PSI (same load carrying capacity here)... and then added a real world unplowed heavy snow test.
you have terrible tire size. wide tires are needed for lateral turns and that's all.
Very interesting as usual. Another area where width (or rather aspect ratio) is hotly debated is on camper forums - people wondering if a wide tyre is more comfortable than a narrow on their VW t5/6. Looking at the pressure charts is something folk do with the wider tyres generally (not always) happy with lower pressures. But then there are discussipns around air volume and sidewall height. One owner did a video showing a road ride with the usual 205/60R16 vs 235/55 R17 but there are more variations VW Transporters/Californias can take.
We need VW to lend you a California for a bit so you can test all the variations and settle this. VW campers are a huge market with keen owners groups and myself (and others) do mention you @tyrereviews in the forums sometimes 😊
That track is essiantially the best condition possible.
Try to drive in half melted slush that suddently wants to make your car go straight. I have a feeling that narrower tire will be better.
I live in Ontario, Canada. Snow tires are there first to keep you from getting stuck. If conditions are bad enough that thats a concern, you have no business driving fast enough to be worried about turn in, etc. Braking is of course very important, but again in snow and ice, you need to be going slow, and braking gently and well in advance of your summer approach. One last point: if you attempt "spirited" driving on snow and ice on a regular basis, you will either wind up upside down in the ditch, or wrapped around a telephone pole.
on my tiny hatchback I went from 175s to big 205s which is the smallest in this video and in the case of small cars, the wider tire helps traction a lot compared to the tiny pizza cutters they come with.
But what kind of brand and quality did you swap to? Also how old was your 175s, age matter a lot with tyres as they harden
@@AlbionSupreme I'm comparing all brand new Hakkapeliitta's. 205s are much more stable in any weather compared to the 175s.
@@Motorsportsgeek Cool, thanks. That's good info
Thanks. I'm in Norway and I go with thinner winter tires. Mainly because of the higher sidewalls and therefore more rubber. Makes for a more comfortable ride in winter, when there is a lot of bumps in the road due to ice.
Interesting. I think the theory about narrow tires is the largest benefit driving through deeper snow. The theory being that there will be less floatation with the narrow tire. Floatation when driving down a snow accumulated highway is bad news. The only time I ever left the road was driving through an unexpected snow storm driving to visit family for the holidays. Snow removal was not keeping up with accumulation, and soon the car was disconnected and floating, even driving 30 MPH on a 60 MPH highway... Though it is more difficult to test scenario, than a snow packed track.
Also I can think of a benefit to snow braking with a wider tire, provided ABS doesn't interfere too much. You get the best snow braking from building up a wedge of snow in front of the tire. Wider tire = wider wedge...
I'd probably do what I've always done, go to smaller steel wheels, with taller sidewall, and maybe one step reduction in width. This ends up being less expensive, than wider aspect tires anyway.
Actually a properly set up skinny tire provides more floatation than the wide tire when appropriately selected and aired... This may seem counterintuitive but this is desirable.
In this test, they ran an UNDERSIZED skinny tire with the same load rating as the wide tire, so required the same air pressure to carry the load safely. No sane person would go with a smaller diameter tire for their winter tire. It's best to oversize on the diameter while stepping down on the width and wheel sizes to get the LONGEST tread patch possible.
By stepping down to a smaller rim, and sizing up the diameter, we can get more load index, which generally buys about a 3-8PSI advantage in load carrying, allowing the tires to be operated at lower pressure and a larger contact patch. The tire size they SHOULD have run for this test, is a 205/65R16 or 215/60R16, which can both carry the BMW tested at 30PSI rather than the 35PSI on the door.
A 255/35R19, has very poor floatation as its contact patch is very wide and short, so it "squeezes out" the snow/slush in front of the tire rather than climb the snow and gradually pack it down. A 205/65R16, operating at reduced air pressure for the same load, has fantastic floatation, as its contact patch is closer to a perfect square, and the weight transfers gradually as the tire climbs up on top and packs down a track that it can hold a grip on and continue to climb through.
My OE tire size on car is a 235/40R18 XL @ 38PSI for full load and/or for high speeds, 33PSI for comfort with lower load/speeds. I run 215/60R16 @ 33-35PSI for daily driving in good weather, and air down to 30PSI front and 26PSI rear for ice/snow. On my SUV, the 315/75R16's are aired down as low as 8-10PSI for ultra deep snow, which produces a contact patch that is about 10" wide X15" long. This "climbs" on top of deep snow rather than dig down and high center.
@@mdocod While Floatation may be desirable driving low speed, in deep snow offroad, I don't think it's what you want operating on road, at higher speed. You want to squish snow out of the way and get down to the road surface.
Look what Rally Drivers use for Winter Stages. They use ultra skinny pizza cutters, with width as low as 145mm!
@@peterscott2662 The rally tires aren't trying to float, they have spikes on them, they are trying to bite. Very different approach than a studdless road going tire.
@@mdocod Road drivers aren't trying to float either. It's the same thing. On the highway, you want to bite down to the road surface. Only 4x4 drivers with big fat tires going relatively slow of the beaten track, should be looking for floatation.
When you are driving down a highway and hit a patch of blown snow. You want a tire that bites down, not floats, which is like hydroplaning, but on snow.
@@peterscott2662 No, it's not the same thing. A studdless tire in ANY of the sizes up for consideration here is NOT going to "bite" down to anything except when conditions are basically standing water and slush. They are all just going to interact with packed snow and ice of various types... If a 30T plow truck running on tires at 110PSI can't "bite down" to the road on packed snow how do you think a sedan is going to?
The same section width doesn't always mean equivalent tread width either - my winters have -10 mm narrower tread than my summers in the same section width - so some tires are designed narrower for different uses even if you spec the same size
Any chance your winter is a michelin?
@@tyrereviews Nope - winter is a Nokian Nordman 7 and summer is a Michelin Defender
Tyre width will have less effect on hard packed ice and snow. As you perfectly demonstrated. You will find more differences on slush or/and wet asphalt.
Also a simular test to this only with nordic winter tyres would ve apreciated. Keep up the great content :)
Great video, a few things I'd like to see though - what pressures did you run each tyre at, and how does the performance change when you adjust the pressure?
The reason tyres with tall sidewalls are popular/better offroad/snow etc is because you can run them at lower pressures than a tyre on a larger wheel with a low profile / small sidewall. And the reason skinny is better than wide when accelerating is becasue the longer footprint means the tyre "clears" its own path more effectively - say for example if the first cm or inch or whatever of the tyres footprint hasnt got optimal grip because its squishing or displacing the snow, the remaining fraction of the tyre is greater for the narrow tyre than the wide tyre.
As for braking - the wider tyre is going to create more of a "bow wave", i.e. its pushing against more snow, which creates more resistance (which also makes it worse at accelerating).
Another interesting point, on sand, vehicles without ABS stop better than vehicles with ABS, because of the bow wave effect mentioned earlier. It would be interesting to see if the same is true on deep snow.
I used to have a VW Fox. That thing had the skinniest tyres. When trying to climb through snow slowly preventing getting stuck it would go around half ton trucks and much larger vehicles. Was astounding how well it ran in the snow and never seems to get stuck. Lol.
Yes, light cars are a cheat for critical snow.
I moved lots of time over swiss mountain roads in winter. And the old Mitsubishi colts where goats, when BMW X3's and other volvo XC's where coming back at you because they where sliddering all over the place.
I guess very light weight and the engine exactly where the traction is generated, is the best way to move around.
Awesome research. I went with 225/45R17 Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5's on 7.5" wide rims for our 2019 VW GTI vs. the narrower 205/50R17 tires. I agree that getting the best tire is most important, I preferred the extra rim protection and the dry pavement handling that you will still have plenty of during winter.
It would be interesting to test the same tires on dry and wet surfaces, as many people use them 99% in these circumstances instead of on snow or ice.
I personally have had smaller and narrower winter tires in the past, but nowadays I prefer sticking to the same 18" 245mm size with a performance oriented winter tire. That way I don't give up too much handling in the dry and wet compared to my summer tires.
Where I live in Maine, we get a lot of slush ridges on the roads and highways. From my personal experience, a tire that is more narrow (205 to 225) will slice through the ridge instead of be deflected or try to ride over it like a 255 or 275 would. The tire width also depends on vehicle weight as well. This experience I speak of was in a Jeep Liberty which comes with a 225 from the factory. I lifted it and put some 265 wide tires on it and the difference was very noticeable.
4:30 "play gracefully with the rear which i throughly enjoyed"
Don't knock it until you've tried it
Nicely done! Now this was a dry conditions test in New England More often than not the roads are wet snow and slush. In these conditions you're not relying on snow on snow traction but instead on displacing wet slush and in my experience the narrower the tire the better.
this testing fits my subjective experience so well. i have narrow all seasons on my volvo and wide nokian winter tires. i felt my accelation was worse than expected for a winter tire but the handling was noticeably sharper than my narrow (and thicker sidewall) all seasons (I'm talking about dry warm conditions)
The theory of a narrow tire is so it can dig through loose snow/slush and get in contact with the pavement, where as the wide tire would float above the loose stuff and have less grip. You're basically testing on packed snow, might as well be testing on pavement and will probably have similar results.
I have 17 inch 225 summer tyres and 16 inch 205 winter tyres. I was thinking I should get 225s for winter too but now I'm sure I definitely don't need those. Thanks for the great video!
I was hoping you would do a test in deeper snow to see what vehicle gets further before getting stuck, but still a good video!
the wider the bumps on the tread, the longer the ride will be but it will be similarly worse on ice
Living in Canada here, driving a RWD car, 08 Magnum with the 3.5L to be precise, wider for the win! running 235/55/18 toyo GSI5 from 2015(the best I've ever had and still with a lot of tread left, i'm about 70% worn and no crack) instead of 215/65/17, did not choose the 18" wheel but I run 235/60/17 in summer. Wider for many reason:
- road are cleared and it's not snowing every hours, even if it's snowing all day long with 20cm thick fresh snow it's nothing
- if it's icy, wider tire give more stability
- It's better to ride over the snow than cutting through like a knife so the underneath of the car will not hit the snow and make the car floating and draging
- When braking wider tire help making that buldge in the front tire to make it slow even more, one thing I do is not hammering the brake for the ABS kick in, it's even worse. I slow the tire until it barely kick in then reduce pressure until it stop then reapply just before it pulse that where the most braking happen, with experience you can hear the snow packing in front of the tire it make a special sound. Over time you know the grip you have just by hear and feel. last year the ABS did not kick in much. Ice is trickier, glass ice is the worst to judge.
I have never been stuck/crash in the 8 years I own that car, driving ESP/TC off on snow bellow 50km/h and keeping around 2000RPM from 1st to 3rd, over 50 I reactivate ESP, it save me once on black ice under a bridge. I have been through a lot with it from snow storm to ice rain where my miror became horizontal ice spike to the door handle for hours of driving, my wipers arms were 5cm thick, hood was about 2cm, the windshield spray nozzle were submerge in it..
My son and I have been fitting snow tires to the family cars for roughly sixteen years. We follow the old school rule of minus one for winter tires and plus one for summer tires. In the beginning most all of the tires were mounted on steel rims, midway along most everyone had alloy summer rims and steel winter rims, but now most of us have alloy rims for both sets of tires. We have been running Nokians for our winter tires and Continentals for summer tires, Preferably DWS 06 Plus if they are available. By the way we live in Western New York.
there is probably a reason the wrc cars have super skinny snow tires. but also they have mutch worse/varrying conditions and the skinny tires probably does goes through thick snow instead of going over. great video really informational.
Very eye-opening. And I would really like to see this same test with summer tyres in heavy rain!
Proper test. It gives us a clue to work with. A starting point to adapt in our local winter conditions.
I like that term 'starting point', I might have to steal that in the future!
This is so wrong in real life, but works fine on a groomed course.
With deep wet or slushy snow, wide snow tires are a handful.
Drive both all winter long, in a variety of conditions and you will see the difference.
In the end any winter tire as long as its not worn out below its effectiveness will outperform any all season or summer only tire.
Buy proper winter tires even the less expensive ones and put them on instead if navigating winter driving with all season or worse summer performance tires.
Nice summary. Wondering if it made a difference whether or not you allowed traction control to make a difference? I've been living in snow country for over 5 decades. The toughest roads to drive safely on are packed snow at the point where the temps have warmed to freezing or slightly above that. Sometimes water sitting on top of the compacted snow/ice. Without going into studded versus unstudded winter tires, those conditions allow me to see the biggest differences. I choose to go with a slightly narrower tire. When possible, driving a bit back and forth to utilize the areas that show a slightly better grip makes much more of a difference. Where I see the most accidents are with inconsistent surface types. A couple of well packed snow areas next to the berms of slushy or less packed snow. Crossing lanes throws in so many different forces that someone who is afraid to hit the accelerator to have the car pull you through is not obvious. I'd like to see testing done in those conditions. It would not be simple. Best wishes.
I'm running 225/45-R17 Michelin Crossclimate2 tires on my Corolla in Toronto. Previously I was using 205/55-R16 Michelin X-Ice. Here are my observations. X-Ice is slightly better on ice but snow performance is about the same (likely due to the extra floatation of the 225s). Crossclimate2 is amazing in wet conditions and pumps water and slush amazingly well giving it very good wet grip. X-Ice has ok wet grip but is still prone to hydroplaning. Dry grip is also better with the Crossclimate2s because it doesn't have much siping which can make a tire feel a bit floaty with the sipes moving about. I made the switch because I found I was only encountering severe winter weather 3-4 times a year where the X-Ice was actually useful. Every other day, traction was just ok as most of the time during winter the roads are dry or slush with some decent snowfall here and there. So I opted for the the Crossclimate2 which performs better for the majority of conditions I actually encounter and gets me through severe conditions as well (even the crazy freak storms we have once or twice a year). Wider tires are generally better for braking and cornering performance which is why opted for a slightly larger contact patch and also to compensate for the reduced siping of the Crossclimate2. So far I am very pleased with the results. I also don't have a lot of storage space so not having two sets of tires is fantastic, as is not needing to swap out twice a year. My point is, you really need to evaluate your driving conditions for the best tire for you. Just going straight to a hardcore winter tire doesn't necessarily make the most sense because they are suited for very specific road conditions (lots of snow and ice). They are not particularly amazing when road conditions are fair and clear. If you rarely see severe snow and ice and the only thing you encounter the majority of the time is dry or wet in cold temps, getting a winter rated tire with more solid/stable tread blocks (like the Crossclimate2 or another comparable tire) might actually be the safer choice overall.