Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT3 (non-studded) or Blizzak LT for Colorado i-70 ski trip driving?

[mjezzi]

Trying to decide between the Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT3 non-studded or Blizzak LT for Colorado i-70 ski trip driving.

Assuming they are both going to be great in snow and ice, I would like to prioritize which one handles better on dry roads with more responsive handling, which I feel like is most of the time in Colorado.

Does anyone have experience with both? Do you prefer one over the other?

Sponsored

 

[webspeedracer]

Trying to decide between the Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT3 none studded or Blizzak LT for Colorado i-70 ski trip driving.

Assuming they are both going to be great in snow and ice, I would like to prioritize which one handles better on dry roads with more responsive handling, which I feel like is most of the time in Colorado.

Does anyone have experience with both? Do you prefer one over the other?

I went with Blizzak LTs 3 weeks ago because I I’ll need to drive up Little Cottonwood Canyon (Snowbird/Alta) regularly. FWIW, my key decision point on CT snow tires, ultimately choosing the Blizzak LTs, was biased towards maximum snow/ice/slush grip, was willing to sacrifice dry characteristics (I still have my Model S with X-Ice Snows). Driving conditions up at Alta/Bird can be gnarly/deep/slippery/slushy and I wanted absolute confidence to stay out of trouble and to be able to help others when necessary. I will be making multiple long trips to CO, ID, WY ski resorts through the winter and I expect these will only last one winter. My impressions:
- Immediately after install I drove to Aspen during that recent big series of storms, spent 9 days driving Basalt-Aspen-Basalt in all conditions. Since then I’ve been driving Salt Lake City in the dry, up/down Wasatch-area canyons in the dry.
- the Blizzaks are reasonably quiet at highway speeds, quieter than the my ~20k mileage OEM Goodyear AT tires, but Blizzaks do have a mild higher-pitched drone that is easily masked with music/podcasts
- initial turn-in feels like the truck does not want to turn at all with the mushy compound and tall blocks, steering suddenly felt very heavy and understeer-y when first installed which was disconcerting at first, but with more time I realized I have to simply add lots more steering input than I was used to with the CT, push the truck into the corner and once at a higher cornering load the tread blocks feel like they lock into each other and corner fairly well. Once I’m set into the corner the under steer is minimal and the truck arcs through the corner as desired (for snow tires). Corner exits have the same mushy release.
- braking feel at the tire/road interface is not-surprisingly mushier and I’ve had to be more prepared for longer stopping distances in the dry, but it is predictable and similar to cornering in that it feels mushy at initial braking and then continued hard braking feels like the tread pattern interlocks and firms up to the limits of the soft compound. The tire is very noisy under medium-hard braking (and full regen) at ~30-10mph. Feels like the stress of the braking bends the blocks out of plane from each other as I slow at full regen, has a staccato-like noise braking at those low speeds.
- I’ve been driving in Chill 95% of the time, and being gentler on regen, to avoid dulling the sipes and sharp edges in the dry.
- on the Aspen trip I drove Roaring Fork valley for 9 days in all conditions during several storm cycles, including fresh ~8” powder, hard-packed snow, black ice, slushy unplowed salted snow, and full Baja mode with no Nannies and full rear bias drifting, and the Blizzaks do really well as expected. They are not an ice/snow license-to-Beast; e.g. they don’t provide outrageous amounts of ice/snow grip, mostly due to the sheer weight of the CT pushing the grip to the limits, but they do provide predictably high grip levels in all of the above conditions. When the tires do break loose (eg drifting in Baja), they regain grip in a predictable progressive way. I nervously watched my 6 o’clock in the really slippery days because I was sure I had substantially more stopping power than most people behind me.
- I-80 Glenwood CO-82 Canyon driving at speed felt surprisingly good once I was used to the soft compound (it’s like adaptongskiing on all-Mtn skis vs carving skis), though the tire tread squirms laterally with pavement undulations and heavy acceleration.
- for reference, I’ve had Michelin X-ice for years on my Model S and LOVED that tire in all conditions, both slippery and dry. Michelin doesn’t make a 3PMSF LT tire that works on the CT. On our Model X I tried Pirelli Scorpion Winter, Nokian Hakka R3 SUV, back to Scorpion Winter. I was not impressed with the Nokian R3s; they didn’t match the Pirellis in grip in ice/snow/wet or dry conditions, and were much louder as they wore down. However, Nokian has improved by two generations and I hear they’re substantially improved, but I decided not to try their new Outpost nAT, despite the Finnish pedigree, because I felt if Nokian didn’t feel they couldn’t put the 3PMSF stamp on it then they werent confident in its winter grip. I decided against the Hakka LT3s because the tread pattern looks too similar to the R3s we had on the Model X, and my disappointment with those, and the fact that they make a studded version gave me less confidence that Nokian has supreme confidence in the grip levels of the studless compound. I’ve been profoundly impressed with Michelins X-ice silica compound In that it feels equally capable to studded tires, and wish Nokian could revise their pure winter tire compound to match (maybe they have, in their recent revisions? ?‍).

Hope that helps, will report back as I get more miles on the Blizzaks.

Maybe you can get someone with recent Hakka LT3 or R5 experience to weigh in?

 

[Stupid_metal_triangle]

I live just like 30 mins off of I-70 up in the Colorado mountains, I would not get studded tires.

The high Colorado sun is great at melting snow, even if it's not above freezing. I will watch the snow on my driveway melt when the high air temp is 20 degrees. I have the non-studded Nokian hakkapeliitta LT3s on my beast and it's fantastic.

If you were up in like Alaska and had roads that were just ice for weeks and months on end then the studs would be a great option. But in Colorado you'll still find dry pavement just a few days after a snow fall. Like many people have pointed out on this forum, modern winter tire compounds are so good these days that even on ice they are still very good. Not as good as studs but studs are hot garbage on dry roads.

I have running shoes that have built in tungsten studs and it sucks to run on dry roads. I'd much rather wear a normal trail shoe is there are going to be parts of the road that are dry, even if it means I have less traction on the icy parts.

 

[mjezzi]

Wow, that is an amazingly detailed response for Blizzaks! Driver magazine worthy, lol. Thanks so much.

I know exactly what you’re talking about with the mushy feel on the blizzaks. I had them many years ago. I also remember their stopping power on dry while driving I-70 to be unexpectedly bad and it really surprised me. Not sure how warm it was that day though.

I hear the Nokians feel a little more normal on dry roads than Blizzak, but I also heard they can feel floaty due to softer sidewalls and Blizzak sidewalls were stiffer, but I’m not sure if there’s a different feel for the RT3s vs other versions and which version the user was driving.

Anyways, I am trying to get some Nokians (hard to find) and if they don’t have them, I will get the Blizzaks. If I do get the Nokians and if you’re up for it, maybe we can meet up and do some side by side testing.

 

[pricedm]

I went with Blizzak LTs 3 weeks ago because I I’ll need to drive up Little Cottonwood Canyon (Snowbird/Alta)....

Nice meeting you at the Parachute, CO Supercharger 11/26. I have a set of Blizzaks lined up for my eventual Cybertruck based on our discussion and what you said here. I really like the Nokian R5 EVs on my Model Y, but....tires designed for studs (Nokian LT) but without studs don't seem to work as well as studless snows...

 

[webspeedracer]

Nice meeting you at the Parachute, CO Supercharger 11/26. I have a set of Blizzaks lined up for my eventual Cybertruck based on our discussion and what you said here.

Oh yeah nice meeting you also, enjoyed our chat!

Fwiw, I will be watching closely to see if Michelin adapts their X-ice compound to an LT tire, would likely switch for next winter.

Enjoy your CT when you get it, won’t regret it!

 

[mjezzi]

I live just like 30 mins off of I-70 up in the Colorado mountains, I would not get studded tires.

The high Colorado sun is great at melting snow, even if it's not above freezing. I will watch the snow on my driveway melt when the high air temp is 20 degrees. I have the non-studded Nokian hakkapeliitta LT3s on my beast and it's fantastic.

If you were up in like Alaska and had roads that were just ice for weeks and months on end then the studs would be a great option. But in Colorado you'll still find dry pavement just a few days after a snow fall. Like many people have pointed out on this forum, modern winter tire compounds are so good these days that even on ice they are still very good. Not as good as studs but studs are hot garbage on dry roads.

I have running shoes that have built in tungsten studs and it sucks to run on dry roads. I'd much rather wear a normal trail shoe is there are going to be parts of the road that are dry, even if it means I have less traction on the icy parts.

Thanks for posting! I have recently come to the same conclusion as you to forget about the studs.

If you don’t mind, I have some additional questions:

1. Did you read webspeedracer’s description of the Blizzaks? How would you say the Nokians feel on dry in comparison to that description?

2. Also, would you say the Nokians feel floaty with soft sidewalls? How do you like the steering response on dry roads?

 

[Stupid_metal_triangle]

Thanks for posting! I have recently come to the same conclusion as you to forget about the studs.

If you don’t mind, I have some additional questions:

1. Did you read webspeedracer’s description of the Blizzaks? How would you say the Nokians feel on dry in comparison to that description?

2. Also, would you say the Nokians feel floaty with soft sidewalls? How do you like the steering response on dry roads?

I don't think I pay that much attention to it. I just know it feels great to have traction on snow.

I haven't noticed anything significant in handling. There was some tire noise early on but that seems to have gone away.

 

[mjezzi]

I ended up getting the Nokians installed. They are great. Handling seems fine, smooth and quiet and great on snow. Pretty happy with them.

 

[webspeedracer]

Thanks for posting! I have recently come to the same conclusion as you to forget about the studs.

If you don’t mind, I have some additional questions:

1. Did you read webspeedracer’s description of the Blizzaks? How would you say the Nokians feel on dry in comparison to that description?

2. Also, would you say the Nokians feel floaty with soft sidewalls? How do you like the steering response on dry roads?

I ended up getting the Nokians installed. They are great. Handling seems fine, smooth and quiet and great on snow. Pretty happy with them.

Good call. Did you go with the Hakka LT3 or the R5 SUV in the slightly smaller diameter?

After a few months with Blizzak LTs on my CT, I've decided to get the Nokian Hakka R5 for my wife's Rivian R1S. The OEM Pirellis (20" ATs) on her R1S are beefy looking but terrible on ice and ice/slush despite having 3pms rating. They're almost as bad as the OEM Goodyear Ads on my Cybertruck, likely for similar reasons of range and durability in a hard compound.

The Blizzak LTs on my truck are "pretty good" in ice/snow but nowhere near as good as my Michelin X-Ice Snows on my MS. I have a feeling Bridgestone doesn't use the same compound for the LT as they do for the DM-V2, so not the same ice-gripping capability. My siping in the Blizzaks are slowly spreading apart and rounding off, because the sipes are too linear and aligned perpendicular to direction of travel, so I'm quickly losing the sharp edges that should be providing extra grip. This, despite my best efforts to be gentle with Chill mode and on regen/braking. I think the other Blizzak tread designs look better in terms of angling the tread blocks and siping away from direction of travel.

I'm hoping the Nokian's prove to be a superior tire on the Rivian, which case I'll switch to those on my CT for next winter.

 

[mjezzi]

Good call. Did you go with the Hakka LT3 or the R5 SUV in the slightly smaller diameter?

After a few months with Blizzak LTs on my CT, I've decided to get the Nokian Hakka R5 for my wife's Rivian R1S. The OEM Pirellis (20" ATs) on her R1S are beefy looking but terrible on ice and ice/slush despite having 3pms rating. They're almost as bad as the OEM Goodyear Ads on my Cybertruck, likely for similar reasons of range and durability in a hard compound.

The Blizzak LTs on my truck are "pretty good" in ice/snow but nowhere near as good as my Michelin X-Ice Snows on my MS. I have a feeling Bridgestone doesn't use the same compound for the LT as they do for the DM-V2, so not the same ice-gripping capability. My siping in the Blizzaks are slowly spreading apart and rounding off, because the sipes are too linear and aligned perpendicular to direction of travel, so I'm quickly losing the sharp edges that should be providing extra grip. This, despite my best efforts to be gentle with Chill mode and on regen/braking. I think the other Blizzak tread designs look better in terms of angling the tread blocks and siping away from direction of travel.

I'm hoping the Nokian's prove to be a superior tire on the Rivian, which case I'll switch to those on my CT for next winter.

I got the Hakka LT3. I had Blizzaks a while ago and I remember them feeling a little too soft on dry pavement, so I wanted to try something else out.

I would love to do a side by side comparison on dry pavement with someone that has Blizzak tires. I'm in the Denver/Boulder area.

 

[webspeedracer]

I got the Hakka LT3. I had Blizzaks a while ago and I remember them feeling a little too soft on dry pavement, so I wanted to try something else out.

I would love to do a side by side comparison on dry pavement with someone that has Blizzak tires. I'm in the Denver/Boulder area.

Yea and I’m also curious about the difference between Hakka R5 SUV vs LT3

 

[mjezzi]

Yea and I’m also curious about the difference between Hakka R5 SUV vs LT3

Isn’t the R5 SUV sizes too small for the cybertruck?

 

[webspeedracer]

Isn’t the R5 SUV sizes too small for the cybertruck?

Sorry I'm putting The R5 on my wife's R1S, which OEM specs 275/65/20, so the R5 SUV matches her Load spec and size is 3.2% smaller diameter. Her speedo will read 90 when she's going 87.1 mph. She wants max grip in ice/snow, and good dry performance, so I'll ignore the variance and appearance for winter.

But you're right, the change from CT spec to R5 SUV is a bigger variance.

 

[MyOtherTruck]

I went with Blizzak LTs 3 weeks ago because I I’ll need to drive up Little Cottonwood Canyon (Snowbird/Alta) regularly. FWIW, my key decision point on CT snow tires, ultimately choosing the Blizzak LTs, was biased towards maximum snow/ice/slush grip, was willing to sacrifice dry characteristics (I still have my Model S with X-Ice Snows). Driving conditions up at Alta/Bird can be gnarly/deep/slippery/slushy and I wanted absolute confidence to stay out of trouble and to be able to help others when necessary. I will be making multiple long trips to CO, ID, WY ski resorts through the winter and I expect these will only last one winter. My impressions:
- Immediately after install I drove to Aspen during that recent big series of storms, spent 9 days driving Basalt-Aspen-Basalt in all conditions. Since then I’ve been driving Salt Lake City in the dry, up/down Wasatch-area canyons in the dry.
- the Blizzaks are reasonably quiet at highway speeds, quieter than the my ~20k mileage OEM Goodyear AT tires, but Blizzaks do have a mild higher-pitched drone that is easily masked with music/podcasts
- initial turn-in feels like the truck does not want to turn at all with the mushy compound and tall blocks, steering suddenly felt very heavy and understeer-y when first installed which was disconcerting at first, but with more time I realized I have to simply add lots more steering input than I was used to with the CT, push the truck into the corner and once at a higher cornering load the tread blocks feel like they lock into each other and corner fairly well. Once I’m set into the corner the under steer is minimal and the truck arcs through the corner as desired (for snow tires). Corner exits have the same mushy release.
- braking feel at the tire/road interface is not-surprisingly mushier and I’ve had to be more prepared for longer stopping distances in the dry, but it is predictable and similar to cornering in that it feels mushy at initial braking and then continued hard braking feels like the tread pattern interlocks and firms up to the limits of the soft compound. The tire is very noisy under medium-hard braking (and full regen) at ~30-10mph. Feels like the stress of the braking bends the blocks out of plane from each other as I slow at full regen, has a staccato-like noise braking at those low speeds.
- I’ve been driving in Chill 95% of the time, and being gentler on regen, to avoid dulling the sipes and sharp edges in the dry.
- on the Aspen trip I drove Roaring Fork valley for 9 days in all conditions during several storm cycles, including fresh ~8” powder, hard-packed snow, black ice, slushy unplowed salted snow, and full Baja mode with no Nannies and full rear bias drifting, and the Blizzaks do really well as expected. They are not an ice/snow license-to-Beast; e.g. they don’t provide outrageous amounts of ice/snow grip, mostly due to the sheer weight of the CT pushing the grip to the limits, but they do provide predictably high grip levels in all of the above conditions. When the tires do break loose (eg drifting in Baja), they regain grip in a predictable progressive way. I nervously watched my 6 o’clock in the really slippery days because I was sure I had substantially more stopping power than most people behind me.
- I-80 Glenwood CO-82 Canyon driving at speed felt surprisingly good once I was used to the soft compound (it’s like adaptongskiing on all-Mtn skis vs carving skis), though the tire tread squirms laterally with pavement undulations and heavy acceleration.
- for reference, I’ve had Michelin X-ice for years on my Model S and LOVED that tire in all conditions, both slippery and dry. Michelin doesn’t make a 3PMSF LT tire that works on the CT. On our Model X I tried Pirelli Scorpion Winter, Nokian Hakka R3 SUV, back to Scorpion Winter. I was not impressed with the Nokian R3s; they didn’t match the Pirellis in grip in ice/snow/wet or dry conditions, and were much louder as they wore down. However, Nokian has improved by two generations and I hear they’re substantially improved, but I decided not to try their new Outpost nAT, despite the Finnish pedigree, because I felt if Nokian didn’t feel they couldn’t put the 3PMSF stamp on it then they werent confident in its winter grip. I decided against the Hakka LT3s because the tread pattern looks too similar to the R3s we had on the Model X, and my disappointment with those, and the fact that they make a studded version gave me less confidence that Nokian has supreme confidence in the grip levels of the studless compound. I’ve been profoundly impressed with Michelins X-ice silica compound In that it feels equally capable to studded tires, and wish Nokian could revise their pure winter tire compound to match (maybe they have, in their recent revisions? ?‍).

Hope that helps, will report back as I get more miles on the Blizzaks.

Maybe you can get someone with recent Hakka LT3 or R5 experience to weigh in?

I appreciate this post x10

Sponsored