Pulled the trigger on some. Michelin xice xi2's

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
............What would you guess that the Xi2 gives up in pure snow traction to the Hakka Rs, are they half as good in those conditions, and twice as good as the Rs in glare/black ice conditions??

Or are the differences between the two in all conditions considered 'splitting hairs'?

You can find tables of 2011 winter test data for the HakkaR and the Xi2 at these two links (One Norwegian, one Russian). Google Translate will be your friend.

http://www.naf.no/Forbrukertester/Dekk/Dekktester/Vinterdekktest-2011/

http://www.autoreview.ru/_archive/section/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=117679&SECTION_ID=5216

Just as an example, for braking on snow from 80 km/hr, the Xi2 required 54.9m, and the HakkaR required 54.7m. For accelerating on snow, it was 5.2 sec vs 5.1 sec.

For braking on ice from 50 km/hr, the Xi2 required 56.3m, and the HakkaR required 61.8m. For accelerating on ice, it was 7.4 sec vs 8.6 sec.

There are also ice and snow handling tests, and ice and snow subjective ratings at these 2 web sites.

I haven't examined all the data in detail, but so far my impression is that the Xi2 is significantly stronger on ice than the HakkaR, but is slightly weaker on snow and slightly weaker on wet braking.

Auto Review has a nice summary table at the bottom of the page, so you can easily compare strengths and weaknesses of each tire.

 

[sciphi]

Looks like the Nokians I have are better for my driving needs than the Michelins. They did better in snow and wet braking than the Michelins, and worse in ice. The roads around here are salted, so they're either wet or snow-covered. We really don't see much ice.

 

[SubLGT]

^ And as an added bonus, the HakkaR has a lower rolling resistance than the Xi2.

 

[dparm]

Thanks for clarifying, I guess the Hakka R is an ice rated tire. I stand corrected.

 

[dailydriver]

Originally Posted By: SubLGT
^ And as an added bonus, the HakkaR has a lower rolling resistance than the Xi2.


Even though the Michelin is LRR rated as well??

And again, THANK YOU for that link to the Euro tests!!

 

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
^ And as an added bonus, the HakkaR has a lower rolling resistance than the Xi2.


Even though the Michelin is LRR rated as well??

And again, THANK YOU for that link to the Euro tests!!

Yes, but it is not a huge difference. In the test scenario, the Xi2 used 1.6% more fuel than the HakkaR. Of all the tires tested (18 total I think), the HakkaR had the lowest rolling resistance.

"Rolling resistance is measured both as a roll-out test and a consumer test on the road. The test car accelerated up to 80 km / h on a flat stretch. Gear is in neutral and the car is rolling freely to 40 km / h.
In the second test measured the actual consumption on a ten-kilometer testvei. The result is an average of the two tests. It is presented as a mathematical calculation of the increase in fuel consumption compared with the best tire in the test."

 

[Rand]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Thanks for clarifying, I guess the Hakka R is an ice rated tire. I stand corrected.


I'm still not sure what you mean by "ice rated" ?

I've seen you post that several times

Is there any snow tires "not ice rated"?

some do better or worse..

I wasnt aware there was a person or company somewhere rating tires for ice or not for ice..?

Also I liked the hakka r's but they were 52$ a tire more than what I paid(in closest size) and not available in my exact size.

If I had done tire rack.. I probably would have gotten the new goodyear ultragrip WRT.. its their latest tire and lightyears ahead of their older stuff, Or possibly the blizzack ws-70.

In part because since they road force balance before shipping Hopefully they weed out any dead goodyears etc.
(it once took them 6 tires to get me 4 round ones)


In the end I was so impresssed with the michelin's "ride like a normal tire" and great ice performance.. that it also made it onto my list.

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: Rand
I'm still not sure what you mean by "ice rated" ?

I've seen you post that several times

Is there any snow tires "not ice rated"?

some do better or worse..

I wasnt aware there was a person or company somewhere rating tires for ice or not for ice..?

Car and Driver may not be the magazine they used to be, but every once in a while they still produce a very informative and useful technical article that you just don't find everywhere.

The money quote:

Quote:
Testing on ice is particularly tricky because of how dramatically grip levels vary—for that reason, Michelin doesn’t even attempt objective testing on ice with its tires—based on temperature, direct sunlight, or, in our case, a light snowfall that rendered the surface as much as twice as slippery from run to run, which nixed any chance of getting useful data.

 

[SubLGT]

^ I remember that C&D test. They allege testing wet braking at 23 degF. Did they cover the test track with antifreeze to enable wet braking tests at 23 degF?

 

[leeharvey418]

A light coating of salt would lower the melting point of ice to well below 23°F. ...just like you see in much of the country for the better part of every winter.

 

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: leeharvey418
.....................The money quote:

Quote:
Testing on ice is particularly tricky because of how dramatically grip levels vary—for that reason, Michelin doesn’t even attempt objective testing on ice with its tires—based on temperature, direct sunlight, or, in our case, a light snowfall that rendered the surface as much as twice as slippery from run to run, which nixed any chance of getting useful data.


Maybe Michelin should contact Test World in Finland to do their ice testing?
http://www.testworld.fi/tyre-testing/performance-testing

 

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: leeharvey418
A light coating of salt would lower the melting point of ice to well below 23°F. ...just like you see in much of the country for the better part of every winter.


If that was the case, C&D should have called it "saltwater braking".

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Maybe Michelin should contact Test World in Finland to do their ice testing?

I knew there was a good reason I bought Nokians.

 

[cchase]

Originally Posted By: leeharvey418
Originally Posted By: Rand
I'm still not sure what you mean by "ice rated" ?

I've seen you post that several times

Is there any snow tires "not ice rated"?

some do better or worse..

I wasnt aware there was a person or company somewhere rating tires for ice or not for ice..?

Car and Driver may not be the magazine they used to be, but every once in a while they still produce a very informative and useful technical article that you just don't find everywhere.

The money quote:

Quote:
Testing on ice is particularly tricky because of how dramatically grip levels vary—for that reason, Michelin doesn’t even attempt objective testing on ice with its tires—based on temperature, direct sunlight, or, in our case, a light snowfall that rendered the surface as much as twice as slippery from run to run, which nixed any chance of getting useful data.


The key word there is "objective" testing.

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: cchase
The key word there is "objective" testing.

Absolutely. I even considered going back and putting the word 'objective' in italics after posting that.

Even the Finnish testing company doesn't explicitly say that they do anything more than qualitative testing on ice...

 

[SubLGT]

Originally Posted By: leeharvey418
.........Even the Finnish testing company doesn't explicitly say that they do anything more than qualitative testing on ice...


Test World does objective, quantitative testing on ice and snow, and subjective, qualitative assessments also. I don't have the link anymore, but I did see a test commissioned by Goodyear for their Ultra Grip Ice+ tire, and it contained objective, quantitative data (braking distances, acceleration times, lap times etc), and subjective assessments about tire behavior.

 

[CapriRacer]

Test World is not the only place that does objective vehicle and tire testing. In fact, there are several places in the US!

The problem is that it is difficult to get repeatable results without extraordinary care in test protocol. You need a control tire and the control tire has to be tested repeatedly throughout the test sequence to identify testing drift. Then the test surface has to be constantly groomed.

 

[kdgrayson]

Originally Posted By: Rand
Originally Posted By: dparm
Thanks for clarifying, I guess the Hakka R is an ice rated tire. I stand corrected.


I'm still not sure what you mean by "ice rated" ?

I've seen you post that several times

Is there any snow tires "not ice rated"?

some do better or worse..

I wasnt aware there was a person or company somewhere rating tires for ice or not for ice..?


There is no "ice rating" for the current winter tire rating system used in North America. The test is only on packed snow. The Kumho Road Venture SAT KL61 are winter rated but got the lowest possible ice braking score in the latest Consumer Reports testing (and only a "B" score on snow). I have Winter Duellers for winter time but the Kumho's keep my Jeep "traction tire" legal in Oregon if I get caught on the road in off-season winter weather. (I'd put on my cable chains if it was really icey).

 

[Rand]

Update: I installed these today. I am irritated. I didnt know I had to specify HUB CENTRIC RIMS to get factory style hub centric rims. DTD sent me some cheapo STeelies with a 5x100 and 6xsomething univeral bolt pattern and they are lug centric with no centering? rings

/sigh

edit: I carefully torqued them down while still in the air.. and checked my hubs have 2 holes..on opposite sides and the center ring thats not touching anything appears to perfectly center on these holes... hard to describe but the wheel appears to be perfectly centered. the lugnuts are the tapered acorn style.

how much should I worry about this?

 

[sciphi]

Wow, a rare DTD fail. They've sent me hub-centric rings with both sets of wheels ordered from them.