Tire Reviews: Wide vs Narrow Winter Tires Tested

[edyvw]

Then you mean you've seen a lot of people running mud tires inflated to 35PSI on ice wind up in ditches.

You're conflating.

No I am not conflicting. Most vehicles running those tires are absolute horror in snow, and you can run 2psi, or 2000 psi, it is still horror.

But I must say, you are are optimist when it comes to pressure as a solution to the problem. If only manufacturers could figure out to put the correct pressure, let's say on a side of the doors.

 

[mdocod]

No I am not conflicting. Most vehicles running those tires are absolute horror in snow, and you can run 2psi, or 2000 psi, it is still horror.

But I must say, you are are optimist when it comes to pressure as a solution to the problem. If only manufacturers could figure out to put the correct pressure, let's say on a side of the doors.

The pressure on the door is the correct pressure, for GVWR at the speed limiter at 115F.

The only pressure that can go on the door, is something around the lowest pressure (for comfort and traction) that can safely carry the weight of the car at any combination of speed, load and temperatures possible without resulting in a blowout.

When it's -10C and can't go more than 25MPH because there's a foot of snow on the road, the calculation is much different, and the door is WRONG.

 

[edyvw]

The pressure on the door is the correct pressure, for GVWR at the speed limiter at 115F.

The only pressure that can go on the door, is something around the lowest pressure (for comfort and traction) that can safely carry the weight of the car at any combination of speed, load and temperatures possible without resulting in a blowout.

When it's -10C and can't go more than 25MPH because there's a foot of snow on the road, the calculation is much different, and the door is WRONG.

The pressure at the door is the one that offers the best performance by the vehicle.
I know vehicles running 315/65 R16 tires cannot go above 25mph in the foot of snow, but many can. And generally, I avoid adjusting pressure over let's say, Loveland Pass at -30f, and then readjusting on I70 or HWY 24. We are discussing the practical performance of vehicles, not wishful thinking.

And, the pressure on the door is the correct one.

 

[dnewton3]

I watched this video yesterday and was absolutely steaming frustrated by the end of it. This video seems to me like a ploy to sell more expensive winter tires in cool looking sizes to owners of sport crossovers and sport sedans by creating a test that will make them all appear comparable. There are several flaws with the test that need to be considered before drawing conclusions...

The narrow tire in this test, is both not the same tread pattern and is a smaller diameter than the other tires tested. Since the tire is a smaller diameter, it comes to the table with no additional load capacity per inflation pressure compared to the larger diameter, wider tires it is competing with, so it must be inflated to the same pressure as the other tires (the 205 and 255 in this test both have the same load index ratings). Furthermore, the prepared surface conditions both of their track and ice do not reveal any of the effects of changing the size or shape of the contact patch, as those conditions are designed to compare tread patterns and rubber compounds, not contact patch shape. The real world does not have a groomed track with a very consistent amount of snow over a hard surface or a very specific type of ice on it.

The "skinny is better" is not a good way to conceptualize it as that's not the primary focus of changing to the "skinny" tire. In reality, it is wide low profile tires on reinforced sidewalls and high inflation pressures whose contact patches are very skinny and rectangular in the wrong direction. The goal is to get to a 60-75+ series with more load capacity so it can safely be used at lower pressures. 60-75 series passenger car tires operated at appropriate pressures for the load produce uniform contact patches that are roughly as long as they are wide (close to square). This provides the MAXIMUM floatation effect. I'm sick of all this nonsense about skinny tires "cutting" though. That's not the effect that makes them superior. The skinny tire has to be taller profile and operating at lower pressure to actually gain a meaningful advantage. A 60-75 series tire operated at appropriate pressures gradually compacts and climbs on top of the snow/slush in front of it. The deformation and larger contact patch of the "skinny" (SQUARE!) tire paves its way OVER unplowed or heavy/loose snow/slush situation, while the rigid, nonflexible low profile reinforced sidewall XL tires at high inflation pressure have almost no useful contact patch longitudinally. The wide rigid tires act like a wedge driving down into the snow digging their own grave. Watching an AWD crossover on low profile tires with the traction control unable to figure out how to lift its tires out of all the silly little crescent shaped holes it has dug itself into is hilarious.. I've seen crossovers with low profile tires totally stuck on a mild incline with a few inches of wet snow. Happens all the time because the tire is not paving/packing/climbing and the traction control is only reactionary, so it not only ALLOWS every tire to dig itself a grave before reacting, it has no other way to work. (Hey, if you've read this far remember that next time you're trying to drive a car with traction control or ABS... Proactive traction is always better than trying to find traction reactively that has already been lost!).

If you always drive on prepared track like winter conditions (frequent plowing is common in some areas, not here!), then low profile tires will work fine as long as they have a good winter rubber compound and tread pattern. If you deal with unplowed roads on a regular basis (common for residencial and rural roads, and even roads in major cities during a snow event), a larger SQUARE contact patch is what you want, and the way to get that is a narrower tire on a smaller wheel and a taller profile, operating at lower pressure if it can be done safely.

-------------

I run 315/75R16's on ice and snow all the time. I can "pave" a path through snow significantly deeper than the available clearance of my SUV using this tire setup at ultra-low pressures. I will go as low as 8PSI to get the contact patch length maximized for busting through 2-3' of snow. For more "normal" conditions when its icey/snowy I'll run 15-25PSI and keep speeds appropriate for the inflation pressure, but this is still coming up short of an ideal square contact patch...

Best tire size I have ever run for driving mountain passes in heavy snow of 6-12" was a 235/85R16. This is not because they are "cutting through" anything. This is because at this size, under the weight of a typical SUV or light truck, this size will produce a very near square contact patch at around 30PSI, which is the sort of pressure that a tire inflated to 35PSI at more normal temps, will drop to during a winter weather situation.. There's no need to air down to get a uniform contact patch that maximizes floatation with this size tire. It's already operating at an ideal contact patch shape for winter weather at normal inflation pressures.

I think you misunderstood, or didn't catch, some of what the tester said.

He most certainly acknowledged that the most narrow tire was a different overall diameter and tread pattern; that's because the company didn't make that most narrow size in the same tread pattern as the other three. That was obviously a somewhat apples to oranges inclusion in the test.

But, there were three tires of the exact same tread design, and only varied in width (using the aspect ratio to compensate for overall diameter). The conclusion was one of an overall effect for the three with the same tread design. The more narrow tire had some benefits over the others, but also had some losses to the others. The OVERALL conclusion was that tire width didn't matter much, because the trade-offs tended to offset each other.


The main limitation I see in these Tyre Review winter tire tests is that he never deals with deep snow. Most of the winter tires I've ever seen him test are more road-oriented where the snow isn't that deep; certainly not on the test track. Most of his testing is on a groomed snow covered track, not a trail covered with 8" of fresh pack. Some tire companies make different winter tread designs based on the expected snow depths. For example, Cooper has three distinctly different winter tread designs, one specific to deep snow. In that case, a more narrow tire may sink down further, thereby gripping a bit better. But that's yet to be proven, because he doesn't test in that type of circumstances.

 

[mdocod]

I think you misunderstood, or didn't catch, some of what the tester said.

He most certainly acknowledged that the most narrow tire was a different overall diameter and tread pattern; that's because the company didn't make that most narrow size in the same tread pattern as the other three. That was obviously a somewhat apples to oranges inclusion in the test.

But, there were three tires of the exact same tread design, and only varied in width (using the aspect ratio to compensate for overall diameter). The conclusion was one of an overall effect for the three with the same tread design. The more narrow tire had some benefits over the others, but also had some losses to the others. The OVERALL conclusion was that tire width didn't matter much, because the trade-offs tended to offset each other.

The main limitation I see in these Tyre Review winter tire tests is that he never deals with deep snow. Most of the winter tires I've ever seen him test are more road-oriented where the snow isn't that deep; certainly not on the test track. Most of his testing is on a groomed snow covered track, not a trail covered with 8" of fresh pack. Some tire companies make different winter tread designs based on the expected snow depths. For example, Cooper has three distinctly different winter tread designs, one specific to deep snow. In that case, a more narrow tire may sink down further, thereby gripping a bit better. But that's yet to be proven, because he doesn't test in that type of circumstances.

The conclusion of this video can be summarized as "Contact patch shape doesn't have a huge impact on groomed/plowed snowy/icy roads."

My experience through my 25 years of driving Colorado winters (many of those years driving 8-12 hours a day on snow days delivering pizza), driving mountain passes in driving snow, doing occasional blizzard rescues/recoveries, and having driven lots of different cars fitted with lots of different sizes and tread/rubber patterns, agrees with the conclusion of this video in those specific conditions, including variations in contact patch from inflation pressures.

My experience through 25 years of driving Colorado winters, is that those conditions are rare during winter storms unless you plan your life around the weather (stay in until its over) and around the plow truck schedule, rather than plan your life around what you want to do when you want to do it. If you job is to drive through the snowstorm, or you simply want to get from one mountain town to the town over the pass to your lodge while the snow is flying, then you're not going to have the luxury of a groomed surface, and the shape of the contact patch DOES matter when the snow and slush and ruts are deep. Achieving that ideal contact patch shape is not possible on many wider lower profile tires at any pressures that they could be operated at without causing possible damage.

Almost EVERYONE in the comments of that video were coming away with the conclusion that wide low profile tires will work fine for winter. That's very unfortunate...

 

[edyvw]

I think you misunderstood, or didn't catch, some of what the tester said.

He most certainly acknowledged that the most narrow tire was a different overall diameter and tread pattern; that's because the company didn't make that most narrow size in the same tread pattern as the other three. That was obviously a somewhat apples to oranges inclusion in the test.

But, there were three tires of the exact same tread design, and only varied in width (using the aspect ratio to compensate for overall diameter). The conclusion was one of an overall effect for the three with the same tread design. The more narrow tire had some benefits over the others, but also had some losses to the others. The OVERALL conclusion was that tire width didn't matter much, because the trade-offs tended to offset each other.


The main limitation I see in these Tyre Review winter tire tests is that he never deals with deep snow. Most of the winter tires I've ever seen him test are more road-oriented where the snow isn't that deep; certainly not on the test track. Most of his testing is on a groomed snow covered track, not a trail covered with 8" of fresh pack. Some tire companies make different winter tread designs based on the expected snow depths. For example, Cooper has three distinctly different winter tread designs, one specific to deep snow. In that case, a more narrow tire may sink down further, thereby gripping a bit better. But that's yet to be proven, because he doesn't test in that type of circumstances.

The problem is, although not nearly as big as the slush test, replicating exactly the same depth for all tires. I think what is missing here, is the disclaimer that this is just a reference. WInter tire testing is far more complicated than summer tire testing, and the average YouTube viewer expects the same information about performance.

 

[mdocod]

The pressure at the door is the one that offers the best performance by the vehicle.
I know vehicles running 315/65 R16 tires cannot go above 25mph in the foot of snow, but many can. And generally, I avoid adjusting pressure over let's say, Loveland Pass at -30f, and then readjusting on I70 or HWY 24. We are discussing the practical performance of vehicles, not wishful thinking.

And, the pressure on the door is the correct one.

If the door pressure is correct, then how come there are 2 different pressures on my door panel for different loads and speeds? The European manual for my S60 has pressures from 33-44PSI listed for different combinations of speeds, temperatures, tire sizes, and loads.

The "correct" pressure is dependent on conditions. The COMPROMISE on the door is there for safety from blowout in the conditions most apt to cause a blowout that could lead to a lethal accident.

 

[edyvw]

If the door pressure is correct, then how come there are 2 different pressures on my door panel for different loads and speeds? The European manual for my S60 has pressures from 33-44PSI listed for different combinations of speeds, temperatures, tire sizes, and loads.

The "correct" pressure is dependent on conditions. The COMPROMISE on the door is there for safety from blowout in the conditions most apt to cause a blowout that could lead to a lethal accident.

Of course, it is correct. I have two pressures on BMW too, one up to 100mph, one above 100mph.
That offers the best performance. I am really not sure what are you arguing here as running lower pressure, especially on vehicles like S60 or my BMW, introduces other problems. Not to mention that running lower pressure on snow tires additionally decreases already compromised performance due to design and compund. My BMW is already undertired running 205/50 R17 instead of 225, with track suspension, and the last thing I need is lowering pressure to gain 1mph over Loveland Pass.

 

[mdocod]

Of course, it is correct. I have two pressures on BMW too, one up to 100mph, one above 100mph.
That offers the best performance. I am really not sure what are you arguing here as running lower pressure, especially on vehicles like S60 or my BMW, introduces other problems. Not to mention that running lower pressure on snow tires additionally decreases already compromised performance due to design and compund. My BMW is already undertired running 205/50 R17 instead of 225, with track suspension, and the last thing I need is lowering pressure to gain 1mph over Loveland Pass.

The S60 T6 OE tire/wheel size is 235/40R18 95XL and calls for 38PSI for GVWR and high speeds or 33PSI for lower loads and lower speeds.

The same car, fitted with 215/60R16 95SL can (and should!) run 28-33PSI for most conditions. This tire size carries the same load at lower pressure, and if you don't take advantage of the lower pressure option, then you'll miss out on some of the elongation potential for the contact patch that is useful in snow.

28-33PSI (depending on load) on these tires would be absolutely fine for transitioning from a snow covered mountain pass state road or highway, to a plowed I70 moving at 65-75MPH.

 

[edyvw]

The S60 T6 OE tire/wheel size is 235/40R18 95XL and calls for 38PSI for GVWR and high speeds or 33PSI for lower loads and lower speeds.

The same car, fitted with 215/60R16 95SL can (and should!) run 28-33PSI for most conditions. This tire size carries the same load at lower pressure, and if you don't take advantage of the lower pressure option, then you'll miss out on some of the elongation potential for the contact patch that is useful in snow.

28-33PSI (depending on load) on these tires would be absolutely fine for transitioning from a snow covered mountain pass state road or highway, to a plowed I70 moving at 65-75MPH.

Running 33psi over let's say 38 psi is fine. I do not think I would go as low as 28psi, especially pushing the vehicle hard in corners. My car is currently on 225/40 R18 and 36psi front and 41psi rear. Going 205 has the front at 32, and rear at 36 and that is recommended by BMW. So, not sure where we going with this as the manufacturer recommends higher pressure on narrower tires.

 

[mdocod]

Running 33psi over let's say 38 psi is fine. I do not think I would go as low as 28psi, especially pushing the vehicle hard in corners. My car is currently on 225/40 R18 and 36psi front and 41psi rear. Going 205 has the front at 32, and rear at 36 and that is recommended by BMW. So, not sure where we going with this as the manufacturer recommends higher pressure on narrower tires.

Your summer tires are 92XL, your winter tires are 93XL, both are the exact same diameter. The tire pressure requirements to carry the load at speed safely are very similar, so you shouldn't be changing pressure much between these tires. 1-2PSI lower on the winters would be fine but much lower would not be safe if you get on the highway... Neither of those tire sizes have much load capacity headroom for the weight of that car.

The fact that BMW calls out a pressure for the rear tires that has nothing to do with load, and everything to do with tuning the car for a particular handling characteristic, is proof that tire pressure selection is very often a compromise, not an absolute.

The ideal winter tire size for your BMW would have been 205/60R16 92SL if 16's will fit over the brakes. That size would carry the car with ~31PSI and produce a near-square contact patch at that pressure.

 

[edyvw]

Your summer tires are 92XL, your winter tires are 93XL, both are the exact same diameter. The tire pressure requirements to carry the load at speed safely are very similar, so you shouldn't be changing pressure much between these tires. 1-2PSI lower on the winters would be fine but much lower would not be safe if you get on the highway... Neither of those tire sizes have much load capacity headroom for the weight of that car.

The fact that BMW calls out a pressure for the rear tires that has nothing to do with load, and everything to do with tuning the car for a particular handling characteristic, is proof that tire pressure selection is very often a compromise, not an absolute.

The ideal winter tire size for your BMW would have been 205/60R16 92SL if 16's will fit over the brakes. That size would carry the car with ~31PSI and produce a near-square contact patch at that pressure.

The smalles tire size for this BMW is 205/55 R16. But, on my BMW it won;t fit bcs. brakes.
BMW is tunning pressure for performance. That is absolutely correct, as in winter, like in summer, one drives over various surfaces. You live in CO, you very well know that I could leave Springs with 60's degrees and ski A-Basin at -10, and go through 4 seasons.
BMW has several tire sizes, from 16 to 19 on 328, or 17 to 19 on 335, square, and staggered set up, and there is pressure recommendation for all of them. 32/36psi on 205/50 R17 is on the lower side of the spectrum, below 100mph. Above 100mph is 36/39.
Sma egoes for my two other cars which run on narrower snow tires;
Atlas
Summer: 255/50 R20
Winter: 235/65 R18
Tiguan:
255/50 R18
Winter: 215/65 R16.

 

[michaelluscher]

I've had good luck with the (narrow tread/taller sidewall) mindset when choosing snow tires
I had a choice between 215/60/16 and 205/65/16
I thought the marginal narrowing and additional sidewall was a little more protection from a pothole induced blowout

I mean, either choice is a vast improvement over the factory 215/55/17 steamrollers, but I still think (narrow & tall) was the right choice
Same hillside, two months apart

I laughed at so many Subarus that year
But I'm not in the Midwest, and this is an old Camry on TireRack special rims
My snow season is also maybe 2.5 months to other people's 6+ months of the year

Those with more premium newer cars have to plan around larger wheel & tire packages
Plus AWD size differences and TPMS and all kinds of other fuss I'm glad I can do without

 

[BrainThicknessVariation]

The conclusion? It doesn't matter as much as choosing the actual make/model.

Possibly true. Only problem is, quality winter tires are less readily available in OEM sizes. You almost have to size down just to get a decent selection.

I'd need to see more comprehensive testing in different conditions to draw any meaningful conclusions about winter tires in various sizes. Eg, slalom test on a highway with loose, slushy snow. First one to veer off the road into the ditch loses.

As usual, with YouTube, the comments section is always the best:

 

[dumkid]

tall skinny tires will shine in the deep fluffy snow, unless it's really deep. then you need taller tires or you need to float on top somehow.