Nokian Hakka R2 winter tires

Status
Not open for further replies.
When people speak of Upstate NY I'm always amused by the varying definitions. For years most denizens of NYC referred to anything north of the Tappan Zee bridge or in AC 914 as upstate.I'm located 25 mi ESE of Syracuse and the tiny hamlet of Pratts Hollow is about 5 miles away. It is the Exact Geographical center of NYS so technically I'm from Central NY!
I guess io really be considered Upstate you'd have to be from Saratoga north to Plattsburgh! BTW Just installed a set on Nokian WRg3's on an AUDI 2007 A6 Avant (245/45 x 17) I just bought last week. Be interesting to see how they compare to the 225/55x16 R2's on our '06 A6 Avant. I wanted the best snow I could find for the miserable secondary roads on the edge of the snowbelt for the car my wife and daughter are using most of the time. I'll use the WRG3 car for long trips & highway use, we'll see if these WRG3's are as good as Nokian's advertising says they are!
 
^^^Yes, please let us know, as IF I can ever find a 17" wheel narrow enough (that fits on my car; offset/bolt pattern), that is the size I would have to use as well.

This would be in anticipation of needing 17s to clear bigger calipers/rotors.
wink.gif
 
Well my first impressions of 245/45x17 WRG3's are good compared to the 245/40x18 ContiPro Contacts. Seem just as smooth & quiet. Perhaps a little bit looser in dry handling. On snow covered back roads they're far superior to the Contis which were downright scary! The Contis exxercised the ABS & ESP (Electronic Stability Control) way more than I was comfortable with! I would say the WRG3's is as good as almost any snow tire out there but not nearly as good as the Hakka R2 in snow & ice. Of course I went down a size width wise over stock w/the Hakka R2's being 225/55x16 vs WRG3's 245/45x17 giving a smaller contact patch for better traction in the slippery stuff. The tradeoff is of course worse dry/wet handling, somewhat squirmier! Still the R2's are a better dry/wet handling snow tire that anything I know of except the Vredestein Extreme Contact. But the Vred doesn't have the superb stopping power on ice/snow that the R2 has. Snow Tire Rant OFF!

BTW The R2's feel a lot tighter than any Blizzak or Gislaved I've ever tried plus their stopping power in snow or ice is amazing!
 
Originally Posted By: stuffinder
Of course I went down a size width wise over stock w/the Hakka R2's being 225/55x16 vs WRG3's 245/45x17 giving a smaller contact patch for better traction in the slippery stuff.


It's actually the opposite. Wider tyre grips better on ice, but sligthly worse on snow. (205/55R16 vs. 225/55R16 R2 test on Tuulilasi -magizine). Obiviously thinner tyre resists slush planing more though, I think difference can be huge especially on worn tyres.
 
Last edited:
Thank You both for straightening me out! Slush & Hydro-planing are the two conditions I fear most so I'm happier with the slightly narrower than stock tire for Winter use. I guess the R2 with whatever "secret" particles are embedded in the tread result in the greatly increased stopping power on ice. The braking is definitely better in ice/snow w/225 R2's over 245 WRG3's. I drove both on the same roads yesterday within a couple of hours! 2006 & 2007 AUDI A6 Avants.
 
Originally Posted By: stuffinder
When people speak of Upstate NY I'm always amused by the varying definitions. For years most denizens of NYC referred to anything north of the Tappan Zee bridge or in AC 914 as upstate.I'm located 25 mi ESE of Syracuse and the tiny hamlet of Pratts Hollow is about 5 miles away. It is the Exact Geographical center of NYS so technically I'm from Central NY!
I guess io really be considered Upstate you'd have to be from Saratoga north to Plattsburgh! BTW Just installed a set on Nokian WRg3's on an AUDI 2007 A6 Avant (245/45 x 17) I just bought last week. Be interesting to see how they compare to the 225/55x16 R2's on our '06 A6 Avant. I wanted the best snow I could find for the miserable secondary roads on the edge of the snowbelt for the car my wife and daughter are using most of the time. I'll use the WRG3 car for long trips & highway use, we'll see if these WRG3's are as good as Nokian's advertising says they are!



I went to college in Morrisville! Close to the geographic center!
 
Everybody still happy with the R2's as season approaches end (as we just got 5" on Long Island)?

The Sonata (215-60-16) needs new winter shoes for next year. I have the Conti EWC on spare rims and started the season at 7/32" front are now between 5-6/32" rears at 6/32. The last snow and this one definitely noticeable that it's time. Sonata see's 50 miles/day mostly highway at 70-75 with traffic (off hours). I really liked the EWC because I could cross rotate to even the wear. Not showing available (maybe next year) but I saw the posts about them changing to directional. They were extremely quiet and handled really well for a snow which was great. They were much better winter than mt WRG2's were previously. Costco has the WS80's with sales normally, Xi3 also available there. They won't even fix flats if they didn't sell them (even if you have a NEW car and get a flat) which annoys me (BJ's charges to fix but that's fine at least they do it).

Getting harder to find places locally to install / change over the mail order tires.

Sequoia has new Altimax Arctic through Mavis Tire, they beat the tirebuyer.com price installed through their "beat it" price thing on web site. It was about $380 installed for 265-70-16. Old set lasted many winters and were always great. Truck is ski vehicle and local DD for wife. If REALLY snowy she stays home (works in schools) so I can take Sequoia but still prefer the Sonata for most times.

Like everybody else torn between the R2, Xi3, WS80, Altimax or new version of EWC if available then. Maybe even catch a season end sale on one of the versions. Thoughts from the crowd?

My speedo with the 215-60-16 worn snows is also off by 3-4mph. Thought about going to 205-65-16 for winter to get that closer, which would also be a bit narrower.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon
Everybody still happy with the R2's as season approaches end (as we just got 5" on Long Island)?

The Sonata (215-60-16) needs new winter shoes for next year.

In that size, the Altimax Arctic is a really great winter tire, IMO. I have them in that size on my 530i, and I would not bother paying a huge premium for the Hakka R2.
 
Coming to the end of winter #2, my R2s are still doing great, even with the brutal stuff that was thrown at them this winter. They're down to about 8-9 32nds at this point, so they'll be fine through next winter and probably be up for replacement after that.
 
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete

In that size, the Altimax Arctic is a really great winter tire, IMO. I have them in that size on my 530i, and I would not bother paying a huge premium for the Hakka R2.


Price premium is always one of those trade offs. Pretty much the exact reason I got the Altimax's for the Sequoia. My wife's commute with the Sequoia is about 5 miles round trip all 30mph in town. Her tires dry rot before they wear usually.The Sonata of course is different.

I was a long user of Gislaved before tire shop switched me to Nokian's one season back in '89 or '90. When I read many places about the Altimax (and saw they were the same as my parents Gislaved that was on there Camry). I tried them for the Sequoia when the Nokians dry rotted and have been very satisfied especially since they were 1/2 the price when compared to Nokian at that time. I just wasn't sure if any of the newer tread technology was worth the extra $$. Has General (continental/gislaved) changed any tread compounds over the years? They work very well but I almost feel like they are old school (like me) at this point. I remember reading test results for the Gislaved Nordfrost 3 version back in like 2006.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon

……………..I just wasn't sure if any of the newer tread technology was worth the extra $$. ………….


It is if ice traction is a high priority.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon
………..Has General (continental/gislaved) changed any tread compounds over the years? They work very well but I almost feel like they are old school (like me) at this point. I remember reading test results for the Gislaved Nordfrost 3 version back in like 2006.


I get the impression that the General Altimax Arctic is only getting small improvements year to year, if at all. If there were big improvements, they usually come with a model name change. General winter tires do not usually show up in the comprehensive winter tire tests coming out of the Scandinavian countries and Russia, even though General has several models for sale over there: http://www.continental-tires.com/www/tires_de_en/themes/news/meldungen/pr_2015_02_18_gt_en.html

But General did introduce a new studdable LT tire this year, the Grabber Arctic.
http://www.moderntiredealer.com/news/story/2015/01/winter-wonder-the-general-grabber-arctic-lt.aspx

http://www.autos.ca/winter-driving/winter-tire-review-general-tire-grabber-arctic-lt/
 
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Originally Posted By: Sequoiasoon

……………..I just wasn't sure if any of the newer tread technology was worth the extra $$. ………….


It is if ice traction is a high priority.


Well for next winter, if nothing happens to the Sonata, it will be Blizzak WS80. Never had the Bridgestones before but these get good reviews so far. Many say less "squishy" feel as compared to previous versions.

Craigslist local, people moving to Florida, less than 900 miles on tires (from store receipt), 4 tires for $250 mounted/balanced.
 
Originally Posted By: Nebroch
Recent test results (Tekniikan Maailma): new Goodyear, R2 and Xi3 on the podium.

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/1977234-post10.html

I'll post some details when I get the magazine.


Nebroch, have you seen the surprising 2015 test results from Tekniikan Maailma, posted here:
http://www.btcf.fi/forum/showthread.php?p=3407901#post3407901

The Bridgestone WS80 came in last, out of 20 tires, in the ice braking test! It required 64.3m to come to a stop, compared to 55.6m for the Michelin Xi3 and 55.7m for the Nokian R2. The Nankang Activa Ice-1 tire stopped 0.1m shorter than the WS80, and tied with the WS80 for longest braking distance on wet asphalt.

Have you read any explanation about the poor ice and wet performance of the WS80 in any Finnish magazines?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top