Winter tires, questions!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by tcp71
The vensa is a camery wagon. LT tires would be ridiculous on that vehicle and make it extremely harsh. Wider than stock tires make for worse ability in the snow as they tend to float and slide more. Winter tires are often narrower than summers to cut through snow and slush better. A set of Nokian Hakkas on steel rims and you are off to the races.


Thats what I originally was considering but they run 100$ more per tire than AT3s..so 460$ more for a set with our taxes...thats a big chunk of change. If the AT3s are as good as even mid quality winters, id go for them.
 
I've heard good things about Continental Winter contact si which are last year's model. You might get a good deal on these since they're being replaced with Viking contact si. I also live in Montreal and would only go with a dedicated winter tire which has the proper specs and the soft compound rubber. I know they cost a little more but may really be worth it in the long run.
 
Originally Posted by Rolla07
Originally Posted by 14Accent
Just for fun, I'll throw in this data point:

I have a customer with a 2008-ish Honda Odyssey that runs AT3's. No joke. I believe the size is 235/65R16. They absolutely LOVE them on the van. It sounds ridiculous, but in all honesty they've worn absolutely perfectly and they run them year round. Keep in mind this is a FWD van.

I don't know what tires qualify under the new Canadian law, but if the AT3's work, give it a shot! They're cheap enough.

Also, stick with a 235. Trust me.


Stock size is 245/50/20. Closest match for 17 inch rim is 245/65/17. I have no issue running 235 though but not sure how that makes much of a difference? 10mm isnt much.
Canadian law just requires the snowflake symbol to be legal in winter.

1. Go to narrowest possible size. 10mm is huge difference when going through snow. I have on Sienna 235/60 R17 winter tires.
2. Forget A/T tires. A/T tires are for all terrain, and snow, ice are not type of terrain, but weather phenomenon. A/T tires have to have very rigid tread blocks as their primary use is rough terrain, rocks etc. They will move you forward, with ease. However, problem is stopping and handling. Here in CO, first people in the ditch are owners of JEEP's. They move forward easily, but they do not stop easily, and that is the most important advantage of snow tires. You could be fine with AWD and good all season tires, but it is braking and handling in curves that separate winter tires from everything else.
3. Someone mentioned that A/T tires will be harsh on Venza. Absolutely true! Venza is Camry, and suspension is as simple as possible (it is same as in my SIenna). That is not BMW X5, or Audi Q7 with double wishbone suspension to absorb harsh impacts.
4. What tires to get? Considering where you live I would go with Continental Viking 7, if not that than Nokian R3. If choice is between Michelin and Bridgestone, I would take Michelin Latitude Xi2 before Bridgestone Blizzak DM-V2. Take into consideration that Nokian is not particularly good performer in anything except snow and ice. Michelin will be best in most diverse conditions.
 
Ice is the main culprit in Montreal, as you well know, but you also get some winter rain. Most snow tires are terrible under wet conditions. If you drive outside of the city you'll need something with good snow traction too, especially to Ottawa or Northern Quebec with negative 25-40C temps. I'd look at Blizzak DM-V2, or Michelin XI2. They are fair instead of awful in rain.
 
Originally Posted by NO2
Ice is the main culprit in Montreal, as you well know, but you also get some winter rain. Most snow tires are terrible under wet conditions. If you drive outside of the city you'll need something with good snow traction too, especially to Ottawa or Northern Quebec with negative 25-40C temps. I'd look at Blizzak DM-V2, or Michelin XI2. They are fair instead of awful in rain.

If ice is main issue, I would definiately avoid DM-V2 and go with Xi2.
 
LT tires harsh? The stock 245/50/20s don't have much impact absorbing side wall compared to a 225/75/17.
How do people fall asleep on trains with steel wheels?
LT tires are the best kept secret. They out perform and outlast SL tires 2 or 3 to one on puddle jumpers.
 
Last edited:
"How do people fall asleep on trains with steel wheels?"

I suspect tracks are smoother than roads and 100 or so years of head start.

KrzyÅ›
 
Originally Posted by edyvw


3. Someone mentioned that A/T tires will be harsh on Venza. Absolutely true! Venza is Camry, and suspension is as simple as possible (it is same as in my SIenna). That is not BMW X5, or Audi Q7 with double wishbone suspension to absorb harsh impacts ...



Do you make this stuff up ? Seriously ...

A Venza is not a covered wagon running on wooden wheels. Really. You make it sound like the strut suspension is not capable of absorbing bumps. It is ...
 
Originally Posted by geeman789
Originally Posted by edyvw


3. Someone mentioned that A/T tires will be harsh on Venza. Absolutely true! Venza is Camry, and suspension is as simple as possible (it is same as in my SIenna). That is not BMW X5, or Audi Q7 with double wishbone suspension to absorb harsh impacts ...



Do you make this stuff up ? Seriously ...

A Venza is not a covered wagon running on wooden wheels. Really. You make it sound like the strut suspension is not capable of absorbing bumps. It is ...


The suspension is absolute POS. It is Camry in disguise, same like my Sienna. It is minimalistic suspension made to be as cheap as possible to repair. That is why people buy those vehicles right? You ain't gonna get suspension from Lexus GS350 on it.
I got RFT on my Senna when I bought it. The amount of harshness that it transfers to cabin, compared to BMW that was also on RFT, also on Bridgestone is hideous.
A/T would not behave any better than RFT's.
 
Last edited:
These Cooper AT tires use a compound that is somewhere in between a true winter and an all season compound. So therefore the performance is going to be somewhere in between, but leaning more towards the winter tire side. I have the Discoverer AT/W and they are perfectly controllable in snowy conditions. Ice is a different story, but I would argue that even true studless tires suck on ice.
 
My recommendation would be the Altimax Arctic 12, you can get it with or without studs according to your needs.

Edyvw is wrong about the Camry/Venza suspension being a "minimalistic suspension made to be as cheap as possible to repair." That would describe my Corolla rear suspension. The Camry suspension has some chops. I own both. As usual he uses any thread to troll for Toyota owners, trying to use his recent Sienna purchase as some kind of credential.
 
Originally Posted by slug_bug
I'm a big fan of Bridgestone Blizzak's. They got my litlle miata through the Michigan winter with no problem.

Love Blizzaks. I ran them on a 2WD Silverado in Buffalo NY Southtowns.
 
Originally Posted by HangFire
My recommendation would be the Altimax Arctic 12, you can get it with or without studs according to your needs.

Edyvw is wrong about the Camry/Venza suspension being a "minimalistic suspension made to be as cheap as possible to repair." That would describe my Corolla rear suspension. The Camry suspension has some chops. I own both. As usual he uses any thread to troll for Toyota owners, trying to use his recent Sienna purchase as some kind of credential.

I own Land Cruiser too. You cannot have it both ways. Camry has McPherson front suspension, it is compromise to offer simple, appliance vehicle. There is nothing wrong with it, but it is far cry from suspensions that are made to actually "wear" A/T tires or RFT tires or are off road focused or performance focused. There are vehicles made specifically in mind of A/T tires, and Venza is definiately not that vehicle. neither is my Tiguan, I would never put A/T tire on Tiguan, and that suspension is more complex than Camry or Venza, but still it is not made for such tires.
As for difference between Corolla and Camry, there is nothing special with rear suspension on Camry. It is 5 point independent suspension, ver common across industry.
I did not bash Toyota here. But every time anyone says about certain limitations of Toyota (or any similar vehicle) it is taken as bashing. It is appliance vehicle, and it has pro's and con's. It goes from point A to point B in most unremarkable way, and you cannot make suddenly Lexus GS out of it.
 
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by HangFire
My recommendation would be the Altimax Arctic 12, you can get it with or without studs according to your needs.

Edyvw is wrong about the Camry/Venza suspension being a "minimalistic suspension made to be as cheap as possible to repair." That would describe my Corolla rear suspension. The Camry suspension has some chops. I own both. As usual he uses any thread to troll for Toyota owners, trying to use his recent Sienna purchase as some kind of credential.

I own Land Cruiser too. You cannot have it both ways. Camry has McPherson front suspension, it is compromise to offer simple, appliance vehicle. There is nothing wrong with it, but it is far cry from suspensions that are made to actually "wear" A/T tires or RFT tires or are off road focused or performance focused. There are vehicles made specifically in mind of A/T tires, and Venza is definiately not that vehicle. neither is my Tiguan, I would never put A/T tire on Tiguan, and that suspension is more complex than Camry or Venza, but still it is not made for such tires.
As for difference between Corolla and Camry, there is nothing special with rear suspension on Camry. It is 5 point independent suspension, ver common across industry.
I did not bash Toyota here. But every time anyone says about certain limitations of Toyota (or any similar vehicle) it is taken as bashing. It is appliance vehicle, and it has pro's and con's. It goes from point A to point B in most unremarkable way, and you cannot make suddenly Lexus GS out of it.


I don't see how the Tiguan macpherson strut suspension is more complex than the Camry macpherson strut suspension. At least with the Camry, you can buy eccentric bolts to add camber adjustment, something you can't do on a VW MacPherson suspension since the MK4's.
 
Originally Posted by UG_Passat
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by HangFire
My recommendation would be the Altimax Arctic 12, you can get it with or without studs according to your needs.

Edyvw is wrong about the Camry/Venza suspension being a "minimalistic suspension made to be as cheap as possible to repair." That would describe my Corolla rear suspension. The Camry suspension has some chops. I own both. As usual he uses any thread to troll for Toyota owners, trying to use his recent Sienna purchase as some kind of credential.

I own Land Cruiser too. You cannot have it both ways. Camry has McPherson front suspension, it is compromise to offer simple, appliance vehicle. There is nothing wrong with it, but it is far cry from suspensions that are made to actually "wear" A/T tires or RFT tires or are off road focused or performance focused. There are vehicles made specifically in mind of A/T tires, and Venza is definiately not that vehicle. neither is my Tiguan, I would never put A/T tire on Tiguan, and that suspension is more complex than Camry or Venza, but still it is not made for such tires.
As for difference between Corolla and Camry, there is nothing special with rear suspension on Camry. It is 5 point independent suspension, ver common across industry.
I did not bash Toyota here. But every time anyone says about certain limitations of Toyota (or any similar vehicle) it is taken as bashing. It is appliance vehicle, and it has pro's and con's. It goes from point A to point B in most unremarkable way, and you cannot make suddenly Lexus GS out of it.


I don't see how the Tiguan macpherson strut suspension is more complex than the Camry macpherson strut suspension. At least with the Camry, you can buy eccentric bolts to add camber adjustment, something you can't do on a VW MacPherson suspension since the MK4's.

I should be more specific, suspension is more stout not per se complex as that type of suspension is generally very similar across industry.
The point was not to say that suspension on Venza is bad. Point is the vehicle is best suited with passenger vehicle tires. But apparently people think once you buy Toyota, anything is possible, bcs. Toyota.
 
The only head to head test I did was Blizzacks against Firestone Winterforce. The Blizzacks handily won, though the Firestone seem to be longer wearing.

I realize there are other fine choices but Blizzacks do for me most of the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
Best Winter tire for FWD with a bit too much power....
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
Ws6
O
Winter Tires or All Weather Tires
2 3 4
Replies
70
Views
6K
oilmaven
O
Pickup Truck Winter Tires - Considering Michelin X-Ice Snow SUV
Replies
14
Views
3K
mdocod
E
New Car with Summer Tires: Need Winter Tires, Too?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
2K
TiGeo
S
CR: Best Tire Brands
2 3
Replies
50
Views
6K
krzyss
Back
Top