Snow tire question

Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.

Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
did fine.

When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
also have to be replaced for this winter.

Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
No problems all summer and fall.

Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
noise....

The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.

Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.

Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
that's what the tire shop manager said.

So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
miles on them---to the rear.

That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
impassable.

Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
was OK?

TIA.

Regards,

Eric M

Eric,

With today's FWD cars, it is generally considered SAFER to run 4 identical
tires. This is because it is felt that snows only in the front create too
much traction when braking and cornering when compared to the back tires,
giving cars a tendency to swap ends on slippery roads. 4 all-season tires
would offer more balanced braking and cornering. However, front-only snows
will typically give you better traction for acceleration. I don't know what
Blizzak's official policy is, but I am sure they would sell you only one
tire if you only needed one because of a blowout or something, so it can't
be a hard & fast rule.

My theory is the only contact between your car and anything that matters is
your tires. I get uncomfortable when my summer tires are below 1/2 tread
life because they just don't work as well in rain, let alone snow, plus they
seem to be more likely to go flat for whatever reason. I run 4 Nokians in
the winter and marvel at their traction. Todays soft compounds in modern
snow tires are really worth the money.

--
Dana C. Rohleder
Port Kent, NY


"Eric Mark" > wrote in message
om...
> Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
> Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
> rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.
>
> Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
> and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
> not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
> to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
> did fine.
>
> When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
> again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
> tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
> OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
> also have to be replaced for this winter.
>
> Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
> all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
> No problems all summer and fall.
>
> Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
> Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
> but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
> drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
> noise....
>
> The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
> in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
> tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
> was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.
>
> Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
> two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.
>
> Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
> liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
> brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
> all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
> if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
> that's what the tire shop manager said.
>
> So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
> to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
> wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
> the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
> miles on them---to the rear.
>
> That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
> in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
> impassable.
>
> Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
> Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
> driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
> front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
> been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
> was OK?
>
> TIA.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric M

> "Eric Mark" > wrote in message
> om...
>> Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
>> Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
>> rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.
>>
>> Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
>> and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
>> not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
>> to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
>> did fine.
>>
>> When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
>> again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
>> tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
>> OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
>> also have to be replaced for this winter.
>>
>> Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
>> all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
>> No problems all summer and fall.
>>
>> Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
>> Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
>> but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
>> drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
>> noise....
>>
>> The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
>> in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
>> tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
>> was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.
>>
>> Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
>> two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.
>>
>> Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
>> liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
>> brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
>> all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
>> if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
>> that's what the tire shop manager said.
>>
>> So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
>> to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
>> wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
>> the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
>> miles on them---to the rear.
>>
>> That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
>> in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
>> impassable.
>>
>> Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
>> Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
>> driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
>> front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
>> been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
>> was OK?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Eric M
>
>

Not sure about the "Official Tire Policy" but I purchased Bridgestone
Blizzaks the second year we purchased our 99 Saturn since I found that the
Firestone All season F40 were crappy in the snow in the Northeast.

You should be aware that the great ability of the Blizzaks end after around
12,000 miles I think you can read about it at http://www.tirerack.com where
I purchased mine.

Then they are like the all seasons you run all year through. One year ago I
decided to purchase the Pirelli P400 Touring tire and they went through the
winter with great results. So much that when I spoke to my friend at the
auto shop he said they are a very nice tire. On the expensive side but I
found them well worth it.

When I bought the Blizzaks I purchased all 4 for around $300 my friend
mounted and balanced them for free, they were exceptional in use. The price
of the tires should never really matter since your life is riding on those
tires.

Elector

I can not tell you about the Blizzaks only being sold in "packs" of 4
only. (Did you try www.tirerack.com?) But I can say that in my opinion
and experience it is better to have the same type of tire on all 4
corners of a car. Even when I had an old rear wheel drive car I had
much better handling in the snow when I had "snow" tires on all
corners. Nothing like turning the wheel and the car going straight
because the front tires can not get a grip.
I have a 2000 SL1 with 36,000 miles on it and it still has the factory
rubber. I never drove it in the snow (I also have a S10 Blazer, at the
slightest hint of snow I drive that.) so I have no experience with it
in the snow.

Paul



(Eric Mark) wrote in message . com>...
> Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
> Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
> rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.
>
> Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
> and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
> not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
> to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
> did fine.
>
> When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
> again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
> tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
> OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
> also have to be replaced for this winter.
>
> Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
> all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
> No problems all summer and fall.
>
> Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
> Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
> but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
> drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
> noise....
>
> The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
> in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
> tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
> was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.
>
> Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
> two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.
>
> Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
> liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
> brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
> all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
> if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
> that's what the tire shop manager said.
>
> So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
> to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
> wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
> the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
> miles on them---to the rear.
>
> That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
> in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
> impassable.
>
> Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
> Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
> driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
> front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
> been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
> was OK?
>
> TIA.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric M

"Dana Rohleder" > wrote in message >...
> Eric,
>
> With today's FWD cars, it is generally considered SAFER to run 4 identical
> tires. This is because it is felt that snows only in the front create too
> much traction when braking and cornering when compared to the back tires,
> giving cars a tendency to swap ends on slippery roads. 4 all-season tires
> would offer more balanced braking and cornering. However, front-only snows
> will typically give you better traction for acceleration. I don't know what
> Blizzak's official policy is, but I am sure they would sell you only one
> tire if you only needed one because of a blowout or something, so it can't
> be a hard & fast rule.
>
> My theory is the only contact between your car and anything that matters is
> your tires. I get uncomfortable when my summer tires are below 1/2 tread
> life because they just don't work as well in rain, let alone snow, plus they
> seem to be more likely to go flat for whatever reason. I run 4 Nokians in
> the winter and marvel at their traction. Todays soft compounds in modern
> snow tires are really worth the money.
>
> --
> Dana C. Rohleder
> Port Kent, NY
>

Hi Dana,

Thanks for the advice. As usual, in the end it comes down to money. I
already spent more than I had planned when I found out the car needed
brakes to pass inspection. The brakes, the two new snow tires, the
inspection and labor came to more than $450.

Plus as noted I had just purchased the Hankook all-seasons---touted as
top-of-the-line---in May; that set me back more than $150.

If I had a lot more money, I would make sure to always run four winter
tires from Thanksgiving to Easter, and also run nothing but the best
all-seasons with at least 12/32 tread the rest of the time.

Then again, if I had a lot more money, I would not be driving a used
Saturn S-series vehicle. That's not a slam, BTW; even though I've put
money into it, I still think my Saturn was a good investment and about
the best car I could get for the money, at least from a dealer. Double
my salary and I'd likely look elsewhere, though.

How much do you pay for four Nokias?

Regards,

Eric M

Living in upper ny state and being a skiier I've used snows on my cars for
over 25 years. I once subscribed to the idea that 2 snows were ok on
front drive cars until I looped it one day. It was on a curve and the
front had plenty of grip, the rear end just came out. That was about 15
yrs. ago and since then I've used snows all around. You can definitly
tell the rear end is more stable during turning and braking, so if you do
a lot of snow driving it's worth it.

I currently have cars with Dunlop Graspics and Winterforce. The Dunlops
definitly have the edge in dry road holding and tire wear. Both are great
on snow, but next time I'll fork out the extr $9 a tire for the Dunlops.
I've had Michelins (Artic Alpine) and Pirellis (210)over the years and
have been happy with those.

A few years ago, driving along a mountan highway in my 2 wheel drive Subaru
Legacy (I now drive a Saturn LW -- a lot better car), I hit a patch of ice
on the road, and gently (I'm an experienced winter driver) applied the
brakes.

Fast than you can blink an eye, the car switched ends and I was driving
backwards down the highway at about 80 k, with virtually no control.
Luckily, we hit a shallow ditch, with very little snow, the car changed ends
again, and I was able to restart the car (which had stalled) and drive out
of the ditch. Many places along that road have interesting curves and drop
offs -- I was very lucky.

My tires? Studded snow tires front, all season rear. I immediately
replaced the rear tires with studded ones, and the car was remarkably more
stable.

On my Saturn, I run 4 Michelin Alpin tires -- which the tire dealer
(Canadian Tire) would NOT install unless I put on 4. After my adventure
with the studded fronts, I know why.

As for the Alpins, they are great -- using a rubber compound that is soft
yet full depth. A lot of other tires have a softer rubber on the outer
portion of their treads, which becomes harder (and less sticky) as the tires
wear. I was told that Blizzaks are made this way.

Dave Fairfield


"Eric Mark" > wrote in message
om...
> Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
> Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
> rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.
>
> Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
> and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
> not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
> to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
> did fine.
>
> When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
> again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
> tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
> OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
> also have to be replaced for this winter.
>
> Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
> all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
> No problems all summer and fall.
>
> Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
> Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
> but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
> drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
> noise....
>
> The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
> in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
> tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
> was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.
>
> Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
> two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.
>
> Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
> liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
> brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
> all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
> if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
> that's what the tire shop manager said.
>
> So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
> to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
> wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
> the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
> miles on them---to the rear.
>
> That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
> in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
> impassable.
>
> Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
> Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
> driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
> front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
> been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
> was OK?
>
> TIA.
>
> Regards,
>
> Eric M

I have heard/read/been told many times that regardless of FWD or RWD, the
better tires should always be on the back. When braking this will give much
reduced likelihood of the rear passing the front in slippery conditions, and
will also when cornering have better rear traction to hopefully keep the
rear from breaking out before the front.

Many people like to go for the better traction in the front on a FWD (to
keep from getting stuck?). Is it not far better to have the front wheel
spinning/stuck trying to get started, than to have the rear of the car pass
the front in a corner or in a braking situation!

"Dave Fairfield" > wrote in message
news:j5Qtd.5839$U47.2092@clgrps12...
>A few years ago, driving along a mountan highway in my 2 wheel drive Subaru
>Legacy (I now drive a Saturn LW -- a lot better car), I hit a patch of ice
>on the road, and gently (I'm an experienced winter driver) applied the
>brakes.
>
> Fast than you can blink an eye, the car switched ends and I was driving
> backwards down the highway at about 80 k, with virtually no control.
> Luckily, we hit a shallow ditch, with very little snow, the car changed
> ends again, and I was able to restart the car (which had stalled) and
> drive out of the ditch. Many places along that road have interesting
> curves and drop offs -- I was very lucky.
>
> My tires? Studded snow tires front, all season rear. I immediately
> replaced the rear tires with studded ones, and the car was remarkably more
> stable.
>
> On my Saturn, I run 4 Michelin Alpin tires -- which the tire dealer
> (Canadian Tire) would NOT install unless I put on 4. After my adventure
> with the studded fronts, I know why.
>
> As for the Alpins, they are great -- using a rubber compound that is soft
> yet full depth. A lot of other tires have a softer rubber on the outer
> portion of their treads, which becomes harder (and less sticky) as the
> tires wear. I was told that Blizzaks are made this way.
>
> Dave Fairfield
>
>
> "Eric Mark" > wrote in message
> om...
>> Yesterday I took my 2000 Saturn SL2 in for inspection and two tires.
>> Turned out it needed new front brake pads, and I decided to get the
>> rotors too while I was spending all my Christmas money.
>>
>> Anyway, in re tires: I got the car in April 2003 with 31K miles on it
>> and what I'm pretty sure were the original tires. They were OK, but
>> not great; a bit noisy at times. I decided to cross my fingers and try
>> to make it through last winter with them, and for the most part they
>> did fine.
>>
>> When I got the car inspected in May, (expired in April, then expired
>> again in November to match the registration; PA is weird), the rear
>> tires did not pass inspection because of dry rot. The front ones were
>> OK, but down to about 6/32 or 7/32 tread at best. I knew they would
>> also have to be replaced for this winter.
>>
>> Anyway, I replaced the rear tires with a set of 2 Hankook Mileage Plus
>> all-seasons. Put them on the front, moved the older tires to the back.
>> No problems all summer and fall.
>>
>> Decided this week to get snow tires for the front and run the Hankook
>> Mileage Plus pair on the rear. Figured I'd try Blizzaks; heard nothing
>> but good things about them apart from the noise issue, and if you
>> drive a Saturn on roads around here you can't be too picky about
>> noise....
>>
>> The guy at the tire shop yesterday told me he could only sell Blizzaks
>> in sets of 4. Said it was not his idea; it came from the company: 4
>> tires or nothing. At first I thought he was kidding, then figured he
>> was trying to pressure me into buying 4 tires instead of 2.
>>
>> Nope. Turned out he was dead serious and was quite happy to sell me
>> two snow tires for the front---just not Blizzaks.
>>
>> Weird. Has anyone else been through this? The issue seems to be
>> liability, in case someone who knows even less about cars than I buys
>> brand new Blizzaks and runs them along with a couple of crappy bald
>> all-seasons. in that case, the car could swing around in a panic stop,
>> if the Blizzak end stops and the crappy-tire-end doesn't. At least
>> that's what the tire shop manager said.
>>
>> So, since 4 Blizzaks was out of my price range and I saw no reason not
>> to run the excellent all-seasons that were only a few months old, I
>> wound up buying two Hankook 404 winter tires for the front, and moved
>> the Hankook all-seasons---still in good shape, with less than 10K
>> miles on them---to the rear.
>>
>> That should get me through the winter. It's fairly bad here at times
>> in the foothills of the Poconos in northeatern PA, but seldom
>> impassable.
>>
>> Anyways, I'm curious about the Blizzak "4 tires or forget it" policy.
>> Is this true all over? Also, anyone on here who's an expert in winter
>> driving: what do you think of running 2 new Hankook snow tires up
>> front and 2 nearly new Hankook all-seasons in the rear; would I have
>> been better off just sticking to 4 all-seasons, as long as the tread
>> was OK?
>>
>> TIA.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Eric M
>
>

Everyone here is pretty much dead on. I've used 4 Blizzaks on my old
Acura Integra and they saved me once on some black ice here in
Washington. I went around a corner after making a stop and didn't know
or feel any lost of control. The car directly behind me spun out
completely at the same spot in the road. I now have an AWD VUE and
considering getting those or similar tires again...

"Nigel" > wrote in message
news:cDrud.479220$wV.124818@attbi_s54...
> Everyone here is pretty much dead on. I've used 4 Blizzaks on my old
> Acura Integra and they saved me once on some black ice here in
> Washington. I went around a corner after making a stop and didn't
know
> or feel any lost of control. The car directly behind me spun out
> completely at the same spot in the road. I now have an AWD VUE and
> considering getting those or similar tires again...

I put a set of Dunlop Graspics on my son's 96 SL2. I haven't driven
it in yet but he seems to like them.

Ken