Question on Nokian i3 & WR load/speed/wear ratings

[bsp]

I have decided to go with either the Nokian i3 or WR tires for my 05 Golf TDI as replacements in the oem size. The WRs may be overkill for central New Jersey/southeastern Pennsylvania winters but I will ruminate on that for a while yet as that will be my most difficult decision. I intend to run either year round and I understand the WRs will wear more quickly than the i3s and will do far better in the snow while the i3's will presumably give me better LRR. On the i3s I see one with a 91 load T rating and another with a 95 load H XL rating . I also see 3 WRs with 91 T, 95 T XL & 91 H ratings. Lets put aside for the moment any arguments about the "safety" of T versus H ratings as I've already seen the discussions on this. 90% of my driving is highway and I try to drive like an old lady for economy. I am assuming that the T rated tires will not wear out as quickly as the H rated ones (correct me if I'm wrong). Assuming I'm correct my question is will the T rated tires for both sets of tires have any measurable better or worse traction than H rated tires in bad driving conditions/rain/snow if I go with those. This question may not apply to the WRs as much but I'm not sure of that either despite the WR's stated treadwear/traction ratings. Thanks.

 

[AkAl]

I just took my first set of wr's back for replacement. they had 4 oz. on one wheel and 3 oz. on another they had 10000 mi on them and were quite worn ,hard to believe you can get 60000 mi. out of these . however the dealer replaced them with new ones that seem much more round. they are a moderately good snow tire nowhere as good as studs,for the price I think I would go with Cooper next time .I drive a 97 passat tdi all thru southcentral Alaska. just for your info.

 

[tditom]

here is my experience with the WR's on my Passat. I would definitely recommend these tires for anyone. If you don't face too much snow, very often, then the i3's might carry you year-round.

I am assuming that the T rated tires will not wear out as quickly as the H rated ones (correct me if I'm wrong).

IIRC, the T-rated i3 is good for 85k miles, while the H has a 50 or 60k mi warranty. IMHO, they downgrade the warranty because of the extra service the H could see (at its speed rating). IOW, I think for a given car, either tire would wear the same.

My Nokian dealer explained to me that since the H is designed for the higher speed capability, it's sidewall is reinforced more. The "XL" tires are rated for a heavier load, I believe they will withstand more punishment.

...will the T rated tires for both sets of tires have any measurable better or worse traction than H rated tires in bad driving conditions...

No. The rubber composition and tread design determine your traction. This is the same for a given tire, no matter what the speed rating.

The WR's are great in all weather. If I was going to run one tire all year round I would use that. Since I have alloys I want to keep out of the snow/salted roads, I am planning on using the i3 for a 3 season tire.

 

[bsp]

The 10,000 seems pretty low to me. I thought you could get an absolute minimum of 40,000 on the WRs if you were easy on them and in my mind I know I would go immediately to the WRs if I knew I could run them to 60,000. Again I mostly do interstate blacktop driving usually around 65mph. What is your thought on this tditom? I'm assuming AKAI was driving on non-paved roads for that type of wear. Also, notwithstanding the fact that different tire loads and different treadwear patterns wear differently on the same car, I guess I'm a little confused on the speed ratings as I thought the general rule of thumb was that the higher the speed rating the more tire wear occured even if you were easy on the tires (with the assumption that even more wear occurs the harder you drive the tires). Again, I may be incorrect as to that assumption. If, however, say the only difference between the i3 T and H (or WR T and H) rated tires was the sidewall I could understand the treadwear/traction could theoretically the same.

 

[bsp]

Actually, it would be mostly 65 mph if it wasn't for that damn construction on the PA Turnpike.

 

[tditom]

...I thought you could get an absolute minimum of 40,000 on the WRs if you were easy on them and in my mind I know I would go immediately to the WRs if I knew I could run them to 60,000. Again I mostly do interstate blacktop driving usually around 65mph. What is your thought on this tditom?

...The next day I took the car in to the Nokian dealer and was very surprised that they determined the left rear tire was OK for further use! They also measured the tread on the tires and I was only down to 10/32" on a tire that had 25K mi on it. (these tires come with a 50K warranty).

My experience tells me that these will be good for well past 60K miles, on the roads I typically drive, and what you will be using it for.

...I thought the general rule of thumb was that the higher the speed rating the more tire wear occured even if you were easy on the tires (with the assumption that even more wear occurs the harder you drive the tires).

Performance tires will have a softer, grippier rubber compostition that will wear faster. Maybe that's what you're thinking of. The UTQG treadwear rating for the WR's is 400 weather they're T or H rated, so I believe they will wear at the same rate when they are on a tdi (because the actual load on the tire doesn't change ).

The UTQG treadwear rating for the i3 is 620 for either T or H rated. correction to my first post on the i3 warranty- the T is 80K mi and the H is 60K. Again- I think the mfr is being conservative and that either tire will have the same life on your Golf. I am planning on the 95H XL for my 3 season tire.

I don't know how much snow you get in that part of PA, but the i3 used to be advertised as handling light snow OK. Now they just call it an "all-season touring tire". If you really don't see much white stuff down there very often, you might be advised to go with this.

 

[bsp]

Thanks tditom.

 

[bsp]

My inclination would be to go to the i3s because of the better wear but I'm still remembering that one winter that we got 15 snowstorms so I'm still somewhat undecided. Thanks again.

 

[tditom]

Glad to help. IIRC, the i3 is about $10 cheaper, too. I believe it is M+S rated (mud + snow), BTW.

 

[jasonTDI]

FWIW I hate the WR in the summer. SLOPPY poor handling tire IMO. The stock Michelins were better in the dry. That said they are great in the winter, not like the RSi or a Blizzak but great for the 80% of the winter that is dry but salt covered. They do wear out fast too. I got 25K on the first set and 24K on the second. That's why I won't drive them year round any longer. They wer just fine on the Volvo XC70 I had though, but that is AWD and drives completly different.

I too had several out of round. They made it right though. I'd stay away from the 95 load ratings or the XL since they will ride really "trucky" and that is not fun.

 

[bsp]

I've had some Hakka's on a previous suv and personally I've had no problems with Nokian's quality control to this point. For me the best tire would be an allseason that's biased toward winter traction with great treadwear with ride and handling at the bottom of the list for various reasons that I feel I don't need to debate as I've considered all the pros and cons, including safety and economy. The i3s don't exactly do that but with their decent lrr and the wide variance of opinion on the WR's wear I guess I'll go with the i3s as an all year tire. I currently have Comfortreads but they've gotten pretty squirrly on wet roads after 55,000 miles on them which is very surprising since they have a lot of tread left on them. As far as quality control goes, I've had problems with Goodyears, Dunlops, and Bridgestones. Pirellis and Firestones I have head nothing but bad about. I've so overresearched this issue I'm driving myself crazy at this point. Outside of the Nokians, the only tires I have had trouble free up to this point have been Michelins.