Reviews & Comparisons

Get the Scoop on the Latest Winter Tires

Check out my freshest reviews and comparisons of winter tires right below.

On the Hunt for Something Specific? Use the search bar to find the exact winter tire you're looking for.

Got Questions or Need Help? Don't hesitate to reach out via email or drop a comment on any post. I'm here to guide you.

My goal? To give you clear, comprehensive reviews that make picking the right winter tires a breeze.

Latest Winter Tire Reviews at Your Fingertips:

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 vs Michelin X Ice XI3

Both the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 and the Michelin X Ice XI3, are reputed for their impressive winter performance, but each has its unique strengths and weaknesses. In this article, we’ll dive deep into their performance categories, giving you a comprehensive understanding of how these tires fare against each other.

Tire Sizes

The Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 comes in 52 total sizes in 15 to 19 inches (wheels) with following specs.

Speed ratings: T or H.
Load ratings: SL or XL.
Tread depth: 11 or 12/32″.
Weight: 17 to 29 lbs.
Tread warranty: None.

Review this tire in greater detail: https://snowytires.com/bridgestone-blizzak-ws90-review/

On the other side, the Michelin X Ice XI3 (used to) come in 14 to 19 inches rims with following specs.

Speed ratings: T and H.
Load ratings: SL or XL.
Tread depth: 10.5/32″.
Weight: 16 to 30 lbs.
Tread warranty: 40k miles.

Tread Appearance

The Bridgestone Blizzak Ws90 is renowned for its solid and thoughtfully crafted directional tread pattern. Let’s check it out in details.

The tread is made up primarily of three prominent ribs, with the central one being seamless/continuous-running.

This main rib is decorated with wave-like sipes and slanted lateral slits, elegantly paired with in-groove notches.

And those notches then join up with the V-shaped incisions aimed towards both sides (facing the shoulders).

Speaking of which, the shoulder blocks also feature notches, though they cover both angles.

Meaning, the ones facing the central rib are lateral, and you also see another pair of these notches, further out, formed by longitudinal slits.

Moreover, these lugs also contain zigzag-shaped slits on them, combined with elongated wave-like sipes.

On the other hand, Michelin X Ice XI3 also comes up with a very unique pattern as well.

Let’s start form the middle.

So here you see a straight longitudinal slits in the middle-most area, which is engraved with small rides on the base.

These basically hold on to the snow particles and allow for amazing traction values. I’ll discuss more on this later.

The surrounding blocks are situated on two ribs, forming two more longitudinal channels, though they are more tough passing, (you can say).

They consist of lugs, having sharp edges (which are chamfered), and numerous wave-like siping.

The shoulder lugs are elongated, and have a more curving design.

And these blocks are laced with multiple-angled sipes, and wave-like, longitudinal, in-groove notches.

Directional Grip

The efficiency of directional grip predominantly relies on the tread’s central area, since it’s where the majority of the tire’s load is concentrated, (talking about when the tire rolls straight, like on highways).

Considering this principle, it’s not surprising that the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 outshines its competitor in this respect. as the middle section of this tire is adorned with a continuous running rib, ensuring a steady ground contact as the tire propels forward in a straight line.

On the other hand, the Michelin X-Ice XI3’s center area features longitudinal grooves. And yes, the surrounding lugs, too, lack the streamlined structure necessary for optimum straight-line rolling.

Therefore, the Blizzak WS90 generally records shorter braking distances, making it superior in terms of directional grip.

Dry Handling

The tire’s lateral traction or handling is significantly influenced by the shoulder lugs.

As the tire navigates corners, the weight it carries shifts towards the tread’s edges (shoulders), and the interaction of these lugs with the ground dictates the handling performance.

So in this area, the Michelin X-Ice XI3 secures the lead, even though both tires showcase similar footprints.

The secret to its triumph lies in its shallower tread depth.

Although the difference is minimal, it plays a substantial role in handling.

Shallower tread depth means the lugs are less susceptible to flexing or bending as the tire corners.

This results in a more balanced steering feedback and superior handling on the X-Ice XI3.

Wet Traction

Wet traction hinges upon two major factors: the intricacy of the siping and the flexibility of the tread.

When it comes to these attributes, both tires perform remarkably well, as they both, well-equipped with plenty of multi-angled biters, provide nearly identical braking distances and handling times.

Though still, if you have to pick one here, I’d say, go with Blizzak, as the tire with it’s more aggressive siping pattern (featuring more teeth, if you will), gets to be 0.3 seconds better on wet handling lap times (on average).

Moreover, the tire also features a relatively softer rubber compound, so its sipes have a better efficacy to soak up the water particles coming underneath.

So Blizzak WS90 is although better, note that the difference is very marginal.

Tread Life

Winter tires typically suffer from shorter tread life, due to their softer rubber compound, which wears out relatively quickly.

Though, this rule, however, doesn’t hold true for the Michelin X-Ice XI3, which stands as one of the most long-lasting winter tires on the market.

So, what’s its secret?

The answer lies in its innovative tread compound. The rubber in the Michelin XI3 is considerably firmer and less susceptible to rapid wear.

In contrast, the Blizzak WS90 comes with a softer compound, which offers excellent adaptability in extreme temperatures but disappoints in the wear department.

That’s why it’s logical that Michelin offers a 40k miles warranty for the XI3, while Bridgestone doesn’t provide one for the Blizzak WS90.

Vibration Absorption

Tires are essentially auxiliary shock absorbers, as they cushion your ride from the imperfections of the road.

And having said that, among the two winter tire titans, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 takes the lead with its innovative compound.

It’s internal construction, basically consist of a softer nylon cap plies, and its outer rubber features a more thermal adaptive tread composition.

And together both of these provide a better settling of the vibrations, compared to Michelin XI3.

Noise Generation

Now let’s talk about the unseen enemy of a peaceful drive – tire noise.

But what causes noise? Well two things. First air that comes in (mostly through shoulder voids), hitting the tread walls.

And second, that impact echoing the walls around, producing in-groove resonance.

Now although both tires have really compact designs, which restrict a lot of air to come in and hit around, the Michelin X-Ice XI3 still manages to hold the upper hand.

This is thanks to its superior pitch sequencing technology, which creates a symphony of different tonal frequencies that harmoniously cancel each other out, effectively muffling the noise.

In simpler words, you don’t get as much groove resonance in this tire’s case.

So Blizzak is louder overall.

Snow Performance

When it comes to navigating snow, the Michelin X-Ice XI3 stands out. (I am talking about fluffy, soft snow here, by the way).

The tire basically is offering more in-groove biters, which effectively trap (more) snow particles.

And because of this, its tread makes snow contact on the ground (with that lodged snow).

It’s like making a snowball: snow sticks better to snow than it does to rubber, thereby creating superior traction.

On the other hand, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 isn’t able to do so. Its tightly packed, less aggressive tread pattern doesn’t catch as much snow, resulting in a lower snow collection efficiency.

So fluffy snow traction is seen better on Michelin XI3.

Ice Performance

Ice is the most slippery thing tires encounter, so here you need a ton of biters on the tread.

And that’s where Blizzak comes in with its thoughtfully crafted tread design, featuring angled cuts and V-shaped grooves that swing in both lateral directions, providing a much better grip.

This also goes for its more aggressive siping pattern, offering shorter braking efficacy on packed up snowy terrains.

On the flip side, the Michelin X-Ice XI3 although also features a lot of biters, they are still not enough to provide you with similar performance values compared to Blizzak.

Fuel Usage

When it comes to fuel economy, the game is all about the tire’s rolling resistance – think of it as the tread’s clinginess to the road.

Here, the Michelin’s tire steps up as the more fuel-efficient choice, even though both tires weigh about the same, and share similar tread designs.

So why is that the case?

Well Michelin XI3 has the advantage of shallower tread depth.

With this, its lugs aren’t that bending, as the tire maneuvers (especially corners).

And with less overall bending of the lugs, less heat generation is made, basically overall, less energy is consumed.

So you get a more fuel efficient tire compared to Blizzak WS90.

Summary

Based on my examination of various performance categories, it’s clear that both the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 and Michelin X-Ice XI3 have their unique strengths and weaknesses.

While the Blizzak WS90 excels in terms of directional grip, wet traction, vibration absorption, and ice performance, it falls short when it comes to dry handling, tread life, noise generation, snow performance, and fuel usage.

On the other hand, the Michelin X-Ice XI3 shines in these areas but doesn’t perform as well in the categories where the Blizzak WS90 leads.

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 vs LM-32

Both these winter tires from Bridgestone are noted for their stellar abilities, though they present unique strengths and weaknesses across different parameters such as comfort levels, fuel usage, traction on different surfaces, and dry directional grip.

Info on Sizes

The Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 comes in 16 to 20″ with following.

Speed ratings: H, V and W.
Load ratings: SL and XL.
Tread depth: 9 to 12/32″.
Weight: 22 to 35 lbs.

While the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 comes in 52 total sizes in 15 to 19 inches (wheels) with following specs.

Speed ratings: T or H.
Load ratings: SL or XL.
Tread depth: 11 or 12/32″.
Weight: 17 to 29 lbs.

Review this tire in greater detail: https://snowytires.com/bridgestone-blizzak-ws90-review/

Tread Appearance

The Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 is a strong tire for winter, with a special tread design. Let’s break down its key features.

The tread has three main parts, or ribs. So let’s talk about them one by one.

First off, the shoulders, so these lugs are filled with a lot of biters. You get lateral notches facing the middle, and these combined with the longitudinal slits (in the middle of these lugs), yield amazing traction values.

Moreover, these shoulder blocks also have zigzag slits running along near the edges of the tire. And like other winter tires, you get a ton of siping here as well.

The central rib is made continuous, and it features similar slits, which grow wider towards the edges as they meet the V-shaped notches.

These V shaped notches face on both sides laterally.

And of course you get a lot of siping here as well.

On the other hand, Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 also features a directional pattern.

If we divide up the tread in the same way, we find three parts, or “ribs”, in the middle that look like columns of blocks.

And these make 4 longitudinal channels.

The middle most rib is continuous running, and features rectilinear (lateral) sipes on it.

And yes, with it’s zigzag shape, it makes very tough passing grooves there.

The surrounding ribs have blocks with sharp edges, and interlocking wave-like sipes.

Moreover, you can also see thick slanted slits in them as well.

Moving towards shoulders, you see elongated lugs here, with similar tread features, though you get very prominent longitudinal cuts here (which act as snow sipes).

And yes, these lugs are connected to the following blocks by secondary rubber layers underneath (and those lugs are also connected to the middle-most rib in a similar fashion).

Comfort Levels

When it comes to comfort, the story unfolds in two parts, we have noise reduction department, and then there’s tire’s ability to settle down the road shocks.

Let’s check both out separately.

Road Noise

The primary source of this noise is air particles colliding with the walls of the tread, with the shoulder area serving as the main gateway.

So you can say, the smaller the shoulder voids, the less noise gets produced.

In this respect, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 scores more points with its relatively more compact design.

By keeping the shoulder voids small, it restricts the amount of air entering and hitting the tread walls.

However, it doesn’t get to celebrate victory just yet, as the Blizzak LM-32 counters with its pitch sequencing technology.

How this technology works?:

Well it works by putting variations in the tread block geometry, causing the air particles to create different sounds. These various tones then cancel each other out, thereby reducing noise.

So, when it comes to noise, it’s a stalemate between the two tires.

Road Bumps Absorption

Next, let’s talk about the ability to absorb shocks, where the Blizzak WS90 seems to take the lead, with its softer overall tread compound.

The tire’s malleable composition lets it soak up the imperfections of the road in a better way.

Though just like the noise, you get to see yet another plot twist here as well.

You see, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 may seem to be less efficient in soaking up the bumps, it still offers a subjectively better feel of overall steering.

So in the light of these factors, it seems fair to call it a draw between the two when it comes to overall comfort.

Fuel Usage

The fuel efficiency of tires is deeply rooted in the tread design and overall weight, as these elements impact the rolling resistance, a key factor that determines fuel consumption.

And in this regard, both Bridgestone Blizzaks exhibit nearly identical levels of rolling resistance.

The Blizzak WS90, lighter on average across all sizes, has slightly wider tread voids. This results in increased lug movement during maneuvers, which in turn requires additional fuel.

And at the same time, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32, despite its heavier weight applying more force on the lugs, manages to strike a balance, with its stiffer compound, leading to equivalent fuel consumption levels.

So, when it comes to fuel efficiency, it’s a draw between these two brothers.

Ice Traction

On icy terrains, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 steps into the spotlight with its superior performance.

The tire employs advanced design techniques, like the even distribution of specialized biters across the tread fitted with V-shaped notches.

These notches enable the tire to achieve a better grip on packed terrains. Moreover, the variety of siping angles within its design equips the tire with a multi-directional grip, enhancing traction.

Conversely, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32, with a less aggressive siping pattern and lacking multiple angles, finds its overall ice traction somewhat limited.

Fluffy Snow Traction

When it comes to navigating the softer, powdery snow terrains, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 takes a slight lead due to its comprehensive network of tread voids, functioning as snow traps.

These snow traps basically offers superior snow to snow contact, where the lodged snow meeting the ground provides greater friction.

And if you are wondering why that happens, know that naturally, snow like to stick to other snowflakes, instead of rubber.

Simply put, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 lacks these specific traits. I mean the tire isn’t able to provide as much snow contact with the lodged snow (in the grooves).

Moreover, with the tire’s smaller tread voids, you also don’t get to see as much paddling where on Blizzak LM-32, snow is thrown backwards and a much better forward momentum is generated.

So overall, Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 emerges as the superior choice in terms of powdery snow traction.

Dry Directional Grip

The capacity for directional grip is mostly attributed to the central area of the tread, as this region carries the bulk of the tire’s load during straight-line motion, like highway driving.

This specific attribute tells why the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 shines in this aspect.

Despite both tires showcasing continuous central ribs for consistent road contact, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32’s compact and continuous pattern extending to the surrounding lugs contributes to a shorter braking distance, by approximately 2 feet, compared to the Blizzak WS90.

Thus, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 demonstrates superior linear grip.

Dry Lateral Traction

Handling, or lateral traction performance is largely dependent on the tire’s shoulder structure and overall mass. Allow me to explain why.

During cornering, due to inertia, the weight is displaced to the edges of the tread (shoulders/sidewalls). Though both tires exhibit similar footprints in this area, the heavier Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 tends to exhibit more lug flex due to its greater weight.

This excessive lug bending leads to an imbalance between understeer and oversteer, compromising the tire’s overall steering feedback.

As a result, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 comes out on top in terms of dry handling, providing better control and stability.

Wet Traction

The tire’s traction on wet surfaces hinges greatly on its tread design and the composition of the rubber compound.

And having said that, here, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 shines a bit brighter than its rival, even though both tires feature extensive siping.

Sipes in a tire primarily act as channels/voids/slits that expel air and draw in water particles, thereby enhancing wet grip.

And so the Blizzak WS90 leveraging a dual siping system, combining assertive interlocking and linear designs, offers wet traction abilities.

Additionally, the multi-angled sipes present in the Blizzak WS90 offer superior cornering capabilities, ensuring grip in all directions.

On the other hand, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 opts for a different siping approach, featuring predominantly lateral sipes, resulting in a slightly different traction performance.

However, it’s noteworthy that the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 excels in resistance to hydroplaning, as the tire demonstrated superior ‘float’ speeds (the maximum speed a tire can maintain over standing water without losing contact with the road) in both straight and curved water-testing scenarios.

To Conclude

Assessing these tires across the spectrum of discussed criteria, it becomes evident that each holds its own appeal based on specific strengths.

The Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 stands out for its commendable performance in wet traction, shock absorption, and ice traction.

On the contrary, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 exhibits superior performance in powdery snow traction and dry directional grip.

It’s also noteworthy that both tires perform equivalently in terms of fuel usage and road noise, making the choice highly dependent on individual requirements and prevalent driving conditions.

Continental WinterContact SI vs Michelin X Ice Snow

Both Michelin X Ice Snow and Continental WinterContact SI are top performers in the winter tire market, each excelling in distinct aspects of traction, lifespan, and comfort, presenting various options to match diverse driver needs and road circumstances.

Available Sizes

The Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

Speed ratings: T and H.
Load ratings: SL and XL.
Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
Tread warranty: 40k miles.

On the other side, the Continental WinterContact SI comes in 15 to 20″ with following.

Speed ratings: H and T.
Load ratings: XL only.
Tread depth: 10/32″ on all.
Weight: 15 to 36 lbs.
Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Continental WinterContact SI, the tire presents a truly unique pattern.

Here, a directional design can be observed, with the central-most area consisting of an uninterrupted rib composed of misaligned blocks that mirror leaves on a vine.

These lugs feature chamfered edges and deep, interlocking sipes.

The surrounding lugs echo similar tread features, albeit with a larger size and siping patterns oriented at different angles to enhance overall traction.

Together, these lugs form three ribs, resulting in four longitudinal grooves.

These grooves are interconnected by slanted lateral tread voids, promoting excellent self-cleaning capabilities.

The shoulder lugs are elongated and have wider lateral gaps, which, in turn, yield a longer siping pattern, albeit with a similar wave-like design.

It’s worth noting that, in contrast to the central blocks, the sharper edges of the shoulder blocks are not chamfered.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, also comes with a distinct directional tread pattern.

Here, 5 circumferential grooves are formed by four ribs, in the middle, (not counting the shoulders).

The central most section has blocks very closed up together. So tread voids there are pretty crowded up, though they still are inter-connected with each other.

Here blocks have a mixture of dual siping, rectilinear and interlocking patterns.

Moreover, you also see sharp off-set edges here, along with snow vices.

Going outwards, you see less aggressive rib, with squared off blocks.

And on shoulders, you see blocks with thickest of all sipes.

These blocks have the widest of all lateral grooves, and their edges there are also serrated.

Dry Performance

The efficacy of dry grip relies on the extent of the rubber’s contact with the surface, underpinned by two primary factors: directional grip and lateral traction.

Let’s discuss them both one after another.

Directional Grip

The effectiveness of the directional grip depends on the central tread area, which basically tells you about the rubber-to-road contact.

And given that the middle area bears the brunt of the weight when a tire rolls straight, Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its more packed up interlocking lugs there, ensure a superior, and uninterrupted surface contact, delivering better performance.

Although the WinterContact SI features a near-continuous running layer, it lacks the streamlined execution of its counterpart, resulting in an almost 9 feet longer braking distance.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Handling

Handling rests on the tire’s shoulder areas and overall weight. As the directional travel applies pressure on the central lugs, cornering shifts the weight towards the shoulders due to inertia. The capacity of these lugs to engage with the road significantly affects performance.

Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its closed shoulder lugs, offers superior performance in this respect. Conversely, the Continental WinterContact SI, aside from featuring broader grooves, also carries a heavier structure.

This additional weight causes increased flex in the tire’s lugs, resulting in diminished steering feedback and an imbalance between understeering and oversteering.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Ice Traction

Michelin X-Ice Snow indisputably commands icy terrains, significantly outshining its counterpart, in all, braking, acceleration, and handling tests.

So why is this the case?

Well this is because simply put, the tire feature more biters.

The Continental tire, with its larger tread voids and less abundant notches simply can’t grip on slippery ice as better as the Michelin.

The tire lacks some intricate features like dual and multi angled siping, which are highly needed on this packed up snowy terrain.

In contrast, Michelin X-Ice Snow presents superior biters.

It offers a more diverse collection of groove notches and snow vices oriented in both lateral directions, coupled with an ample supply of dual-patterned siping, providing better overall gripping efficacy.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Comfort Levels

The sum of ride comfort hinges on two aspects: the noise emitted and the tire’s capacity to mitigate road shocks.

Firstly, let’s delve into the noise factor.

Simply put, noise generation is a product of air particles striking the tread’s walls. And so this tells us, that larger tread gaps result in a noisier ride.

Consequently, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, due to its tightly-packed tread gaps, provides a superior ride in terms of noise levels.

Enhanced by its sophisticated pitch sequencing technology, the tread blocks’ slight geometric variance results in air particles creating disparate tones that effectively cancel each other out.

On the other hand, the Continental WinterContact SI excels in vibration damping, thanks to its relatively softer tread compound. This feature grants it a superior shock absorption ability, ensuring a more smooth and comfortable ride.

Winner: Both!

Snow Traction

On fluffy snow, hands down we have a clear winner, the Continental WinterContact.

Basically, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, featuring a more closed design with a continuous running rib in the center and absent interlocking grooves, lacks the ability to gather snow, offering its rival an edge.

The significance of snow gathering stems from the principle that snow adheres better to snow than to rubber.

And the Continental tire, with its wider tread voids, permits improved snow-to-snow contact, enabling its lug voids to retain fluffy snow particles within their interconnected grooves and snow vices.

Additionally, its pronounced directional pattern facilitates paddling, scooping snow backwards, and generating superior forward momentum.

Winner: Continental WinterContact SI

Wet Traction

Two primary elements steer wet traction: the tread design and the rubber compound utilized in the tire’s construction. These variables essentially dictate the tire’s grip on damp surfaces and its resistance to hydroplaning.

Let’s discuss each.

Wet Grip

Although both tires feature substantial siping, the Michelin X-Ice Snow edges ahead slightly in performance. It incorporates a more aggressive siping pattern, merging linear and interlocking slits.

Moreover, the generous number of biters on its tread allows for more effective gripping on wet surfaces.

These attributes give the Michelin tire a slight advantage in terms of grip. Sipes operate by expelling air, subsequently forming a vacuum that draws in water particles.

In this area, the Continental WinterContact, with its less efficient siping, trails its competitor.

Winner: Michelin X Ice.

Hydroplaning resistance

Hydroplaning, essentially a form of floating, occurs when water forms a thin layer between the tire tread and the road surface due to ineffective water dispersion. Wider grooves help to prevent this.

That’s why the Continental WinterContact SI excels in this area.

Its broad grooves and sweeping arms allow for higher average speeds without hydroplaning in both straight-line and curve aquaplaning tests.

Its interconnected groove system efficiently disperses water in all directions, delivering superb hydroplaning resistance.

Winner: Continental WinterContact SI

Summing Up

What key takeaways can we glean from this discussion? Well, quite a few!

In snowy terrains, particularly with fluffy snow, the Continental WinterContact SI distinguishes itself through its unique tread design. However, this same design restrains the tire’s performance on icy and wet surfaces.

Also, its wider grooves, while beneficial for snow scooping, reduce the tire’s effectiveness in terms of dry traction, albeit the difference between the two tires is marginal.

In terms of comfort, both tires match evenly, given that comfort depends on noise generation and vibration absorption capabilities.

The Continental tire performs better in the latter, whereas the Michelin X-Ice Snow emerges as the superior choice for overall road noise reduction.

Cooper Evolution Winter vs Bridgestone Blizzak WS90

The stage is set for Cooper Evolution Winter, boasting its remarkable durability in severe conditions, to clash with the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90, celebrated for its comprehensive winter performance. When these tire titans vie for supremacy, who will claim victory?

Available Sizes

The Cooper Evolution Winter comes in 67 sizes in 14 to 20 inches, having following specs.

Speed ratings: T and H.
Load ratings: SL or XL.
Tread depth: 12 and 14/32″.
Weight: 17 to 37 lbs.
Tread warranty: None.

On the other hand, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 offer 52 total sizes in 15 to 19 inches (wheels) with following specs.

Speed ratings: T or H.
Load ratings: SL or XL.
Tread depth: 11 or 12/32″.
Weight: 17 to 29 lbs.

Review this tire in greater detail: https://snowytires.com/bridgestone-blizzak-ws90-review/

Tread Appearance

The Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 is a robust winter tire showcasing a well-thought-out tread design. Let’s take a deeper dive into its notable characteristics.

So its tread has 3 parts, where there are 2 outer ribs, and the one in the middle.

Starting with the outer ones, the shoulders, you see a lot of biters there.

There are full depth notches facing the middle, laterally, and then there are similar biters arranged longitudinally, (in the central part of these shoulders).

Moreover, you also see zigzag slits, further out.

And yes, of course, there’s a lot of siping here, as one would expect.

The middle rib is made continuous.

And there are lateral slits here, which meet up with the V shaped notches, facing both sides (laterally).

On the other hand, Cooper Evolution Winter also features a directional pattern.

When we look at the tread, we see it has three ribs, in the middle, which are like columns of blocks, if you will.

These “columns” create 4 circumferential channels of very zigzag shapes.

The middle most rib houses arrow-shaped lugs with keen edges, embedded with wave-like sipes that run laterally.

While on the surrounding ribs, you see two types of lugs having multi-angles siping, along with stud holes.

Moreover, these blocks are also “open”, forming wider surrounding grooves, or tread voids.

As for the shoulder lugs, they closely mirror the aforementioned features, including snow vices, sipes, and stud holes.

And yes like the following rib, these blocks also create snow-vices along with sharp (multiple) edges.

Wet Traction

Wet traction is predominantly determined by two elements: tread design and rubber compound. These, in turn, dictate the tire’s grip and hydroplaning resistance. Let’s check them out one by one.

Wet Grip

Despite both tires being equipped with considerable siping and pliable tread rubber, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 still gains the upper hand in terms of grip.

This is because, the tire features dual siping design, where you get to see a comprehensive array of rectilinear and interlocking pattern of those slits.

For folks who don’t know sipes work by sucking in water particles, so the biters can grip on the slightly dried up surface, and here dual siping designs work better.

Moreover, as already mentioned in the Ice Performance section, you get multiple angles to siping here on Blizzak too, and so they offer superior biting efficacy on the wet ground.

In contrast, the Cooper Evolution Winter, featuring only laterally oriented sipes, isn’t as proficient in delivering overall traction, resulting in longer wet braking distances and handling times on average.

Hydroplaning resistance

Hydroplaning occurs when water doesn’t let the tread to properly contact the surface below, and so this causes the tire to float a little bit, where all sort of traction is lost. So it’s a big deal.

And out of both tires, the Cooper Evolution Winter performs exceptionally well.

Its broader grooves and sweeping arms, enable higher average float speeds, in both curved and straight aquaplaning tests.

Moreover, its interconnected web of grooves proficiently disperses water in all directions, offering superior hydroplaning resistance overall.

On the other side, the Blizzak WS90 lacks with its longitudinal rib, which doesn’t allow proper sideways removal of water (as quickly as its counterpart).

Dry Traction

Dry traction is two parts, there’s directional grip and then there’s handling. Let’s check out both one by one.

Directional Grip

So dry grip depends on the central area of the tread, as that forms the most contact with the ground, especially when it comes to winter tires, with the rounded contact patch and directional design (for the most part).

And so in this case, with Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 takes the cake.

The tire features a continuous running central most rib, which doesn’t allow for any breaking of the connection between the rubber and the road.

This results in superior baking distances (measure of directional grip).

On the other side, Evolution Winter lacks with it’s wider tread voids, which can’t offer the similar contact patch.

Handling

The overall sideways traction or cornering abilities of a tire hinges on its shoulder lugs.

And here, two things are judged. One, how well those lugs meet with the ground as the tire turns. And two, how much lugs bend, during.

And in both of these aspects, you get to see, the Blizzak WS90 has the upper hand.

It’s closed up pattern forms a greater contact with the ground, and with it’s lighter weight, its lugs don’t want to flex/mold too much as the tire corners.

You see, during cornering, most of the tire’s weight goes towards shoulders, and their bending limits the over and under steering balance, causing a delayed steering response.

That’s why with heavier structures and wider grooves, you see longer handling lap times on Cooper Evolution Winter.

Snow Performance

When it comes to performance on fluffy snow, both tires make a commendable show of themselves, but the Cooper Evolution Winter still inches forward a little bit. And an examination of its tread design shows the reasons behind this.

As already discussed, the tire comes with a greater number of voids, predominantly formed by in-groove notches, which basically serve to entrap snow particles, facilitating better snow-to-snow contact.

The entrapped snow forms the contact patch with the ground as the tire rotates, creating improved traction, and this happens because snow adheres more effectively to itself than to rubber.

Furthermore, the tire features sweeping V-shaped lugs, which are proficient at displacing heavy snow, and aiding forward progression, by pushing the snow backward during rotation. (Newtons Third Law if you will).

And so this attributes contributes to the tire’s slightly superior acceleration times.

In contrast, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 takes the back seat here.

And the tire’s longer braking distance and handling times (on tests), are because of it’s rather more sealed/crowded up tread pattern with narrower in-groove notches.

These aren’t able to offer as much snow to snow contact.

Moreover, with missing swooping lugs, you also don’t get the plowing effect here too.

Tread Life

Tread life is highly influenced by rolling resistance, which is the product of tire’s weight and rubber composition.

So it makes sense why the Cooper Evolution Winter takes the back seat in this department too.

The tire’s heavier weight places a lot more stress on the tread, and as lugs are more spaced apart, each lug get to bear more weight pressure upon itself, as they rub against the road with greater force.

And yes, the tire’s relatively softer rubber compound isn’t helping that either.

In this context, the Blizzak WS90 holds the advantage of being lighter, and featuring streamlined lugs, which face smaller friction as the tread meets the road.

Ice Performance

On icy terrain, the situation flips, with the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 providing shorter braking distance (on average, on all tests). And you also get to see similar results in the acceleration department.

That’s because the tire features a ton of biters spread across the tread.

Its central rib for example gets to have two slanted incisions of varying widths, creating off-set edges, and even those join further into V shaped notches facing in both directions (sideways).

All of these tread features basically better grip on the packed up snow and icy terrain.

And yes, same goes for the sipes. Although both tires have plenty, the Blizzak WS90 gets to provide more angles to them.

In terms of handling, where shoulders play a major role, you get to see a ton of biters there as well.

Like I mentioned in the tire’s tread section, those shoulder blocks get both laterally and longitudinally arranged notches, which grip in all directions.

Moreover, you also get similar to the middle, multi-angled sipes. So these get to be parallel to the direction of tire’s travel, providing extra gripping.

In contrast, the Cooper Evolution Winter, with its wider tread voids, fails to grip the ice as effectively. Also, the absence of notches and multi-angled siping on its central and shoulder lugs leads to a longer average braking distance and handling time.

Though subjectively, its steering feedback aligns closely with that of the Blizzak WS90.

Comfort Levels

Tire comfort is predominantly influenced by factors like road noise and vibration absorption. These factors are determined by the tire’s construction, materials utilized, tread pattern, and sidewall design, which essentially reflects the smoothness during cornering.

Let me start with noise.

So simply put, noise is just air particles hitting the tread walls, so voided the tire gets, the louder it becomes.

That’s why with a smaller tread voids, you see Blizzak WS90 taking the lead here.

Though in the other part of comfort, which has to do with bumps absorption, you see Cooper Evolution performing better.

This is because the tire basically has a relatively softer tread compound, and so the shocks get absorbed in its tread in a much better way.

Fuel Economy

The fuel efficiency of tires is intrinsically tied to their traction and structural weight, and both of which are dimensions where the Cooper Evolution Winter could see some improvements.

The tire has a combination of relatively greater weight and tread voids, and both of these cause extra lug bending, as the tire corners, brakes or accelerates.

This molding/bending of the lugs, of course, causes extra energy expenditure.

On the other side, the Blizzak WS90 has a more streamlined, longitudinally aligned ribs, which don’t produce as much of the rolling resistance.

And the tread compactness, don’t waste energy in to flexing the blocks, and instead focuses that energy in to rolling the tire as a whole.

To Conclude

In terms of snow performance, the Cooper Evolution Winter excels with its unique tread design and larger number of tread voids, showcasing superior snow grip and removal abilities.

However, when faced with icy conditions, the Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 outperforms its rival. It owes this performance to its intricate biters, slanted incisions, and multi-angled sipes, which together enhance traction and handling capabilities.

In a similar manner, the tire also demonstrates superior grip, in both wet and dry roads, though the Cooper Evolution Winter shines in its resistance to hydroplaning.

But when considering all aspects, the Blizzak WS90 edges ahead, given its slightly superior fuel economy, tread life, and quieter performance.

Continental VikingContact 7 vs Michelin X Ice Snow

Michelin X Ice Snow and Continental VikingContact 7, both being leading names in the world of winter tires, showcase exceptional capabilities in different areas, setting the bar high in grip, durability, and ride quality, thus providing an array of choices to suit varying user preferences and driving conditions.

Available Sizes

The Michelin X-Ice Snow (review) comes in 125 total sizes in 15 to 22 inches. They have following specs.

Speed ratings: T and H.
Load ratings: SL and XL.
Tread depth: 10.5/32″ on all.
Weight: 16 to 40 lbs.
Tread warranty: 40k miles.

On the other side, the Continental VikingContact 7 (review), comes in 14 to 22 inches with following specs.

Speed ratings: H and T.
Load ratings: SL and XL (mostly).
Tread depth: 10/32″ on all.
Weight: 14 to 35 lbs.
Tread warranty: None.

Tread Pattern

Starting with the Continental VikingContact 7, the tire displays a densely packed tread design, albeit maintaining its directional orientation.

To understand this tread, it’s useful to examine its two parts: the central area and the shoulders.

The central part of the tread showcases blocky, squared-off lugs. These blocks are adorned with numerous wave-like sipes and chamfered edges. As they rest on secondary rubber layers, serving as reinforced foundations, the gaps between these blocks function as in-groove notches.

As we shift towards the tread extremities, the shoulder blocks here take on an elongated shape and are paired up, linking to each other. Beyond forming sharper edges, these blocks feature a thicker, more pronounced siping pattern.

It’s also worth mentioning that these blocks are separated from each other by broad lateral voids, which significantly aid in the tread’s self-cleaning.

The Michelin X-Ice Snow, on the other side, also displays a unique, directional tread pattern

Here a total of 6 ribs are seen.

The middle most area of the tread has very good inter-connectivity of tread voids.

Here blocks are seen with thick siping slits, along with wave-like pattern.

They also have chamfered edges, off-set sides, and snow vices to them, allowing for epic snow traction.

The surrounding lugs becomes more squared off, and are not equipped with as many biters.

Though same is not the case for shoulder lugs, which carry much aggressive overall siping, and have zigzag serrated edges on their lateral sides.

Snow Performance

While both tires demonstrate considerable prowess under snowy conditions, the Continental VikingContact 7 distinguishes itself as the more proficient option on fluffy snow, and an analysis of its tread design provides the reason why.

This tire, characterized by a larger number of tread voids, mainly in the form of in-groove notches, the VikingContact adeptly traps snow particles, thereby improving snow-to-snow contact.

And as snow adheres better to itself than it does to rubber, this results in enhanced gripping efficiency.

Moreover, the sweeping lugs of the VikingContact excel in clearing away heavy snow, enabling forward momentum by casting the snow backward as the tire rolls. This unique attribute contributes to the tire’s slightly superior acceleration times.

On the flip side, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exhibits somewhat diminished efficiency in braking and handling. Its design is relatively enclosed, featuring a continuous central rib and narrower in-groove notches.

And while it does possess a directional tread pattern, it lacks the comprehensive swooping arms of its counterpart, limiting its effectiveness in paddling through snow.

Winner: Continental VikingContact 7

Ice Performance

The tables turn when it comes to icy conditions, with the Michelin X-Ice Snow offering 6 feet shorter braking distances and faster acceleration times compared to its counterpart.

This superior performance can be attributed to the numerous intricate biters spread across the tire’s tread. Its central area features slanted incisions of varying width, and when combined with snow vices, this ensures superior longitudinal ice traction.

Further enhancing its performance are its multi-angled sipes, offering extra gripping on almost all kinds of icy surfaces.

On the other hand, the Continental VikingContact 7, characterized by wider tread voids, doesn’t grip the ice as efficiently as the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Moreover, it lacks notches and multi-angled siping on both the central and shoulder lugs, leading to longer average braking distances and handling times. However, subjectively, its steering feedback is almost on par with the Michelin X-Ice Snow.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Wet Traction

Wet traction primarily hinges on two factors: tread design and rubber composition, which inform us about grip and hydroplaning resistance respectively.

Regarding grip, despite both tires boasting ample siping and soft tread rubbers, the Michelin X-Ice Snow edges ahead.

This advantage is due to the tire’s extensive collection of straight and interlocking sipes, offering superior water absorption capabilities and thus leading to enhanced wet grip.

The Continental VikingContact 7, on the other hand, only features laterally oriented sipes, and thus doesn’t provide as much overall traction, leading to longer wet braking distances and handling times on average.

However, in the area of hydroplaning resistance, the Continental VikingContact 7 shines.

With its wider grooves and sweeping arms, it offers higher float speeds in both curved and straight aqua tests.

Its interconnected network of grooves efficiently disperses water in all directions, offering better resistance to hydroplaning overall.

Winner: Both!

Dry Traction

The efficiency of dry grip largely depends on the tire’s contact with the ground, with directional grip and lateral traction playing pivotal roles.

In this aspect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, with its continuous central rib, holds the upper hand. The tire’s design ensures superior and consistent surface contact as it moves in a straight line, particularly on highways. This, in turn, translates into shorter braking distances and quicker acceleration times in tests.

The continuous running rib of the Michelin X-Ice Snow, along with its surrounding closed-up lugs, contributes significantly to this aspect, although its lighter weight is a considerable factor in improving handling.

On the other hand, the heavier structure of the VikingContact 7 offers a limited performance. Its additional weight induces greater lug movement when the tire corners, reducing steering feedback and leading to longer handling times compared to its counterpart.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Comfort Levels

Comfort in a tire is largely determined by factors such as road noise and vibration absorption. These aspects are heavily influenced by the tire’s construction, the materials used, the tread pattern, and the overall sidewall design, which primarily dictates cornering smoothness.

Focusing on road noise and vibration absorption, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exhibits superior performance in terms of quietness. This is largely due to the tire’s less voided tread, a crucial aspect since noise typically results from air particles colliding with the tread walls.

However, the Continental VikingContact 7, despite being noisier, compensates for this with better vibration absorption, providing a smoother ride over bumps and thus enhancing the overall comfort. Considering all these factors, both tires offer comparable comfort levels.

Winner: Both!

Fuel Economy

Fuel consumption in tires is closely linked to their road surface adhesion and overall structural weight. These are areas where the VikingContact 7 could use some improvement.

The tire’s significant weight increases its overall rolling resistance, while its wider tread voids lead to increased friction as the tire rolls over asphalt surfaces.

Contrarily, the Michelin X-Ice Snow, being lighter, exerts less pressure on the surface, thereby reducing overall friction.

Also, its tread features longitudinally aligned ribs that streamline the tire’s movement when rolling straight, minimizing obstacles and saving energy. This, in turn, improves fuel economy.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

Tread Life

The longevity of tire tread is significantly impacted by rolling resistance, particularly with these two tire models. In this aspect, the Michelin X-Ice Snow takes the lead.

Due to its lighter weight, the Michelin X-Ice Snow exerts less pressure on the tread blocks as they interact with the road. This reduces friction and slows down the rate of rubber degradation, thus prolonging the tire’s lifespan.

Conversely, the Continental VikingContact 7, with its heavier weight, concentrates more load on a smaller rubber surface because of its larger tread voids. As a result, each lug bears more weight, accelerating tread wear and reducing its overall lifespan.

It’s worth noting, however, that the performance gap between the two tires is relatively small, which is likely why neither model comes with any tread life warranties.

Winner: Michelin X Ice Snow

To Conclude

When considering snow performance, the Continental VikingContact 7 shines with its unique tread design and higher number of tread voids, delivering superior snow gripping and clearing capabilities.

However, when it comes to icy conditions, the Michelin X-Ice Snow outperforms its counterpart, owing to its intricate biters, slanted incisions, and multi-angled sipes that provide enhanced traction and handling.

On dry asphalt, the Michelin X-Ice Snow leads in terms of grip, although the VikingContact 7 shows superior resistance to hydroplaning.

However, taking into account overall performance, the Michelin X-Ice Snow appears to be the more desirable choice. It offers slightly better fuel efficiency and tread life, along with quieter operation, providing a balanced blend of performance, comfort, and durability.