Studded vs non-studded Nokian LT2/3 - calling fellow northerners & Canadians

[weissbrewer]

Northern folks with yrs of experience using true winter tires and studded on HD vehicles (not sedans/cars) I would like your use experience and opinion on choosing studded vs non-studded of same model. For example Nokian offers several models in both versions. I have used the LT2 studded a couple seasons and in the narrow 245/75-17 it provides incredible tracking through the slop as well as great traction on hard pack due to the increased ground pressure from it's narrow width.

I am considering a new set and am biting on the marketing of their even better new stud tech in the LT3. Now they are also making it in an almost ideal size of 265/70-18 though it would be giving up some of the narrow benefits of the above profile. 1" on width while gaining ground clearance but honestly, the clearance is not an issue because there's so much to begin with and when the snow is deep, it's generally just too deep regardless.

As for the idea of super wide tundra type flotation, I don't think that's going to happen on my 7400 lb lr3 with it's inability to fit a huge width tire anyway. Plus, in the US you're not out on Iceland type terrain anyway.

Nokian Tyres Hakkapeliitta LT3 - Premium winter tire for light trucks / Nokian Tyres

The Nokian Tyres Hakkapeliitta LT3 winter tire offers exceptional winter grip and driving stability combined with strong structure and superb durability for demanding winter use.

www.nokiantires.com

Main question here is studs vs not.

I have the luxury of using different vehicles for different outings such that a the studded vehicle wouldn't need to be used to go out around the low lands on daily basis and would be left parked for use only when traveling into the mtns and/or during storms or on a north/winter specific trip. For people who live somewhere less fluctuating that can be hard to understand. In Seattle area you can stay out of snow all winter honestly unless there's a freak lowland storm or you can drive in it every weekend or the whole time on a trip north/inland to BC, Idaho, etc.


If you want to post that you love Blizzacks or don't see the need for studs, just don't post.

I run Nokian R2 and R3s and live on the side of a mountain in NH...lots of ice, never going back to studs.....plus the r2/3 is great in the rain! I have them on a disco/diesel grand cherokee and a tesla...

 

[Speedkills]

So I tried the studless, my short review, they are great in snow but on ice I wish I would have gone with the studs.

 

[Jwestpro]

So I tried the studless, my short review, they are great in snow but on ice I wish I would have gone with the studs.

I had the studded LT2 Nokian on since 1st of year now and only take that vehicle out when conditions suggest. A week in the Winthrop area that I knew would be ice and snow proved the correct choice especially in dealing with the mountain passes.

 

[TripleE]

Bringing this thread back from the dead.

Thinking about going with the LT3 studded for my 110. No ABS, no traction control, open front and rear. Skiing every weekend, plus snow town resort trips. Snow in town melts the same day typically and frequent dry roads in town. I also have an RRS (rear locker) with Blizzaks and chains.

Was a little put off by the comments in this thread about conditions where studs are not ideal, old school tech, etc. Though the 110 is old school tech... Are those non-ideal conditions really that much of a difference in traction ability compared to non-studded?

Thanks!

 

[DieselRanger]

Bringing this thread back from the dead.

Thinking about going with the LT3 studded for my 110. No ABS, no traction control, open front and rear. Skiing every weekend, plus snow town resort trips. Snow in town melts the same day typically and frequent dry roads in town. I also have an RRS (rear locker) with Blizzaks and chains.

Was a little put off by the comments in this thread about conditions where studs are not ideal, old school tech, etc. Though the 110 is old school tech... Are those non-ideal conditions really that much of a difference in traction ability compared to non-studded?

Thanks!

My opinion: I think with old school tech you need old school traction. Modern snow tires with tiny bits of glass and elf-magic tread compounds have been designed to work well with modern traction control systems and ABS that can sense wheel slip in single-degree increments and work "with" those systems to maintain traction. In old school vehicles, that slip detector is in your butt and your hands on the steering wheel, and it's modulated by your right foot.

Studs will always be better on ice and hard packed snow, period. Doesn't matter what you're driving. But if you're only on sheet ice infrequently or drive to winter vs drive in winter, they're usually an unnecessary expense, and careful driving with good non-studded snows is usually good enough.

 

[TripleE]

Good perspective. Appreciate it.

 

[nickw]

Bringing this thread back from the dead.

Thinking about going with the LT3 studded for my 110. No ABS, no traction control, open front and rear. Skiing every weekend, plus snow town resort trips. Snow in town melts the same day typically and frequent dry roads in town. I also have an RRS (rear locker) with Blizzaks and chains.

Was a little put off by the comments in this thread about conditions where studs are not ideal, old school tech, etc. Though the 110 is old school tech... Are those non-ideal conditions really that much of a difference in traction ability compared to non-studded?

Thanks!

I put some LT3's on my 19' Ranger (235/85R16s) and ended up with the studded version of them. I've used studless in the past on my Audi's and they were absolutely amazing in the snow and saw not reason to transition to studs. BUT, it's a big but, based on my research the LT3's and most heavier duty truck tires are not built with the same siping and soft compound the lighter passenger tires are and it seemed that they didn't work as good as the lighter duty studless car tires. Also, when I purchased last year it seemed that most oversize / narrow tires I was looking for were primarily studded so that's the path I went. I'd wager a guess that most load range D/E tires need to have a stiffer compound to deal with weight so can't use the super soft compound tires we see on lighter duty tires...but I am no expert...

They work great, we don't get a lot of snow here in Portland but when we do, it's typically really brutal conditions, lots of glazed ice, slush, black ice, etc....I've had good luck with them so far!

 

[TripleE]

Interesting points there! I’ve just ordered a set of studded 285/75/16 to match the size of my KM3s as I’d like to carry a single sized set of chains.

 

[Red_Leader]

I put some LT3's on my 19' Ranger (235/85R16s) and ended up with the studded version of them. I've used studless in the past on my Audi's and they were absolutely amazing in the snow and saw not reason to transition to studs. BUT, it's a big but, based on my research the LT3's and most heavier duty truck tires are not built with the same siping and soft compound the lighter passenger tires are and it seemed that they didn't work as good as the lighter duty studless car tires. Also, when I purchased last year it seemed that most oversize / narrow tires I was looking for were primarily studded so that's the path I went. I'd wager a guess that most load range D/E tires need to have a stiffer compound to deal with weight so can't use the super soft compound tires we see on lighter duty tires...but I am no expert...

They work great, we don't get a lot of snow here in Portland but when we do, it's typically really brutal conditions, lots of glazed ice, slush, black ice, etc....I've had good luck with them so far!

Got any pics? I've got a 2020 Ranger and mulling this.