Personal Review: Nokian WR vs Bridgestone RE92s

[StringFellow]

Well, since there are quite a few threads here about the RE92s and the WRs, I thought I would post my personal review for others.

 

My Driving Style (OB XT Limited): I am not an extremely agressive driver but do enjoy spirited driving, curvy back roads and some nice highway travel time. I usually don't take curves at high speeds or push the tires to the "edge".

 

Now that I have defined my driving style, on to the review.....

 

WR Pros over 92s:

 

1. Steering response has been improved greatly.

2. Nice road feedback/No spongy feeling with abrupt vehicle path changes.

3. Much quieter

4. Bumps don't feel as sharp/abrupt.

 

RE92 Pros over WRs:

 

1. WRs seem to pass **slight** road variations into the passenger cabin, much more so than the 92s.

2. Easier to find/purchase.

 

Overall the WRs are a huge improvement and make a nice all season tire, slightly skewed towards a winter tire. If you don't want a dedicate winter tire, but expereince some snow, this is a great upgrade for your Subbie.

 

If you are interested, here is where I purchase my tires: http://www.tirefactory.net

 

Mention the group buy over at NASIOC and get $10 off of a tire or $40 off of a set.

 

-S

[mele63]

Good job. Lots of relevant info. I'm planning to use up my RE92's, but I'm putting these on the list for replacements for when it's time.

[zzdoc]

The Nokian WR is available in 225/55R17. I've had a set on my XT since I bought it last November. So far they have 20,000 km on them and are holding up extremely well. THey were better than any all-season tire that I have ever used in the winter and have been much better in the summer than I expected. Very stable at speeds over 150 kph and good grip on corners and on wet roads.

They aren't as good as the combination of a high-performance winter tire and another set of high-performance summer tires but they are definitely the way to go if you drive in snow/ice and only want one set of tires.

[forestir]

Thanks for the review. Gotta get rid of that spongy feeling of the RE92s. And they howl so early...

[StringFellow]

According to Nokian, they are rated as an all season tire with a 50K mile warranty. I have the 225/55/17 installed.

 

-S

[zzdoc]

I traded the stock Bridgestone tires in on the Nokians the day that I picked up the car so I can't really comment on the price. I think that I paid somewhere in the order of $250 cdn difference to switch.

 

The 2225-55R17 size is listed on the Nokian website in the truck/SUV tires and carries an EL (extra load) designation. I don't know if that means the sidewalls are significantly stiffer or not but they certainly perform well. They handled a Northern Ontario winter without any problem at all.

[StringFellow]

I paided $675 (US) for a set of four with free shipping. That price included the NASIOC group buy discount. Basically worked out to about $169 (US) per tire. You still have to consider mounting and balancing, but that is the case with any tire ordered online. Not a cheap tire, but also not an expensive tire, especially with a 50K (miles) warranty. Prices and installation might vary if you can find the tires locally.

 

Everyone likes the Faulkens because of their cheap price, but if you figure it out based on the tread life, the Nokians work out to be slightly cheaper in the long run.

 

I also see people mentioning the Michilins, but they are almost $200 a piece from tire rack.

 

So overall, based on the performance of the tires and tread life, I would say it was a good price for what I got.

 

-S