Nokian WR First Impressions - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

DaveJ · #16 12-07-2003, 07:28 AM

I'm very happy with my how the WRs performed in the snow. We had about 6-8 inches of mostly hardpacked snow with some ice.

I thought the rear wheel traction was excellent for an all-season tire. And front traction was suprisingly good while turning in deep snow or slush.

No, the winter traction isn't as good as my Artic Alpin's, but I wouldn't expect them to be. These aren't dedicated snow tires. And the WR's don't have all the disadvantages of the Alpin's (noisy, terrible handling, fast wearing, one season use). Maybe the NRWs were better, but I never tried them. I suppose the tire to compare the WR's to is the new ContExtremeContact, which received positive early reviews. I don't know how it performed in real snow conditions.

ERASE, I'm sure your traction will improve as the tire wears off the resisdual from the manufacturing process. My dry and wet traction improved substantially over the course of 2-3 weeks of driving. I never notice the rear tires slipping in normal driving conditions. However, when I first tried them it was a common occurance.

If I had to do it again, I would still buy the WRs. But if I was driving the car full time and wanted maximum winter weather traction, I would buy dedicated snow tires, and most likely the Hakka's.

#17 12-10-2003, 10:57 AM

Dave,

I'm glad you are happy with your Wr's. Perhaps they work better on your 1998. I just went skiing to Killington yesterday in the 1994 E420. I thought that should wear off the compound. I did some faster driving on the dry pavement 110-120mph for about an hour or so on the way back. I thought the handling/ cornering was poorer compared to my older NRW's and the snow traction still less. I found the car fishtailing a lot on wet packed snow- something that never happened with my NRW's.

I can't wait to have these Wr's stripped off of the car. I was thinking about the Hakka 2's which though will corner worse and are rated for lower speeds- will at least, hopefully, provide me with some better winter traction.

I've looked online at some reviews. Here is one- unfortunately in swedish though easy enough to understand. http://www.aftonbladet.se/bil/0310/18/dacktest.pdf

Of course not all of the tires are available for sale in the USA. I thought canada might be a better judge for snowtires than the USA- so I found this there. http://forums.beyond.ca/showthread/t-26846.html

I swore by Hakka's when I had a ride with a friend who owns a ski shop on the access road at Killington ski resort he had an Acura Integra 2000 with Hakka 1's- the thing ripped through snowbanks no problem- we were laughing that the grip was so crazy!. I was convinced and bought NRW's for my 1993 300E 2.6 and was super satisfied- the dry weather performance was excellent IMHO. Snow performance was good too.

IMHO I counldn't believe the WR's were made by the same company- they were so unlike the other Hakka's I was so impressed by and reccommended to friends.

400E · #18 12-10-2003, 08:44 PM

Looks like a wide variety of opinions about the snow traction of WRs. I got to test mine out in the last 24 hours following the first snow of the season here in the midwest. I am very happy with the snow traction of these tires. They are every bit as good, if not better, than Michelin Arctic Alpins, in my experience with my car.

I do have them pumped up to 34F/36R if that makes a difference.

#19 12-11-2003, 08:55 AM

I'll try those pressures and see if there is an improvement- otherwise I'll be posting my impressions of the Hakka 2 later as I get them put on on Friday. I would be happy if it was a quick fix because I am sure the handling on the WR is superior to the Hakka 2.

edge · #20 12-12-2003, 12:27 AM

I wanted Hakka's but they are so expensive so I bought Kumho's.