CX-5: How's the AWD do in winter? Is it fun to drive?

[MikeM.]

Mike- thanks for the feedback. To clarify, I only intend to run the x-ice December through April. Will go back to the all seasons otherwise. The michelins are also the same price as the blizzaks, which offer no tread wear warranty. Again I'm not concerned about a claim, just feel more confident that Michelin thinks they will last longer.

I think you misunderstood what I was attempting to say. The other tires don't have a tread life warranty. This means they can sell a tire that costs more to make at a slightly lower price point. The fact that they cost the same is meaningless because you don't know how much mark-up there is. The consumer always ends up paying for the tread life warranty and I would not use the fact that one tire offers it as evidence, in and of itself, that it will last longer than any other tire that offers no warranty. The others don't offer a warranty because it's problematic to do so with winter tires (the consumer takes the winter tires off before the warranty expires but the cars odometer is still racking up miles).


I agree the X-Ice 2's will probably last longer than say Blizzak WS80's and I wouldn't recommend the WS-80's for an AWD CX-5 for the same reason I don't recommend the X-Ice. After 3 winters with the UltraGrip Ice WRT's I am impressed with their tread life. I haven't kept good track of odometer readings but they look to have at least two more winters left, if not three. I put these on the CX-5 the first winter when the car was new so no direct comparisons with other tires on the same car but they do seem to be wearing more slowly than I expected relative to other winter tires on other cars. Their strong suit is on cold pavement, especially cold, very wet pavement. They are better than most all season radials in this regard.

 

[inlinev]

Ok, i did take a look at goodyears official site, and the ultra grip WRT does come in 225/65/17. I guess tirerack must be sold out or something...

edit, according to tireracks testings, the goodyear ultra grip WRT scored last on almost all categories agains the blizzak WS70, Michelin x-ice 3 and continental winter contact. Seems i'll probably stick with the Michelin.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=167

 

[MikeM.]

Ok, i did take a look at goodyears official site, and the ultra grip WRT does come in 225/65/17. I guess tirerack must be sold out or something...

edit, according to tireracks testings, the goodyear ultra grip WRT scored last on almost all categories agains the blizzak WS70, Michelin x-ice 3 and continental winter contact. Seems i'll probably stick with the Michelin.

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/testDisplay.jsp?ttid=167

I'm just saying the 225/65/17 UltrGrip Ice WRT's get along particularly well with the AWD CX-5. Tire rack tested the 215/60/16's and all the testing was done in far northern Europe and on an ice rink using a BMW sedan. I would expect your results with an AWD CX-5 in Pennsylvania to mirror my results more so than theirs. I was also fed up with the drastic fall off in winter performance as soon as my previous winter tires had a couple thousand miles on them. Tire rack was only testing brand new tires. The performance of my Goodyear's is very near what it was the first day I used them which has not been my experience with any other winter tire. I can't even remember why I decided to try these because previously I had a very dim view of Goodyear tires!

If you read my earlier reviews here, you will see that I found the snow and ice performance to be a bit below that of the most winter oriented winter tires but it was more than made up for by the bare and wet pavement performance and excellent steering response. Sure, Tire Rack found these tires to be harsh or too firm on bare pavement but that was with a lower profile tire on a completely different chassis. I just thought I would mention these things because I know you are concerned with tire life as well as performance.

It's easy to get into the minutia of which tire performed a little better on which test but totally lose sight of the fact that they are testing different tire sizes on a different chassis in a vastly different climate. I just got tired of winter tires that felt "squirmy" every time I drove them.

 

[MikeM.]

I've wondered about the 17 vs. 19's in general, if one rides better than the other. I've owned cars with rims ranging from 15 to 19" rims, and never really noticed a difference I could attribute to rim size except the larger rim has a larger contact patch without adding width, which leads to a much better steering feel.

It's not the rim size that's relevant to the ride as much as it is the sidewall height. When speaking of 17" vs. 19" on a CX-5, there is an implied assumption that the tire diameters are equal. Thus, the 17" wheel has another inch of sidewall height compared to the 19". But when comparing different vehicles, you could easily find that the sidewall on the 17" wheel is the same height as the sidewall on the 19" wheels (because the 19" wheels/tires might be a bigger diameter overall)

A bigger diameter overall will provide a nicer ride (all other things being equal) but the 17" and 19" CX-5 wheels/tires have the same overall diameter so it's all about sidewall height.

 

[Unobtanium]

It's not the rim size that's relevant to the ride as much as it is the sidewall height. When speaking of 17" vs. 19" on a CX-5, there is an implied assumption that the tire diameters are equal. Thus, the 17" wheel has another inch of sidewall height compared to the 19". But when comparing different vehicles, you could easily find that the sidewall on the 17" wheel is the same height as the sidewall on the 19" wheels (because the 19" wheels/tires might be a bigger diameter overall)

A bigger diameter overall will provide a nicer ride (all other things being equal) but the 17" and 19" CX-5 wheels/tires have the same overall diameter so it's all about sidewall height.

Right. You're correct. I was tired when I typed that and made the simple-minded error of just that. I agree.

 

[vroom]

To the OP:

I've driven 2 winters with my AWD, one being the worst in 100 years in one of the worst winter driving locations in North America. Here is my take on real world use (not climbing steep plastic slopes):

- You can take off from snowy intersection stops and red lights in a winter storm practically like on dry pavement. When there is slip, it is very controled and stable. (Nice)
- I've climbed up my moderately sloped driveway in an ice storm, while my GF's FWD Hyunday could not. I was very happy about not leaving my car in the street with all these plows going by. (Nice)
- Disactivating the traction control, I was able to get good drifts going on deserted streets or parking lots. (Fun!)
- In normal driving on snowy or icy roads, it feel better and more stable than anything I've driven before.

So can a Subaru out-perform the CX-5 on plastic hills or 45 degree wet grassy slopes. Possibly, I don't care, I'll never be in such a sittuation. The CX-5 AWD system does a good enough job at what I need it to do.

Disclosure: I do have what are probably some of the best winter tires out there, the Nokkian Hakkapelita R2 SUV. That helps a LOT with winter driving, way more than AWD. I was originally looking for the X-Ice, but 2 independent tire shop owners strongly suggested otherwise. The X-Ice are great on ice (as the name suggests), but not so good in snow (something about threads filling up too much). Here we get snow more than ice, so the Nokians were a no-brainer.

 

[inlinev]

Sniw tires are supposed to pack themselves with snow. Snow aids in snow traction. I think they just wanted to sell you something else. The x-ice finishes top spots on CR and tire rack testing. Not knocking the nokkians, you were given a silly excuse.

 

[MikeM.]

Sniw tires are supposed to pack themselves with snow. Snow aids in snow traction. I think they just wanted to sell you something else.

I agree. Even Tire Rack conceals the out of stock condition (making it appear that it's not available in that size rather than saying "out of stock") in order to get you to buy something else.

The x-ice finishes top spots on CR and tire rack testing.

Does Consumer Reports test tires all the way until end of life? I know Tire Rack does not. Because some winter tires only have the special winter rubber compound in the first 60% of the tread depth. That means they are essentially good for nothing at that point because the tread depth is compromised at the same time the winter rubber compound is worn away. Also, some winter tires have extra biting edges molded into the first 1/16" of tread which makes them particularly good for the first 1-2000 miles (where most testing occurs). This does not accurately reflect their real world performance.

 

[inlinev]

Mike that's a good point about tire life. I know the blizzaks are like this, but from what I can tell the x ice 3 is the same throughout. I'll dig around for details.

Mike, any thoughts on running narrow tires, like a 215/65/17. I see the x ice 3 doesn't cover 225/65/17. They have the 215 and 225/60/17, which would lead to a slight larger speed deviation (traveling slower than speedo)

 

[vroom]

Sniw tires are supposed to pack themselves with snow. Snow aids in snow traction. I think they just wanted to sell you something else. The x-ice finishes top spots on CR and tire rack testing. Not knocking the nokkians, you were given a silly excuse.

Possible, but I doubt it.

When I bought mine two years ago the X-Ice was on display in the show room. The guy told me he had them, could sell them to me if I insisted, but told me they were not well suited to our climate.

Last year my GF bought her snow tires for her Hyunday Elantra. Different shop banner, different owner. Again, X-Ice on display. The guy told her the exact same thing I was told the year before: the X-Ice are superb on ice, but medeocre on snow.

Tests by CR and other similar organizations are usually done on an icy track or hard packed snow, a condition both experts told me were perfect for the the X-Ice. So its no wonder they score highly.

Now as for snow packing in treads helping traction, I saw that once in a Youtube video. I'm faily certain it's a misconception of how snow tires work. Nokkian goes to the trouble of explaining how their threads are designed to knock snow out of the threads. I also snow shoe and hike a lot in winter, and when my boots or snow shoes get full of snow, I slip all over the place. The reason has something to do with how snow cristals pack. If an empty thread packs snow on the ground, the ground-snow and thread-snow form a single mass of intertwined snow cristals. Very solid. Once the bond breaks and all the cristals at the interface have been sheared off, the bond can never be re-established as strongly. In other words, soft snow bonds well with soft snow when pressed toghether, but hard packed snow does not.

 

[MikeM.]

Mike, any thoughts on running narrow tires, like a 215/65/17. I see the x ice 3 doesn't cover 225/65/17. They have the 215 and 225/60/17, which would lead to a slight larger speed deviation (traveling slower than speedo)

There is a range of tire sizes/widths that are considered an "acceptable" fit on a given rim size but the sizes at the edges of that range get their beads squeezed together or spread apart a little to fit that rim width. This can have unintended consequences to the way the tread holds the road (or ice as the case may be), especially when cornering. It can also lead to uneven tread wear and a smaller air pressure window in order to avoid uneven tread wear. It's always safest to stay in the middle of the recommended range for a given rim size.

That said, as long as the tires meet the required load range, there can actually be some deep snow advantages to equipping your car with narrower winter rims and tires to suit.

It's odd the Xi3 isn't available in 225/65/17 because the xi2 was available (and still is) in that size. Michelin may have over manufactured the xi2 in that size and held off on the xi3 to dry up the supply channels of extra stock of the xi2.


One more thought on winter tire selection. I think tire testers neglect the importance of steering response on a winter tire. Let me explain why. Winter driving often comprises miles driven on roads near the freezing point at higher speeds. As a winter driver, I often don't know how much traction I might have at a given moment without feeling a slip or slide at some point and, while I will occasionally give the brakes a quick jab or move the steering wheel left/right to test surface traction, particularly if evening is setting in and temperatures are dropping, it's impractical to do this for every hollow or every 5 seconds. A winter tire with a lot of "tread squirm" (which is very common on winter tires) has a vague steering response which replicates the feeling of driving straight on slippery ice. A tire with excellent steering response communicates what it's doing back to the driver which allows an early detection of ice and valuable feedback that it's time to slow down. Even going in a straight line, a tire with good feedback talks to the driver, especially on a car like the CX-5. A squirmy tread masks this direct feedback.


Honestly, the Tire Rack winter tire testers acknowledged the superior steering response of the UltraGrip Ice WRT's but immediately followed with a strange comment about them feeling "unsettled" on lane changes. WTF? Usually an excellent steering response is excellent for quick lane changes. Now I've never driven that particular tire fitment on that BMW so I can't say what they were feeling but I can tell you that the 225/65/17's on the CX-5 don't exhibit any such behavior. In fact, the excellent steering response of the UltraGrip Ice WRT''s is EXACTLY what makes them my favorite winter tire to date. But that's because my CX-5 is AWD. If I had a 2WD car I would opt for a tire that had a bit more ultimate snow/ice traction because I might need it. There is no such concern with the excellent snow capabilities of the AWD CX-5 and I feel I am safer with the better feedback this tire provides. Plus, it's a bit more fun when pushing hard under winter conditions. Not only do I get more feedback but I get more progressive slides. The squirmy tires have a bit more all or nothing. At least it seems that way - it could be an illusion caused by the better feedback.

And just so there is no confusion, the name of the UltraGrip Ice WRT's is a misnomer. Their ultimate ice grip is average at best for a winter tire. But, on a car as good as the AWD CX-5 on the ice, you won't have any issues here.

 

[MikeM.]

Now as for snow packing in treads helping traction, I saw that once in a Youtube video. I'm faily certain it's a misconception of how snow tires work. Nokkian goes to the trouble of explaining how their threads are designed to knock snow out of the threads.

There is a bit of truth to both perspectives.

Fresh cold snow has millions of sharp crystals and traction will be increased if it packs into the treads, particularly if it's dry snow on top of a sheet of ice.

Old snow, refrozen snow and wet snow near and above the freezing point is better ejected from the treads. Because old/re-frozen-melted and wet/melting snow comprise the most challenging winter conditions, it is more important for a tire to eject this kind of snow than it is for it to hold onto cold/dry snow.

There are so many variations of winter driving conditions it boggles my mind. It's much more involved than "how much traction do I have on a scale of 1-20?".

 

[jhu8]

Not a winter diving video but a cool one nonetheless. https://youtu.be/jbZham9jtYc. Cx5 seems to do really well and the guy commends the fun in driving the car.

 

[inlinev]

Possible, but I doubt it.

When I bought mine two years ago the X-Ice was on display in the show room. The guy told me he had them, could sell them to me if I insisted, but told me they were not well suited to our climate.

Last year my GF bought her snow tires for her Hyunday Elantra. Different shop banner, different owner. Again, X-Ice on display. The guy told her the exact same thing I was told the year before: the X-Ice are superb on ice, but medeocre on snow.

Tests by CR and other similar organizations are usually done on an icy track or hard packed snow, a condition both experts told me were perfect for the the X-Ice. So its no wonder they score highly.

Now as for snow packing in treads helping traction, I saw that once in a Youtube video. I'm faily certain it's a misconception of how snow tires work. Nokkian goes to the trouble of explaining how their threads are designed to knock snow out of the threads. I also snow shoe and hike a lot in winter, and when my boots or snow shoes get full of snow, I slip all over the place. The reason has something to do with how snow cristals pack. If an empty thread packs snow on the ground, the ground-snow and thread-snow form a single mass of intertwined snow cristals. Very solid. Once the bond breaks and all the cristals at the interface have been sheared off, the bond can never be re-established as strongly. In other words, soft snow bonds well with soft snow when pressed toghether, but hard packed snow does not.

Given your location I can see why you went with the Nokian's. Here in Southeast Pennsylvania, we get about 40-60 inches of snow, but our roads are cleared fairly quickly. Salt is extensively used up here as well. We typically deal with slush and ice around here, and some snow, maybe an inch or two before it is cleared. So given this, i need my snow tires to offer better than average dry handling in the winter as well. And my research has led me to believe that the X-ice is better suited for this. Tire rack for example describes these tires as similar to all seasons in the dry, in feel and responsiveness. While I think the Nokian's would work for me here just as well, I don't believe they make the Hakka R2 in 225/65/17.

 

[inlinev]

There is a range of tire sizes/widths that are considered an "acceptable" fit on a given rim size but the sizes at the edges of that range get their beads squeezed together or spread apart a little to fit that rim width. This can have unintended consequences to the way the tread holds the road (or ice as the case may be), especially when cornering. It can also lead to uneven tread wear and a smaller air pressure window in order to avoid uneven tread wear. It's always safest to stay in the middle of the recommended range for a given rim size.

That said, as long as the tires meet the required load range, there can actually be some deep snow advantages to equipping your car with narrower winter rims and tires to suit.

It's odd the Xi3 isn't available in 225/65/17 because the xi2 was available (and still is) in that size. Michelin may have over manufactured the xi2 in that size and held off on the xi3 to dry up the supply channels of extra stock of the xi2.


One more thought on winter tire selection. I think tire testers neglect the importance of steering response on a winter tire. Let me explain why. Winter driving often comprises miles driven on roads near the freezing point at higher speeds. As a winter driver, I often don't know how much traction I might have at a given moment without feeling a slip or slide at some point and, while I will occasionally give the brakes a quick jab or move the steering wheel left/right to test surface traction, particularly if evening is setting in and temperatures are dropping, it's impractical to do this for every hollow or every 5 seconds. A winter tire with a lot of "tread squirm" (which is very common on winter tires) has a vague steering response which replicates the feeling of driving straight on slippery ice. A tire with excellent steering response communicates what it's doing back to the driver which allows an early detection of ice and valuable feedback that it's time to slow down. Even going in a straight line, a tire with good feedback talks to the driver, especially on a car like the CX-5. A squirmy tread masks this direct feedback.


Honestly, the Tire Rack winter tire testers acknowledged the superior steering response of the UltraGrip Ice WRT's but immediately followed with a strange comment about them feeling "unsettled" on lane changes. WTF? Usually an excellent steering response is excellent for quick lane changes. Now I've never driven that particular tire fitment on that BMW so I can't say what they were feeling but I can tell you that the 225/65/17's on the CX-5 don't exhibit any such behavior. In fact, the excellent steering response of the UltraGrip Ice WRT''s is EXACTLY what makes them my favorite winter tire to date. But that's because my CX-5 is AWD. If I had a 2WD car I would opt for a tire that had a bit more ultimate snow/ice traction because I might need it. There is no such concern with the excellent snow capabilities of the AWD CX-5 and I feel I am safer with the better feedback this tire provides. Plus, it's a bit more fun when pushing hard under winter conditions. Not only do I get more feedback but I get more progressive slides. The squirmy tires have a bit more all or nothing. At least it seems that way - it could be an illusion caused by the better feedback.

And just so there is no confusion, the name of the UltraGrip Ice WRT's is a misnomer. Their ultimate ice grip is average at best for a winter tire. But, on a car as good as the AWD CX-5 on the ice, you won't have any issues here.

I appreciate your feedback. Being in WA i'm sure you've gone through your share of snow tires. What other brands have you used?

Yes the 215's still come with a 99 load rating (~1700 lbs), same as the 225. They are a bit cheaper because it is a T speed rather than H with the 225.

Yes the size quirk is odd, but according to TR, Michelin has decided to keep the x-ice 2 for those "odd" sizes that they have decided not to offer in the 3. So maybe they want to clear stock.

 

[vroom]

And my research has led me to believe that the X-ice is better suited for this.

You may very well be right! I never said they were bad tires, just that they were not suited to my most common driving conditions here in the great white snowy North! A few years back we had a total accumulation of over 5 meters (15 feet)!

I While I think the Nokian's would work for me here just as well, I don't believe they make the Hakka R2 in 225/65/17

Unless they stopped, they do. I have some!

 

[ALafya]

Interesting read, Re: CRV on rollers test, which is very similar to the wet grass video:
http://www.l2sfbc.com/rmp/blog/honda-crv-tech-analysis-4wd-failure

What I don't completely understand is what happens with the clutch pack which connects the rear wheels. Is it slipping in this scenario? Sounds like a little less slip will get the car off the rollers. Based on the fact the previous gen CR-V was programmed to overcome this obstacle, with same/similar hardware and since Subaru videos show it can overcome it, and with CVT you get also a clutch-type coupling, what is the true limitation some AWD vehicles (but not others) have? Is it just better program?
With the CX-5, what happens if one of the front wheels goes in the air / loses traction with the ground? Seems that with open diff, it would be same as the rollers test.

 

[yugrus]

"With the CX-5, what happens if one of the front wheels goes in the air / loses traction with the ground?"

I'm very curious about that as well. I searched high and low, but from the drawings in service manual, it looks like that the rear axle gets power through the transfer case (two gears really) only from the front right hand drive shaft. It's not "symmetrical", as with Subaru AWD setup.
I'd imagine that if the wheel gets in the air it gets brake from ABS/TSC system, and the power goes to another wheel on the axle. But then it becomes peculiar if the RIGHT front wheel loses traction. It gets the brake, the left wheel gets traction, OK, fine. But what if the left wheel has no traction either? The power can not be sent to the rear because the front RIGHT axle is under the stability system control already...
Beats me...

 

[Unobtanium]

"With the CX-5, what happens if one of the front wheels goes in the air / loses traction with the ground?"

I'm very curious about that as well. I searched high and low, but from the drawings in service manual, it looks like that the rear axle gets power through the transfer case (two gears really) only from the front right hand drive shaft. It's not "symmetrical", as with Subaru AWD setup.
I'd imagine that if the wheel gets in the air it gets brake from ABS/TSC system, and the power goes to another wheel on the axle. But then it becomes peculiar if the RIGHT front wheel loses traction. It gets the brake, the left wheel gets traction, OK, fine. But what if the left wheel has no traction either? The power can not be sent to the rear because the front RIGHT axle is under the stability system control already...
Beats me...

5:05 rear wheel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_b06FYls1g

 

[yugrus]

5:05 rear wheel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_b06FYls1g

What did you get from it?