I don't mean to pick on you, but your comment neatly sums up several of my gripes about peoples' misconceptions about tires.
What is my misconception about tires that you are referring to? The fact that Bridgestone is the company, blizzak is a family of tires within that company and the fact that there are different models with different applications, tread patterns and compound within that family of tires? This is all stuff I know already.
And Blizzak is a brand name - nothing more. You really think that a highway tire and a mud tire have a lot in common just because Bridgestone elects to mold the word 'DUELER' into the sidewall of both of them?
Again, same family of tires, different models. The all-terrain T/A is different from the all-terrain M/T. Just like the DM-V1 is different then the WS80. My guess is that the since the DM-V1 is listed as a light duty truck tire it has different sizes that are available for more vehicles that fall into that category then the WS80 does. It just happens to be that both of those models are available in a size that would work for the 17" CX-5 wheels. The OP stated he decided not to go with the "blizzards" (I'm assuming he meant blizzaks) and I was pointing out that they are both blizzaks tires, from bridgstone, just different models.
Eh... I'll grant that 'light duty truck' in itself is a source of a lot of confusion, but at the end of the day, the tire is what it is. I'd bet good money that the major distinction between the two is the tread compound, and that structurally they're pretty similar (at least in the 225/55R19 102x service description).
You are correct, the two tires have different tread compounds. The DM-V1 being an older tread compound. The DM-V1 is on closeout, I suspect because it is being discontinued in favor of a newer tire design and thread compound to fill the same role in the blizzak line-up. The WS80 is bridgestones newest WS series of tire. It replaced the WS70 and the WS60 before that, that replaced the WS50 before that.
Fully independent suspension, low torque, low weight, with a suspension setup that prioritizes handling and comfort over load capacity? Yeah... I'd put the CX-5 a hell of a lot closer to the car end of that equation.
Yes the CX-5 is not a truck, it is not classified as a full on SUV, it's a CUV which puts it kinda between a car and SUV/truck. Car like suspension design, car like power and torque values, but I disagree with you that the CX-5 has low weight. Compared to some cars that the WS80 would be a good candidate such as a Honda civic the CX-5 is much heavier. The CX-5 is more car like then say a jeep grand Cherokee but more truck like then a accord. which brings us to the next point....
Again, this is probably just a function of the tread compound, but it indicates that the WS-80 is more resistant to heat buildup and consequent damage. And the number is pretty arbitrary, anyway - you're talking about an index of results of laboratory tests, not a real-world road speed.
For this size of tire, both of them hold the same load rating which is more important then speed rating and propably dependent on the compound like you said. All this means is that the two tires are very similar in there applications. For the 225/65/R17 size that I'm looking at both the DM-V1 and the WS80 would work on the CX-5 from a load rating stand point. For instance the WS80 in a 195/50R16 which would have fit my old P5 has a load index of 84 and they don't even make that size in the DM-V1 so there is no comparison. like I said the WS80 is geared more towards passenger cars and passenger car tire sizes and the DM-V1 is geared more towards the sizes found on SUV's and trucks. It just so happens that there is over lap in the sizes available that would work for the CX-5. I don't ever plan on going above even 106 in the winter on winter tires so the speed rating is a mute point, I was just pointing out the difference.
Of course it did - all the WS-80 buyers wanted to crow to the world about how awesome their shiny new tires were. I appreciate that Tire Rack tries to get a decent sample size before they include a tire in their ratings table, but they still accept reviews with zero (or practically zero) miles on the tires. I'd be utterly shocked if there are even 500 people in the entire US who got 10,000 miles on a set of WS-80s last winter.
The rating may change as more people report and review the tires after several seasons but the fact that the WS80 has a newer compound and gets better reviewed in almost areas, doesn't really surprise me. The one area of contention that the OP brought up was dry traction and a mushy feeling on dry pavement. The WS80 was rated slightly higher then the DM-V1 on dry traction. Most likely due to the newer compound. there is a reason the DM-V1 is on closeout and being discontinued. It's because its an older tire in the line up and they are replacing it with a newer version with an updated tread pattern and compound, the DM-V2. You can read about here:
http://www.moderntiredealer.com/channel/retailing/news/story/2015/02/bridgestone-expands-blizzak-line-with-dm-v2.aspx
So I don't really know why you felt it necessary to "pick on" me about the fact that I didn't understand the OP when he said he didn't go with the "blizzards" because tire rack suggested a mushier ride on dry winter roads. From what I saw it was the opposite, with the WS80 being higher rated for dry winter road driving. But I guess you think I have misconceptions about tires in general and don't a thing about the topic. I guess I'll just continue to live in my ignorant bliss.
