Nashua_Night_Hawk

205/60/16 MZ-02: Cheaper tire, introduced in 98',has a 801 rev/mile with diameter of 26".
Load Rating: 92.
Spee Rating: Q

or

215/55/16 MZ-01: More Expensive tire. Unidirectional tread, better performance, introduced in 99' has 817 rev/mile with diameter of 25.5" .
Load Rating: 91.
Spee Rating: Q

Reference Stock:
215/50/17 MXM4: More Expensive. a PIG, has 819 rev/mile with diameter of 25.5" .
Load Rating: 93 XL.
Spee Rating: V.

I ordered the MZ-02 but I think I will call tommorrow and order the MZ-01 instead, I have this option at no additional cost.

I ordered the 16" Fox 2 (same one from tirerack). Total cost of 4 rims + tires installed, balanced and monted is $725.

scl23

As far I I understand, Q is worse than V is worse than Z. Why are you getting smaller rims and tires with worse traction? The damn things we have now are like teflon donuts.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

MZ-01 and MZ-02 are snow tires.

EricL

Why not go with the tire with the better snow performance (as in the MZ-02)?

See the usual link:

http://www.tirerack.com/tires/surveyresults/winter.jsp

The load rating and difference in revs/mile are not of any major consequence. You would probably have to find someone who tried BOTH tires to know exactly what is up. AS you probably noticed the higher speed rated tires in 17" are a lot more $$$.

Are you planning to go over 99MPH in snow and ice conditions?

IMO -- They will probably be floppy enough that you probably wouldn't want to go 99 MPH on them in the dry...

WiLd~CL~TYPS-@SS

I have the 235-45-17 mz-01 right now..they are really good snow tires..i got them for $750..if you want them..i can hook you up with better deal..but you have to pay the shipping
i can post pic if you want

EricL

IMO -- if I were going to blow off the 16" wheels and go with the wider tire in a 235/45-17, I sure would pick the LM-22s. They are at the top of the customer ratings, have a HR load rating, and good dry pavement traction/handling. But, that's just me. Due to California’s retarded "chain/cable" regs, I would probably get 16" wheels and be able to toss some cables on them in snow areas (beats being stuck trying to get home)...

Nashua_Night_Hawk

EricL,

Although, the Survey result shows that MZ-02 ranks higher than MZ-01.

Here how they compared the MZ-01 with competition:

<table border="2" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" width="483">
<tr valign="middle">
<td><br>
</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass"><b><img height="95" width="128" src="../images/tests/icebox_s.jpg"><br>
<a href="../bridgestone/bs_blizz_mz01.jsp">Bridgestone<br>
Blizzak MZ-01</a></b></td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass"><b><img height="96" width="127" src="../images/tests/icebox_r.jpg"><br>
<a href="../pirelli/pi_win_ice_a.jsp">Michelin<br>
Pilot Alpin</a></b></td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass"><b><img height="95" width="128" src="../images/tests/icebox_b.jpg"><br>
<a href="../pirelli/pi_win_ice_a.jsp">Pirelli<br>
Asimmetrico Ice</a></b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="7" class="mainclass"><b>Real World Road Ride Ratings</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Ride Comfort</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">7.58</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.75</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.75</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Noise Comfort</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.67</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.33</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.67</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Handling</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">4.83</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.75</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">7.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Road Rating</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.36</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.61</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.81</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="7" class="mainclass"><b>Ice Rink Drive Ratings</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Acceleration</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">9.00</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.42</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.33</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Braking</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">8.08</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.33</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.00</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Cornering</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">8.33</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.00</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.08</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Handling</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">8.25</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.33</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.08</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Track Rating</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">8.42</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.27</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.12</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Combined</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">7.54</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">5.85</td>
<td colspan="2" align="center" class="mainclass">6.42</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="7" class="mainclass"><b>Ice Rink Drive Results</b></td>
</tr>
<tr valign="bottom">
<td class="mainclass"><br>
</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>60 ft. Accel<br>
Seconds</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>Cornering<br>
# Cones Hit</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>60 ft. Accel<br>
Seconds</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>Cornering<br>
# Cones Hit</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>60 ft. Accel<br>
Seconds</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass"><b>Cornering<br>
# Cones Hit</b></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass">Averages</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">4.97</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">0.5</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.50</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">3.50</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.17</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">2.20</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</td>
<td width="35%" align="right">

And here how is the MZ-02 compared to the competition:


<table border="2" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%">
<tr>
<td valign="top" class="mainclass"><b>REAL WORLD<br>
ROAD RIDE<br>
RATINGS - DRY</b></td>
<td class="mainclass">Bridgestone<br>
<a href="../bridgestone/bs_blizz.jsp">Blizzak WS-15</a><br>
Studless Winter<br>
215/60R16 95Q</td>
<td class="mainclass">Bridgestone<br>
<a href="../bridgestone/bs_blizz2.jsp">Blizzak MZ-02</a><br>
Studless Winter<br>
215/60R16 95Q</td>
<td class="mainclass">Michelin<br>
<a href="../michelin/mi_arctic_alpin.jsp">Arctic-Alpin</a><br>
Studless Winter<br>
215/60R16 95Q</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass"><b>Ride Comfort</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.94</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">7.13</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.81</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass"><b>Noise Comfort</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.75</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.81</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">7.13</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass"><b>Real World Handling</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">5.56</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">5.94</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.13</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td class="mainclass"><b>Overall Road Rating</b></td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.42</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.62</td>
<td align="center" class="mainclass">6.69</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</td>
<td width="33%" align="right">

EricL

Yes, as with various issues, the customer ratings are "influenced" by many factors.

However, I do give great stock to the test in a given session. The question is, what changed between sessions *and* are the conditions of the separate test done under identical conditions.

With that said -- sure, it is EXTREAMLY helpful to view the test results. However, I think a lot of people here are starting to compare the numbers as absolutes.

So, within a given test group, the test should be fair-and-square (subject to manufacturing variances -- which should be minor in a well-made tire).

However, there have been a few occasions where the Max performance numbers get compared to Ultra Performance numbers, and this IS NOT RIGHT.

If you look carefully, the tires are evaluated in different conditions...


"Bridgestone Blizzak MZ-01 - Developed for use where ice traction is a priority, Bridgestone's nickname of "The IceGripper" for the Blizzak MZ-01 identifies it's one of the tires that takes an alternate approach to the Performance Winter Tire Category. While the Blizzak MZ-01 is available in the low profile, large rim diameter sizes, rather than focusing on traditional European dry road handling and high speed durability, the Blizzak MZ-01 follows in the tradition of other Blizzak tires by providing superior ice traction combined with good snow traction."

Bridgestone Blizzak MZ-02

"The best ice traction with good snow traction and dry road handling for urban and rural areas with moderate to heavy snowfall, inconsistent snow removal, and on snow packed down by heavy traffic. Frequent or lengthy winter travel on crowded, dry expressways, as well as, on snow covered highways and winding roads."


IMO -- I don't think it is valid to join or key on the Michelin Alpines (in the different tests) and then use those numbers as absolutes. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but I would be careful about "splicing" independent test sets...

$0.02...

Quote from old BMW review: "* Bridgestone Blizzak MZ 01 - Good on ice, snow. Squirmy on dry/salted pavement. Special tread compound goes to only half tread depth - after that, it's just an OK 4-season tire. Wears very quickly. (MZ 02 is older, no 16" size)"

bigbadboss101

I went with 235 45 17 Blizzak LM22 for my Maxima. Tire rack survey ranked this better than the MZ01, 02, but not as high as the WS15, WS50 on ice. So far it has performed well in snow/ice. I am in Western Canada. Stock Potenza RE93 were hazardous.

CO-CL-S

I just got my MZ-02's 205/60-16 on 16" rims delivered from tirerack for $845. I'll mount them this weekend and let you know how they feel ride wise, I don't think we're getting any snow this weekend and I'm not planning a trip to the mountains.

Nashua_Night_Hawk

Same setup I ordered. Actually, the local town fair tire ordered this setup from Tirerack, but beated their price by a long stick. He charged me $725 installed. I put down $125 and $600 when mounted.

I guess EricL convienced me to stay with MZ-02. Thanks EricL

Now my 4 stock CL-S rims and 1 tire are for sale. Anyone takers... I have no use for them, so I will give them away for cheap....