Segment
1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Premium2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Upper-middle
Comparison: Firestone Winterhawk 3 vs. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001
Table of contents:
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from USA (Firestone) against a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Bridgestone). Generally, Bridgestone winter tyres are slightly better rated (93%) than Firestone (60%). But when it comes to comparing Firestone Winterhawk 3 and Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001, the rating is the same - 0%. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2017 225/50 R17 test, where both the Winterhawk 3 and the Blizzak LM-001 were tested. See more mutual tests below. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 92% of Firestone Winterhawk 3 has C wet grip rating, whereas 71% of Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 has B rating.
| # | Firestone Winterhawk 3
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R13 - R18 | R14 - R21 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
2. Firestone Winterhawk 3 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Snow
(Overall rating)Dry
(Overall rating)Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Ice
(Overall rating)Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 1 | 2+ | |||
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 2 | 2 | 2- | |||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: Good | 1- | 2- | 2 | 2+ | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,2 | 25,9 | |||||
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 | 36,3 | 27,9 | |||||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 32,5 | 28,7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 25 | |||||
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 | 39,8 | 27,5 | |||||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 38,5 | 25,9 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,3 | 2,1 | 1,7 | 2,0 | 2,8 | 1,5 | 1,5 |
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: - | 3,0 | 2,9 | 2,4 | 2,0 | 2,8 | 2,0 | 2,2 |
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2,5 | 2,1 | 3,3 | 2,4 | 3,7 | 2,0 | 2,1 |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,8 | 1,9 | 1,7 | 2,2 | 2,8 | 1 | 1,5 |
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: - | 4,6 | 2,3 | 2,8 | 2,6 | 3,0 | 2,0 | 1,8 |
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2,8 | 2,6 | 1,9 | 2,9 | 3,6 | 2,5 | 2,0 |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 36,8 | 27,7 | |||||
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 | 41,9 | 28,9 | |||||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 43,4 | 28,1 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 2+ | 1 | 1 | |||
| Firestone Winterhawk 3 Rating: - | 2- | 2 | 2 | 2 | |||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2- | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
