Segment
1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 Premium2. Nokian WR D4 Upper-middle
Comparison: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 vs. Nokian WR D4
Table of contents:
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Bridgestone) against a tyre from a manufacturer from Finland (Nokian). Generally, Nokian winter tyres are slightly better rated (52%) than Bridgestone (46%). Important for this comparison is also the Automotorsport 2015 225/50 R17 test, where both the Blizzak LM-32 and the WR D4 were tested. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 52% of Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 has C wet grip rating, whereas 97% of Nokian WR D4 has B rating.
| # | Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 | Nokian WR D4 | Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R14 - R20 | R13 - R20 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
2. Nokian WR D4 14.
Average position in tests
1. Nokian WR D4 6.04
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Nokian WR D4 Highly recommended2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 Conditionally recommended
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian WR D4 Recommended2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 Conditionally recommended
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Points total | Wet | Dry | Snow | Enviromental impact | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 9,2 | 9,4 | 9,2 | 9,3 | 9,4 | ||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 7,4 | 6,6 | 7,7 | 8,0 | 7,3 | ||
| Nokian WR D4 Rating: Recommended | 8,2 | 8,0 | 7,9 | 8,7 | 8,4 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||