Winter Cycling - Nokian vs. Nashbar studded tires?

I'm thinking of getting some studded tires for my commute this winter (first winter for commuting, second for riding). On these forums and on http://www.icebike.com, I've seen good reviews of both Nokian and Nashbar studded tires. On the Nokian side, I'm looking at the Hakkapeliitta W106; Nashbar only has one type (NS-TUD), actually made by Kenda. I'm looking at the 26x1.95 versions in both cases. My commute is mostly on paved roads that are generally plowed in winter. My main concern is black ice.

The differences I see in tires are as follows:
The Nokians position the studs in the center of the tread, while Nashbar keeps them on the outer portion.
The Nokians use tungsten carbide studs, while Nashbar uses steel.
The Nokians are slightly more expensive (about $5 per tire at the best prices I've been able to find).

I'm not concerned about the price difference, but the other two leave me wondering what's better. I've heard that wear is not really a concern with carbide studs, but I don't know about steel. Also, I have no idea what stud pattern is better. I can see merits for both. Might the tire pressure used have an effect on which is better?

Any comments/suggestions on these tires would be appreciated.

IMO, I'd like for those conditions tires that have the studs placed so that they do not (mostly) touch the road, but then again i'm somewhat used to icy conditions (20 years on winter cycling) and I am usually able to put my other foot on the ground for additional support, if the back wheel loses its friction (and mostly also when front wheel has done so (about 20 times, of which 6 have lead to a fall (usually minor ones)).

I might add that still, I would be extra careful if there's wet slick ice (the kind you cannot properly walk on). And, in addition, carrying broad objects on your back rack may mean that you cannot abandon your bike quickly enough if all control is lost, this is the main reason for me to not use broad rack packs in winter. It might be a good idea to practise this before trying steep downhills in winter.

The Nashbar (Kenda) 700c tires work great for me and they go on sale for great (affordable) prices. They have carbide studs as well. http://www.kendausa.com/bicycle/wintertire.html

No comparison data here, as I have not used the Kenda tyre. What I have read seems to imply the steel studs wear quickly, especially if you have to ride on pavement every now and then. I have used the same set of W106s for at least 4-5 winters now, and they're still good to go. I like the fact that I don't have to worry about the studs if there's an occasional patch of dry pavement.

--J

I'm tempted by the Kenda/Nashbar ones myself. I'll be mostly on ploughed roads, but I'd like the studs for when I hit ice or "ploughed on a budget" roads. I think the side-studs would be a good compromise, but since I haven't tried studded tired before I'm hesitant to spend my $$.

I have the Nashbar 26 X 1.95's. I used them last winter on many snowy/icy rides. I can tell you that i didn't have one occurance of slippage in a few hundred miles of riding. My ride even takes me on gravel roads which is very treacherous when covered with ice.

The ice is manageable until it melts and then refreezes. At that point it becomes VERY slick. I detected hardly any wear on these tires from last year. I did however, only run them on ice and snow. I tried not to run them on dry pavement, although it is usually not completely avoidable.

I would probably spring for the Nokians if i wanted to spend them money. Just because they are supposed to wear longer. I wouldn't probably be as anal about switching them out if i had the carbide studs.

http://www.kendausa.com/bicycle/wintertire.html

Of these I would choose Klondike K946s, and keep them quite hard, the additional friction the studs provide is most useful in turns. Gotta go checking LBSs for something like these, when the temperatures drop.

But... if there'd be a lot of breaking and accelerating, on an icy surface, involved on my biking routes, I'd probably would choose tires that have studs in the middle, too.

I have no experience with the Kenda's, but my Nokian Extreme 296's go on in November and stay on until March...they see time on ice and snow and on dry pavement. I commute on them so they are out there every day no matter what the conditions. I'm going into the third season on them this year and there is very little wear on the studs. Nokian makes a fantastic studded tire...I've had great experience with them.

I use the Nokian W106. The carbide studs is essential for me, because they wear at the same rate as the tire rubber does. At the end of this winter, I will have just about 2,000 miles (three seasons) of riding on them. How well do they work? Great!

If you have steel studs and ride mostly on dry pavement, the studs will wear out very quickly. That makes them pretty much useless.

Paul

Sorry, but I only have experience with the Nokians. However, I have absolutely no complaints.

http://www.bikegreenecounty.com/photos/Mtb62.jpg

Thanks to all for the comments. Given the discussion here, I think I'm going to spring for the Nokians and see how it goes.