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.