Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 4 of 4
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    10
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Comparing Nokians

    I am very impressed with Nokian Extremes, but am interested in the difference between them and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta W240s. The difference in the number of studs between the two tires isn't that great, so I was wondering how they each ride. The W240s are described by Peter White as the ultimate no-compromises, do-everything studded tire. Anyone have experience with them? And has anyone ridden both the Extremes and W240s that could explain their ride characteristics/differences?

  2. #2
    Single-serving poster electrik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cgm55082 View Post
    I am very impressed with Nokian Extremes, but am interested in the difference between them and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta W240s. The difference in the number of studs between the two tires isn't that great, so I was wondering how they each ride. The W240s are described by Peter White as the ultimate no-compromises, do-everything studded tire. Anyone have experience with them? And has anyone ridden both the Extremes and W240s that could explain their ride characteristics/differences?
    Sizing, w240 are for touring applications and the extreme 294 are for XC

    w240

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    351
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This may be no help, but my only experience is with 160 stud Nokian Mount & Grounds. This is my second winter on them and my impressions are:

    1. They absolutely rule ice. I can't even imagine how Extremes, Freddie's Revenz, etc. can be any better, but I have to assume they are.
    2. Deep snow is hard work. I think this is an axiom across all winter tires, maybe the only exception is those double-wide rims with 4 inch wide tires run at 9 psi or whatever.
    3. So if you accept that a reasonable amount of studs tames ice, deep snow is hard work, then the natural conclusion is that all of the difference in studded tires are subtle gradients between ice and deep snow. Since the tread works the snow and the studs work the ice, there's probably some point of diminishing returns on number of studs unless you're racing across a Minneapolis lake. That said, I'm going to order a pair of Freddie's Revenz to put on my 2001 Hoo Koo E Koo Disc just to see what Winter singletrack is all about.

  4. #4
    Single-serving poster electrik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    5,097
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by RaleighComp View Post
    This may be no help, but my only experience is with 160 stud Nokian Mount & Grounds. This is my second winter on them and my impressions are:

    1. They absolutely rule ice. I can't even imagine how Extremes, Freddie's Revenz, etc. can be any better, but I have to assume they are.
    ...
    Yeah, those extremes are far stickier on ice... plus the larger tire in general is more stable around ruts.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •