Tyre reviews Nokian Hakkapeliitta 7. Page 11 730

This tyre isn't for dry asphalt, it's perfect for snow and ice. I recommend it to those who mostly drive on suburban roads and real Russian winter conditions.

P.S. Moderator, add Nissan Juke to the list!

Installed 175/65 R13 (definitely Russia)
+ good tire, but I would have looked for another option next time
- expecting more from a well-advertised brand :) holds "slop" poorly, usually gets stuck when trying to traction, ABS often triggers, goes out of snow-covered (packed) groove slowly and reluctantly, may easily slide back, noisy.
otherwise, a good tire :)

We bought several sets for our service Ford Rangers 2009. Previously, we had Michelin X-Ice North and Bridgestone Blizzak DM Z3. If I summarize - Hakkapeliitta is a order of magnitude better than Michelin in most areas, but it lags behind Blizzak on icy wet roads. I was very impressed that it keeps the car's maneuverability to the end, especially for a pickup truck without ESP, it's just great. Yes, it

Pros: NO BLIPS
Cons: LOUD, EXPENSIVE, SQUEALS WHEN ACCELERATING, GRINDS WHEN BRAKING, ABS NOISE WHEN BRAKING, SLIPPERS IN CORNERS, DURING MOUNTING LARGE DISBALANCE, GOOD DISK BALANCE ON DISC (ADVICE: IF LIKE TO SHIP IN 50-100KM)
Comment: EXPERIENCED USING HAKKAPELIITTA1

Bought on February 1st. Finally I can drive on studded tires, previously I used Hackensack Q. Now, ice is no longer a problem! Braking and accelerating on ice is simply wonderful!!! Disadvantages are: cornering at high speeds and braking on a clean asphalt, but you can quickly get used to this. On an ungritted road, the car slightly shakes, and on a curve it can tip over the back of the car and weak side resistance to

They are completely normal tyres, and the price is not reasonably high, especially considering they are made in Russia. For the city, they are not suitable, as they brake and handle very badly on asphalt, compared to the GNF5 (presumably due to a large number of studs), they are good on snow and ice, it feels like they made this tyre just for themselves. And, yes, it is also very noisy.

I drove it through winter, wasn't exactly thrilled. Maybe that's because I expected more. Perhaps because my car is a rear-wheel drive, but I couldn't relax during the winter.

Now I'll be driving on my second season. Since I barely drove last year. Don't put studs on if you have a light car, as you'll be sliding like on ice skates.

In general, I don't see a big difference between

Bought from a dealer, already driven 350 km, more than 60 km/h not driven and no sharp starts and brakes, they say studs need to be run-in.
First snow, impressions: on liquid porridge slightly float, braking good, but expected more.
On ice keep, but haven't understood yet, the feeling that the braking distance is too long.
Today on a densely packed, wet porridge, 3 cm high, at exit from courtyard

Excellent tire. Drives and holds road very confidently on ice and snow. Crawls and digs into small snowdrifts like a madwoman). Never got stuck in snowed-in backyards all winter.

5 stars for "wear" - possibly wrong, since I didn't drive much on it, but... driving style is somewhere between "moderate" and "aggressive": sharp starts and maneuvers.., about half of the mileage (8000 km in Dec-Mar) was on

This tire is great. It works perfectly in snow, ice, and even on Moscow's abrasive asphalt. The car is very predictable when cornering and sliding, and it handles well in these situations. After 30,000 km of harsh winter driving, only a few studs have been lost from the front tires. Surprisingly, it also performs well in the rain and on dry asphalt - as long as you keep in mind that it's a studded tire. Compared to the fifth generation Haku