Segment
1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Premium2. BF Goodrich g-force Winter Upper-middle
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from USA (BF) against a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Bridgestone). Generally, Bridgestone winter tyres are slightly better rated (93%) than BF (75%). But when it comes to comparing BF Goodrich g-force Winter and Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001, the rating is the same - 0%. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2016 205/55 R16 test, where both the Goodrich g-force Winter and the Blizzak LM-001 were tested. See more mutual tests below.
# | BF Goodrich g-force Winter
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001
| Add to comparison |
---|---|---|---|
![]() | ![]() | ||
Dimensions | R14 - R18 | R14 - R21 | |
Price | |||
Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Premium2. BF Goodrich g-force Winter Upper-middle
Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 1- | 2 | 2+ | 1 | |||
BF Goodrich g-force Winter Rating: - | 3 | 2- | 2 | 1- | |||
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2 | 3+ | 2+ | 1- | |||
Show test details |
Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 34,2 | 25 | |||||
BF Goodrich g-force Winter | 39,4 | 26,8 | |||||
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 38,5 | 25,9 | |||||
Show test details |
Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 2,3 | 2,1 | 1,7 | 2,0 | 2,8 | 1,5 | 1,5 |
BF Goodrich g-force Winter Rating: - | 3,9 | 2,6 | 2,2 | 2,2 | 3,6 | 1,5 | 1,8 |
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2,5 | 2,1 | 3,3 | 2,4 | 3,7 | 2,0 | 2,1 |
Show test details |
Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Best values in test | 36,8 | 27,7 | |||||
BF Goodrich g-force Winter | 42,9 | 28,8 | |||||
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 43,4 | 28,1 | |||||
Show test details |