Comparison: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 vs. Nokian WR Snowproof (2026)

Dry road behaviour is where this matchup throws its one genuine surprise. The Nokian's dry braking score is measurably stronger than the Bridgestone's, and its dry handling objective score (98.5) sits marginally above the Blizzak's (96.5). On paper, the Finnish tyre stops shorter on a dry road. The Bridgestone, however, counters with more dynamic and precise steering on dry tarmac — testers consistently describe its handling as sporting and engaging, with accurate turn-in. The Nokian's dry composure is solid but less involving. For everyday driving, both cover dry roads adequately, but the Bridgestone's handling confidence is the more polished experience.

This is where the gap becomes decisive. Across two measured braking tests, the Bridgestone averages 30.7 m in the wet against the Nokian's 34.4 m — a nearly four-metre difference that is enormous in emergency situations. The Blizzak LM-005 earned the best wet result in its ADAC test group and collected consistent praise for short wet braking and exceptional aquaplaning resistance, where its score of 84.9 dwarfs the Nokian's 65.6. The Nokian's wet braking score of 68.3 is one of the weakest figures in the premium winter segment, and its aquaplaning behaviour is a genuine concern. For any driver who values wet-road safety as the primary criterion, this comparison is not close.

Snow braking distances are essentially identical across two shared tests — the Bridgestone averages 26.4 m, the Nokian 26.9 m. But the broader snow picture is more nuanced. The Nokian scores slightly better on overall snow performance (78.6 vs 77.6), with strong snow acceleration figures, while the Blizzak has repeatedly drawn criticism for understeer and limited lateral traction on snow — a recurring weakness noted across multiple independent test groups. The Nokian's ice lateral guidance score is also competitive. For drivers in genuinely severe winter climates with frequent snow and ice, the gap between these two narrows considerably — this is the one area where the Nokian can reasonably claim parity or a slight edge.

The Nokian WR Snowproof is meaningfully quieter and more comfortable than its test record might suggest. Its interior noise score (86.6) and ride comfort score (83.9) both outperform the Blizzak in aggregate, and real owners frequently highlight lower fuel consumption as a key strength — one reviewer noted nearly a litre per 100 km saved compared to a previous equivalent tyre, consistent with the Nokian's excellent rolling resistance score of 91.7 versus the Bridgestone's 86.6. The Nokian also holds a mileage advantage (72.8 vs 63.5), a known weakness of the Blizzak LM-005 flagged in ADAC testing. If refinement and running economy matter to you, the Nokian is the quieter, longer-lasting, more fuel-efficient option — the one domain where it genuinely leads.