The Hakka R2 reviews suggested it wasn't the world's best snow tire in the dry. I'm not sure I'd go with that for an area with minimal snowfall. The R3 is supposed to be better, but who knows.

Why not a performance snow instead? I really liked the Pirelli Sotozero 3's. I think plaz did too. I admittedly never actually spent much time on snow/ice with them though, but the reviews are good there too.


I won't ever run a full snow unless they're on a car that is reserved for snowy driving. They're too mushy in the dry to drive often on clear roads.

We always ran the Blizzak performance snows or the Michelin Pilot Alpins. No complaints about either except for the random really hot days in DC winter.

The Hakkas are extremely noisy and pretty aggressively biased to bad traction. They are great in slush, ice, and other foul inclement environments, but aren't great in the dry.

for the R2 that's the case. But they're saying the R3 changes the game a bit.

I think the right answer is to just buy whatever is on sale at tirerack. I hate all-season tires and I don't mind switching tires a couple times a year on the daily driver. With the ice storms we get here it's still worth it to me to have a tire meant for those conditions even if it means sacrificing feel / grip on January days where it's just cold, not snowy/icy.

edit: I was wrong, the tires I have on the Mazda's winter wheels are Pirelli Sottozeros, but they're old... probably three or four years old... so I'm not sure what model.