Ford Transit USA Forum banner

Horrible traction in snow

136K views 180 replies 72 participants last post by  Tijoe 
#1 ·
I just got back from 3 hours in the snow. I have plenty of weight in the van. The stock tires just don't have enough surface area meeting the road. These are the hancooks Ford put on from the factory. Only 4000 miles on them. The tread seams similar to the Michelin LTX I ran on my E 350. I really need to increase the size of the tires. It's bordering on dangerous driving on these hancooks.
 
#71 ·
Will the <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:punctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:ApplyBreakingRules/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT2 LT235/85R16 E/10PR BSW Studded snow tires work with a 2016 Transit 150 Wagon Van with the 3.5 engine?

I was looking for the
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:punctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:ApplyBreakingRules/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->Nokian Hakkapeliitta LT2 LT235/75R16 E/10PR BSW tires, i have not found these yet.


Other options for studded tires for this van?
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:punctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:ApplyBreakingRules/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w:DontGrowAutofit/> <w:UseFELayout/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]-->


<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->
 
#73 · (Edited)
If you're planning on rolling on deep snow or ice the wider footprint tire is likely to hinder performance. Rallycars are a great example, they run tall and skinny studded rubber to quickly (and controllably) navigate snowy mountain passes.

Either stick with the OEM size for winters or go 225/75. Studded Hakkas are the C3s like mentioned previously. Non-studded CR3.


There's almost zero chance a 31.7 OD tire is going to fit (w/o modification), especially being wider. See the fender clearance comparison...

http://www.wheel-size.com/calc/?whe...85-16X7ET55&fcl=50mm&wcl=30mm&scl=50mm&sr=0mm

 
#74 ·
First snow of the year here in Wisconsin. 2 inches of wet 30 F. snow, and my 12 passenger has horrendous traction on flat roads. Today convinced me that I need an alternative to these OEM Vanco 4 seasons.

One caveat regarding my poor traction, though, is that I've got the back row of seats out - that's what? 200 lbs that would otherwise be just in front of the rear axle? On a 3-4 ton van, how much is that really hurting my traction? I can't think that it'd be much. I could be wrong, though.

Still seeing what my local tire guys can come up with for winter wheels/winter Nokians combo... I'm thinking that the all weather Nokians might not be that much better than the OEMs - true or false? Therefore, I'm still thinking about going the dedicated winter tire/winter wheel combo and swapping wheels / tires in spring and fall.
 
#75 ·
Yesterday was the first snow run since getting the new Firestone Transforce tires. Very impressed with how the van handled, it was remarkably stable through some really slushy snow. Traction was much less of an issue than before.

My traction solution is 560 lbs of sand behind the 4th row. With everyone loaded up we are nearly 8,000 lbs on those skinny 235-section tires, and they seem to do a good job cutting through snow.

 
#76 ·
It would be nice to put some sort of a cargo net over the sand bags. If you get in an accident they will kill people in the van. A 50 lb sand bag will travel right thru everyone and everything in it's path.

I have the hak studded 235/65's and they perform very well. Lots of traction so far. I also have a lot of weight in the van to compensate, and run lower tire pressure than OEM.
 
#78 ·
I highly doubt you will see AWD anytime soon.

As for a fix I don't think this van is any different than other vehicles intended for load carrying. If you don't carry a load you need to add some weight for traction. Every drive a RWD pick up with no weight in the back in winter? awful experience.
 
#79 ·
Nokian WRC

I got a set of Nokian WRC3 studless snow tires today. ($175 each for tires only) The stock size with plenty of weight rating. I will say that they are more squishy feeling that the vanco's, which obviously are terrible in any slick conditions. The Vanco's felt much more rigid and responsive when you wiggle the steering wheel a little bit, while the Nokians make the van feel a bit like its over-loaded with cargo. (I know exactly how that feels!)

Can't give a report on their snow performance until I encounter some! Maybe over the holiday roadtrips! Here's what they look like anyway.

Land vehicle Tire Vehicle Alloy wheel Automotive tire


Tire Alloy wheel Automotive tire Synthetic rubber Wheel


Land vehicle Vehicle Car Van Motor vehicle
 
#80 ·
2018 will only have small changes. 2019 full model refresh......... then maybe but slim,,,, if they intend to add AWD or 4wd (less likely). The small wheel wells are the part that kills me. Going to trim them for better clearance similar to sprinter
 
#81 ·
First time in the snow with my o15 Transit. Stock Hankook Tires traction control and limited-slip 8 degree incline 2 inches of snow over ice. No way I would have gotten up the hill using the traction control. Engine lost power each wheel moved slightly. Turned off the traction control and the limited slip worked really well. I typically run real snow tires in the back 4 months out of the year.
 
#82 ·
funny what I would like the most is AWD over 4x4. For my use. 4x4 tends to be awful for driving, and sure divides more torque evening between the front and the rear, but AWD is more all around useful.

I had an FJ80 Land Cruiser with AWD. So all year it was in pushing the 4 tires. If the going got really rough, like a back country mud road, I could lock the centre diff, making it a 4x4. Otherwise the torque went front to back, and it always had great traction in the winter.

If they make a hybrid transit, with front wheel drive and a rear electric axle for the AWD that would be very nice.
 
#83 ·
Here in Ohio !!!!

I am not sure why everyone is so up in arms about traction, other than the fact that the Hancook tires and the Continental tires are fairly smooth tread. After the first measurable snow here ,my new Mastercraft Courser HXT tires are doing great and the TCS does just what it is supposed to do..drive wheel begins to lose traction and the TCS kicks in and shifts power to the other rear wheel,,, almost like having a limited slip differential! !! :D
 
#85 ·
Today is the first real test of the new tires, and I'm quite impressed. With 560 lbs of sand in the back and fresh Transforce HT tires this thing handles quite well. Far better than my '15 F150 does in 2WD.

I suspect having about 4,000 on those skinny drive tires makes much of the difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
#86 · (Edited)
Any Nokian experts out there?

I'm going to buy some new tires this week - that's the plan, anyway. I haven't completely given up on the idea of a second set of wheels with real snow tires, but the roads in central Wisconsin are plowed pretty well.

I was looking at the WR C3's or the Weatherproof C's as a year round tire. Not a lot of info out there online about these tires other than from Nokian themselves. From what I can tell, the WR C3's seem to be a dedicated winter tire and not suitable to doing 20k year round in the midwest with our hot summers - though I could be wrong about that. The Weatherproof C's are listed as all seasons. Correct about the WR C3's?

As for sizes, the WR C3's come in taller and skinnier 225/75's and the Weatherproof C's come in in the stock size 235/65. I think I'd prefer the taller skinnier 225's for the winter. Unfortunately, the Weatherproof C's don't come in that taller skinnier size. Would that small a difference in tire width even matter in light snow and ice?

Interestingly, the WR C3, the Weatherproof C, and the winter CR3 all look to have the same tread pattern, so it must be the rubber compound that differs between them and if I had to guess based on Nokian brochures, the CR3 would be the softest, the WR C3 in the middle, and the Weatherproof C the hardest.

So, am I wrong for thinking that if I went with a dedicated winter wheel setup, the softest CR3 would make the most sense, and if I went with a new all season on my on van year round, the Weatherproof C would be the way to go? Where would the WR C3 fit in?

But now that I review the 2016/2017 Nokian tire guide, the Weatherproof C isn't even listed...
https://dc602r66yb2n9.cloudfront.net/pub/web/attachments/others/pricelists/NT_US_Product_guide.pdf
 
#88 ·
Cost/benefit

Any Nokian experts out there?

I'm going to buy some new tires this week - that's the plan, anyway. I haven't completely given up on the idea of a second set of wheels with real snow tires, but the roads in central Wisconsin are plowed pretty well.

I was looking at the WR C3's or the Weatherproof C's as a year round tire. Not a lot of info out there online about these tires other than from Nokian themselves. From what I can tell, the WR C3's seem to be a dedicated winter tire and not suitable to doing 20k year round in the midwest with our hot summers - though I could be wrong about that. The Weatherproof C's are listed as all seasons. Correct about the WR C3's?

As for sizes, the WR C3's come in taller and skinnier 225/75's and the Weatherproof C's come in in the stock size 235/65. I think I'd prefer the taller skinnier 225's for the winter. Unfortunately, the Weatherproof C's don't come in that taller skinnier size. Would that small a difference in tire width even matter in light snow and ice?

Interestingly, the WR C3, the Weatherproof C, and the winter CR3 all look to have the same tread pattern, so it must be the rubber compound that differs between them and if I had to guess based on Nokian brochures, the CR3 would be the softest, the WR C3 in the middle, and the Weatherproof C the hardest.

So, am I wrong for thinking that if I went with a dedicated winter wheel setup, the softest CR3 would make the most sense, and if I went with a new all season on my on van year round, the Weatherproof C would be the way to go? Where would the WR C3 fit in?

But now that I review the 2016/2017 Nokian tire guide, the Weatherproof C isn't even listed...
https://dc602r66yb2n9.cloudfront.net/pub/web/attachments/others/pricelists/NT_US_Product_guide.pdf

You are using good logic and bring up interesting points. Ultimately it comes down to how the cost/benefit ratio works out for you. Dedicated rims versus changing tires versus not changing tires. Because I don't drive the van much in the summer I went with the factory spec'ed Hakkapalittas. I have driven Hakk's all year round and did not notice undo tire degradation in the summer. Did I get 100,000 mile Michelin kind of wear - no. But, this is all about compromises.


Yes, a narrower tire will give you better snow traction. Now, is it noticeable and, your stipulation was MINOR ice and snow. If you have not used Hakk's before then you would certainly never know the difference and in minor (less than say 3") I can't see it making much of a difference at all. I just drove thru 2-3" of ice/snow from last nights mid-west storm and had no problems with a fully loaded van on the stock spec'ed Hakk's.


I would also urge some caution on tire ratings. Letter and ply ratings does not tell you what the tires will actually support. There are very few tires in this dimension that are actually spec'ed to handle 3000#+ weights - the Hakk's are.


Good luck,


Larry
 
#89 ·
My first snow (10"+) Sunday with my empty 2015 Transit and it was horrible.. It was a very fluffy snow and I had a hard time getting the thing started from a stop. heading up a slight incline? fish tailing in slow motion everywhere. It sucked.. Stopped at the local tire dealer to check on snow tires and got a price of $1051? WTF? Tire guys had to push me out of their parking lot..

Today at work was going to be a pain but once I loaded up some weight in the back I got around just fine.

Jeff
 
#92 · (Edited)
I was told by my local tire shop that they had installed snows in this alternate size on some of the Transits that came in due to cost and they have heard feedback about the vans "wandering" and not being stable. A friend has a T250 and did this and he told me the same thing after buying the alternate size snows. I bit the bullet and bought the Continental Vancontact Winter in the stock size...no issues, even at highway speed.
 
#93 · (Edited)
I too opted for the Continental Vancontact Winter tires in stock size/E-rated. I only have a few days of mountain driving under my belt with my new van and tires, but am already favorably impressed by how well the tires grip the road and handle ice and snow. Very solid performance at 70 mph on dry highways as well.
 
#97 ·
I do have the Hankook tires, I just swapped the rears for a pair of snows. I live in Connecticut, and my traction control would kick on backing over wet leaves during the fall. This is with 1500 pounds of tools in the back of the truck. There was no way I was going the winter with the all seasons. They ride great, but I won't run them year round.
 
#98 ·
I am using one of my old Sprinter Winter sets, Bridgestone Blizzaks, 225/75R16's, and they work fine. Just got back from putting 1300 miles on them on a trip to CA, about 300 miles of which were on packed snow/ice, and they worked great. The only issue I can think of would be packing the wheel wells behind the front tires if you were driving on fresh powder. The tires clear everything on the van, even when turning, but there's only about an inch or a little more clear behind them, so I could see the possibility of a clearance issue with sticky snow. I do not think they're rated as high as the factory tires.
 
#100 ·
If you go with bigger tires, you will not be able to use chains. It may look "cool", but having big tires just makes the van that much less capable. Tires will always look small on such a large vehicle, going 1-2" taller still won't really have the visual effect you're after.

And "wandering" with new tires is pretty common in vans. It did that with my Sprinter for the first 500+ miles every time I got new tires.
 
#102 ·
So, ordered a set of Continental (VancocontactWinter) E rated tires to replace the kooks. For the heck of it I called Ford and they have a Goodyear UltraGrip for about $400 less in an E rate.

Anybody have experience with these Goodyear's

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
#103 ·
That's what I get for believing a service writer at the stealership. Even asked her to confirm the E rating, she confirms then emails me the quote.


Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top