сравнение: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 срещу. Continental WinterContact TS 860 (2026)

In dry conditions the two tyres are closely matched on paper, with the WinterContact TS 860 scoring marginally higher overall — but neither tyre is where dry performance is won or lost. The Blizzak LM-005 carries a well-documented weakness here: extended dry braking distances appear consistently across multiple test rounds, and testers have flagged that it lacks the last fraction of grip at the limit compared to the very best in class. The TS 860, meanwhile, earns solid marks for dry handling with a composed, predictable character that real-world owners on Ford Focus and Renault Megane platforms describe as confidence-inspiring. In the one direct dry braking measurement available from Használtautó.hu in 205/55 R15, both tyres stop in an identical 15.4 metres — a result that neatly captures how close they are in this discipline.

This is where the Blizzak LM-005 pulls clearly ahead. Across two measured wet braking tests, the Blizzak averages 22.8 metres versus 24.0 metres for the WinterContact TS 860 — a gap that translates directly into shorter stopping distances in the rain. The Blizzak's wet braking score of 94.6 is among the highest in the winter segment, and its aquaplaning resistance is equally strong; testers have repeatedly described it as the benchmark for wet-road behaviour, combining precise turn-in with excellent stability through standing water. The TS 860 is by no means weak in the wet — it earns a B wet grip EU label and scores 91.6 overall — but it cannot match Bridgestone's wet specialisation. Owners of the Continental do report excellent wet weather confidence, but those coming from the TS 860 to more modern tyres often note the upgrade in ultimate wet grip.

On snow, the tables turn sharply. The WinterContact TS 860 posts a snow performance score of 90.5 against 77.6 for the Blizzak LM-005 — one of the more significant gaps in this comparison. Test data shows the Continental with strong snow handling, snow circle cornering and snow braking scores, and testers consistently note its assured, planted behaviour on packed snow. The Blizzak, despite being agile and quick on snow in some conditions, draws repeated criticism for moderate lateral grip and a tendency toward understeer when pushed hard on a snowy surface. Its snow acceleration scores are strong, but overall winter capability on snow is clearly a weak point relative to the Continental. Drivers who regularly face significant snowfall should weight this difference heavily.

The Blizzak LM-005 has a meaningful advantage in noise refinement, scoring 82.9 against 77.8 for the TS 860 — and this shows up in real owner feedback too, with quiet running among the most frequently praised attributes of the Bridgestone. The Continental generates more road noise, a point raised by a minority of its 623 Heureka reviewers. On rolling resistance the Blizzak also leads (86.6 vs 81.7), which over a tyre's lifetime translates to modest but real fuel savings. Mileage is where the TS 860 fights back: its tread life score of 77 versus a notably low 63.5 for the Blizzak reflects a genuine durability gap — one Blizzak owner noticed accelerated wear in mixed urban use, while a TS 860 owner on a Renault Megane found the tread life acceptable across two winters despite some highway use. For high-mileage drivers, the Continental's durability advantage is worth factoring into the total cost.