Tests – · none yet Owners 63 · 21 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo2 — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 0 + 5 road tests and 21 + 28 owner reviews. How we score
Winter i cept evo2 leads, 69–65 Narrow edge
Add your size for an exact match
/R
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 67 · 5 tests Owners 71 · 28 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 10 in 2017 Sport Auto Winter Tyre Test (snow braking)
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
65
Dry
Winter i cept evo2 +267Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 5 tests ≈ 66 (est.) 65 Reviews found online 63 71 Blizzak LM-32: 60% × 65.9 (est.) + 40% × 63 = 65
Winter i cept evo2: 60% × 64.8 + 40% × 70.8 = 67
No road tests of dry for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
-
65
Wet
Winter i cept evo2 +671Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 5 tests ≈ 67 (est.) 70 Reviews found online 64 73 Blizzak LM-32: 60% × 66.8 (est.) + 40% × 63.5 = 65
Winter i cept evo2: 60% × 70.2 + 40% × 73.4 = 71
No road tests of wet for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
66
Snow
Winter i cept evo2 +470Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 5 tests ≈ 68 (est.) 72 Reviews found online 63 66 Blizzak LM-32: 60% × 68.2 (est.) + 40% × 63.1 = 66
Winter i cept evo2: 60% × 72 + 40% × 66.1 = 70
No road tests of snow for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
61
Comfort
Winter i cept evo2 +970Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 67 (est.) ≈ 69 (est.) Reviews found online 58 71 Blizzak LM-32: 40% × 66.5 (est.) + 60% × 58 = 61
Winter i cept evo2: 40% × 69 (est.) + 60% × 70.6 = 70
No road tests of comfort for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
No road tests of comfort for Winter i cept evo2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
64
Noise
Blizzak LM-32 +955Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests ≈ 66 (est.) 47 Reviews found online 59 ≈ 66 (est.) Blizzak LM-32: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 59.1 = 64
Winter i cept evo2: 60% × 47.4 + 40% × 66.4 (est.) = 55
No road tests of noise for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
No owner ratings of noise for Winter i cept evo2. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
-
66
Treadwear
Winter i cept evo2 +470Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests ≈ 66 (est.) 67 Reviews found online 66 73 Blizzak LM-32: 60% × 66.2 (est.) + 40% × 65.6 = 66
Winter i cept evo2: 60% × 67.3 + 40% × 72.8 = 70
No road tests of treadwear for Blizzak LM-32. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
-
59
Handling (owners)
Winter i cept evo2 +1473Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Reviews found online 59 73 -
–
Efficiency
No comparison59Why this score
Source Blizzak LM-32 Winter i cept evo2 Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 4 tests – 59
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 | Hankook Winter i cept evo2 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 65 | 69 |
| Dry | 65 | 67 |
| Wet | 65 | 71 |
| Snow | 66 | 70 |
| Comfort | 61 | 70 |
| Noise | 64 | 55 |
| Treadwear | 66 | 70 |
| Handling (owners) | 59 | 73 |
| Efficiency | – | 59 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Recomputed
Headline score
65
/ 100
Blizzak LM-32
69
/ 100
Winter i cept evo2
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
The professional test results behind the scores
Per discipline: the average % of the best tire over every test both tires were in, and how many of those tests each one won. “Different tests” rows compare results from separate tests.
| Discipline | Category | Blizzak LM-32 | Winter i cept evo2 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #7/10 2014 AMS Winter Tyre Test | #5/11 2019 19 Inch Performance Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Blizzak LM-32
Pros
- Exceptional traction and reliability in deep snow and winter storms
- Stable and satisfying handling on cold, dry roads
- Good resistance to aquaplaning and solid durability/tread life reported by some users
Cons
- Poor and unpredictable wet weather grip, leading to wheel spin and sliding
- Noticeable road noise and humming that increases as the tread wears down
- Vague steering feel and lackluster performance under quick acceleration
Tire B Winter i cept evo2
Pros
- Impressive grip and traction on snow and ice
- High level of ride comfort and low noise levels
- Good value for money compared to higher-priced premium alternatives
Cons
- Soft sidewalls or goofy feel on dry roads, particularly in warmer winter temperatures
- Performance and grip degrade significantly as the tire ages over multiple seasons
- Can struggle to put down high torque/power on rear-wheel-drive vehicles
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 | B · Hankook Winter i cept evo2 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Winter | Winter |
| Vehicle type | SUV and 4x4 | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 36 | 79 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 20″ | 15″ – 22″ |
| Tread depth | 11/32″ | — |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | — |
| Max pressure | 50 psi | — |
| Sizes in common | 28 | 28 |
Which one should you actually buy?
65
/ 100
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32
69
/ 100
Hankook Winter i cept evo2
Narrow edge: Hankook Winter i cept evo2 — better handling, comfort and wet. Pick the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 if noise matters most to you.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Hankook Winter i cept evo2 scores 73 vs 59 on handling.
Pick tire A
You want a quieter cabin
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 scores 64 vs 55 on noise.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Hankook Winter i cept evo2 scores 70 vs 61 on comfort.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Hankook Winter i cept evo2 scores 71 vs 65 on wet.
Tire A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32
Tire B · Hankook Winter i cept evo2
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Which is better in the wet, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Hankook Winter i cept evo2, 71 vs 65 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Neither, by our numbers: 65 vs 67 on the dry score, within 3 points.
Which is better in snow, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Hankook Winter i cept evo2, 70 vs 66 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32, 64 vs 55 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Hankook Winter i cept evo2, 70 vs 61 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Blizzak LM-32 or Winter i cept evo2?
Hankook Winter i cept evo2, 70 vs 66 on our treadwear score.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology