tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4 vs General Grabber Arctic — 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 + 0 road tests and 7 + 18 owner reviews. How we score

Grabber Arctic is ahead, 71–62

Check price on Amazon · Grabber Arctic or Blizzak LM25 4X4 on Amazon
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.

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 63

    Dry

    Grabber Arctic +3
    66
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 65 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)
    Reviews found online6065

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 60% × 64.5 (est.) + 40% × 59.6 = 63

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66

    No road tests of dry for Blizzak LM25 4X4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

    No road tests of dry for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

  2. 60

    Wet

    Grabber Arctic +14
    74
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 62 (est.)≈ 73 (est.)
    Reviews found online5675

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 60% × 62.4 (est.) + 40% × 55.5 = 60

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 72.9 (est.) + 40% × 74.8 = 74

    No road tests of wet for Blizzak LM25 4X4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

    No road tests of wet for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 67

    Snow

    Grabber Arctic +10
    77
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 69 (est.)≈ 74 (est.)
    Reviews found online6582

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 60% × 68.8 (est.) + 40% × 65.1 = 67

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 74 (est.) + 40% × 81.6 = 77

    No road tests of snow for Blizzak LM25 4X4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).

    No road tests of snow for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).

  4. 54

    Comfort

    Grabber Arctic +14
    68
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 64 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online4767

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 40% × 64.3 (est.) + 60% × 47.2 = 54

    Grabber Arctic: 40% × 68.3 (est.) + 60% × 67.1 = 68

    No road tests of comfort for Blizzak LM25 4X4. 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 Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

  5. 60

    Noise

    Grabber Arctic +6
    66
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 66 (est.)≈ 66 (est.)
    Reviews found online4965

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 49.4 = 60

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 64.8 = 66

    No road tests of noise for Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 62

    Treadwear

    Grabber Arctic +8
    70
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 64 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online5972

    Blizzak LM25 4X4: 60% × 63.8 (est.) + 40% × 59.1 = 62

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 68.4 (est.) + 40% × 71.6 = 70

    No road tests of treadwear for Blizzak LM25 4X4. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

    No road tests of treadwear for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

  7. 60

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber Arctic
    Reviews found online60–
Scores at a glance
CategoryBridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4General Grabber Arctic
Relative Score 62 71
Dry 63 66
Wet 60 74
Snow 67 77
Comfort 54 68
Noise 60 66
Treadwear 62 70
Handling (owners) 60 –

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

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Recomputed
Headline score
± 8

Blizzak LM25 4X4

± 7

Grabber Arctic

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.

DisciplineCategoryBlizzak LM25 4X4Grabber ArcticΔHead-to-head
Also published by the testers (not in the score)
Overall Ranking Overall #7/8 2010 Auto Bild Winter 4x4 Tyre Test #4/8 2022 Consumer Reports Winter/Snow Truck/SUV Tires – Different tests

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A Blizzak LM25 4X4

Pros

  • Exceptional grip and traction in deep snow and severe winter conditions
  • Good stability and control on dry and mixed winter roads
  • Sporty handling feel and low noise in dry weather

Cons

  • Extremely slippery performance on wet and cold roads
  • High noise levels reported by some users
  • Potential performance reduction if tires are aged during storage before installation
All owner themes in the Blizzak LM25 4X4 review

Tire B Grabber Arctic

Pros

  • Exceptional traction and handling in snow and slush
  • Great value and affordable price point compared to premium competitors
  • Reliable cold-weather performance on wet and icy surfaces

Cons

  • Moderate road noise when studded or on dry/slightly wet pavement
  • Average performance on hard-packed ice unless studded
  • Directional/rotational tread pattern may limit tire rotation options for some drivers
All owner themes in the Grabber Arctic review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4 B · General Grabber Arctic
CategoryWinterWinter
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4SUV and 4x4
Sizes available48
Rim diameters17″ – 19″16″ – 20″
Tread depth11/32″12/32″
SidewallBlackwallBlackwall
Max pressure51 psi51 psi
Sizes in common11

Which one should you actually buy?

Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4

General Grabber Arctic

Winner: General Grabber Arctic — better wet, comfort and snow. It leads or ties in every category we score. Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 7 reviews), so read this result as provisional. General Grabber Arctic rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 18 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire B Your priority is wet-weather safety

General Grabber Arctic scores 74 vs 60 on wet.

Pick tire B You want the most comfortable ride

General Grabber Arctic scores 68 vs 54 on comfort.

Pick tire B You drive through snowy winters

General Grabber Arctic scores 77 vs 67 on snow.

Pick tire B You want the longest tread life

General Grabber Arctic scores 70 vs 62 on treadwear.

Tire A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 4X4
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · General Grabber Arctic
Check price on Amazon

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

Which is better in the wet, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 74 vs 60 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 63 on our dry score.

Which is better in snow, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 77 vs 67 on our snow score.

Which is quieter, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 60 on our noise score.

Which is more comfortable, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 68 vs 54 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Blizzak LM25 4X4 or Grabber Arctic?

General Grabber Arctic, 70 vs 62 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