tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

General Grabber Arctic LT vs Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 — 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 + 1 road tests and 7 + 21 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Grabber Arctic LT 69, Blizzak WS90 68.

Check price on Amazon · Grabber Arctic LT Check price on Amazon · Blizzak WS90
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. 68

    Dry

    Blizzak WS90 +5
    73
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests≈ 68 (est.)85
    Reviews found online6954

    Grabber Arctic LT: 60% × 68.3 (est.) + 40% × 68.8 = 68

    Blizzak WS90: 60% × 84.9 + 40% × 54.1 = 73

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

  2. 74

    Wet

    Grabber Arctic LT +7
    67
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests≈ 73 (est.)66
    Reviews found online7569

    Grabber Arctic LT: 60% × 73.3 (est.) + 40% × 75.4 = 74

    Blizzak WS90: 60% × 65.6 + 40% × 68.5 = 67

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

  3. 70

    Snow

    Blizzak WS90 +3
    73
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests≈ 70 (est.)69
    Reviews found online7079

    Grabber Arctic LT: 60% × 70.2 (est.) + 40% × 69.6 = 70

    Blizzak WS90: 60% × 68.9 + 40% × 78.5 = 73

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

  4. 67

    Comfort

    Grabber Arctic LT +6
    61
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests≈ 68 (est.)69
    Reviews found online6655

    Grabber Arctic LT: 40% × 68.1 (est.) + 60% × 66.1 = 67

    Blizzak WS90: 40% × 68.8 + 60% × 55.2 = 61

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

  5. 66

    Noise

    Grabber Arctic LT +3
    63
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score) · – / 1 tests≈ 66 (est.)70
    Reviews found online6451

    Grabber Arctic LT: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 64.2 = 66

    Blizzak WS90: 60% × 70.4 + 40% × 51.1 = 63

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

  6. 65

    Treadwear

    Grabber Arctic LT +4
    61
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 65 (est.)≈ 63 (est.)
    Reviews found online6458

    Grabber Arctic LT: 60% × 65.4 (est.) + 40% × 63.5 = 65

    Blizzak WS90: 60% × 63.4 (est.) + 40% × 57.8 = 61

    No road tests of treadwear for Grabber Arctic LT. 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 Blizzak WS90. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

  7. –

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    62
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber Arctic LTBlizzak WS90
    Reviews found online–62
Scores at a glance
CategoryGeneral Grabber Arctic LTBridgestone Blizzak WS90
Relative Score 69 68
Dry 68 73
Wet 74 67
Snow 70 73
Comfort 67 61
Noise 66 63
Treadwear 65 61
Handling (owners) – 62

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

Grabber Arctic LT

± 7

Blizzak WS90

Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.

Pros, cons & observations

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

Tire A Grabber Arctic LT

Pros

  • Strong traction on packed snow, ice and freshly fallen unplowed snow, including on steep driveways
  • Marked improvement over previous all-season, all-terrain and 'no season' tires in slippery conditions
  • Improved braking and stopping in slippery conditions

Cons

  • One reviewer would like a more aggressive tread pattern
  • Tight fit when mounting on stock Ford wheels, though no leaks were reported in cold weather
  • Cost is not criticized directly, but one reviewer notes the Michelin Latitude X-Ice was 'quite expensive', implying the General is the more budget-oriented choice
All owner themes in the Grabber Arctic LT review

Tire B Blizzak WS90

Pros

  • Outstanding grip and acceleration on ice and hard-packed snow
  • Excellent braking performance in hazardous winter conditions
  • Strong capability in slush and deep snow

Cons

  • Increased road noise during highway driving
  • Less responsive or 'softer' handling feel on dry pavement
  • Potential for minor rubbing depending on vehicle fitment
All owner themes in the Blizzak WS90 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · General Grabber Arctic LT B · Bridgestone Blizzak WS90
CategoryWinterWinter
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4Passenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available645
Rim diameters16″ – 18″15″ – 19″
Tread depth16/32″11/32″
SidewallBlackwallBlackwall
Max pressure80 psi44 psi
Sizes in common00

Which one should you actually buy?

General Grabber Arctic LT

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90

Too close to call: General Grabber Arctic LT and Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 are within 2 points overall. General Grabber Arctic LT is stronger on wet, comfort and treadwear. Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 is stronger on dry and snow. General Grabber Arctic LT rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 7 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

General Grabber Arctic LT scores 74 vs 67 on wet.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

General Grabber Arctic LT scores 67 vs 61 on comfort.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90 scores 73 vs 68 on dry.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

General Grabber Arctic LT scores 65 vs 61 on treadwear.

Tire A · General Grabber Arctic LT
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Bridgestone Blizzak WS90
Check price on Amazon

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

Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

Which is better in the wet, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

General Grabber Arctic LT, 74 vs 67 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90, 73 vs 68 on our dry score.

Which is better in snow, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

Bridgestone Blizzak WS90, 73 vs 70 on our snow score.

Which is quieter, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

General Grabber Arctic LT, 66 vs 63 on our noise score.

Which is more comfortable, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

General Grabber Arctic LT, 67 vs 61 on our comfort score.

Which lasts longer, Grabber Arctic LT or Blizzak WS90?

General Grabber Arctic LT, 65 vs 61 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