BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been seventeen tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 | three | |
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 | fourteen |
While it might look like the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is better than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Excellent snow performance (braking/traction/handling wins in most tests)
- Lower noise and higher comfort
- Superior wear and abrasion (often 10-30% advantage)
- Stronger value proposition (lower price and better price-to-performance)
- Class-leading wet braking and wet handling (wins in 13/13 wet braking comparisons)
- Consistently better dry handling and short dry stops
- Lower rolling resistance in most tests
- Strong all-round security in mixed winter conditions
Dry Braking
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during seven dry braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 1.44% less distance than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Dry Braking: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during seven dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 1.46% faster around a lap than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from thirteen tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during thirteen wet braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 10.1% less distance than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Wet Braking: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 11.22% less distance than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during seven wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 3.18% faster around a wet lap than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during four wet circle tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 3.81% faster around a wet circle than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Wet Circle: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during five straight aqua tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 floated at a 1.66% higher speed than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Straight Aqua: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from six tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during six curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 slipped out at a 5.61% higher speed than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from thirteen tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during nine snow braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.01% less distance than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Braking: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during five snow traction tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 had 1.76% better snow traction than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Traction: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during six snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 2.19% faster around a lap than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during three snow slalom tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 4.92% faster through a slalom than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Slalom: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 and Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 performed equally well in ice braking tests.
Best In Ice Braking: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during seven noise tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 measured 1.09% quieter than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Noise: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from six tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during five wear tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 is predicted to cover 8.38% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Wear: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during four value tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 proved to have a 11.53% better value based on price/1000km than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Value: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Price
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during four price tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 cost 4.4% less than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Price: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Price winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during six rolling resistance tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had a 8.53% lower rolling resistance than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 and Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 performed equally well in fuel consumption tests.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 emitted 32.53% less particle wear matter than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Abrasion: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers largely praise the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 for outstanding snow and ice traction, strong wet grip and aquaplaning resistance, good comfort, and value, with many saying they'd buy again. Dry performance is acceptable for a winter tyre but less responsive with softer handling and modest on-center feel. Wear is generally viewed as good, though a few sporty drivers report faster wear. Noise is mostly low, with occasional reports of wet-road noise.
Based on 28 reviews with an average rating of 88%
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 Driver Reviews
Drivers of the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 frequently praise its outstanding wet grip and braking, along with predictable, stable handling and good comfort when new. Many also find it capable in light-to-moderate snow. However, a significant number report rapid tread wear and a notable drop-off in snow/ice traction as the tyre ages, with some also noting rising noise levels over time. Overall sentiment is moderately positive, but durability and aged winter performance are recurring concerns.
Based on 104 reviews with an average rating of 71%
Conclusion
Key Differences
- Wet performance: LM005 stops ~8-12% shorter and corners faster in the wet across nearly every test
- Snow performance: gForce Winter 2 typically brakes and handles better on snow (wins 9/11 snow braking comparisons)
- Aquaplaning: BFGoodrich often leads in straight-line aquaplaning; Bridgestone stronger in curved aquaplaning
- Noise/comfort: BFGoodrich is generally quieter
- Wear/longevity: BFGoodrich shows meaningfully lower wear and abrasion; LM005 often rated low for mileage
- Efficiency: LM005 usually has lower rolling resistance; BFGoodrich offsets with better purchase price/value
Overall Winner: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.