Menu
Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 View Gallery (1)
185-295/35-65 R15-20 60 sizes 2010 Winter rated

Bridgestone Blizzak LM32

The Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 is a High Performance Winter tyre designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

6.6
Tyre Reviews Score Based on User Reviews
Limited Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
84%
Wet Grip
70%
Road Feedback
69%
Handling
69%
Wear
81%
Comfort
72%
Buy again
65%
Snow Grip
70%
Ice Grip
57%
19 Reviews
71% Average
185,200 miles driven
17 Tests (avg: 7th)
Bridgestone Blizzak LM32

Bridgestone Blizzak LM32

Winter Premium
BETA
6.6 / 10
Based on User Reviews · Limited Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tyre Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tyre scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 17
Publications: 4
Period: 2010 - 2014
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 19
Avg Rating: 70.9%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 1.98
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tyre tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2014 AZ Winter Tyre Test Auto Zeitung 2014 205/55 R16 10/11 0 metrics
2014 AMS Winter Tyre Test Auto Motor Und Sport 2014 205/55 R16 7/10 0 metrics
2013 Auto Zeitung Winter Tyre Test Auto Zeitung 2013 195/65 R15 6/8 0 metrics
2013 Auto Bild Top 15 Winter Tyre Shootout Auto Bild 2013 195/65 R15 4/15 0 metrics
2013 Winter Tyre Overview - Braking Auto Bild 2013 195/65 R15 3/50 0 metrics
2012 Auto Bild Top 15 Winter Tyre Test Auto Bild 2012 205/55 R16 2/15 0 metrics
2012 European Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 ADAC 2012 205/55 R!6 6/16 0 metrics
2012 Auto Bild Performance Winter Tyre Test Auto Bild 2012 225/45 R17 8/9 0 metrics
2012 Auto Zeitung Winter Tyre Test Auto Zeitung 2012 205/55 R16 8/8 0 metrics
2012 Auto Bild 42 Winter Tyre Braking Test Auto Bild 2012 205/55 R16 3/43 0 metrics
2011 AMS Winter Tyre Test Auto Motor Und Sport 2011 205/55 R16 11/14 0 metrics
2011 European Winter Tyre Test - 195/65 R15 2011 195/65 R15 13/14 0 metrics
2011 Auto Bild Winter Tyre Test Auto Bild 2011 225/45 R17 2/12 0 metrics
2011 Auto Zeitung Winter Tyre Test Auto Zeitung 2011 205/55 r16 10/14 0 metrics
2010 AMS Winter Tyre Test Auto Motor Und Sport 2010 205/55 r16 9/10 0 metrics
2010 Auto Bild Winter Tyre Test Auto Bild 2010 195/65 r15 8/12 0 metrics
2010 Auto Zeitung Winter Tyre Test Auto Zeitung 2010 195/65 r15 9/13 0 metrics
17
Tests
7th
Average
2nd
Best
13th
Worst
Latest Tyre Test Results
2014 AMS Winter Tyre Test
205/55 R16 • 2014
7th/10
Great grip and handling in the dry
Poor grip in snow, high rolling resistance
2014 AZ Winter Tyre Test
205/55 R16 • 2014
10th/11
Low on snow, only average in the wet. In dry conditions the Bridgestone drives safely and brakes well, but has a very high rolling resistance
3rd/50

Alternative Tyres

8.4/10
92% 53 reviews
7.6/10
86% 9 reviews
7.4/10
86% 17 reviews
7.0/10
86% 11 reviews
6.8/10
87% 42 reviews
6.5/10
87% 17 reviews
Size Fuel Wet Noise
15 inch
195/65 R15 91 H E C 72
195/65 R15 91 T E C 71
195/65 R15 91 H E C 72
195/65 R15 91 H D C 70
185/65 R15 88 T D C 70
16 inch
205/55 R16 91 H E D 71
205/55 R16 91 H E D 72
205/55 R16 91 H D C 71
205/55 R16 91 H D C 70
205/60 R16 92 H D C 70
205/60 R16 92 H D C 70
205/60 R16 92 H E C 72
205/60R16 92 H E C 72
205/55R16 91 H D C 71
17 inch
225/50 R17 94 H D C 72
225/45 R17 91 H D C 70
205/50 R17 93 V XL E C 70
205/50 R17 93 H XL D C 71
225/50 R17 94 H E C 72
225/50 R17 94 H D C 72
225/50 R17 94 H E C 72
215/45 R17 91 V XL E C 71
225/50R17 94 H D C 72
205/50R17 93 H XL E C 70
205/50R17 93 H XL D C 71
18 inch
225/40 R18 92 V XL D C 70
225/40 R18 92 V XL D C 70
19 inch
235/35 R19 91 V XL D C 72
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 >>

Questions and Answers for the Bridgestone Blizzak LM32

Ask a question
March 4, 2019

Are these tyres run flats?

The Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 is available in ROF (runflat) fitment.
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Size Price Range  
Available in 1 tyre sizes - View all.

Top 3 Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 Reviews

Given 31% while driving a BMW 330d (225/50 R17 H) on a combination of roads for 15,000 spirited miles
These the worst tyres I have ever used. How a brand positioned as a premium choice can discharge a product with almost zero grip in wet conditions is surprising. Adding the vague, almost non-existing steering feel and an intense humming noise as they started to wear. Scrapped them with plenty of tread left. Avoid!
December 14, 2020
Given 41% while driving a Volvo V70D5 (225/45 R17 W) on a combination of roads for 1,000 easy going miles
I've had two sets of Blizzaks now. The first set came free on a set of wheels, and were fairly dreadful. I put this down to them being quite old, got rid of them, and carried on with life. I've just picked up another set as they came up at a good price, and I honestly wish I hadn't. They are extremely poor in anything that isn't a bone dry, cold scenario. As winter tends to be cold and wet, these tyres are useless. I'm actually hoping they wear out quickly so I can put something good on the car. Pros:- - fine in the dry Cons:- - wet weather performance is biblically poor - they're noisy as balls - fuel economy is worse by 5-10% All in all, avoid at all costs.
December 2, 2020
Given 52% while driving a Mazda 6 Wagon (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 10,000 spirited miles
Stray away.
May 30, 2019

How would you rate the Bridgestone Blizzak LM32?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 Reviews

Initial Impressions Review
Given 82% while driving a Nissan Juke (225/45 R18) on for 4,000 miles
Driven over various road services tyres perform well tread pattern seems too help / pre-worn brought
Not to noisy have tyres at 33 PTS front. Would certainly consider buying again
March 5, 2026
Given 63% while driving a Mercedes Benz C200 CDI Elegance (195/65 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 9,000 average miles
Bought these two tyres over Bridgestone Blizzak LM25 and put them on the back. Inittialy they weren't my fist choice but I didn't wanted to mix different manufactures.
Dry and snow grip is very good, but wet grip is very poor, especially on a climb (ESP immediately interferes) and on motorways. They didn't offer me that much of a confidence on wet because they start to loose grip very easy. In start they were acceptable quiet but while time was passing by, they started to be more and more nosier. Honestly I was disappointed because I was expecting more from this premium brand. I wouldn't recommend putting these tyres on RWD vheicles. All in all, they are ok tyres if you are looking only snow and dry easy going grip, but very expensive, you can buy better all round winter tyres for less money.
January 22, 2019
Given 68% while driving a Toyota Yaris (185/60 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 20,000 easy going miles
I have ordered a new set of these winter tyres, being excited after seeing some initial encouraging reviews. However, I have been a bit disappointed really. Even more so that they were on a mild going, low-torque 1.33L VVTI gasoline Yaris, which is sprinty but does not have that much torque. These tires lost grip quite quickly when stepping more quickly on the pedal and even more so, they didn't offer that much of a confidence when braking in winter conditions. That is, with cold, wet, melted snow (slur) or even dry fresh snow. On ice it's not even worth mentioning. Really they do not stand up to the level to which Blizzak is advertised.
January 16, 2019
Given 49% while driving a BMW 330D Touring (245/40 R17 V) on a combination of roads for 8,000 spirited miles
I have these fitted to the back of my BMW and they're ok in the dry, still spin relatively easily when setting off quickly and still easily get 'let off oversteer' and power oversteer is relatively easy to achieve as well.
In the wet I'd say unless driven with caution they're dangerous, spin very easily and slide very easily as well, very unpredictable, breaking away with no prior warning, you definitely need to keep your wits about you if trying to make decent progress. For instance entering a motorway slip road recently, 4th gear at approx 50mph it flicked sideways on 1/2 throttle.
They are surprisingly good in the snow though which I guess is ultimately what I bought them for. Only ever got stuck when the chassis ground out due to the depth of the snow, otherwise I didn't have any problems. Very predictable and stable.
Overall I wouldn't recommend them for any car with reasonable power as they are so easily overwhelmed.
March 20, 2018
Given 90% while driving a Audi A4 (195/65 R15 T) on mostly motorways for 15,000 average miles
Excellent in all weather conditions from -10oC to 35oC!
February 21, 2018
Given 64% while driving a MINI countryman cooper diesel all4 (195/60 R16 H) on a combination of roads for 20,000 average miles
Non runflat version fitted to Mini Countryman on 16" steel rims for winter use only - pretty average winter tyre, nothing special and i wouldn't jump to use them again; far better performance and value from Nokian range. Bridgestone nowhere near premium status in winter tyres. They lasted 4 winters and ca 20k miles.
April 28, 2017
Given 74% while driving a Peugeot 307 (225/45 R17) on mostly motorways for 27,000 average miles
Bought this after good experience with Bridgestone Turanza T001 summer tyre.

As of performance of LM32 tyre, I'm quite statisfied. Very good grip on dry, and satisfying grip in wet conditions. In wet conditions they are not quite as good as summer Turanza tyres in cornering, but nevertheless they felt statisfying and progressive. They had good grip on snow (driven on max. snow dept of cca. 10cm) and did not budge on several hundred kilometers on icy highway when they were on the end of thread life (thread depth cca. 4,5mm)

Good comfort, but after 10 000 miles these tyres got quite noisy. Even changing sound frequency when driving over shallow puddles. Very strange. I had similar experience with noise on my other car with Bridgestone LM30 tyre.
Now the LM32 are so loud (at the end of their life, thread depth 4mm) that they had masked the sound of two bearings starting to fail! Honestly, I would not buy this tyre again just because of this irritating noise.
March 23, 2016
Given 76% while driving a Kia Motors (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 2,000 average miles
Kia Soul 2 only had for 2000miles but Blizzack LM32 are noisey and the car still over dampened(ie) the Soul is not the quietest of cars and suspension is hard like a sports car.Discussed with KIA. Awaiting response.Our model is 2011 so may be improved by now.Passengers have complained of hard ride.I doubt if the Blizzacks,being winter tyres are to blame for hard ride.Not tried at the limit but have had wheel spin at emergency rapid foot down takeoff.TRead looks good for winter now passed but i fit all year round in Scotland
April 16, 2014
Given 91% while driving a Ford Focus mk2 (195/65 R15 T) on mostly country roads for 0 average miles
Excellent winter tyres, especially on snowy roads. Uphill, downhill, curves, straight lines, snowy, wet or dry, these tires just make the driving seem almost too easy. No slippage whatsoever.
They are a bit noisier and slightly more fuel consuming than the Good Year summer tyres they've replaced for the winter, but that is to be expected, no proper winter tyre will be as smooth as a summer tyre. You've got to give something for the extra grip you get, right?
Overall, highly recommended and would definitely buy again.
January 29, 2014
Given 93% while driving a Peugeot 206 1.6 xt (175/65 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 20,000 easy going miles
Drove all year. Good tyre life. Good at countering aquaplanning, never happened or I never felt it. Good speed in the winter, overtakings at max speed and cruise of 90kmh in full snowstorm on motorways, other cars keept 75kmh for 200 a miles jurney.

I also drove over a 10cm metalic cube on the motorway and no damage of left front tyre. Car engined stopped by the incident and I had to reset the fuel cutoff
January 4, 2014
Given 90% while driving a Dacia Logan (185/65 R15 T) on track for 200 average miles
These tyres are quite amazing in snow ! The risk to get stuck is almost zero. A decent grip on the ice too. It's my first winter with these gums... Very good choice for a beginner too
December 24, 2012
Given 96% while driving a Mercedes Benz C200 CDI Sport (195/65 R15 H) on mostly country roads for 0 average miles
You can't miss with this tyers,on dry,on wet,on snow...
September 23, 2011
Rate the Bridgestone Blizzak LM32