Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
Patterns are clear: the LM005 dominates wet grip and remains quietly comfortable and efficient, while the Hankook consistently counters with superior aquaplaning margins, stronger dry braking, better value, and often better longevity. In snow, they trade blows-Bridgestone tends to stop shorter, Hankook often accelerates and handles slightly better-so the best choice hinges on your most frequent winter conditions and priorities.
Test Results
Independent comparison tire tests are the best source of data to get tire information from, and the good news is there have been fourteen tests which compare both tires directly!
| Tire | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 | eight | |
| Hankook Winter i cept evo3 | five | |
| one draws in one tests | ||
While it might look like the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is better than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tires are very complicated objects which means where one tire is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tires compare across multiple tire test categories.
Key Strengths
- Class-leading wet performance (dominant in wet braking and handling)
- Low noise and strong comfort
- Lower rolling resistance for better fuel efficiency
- Consistently short snow braking with precise, neutral feel
- Excellent straight and curved aquaplaning resistance
- Short dry braking and stable dry behavior
- Strong value proposition with lower price and often better wear
- Very good snow traction and agile snow handling
Dry Braking
Looking at data from eleven tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during eight dry braking tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 stopped the vehicle in 1.13% less distance than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Dry Braking: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during two dry handling [s] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 0.04% faster around a lap than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from eight tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during six dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 0.49% faster around a lap than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one subj. dry handling tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scored 0.28% more points than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from fourteen tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during thirteen wet braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 5.34% less distance than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Braking: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Cool
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one wet braking - cool tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 6.69% less distance than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Braking - Cool: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Braking - Cool winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Worn
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one wet braking - worn tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 5.49% less distance than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Braking - Worn: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Braking - Worn winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during three wet handling [s] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 2.81% faster around a wet lap than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from eight tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during eight wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was 1.81% faster around a wet lap than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during two subj. wet handling tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scored 2.28% more points than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had 2.16% higher lateral wet grip than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Wet Circle: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from eleven tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during nine straight aqua tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 floated at a 0.85% higher speed than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Straight Aqua: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from nine tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during six curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 slipped out at a 0.73% higher speed than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from fourteen tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during nine snow braking tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 stopped the vehicle in 0.97% less distance than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Snow Braking: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during three snow traction tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 accelerated 3.66% faster than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Traction: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from eight tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during five snow traction tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had 1.41% better snow traction than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Snow Traction: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [s]
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during two snow handling [s] tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was 1.49% faster around a lap than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Handling [s]: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from eight tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during three snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was 0.02% faster around a lap than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Snow Handling
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during one subj. snow handling tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 scored 2.59% more points than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Subj. Snow Handling: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Subj. Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Circle
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during one snow circle tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 provided 1.72% more lateral grip than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Snow Circle: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Snow Circle winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from seven tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during five snow slalom tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was 1.2% faster through a slalom than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Snow Slalom: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during two subj. comfort tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scored 3.82% more points than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from ten tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during ten noise tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 measured 2.98% quieter than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Noise: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during one wear tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 is predicted to cover 7.66% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Wear: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during three value tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 proved to have a 22.86% better value based on price/1000km than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Value: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Price
Looking at data from seven tire tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 was better during seven price tests. On average the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 cost 16.23% less than the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005.
Best In Price: Hankook Winter i cept evo3
See how the Price winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from eleven tire tests, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was better during nine rolling resistance tests. On average the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had a 7.63% lower rolling resistance than the Hankook Winter i cept evo3.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 Driver Reviews
Driver feedback on the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is polarized, but the dominant theme is very strong wet-road grip and braking, with many high-scoring reviews praising predictable, confidence-inspiring handling in cold rain and slush. Snow performance is often described as good when the tire is new and in typical Central/Western European winters, but a sizeable group report that snow/ice traction drops sharply as the tire ages or wears (often around the 4-5 mm range). The most consistent downside is fast or uneven treadwear/short service life, sometimes accompanied by increasing road noise over time, which makes the LM005 feel expensive to run despite its wet-weather strengths.
Based on 107 reviews with an average rating of 71%
Hankook Winter i cept evo3 Driver Reviews
Across 20 reviews, the Hankook Winter i*cept evo3 is described as a highly confidence-inspiring winter tire with standout traction in snow and strong, predictable grip in wet conditions (often praised for stability and aquaplaning resistance). Many drivers also report good dry-road handling for a winter tire and consider it excellent value versus premium brands. A smaller minority mention increased road noise or a firmer/less comfortable ride compared with their summer tires, but this is not the dominant experience.
Based on 22 reviews with an average rating of 86%
Conclusion
If you value sharper dry stopping, strong aquaplaning reserves, snow agility, and a friendlier purchase price, the Winter i*cept evo3 makes a compelling case. It frequently tops straight and curved aquaplaning tests, often brakes shorter in the dry, shows better wear and cost-per-1,000 km in UHP sizes, and offers excellent value. The trade-off is average-to-good (not best-in-class) wet lap pace and typically more noise and higher rolling resistance.
Bottom line: choose Bridgestone for wet-weather security and refinement; choose Hankook for value-driven performance with robust aquaplaning safety and sportier dry behavior.
Key Differences
- Wet dominance: LM005 wins 13/14 wet braking and 11/11 wet handling; Hankook trails here.
- Aquaplaning safety: Hankook leads straight and curved aquaplaning (9 vs 2; 6 vs 3 wins).
- Dry braking: Hankook takes more dry stops (8 vs 3), while Bridgestone often steers/handles well.
- Noise and refinement: LM005 is consistently quieter (10 noise wins to 0).
- Efficiency: LM005 usually has lower rolling resistance (9 vs 2), aiding fuel economy.
- Value and longevity: Hankook tends to be cheaper with better wear/cost per 1,000 km in UHP tests.
Overall Winner: Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
Based on the tire test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tire has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tire buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Hankook Winter i cept evo3 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Footnote
This page has been developed using tire industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tires in the same test.
Why is this important? Tire 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 tire test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tire tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tire 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 tire comparison, Tire Reviews doesn't.