75
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
71/100
19 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated September 2026
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 vs Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 — Compared (September 2026)
Our Relative Score blends 60% objective test data with 40% owner-review signal — so any two tires can be compared even if they were never tested on the same day.
VS
76
/ 100
Objective (60%)
96/100
35 professional tests
User signal (40%)
71/100
110 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictToo close to call: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 and Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 are within 2 points overall. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 is stronger on treadwear. Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is stronger on wet, comfort and snow.
Read full
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made via links on this page.
Category breakdown
7 categories, side by side
Each bar is the Relative Score for that category. Expand a tile to see the test results and owner ratings behind it.
Dry
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 89 |
| Tire Rack owners | 87 | 87 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 84 | 77 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
Blizzak LM005 leads by 18
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 91 |
| Tire Rack owners | 88 | 88 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 70 | 84 |
Snow
Score (0–100)
Blizzak LM005 leads by 7
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 80 |
| Tire Rack owners | 86 | 81 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 70 | 72 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
Blizzak LM005 leads by 8
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 84 |
| Tire Rack owners | 85 | 81 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 72 | 74 |
Noise
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 63 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Blizzak LM-32 leads by 22
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 81 | 64 |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 81 | 59 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Blizzak LM005 leads by 4
Why this score
| Source | Blizzak LM-32 | Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 69 | 73 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 | Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 75 | 76 |
| Dry | 84 | 84 |
| Wet | 70 | 88 |
| Snow | 70 | 77 |
| Comfort | 72 | 80 |
| Noise | – | 63 |
| Treadwear | 81 | 59 |
| Handling | 69 | 73 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Personalize
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score
75
/ 100
Tire A
76
/ 100
Tire B
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
From owners
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews across retailers and review sites — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
The Bridgestone Blizzak LM32 receives a polarized reception from users, with performance heavily dependent on driving style and specific winter conditions. While many owners praise its exceptional traction in deep snow and ice, a significant portion of users report disappointing grip in wet conditions and an increase in road noise as the tread wears down.
Pros
- Outstanding traction and confidence in deep snow and icy conditions
- Reliable performance on dry, cold pavement
- Robust construction and durability against road hazards
- Consistent tread life over multiple winter seasons
Cons
- Poor wet-weather grip and susceptibility to hydroplaning
- Noticeable increase in road noise and humming as the tire ages
- Vague steering feedback and unpredictable handling at the limit
- Tendency to lose traction during rapid acceleration
Observations
- Rear-wheel drive vehicle owners reported significant issues with traction and unpredictable oversteer in wet conditions.
- Users on smaller, lower-torque vehicles noted that the tires still struggled to maintain grip during aggressive acceleration.
The Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is widely regarded as a class-leading winter tire for wet and slushy conditions, offering exceptional grip and braking performance that rivals summer tires. While it performs reliably in fresh snow, user consensus indicates a significant decline in performance and tread life after the first two seasons, with many owners reporting premature wear and increased noise levels as the tire ages.
Pros
- Exceptional wet-weather grip and aquaplaning resistance.
- Predictable and stable handling on dry roads.
- Strong performance in slush and fresh snow when new.
- High levels of ride comfort and low noise levels during the initial phase of ownership.
Cons
- Rapid and premature tread wear, often failing to last beyond 15,000–20,000 km.
- Significant performance degradation in snow and ice after the first or second season.
- Development of loud humming or buzzing noises as the tire ages.
- Reports of tread deformation, wobbly blocks, or uneven wear patterns.
Observations
- Heavy vehicles, including EVs and large SUVs, appear to accelerate the rapid tread wear observed by many users.
- Users with RWD vehicles noted that while the tire is predictable, it can struggle with traction on steep inclines once the tread depth drops below 5mm.
- Drivers of performance-oriented or heavier cars reported noticeable understeer during spirited driving in dry conditions.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 | B · Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | — | Winter Premium Touring tires |
| Vehicle type | — | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | — | 11 |
| Rim diameters | — | 17″ – 21″ |
| Tread depth | — | 9/32″ |
| Sidewall | — | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | — | 50 psi |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
75
/ 100
Bridgestone
76
/ 100
Bridgestone
Too close to call: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 and Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 are within 2 points overall. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 is stronger on treadwear. Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 is stronger on wet, comfort and snow.
Pick tire A
You want the longest tread life
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 scores 81 vs 59 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scores 88 vs 70 on wet.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scores 80 vs 72 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You drive through snowy winters
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 scores 77 vs 70 on snow.
Tire A · Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32
Tire B · Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
More comparisons
Also compared with
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-32 also compared with
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 also compared with
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements) normalized against the best tire in each test and weighted toward recent tests. 40% comes from thousands of owner reviews collected from retailers and review sites. When a tire has only one of the two, we use what exists and say so.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.