Comparison: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 vs. Apollo Alnac 4G

In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Bridgestone) against a tyre from a manufacturer from India (Apollo). Generally, Bridgestone winter tyres are slightly better rated (93%) than Apollo (57%). In this particular case, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 has a better rating of 88% compared to 23% of the Apollo Alnac 4G. The first tyre test of Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 was done in 2019, compared to 2015 when was the Apollo Alnac 4G first tested. Important for this comparison is also the Autobild 2021 205/55 R16 test, where both the Blizzak LM-005 and the Alnac 4G were tested. We also know where Blizzak LM-005 is made - Italy/Hungary/Poland.

#	Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 /88%	Apollo Alnac 4G /23%	Add to comparison Make Model New comparison

Dimensions	R14 - R22	R14 - R17
Price	Set dimension to see prices	Set dimension to see prices
Remove	Remove from comparison	Remove from comparison

Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005

/88%

Apollo Alnac 4G

/23%

Add to comparison

Make

Model

New comparison

Dimensions

R14 - R22

R14 - R17

Price

Set dimension to see prices

Remove

Remove from comparison

Segment

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 Premium

2. Apollo Alnac 4G Lowcost

Number of sizes available

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 213

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 35

Number of tests

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 49x

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 8x

Best position in test

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 1.

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 2.

Worst position in test

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 15.

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 30.

Average position in tests

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 3.2

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 18.88

Year of the last test

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 2024

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 2023

Best rating in test

1. Apollo Alnac 4G Exemplary

2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 Very good

Worst rating in test

1. Apollo Alnac 4G Satisfactory

2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 Conditionally recommended

Snow

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

82%

Apollo
Alnac 4G

?

Snow traction

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 82%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Snow braking

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 86%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Snow handling

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 72%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Snow cornering

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 77%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Snow acceleration

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 94%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Lateral guidance on snow

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 76%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Wet

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

91%

Apollo
Alnac 4G

75%

Wet braking

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 95%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 69%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 86%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 80%

Wet handling

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 93%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 73%

Aquaplaning - cross

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 84%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 69%

Wet circle cornering

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 90%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 83%

Wet braking according to EU label

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 A

2. Apollo Alnac 4G ?

Dry

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

83%

Apollo
Alnac 4G

68%

Dry braking

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 81%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 77%

Dry handling

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 89%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 70%

Dry steering response

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 84%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Dry lane changing

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 80%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Dry driving behavior

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 83%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 63%

Comfort

(Overall rating)

Apollo
Alnac 4G

82%

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

80%

Exterior noise

1. Apollo Alnac 4G 82%

2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 79%

Comfort

1. Apollo Alnac 4G 87%

2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 83%

Interior noise

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 85%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 81%

Outside noise accoring to EU label

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 ?

2. Apollo Alnac 4G ?

Costs

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

75%

Apollo
Alnac 4G

71%

Rolling resistance

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 87%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 61%

Mileage

1. Apollo Alnac 4G 65%

2. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 64%

Price/value

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 60%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Fuel efficiency

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 89%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 87%

Fuel consumption according to EU label

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 C

2. Apollo Alnac 4G ?

Ice

(Overall rating)

Bridgestone
Blizzak LM-005

80%

Apollo
Alnac 4G

?

Ice braking

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 79%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Ice lateral guidance

1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 82%

2. Apollo Alnac 4G 0%

Add to comparison

Mutual tests

Autobild Winter tyre test 2021 205/55 R16

Name	Stopping distance on wet	Stopping distance on snow
Best values in test	32,1	27,3
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005	32,1	28,1
Apollo Alnac 4G	38	29,5
Show test details

Comparison: Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005 vs. Apollo Alnac 4G

Add to comparison

Add to comparison

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Summer

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Winter

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Allround

Rankings

Tests

Brands

Rankings

Tests

Brands