Performance on ice and snow: Poor traction on ice. Longitudinal traction on snow improved significantly. Poor acceleration on snow.
Performance on asphalt: Long stopping distance on wet and dry pavement. Poor lateral traction in the wet. Extreme behavior during acceleration.

Positive: Good overall performance on ice (but if you make an abrupt turn of the steering wheel, the grip on the rear axle is not reliable enough). Confident behavior on snow.
Negative: Long braking distance on snow, dry, and wet pavementInaccurate steering response, and prominently prone to rear axle skid when driving on asphalt. Already an old model, and this is beginning to show through.

Positive: Acceptable performance on snow. Low rolling resistance. Negative: Weak traction on ice. Although Bridgestone is considered to be premium-grade tires, its performance falls obviously short of its stated class.

The Bridgestone Noranza 001 tires were first presented in 2016, and now they cannot really hold their own against more recent models from other manufacturers. These tires demonstrated acceptable grip on ice, but on snow they were among the worst. On asphalt, these tires behave rather predictably but one must consider the fact that they had one of the longest dry braking distances on test. Generally speaking, Bridgestone delivered an average performance, occupying the seventh line of the tournament bracket.

Bridgestone has good grip on ice, especially when braking and accelerating. The braking distance and lateral grip are worse than desired on wet asphalt. The tires has low rolling resistance and average noise, but it is unstable and requires adjustment of the steering wheel on the track.

These tires has 190 spikes, just as the Continental and Nokian models. However, its traction on ice and snow is slightly weaker than that of the mentioned premium models. Such a low position of Bridgestone Noranza 001 in the tournament bracket is explained by its rather low scores on wet and dry pavement.