2022/23 Tyre Reviews Studless Winter Tyre Test

Snow tyres, studless friction tyres, extreme winter tyres, nordic winter tyres. This category of tyre goes by many names, and they have one design goal, to be the very best on snow and ice for harsh winter climates, where studded tyres aren't appropriate, or for people who don't want studs.

To find out which is the best, Tyre Reviews has taken 7 of the most popular tyres available to both the North American and Nordic markets, and will be putting them through a full range of tests, including ice, snow, wet and dry testing to find out which is best at what. Also, to help you understand where these tyres fit in the market, I'm also including the very best of the central european and studded winter tyres, the Continental WinterContact TS870 and the studded Nokian Happapelliita 10.

Test Publication:

205/55 R16 9 tyres 6 categories

Similar Tests

Test Publication:

https://www.tyrereviews.com

Test Size: 205/55 R16

Tyres Tested: 9 tyres

Test Categories:
6 categories (20 tests)

Similar Tests

Ice

Fortunately all the tyres performed well during ice handling, apart from maybe the Federal which was over 10% off the best, and just had a lot of understeer, especially on throttle, but still impressive grip on this semi rough ice.

Yokohama, Cooper and Pirelli were next, all three tyres having good levels of grip, but you had to be extra careful with all your inputs, instead of the regular amounts of careful ice demands.

The top three, all within a few percent of each other, were Nokian, Michelin and Continental.

The Conti was the fastest, it had excellent levels of grip, but of the three it was the most peaky, meaning the grip fell off a little bit faster. The Michelin was my favorite of all the tyres to drive as it felt like it had the best turn in and grip when trying to do more than one thing at the front, but the Nokian was a very close, impressive second, both these tyres were the most predictable and balanced and lovely.

As for the two reference tyres, the Central European Continental WinterContact TS870, wow, what an impressive tyre. Yes it was the slowest, but not THAT much slower than the worst nordic winter tyre, and it was easy and friendly to drive. The studded tyre felt really great on the brakes, but I was finding quite a lot of understeer mid corner so it didn't have the advantage it should. This is a multiple test winning studded winter tyre, so it just goes to show how advanced these friction winter tyres are, especially on rough ice.

Ice traction and braking brought back the advantage to the studded Hakkapeliitta 10 which had a huge advantage on the smooth ice. This really highlights how impressive studded tyres are in the most difficult conditions.

Snow

Once again during snow handling, none of these tyres were really bad. Yokohama, Cooper and Federal were at the back, because shockingly, they had less grip than the rest. This meant you just had to do everything more slowly, steering, throttle, cornering, with the Cooper and Federal having the most understeer of all the tyres.

The top 4 were all within 1% of each other, with the order being Michelin, Continental, Pirelli and Nokian the fastest.

Like on ice, the Conti was a small amount more difficult to drive as the transition from grip to sliding was more abrupt, but we're talking very small amounts. If I had to pick one to drive just on snow, it would be the Pirelli as it was a tyre that felt like it willed you around the lap, or the Nokian, or the Michelin. This Golf 8 test car makes separating things really hard.

The CE TS870 again managed to pretty much match the best extreme winter tyre on test, which is very impressive again as I think this is going to do very well in the dry and wet, and the studded tyre pretty much matched the Nordic Nokian, which means Nokian technically won this test twice.

Snow traction had the Nokian once again leading the group, with the Central European winter tyre actually beating three of the studless friction tyres!

The Yokohama stopped the car extremely well, leading snow braking.

Like snow handling, snow circle was another double win for Nokian.

Wet

Even though these tyres are going to see a lot of snow and ice, the wet grip is still very important. Of the seven, Cooper was the slowest of the group and was difficult to drive with limited grip in all directions. Yokohama was the next slowest, this was the only tyre that made the VW Golf have a loose rear end and while the oversteer was fun, it wasn't what I'd call the best balance for the road. Federal was fifth, it felt like it had much better grip than the previous two, but the steering was a bit vague, while the Nokian in fourth had a great balance and what felt like good grip, but it was one of only two tyres that felt like it was aquaplaning in parts during the wet handling lap which was costing it time. The top three were very close, and were formed of Pirelli, Michelin and Continental. All three of these tyres were a joy to drive, if I had to give it to one it would be the Michelin by the smallest of margins in terms of balance and steering reactions, however the Continental clearly had the most grip as it was the fastest, all while having the same micro aquaplaning issues that slowed down the Nokian! 

The all important wet braking test was led by Federal, with the Continental, Nokian and Michelin all performing well. I'm really not sure how the federal jumped up the order here, I knew what I was on when doing the braking test and it was definitely this good in braking, so gotta respect that result. Even if it is at odds with the rest of the tests.

The aquaplaning tests backed up my subjective feelings with the Nokian and Continental having the worst performance over the straight and curved tests, with the Michelin proving best in both deep water tests. This is impressive considering the Michelin did so well in wet handling and in my head this will be good for slush, though I don't actually know that.

If you've been looking at the data you may have noticed two things about the reference tyres. Firstly, there was no data for the studded tyre, that's because the test facility I conducted the braking and handling didn't allow studded tyres on their tracks due to damage, which I totally respect. But more importantly you should have noticed that the central european Continental Wintercontact TS870 absolutely owned the wet grip tests. It wasn't even close! I actually wrote in my notes when testing "This is how I imagine most people imagine going from road tyres to slicks, only it's a bigger difference. And it's a winter tyre!"

Dry

The dry handling data almost perfectly matched dry braking, so I'll summarize them together. The Continental was the best in both handling and braking with the Pirelli close behind it in terms of grip and subjective handling. The Nokian was excellent around the dry handling lap and fourth in braking, closely followed by the Michelin. 

Like in the wet the Federal, Yokohama and Cooper were the slowest over the lap with the Federal being particularly difficult to drive, and like in the wet the Federal was much better in dry braking than dry handling. 

If I've done my job properly, by this point it should be no surprise that the CE winter tyre held its wet advantage in the dry too, though not as vast, but it was certainly noticeable, especially in braking.

Noise and Comfort

What about noise and comfort? The Nokian and Continental led the way in the internal noise measurements, with the CE winter tyre joint third with Michelin. The Nokian was also the most comfortable subjectively, tying for points with the far noiser Federal and Yokohama so if you want a quiet and comfortable tyre, the Nokian excels. 

Environment

The rolling resistance of the top four performing tyres was only split by 4% which is a pretty insignificant difference in fuel use, maybe around 1% in the real world.

The next group of tyres dropped 15% from the best and the Federal was 32% behind, which you would certainly notice. Again, it was Michelin, Nokian and Continental leading the way with the lowest rolling resistances, with Yokohama sliding into the front running group.

Results

For the overall results I'm going to use a score weighting which matches these tyres intended use, IE heavily in favor of the snow and ice performance of the tyres. If you want to use a different score weighting you can now alter this to your own taste using the link below.

1^st

Continental VikingContact 7

205/55 R16 94T

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.2 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm

Excellent in all conditions, Best wet and dry handling lap times, shortest dry braking, very good wet braking, good in snow, best ice handling lap, very low noise levels and low rolling resistance.

Average aquaplaning resistance.

The Continental was the best in the dry and had a small advantage in the wet grip tests, but did struggle in the deeper water of the two aquaplaning tests. It was excellent in the snow and ice, had the lowest internal noise and was comfortable, but of the top three tyres it did have the highest rolling resistance, but even that was just 3.1% off the best.

Dry

92.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	45.87 M	41.27 M	+4.6 M	89.97%
Dry Handling	2nd	72.6 s	71.03 s	+1.57 s	97.84%
Subj. Dry Handling	2nd	100 Points	110 Points	-10 Points	90.91%

Wet

79.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	35.03 M	25.78 M	+9.25 M	73.59%
Wet Handling	2nd	80.8 s	74.29 s	+6.51 s	91.94%
Subj. Wet Handling	3rd	95 Points	120 Points	-25 Points	79.17%
Straight Aqua	7th	75.12 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-24.33 Km/H	75.54%
Curved Aquaplaning	7th	58.1 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-19.3 m/sec2	75.06%

Snow

97.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	4th	15.63 M	15.37 M	+0.26 M	98.34%
Snow Traction	2nd	5.62 s	5.55 s	+0.07 s	98.75%
Snow Handling	4th	88.08 s	87.73 s	+0.35 s	99.6%
Subj. Snow Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Snow Circle	6th	29.49 S	28.9 S	+0.59 S	98%

Ice

80.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	4th	10.34 M	7.7 M	+2.64 M	74.47%
Ice Traction	3rd	6.1 s	3.23 s	+2.87 s	52.95%
Ice Handling	1st	52.17 s			100%
Subj. Ice Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%

Comfort

97.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	4th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Noise	1st	61.9 dB			100%

Value

95.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	4th	7.56 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+0.31 kg / t	95.9%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

1^st

Michelin X Ice Snow

205/55 R16 94H

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.1 kgs
• Tread: 8.1 mm

Best aquaplaning resistance and very good in the wet with excellent handling, best ice braking and very good on ice, good in all the snow tests, very good in the dry. Low noise, high levels of comfort, lowest rolling resistance on test.

Average dry braking.

The Michelin couldn't quite match the Continental in the dry, but was essentially the same in the wet and had the best hydroplaning resistance of all the tyres on test. It was a few percent behind the Continental in the snow but equaled it on the ice. It was also quiet and comfortable and had the best rolling resistance of all the tyres tested.

Dry

90.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	47.88 M	41.27 M	+6.61 M	86.19%
Dry Handling	5th	73.01 s	71.03 s	+1.98 s	97.29%
Subj. Dry Handling	4th	98 Points	110 Points	-12 Points	89.09%

Wet

82%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	35.59 M	25.78 M	+9.81 M	72.44%
Wet Handling	3rd	81.55 s	74.29 s	+7.26 s	91.1%
Subj. Wet Handling	2nd	100 Points	120 Points	-20 Points	83.33%
Straight Aqua	2nd	80.11 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-19.34 Km/H	80.55%
Curved Aquaplaning	2nd	63.8 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-13.6 m/sec2	82.43%

Snow

97.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	6th	15.81 M	15.37 M	+0.44 M	97.22%
Snow Traction	5th	5.66 s	5.55 s	+0.11 s	98.06%
Snow Handling	5th	88.56 s	87.73 s	+0.83 s	99.06%
Subj. Snow Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Snow Circle	3rd	29.09 S	28.9 S	+0.19 S	99.35%

Ice

81.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	2nd	10.14 M	7.7 M	+2.44 M	75.94%
Ice Traction	4th	6.12 s	3.23 s	+2.89 s	52.78%
Ice Handling	2nd	52.92 s	52.17 s	+0.75 s	98.58%
Subj. Ice Handling	1st	100 Points			100%

Comfort

97.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	4th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Noise	3rd	62.1 dB	61.9 dB	+0.2 dB	99.68%

Value

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	1st	7.25 kg / t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

1^st

Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5

205/55 R16 94R

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 8.55 kgs
• Tread: 8.5 mm

Best in the snow with the best handling lap, traction and lateral grip, very good in ice with best traction on smooth ice, good wet and dry braking, very low noise, best subjective comfort, very low rolling resistance.

Lowest aquaplaning resistance on test.

The Nokian ever so slightly edged the Michelin in the dry, matched it in the wet grip tests but was the worst in hydroplaning resistance, but then was the best in the snow overall. It had the best traction on ice, but then the Michelin had the best braking and the Continental the best handling. The Nokian was also joint quietest and had the second lowest rolling resistance overall.

Dry

91.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	47.45 M	41.27 M	+6.18 M	86.98%
Dry Handling	4th	72.96 s	71.03 s	+1.93 s	97.35%
Subj. Dry Handling	2nd	100 Points	110 Points	-10 Points	90.91%

Wet

77.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	35.21 M	25.78 M	+9.43 M	73.22%
Wet Handling	5th	83.2 s	74.29 s	+8.91 s	89.29%
Subj. Wet Handling	3rd	95 Points	120 Points	-25 Points	79.17%
Straight Aqua	8th	71.46 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-27.99 Km/H	71.86%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	55.8 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-21.6 m/sec2	72.09%

Snow

98.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	3rd	15.51 M	15.37 M	+0.14 M	99.1%
Snow Traction	1st	5.55 s			100%
Snow Handling	2nd	87.8 s	87.73 s	+0.07 s	99.92%
Subj. Snow Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Snow Circle	2nd	28.98 S	28.9 S	+0.08 S	99.72%

Ice

80.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	3rd	10.18 M	7.7 M	+2.48 M	75.64%
Ice Traction	2nd	6.06 s	3.23 s	+2.83 s	53.3%
Ice Handling	3rd	53.5 s	52.17 s	+1.33 s	97.51%
Subj. Ice Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%

Comfort

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	100 Points			100%
Noise	1st	61.9 dB			100%

Value

98.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	2nd	7.34 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+0.09 kg / t	98.77%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Pirelli Ice Zero FR

205/55 R16 94T

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.22 kgs
• Tread: 8.9 mm

Very good grip in the snow, the wet and the dry. Dynamic handling in all conditions.

Limited snow braking, average rolling resistance, average aquaplaning resistance.

The Pirelli Ice Zero FR was a fun tyre to drive, and well deserved fourth overall. It's only weakness was snow braking, but that was only 3.3% off the best, it excelled in snow handling being the fastest and nicest tyre to drive, to had excellent snow traction, it was good on ice, and very good in the wet and dry. I'm recommending the Ice Zero FR as a good all round tyre.

Dry

91.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	46.66 M	41.27 M	+5.39 M	88.45%
Dry Handling	3rd	72.88 s	71.03 s	+1.85 s	97.46%
Subj. Dry Handling	4th	98 Points	110 Points	-12 Points	89.09%

Wet

78.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	35.94 M	25.78 M	+10.16 M	71.73%
Wet Handling	4th	82.65 s	74.29 s	+8.36 s	89.89%
Subj. Wet Handling	5th	92 Points	120 Points	-28 Points	76.67%
Straight Aqua	6th	75.71 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-23.74 Km/H	76.13%
Curved Aquaplaning	5th	58.7 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-18.7 m/sec2	75.84%

Snow

98.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	8th	15.9 M	15.37 M	+0.53 M	96.67%
Snow Traction	3rd	5.63 s	5.55 s	+0.08 s	98.58%
Snow Handling	3rd	88 s	87.73 s	+0.27 s	99.69%
Subj. Snow Handling	1st	100 Points			100%
Snow Circle	4th	29.21 S	28.9 S	+0.31 S	98.94%

Ice

77%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	5th	10.68 M	7.7 M	+2.98 M	72.1%
Ice Traction	6th	6.51 s	3.23 s	+3.28 s	49.62%
Ice Handling	4th	54.18 s	52.17 s	+2.01 s	96.29%
Subj. Ice Handling	4th	90 Points	100 Points	-10 Points	90%

Comfort

96.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	4th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Noise	5th	62.7 dB	61.9 dB	+0.8 dB	98.72%

Value

86.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	7th	8.38 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+1.13 kg / t	86.52%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

5^th

Yokohama iceGUARD iG53

205/55 R16 91H

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.76 kgs
• Tread: 8.9 mm

Best snow braking on test, reasonable ice traction, good aquaplaning resistance, low rolling resistance.

Very long wet braking with difficult wet handling, longest dry braking on test, average ice performance, high internal noise.

The Yokohama Iceguard IG53 peaked in snow braking where it had a surprise win, but that was the only standout result. It had the longest braking in the wet and dry, it was mid pack on ice and has the noisiest tyre on test. It did however have one of the lowest rolling resistances on test. A tire like this is certainly a better buy than a tire like the Federal, but it still sits behind the rest of the group.

Dry

88.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	8th	49.49 M	41.27 M	+8.22 M	83.39%
Dry Handling	7th	73.31 s	71.03 s	+2.28 s	96.89%
Subj. Dry Handling	6th	95 Points	110 Points	-15 Points	86.36%

Wet

74.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	8th	38.72 M	25.78 M	+12.94 M	66.58%
Wet Handling	7th	84.16 s	74.29 s	+9.87 s	88.27%
Subj. Wet Handling	8th	75 Points	120 Points	-45 Points	62.5%
Straight Aqua	5th	75.99 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-23.46 Km/H	76.41%
Curved Aquaplaning	4th	59.4 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-18 m/sec2	76.74%

Snow

93.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	1st	15.37 M			100%
Snow Traction	7th	5.92 s	5.55 s	+0.37 s	93.75%
Snow Handling	8th	90.99 s	87.73 s	+3.26 s	96.42%
Subj. Snow Handling	6th	80 Points	100 Points	-20 Points	80%
Snow Circle	9th	30.35 S	28.9 S	+1.45 S	95.22%

Ice

76.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	6th	10.97 M	7.7 M	+3.27 M	70.19%
Ice Traction	5th	6.41 s	3.23 s	+3.18 s	50.39%
Ice Handling	7th	54.74 s	52.17 s	+2.57 s	95.31%
Subj. Ice Handling	4th	90 Points	100 Points	-10 Points	90%

Comfort

98.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	100 Points			100%
Noise	8th	63.4 dB	61.9 dB	+1.5 dB	97.63%

Value

96.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	3rd	7.5 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+0.25 kg / t	96.67%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Cooper Weathermaster S100

205/55 R16 91T

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.88 kgs
• Tread: 8.6 mm

Good aquaplaning resistance, no huge weakness in the snow.

Long dry, wet and ice braking distances, lower grip on ice, high internal noise, high rolling resistance.

The Cooper Weathermaster S1000 has a fine, if not class leading snow performance, but struggles more on ice where it has the second weakest smooth ice traction of the test and below average in handling and braking. In the wet the Cooper has longer wet braking distances and the slowest wet handling lap, but the aquaplaning resistance is good. A longer than average dry braking distance and high rolling resistance rounds out the test for Cooper.

Dry

87.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	7th	49.47 M	41.27 M	+8.2 M	83.42%
Dry Handling	6th	73.15 s	71.03 s	+2.12 s	97.1%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	90 Points	110 Points	-20 Points	81.82%

Wet

75.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	37.76 M	25.78 M	+11.98 M	68.27%
Wet Handling	8th	85.41 s	74.29 s	+11.12 s	86.98%
Subj. Wet Handling	6th	80 Points	120 Points	-40 Points	66.67%
Straight Aqua	4th	76.46 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-22.99 Km/H	76.88%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	59.8 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-17.6 m/sec2	77.26%

Snow

92.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	7th	15.85 M	15.37 M	+0.48 M	96.97%
Snow Traction	7th	5.92 s	5.55 s	+0.37 s	93.75%
Snow Handling	7th	89.87 s	87.73 s	+2.14 s	97.62%
Subj. Snow Handling	6th	80 Points	100 Points	-20 Points	80%
Snow Circle	8th	30.15 S	28.9 S	+1.25 S	95.85%

Ice

71.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	7th	11.97 M	7.7 M	+4.27 M	64.33%
Ice Traction	7th	7.92 s	3.23 s	+4.69 s	40.78%
Ice Handling	6th	54.63 s	52.17 s	+2.46 s	95.5%
Subj. Ice Handling	7th	85 Points	100 Points	-15 Points	85%

Comfort

93.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	8th	90 Points	100 Points	-10 Points	90%
Noise	7th	63.3 dB	61.9 dB	+1.4 dB	97.79%

Value

85.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	8th	8.45 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+1.2 kg / t	85.8%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Federal Himalaya ICEO

205/55 R16 91Q

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 11.2 kgs
• Tread: 9.1 mm

Very good wet braking, high aquaplaning resistance, good dry braking, good snow braking.

Weaker in the handling tests, very low grip on ice, higher levels of noise, very high rolling resistance.

The Federal Himalaya ICEO was excellent in the wet with good braking and high levels of aquaplaning resistance. It was also good in dry braking, but struggled more on the dry handling lap. The snow performance was average, however for a nordic winter tyre it struggled on ice, and was nearly 40% worse than the best on test during ice traction. The ICEO also had the highest rolling resistance on test.

Dry

85.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	46.88 M	41.27 M	+5.61 M	88.03%
Dry Handling	8th	73.8 s	71.03 s	+2.77 s	96.25%
Subj. Dry Handling	8th	80 Points	110 Points	-30 Points	72.73%

Wet

77.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	33.61 M	25.78 M	+7.83 M	76.7%
Wet Handling	6th	83.5 s	74.29 s	+9.21 s	88.97%
Subj. Wet Handling	6th	80 Points	120 Points	-40 Points	66.67%
Straight Aqua	3rd	79.61 Km/H	99.45 Km/H	-19.84 Km/H	80.05%
Curved Aquaplaning	5th	58.7 m/sec2	77.4 m/sec2	-18.7 m/sec2	75.84%

Snow

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	5th	15.74 M	15.37 M	+0.37 M	97.65%
Snow Traction	9th	6.03 s	5.55 s	+0.48 s	92.04%
Snow Handling	6th	89.24 s	87.73 s	+1.51 s	98.31%
Subj. Snow Handling	9th	75 Points	100 Points	-25 Points	75%
Snow Circle	7th	29.94 S	28.9 S	+1.04 S	96.53%

Ice

66.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	8th	12.66 M	7.7 M	+4.96 M	60.82%
Ice Traction	9th	9.18 s	3.23 s	+5.95 s	35.19%
Ice Handling	8th	58.28 s	52.17 s	+6.11 s	89.52%
Subj. Ice Handling	8th	80 Points	100 Points	-20 Points	80%

Comfort

99.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	100 Points			100%
Noise	6th	62.9 dB	61.9 dB	+1 dB	98.41%

Value

68.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	9th	10.54 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+3.29 kg / t	68.79%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Continental WinterContact TS 870

205/55 R16 91H

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 8.15 kgs
• Tread: 8.9 mm

Dry

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	41.27 M			100%
Dry Handling	1st	71.03 s			100%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	110 Points			100%

Wet

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	25.78 M			100%
Wet Handling	1st	74.29 s			100%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	120 Points			100%
Straight Aqua	1st	99.45 Km/H			100%
Curved Aquaplaning	1st	77.4 m/sec2			100%

Snow

92.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	9th	16 M	15.37 M	+0.63 M	96.06%
Snow Traction	6th	5.85 s	5.55 s	+0.3 s	94.87%
Snow Handling	9th	92.12 s	87.73 s	+4.39 s	95.23%
Subj. Snow Handling	6th	80 Points	100 Points	-20 Points	80%
Snow Circle	5th	29.33 S	28.9 S	+0.43 S	98.53%

Ice

63.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	9th	12.71 M	7.7 M	+5.01 M	60.58%
Ice Traction	8th	9.13 s	3.23 s	+5.9 s	35.38%
Ice Handling	9th	59.99 s	52.17 s	+7.82 s	86.96%
Subj. Ice Handling	9th	70 Points	100 Points	-30 Points	70%

Comfort

97.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	4th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Noise	3rd	62.1 dB	61.9 dB	+0.2 dB	99.68%

Value

90.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	5th	8.02 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+0.77 kg / t	90.4%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10

205/55 R16 94T

• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.33 kgs
• Tread: 9.1 mm

Snow

98.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	2nd	15.5 M	15.37 M	+0.13 M	99.16%
Snow Traction	4th	5.64 s	5.55 s	+0.09 s	98.4%
Snow Handling	1st	87.73 s			100%
Subj. Snow Handling	2nd	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Snow Circle	1st	28.9 S			100%

Ice

96.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Ice Braking	1st	7.7 M			100%
Ice Traction	1st	3.23 s			100%
Ice Handling	5th	54.33 s	52.17 s	+2.16 s	96.02%
Subj. Ice Handling	4th	90 Points	100 Points	-10 Points	90%

Value

87.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	6th	8.29 kg / t	7.25 kg / t	+1.04 kg / t	87.45%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts