Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Show full testing methodology
Score Weighting
Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.
| Test | Within category | Share of overall score |
|---|---|---|
| Dry · 22% | ||
| Dry Braking | 50% | 11% |
| Dry Handling | 50% | 11% |
| Wet · 39% | ||
| Wet Braking | 50% | 19.5% |
| Wet Handling | 50% | 19.5% |
| Snow · 33% | ||
| Snow Braking | 46% | 15.18% |
| Snow Handling | 54% | 17.82% |
| Ice · 6% | ||
| Ice Braking | 100% | 6% |
Our standard methods
The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.
Dry Braking
For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.
Dry Handling
For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.
Wet Braking
For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tyre performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
Wet Handling
For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Snow Braking
For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.
Snow Handling
For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.
Ice Braking
For ice braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 35 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a prepared ice surface. Surface temperature is continuously monitored as ice friction properties vary substantially with temperature. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set but with ice testing, you often do many more. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing surface conditions.
To find out which is best for your own situation, watch the video for the full details, and the data can be found further down the page.
Dry
Dry Braking
Dry braking in meters
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 25.62 m | Best | |
| 29.19 m | +3.57 m | |
| 29.74 m | +4.12 m | |
| 30.22 m | +4.60 m | |
| 31.58 m | +5.96 m | |
| 33.21 m | +7.59 m |
The difference between best and worst was 29.6% (7.59 m ≈ 1.7 Car Lengths).
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 51.4 s | Best | |
| 51.57 s | +0.17 s | |
| 51.83 s | +0.43 s | |
| 52.8 s | +1.40 s | |
| 53.97 s | +2.57 s | |
| 54.37 s | +2.97 s |
The difference between best and worst was 5.8% (2.97 s).
Wet
Wet Braking
Wet braking in meters
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 27.07 m | Best | |
| 30.96 m | +3.89 m | |
| 31.92 m | +4.85 m | |
| 33.97 m | +6.90 m | |
| 38.18 m | +11.11 m | |
| 38.95 m | +11.88 m |
The difference between best and worst was 43.9% (11.88 m ≈ 2.6 Car Lengths).
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 37.8 s | Best | |
| 38.6 s | +0.80 s | |
| 38.9 s | +1.10 s | |
| 39.3 s | +1.50 s | |
| 41.9 s | +4.10 s | |
| 42 s | +4.20 s |
The difference between best and worst was 11.1% (4.2 s).
Snow
Snow Braking
Snow braking in meters
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 32.83 m | Best | |
| 33.87 m | +1.04 m | |
| 35.19 m | +2.36 m | |
| 35.23 m | +2.40 m | |
| 60.24 m | +27.41 m | |
| 98.62 m | +65.79 m |
The difference between best and worst was 200.4% (65.79 m ≈ 14.6 Car Lengths).
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 92.2 s | Best | |
| 92.9 s | +0.70 s | |
| 94.4 s | +2.20 s | |
| 96.8 s | +4.60 s | |
| 128.1 s | +35.90 s | |
| 202.6 s | +110.40 s |
The difference between best and worst was 119.7% (110.4 s).
Ice
Ice Braking
Ice braking in meters
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tyre | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 24.23 m | Best | |
| 26.78 m | +2.55 m | |
| 43.25 m | +19.02 m | |
| 48.45 m | +24.22 m | |
| 57.9 m | +33.67 m |
The difference between best and worst was 139% (33.67 m ≈ 7.5 Car Lengths).
Results
Note: There's no "winner" in this test, the final order below is simply to keep them in the summer tyre to studded tyre order as presented in the video. You need to decide which type of tyre is best for you, based on your own driving patterns.
Nokian Hakka Blue 2
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (6)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 25.62 m | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 51.4 s | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 27.07 m | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 37.8 s | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 98.62 m | +65.79 m |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 202.6 s | +110.40 s |
Nokian zLine AS
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (7)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 29.19 m | +3.57 m |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 51.57 s | +0.17 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 33.97 m | +6.90 m |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 39.3 s | +1.50 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 60.24 m | +27.41 m |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 128.1 s | +35.90 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 5th / 5 | 57.9 m | +33.67 m |
Nokian WeatherProof
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (7)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 30.22 m | +4.60 m |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 52.8 s | +1.40 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 31.92 m | +4.85 m |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 38.6 s | +0.80 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 35.19 m | +2.36 m |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 96.8 s | +4.60 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 4th / 5 | 48.45 m | +24.22 m |
Nokian WR Snowproof
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (7)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 29.74 m | +4.12 m |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 51.83 s | +0.43 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 30.96 m | +3.89 m |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 38.9 s | +1.10 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 4th / 6 | 35.23 m | +2.40 m |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 6 | 94.4 s | +2.20 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 5 | 43.25 m | +19.02 m |
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (7)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 31.58 m | +5.96 m |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 53.97 s | +2.57 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 38.95 m | +11.88 m |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 41.9 s | +4.10 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 33.87 m | +1.04 m |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 92.2 s | Best in this discipline |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 5 | 26.78 m | +2.55 m |
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (7)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 33.21 m | +7.59 m |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 54.37 s | +2.97 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 6 | 38.18 m | +11.11 m |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 6 | 42 s | +4.20 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 6 | 32.83 m | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 6 | 92.9 s | +0.70 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 1st / 5 | 24.23 m | Best in this discipline |
I have RWD old corolla i was thinking about purchasing nokian weatherproof or new nokian wr snowproof (shame that there are not more tests to decide clearly on them) what do you think will be more suitable for this car in winter with snow and ice on the road? My other option for tires was Continental WinterContact TS 860 but they are out of my budget range. Shame we can't get nokian WR D3 anymore as it is discontinued here in Slovakia. I found nokian weatherproof interesting but there is not clear how RWD car will handle turning on icy road so i don't slide to much in traffic. That why i would like your opinion in this matter.
As you can see the weatherproof and snowproof were very close in this test. If you see a lot of ice you should go for a more nordic optimised pattern.
My point is i am worried about nokian weatherproof handling icy roads. There is not clear how will the tire grip when driving in corners on such road or driving up the hill with ice and snow on the road or in deep snow. I find other properties of weatherproof great but this part with ice and snow was never clearly explained. With new wr snowproof is not clear if it will have the same quality properties of weatherproof but i bet will be better in snow and ice beacause of compound. Yes with weather changing so quickly in winter time there is no winner i think.
In addition:
My tire shop contacted me that they can provide as well Continental WinterContact TS 860 for some more reasonable price so now I am considering wich of the two tires the nokian wr snowproof and Continental WinterContact TS 860 can handle driving up some icy road better with rwd car. I read some confusing ratings regarding ice for continental.
Why is the ice braking for the Hakka Blue not on the graph?
We couldn't get it to the ice braking lake due to lack of grip!
Nice test. To bad though that speed and temperature are not mentioned.
Moreover, there is a difference in wet ice (around freezing) and dry ice (far below freezing).
The data would become of more practical use, if all tests would be done with the same speed (e.g. 50 or 80 km/hr), and at different temperatures (e.g. 10 degr.C, 5 degr.C, 0 degr. C, -5 degr. etc.).
With respect to safety, it is my view that performance on ice is the most critical one. Ice will cause crashes even when driving carefully with poor tyres. Reduced wet or dry performance, only matter in case of emergencies.
Around -15c for snow and ice, and +15 for dry and wet. We were aiming for much lower, but it was a warm spring in Finland sadly.
Great test, indeed.
I would like to point one thing. In fact, on the dry/wet those Nordic tyres do not lose to their summer rivals as much as the latter lose to winter tyres on ice/snow. That said, the ideal solution is the studded Hakkapeliitta. At least, you will not have to fear black ice or other nasty things. If it is not possible, like in my case (kind of sporty Astra OPC), then something Nordic should do the job. From my experience with previous cars, two or three-year-old studded tyres are still better on ice than studless ones. Nokian makes good studs with a long operation life.
Cheers,
Great test.
Ice test was done at what temperature?
I wonder if 'used' studs would put the studded tyre second.
The ice test also shows that all winter tyres should be compared on ice, big differences there!
Even studded tyres are tested on the dry, why aren't AS/AW/Winters tested on ice as standard? (talking to the magazines/test institutes testing).
Now people who want don't want a nordic winter tyre for various reasons are left guessing what would happen on ice, when there will be quite large differences ....
Ice was around -15c. We shot another video comparing nordic winters to studded winters just on ice, the nordics were really impressive. It'll be out before the year is out :)
Great.
Maybe I am in a minority, but I would love a sporty nordic winter tyre, with much improved dry behaviour like a 'european' winter, yet without best in class wet performance but instead decent ice performance (somewhere midst of the huge gap between the nordic and the other studless siped tyres)....
And if it exists already, I wouldn't know because ice is barely tested... Now I 'prefer' european winters that do worse in the wet, in the faint hope they just aren't worse overall, but perhaps a bit better on ice....
Conti TS860 S is probably the best you'll do in sporty european winter, but I need to test this for myself next year!
From my understanding as the compound gets more nordic to work on ice without studs, you lessen the dry performance so finding a tyre that does both is going to be really tricky.
860S very sceptical on ice and doesn't come in 235/40R18. That's another issue, the nordic Goodyear Ultragrip Ice 2 is among the best in the dry among the Nordics, but not available in the above sporty size (no 225/40 either) ..
Try 850P.
Thanks, but the point with tyre test is that I don't want to try all tyres first ;)
850P is like the 850P a performance european winter tyre, quite far removed from the Nordic ones and with afaik zero published numbers on ice performance...
There are plenty of winter tests (inclusive ice perf.) of TS 850P for both sizes you have mentioned.
1) For 235/40 R18 see https://reifenpresse.de/rei...
2) 225/40 R18 see https://reifenpresse.de/rei...
Maybe different in the actual publications, but in the replications of the tests here on tyrereviews, there is no ice performance even mentioned in the SportAuto tests...
Looking for a winter set and I’ve narrowed things down to the Conti 850p and Michelin Pilot alpin PA4. Live in the city and don’t use the car for commuting. But mainly long distance drives to southwest UK and a bit of skiing in Switzerland/Austria. Car is an Audi A4 Quattro (252hp).
Both excellent tyres, the Conti generally has the edge in testing
Thanks for the quick reply! I've just realised there is a "Pilot Alpin 5" (without the additional 'PA' in the name). Is this a direct replacement for the Pilot Alpin PA4? Doesn't seem like there is a lot of data on the new model. I've always been a fan of Michelin
It is a direct replacement, not much test data, but as you say, it's a Michelin so will be up there with the best. I should be trying them next month.
It exists already Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 (even in SUV version).
I have read about Michelin and a technologi that they are calling "Evergrip".
Michelin are claming that a worn premium tyre is as good or better than a new budget tyre.
I think i would be interesting to see how a worn Michelin at 1,6 - 2 mm tread debth would compare to a Continental with 3 mm tread depth or 4 mm if the test is about wintertyres.
I agree, something I'd love to do! It's very difficult and expensive to do, but I am working on it!
Fantastic - as you may have noticed, Michelin are refering to budget tyres in their marketing material, but as I wrote I think it could be interesting to see how they measure up til a Continental which is another premium brand. And Continental are one of the brands who still recommends 3 / 4 mm. on summer / wintertyres.
Sorry, I'll make a note. There's no "winner" in this test, the final order was simply to keep them in the summer->studs order. Each person needs to decide for themselves what works for their own driving patterns.