Continental IceContact 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
- TR Score
- 9.1/10
- Owners say
- 79% · 3
- TR Score
- 8.7/10
- Owners say
- 86% · 17
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Continental IceContact 3 finished ahead 2 times and the Hakkapeliitta R5 not once. The IceContact 3 stopped 7.9% shorter in the wet; the Hakkapeliitta R5 stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Check the studded tyre rules where you drive first. If studs are legal and you face real ice, the Continental IceContact 3 stops around 11 percent shorter on ice and brakes better in the wet too. If studs are banned or your winter is mostly cold tarmac and snow, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is quieter, more economical and better in the dry.
Where the IceContact 3 is stronger
- Shorter ice braking in both measurements, 15.87m against 17.87m at Vi Bilägare
- Faster ice traction in both runs, 6.81s against 9.42s, 27.7 percent
- Shorter wet braking in both tests and better straight aquaplaning in both measurements
Where the Hakkapeliitta R5 is stronger
- Legal all season where studs are banned or date-restricted
- Shorter dry braking in both measurements and lower fuel use in both tests
- Quieter, 10 points against 6 at Tekniikan Maailma, and better rated on snow handling
The bullet points are analysis of the shared tests and of owner reviews; the measured wins in each discipline are in the tables below. Where the two disagree, the figures are right.
IceContact 3 vs Hakkapeliitta R5 at a glance
| Category | IceContact 3 | Gap | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won4 shared tests | 2 | 0 | |
| Dry4 measurements | 1 | The Hakkapeliitta R5 stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry (2 tests) | 3 |
| Wet8 measurements | 6 | The IceContact 3 stopped 7.9% shorter in the wet (2 tests) | 0 |
| Snow6 measurements | 3 | Level between the two. | 3 |
| Ice6 measurements | 5 | The IceContact 3 stopped 11.2% shorter on ice (2 tests) | 1 |
| Comfort3 measurements | 0 | 2 | |
| Value2 measurements | 0 | The Hakkapeliitta R5 used 4.9% less fuel (2 tests) | 2 |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 9.1/10 | The IceContact 3 by 0.4 | 8.7/10 |
| Owner rating3 and 17 reviews | 79% | The Hakkapeliitta R5 by 7 points | 86% |
| Pricein the 2 tests that listed prices | +13.2% | The IceContact 3 was dearer in 2 of 2 | Cheaper |
Wins count every measurement the shared tests recorded for both tyres; a tick marks the tyre ahead on that line. Subjective driver scores count as wins but are never averaged, because each test uses its own scale.
Head to head in 4 tests, 2024 to 2025
Each row is one published test in which both tyres ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | IceContact 3 | Field | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tyre Test | P3 of 8Studded Winter Tyres | P4 of 7Nordic Friction Winter Tyres | |
| 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tyre Test | P2 of 7Studded Winter Tyres | P2 of 7Nordic Friction Winter Tyres | |
| 2024 Studded Tyre Test | P5 of 8 | P7 of 8 | |
| The Best Studded / Friction Winter Tyres for 2024 | P6 of 6Studded Winter Tyres | P4 of 6Nordic Friction Winter Tyres |
Performance profile
11 measurements from the 4 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
IceContact 3
Hakkapeliitta R5
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 36 m stop against 34.2 m is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 85%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 7 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
IceContact 3
Hakkapeliitta R5
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
IceContact 3
Hakkapeliitta R5
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the IceContact 3 79% from 3 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tyres posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | IceContact 3 | Gap | Hakkapeliitta R5 | Wins | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 31.99 | 2.6% | 31.16 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 68.8% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 35.12 | 7.9% | 38.15 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 40.4 | 2% | 41.25 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | = | scored | 0-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 65.75 | 15% | 57.15 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 31.07 | 0.3% | 31 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 5.11 | 1.7% | 5.05 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 75.1 | 0.7% | 75.6 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 11.1% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 29.19 | 11.2% | 32.89 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 6.46 | 18.3% | 8.06 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 50.2 | 4.4% | 48 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 14.3% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | = | scored | 0-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| scored | 66.7% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 73.6 | 2.1 dB | 71.5 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 5.82 | 4.9% | 5.54 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tyres shared. "Scored" rows are subjective driver ratings: each test uses its own scale, so only the wins are counted.
Scores beyond the shared tests
On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the IceContact 3 scores 9.1 and the Hakkapeliitta R5 8.7 out of 10.
| IceContact 3 | Category | Hakkapeliitta R5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 64 | Dry | 56 | ||
| 78 | Wet | 33 | ||
| 87 | Comfort | 28 | ||
| 55 | Value | 88 | ||
| 89 | Snow | 88 | ||
| 56 | Ice | 81 | ||
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
What owners say
| IceContact 3 | Category | Hakkapeliitta R5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.7 | Dry Grip | 8.3 | ||
| 8 | Wet Grip | 7.7 | ||
| 8 | Road Feedback | 8.7 | ||
| 8.3 | Handling | 8.6 | ||
| 5 | Wear | 8.3 | ||
| 7.3 | Comfort | 8.9 | ||
| 9 | Snow Grip | 9 | ||
| 7 | Ice Grip | 8.5 | ||
Owners rate the IceContact 3 79% from 3 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Continental IceContact 3
- 79%from 3 reviews
- 16,500 milesdriven by reviewers
All 3 IceContact 3 reviewsDriving in northern Norway, coastal climate, it has good handeling in mild slippery weather, excellent in proper winter driving
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
- 86%from 17 reviews
- 88%would buy again
- 117,745 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers largely praise the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 for exceptional winter capability, with standout grip and braking on snow and strong confidence on ice, plus a very quiet and comfortable ride. A minority report weaknesses in wet conditions and aquaplaning resistance, and some note slush performance can be shaky around 0°C. Overall sentiment is strongly positive, with most users finding it a top-tier studless winter tyre for harsh climates.
- outstanding snow traction and handling
- strong ice grip and braking for a studless winter tyre
- very quiet and comfortable ride
- confidence-inspiring winter performance
- wet grip and aquaplaning resistance
- slush performance around 0°C
Summarised by AI from 13 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 17 Hakkapeliitta R5 reviewsGood Tires in almost all conditions. Feels better in try and wet than previous version r2 or r3. Good on wear. Could be better on ice and snow braking. Continental vikingcontact 7 feels better on ice and snow braking.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
| Category | IceContact 3 | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| On the market since | - | 2021 |
| Replaced | Continental IceContact 2 | Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3 (2018) |
| Replaced by | Continental IceContact 8 | - |
| Price in the shared tests | The IceContact 3 was the dearer tyre in 2 of the 2 tests that listed prices, by 13.2% on average. Each test priced the tyres in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
Reading the results
Written from the test results and owner reviews above. It is analysis, not a measurement: where it and the tables disagree, the tables are right.
These two are not the same kind of winter tyre. The Continental IceContact 3 is a studded tyre and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is a Nordic friction tyre, so before anything else, check what is legal and practical where you drive. Studded tyres are banned or date-restricted in much of Europe.
Across four shared Nordic tests the Continental finished ahead twice, the Nokian once, with one dead heat at Tekniikan Maailma, both 2nd of 14. The Continental was 3rd of 20 against 5th at Teknikens Värld in 2025 and 5th of 8 against 7th at Vi Bilägare, while the Nokian was 4th of 17 against 6th in Teknikens Värld's 2024 test.
Ice is where the studs tell. The Continental stopped shorter on ice in both measurements, 15.87m against 17.87m at Vi Bilägare and 42.5m against 47.9m at Tekniikan Maailma, and it pulled away faster in both ice traction runs, 6.81s against 9.42s. It also braked shorter in the wet in both tests and resisted straight aquaplaning better in both, 68.3 against 58.6 km/h.
Conclusion
Start with the law. The Continental IceContact 3 is studded and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is a Nordic friction tyre, so in countries where studs are banned or restricted by date, the Nokian is the only one of the two you can fit for the whole season. Where studs are allowed, the choice comes down to what you drive on.
The Continental IceContact 3 is the ice tyre. It stopped shorter on ice in both measurements, 15.87m against 17.87m at Vi Bilägare, 11.2 percent, and 42.5m against 47.9m at Tekniikan Maailma, 11.3 percent, and it was quicker away in both ice traction runs, 6.81s against 9.42s, 27.7 percent. It also braked shorter in the wet in both tests, 34.74m against 38.39m and 35.5m against 37.9m, won both wet handling comparisons and resisted straight aquaplaning better in both measurements, 68.3 against 58.6 km/h at Vi Bilägare and 63.2 against 55.7 km/h at Teknikens Värld. It finished ahead in two of the four shared tests, 3rd of 20 against 5th and 5th of 8 against 7th.
The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is the quieter, more economical and better dry-road tyre. It braked shorter in the dry in both measurements, 30.8m against 31.5m, used less fuel in both tests, 5.25 against 5.75 l/100km at Vi Bilägare, and it was rated quieter, 10 points against 6 at Tekniikan Maailma. Its judges also preferred it on snow, 20 points against 18 for subjective snow handling at Teknikens Värld, and it took the 2024 Teknikens Värld test, 4th of 17 against the Continental's 6th.
One result stands out as a caution: the Nokian was scored higher for subjective ice handling in Teknikens Värld's 2024 test even though the Continental dominates every measured ice figure, so a friction tyre can still feel composed on ice even when it stops longer. If your winter is glare ice and studs are legal, the Continental. If it is cold tarmac, snow and long motorway runs, or studs are not an option, the Nokian.
IceContact 3 vs Hakkapeliitta R5: your questions
Is the Continental IceContact 3 or the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 the better tyre?
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Continental IceContact 3 finished ahead 2 times and the Hakkapeliitta R5 not once. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the IceContact 3 scores 9.1 and the Hakkapeliitta R5 8.7 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the IceContact 3 or the Hakkapeliitta R5?
The IceContact 3 led 6 of the 8 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 7.9% shorter in the wet across 2 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Hakkapeliitta R5 led 3 of the 4 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
Across the shared tests the snow measurements are split 3-3 between the IceContact 3 and the Hakkapeliitta R5.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Hakkapeliitta R5 used 4.9% less fuel (2 tests). Owners rate wear 5/10 for the IceContact 3 and 8.3/10 for the Hakkapeliitta R5.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 7.3/10 for the IceContact 3 and 8.9/10 for the Hakkapeliitta R5.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the IceContact 3 79% from 3 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the IceContact 3 was the dearer tyre in 2 of them, by 13.2% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs
Michelin X Ice Snow vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
0-6 in 8 shared tests
vs
Continental VikingContact 8 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
6-0 in 6 shared tests
vs
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
2-2 in 6 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
7-1 in 8 shared tests
vs
Continental IceContact 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
0-7 in 7 shared tests
vs
Continental IceContact 3 vs Michelin X Ice Snow
2-0 in 6 shared tests
vs
Michelin X Ice North 4 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
1-2 in 5 shared tests
vs
Continental IceContact 3 vs Michelin X Ice North 4
3-6 in 11 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tyre wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tyres ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tyre Reviews Score rates each tyre out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tyres can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tyre Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tyres independently since 2007.
Discussion