BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ finished ahead 2 times and the gForce Winter 2 not once, with one level. The gForce Winter 2 was stronger in snow and value, the WinterCraft WP52+ in dry and wet.
Performance profile
15 measurements from the 3 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
gForce Winter 2
WinterCraft WP52+
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 95%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow.
Where each scores higher
gForce Winter 2
WinterCraft WP52+
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
gForce Winter 2
WinterCraft WP52+
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the gForce Winter 2 89% from 30 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. 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. Wins count the tests in which each tyre did better.
| Measurement | gForce Winter 2 | Gap | WinterCraft WP52+ | Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry WinterCraft WP52+ ahead | ||||
| Dry Braking m | 45.2 | 4.1% | 43.35 | 0-2 |
| Dry Handling km/h | 111.5 | 1.1% | 112.7 | 0-2 |
| Wet WinterCraft WP52+ ahead | ||||
| Wet Braking m | 51.5 | 3.7% | 49.5 | 0-3 |
| Wet Handling km/h | 79.35 | 1.7% | 80.7 | 0-2 |
| Wet Circle s | 12.74 | 1.6% | 12.53 | 0-2 |
| Straight Aqua km/h | 84.65 | 2.5% | 82.55 | 2-0 |
| Curved Aquaplaning m/sec2 | 2.67 | 11.4% | 2.39 | 2-0 |
| Snow gForce Winter 2 ahead | ||||
| Snow Braking m | 28.5 | 2.7% | 29.3 | 3-0 |
| Snow Traction N | 3,992 | 4.5% | 3,821 | 2-0 |
| Snow Handling km/h | 58.2 | 0.4% | 57.95 | 2-0 |
| Snow Slalom m/sec2 | 3.24 | 2.9% | 3.15 | 2-0 |
| Comfort Level | ||||
| Subj. Comfort pts | scored | 4.1% | scored | 1-1 |
| Noise dB | 69.3 | 0.1 dB | 69.2 | 1-1 |
| Value gForce Winter 2 ahead | ||||
| Wear km | 49,715 | 2.8% | 48,335 | 2-0 |
| Rolling Resistance kg / t | 8.19 | 0.6% | 8.24 | 1-1 |
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.
Head to head in 3 tests, 2025 to 2026
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 | gForce Winter 2 | Field | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Auto Bild Winter Tyre Test | P11 of 20 | P8 of 20 | |
| 2026 Winter Tyre Braking Test - 50 Sets | P10 of 50 | P10 of 50 | |
| 2025 Autobild Winter Tyre Test | P12 of 20 | P3 of 20 |
gForce Winter 2 vs WinterCraft WP52+: your questions
Is the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 or the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ the better tyre?
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ finished ahead 2 times and the gForce Winter 2 not once, with one level. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the gForce Winter 2 scores 8.3 and the WinterCraft WP52+ 9.3 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the gForce Winter 2 or the WinterCraft WP52+?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 7 of the 11 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 3.7% shorter in the wet across 3 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 4 of the 4 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 4.1% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The gForce Winter 2 led 9 of the 9 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.7% shorter on snow across 3 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The gForce Winter 2 lasted 2.8% longer in the wear tests (2 tests). Owners rate wear 8.7/10 for the gForce Winter 2 and 8.3/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 9.2/10 for the gForce Winter 2 and 8.8/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the gForce Winter 2 89% from 30 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. 100% of gForce Winter 2 owners would buy it again, against 100% for the WinterCraft WP52+.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the gForce Winter 2 was the dearer tyre in 2 of them, by 18.1% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The gForce Winter 2 is made in 75 sizes (14 to 20 inch) and the WinterCraft WP52+ in 115 (13 to 21 inch). 61 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the gForce Winter 2 is graded B for wet grip and D for rolling resistance in most sizes; the WinterCraft WP52+ B and C.
Which is the newer tyre?
The WinterCraft WP52+ is the newer design: it reached the market in 2025, the gForce Winter 2 in 2016.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs 
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs Linglong Sport Master Winter
3-1 in 4 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Kleber Krisalp HP3
13-5 in 20 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
5-3 in 8 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
3-14 in 17 shared tests
vs
Barum Polaris 5 vs BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
0-13 in 13 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Firestone Winterhawk 4
9-5 in 14 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Michelin Alpin 6
3-11 in 14 shared tests
vs 
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Semperit Speed Grip 5
6-4 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.