Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs Michelin Alpin 7
- TR Score
- 9.3/10
- Owners say
- 91% · 6
- TR Score
- 9.5/10
- Owners say
- 90% · 12
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Alpin 7 finished ahead 2 times and the WinterCraft WP52+ not once. The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Choose the Michelin Alpin 7 for its consistently stronger overall results, secure dry handling and shorter ice braking in ADAC's test. Choose the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ if dry braking and lower measured cost per 1,000 km matter more, while allowing for its handling and curved-aquaplaning drawbacks.
Where the WinterCraft WP52+ is stronger
- Shorter dry braking distances in both shared tests
- Strong wet braking in ADAC's 2026 test
- Lower measured cost per 1,000 km in both tests
Where the Alpin 7 is stronger
- Second overall in both shared tests
- More secure dry handling and shorter ice braking in ADAC's 2026 test
- Lower rolling resistance in AvD's 2026 test
Conclusion
Michelin's second place in both the 2026 AvD and ADAC tests is the clearest overall pattern. AvD rated it very good, highlighting snow performance, low rolling resistance and the longest predicted tread life in that test. ADAC rated it good overall and found it precise and secure on dry roads, with strong ice braking. Kumho finished sixth in AvD, where it was the best tyre rated good, but shared twelfth in ADAC. That lower ADAC result needs context: Kumho braked well on dry and wet roads, yet its imprecise dry handling and oversteer in evasive manoeuvres limited its overall grade.
Kumho stopped shorter on dry roads in both tests, by about 4% in AvD and 2% in ADAC, though that braking advantage did not translate into better dry handling in ADAC's assessment. The wet braking result switched: Michelin was about 1% shorter in AvD, effectively very close, while Kumho was about 5% shorter in ADAC. Snow braking also switched, with relatively small gaps. ADAC measured Michelin stopping about 7% shorter on ice and retaining more grip in curved aquaplaning. AvD likewise identified curved aquaplaning as a Kumho weakness. These are more useful distinctions than declaring either tyre better for every wet or wintry journey.
Wear predictions deserve particular caution. Michelin's predicted life was about 42% longer than Kumho's in AvD, but ADAC found the unusual opposite result: Kumho's was about 21% longer and the best in that test. Kumho nevertheless had the lower measured cost per 1,000 km in both. Michelin showed lower rolling resistance in AvD and slightly lower fuel consumption in ADAC, while ADAC measured less abrasion. Choose Michelin if secure handling, ice braking and consistently high overall results matter most. Kumho suits a driver prioritising short braking distances and lower measured running cost, provided they accept the dry-handling concern raised by ADAC and the curved-aquaplaning weakness noted by AvD.
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.
WinterCraft WP52+ vs Alpin 7 at a glance
| Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | Gap | Alpin 7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won2 shared tests | 0 | 2 | |
| Dry2 measurements | 2 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry (2 tests) | 0 |
| Wet5 measurements | 3 | 2 | |
| Snow3 measurements | 2 | 1 | |
| Ice1 measurement | 0 | 1 | |
| Comfort1 measurement | 0 | 1 | |
| Value5 measurements | 1 | 4 | |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 9.3/10 | The Alpin 7 by 0.2 | 9.5/10 |
| Owner rating6 and 12 reviews | 91% | Too close to call | 90% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 100% | Too close to call | 100% |
| Pricein the 2 tests that listed prices | Cheaper | The Alpin 7 was dearer in 2 of 2 | +42.1% |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 115 | 40 sizes made in both | 49 |
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 2 tests in 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 | WinterCraft WP52+ | Field | Alpin 7 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 AvD Winter Tyre Test | P6 of 15 | P2 of 15 | |
| 2026 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 185/65 R15 | P12 of 16 | P2 of 16 |
Performance profile
13 measurements from the 2 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
WinterCraft WP52+
Alpin 7
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.
Where each scores higher
WinterCraft WP52+
Alpin 7
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
WinterCraft WP52+
Alpin 7
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6 reviews and the Alpin 7 90% from 12. 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 | WinterCraft WP52+ | Gap | Alpin 7 | Wins | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 42.8 | 2.6% | 43.95 | 2-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 41.65 | 1.9% | 42.3 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 39 | 1% | 39.4 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 87.3 | 1.6% | 85.9 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 3.2 | 9.4% | 3.5 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 17.7 | 0.6% | 17.65 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 2,868 | 0.6% | 2,851 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 21.5 | 6.5% | 20.1 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 73.1 | 0.8 dB | 72.3 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 39,412 | 10.4% | 44,048 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 9.03 | 12.3% | 7.92 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 5.6 | 1.8% | 5.5 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 95 | 16.8% | 79 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
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. "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 WinterCraft WP52+ scores 9.3 and the Alpin 7 9.5 out of 10.
| WinterCraft WP52+ | Category | Alpin 7 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 92 | Dry | 78 | ||
| 88 | Wet | 82 | ||
| 46 | Comfort | 64 | ||
| 79 | Value | 85 | ||
| 68 | Snow | 77 | ||
| 35 | Ice | 84 | ||
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
| WinterCraft WP52+ | Category | Alpin 7 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.3 | Dry Grip | 8.8 | ||
| 9.3 | Wet Grip | 9 | ||
| 9 | Road Feedback | 7.7 | ||
| 9 | Handling | 8.6 | ||
| 8.3 | Wear | 9.8 | ||
| 8.8 | Comfort | 9.5 | ||
| 9.3 | Snow Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 8.4 | Ice Grip | 7.7 | ||
Owners rate the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6 reviews and the Alpin 7 90% from 12. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
- 91%from 6 reviews
- 100%would buy again
- 40,507 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers report the Kumho WinterCraft WP52 plus delivers impressively strong winter performance for the price, with repeated praise for confident grip (especially in wet conditions) and secure handling. Reviews consistently highlight low road noise and noticeably improved ride comfort versus some premium or run-flat alternatives, with multiple users describing a premium feel and excellent value. No recurring performance drawbacks were reported across the reviews.
- Strong wet grip and water shedding
- Confident handling and traction in cold/winter conditions
- Low road noise / quiet ride
- Good ride comfort
Summarised by AI from 5 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 6 WinterCraft WP52+ reviewsI bought these after looking at the tests. They offer performance close to premium tires while being very affordable. That's actually the reason I chose this tire. If you don't have extreme winter conditions where you are, you can go for this tire. If the winter conditions are bad, Barum might be a good alternative since it's still reasonably priced.
Michelin Alpin 7
- 90%from 12 reviews
- 100%would buy again
- 79,527 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers rate the Michelin Alpin 7 very highly overall, most often praising its very low noise and notably improved ride comfort/refinement versus previous winter or summer setups. Reviews frequently highlight confident grip and stability in dry and wet conditions, with many also reporting strong performance in snow and slush. A smaller set of users mention a softer sidewall/less direct steering feel, and a couple note that for true Nordic winters (deep snow/ice-heavy conditions) a dedicated Nordic winter tyre may be a better fit.
- Very quiet/low road noise (near summer-tyre levels for many)
- High ride comfort and good bump/pothole absorption
- Strong dry and wet grip with stable handling, including at higher speeds
- Good snow and slush traction with predictable control
- Soft sidewalls/less direct steering feel (floatier feedback, slightly longer-feeling dry braking for some)
- Higher energy consumption/efficiency loss versus summer tyres (typical winter-tyre penalty)
Summarised by AI from 11 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 12 Alpin 7 reviewsDefinitely comfortable, safe tires that provide amazing grip on snow and ice. I'm very satisfied, I won't use another tire.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tyre: 115 sizes of the WinterCraft WP52+ and 49 of the Alpin 7, 40 of them made in both.
| Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | Alpin 7 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| Sizes made | 115 sizes, 13 to 21 inch | 49 sizes, 15 to 20 inch |
| Made in both | 40 sizes 185/65 R15195/65 R15195/55 R16195/60 R16205/55 R16205/60 R16215/55 R16215/60 R16215/65 R16225/55 R16205/45 R17205/50 R17and 28 more | |
| EU label wet grip | B82%A18% | B100% |
| EU label rolling resistance | C65%D32%B2%E1% | C66%B30%D5% |
| EU label noise | 70-73 dB B100% | 69-71 dB B100% |
| Severe snow (3PMSF) sizes | 209 of 211 | 64 of 64 |
| On the market since | 2025 | 2024 |
| Awards | Winner: Winter Touring Tyre of the Year (WhatTyre, 2026/27) | Highly Recommended: Best Winter Tyre (DriverReviews, 2025/26) Winner: Best Winter SUV Tyre (DriverReviews, 2025/26) |
| Price in the shared tests | The Alpin 7 was the dearer tyre in 2 of the 2 tests that listed prices, by 42.1% on average. Each test priced the tyres in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
Label grades are shown as the share of registered sizes carrying each grade, so "B (88%), C (12%)" means most sizes are B. Grades vary by size; check the label for yours.
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.
Two independent 2026 winter tyre tests put the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ and Michelin Alpin 7 side by side: AvD in 225/45 R17 and ADAC in 185/65 R15. Michelin finished second in both, while Kumho was sixth in AvD and joint twelfth in ADAC. Those positions favour Michelin overall, but Kumho stopped shorter on dry roads in both tests and had a lower measured cost per 1,000 km in each.
The difference is not simply about braking grip. AvD found Michelin especially strong for snow performance, wear and rolling resistance, while ADAC praised its secure dry handling and ice braking. Kumho braked well, notably in ADAC's wet test, but ADAC marked down its unsettled dry handling and AvD found its curved aquaplaning resistance weak. Wet and snow braking leads changed between the two sizes, as did predicted tread life, so neither tyre has a consistent advantage on those measures.
WinterCraft WP52+ vs Alpin 7: your questions
Is the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ or the Michelin Alpin 7 the better tyre?
In the 2 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Michelin Alpin 7 finished ahead 2 times and the WinterCraft WP52+ not once. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the WinterCraft WP52+ scores 9.3 and the Alpin 7 9.5 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the WinterCraft WP52+ or the Alpin 7?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 3 of the 5 wet measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which is better in the dry?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 2 of the 2 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 2 of the 3 snow measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 8.8/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+ and 9.5/10 for the Alpin 7.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6 reviews and the Alpin 7 90% from 12. 100% of WinterCraft WP52+ owners would buy it again, against 100% for the Alpin 7.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the Alpin 7 was the dearer tyre in 2 of them, by 42.1% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The WinterCraft WP52+ is made in 115 sizes (13 to 21 inch) and the Alpin 7 in 49 (15 to 20 inch). 40 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the WinterCraft WP52+ is graded B for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Alpin 7 B and C.
Which is the newer tyre?
The WinterCraft WP52+ is the newer design: it reached the market in 2025, the Alpin 7 in 2024.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P vs Michelin Alpin 7
5-0 in 5 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 vs Michelin Alpin 7
8-4 in 12 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Blizzak 6 vs Michelin Alpin 7
5-5 in 11 shared tests
vs
Continental WinterContact TS 870 vs Michelin Alpin 7
5-1 in 6 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Alpin 7 vs Pirelli Cinturato Winter 3
0-5 in 5 shared tests
vs 
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs Linglong Sport Master Winter
3-1 in 4 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Alpin 7 vs Nokian Snowproof 3P
1-2 in 3 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Alpin 7 vs Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
5-1 in 6 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