BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 vs Fulda Kristall Control HP2
Expect a clear split in character. The BFGoodrich consistently leads on objective safety metrics in the wet and on snow, often by 2-6% in braking and with strong aquaplaning reserves, while the Fulda counters with lower rolling resistance, longer projected life, and better purchase value. Dry handling feel is usually marginally better on the Fulda, but the BFGoodrich's all-weather stopping power and snow traction repeatedly translate into higher overall test finishes.
Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been eighteen tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 | eighteen |
While it might look like the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 is better than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Class-leading wet braking and strong wet handling consistency (2-6% advantages in multiple tests)
- Outstanding snow performance (braking, traction, handling) with repeat test leadership
- Very good aquaplaning resistance and generally lower noise
- Consistently higher overall test placements across sizes and years
- Lower rolling resistance in most tests and typically better purchase value
- Longer projected tread life in several independent wear assessments
- Good steering precision and stability on dry roads
- Occasionally strong curved aquaplaning results
Dry Braking
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during seven dry braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.41% less distance than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Dry Braking: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during six dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was 0.27% faster around a lap than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from fifteen tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during fifteen wet braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 stopped the vehicle in 3.61% less distance than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Wet Braking: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.61% less distance than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during seven wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 2.44% faster around a wet lap than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during four wet circle tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 1.7% faster around a wet circle than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Wet Circle: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during seven straight aqua tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 floated at a 3.06% higher speed than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Straight Aqua: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from five tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during five curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 slipped out at a 4.4% higher speed than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from fifteen tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during thirteen snow braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 stopped the vehicle in 2.3% less distance than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Snow Braking: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from six tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during five snow traction tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 had 1.1% better snow traction than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Snow Traction: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during five snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 1.65% faster around a lap than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during three snow slalom tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was 1.78% faster through a slalom than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Snow Slalom: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during one ice braking tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 stopped the vehicle 4.76% shorter than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Ice Braking: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during one subj. comfort tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 scored 8.75% more points than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during eight noise tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 measured 3.25% quieter than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Noise: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from eight tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during five wear tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 is predicted to cover 8.58% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Wear: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during seven value tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 proved to have a 18.32% better value based on price/1000km than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Value: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Price
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during three price tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 cost 14.95% less than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Price: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Price winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from seven tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during five rolling resistance tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 had a 3.84% lower rolling resistance than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 was better during one fuel consumption tests. On average the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 used 1.75% less fuel than the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Fulda Kristall Control HP2
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 emitted 13.85% less particle wear matter than the Fulda Kristall Control HP2.
Best In Abrasion: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers largely praise the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 for outstanding snow and ice traction, strong wet grip and aquaplaning resistance, good comfort, and value, with many saying they'd buy again. Dry performance is acceptable for a winter tyre but less responsive with softer handling and modest on-center feel. Wear is generally viewed as good, though a few sporty drivers report faster wear. Noise is mostly low, with occasional reports of wet-road noise.
Based on 28 reviews with an average rating of 88%
Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Driver Reviews
Drivers of the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 generally report strong wet and snow traction, predictable handling, and good comfort/noise levels, with several noting good value and even low rolling resistance. High-scoring reviews particularly praise its stability and confidence in winter conditions. A minority highlight longer-term issues, citing performance deterioration as the rubber hardens with age and instances of uneven rear wear/cupping that can raise noise. Overall sentiment skews moderately positive with some durability/aging caveats.
Based on 11 reviews with an average rating of 68%
Conclusion
Fulda's Kristall Control HP2 makes its case on cost of ownership: stronger wear results in several tests, lower rolling resistance more often than not, and better value/price metrics. Steering precision in the dry is a recurring positive, but wet-grip shortfalls and unbalanced winter capability limit its confidence in harsher conditions. If you prioritize winter safety and wet-road competence, choose the BFGoodrich. If you drive in milder winters, value long life and lower running costs, and want a keener purchase price, the Fulda can fit the brief.
Key Differences
- Safety priority vs. economy: BFGoodrich leads wet/snow braking; Fulda leads value, price, and often efficiency
- Wet performance: BFGoodrich wins 15/15 wet braking and most wet handling/circle tests; Fulda trails
- Snow performance: BFGoodrich generally superior across braking, traction, and handling; Fulda occasionally close but less consistent
- Aquaplaning split: BFGoodrich ahead in straight-line aquaplaning; Fulda often better in curved aquaplaning
- Dry behavior: Fulda marginally better in dry handling feel; BFGoodrich often slightly shorter dry stops
- Running costs: Fulda typically offers lower rolling resistance and longer wear; BFGoodrich is quieter but can be pricier
Overall Winner: BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.