Test Charts / Vi Bilagare

2020 Studded Winter Tyre Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tyre, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 205/60 R16
Tyres tested: 8
Disciplines: 13

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tyres can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tyres does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1GT Radial IcePro 3	28.88 m	Best	0 km/h
2Continental IceContact 3	30.75 m	+1.87 m	32 km/h
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	31.02 m	+2.14 m	34 km/h
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	31.11 m	+2.23 m	35 km/h
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	31.6 m	+2.72 m	38 km/h
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	31.94 m	+3.06 m	40 km/h
7Michelin X Ice North 4	32.31 m	+3.43 m	42 km/h
8Nokian Nordman 7	33.3 m	+4.42 m	47 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (4.42 m ≈ 1 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Nokian Nordman 7 would still be travelling at 47 km/h when the GT Radial IcePro 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5 Points	Best
2Pirelli Ice Zero 2	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Continental IceContact 3	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	3 Points	-2.00 Points
7Nokian Nordman 7	2 Points	-3.00 Points
7GT Radial IcePro 3	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1GT Radial IcePro 3	33.87 m	Best	0 km/h
2Pirelli Ice Zero 2	34.8 m	+0.93 m	21 km/h
3Michelin X Ice North 4	35.06 m	+1.19 m	24 km/h
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	36.15 m	+2.28 m	33 km/h
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	36.92 m	+3.05 m	37 km/h
5Continental IceContact 3	36.92 m	+3.05 m	37 km/h
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	37.18 m	+3.31 m	39 km/h
8Nokian Nordman 7	38.91 m	+5.04 m	47 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 14.9% (5.04 m ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Nokian Nordman 7 would still be travelling at 47 km/h when the GT Radial IcePro 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1GT Radial IcePro 3	43.11 s	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	43.77 s	+0.66 s
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	44.1 s	+0.99 s
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	44.12 s	+1.01 s
5Hankook Winter i pike RS2	44.75 s	+1.64 s
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	45.17 s	+2.06 s
7Nokian Nordman 7	45.75 s	+2.64 s
7Michelin X Ice North 4	45.75 s	+2.64 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.1% (2.64 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Ice Zero 2	64.6 km/h	Best
2GT Radial IcePro 3	64.1 km/h	-0.50 km/h
3Continental IceContact 3	63.7 km/h	-0.90 km/h
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	62.9 km/h	-1.70 km/h
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	62.4 km/h	-2.20 km/h
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	62.1 km/h	-2.50 km/h
7Nokian Nordman 7	61.7 km/h	-2.90 km/h
8Michelin X Ice North 4	59.4 km/h	-5.20 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 8% (5.2 Km/H).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin X Ice North 4	10.5 m	Best	0 km/h
1Continental IceContact 3	10.5 m	Best	0 km/h
3Nokian Nordman 7	10.51 m	+0.01 m	4 km/h
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	10.58 m	+0.08 m	11 km/h
5Hankook Winter i pike RS2	10.6 m	+0.10 m	13 km/h
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	10.71 m	+0.21 m	18 km/h
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	10.71 m	+0.21 m	18 km/h
8GT Radial IcePro 3	10.73 m	+0.23 m	19 km/h

All the tyres in the Snow Braking test finished less than 3% apart. From 130 km/h, the GT Radial IcePro 3 would still be travelling at 19 km/h when the Michelin X Ice North 4 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Ice Zero 2	3.62 s	Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4	3.67 s	+0.05 s
2Continental IceContact 3	3.67 s	+0.05 s
4Nokian Nordman 7	3.72 s	+0.10 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	3.75 s	+0.13 s
6Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3.79 s	+0.17 s
7GT Radial IcePro 3	3.83 s	+0.21 s
8Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	3.92 s	+0.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.3% (0.3 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	74.62 s	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	75.04 s	+0.42 s
3Nokian Nordman 7	75.19 s	+0.57 s
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	75.19 s	+0.57 s
5Michelin X Ice North 4	75.69 s	+1.07 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	75.74 s	+1.12 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	76.85 s	+2.23 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	78.81 s	+4.19 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.6% (4.19 s).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	3.43 m	Best	0 km/h
2Michelin X Ice North 4	3.47 m	+0.04 m	14 km/h
3Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	4.07 m	+0.64 m	52 km/h
4Continental IceContact 3	4.2 m	+0.77 m	56 km/h
5Nokian Nordman 7	4.31 m	+0.88 m	59 km/h
6Hankook Winter i pike RS2	4.68 m	+1.25 m	67 km/h
7Pirelli Ice Zero 2	5.2 m	+1.77 m	76 km/h
8GT Radial IcePro 3	5.31 m	+1.88 m	77 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 54.8% (1.88 m ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the GT Radial IcePro 3 would still be travelling at 77 km/h when the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Ice Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	1.89 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	1.94 s	+0.05 s
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	2.08 s	+0.19 s
4Continental IceContact 3	2.18 s	+0.29 s
5Nokian Nordman 7	2.22 s	+0.33 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	2.42 s	+0.53 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	2.8 s	+0.91 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	3.29 s	+1.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 74.1% (1.4 s).

Ice Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	51.23 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	51.4 s	+0.17 s
3Continental IceContact 3	52.24 s	+1.01 s
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	53.52 s	+2.29 s
5Nokian Nordman 7	55.11 s	+3.88 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	56.42 s	+5.19 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	59.02 s	+7.79 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	61.42 s	+10.19 s

The difference between best and worst was 19.9% (10.19 s).

Comfort

Subj. Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5 Points	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5Nokian Nordman 7	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5GT Radial IcePro 3	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

Value

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5.66 l/100km	Best	£0
2Hankook Winter i pike RS2	5.67 l/100km	+0.01 l/100km	£3
3Continental IceContact 3	5.69 l/100km	+0.03 l/100km	£8
4Pirelli Ice Zero 2	5.71 l/100km	+0.05 l/100km	£14
5Nokian Nordman 7	5.74 l/100km	+0.08 l/100km	£22
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	5.76 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	5.76 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
8GT Radial IcePro 3	5.78 l/100km	+0.12 l/100km	£33

All the tyres in the Fuel Consumption test finished less than 3% apart. Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the GT Radial IcePro 3 uses about 23 L (£33) more fuel than the Michelin X Ice North 4.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tyre selection above.

Petrol/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

19,000 km

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

£1.45/L

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.