Menu

A newer edition of this test is out: The BEST Studded Tyres for 2025

Test source Vi Bilagare

2024 Studded Tyre Test

Overall test winnerNokian Hakkapeliitta 10

The excellent magazine Vi Bilagare tested seven studded tyres and one friction (non-studded) winter tyre - the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5.

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson
5 min read Updated
Tyre shortlist Read the test
Tyres tested
8
Tested size
225/45 R17
Disciplines
13

At a glance

Tyre shortlist

8 Tyres tested

Published finishing positions, with the strengths and considerations from this test. Owner reviews cover other sizes and driving conditions.

1st

Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10

+The Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 is the strongest tyre in winter corners, with the best ice handling and second place for ice braking, ice traction and snow handling, and its responsive steering and active rear help it turn.

−Wet roads are its weakness, sixth for wet braking and second from last for straight-line aquaplaning, and its straight-line stability on dry roads is reduced.

Read full verdict
10 owner reviews Test Results
2nd

Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3

+The Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3 has the best ice braking and ice traction in the test and the best aquaplaning resistance, with good wet grip and stability on asphalt.

−It has the longest dry braking distance and is the loudest tyre in the test, it is second from last for snow braking, traction and handling, and it loses grip more suddenly in corners. It also lost a number of poorly fitted studs during the test.

Read full verdict
Read owner reviews Test Results
3rd

Michelin X Ice North 4

+The Michelin X Ice North 4 shares the best dry handling score, is second for snow traction and third for ice handling, and is one of the quieter tyres with the third-lowest fuel consumption. It understeers predictably in all conditions.

−Wet grip is its main weakness, last for wet handling and second from last for wet braking.

Read full verdict
13 owner reviews Test Results
4th

Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2

+The Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 brakes consistently well, third on ice and in the wet, joint third on snow and fourth in the dry, and it is third for straight-line aquaplaning and snow traction.

−The steering feels somewhat vague, it is fifth for ice traction and ice handling, and its fuel consumption is the second highest.

Read full verdict
1 owner review Test Results
5th

Continental IceContact 3

+The Continental IceContact 3 has the best wet and snow handling in the test and shares the best dry handling score, is second for wet braking and snow braking, and is the second-quietest tyre in the test.

−Ice is unusually weak for a studded tyre, sixth for braking, traction and handling, and it has the highest fuel consumption in the test.

Read full verdict
3 owner reviews Test Results
6th

Nordman North 9

+The Nordman North 9 has the shortest snow braking distance in the test, is third for ice traction, has the second-lowest fuel consumption and is the second-cheapest tyre in the test.

−Its winter grip trails the premium tyres, second from last for ice handling, and it is the second-loudest tyre in the test.

Read full verdict
1 owner review Test Results
7th

Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5

+The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5, a non-studded tyre, is second for ice handling and first for snow traction, and it is the quietest tyre in the test, with the shortest dry braking distance and the lowest fuel consumption.

−On smooth ice it cannot match the studded tyres, last for ice braking and traction, and it is last for wet braking, dry handling and aquaplaning.

Read full verdict
17 owner reviews Test Results
8th

Mazzini Ice Leopard

+The Mazzini Ice Leopard has the shortest wet braking distance in the test, is second for dry braking, wet handling and straight-line aquaplaning, and it is by far the cheapest tyre in the test.

−Its ice grip is much worse than the established brands, last for ice handling and second from last for ice braking and traction. It is last on snow for braking, traction and handling, and grip disappears suddenly in corners.

Read full verdict
Read owner reviews Test Results

Tyre shortlist

Compare selected tyres

2024 Studded Tyre Test · 225/45 R17

TyreNokian Hakkapeliitta 10Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3Michelin X Ice North 4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2Continental IceContact 3Nordman North 9Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5Mazzini Ice Leopard
Position1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry89.1%90.3%95.7%90.3%97.6%88.1%89.8%91.2%
Wet93.6%97.5%94.2%97.3%98.6%95.4%91.7%98.8%
Snow97.9%95.8%98.3%98.3%98.1%97.4%99.3%94.5%
Ice93.2%99.6%87.6%86.8%77.4%85.8%70%70.6%
Comfort94.7%93.6%95.8%95.1%97.2%94.6%100%95.6%
Fuel Consumption94.6%94.6%95.5%92.1%91.3%96.3%100%92.9%
Keep researchingRead owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results

Explore the complete results →

The full test

The evidence behind the verdict

The excellent magazine Vi Bilagare tested seven studded tyres and one friction (non-studded) winter tyre - the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5. Testing was conducted in various locations across Finland and Sweden, using a Volkswagen Golf for most tests.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Recorded test conditions

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking
80 → 5 km/h · 12–15 °C
Subj. Dry Handling
14–17 °C
Wet Braking
80 → 5 km/h · 12–14 °C
Wet Handling
7–9 °C
Snow Braking
35 → 5 km/h · -6–-4 °C
Snow Traction
5 → 35 km/h · -6–-4 °C
Snow Handling
-12–-11 °C
Ice Braking
25 → 5 km/h · -6–-5 °C
Ice Traction
5 → 25 km/h · -6–-5 °C
Ice Handling
-15–-12 °C

Friction vs Studded Performance

The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 friction tyre showed some interesting characteristics. On rough ice and snow, it matched or exceeded the studded tyres for cornering grip. However, on polished ice, it struggled significantly with braking and acceleration, performing similarly to the budget Mazzini studded tyre. The friction tyre excelled in comfort aspects, with the lowest noise levels and best fuel economy, but showed clear weaknesses in wet grip and early aquaplaning.

Budget Tyre Performance

The Chinese-made Mazzini Ice Leopard highlighted the performance gap between premium and budget tyres. While it showed decent performance on dry and wet asphalt, it struggled in winter conditions. Its ice grip was poor, with sudden loss of cornering grip occurring without warning. Even with studs, it couldn't outperform the friction tyre on polished ice.

Other Points

The magazine noted that production changes due to leaving Russia have affected quality control, with both Michelin and Bridgestone showing inconsistent stud mounting, the Bridgestone had significant stud retention issues during testing, losing 26 studs from the front tyres, and that the Continental showed unusual characteristics for a studded tyre, with ice performance being its weakest point but excellent wet and dry road handling.

Dry

Dry Braking

Dry Braking

Dry braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 13.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 31.52 m Best 0 km/h
2Mazzini Ice Leopard
 32.29 m +0.77 m 20 km/h
3Continental IceContact 3
 32.47 m +0.95 m 22 km/h
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 32.66 m +1.14 m 24 km/h
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 33.14 m +1.62 m 29 km/h
6Michelin X Ice North 4
 33.26 m +1.74 m 30 km/h
7Nordman North 9
 33.59 m +2.07 m 32 km/h
8Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 34.13 m +2.61 m 36 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 8.3% (2.61 m ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3 would still be travelling at 36 km/h when the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 had stopped.

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

Subj. Dry Handling

Subj. Dry Handling

Subjective Dry Handling Score [Average Temperature 15.5c]

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4
 5 Points Best
1Continental IceContact 3
 5 Points Best
3Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 4 Points -1.00 Points
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 3 Points -2.00 Points
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 3 Points -2.00 Points
4Nordman North 9
 3 Points -2.00 Points
4Mazzini Ice Leopard
 3 Points -2.00 Points
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 2 Points -3.00 Points

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

Wet

Wet Braking

Wet Braking

Wet braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 13c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Mazzini Ice Leopard
 34.3 m Best 0 km/h
2Continental IceContact 3
 34.74 m +0.44 m 15 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 35.34 m +1.04 m 22 km/h
4Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 35.42 m +1.12 m 23 km/h
5Nordman North 9
 36.34 m +2.04 m 31 km/h
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 37.22 m +2.92 m 36 km/h
7Michelin X Ice North 4
 37.27 m +2.97 m 37 km/h
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 38.39 m +4.09 m 42 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 11.9% (4.09 m ≈ 0.9 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 would still be travelling at 42 km/h when the Mazzini Ice Leopard had stopped.

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

Wet Handling

Wet Handling

Wet handling time in seconds [Average Temperature 8c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental IceContact 3
 40.7 s Best
2Mazzini Ice Leopard
 41.4 s +0.70 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 41.5 s +0.80 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 41.7 s +1.00 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 41.9 s +1.20 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 41.9 s +1.20 s
5Nordman North 9
 41.9 s +1.20 s
8Michelin X Ice North 4
 42.1 s +1.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.4% (1.4 s).

Straight Aqua

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in Km/H

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 74 km/h Best
2Mazzini Ice Leopard
 71.1 km/h -2.90 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 70.7 km/h -3.30 km/h
4Michelin X Ice North 4
 69.2 km/h -4.80 km/h
5Continental IceContact 3
 68.3 km/h -5.70 km/h
6Nordman North 9
 68.2 km/h -5.80 km/h
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 63 km/h -11.00 km/h
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 58.6 km/h -15.40 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 20.8% (15.4 Km/H).

Snow

Snow Braking

Snow Braking

Snow braking in meters (35 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature -5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Nordman North 9
 12.31 m Best 0 km/h
2Continental IceContact 3
 12.34 m +0.03 m 6 km/h
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 12.41 m +0.10 m 12 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 12.41 m +0.10 m 12 km/h
5Michelin X Ice North 4
 12.42 m +0.11 m 12 km/h
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 12.5 m +0.19 m 16 km/h
7Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 12.68 m +0.37 m 22 km/h
8Mazzini Ice Leopard
 12.94 m +0.63 m 29 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 5.1% (0.63 m). From 130 km/h, the Mazzini Ice Leopard would still be travelling at 29 km/h when the Nordman North 9 had stopped.

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

Snow Traction

Snow Traction

Snow acceleration time (5 - 35 km/h) [Average Temperature -5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 4.1 s Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4
 4.21 s +0.11 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 4.24 s +0.14 s
4Continental IceContact 3
 4.32 s +0.22 s
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 4.32 s +0.22 s
6Nordman North 9
 4.35 s +0.25 s
7Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 4.4 s +0.30 s
8Mazzini Ice Leopard
 4.45 s +0.35 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.5% (0.35 s).

Snow Handling

Snow Handling

Snow handling time in seconds [Average Temperature -11.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental IceContact 3
 75.1 s Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 75.2 s +0.10 s
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 75.6 s +0.50 s
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 75.8 s +0.70 s
5Michelin X Ice North 4
 76.2 s +1.10 s
6Nordman North 9
 76.4 s +1.30 s
7Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 77.1 s +2.00 s
8Mazzini Ice Leopard
 78 s +2.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.9% (2.9 s).

Ice

Ice Braking

Ice Braking

Ice braking in meters (25 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature -5.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 11.03 m Best 0 km/h
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 11.73 m +0.70 m 32 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 12.64 m +1.61 m 46 km/h
4Michelin X Ice North 4
 13.38 m +2.35 m 54 km/h
5Nordman North 9
 13.77 m +2.74 m 58 km/h
6Continental IceContact 3
 15.87 m +4.84 m 72 km/h
7Mazzini Ice Leopard
 17.54 m +6.51 m 79 km/h
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 17.87 m +6.84 m 80 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 62% (6.84 m ≈ 1.5 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 would still be travelling at 80 km/h when the Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3 had stopped.

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

Ice Traction

Ice Traction

Ice acceleration time (5 - 25 km/h) [Average Temperature -5.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 4.61 s Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 5.38 s +0.77 s
3Nordman North 9
 5.55 s +0.94 s
4Michelin X Ice North 4
 5.66 s +1.05 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 6.19 s +1.58 s
6Continental IceContact 3
 6.81 s +2.20 s
7Mazzini Ice Leopard
 7.99 s +3.38 s
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 9.42 s +4.81 s

The difference between best and worst was 104.3% (4.81 s).

Ice Handling

Ice Handling

Ice handling time in seconds [Average Temperature -13.5c]

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 47.8 s Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 48 s +0.20 s
3Michelin X Ice North 4
 48.2 s +0.40 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 48.4 s +0.60 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 48.5 s +0.70 s
6Continental IceContact 3
 50.2 s +2.40 s
7Nordman North 9
 50.7 s +2.90 s
8Mazzini Ice Leopard
 52.2 s +4.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 9.2% (4.4 s).

Comfort

Noise

Noise

External noise in dB

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 71.5 dB Best
2Continental IceContact 3
 73.6 dB +2.10 dB
3Michelin X Ice North 4
 74.6 dB +3.10 dB
4Mazzini Ice Leopard
 74.8 dB +3.30 dB
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 75.2 dB +3.70 dB
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 75.5 dB +4.00 dB
7Nordman North 9
 75.6 dB +4.10 dB
8Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 76.4 dB +4.90 dB

The difference between best and worst was 6.9% (4.9 dB).

Value

Fuel Consumption

Fuel Consumption

Fuel consumption in Litres per 100 km

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
 5.25 l/100km Best £0
2Nordman North 9
 5.45 l/100km +0.20 l/100km £55
3Michelin X Ice North 4
 5.5 l/100km +0.25 l/100km £69
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
 5.55 l/100km +0.30 l/100km £83
4Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
 5.55 l/100km +0.30 l/100km £83
6Mazzini Ice Leopard
 5.65 l/100km +0.40 l/100km £110
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
 5.7 l/100km +0.45 l/100km £124
8Continental IceContact 3
 5.75 l/100km +0.50 l/100km £138

The difference between best and worst was 9.5% (0.5 l/100km). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Continental IceContact 3 uses about 95 L (£138) more fuel than the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

19,000 km
£1.45/L
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.

Results

1st

Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10

225/45 R17 94T XL
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 dominated winter performance, particularly strong in corners on both ice and snow. The steering is responsive with an active rear end that helps turning, though this might not suit drivers wanting ultimate stability. Its weaknesses showed on wet roads with longer braking distances and early aquaplaning, plus reduced straight-line stability on dry roads.
Dry89.1%
Wet93.6%
Snow97.9%
Ice93.2%
Comfort94.7%
Fuel Consumption94.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better5th / 833.14 m+1.62 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 83 Points-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better6th / 837.22 m+2.92 m
Wet HandlingLower is better5th / 841.9 s+1.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better7th / 863 km/h-11.00 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better3rd / 812.41 m+0.10 m
Snow TractionLower is better4th / 84.32 s+0.22 s
Snow HandlingLower is better2nd / 875.2 s+0.10 s
Ice BrakingLower is better2nd / 811.73 m+0.70 m
Ice TractionLower is better2nd / 85.38 s+0.77 s
Ice HandlingLower is better1st / 847.8 sBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better6th / 875.5 dB+4.00 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better4th / 85.55 l/100km+0.30 l/100km
Shore
55
Stud Count
216
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.9 kgs
Tread
9.1 mm
Price
2402.00
2nd

Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3

225/45 R17 94T XL
Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3
Bridgestone Spike 3 is a new model excelling in water displacement and ice grip, but suffered quality control issues with poorly mounted studs, losing 26 during testing. While showing good wet grip and stability on asphalt, it tends to lose grip more suddenly than rivals in corners. Road noise is higher than most competitors.
Dry90.3%
Wet97.5%
Snow95.8%
Ice99.6%
Comfort93.6%
Fuel Consumption94.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better8th / 834.13 m+2.61 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better3rd / 84 Points-1.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better4th / 835.42 m+1.12 m
Wet HandlingLower is better4th / 841.7 s+1.00 s
Straight AquaHigher is better1st / 874 km/hBest in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better7th / 812.68 m+0.37 m
Snow TractionLower is better7th / 84.4 s+0.30 s
Snow HandlingLower is better7th / 877.1 s+2.00 s
Ice BrakingLower is better1st / 811.03 mBest in this discipline
Ice TractionLower is better1st / 84.61 sBest in this discipline
Ice HandlingLower is better4th / 848.4 s+0.60 s
NoiseLower is better8th / 876.4 dB+4.90 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better4th / 85.55 l/100km+0.30 l/100km
Shore
63
Stud Count
262
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.8 kgs
Tread
9.4 mm
Price
2796.00
3rd

Michelin X Ice North 4

225/45 R17 94T XL
Michelin X Ice North 4
Michelin X-Ice North 4, despite being an older design from 2018, remains highly competitive with a well-balanced performance. It combines good ice grip with relatively low noise and fuel consumption. The tyre understeers predictably in all conditions, making it user-friendly, though wet grip is its main weakness.
Dry95.7%
Wet94.2%
Snow98.3%
Ice87.6%
Comfort95.8%
Fuel Consumption95.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better6th / 833.26 m+1.74 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better1st / 85 PointsBest in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better7th / 837.27 m+2.97 m
Wet HandlingLower is better8th / 842.1 s+1.40 s
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 869.2 km/h-4.80 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better5th / 812.42 m+0.11 m
Snow TractionLower is better2nd / 84.21 s+0.11 s
Snow HandlingLower is better5th / 876.2 s+1.10 s
Ice BrakingLower is better4th / 813.38 m+2.35 m
Ice TractionLower is better4th / 85.66 s+1.05 s
Ice HandlingLower is better3rd / 848.2 s+0.40 s
NoiseLower is better3rd / 874.6 dB+3.10 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better3rd / 85.5 l/100km+0.25 l/100km
Shore
59
Stud Count
252
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.7 kgs
Tread
8.3 mm
Price
2656.00
4th

Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2

225/45 R17 94T XL
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 delivers consistent performance and excellent braking across all conditions. It has the deepest tread pattern in the test, which may contribute to its somewhat vague steering feel. While safe and secure, it offers less precise handling for enthusiast drivers.
Dry90.3%
Wet97.3%
Snow98.3%
Ice86.8%
Comfort95.1%
Fuel Consumption92.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better4th / 832.66 m+1.14 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 83 Points-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better3rd / 835.34 m+1.04 m
Wet HandlingLower is better3rd / 841.5 s+0.80 s
Straight AquaHigher is better3rd / 870.7 km/h-3.30 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better3rd / 812.41 m+0.10 m
Snow TractionLower is better3rd / 84.24 s+0.14 s
Snow HandlingLower is better4th / 875.8 s+0.70 s
Ice BrakingLower is better3rd / 812.64 m+1.61 m
Ice TractionLower is better5th / 86.19 s+1.58 s
Ice HandlingLower is better5th / 848.5 s+0.70 s
NoiseLower is better5th / 875.2 dB+3.70 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better7th / 85.7 l/100km+0.45 l/100km
Shore
60
Stud Count
190
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
11.3 kgs
Tread
9.9 mm
Price
2386.00
5th

Continental IceContact 3

225/45 R17 94T XL
Continental IceContact 3
Continental IceContact 3 showed unusually poor ice performance for a studded tyre, with braking distances a full car length longer than the best at just 25 km/h. However, it excelled on asphalt with the best dry and wet handling characteristics and low noise levels. Strong on snow with predictable behavior.
Dry97.6%
Wet98.6%
Snow98.1%
Ice77.4%
Comfort97.2%
Fuel Consumption91.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better3rd / 832.47 m+0.95 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better1st / 85 PointsBest in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better2nd / 834.74 m+0.44 m
Wet HandlingLower is better1st / 840.7 sBest in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better5th / 868.3 km/h-5.70 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better2nd / 812.34 m+0.03 m
Snow TractionLower is better4th / 84.32 s+0.22 s
Snow HandlingLower is better1st / 875.1 sBest in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better6th / 815.87 m+4.84 m
Ice TractionLower is better6th / 86.81 s+2.20 s
Ice HandlingLower is better6th / 850.2 s+2.40 s
NoiseLower is better2nd / 873.6 dB+2.10 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better8th / 85.75 l/100km+0.50 l/100km
Shore
61
Stud Count
190
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.9 kgs
Tread
8.4 mm
Price
2689.00
6th

Nordman North 9

225/45 R17 94T XL
Nordman North 9
Nordman North 9, Nokian's budget brand, uses the previous generation Hakkapeliitta 9 tread pattern with harder rubber. It matches or beats the premium Nokian on asphalt but has reduced winter grip. The tyre was notably loud, recording the worst noise comfort in the test.
Dry88.1%
Wet95.4%
Snow97.4%
Ice85.8%
Comfort94.6%
Fuel Consumption96.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better7th / 833.59 m+2.07 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 83 Points-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better5th / 836.34 m+2.04 m
Wet HandlingLower is better5th / 841.9 s+1.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better6th / 868.2 km/h-5.80 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better1st / 812.31 mBest in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better6th / 84.35 s+0.25 s
Snow HandlingLower is better6th / 876.4 s+1.30 s
Ice BrakingLower is better5th / 813.77 m+2.74 m
Ice TractionLower is better3rd / 85.55 s+0.94 s
Ice HandlingLower is better7th / 850.7 s+2.90 s
NoiseLower is better7th / 875.6 dB+4.10 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better2nd / 85.45 l/100km+0.20 l/100km
Shore
57
Stud Count
196
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.3 kgs
Tread
9 mm
Price
1991.00
7th

Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5

225/45 R17 94T XL
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 friction tyre proved that non-studded tyres can match studded ones in many winter conditions, particularly on rough ice and snow. Its soft compound gives understeery handling and excels in comfort with low noise and rolling resistance. Main weaknesses are wet grip and early aquaplaning.
Dry89.8%
Wet91.7%
Snow99.3%
Ice70%
Comfort100%
Fuel Consumption100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better1st / 831.52 mBest in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better8th / 82 Points-3.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better8th / 838.39 m+4.09 m
Wet HandlingLower is better5th / 841.9 s+1.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better8th / 858.6 km/h-15.40 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better6th / 812.5 m+0.19 m
Snow TractionLower is better1st / 84.1 sBest in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better3rd / 875.6 s+0.50 s
Ice BrakingLower is better8th / 817.87 m+6.84 m
Ice TractionLower is better8th / 89.42 s+4.81 s
Ice HandlingLower is better2nd / 848 s+0.20 s
NoiseLower is better1st / 871.5 dBBest in this discipline
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better1st / 85.25 l/100kmBest in this discipline
Shore
52
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
9.6 kgs
Tread
8.2 mm
Price
2332.00
8th

Mazzini Ice Leopard

225/45 R17 94T XL
Mazzini Ice Leopard
Mazzini Ice Leopard, the Chinese budget option, struggled in demanding conditions with significantly worse ice grip than established brands. Grip disappears suddenly without warning in corners. While showing decent braking on asphalt, the stability and steering feel are mediocre. Even with studs, it couldn't outperform the friction tyre on polished ice.
Dry91.2%
Wet98.8%
Snow94.5%
Ice70.6%
Comfort95.6%
Fuel Consumption92.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better2nd / 832.29 m+0.77 m
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 83 Points-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better1st / 834.3 mBest in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better2nd / 841.4 s+0.70 s
Straight AquaHigher is better2nd / 871.1 km/h-2.90 km/h
Snow BrakingLower is better8th / 812.94 m+0.63 m
Snow TractionLower is better8th / 84.45 s+0.35 s
Snow HandlingLower is better8th / 878 s+2.90 s
Ice BrakingLower is better7th / 817.54 m+6.51 m
Ice TractionLower is better7th / 87.99 s+3.38 s
Ice HandlingLower is better8th / 852.2 s+4.40 s
NoiseLower is better4th / 874.8 dB+3.30 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better6th / 85.65 l/100km+0.40 l/100km
Shore
123
Stud Count
61
3PMSF
Yes
Weight
10.7 kgs
Tread
9 mm
Price
1179.00

More tyre tests

Cross-check this test

All tyre tests

Where these tyres were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

More tyre tests2026 Auto Bild 205/55 R16 Winter Tyre Test2026 Auto Bild Winter Tyre Test2026 Tire Rack New Winter Tyre Test2026 Auto Bild Sportscars Winter Tyre TestAll tests: Winter Tyres
Best tyresBest Winter TyresBest UHP Winter TyresBest Studless Winter Tyres

Discussion

  1. No comments yet — be the first.
Rate your tyres

My tyres

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tyres

Save tyres from a tyre page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tyres. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.

Where to buy

Affiliate links: if you buy, we may earn a commission. It never changes our tests, scores or recommendations. How we stay independent