For 2024 ADAC have tested two sizes of winter tyres. The below test covers the 16" version. There's nothing particularly shocking in the overall results, so enjoy the data, which includes wear, below!

Test setup & methodology

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

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 100 → 0 km/h
Wet Braking: 80 → 0 km/h
Wet Braking - Concrete: 80 → 0 km/h
Snow Braking: 30 → 0 km/h
Ice Braking: 20 → 0 km/h

Dry

The Falken EUROWINTER HS02 performed best in dry braking, stopping in 43.3 meters. The worst performer was the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22, taking 46.5 meters to stop - a difference of 3.2 meters. Most tyres clustered between 44-46 meters, with the top 3 (Falken, Nokian, and Goodyear) showing noticeably shorter braking distances.

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Falken EUROWINTER HS02	43.3 m	Best	0 km/h
2Nokian Snowproof 2	44.1 m	+0.80 m	18 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	44.2 m	+0.90 m	19 km/h
4Vredestein Wintrac	44.5 m	+1.20 m	21 km/h
5Continental WinterContact TS 870	44.7 m	+1.40 m	23 km/h
6Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	45.2 m	+1.90 m	27 km/h
7Michelin Alpin 6	45.5 m	+2.20 m	29 km/h
8Dunlop Winter Sport 5	45.6 m	+2.30 m	29 km/h
9Hankook Winter I cept RS3	45.7 m	+2.40 m	30 km/h
10GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	45.8 m	+2.50 m	30 km/h
11Zeetex WH 1000	46 m	+2.70 m	31 km/h
12Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	46.5 m	+3.20 m	34 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 7.4% (3.2 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 would still be travelling at 34 km/h when the Falken EUROWINTER HS02 had stopped.

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

Wet

In wet braking, there was a tie for first place between the Continental WinterContact TS 870 and Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2, both stopping in 35.1 meters. The worst performer was the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 at 40.7 meters - a significant 5.6 meter difference. The top 5 tyres were closely grouped within 0.8 meters of each other, while there was a clear performance drop-off for the bottom 3 tyres.

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	35.1 m	Best	0 km/h
1Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	35.1 m	Best	0 km/h
3Michelin Alpin 6	35.4 m	+0.30 m	12 km/h
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	35.5 m	+0.40 m	14 km/h
5Falken EUROWINTER HS02	35.9 m	+0.80 m	19 km/h
6Vredestein Wintrac	36.1 m	+1.00 m	22 km/h
7Nokian Snowproof 2	36.4 m	+1.30 m	25 km/h
8GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	36.9 m	+1.80 m	29 km/h
9Hankook Winter I cept RS3	37.1 m	+2.00 m	30 km/h
10Dunlop Winter Sport 5	37.2 m	+2.10 m	31 km/h
11Zeetex WH 1000	39.7 m	+4.60 m	44 km/h
12Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	40.7 m	+5.60 m	48 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 16% (5.6 m ≈ 1.2 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 would still be travelling at 48 km/h when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

On concrete in wet conditions, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best, stopping in 38.5 meters. The Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 again performed worst, taking 46.6 meters - a substantial 8.1 meter difference. There was a noticeable performance gap between the top 4 tyres and the rest of the field.

Wet Braking - Concrete
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	38.5 m	Best	0 km/h
2Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	39 m	+0.50 m	15 km/h
3Michelin Alpin 6	39.1 m	+0.60 m	16 km/h
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	39.2 m	+0.70 m	17 km/h
5Falken EUROWINTER HS02	40.2 m	+1.70 m	27 km/h
6Vredestein Wintrac	40.3 m	+1.80 m	27 km/h
7Nokian Snowproof 2	41 m	+2.50 m	32 km/h
8Dunlop Winter Sport 5	41.7 m	+3.20 m	36 km/h
9Hankook Winter I cept RS3	42.1 m	+3.60 m	38 km/h
10GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	42.3 m	+3.80 m	39 km/h
11Zeetex WH 1000	44.3 m	+5.80 m	47 km/h
12Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	46.6 m	+8.10 m	54 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 21% (8.1 m ≈ 1.8 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 would still be travelling at 54 km/h when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

The Hankook Winter I cept RS3 performed best in straight aquaplaning, maintaining control up to 84.4 km/h. The worst performer was the Zeetex WH 1000 at 68.9 km/h - a significant 15.5 km/h difference. There was a clear performance divide, with the top 7 tyres maintaining control above 80 km/h, while the bottom 5 dropped below 77 km/h.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Hankook Winter I cept RS3	84.4 km/h	Best
2Continental WinterContact TS 870	84 km/h	-0.40 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	83.1 km/h	-1.30 km/h
4Vredestein Wintrac	81 km/h	-3.40 km/h
5Nokian Snowproof 2	80.7 km/h	-3.70 km/h
6Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	80.6 km/h	-3.80 km/h
7Falken EUROWINTER HS02	80.4 km/h	-4.00 km/h
8Michelin Alpin 6	77.2 km/h	-7.20 km/h
9Dunlop Winter Sport 5	76.5 km/h	-7.90 km/h
10GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	76.1 km/h	-8.30 km/h
11Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	69 km/h	-15.40 km/h
12Zeetex WH 1000	68.9 km/h	-15.50 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 18.4% (15.5 Km/H).

In curved aquaplaning, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best with 3.7 m/sec2 of lateral acceleration. The Zeetex WH 1000 and Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 tied for worst at 2.4 m/sec2 - a difference of 1.3 m/sec2. There was a notable performance gap between the top 5 tyres and the rest of the field.

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	3.7 m/sec2	Best
2Dunlop Winter Sport 5	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
2Hankook Winter I cept RS3	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
2Nokian Snowproof 2	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
6Vredestein Wintrac	3.3 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
6Falken EUROWINTER HS02	3.3 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
8Michelin Alpin 6	3.2 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
9Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
10GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	2.9 m/sec2	-0.80 m/sec2
11Zeetex WH 1000	2.4 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2
11Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	2.4 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2

The difference between best and worst was 35.1% (1.3 m/sec2).

Snow

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 and Dunlop Winter Sport 5 tied for best snow braking performance, stopping in 9.9 meters. The Zeetex WH 1000 and Falken EUROWINTER HS02 tied for worst at 11.0 meters - a difference of 1.1 meters. Most tyres performed relatively closely, with only 1.1 meters separating the best from worst.

Snow Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Dunlop Winter Sport 5	9.9 m	Best	0 km/h
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	9.9 m	Best	0 km/h
3Hankook Winter I cept RS3	10 m	+0.10 m	13 km/h
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	10.1 m	+0.20 m	18 km/h
4Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	10.1 m	+0.20 m	18 km/h
6Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	10.2 m	+0.30 m	22 km/h
6Nokian Snowproof 2	10.2 m	+0.30 m	22 km/h
8Michelin Alpin 6	10.3 m	+0.40 m	26 km/h
8GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	10.3 m	+0.40 m	26 km/h
10Vredestein Wintrac	10.5 m	+0.60 m	31 km/h
11Zeetex WH 1000	11 m	+1.10 m	41 km/h
11Falken EUROWINTER HS02	11 m	+1.10 m	41 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 11.1% (1.1 m). From 130 km/h, the Falken EUROWINTER HS02 would still be travelling at 41 km/h when the Dunlop Winter Sport 5 had stopped.

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

The Michelin Alpin 6 provided the best snow traction at 236 N. The Zeetex WH 1000 performed worst at 208 N - a difference of 28 N. There was a clear performance divide, with the top 9 tyres providing over 229 N of traction, while the bottom 3 dropped below 222 N.

Snow Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Alpin 6	236 N	Best
2Dunlop Winter Sport 5	235 N	-1.00 N
2Vredestein Wintrac	235 N	-1.00 N
4Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	233 N	-3.00 N
4Hankook Winter I cept RS3	233 N	-3.00 N
6Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	231 N	-5.00 N
6Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	231 N	-5.00 N
8GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	230 N	-6.00 N
9Continental WinterContact TS 870	229 N	-7.00 N
10Nokian Snowproof 2	222 N	-14.00 N
11Falken EUROWINTER HS02	216 N	-20.00 N
12Zeetex WH 1000	208 N	-28.00 N

The difference between best and worst was 11.9% (28 N).

Ice

On ice, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best, stopping in 18.3 meters. The Nokian Snowproof 2 performed worst at 21.6 meters - a difference of 3.3 meters. There was a notable performance gap between the top 6 tyres and the rest of the field.

Ice Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	18.3 m	Best	0 km/h
2Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	19.1 m	+0.80 m	27 km/h
3Vredestein Wintrac	19.4 m	+1.10 m	31 km/h
3Falken EUROWINTER HS02	19.4 m	+1.10 m	31 km/h
3Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	19.4 m	+1.10 m	31 km/h
6Hankook Winter I cept RS3	19.8 m	+1.50 m	36 km/h
7Dunlop Winter Sport 5	20 m	+1.70 m	38 km/h
7Zeetex WH 1000	20 m	+1.70 m	38 km/h
9GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	20.3 m	+2.00 m	41 km/h
10Michelin Alpin 6	20.8 m	+2.50 m	45 km/h
11Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	21.2 m	+2.90 m	48 km/h
12Nokian Snowproof 2	21.6 m	+3.30 m	51 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 18% (3.3 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Nokian Snowproof 2 would still be travelling at 51 km/h when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

Comfort

The Vredestein Wintrac was the quietest tyre at 70.4 dB. The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 was the noisiest at 73.0 dB - a difference of 2.6 dB. Most tyres performed relatively closely, with only 2.6 dB separating the quietest from the noisiest.

Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Vredestein Wintrac	70.4 dB	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	70.9 dB	+0.50 dB
3Falken EUROWINTER HS02	71 dB	+0.60 dB
4Continental WinterContact TS 870	71.1 dB	+0.70 dB
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	71.2 dB	+0.80 dB
6GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	71.3 dB	+0.90 dB
7Zeetex WH 1000	71.6 dB	+1.20 dB
8Hankook Winter I cept RS3	71.7 dB	+1.30 dB
9Michelin Alpin 6	71.9 dB	+1.50 dB
10Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	72 dB	+1.60 dB
11Nokian Snowproof 2	72.5 dB	+2.10 dB
12Dunlop Winter Sport 5	73 dB	+2.60 dB

The difference between best and worst was 3.7% (2.6 dB).

Value

The Michelin Alpin 6 showed the best projected tread life at 53,200 km. The Vredestein Wintrac had the shortest projected life at 33,400 km - a significant difference of 19,800 km. There was a wide range of performance, with clear tiers of durability among the tested tyres.

Wear
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Alpin 6	53,200 KM	Best
2Hankook Winter I cept RS3	52,800 KM	-400 KM
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	49,100 KM	-4,100 KM
4Dunlop Winter Sport 5	48,700 KM	-4,500 KM
5Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	47,000 KM	-6,200 KM
6Zeetex WH 1000	44,100 KM	-9,100 KM
7Continental WinterContact TS 870	43,800 KM	-9,400 KM
8Falken EUROWINTER HS02	42,300 KM	-10,900 KM
9Nokian Snowproof 2	38,500 KM	-14,700 KM
10GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	37,100 KM	-16,100 KM
11Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	34,000 KM	-19,200 KM
12Vredestein Wintrac	33,400 KM	-19,800 KM

The difference between best and worst was 37.2% (19,800 KM).

Several tyres tied for best fuel consumption at 5.1 l/100km. The worst performers (including Zeetex WH 1000 and Winrun Winter max A1 WR22) consumed 5.2 l/100km - a minor 0.1 l/100km difference. Overall, fuel consumption was very similar across all tested tyres.

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Dunlop Winter Sport 5	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
1Vredestein Wintrac	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
1Hankook Winter I cept RS3	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
1Nokian Snowproof 2	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
1GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	5.1 l/100km	Best	£0
7Michelin Alpin 6	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
7Zeetex WH 1000	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
7Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
7Falken EUROWINTER HS02	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
7Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
7Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28

All the tyres in the Fuel Consumption test finished less than 3% apart. Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Michelin Alpin 6 uses about 19 L (£28) more fuel than the Dunlop Winter Sport 5.

Adjust the assumptions

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

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.

The Hankook Winter I cept RS3 and Michelin Alpin 6 tied for best (lowest) abrasion at 48 mg/km/t. The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 had the highest abrasion at 79 mg/km/t - a significant difference of 31 mg/km/t. There was a wide range of performance, with clear groupings of tyres at different abrasion levels.

Abrasion
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Alpin 6	48 mg/km/t	Best
1Hankook Winter I cept RS3	48 mg/km/t	Best
3Dunlop Winter Sport 5	57 mg/km/t	+9.00 mg/km/t
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	57 mg/km/t	+9.00 mg/km/t
5Continental WinterContact TS 870	59 mg/km/t	+11.00 mg/km/t
6Winrun Winter max A1 WR22	61 mg/km/t	+13.00 mg/km/t
7Nokian Snowproof 2	62 mg/km/t	+14.00 mg/km/t
8Falken EUROWINTER HS02	71 mg/km/t	+23.00 mg/km/t
9Vredestein Wintrac	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t
9Zeetex WH 1000	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t
9GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t
12Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	79 mg/km/t	+31.00 mg/km/t

The difference between best and worst was 64.6% (31 mg/km/t).

Results

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 tyre performs excellently in safety tests across all road surfaces. It scores particularly well in wet and winter conditions, offering good handling, short braking distances, and high safety reserves. The tyre also has a good environmental rating due to its durability, low wear, light weight, and fuel efficiency.

Dry96.9%

Wet99.9%

Snow98.4%

Ice100%

Comfort99%

Value88.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 12	44.7 m	+1.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	35.1 m	Best in this discipline
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	1^st / 12	38.5 m	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 12	84 km/h	-0.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 12	3.7 m/sec2	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	9.9 m	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better	9^th / 12	229 N	-7.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	18.3 m	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 12	71.1 dB	+0.70 dB
WearHigher is better	7^th / 12	43800 KM	-9,400.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	5^th / 12	59 mg/km/t	+11.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.4 kgs

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 tyre demonstrates varied capabilities across different road conditions. While it performs adequately on dry surfaces with good steering feel but some weaknesses in borderline situations, it excels on wet roads with above-average braking, aquaplaning resistance, and handling. In winter conditions, it shows strong handling performance and slightly above-average braking, but struggles on ice. The tyre's environmental impact is positive, with good projected mileage, wear ratings, and fuel efficiency. Overall, the UltraGrip Performance 3 is most impressive on wet and general winter roads, with room for improvement on dry surfaces and icy conditions, making it a well-rounded option with particular strengths in challenging weather.

Dry98%

Wet98.5%

Snow97.9%

Ice86.3%

Comfort98.9%

Value92.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	44.2 m	+0.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 12	35.5 m	+0.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	4^th / 12	39.2 m	+0.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 12	83.1 km/h	-1.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 12	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 12	10.1 m	+0.20 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	6^th / 12	231 N	-5.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	11^th / 12	21.2 m	+2.90 m
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 12	71.2 dB	+0.80 dB
WearHigher is better	3^rd / 12	49100 KM	-4,100.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	3^rd / 12	57 mg/km/t	+9.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8 kgs

The Michelin Alpin 6 tyre demonstrates good overall performance across various driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback and precise handling with adequate safety reserves, though its braking distance is slightly below average. In wet conditions, it excels in braking tests and performs well in aquaplaning resistance and handling. The tyre's best performance is on winter roads, with average to above-average results in braking and traction, and very good handling due to its safety reserves and precise control. Ice braking is rated as satisfactory. Environmentally, the Alpin 6 stands out with the highest mileage and lowest wear in the test, as well as good efficiency due to its low weight and fuel consumption. However, it's slightly noisier than average. Overall, the Michelin Alpin 6 is a well-rounded tyre with particular strengths in winter conditions and environmental performance.

Dry95.2%

Wet95.7%

Snow98.2%

Ice88%

Comfort97.9%

Value99.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 12	45.5 m	+2.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	35.4 m	+0.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	3^rd / 12	39.1 m	+0.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 12	77.2 km/h	-7.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 12	3.2 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	8^th / 12	10.3 m	+0.40 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	1^st / 12	236 N	Best in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better	10^th / 12	20.8 m	+2.50 m
NoiseLower is better	9^th / 12	71.9 dB	+1.50 dB
WearHigher is better	1^st / 12	53200 KM	Best in this discipline
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	1^st / 12	48 mg/km/t	Best in this discipline

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.2 kgs

The Hankook Winter icept RS3 tyre shows mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback, precise handling, and good safety reserves during sudden evasive maneuvers, though its braking distance is slightly longer than average. Its performance on wet roads is less impressive, barely missing a good rating. While it handles aquaplaning well, it struggles with wet braking and handling, showing weak grip and a tendency to oversteer. The tyre performs well on winter roads, with above-average braking and acceleration on snow, and safe, precise handling on snowy courses. Ice braking performance is average. Environmentally, the tyre scores well with above-average mileage, very low wear, light weight, and low fuel consumption. However, it's noted that production residues on new tyres unnecessarily end up in nature during the first few kilometers of use. Overall, the Hankook Winter icept RS3 excels in dry and winter conditions but has room for improvement on wet surfaces.

Dry94.8%

Wet95.9%

Snow98.9%

Ice92.4%

Comfort98.2%

Value99.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	9^th / 12	45.7 m	+2.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 12	37.1 m	+2.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	9^th / 12	42.1 m	+3.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 12	84.4 km/h	Best in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 12	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	10 m	+0.10 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	4^th / 12	233 N	-3.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	6^th / 12	19.8 m	+1.50 m
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 12	71.7 dB	+1.30 dB
WearHigher is better	2^nd / 12	52800 KM	-400.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	1^st / 12	48 mg/km/t	Best in this discipline

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.4 kgs

The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 tyre shows mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it struggles with precision and steering feedback, requiring frequent corrections to maintain the desired path. It also shows weaknesses in sudden evasive maneuvers and has below-average dry braking distances. Performance on wet roads is marginally good, with satisfactory results in braking and longitudinal aquaplaning, but excelling in lateral aquaplaning resistance and handling. The tyre's strongest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves clearly good ratings. It offers some of the shortest braking distances on snow, above-average traction, and excellent handling with good combination of longitudinal and lateral forces. Ice braking narrowly misses a good rating. Environmentally, the Winter Sport 5 scores well, offering above-average mileage, low wear, and good efficiency due to its low weight and fuel consumption. Overall, the Dunlop Winter Sport 5 excels in winter conditions and environmental performance but has notable room for improvement on dry surfaces.

Dry95%

Wet94.2%

Snow99.8%

Ice91.5%

Comfort96.4%

Value92.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 12	45.6 m	+2.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	10^th / 12	37.2 m	+2.10 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	8^th / 12	41.7 m	+3.20 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 12	76.5 km/h	-7.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 12	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	9.9 m	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better	2^nd / 12	235 N	-1.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	7^th / 12	20 m	+1.70 m
NoiseLower is better	12^th / 12	73 dB	+2.60 dB
WearHigher is better	4^th / 12	48700 KM	-4,500.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	3^rd / 12	57 mg/km/t	+9.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.2 kgs

The Nokian Tyres Snowproof 2 demonstrates mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it shows slight weaknesses in precision and steering feedback, requiring minor corrections to maintain the desired path. Its performance in sudden evasive maneuvers is not entyrely convincing, with a tendency to oversteer. However, it achieves good dry braking distances. On wet surfaces, the tyre performs well overall, with good results in aquaplaning resistance and handling, though narrowly missing a good rating in wet braking. Its weakest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves good snow braking but only satisfactory results in traction and handling due to average grip levels and suboptimal force combination. Ice braking is below average. Environmentally, the tyre's performance is mixed, with below-average projected mileage but good wear resistance and efficiency due to low weight and fuel consumption. Overall, the Nokian Tyres Snowproof 2 excels on wet roads but has room for improvement on dry and winter surfaces, as well as in terms of longevity.

Dry98.2%

Wet96.4%

Snow95.4%

Ice84.7%

Comfort97.1%

Value83.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 12	44.1 m	+0.80 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 12	36.4 m	+1.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	7^th / 12	41 m	+2.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 12	80.7 km/h	-3.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 12	3.6 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	6^th / 12	10.2 m	+0.30 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	10^th / 12	222 N	-14.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	12^th / 12	21.6 m	+3.30 m
NoiseLower is better	11^th / 12	72.5 dB	+2.10 dB
WearHigher is better	9^th / 12	38500 KM	-14,700.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	7^th / 12	62 mg/km/t	+14.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.2 kgs

The Falken Eurowinter HS02 tyre shows varied performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it excels with the best rating in the test, offering precise steering, good safety reserves, and the shortest braking distance. Wet performance is marginally good, with above-average results in braking and aquaplaning resistance, though it narrowly misses a good rating in handling due to slightly lower precision. The tyre's weakest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves only satisfactory results in braking, traction, and handling, with early tendencies to under- and oversteer. Ice braking is average. Environmentally, the tyre narrowly misses a good rating despite good projected mileage, wear resistance, and efficiency. Average noise levels and only adequate sustainability in its Turkish production prevent a higher environmental score. Overall, the Falken Eurowinter HS02 performs best on dry and wet roads but struggles in winter conditions, with room for improvement in environmental aspects.

Dry100%

Wet95.9%

Snow90.8%

Ice94.3%

Comfort99.2%

Value83%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	43.3 m	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 12	35.9 m	+0.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	5^th / 12	40.2 m	+1.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 12	80.4 km/h	-4.00 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	6^th / 12	3.3 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	11^th / 12	11 m	+1.10 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	11^th / 12	216 N	-20.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	19.4 m	+1.10 m
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 12	71 dB	+0.60 dB
WearHigher is better	8^th / 12	42300 KM	-10,900.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	8^th / 12	71 mg/km/t	+23.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.3 kgs

The Zeetex WH 1000 tyre demonstrates below-average performance across most driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers only adequate steering feedback and precision, requiring frequent corrections. It tends to oversteer during dynamic maneuvers, and its braking distance is longer than average. Wet performance is also rated as merely adequate, with satisfactory results in braking and aquaplaning tests but weak handling due to low grip and poor combination of longitudinal and lateral forces. Winter performance is slightly better, rated as satisfactory overall. Snow and ice braking narrowly miss good ratings, but snow traction is clearly satisfactory, and handling is again rated as just adequate due to early under- and oversteering tendencies and lack of precision. Environmentally, the tyre achieves a satisfactory rating. It scores well in projected mileage and wear resistance but misses a good efficiency rating due to its weight. Sustainability is impacted by rubber protrusions on new tyres. Overall, the Zeetex WH 1000, produced in China, shows significant room for improvement across all performance aspects, particularly in dry and wet conditions.

Dry94.1%

Wet83.3%

Snow89%

Ice91.5%

Comfort98.3%

Value84%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	11^th / 12	46 m	+2.70 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	11^th / 12	39.7 m	+4.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	11^th / 12	44.3 m	+5.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	12^th / 12	68.9 km/h	-15.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	11^th / 12	2.4 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	11^th / 12	11 m	+1.10 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	12^th / 12	208 N	-28.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	7^th / 12	20 m	+1.70 m
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 12	71.6 dB	+1.20 dB
WearHigher is better	6^th / 12	44100 KM	-9,100.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	9^th / 12	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 9 kgs

The GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo tyre demonstrates mixed performance across different driving conditions, with notable weaknesses on dry roads. It struggles with steering precision and feedback on dry surfaces, requiring frequent corrections and showing a tendency to oversteer in dynamic maneuvers. Wet performance is slightly better, rated as clearly satisfactory overall, though handling remains a weak point due to low grip and imprecise control. The tyre's best performance is in winter conditions, where it nearly achieves a good rating with strong snow braking and traction, but still shows room for improvement in handling precision and combining longitudinal and lateral forces. Environmentally, the tyre receives a satisfactory rating, with good wear resistance and efficiency but only satisfactory projected mileage. Produced in China, its sustainability rating is adequate. Overall, while the GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo shows some strengths in winter conditions, it requires significant improvements across all performance aspects, particularly in dry conditions and environmental factors.

Dry94.5%

Wet91.4%

Snow96.8%

Ice90.2%

Comfort98.7%

Value79.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	10^th / 12	45.8 m	+2.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 12	36.9 m	+1.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	10^th / 12	42.3 m	+3.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 12	76.1 km/h	-8.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	10^th / 12	2.9 m/sec2	-0.80 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	8^th / 12	10.3 m	+0.40 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	8^th / 12	230 N	-6.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	9^th / 12	20.3 m	+2.00 m
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 12	71.3 dB	+0.90 dB
WearHigher is better	10^th / 12	37100 KM	-16,100.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	9^th / 12	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.8 kgs

The Vredestein Wintrac tyre receives mixed ratings for driving safety. It performs adequately on dry roads, narrowly misses a good rating on wet surfaces, and earns a clear "good" rating on winter roads. On dry surfaces, it lacks precision and requires frequent steering corrections. In wet conditions, it excels in braking and aquaplaning resistance but falls short in handling. The tyre performs well on winter roads, offering good traction, excellent handling, and strong performance in icy conditions. However, its environmental assessment is only satisfactory, with a mediocre predicted lifespan. The tyre's efficiency is praised for its low fuel consumption and light weight.

Dry97.3%

Wet95.6%

Snow97.1%

Ice94.3%

Comfort100%

Value77.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 12	44.5 m	+1.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 12	36.1 m	+1.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	6^th / 12	40.3 m	+1.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 12	81 km/h	-3.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	6^th / 12	3.3 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	10^th / 12	10.5 m	+0.60 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	2^nd / 12	235 N	-1.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	19.4 m	+1.10 m
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 12	70.4 dB	Best in this discipline
WearHigher is better	12^th / 12	33400 KM	-19,800.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 12	5.1 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	9^th / 12	72 mg/km/t	+24.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.3 kgs

The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 tyre receives mixed ratings for driving safety. It performs adequately on dry roads, earning only a satisfactory rating due to insufficient steering precision and a tendency to oversteer during dynamic maneuvers. However, it achieves good ratings on both wet and winter roads. On wet surfaces, it excels in braking and longitudinal aquaplaning resistance, narrowly missing good ratings in lateral aquaplaning and handling. The tyre performs well on winter roads, with good braking on snow and ice, excellent snow traction, and very good handling characteristics. Its environmental assessment falls short of a good rating, with satisfactory wear resistance and only average predicted lifespan. However, the tyre scores well in efficiency, particularly due to its low weight.

Dry95.8%

Wet96%

Snow98%

Ice95.8%

Comfort99.3%

Value75.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 12	45.2 m	+1.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 12	35.1 m	Best in this discipline
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	2^nd / 12	39 m	+0.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 12	80.6 km/h	-3.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	9^th / 12	3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	6^th / 12	10.2 m	+0.30 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	4^th / 12	233 N	-3.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 12	19.1 m	+0.80 m
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 12	70.9 dB	+0.50 dB
WearHigher is better	11^th / 12	34000 KM	-19,200.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	12^th / 12	79 mg/km/t	+31.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 8.5 kgs

The Winrun Winter-max A1 WR22 tyre receives a poor overall safety rating, primarily due to significant weaknesses on wet surfaces. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback and borderline behavior, though with longer than average braking distances. Its performance on wet roads is inadequate, with early understeer and oversteer tendencies, poor grip, and barely satisfactory aquaplaning resistance. However, the tyre performs well on winter roads, demonstrating good braking and traction on snow and ice, as well as precise handling on snowy surfaces. In terms of environmental impact, the Chinese-made tyre narrowly misses a good rating. It scores well in predicted mileage and wear resistance but only achieves a satisfactory efficiency rating due to its high weight.

Dry93.1%

Wet81.8%

Snow97.9%

Ice94.3%

Comfort97.8%

Value89.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	12^th / 12	46.5 m	+3.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	12^th / 12	40.7 m	+5.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	12^th / 12	46.6 m	+8.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	11^th / 12	69 km/h	-15.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	11^th / 12	2.4 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 12	10.1 m	+0.20 m
Snow TractionHigher is better	6^th / 12	231 N	-5.00 N
Ice BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 12	19.4 m	+1.10 m
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 12	72 dB	+1.60 dB
WearHigher is better	5^th / 12	47000 KM	-6,200.00 KM
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 12	5.2 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	6^th / 12	61 mg/km/t	+13.00 mg/km/t

3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 9.2 kgs

Tyre	Continental WinterContact TS 870	Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	Michelin Alpin 6	Hankook Winter I cept RS3	Dunlop Winter Sport 5	Nokian Snowproof 2	Falken EUROWINTER HS02	Zeetex WH 1000	GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo	Vredestein Wintrac	Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2	Winrun Winter max A1 WR22
Position	1^st	2^nd	3^rd	4^th	5^th	6^th	7^th	8^th	9^th	10^th	11^th	12^th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry	96.9%	98%	95.2%	94.8%	95%	98.2%	100%	94.1%	94.5%	97.3%	95.8%	93.1%
Wet	99.9%	98.5%	95.7%	95.9%	94.2%	96.4%	95.9%	83.3%	91.4%	95.6%	96%	81.8%
Snow	98.4%	97.9%	98.2%	98.9%	99.8%	95.4%	90.8%	89%	96.8%	97.1%	98%	97.9%
Ice	100%	86.3%	88%	92.4%	91.5%	84.7%	94.3%	91.5%	90.2%	94.3%	95.8%	94.3%
Comfort	99%	98.9%	97.9%	98.2%	96.4%	97.1%	99.2%	98.3%	98.7%	100%	99.3%	97.8%
Value	88.4%	92.2%	99.3%	99.7%	92.6%	83.7%	83%	84%	79.8%	77.2%	75.4%	89.2%
Keep researching	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	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

Menu

Tyre shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry

Wet

Snow

Ice

Comfort

Value

Results

Cross-check this test