Menu

A newer edition of this test is out: 2026 Motor Winter Tyre Test

Test source Motor

2025 Motor Winter Tyre Test

Overall test winnerContinental WinterContact TS 870

Polish magazine Motor has tested eight winter tyres in 205/55 R16, a size fitted to cars such as the VW Golf, Ford Focus, Opel Astra and Audi A3, using a Golf as the test car.

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson
8 min read
Tyre shortlist Read the test
Tyres tested
8
Tested size
205/55 R16
Test vehicle
VW Golf (Skoda Octavia for straight aquaplaning)
Disciplines
15

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

Continental WinterContact TS 870

+The Continental WinterContact TS 870 was the best tyre on wet and dry roads, stopping shortest on both, holding the most grip on the wet circle and resisting both straight and curved aquaplaning best. On snow it stopped and accelerated best and shared the most traction, and it was also rated best for dry handling, the quietest tyre and among the most comfortable.

−The Continental WinterContact TS 870 was not the fastest on the snow, wet or dry handling courses, although it was close to the best on all three. Its rolling resistance was only mid-field.

Read full verdict
27 owner reviews Test Results
2nd

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

+The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 was the fastest tyre on the wet handling course and close to the best for wet braking, wet circle grip and both aquaplaning tests. It shared the most traction on snow and stopped well on dry roads.

−The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 had the highest rolling resistance in the test and was the most expensive tyre. It was among the slower tyres round the dry handling course and was rated in the lower half for dry handling.

Read full verdict
18 owner reviews Test Results
3rd

Michelin Alpin 7

+The Michelin Alpin 7 was fastest round the snow handling course and among the best for snow braking, traction and acceleration. It had the lowest rolling resistance in the test, was among the quietest tyres, and was rated among the best for dry handling.

−The Michelin Alpin 7 was only mid-field on wet roads, behind the leaders for braking, handling and aquaplaning resistance, and it was also mid-field for dry braking.

Read full verdict
13 owner reviews Test Results
4th

Bridgestone Blizzak 6

+The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 stopped second shortest on wet roads and was among the best on the wet circle. It was also second best in the snow acceleration test, rated among the most comfortable tyres, and had low rolling resistance.

−The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 was the slowest tyre round the snow handling course and was among the weakest for snow braking and traction.

Read full verdict
14 owner reviews Test Results
5th

Nokian Snowproof 2

+The Nokian Snowproof 2 stopped second shortest on dry roads and was among the best in both aquaplaning tests. It was also one of the quietest tyres and had the second lowest rolling resistance.

−The Nokian Snowproof 2 needed the longest distance in the snow acceleration test and was in the lower half for wet braking, wet handling and wet circle grip. It was also one of the slower tyres round the dry handling course and was rated lower than most for dry handling.

Read full verdict
10 owner reviews Test Results
6th

Laufenn I Fit+

+The Laufenn i Fit+ set the fastest lap of the dry handling course and was rated second best for dry handling. It was also among the best for snow braking and third fastest on the wet handling course, and it is one of the cheapest tyres in the test.

−The Laufenn i Fit+ was among the weaker tyres for straight and curved aquaplaning resistance, and it was rated among the less comfortable tyres. It was also mid-field for wet braking and rolling resistance.

4 owner reviews Test Results
7th

Kormoran Kormoran Snow

+The Kormoran Snow was second fastest round the snow handling course and close to the best for snow braking and traction. It was also the cheapest tyre in the test.

−The Kormoran Snow was weak on wet roads, with long braking distances, little wet circle grip and poor aquaplaning resistance. It also needed the longest dry braking distance, was the slowest round the dry handling course and was rated lowest for dry handling, as well as being the loudest and least comfortable tyre.

Read full verdict
1 owner review Test Results
8th

Tomket Snowroad Pro 3

+The Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 was second fastest round the dry handling course, and Motor rates its dry braking as good.

−The Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 was the weakest tyre on wet roads, with by far the longest braking distance, the slowest handling lap, the least wet circle grip and the earliest straight-line aquaplaning. On snow it had the least traction and needed the longest braking distance.

Read full verdict
1 owner review Test Results

Tyre shortlist

Compare selected tyres

2025 Motor Winter Tyre Test · 205/55 R16

TyreContinental WinterContact TS 870Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3Michelin Alpin 7Bridgestone Blizzak 6Nokian Snowproof 2Laufenn I Fit+Kormoran Kormoran SnowTomket Snowroad Pro 3
Position1st2nd3rd4th5th6th7th8th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry99.7%96.5%96.9%96.4%96.7%98.1%92%96.4%
Wet99.9%99.1%95.8%97.5%95.2%94.2%85.9%82.5%
Snow99.8%98.7%99.7%97.3%98%98.4%99.1%96.6%
Comfort100%95.4%96%98.7%95.6%91.5%86.9%91.3%
Rolling Resistance93.5%84.8%100%94%95.8%90.9%90.3%90.7%
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

Polish magazine Motor has tested eight winter tyres in 205/55 R16, a size fitted to cars such as the VW Golf, Ford Focus, Opel Astra and Audi A3, using a Golf as the test car. Premium tyres from Bridgestone, Continental, Goodyear and Michelin are joined by the Nokian Snowproof 2, and by three budget tyres: the Polish Kormoran Snow, the Laufenn i Fit+ from Hankook's budget brand and the Chinese Tomket Snowroad Pro 3. Prices ranged from 226 to 485 zloty per tyre.

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 won with a clear lead, scoring almost full marks and coming out on top on snow, wet and dry roads. The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 was second, losing most of its points on dry roads, and the Michelin Alpin 7 edged the Bridgestone Blizzak 6 for third thanks to slightly better snow results. The Laufenn i Fit+ was the best of the budget tyres by a wide margin, and Motor recommends it as good value, while the Kormoran and the Tomket fell well behind on wet roads.

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
100 → 0 km/h
Wet Braking
100 → 0 km/h
Snow Braking
50 → 0 km/h
Snow Traction
0 → 20 km/h

The tyres, all made in 2024, were bought from an online shop and run in on wet asphalt at a test centre in Germany. The snow tests took place in Sweden, and the wet and dry tests in Germany in the spring. Motor used a VW Golf for every test except straight aquaplaning, which was run on a Skoda Octavia, and rolling resistance was measured in a laboratory. This is our summary of the headline findings; for the full scoring and Motor's methodology, see the original test.

Snow

The Continental stopped shortest on snow, with the Michelin and Laufenn next. The Bridgestone and Tomket needed the longest distances, but the whole field was separated by less than 1.5 metres and Motor considers every tyre safe on snow.

Snow Braking

Snow braking in meters (50 - 0 km/h)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 28.3 m Best 0 km/h
2Michelin Alpin 7
 28.6 m +0.30 m 13 km/h
3Laufenn I Fit+
 28.7 m +0.40 m 15 km/h
4Nokian Snowproof 2
 28.8 m +0.50 m 17 km/h
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 28.8 m +0.50 m 17 km/h
4Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 28.8 m +0.50 m 17 km/h
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 29.3 m +1.00 m 24 km/h
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 29.5 m +1.20 m 26 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 4.2% (1.2 m). From 130 km/h, the Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 would still be travelling at 26 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 Continental and Goodyear shared the most traction on snow, with the Michelin just behind. The Tomket had the least.

Snow Traction

Pulling Force in Newtons

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 2826 N Best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 2826 N Best
3Michelin Alpin 7
 2824 N -2.00 N
4Laufenn I Fit+
 2807 N -19.00 N
5Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 2806 N -20.00 N
6Nokian Snowproof 2
 2790 N -36.00 N
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 2775 N -51.00 N
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 2721 N -105.00 N

The difference between best and worst was 3.7% (105 N).

In the acceleration test from standstill to 20 km/h the Continental needed the shortest distance, ahead of the Bridgestone and Michelin. The Nokian needed the longest.

Snow Traction

Snow acceleration distance in meters (0 - 20 km/h)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 8.48 m Best
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 8.63 m +0.15 m
3Michelin Alpin 7
 8.64 m +0.16 m
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 8.73 m +0.25 m
5Laufenn I Fit+
 8.74 m +0.26 m
5Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 8.74 m +0.26 m
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 8.78 m +0.30 m
8Nokian Snowproof 2
 8.99 m +0.51 m

The difference between best and worst was 6% (0.51 m).

The Michelin was fastest round the snow handling course, with the Kormoran and Continental close behind. The Bridgestone was the slowest.

Snow Handling

Snow handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Michelin Alpin 7
 74.6 s Best
2Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 74.8 s +0.20 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870
 75.1 s +0.50 s
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 76.2 s +1.60 s
5Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 76.6 s +2.00 s
5Laufenn I Fit+
 76.6 s +2.00 s
7Nokian Snowproof 2
 76.8 s +2.20 s
8Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 77 s +2.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.2% (2.4 s).

Wet

The Continental stopped shortest on wet roads, with the Bridgestone and Goodyear close behind. The budget tyres split widely here: the Laufenn stopped slightly shorter than the Nokian, but the Kormoran needed more than 9 metres further than the Continental, and the Tomket almost 14 metres further, a result Motor calls dangerous.

Wet Braking

Wet braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 52.9 m Best 0 km/h
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 53.2 m +0.30 m 10 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 53.5 m +0.60 m 14 km/h
4Michelin Alpin 7
 54.8 m +1.90 m 24 km/h
5Laufenn I Fit+
 56.1 m +3.20 m 31 km/h
6Nokian Snowproof 2
 56.4 m +3.50 m 32 km/h
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 62.3 m +9.40 m 50 km/h
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 66.6 m +13.70 m 59 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 25.9% (13.7 m ≈ 3 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 would still be travelling at 59 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 Goodyear was fastest round the wet handling course, ahead of the Continental and Laufenn. The Tomket was by far the slowest, and Motor rated its handling as only just acceptable.

Wet Handling

Wet handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 85.9 s Best
2Continental WinterContact TS 870
 86.3 s +0.40 s
3Laufenn I Fit+
 87.2 s +1.30 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 87.7 s +1.80 s
5Michelin Alpin 7
 88.4 s +2.50 s
6Nokian Snowproof 2
 89 s +3.10 s
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 91.6 s +5.70 s
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 96.8 s +10.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 12.7% (10.9 s).

On the wet circle the Continental held the most grip, ahead of the Goodyear and Bridgestone, while the Kormoran and Tomket held the least.

Wet Circle

Average cornering G force in the wet

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 0.74 g Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 0.73 g -0.01 g
3Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 0.72 g -0.02 g
4Michelin Alpin 7
 0.7 g -0.04 g
4Laufenn I Fit+
 0.7 g -0.04 g
4Nokian Snowproof 2
 0.7 g -0.04 g
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 0.62 g -0.12 g
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 0.62 g -0.12 g

The difference between best and worst was 16.2% (0.12 g).

The Continental resisted straight-line aquaplaning longest, only just ahead of the Goodyear, with the Nokian next. The Laufenn, Kormoran and Tomket were the first to float.

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in Km/H

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 86.2 km/h Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 86 km/h -0.20 km/h
3Nokian Snowproof 2
 84.6 km/h -1.60 km/h
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 82.5 km/h -3.70 km/h
4Michelin Alpin 7
 82.5 km/h -3.70 km/h
6Laufenn I Fit+
 76.8 km/h -9.40 km/h
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 71.6 km/h -14.60 km/h
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 69.9 km/h -16.30 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 18.9% (16.3 Km/H).

The Continental also kept the most grip in curved aquaplaning, with the Nokian and Goodyear close behind. The Tomket and Kormoran held the least.

Curved Aquaplaning

Remaining lateral acceleration

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 3.72 m/sec2 Best
2Nokian Snowproof 2
 3.69 m/sec2 -0.03 m/sec2
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 3.69 m/sec2 -0.03 m/sec2
4Michelin Alpin 7
 3.4 m/sec2 -0.32 m/sec2
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 3.34 m/sec2 -0.38 m/sec2
6Laufenn I Fit+
 3.07 m/sec2 -0.65 m/sec2
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 2.59 m/sec2 -1.13 m/sec2
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 2.54 m/sec2 -1.18 m/sec2

The difference between best and worst was 31.7% (1.18 m/sec2).

Dry

The Continental stopped shortest on dry roads too, ahead of the Nokian and Goodyear. The Kormoran needed the longest distance, and Motor notes that at the point where the Golf on Continental tyres had stopped, the same car on Kormoran tyres was still travelling at about 25 km/h.

Dry Braking

Dry braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 44.6 m Best 0 km/h
2Nokian Snowproof 2
 45 m +0.40 m 12 km/h
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 45.4 m +0.80 m 17 km/h
4Laufenn I Fit+
 45.9 m +1.30 m 22 km/h
5Michelin Alpin 7
 46 m +1.40 m 23 km/h
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 46.1 m +1.50 m 23 km/h
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 46.2 m +1.60 m 24 km/h
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 47.7 m +3.10 m 33 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 7% (3.1 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Kormoran Kormoran Snow would still be travelling at 33 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 fastest lap of the dry handling course was set on the budget Laufenn, with the Tomket and Continental next. The Goodyear and Nokian were a little over a second behind the Laufenn, and the Kormoran was clearly the slowest.

Dry Handling

Dry handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Laufenn I Fit+
 53.1 s Best
2Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 53.3 s +0.20 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870
 53.5 s +0.40 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 53.7 s +0.60 s
5Michelin Alpin 7
 54 s +0.90 s
6Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 54.2 s +1.10 s
7Nokian Snowproof 2
 54.3 s +1.20 s
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 55.4 s +2.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.3% (2.3 s).

Motor's testers rated the Continental best for dry handling, with the Laufenn and Michelin next. The Kormoran was rated lowest, and Motor says it is not suited to a sporty driving style.

Subj. Dry Handling

Subjective Dry Handling Score

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 7.5 Points Best
2Laufenn I Fit+
 7 Points -0.50 Points
3Michelin Alpin 7
 6.7 Points -0.80 Points
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 6.2 Points -1.30 Points
5Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 6 Points -1.50 Points
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 6 Points -1.50 Points
7Nokian Snowproof 2
 5.9 Points -1.60 Points
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 4.9 Points -2.60 Points

The difference between best and worst was 34.7% (2.6 Points).

Comfort

The Continental was the quietest tyre in the exterior noise measurement at 50 km/h, with the Michelin and Nokian next. The Kormoran, with its aggressive tread pattern, was the loudest.

Noise

External noise in dB

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 63.7 dB Best
2Michelin Alpin 7
 64.3 dB +0.60 dB
3Nokian Snowproof 2
 64.8 dB +1.10 dB
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 65.1 dB +1.40 dB
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 65.4 dB +1.70 dB
6Laufenn I Fit+
 65.5 dB +1.80 dB
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 65.8 dB +2.10 dB
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 66.9 dB +3.20 dB

The difference between best and worst was 5% (3.2 dB).

The Continental and Bridgestone were rated the most comfortable, and the Kormoran the least.

Subj. Comfort

Subjective Comfort Score

Higher is better ↑
Position / TyreResultGap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870
 7 Points Best
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 7 Points Best
3Nokian Snowproof 2
 6.5 Points -0.50 Points
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 6.5 Points -0.50 Points
3Michelin Alpin 7
 6.5 Points -0.50 Points
6Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 6 Points -1.00 Points
6Laufenn I Fit+
 6 Points -1.00 Points
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 5.5 Points -1.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 21.4% (1.5 Points).

Value

The Michelin had the lowest rolling resistance, with the Nokian next, and the Goodyear had the highest. Motor estimates that for a car using 10 litres per 100 km, the difference between the Michelin and the Goodyear is worth around half a litre per 100 km.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Position / TyreResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
1Michelin Alpin 7
 0.76 kg/t Best £0
2Nokian Snowproof 2
 0.79 kg/t +0.03 kg/t £17
3Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 0.81 kg/t +0.05 kg/t £29
3Continental WinterContact TS 870
 0.81 kg/t +0.05 kg/t £29
5Laufenn I Fit+
 0.83 kg/t +0.07 kg/t £41
6Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
 0.84 kg/t +0.08 kg/t £46
6Kormoran Kormoran Snow
 0.84 kg/t +0.08 kg/t £46
8Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 0.89 kg/t +0.13 kg/t £75

The difference between best and worst was 17.1% (0.13 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 uses about 52 L (£75) more fuel than the Michelin Alpin 7.

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

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 wins with almost full marks, the best tyre on snow, wet and dry roads and the choice for the most demanding drivers. The Goodyear is excellent on wet roads and very good on snow but loses points on dry roads, and the Michelin beats the Bridgestone for third by a whisker. The Nokian Snowproof 2 is close behind the premium tyres at a lower price, and the Laufenn i Fit+ is the clear winner of the budget class. Motor finds the Kormoran very good on snow but well behind the Laufenn on wet and dry roads despite costing only a little less, and says the Tomket can be dangerous on wet roads. For the full data and methodology, see Motor's original test.

1st

Continental WinterContact TS 870

205/55 R16
Continental WinterContact TS 870
Motor Test Winner Zwycięzca testu
The Continental WinterContact TS 870 wins the test with a clear lead and almost full marks. It was the best tyre on snow, wet and dry roads, with no real weakness anywhere in the test, and it was also quiet and comfortable. Motor recommends it to the most demanding drivers, and it is the tyre to choose if safety in every condition is the priority.
Dry99.7%
Wet99.9%
Snow99.8%
Comfort100%
Rolling Resistance93.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 844.6 mBest in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better3rd / 853.5 s+0.40 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better1st / 87.5 PointsBest in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better1st / 852.9 mBest in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better2nd / 886.3 s+0.40 s
Wet CircleHigher is better1st / 80.742 gBest in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better1st / 886.2 km/hBest in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better1st / 83.72 m/sec2Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better1st / 828.3 mBest in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better1st / 88.48 mBest in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better1st / 82826 NBest in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better3rd / 875.1 s+0.50 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 87 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better1st / 863.7 dBBest in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better4th / 80.81 kg/t+0.05 kg/t
Production
4524
Origin
Slovakia
Shore
63
Price
439.00
2nd

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

205/55 R16
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
Motor Recommended Godna polecenia
The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 finishes second and is recommended by Motor. It is excellent on wet roads, the fastest on the wet handling course and close to the Continental in every other wet test, and very good on snow. It loses most of its points on dry roads, though it remains safe there, and its high rolling resistance and price count against it.
Dry96.5%
Wet99.1%
Snow98.7%
Comfort95.4%
Rolling Resistance84.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 845.4 m+0.80 m
Dry HandlingLower is better6th / 854.2 s+1.10 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better5th / 86 Points-1.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better3rd / 853.5 m+0.60 m
Wet HandlingLower is better1st / 885.9 sBest in this discipline
Wet CircleHigher is better2nd / 80.728 g-0.01 g
Straight AquaHigher is better2nd / 886 km/h-0.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better2nd / 83.69 m/sec2-0.03 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 828.8 m+0.50 m
Snow TractionLower is better4th / 88.73 m+0.25 m
Snow TractionHigher is better1st / 82826 NBest in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better4th / 876.2 s+1.60 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better3rd / 86.5 Points-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better4th / 865.1 dB+1.40 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better8th / 80.893 kg/t+0.14 kg/t
Production
1824
Origin
Germany
Shore
65
Price
485.00
3rd

Michelin Alpin 7

205/55 R16
Michelin Alpin 7
Motor Recommended Godna polecenia
The Michelin Alpin 7 finishes third and is recommended by Motor. It is a well-balanced tyre with excellent snow performance and the lowest rolling resistance in the test, and it edged the Bridgestone thanks to its stronger snow results. On wet and dry roads it was a step behind the leaders, but still safe, so it suits drivers who see a lot of snow and care about efficiency.
Dry96.9%
Wet95.8%
Snow99.7%
Comfort96%
Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 846 m+1.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better5th / 854 s+0.90 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better3rd / 86.7 Points-0.80 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better4th / 854.8 m+1.90 m
Wet HandlingLower is better5th / 888.4 s+2.50 s
Wet CircleHigher is better4th / 80.704 g-0.04 g
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 882.5 km/h-3.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better4th / 83.4 m/sec2-0.32 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better2nd / 828.6 m+0.30 m
Snow TractionLower is better3rd / 88.64 m+0.16 m
Snow TractionHigher is better3rd / 82824 N-2.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better1st / 874.6 sBest in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better3rd / 86.5 Points-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better2nd / 864.3 dB+0.60 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better1st / 80.757 kg/tBest in this discipline
Production
3824
Origin
Italy
Shore
67
Price
447.00
4th

Bridgestone Blizzak 6

205/55 R16
Bridgestone Blizzak 6
Motor Recommended Godna polecenia
The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 finishes fourth, only just behind the Michelin, and is recommended by Motor. It is strong on wet and dry roads, with very good wet braking and wet grip, and it is comfortable. Its snow results were uneven, which cost it third place, though Motor considers it safe in winter conditions.
Dry96.4%
Wet97.5%
Snow97.3%
Comfort98.7%
Rolling Resistance94%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 846.1 m+1.50 m
Dry HandlingLower is better4th / 853.7 s+0.60 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 86.2 Points-1.30 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better2nd / 853.2 m+0.30 m
Wet HandlingLower is better4th / 887.7 s+1.80 s
Wet CircleHigher is better3rd / 80.722 g-0.02 g
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 882.5 km/h-3.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better5th / 83.34 m/sec2-0.38 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better7th / 829.3 m+1.00 m
Snow TractionLower is better2nd / 88.63 m+0.15 m
Snow TractionHigher is better7th / 82775 N-51.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better8th / 877 s+2.40 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 87 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better5th / 865.4 dB+1.70 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better3rd / 80.805 kg/t+0.05 kg/t
Production
2024
Origin
Spain
Shore
70
Price
410.00
5th

Nokian Snowproof 2

205/55 R16
Nokian Snowproof 2
The Nokian Snowproof 2 finishes fifth, close behind the four premium tyres. Motor describes it as a tyre that never surprises the driver, with consistent results across every surface, strong aquaplaning resistance and low rolling resistance. It offers a stable level of safety at a lower price than the premium tyres.
Dry96.7%
Wet95.2%
Snow98%
Comfort95.6%
Rolling Resistance95.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 845 m+0.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better7th / 854.3 s+1.20 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better7th / 85.9 Points-1.60 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better6th / 856.4 m+3.50 m
Wet HandlingLower is better6th / 889 s+3.10 s
Wet CircleHigher is better6th / 80.695 g-0.05 g
Straight AquaHigher is better3rd / 884.6 km/h-1.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better2nd / 83.69 m/sec2-0.03 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 828.8 m+0.50 m
Snow TractionLower is better8th / 88.99 m+0.51 m
Snow TractionHigher is better6th / 82790 N-36.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better7th / 876.8 s+2.20 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better3rd / 86.5 Points-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better3rd / 864.8 dB+1.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better2nd / 80.79 kg/t+0.03 kg/t
Production
4124
Origin
Finland
Shore
65
Price
369.00
6th

Laufenn I Fit+

205/55 R16
Laufenn I Fit+
Motor Recommended Godna polecenia
The Laufenn i Fit+ finishes sixth and is the clear winner of the budget class, recommended by Motor as good value for money. It is mid-field in most tests but surprises in some, setting the fastest dry lap of all. Its wet braking was far ahead of the other budget tyres, and it suits drivers looking for a capable winter tyre at a low price.
Dry98.1%
Wet94.2%
Snow98.4%
Comfort91.5%
Rolling Resistance90.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 845.9 m+1.30 m
Dry HandlingLower is better1st / 853.1 sBest in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better2nd / 87 Points-0.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better5th / 856.1 m+3.20 m
Wet HandlingLower is better3rd / 887.2 s+1.30 s
Wet CircleHigher is better5th / 80.697 g-0.05 g
Straight AquaHigher is better6th / 876.8 km/h-9.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better6th / 83.07 m/sec2-0.65 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better3rd / 828.7 m+0.40 m
Snow TractionLower is better5th / 88.74 m+0.26 m
Snow TractionHigher is better4th / 82807 N-19.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better5th / 876.6 s+2.00 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 86 Points-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better6th / 865.5 dB+1.80 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better5th / 80.833 kg/t+0.08 kg/t
Production
2924
Origin
China
Shore
73
Price
250.00
7th

Kormoran Kormoran Snow

205/55 R16
Kormoran Kormoran Snow
The Kormoran Snow finishes seventh. It is very good on snow and the cheapest tyre here, but on wet and dry roads it cannot compete with the Laufenn, which costs only a little more. Motor considers its wet braking only just safe, so for drivers who mostly see wet and dry roads, the Laufenn is the better budget choice.
Dry92%
Wet85.9%
Snow99.1%
Comfort86.9%
Rolling Resistance90.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 847.7 m+3.10 m
Dry HandlingLower is better8th / 855.4 s+2.30 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better8th / 84.9 Points-2.60 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better7th / 862.3 m+9.40 m
Wet HandlingLower is better7th / 891.6 s+5.70 s
Wet CircleHigher is better7th / 80.622 g-0.12 g
Straight AquaHigher is better7th / 871.6 km/h-14.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better8th / 82.54 m/sec2-1.18 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 828.8 m+0.50 m
Snow TractionLower is better5th / 88.74 m+0.26 m
Snow TractionHigher is better5th / 82806 N-20.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better2nd / 874.8 s+0.20 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better8th / 85.5 Points-1.50 Points
NoiseLower is better8th / 866.9 dB+3.20 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better7th / 80.838 kg/t+0.08 kg/t
Production
4224
Origin
Serbia
Shore
60
Price
226.00
8th

Tomket Snowroad Pro 3

205/55 R16
Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
The Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 finishes last. Motor says it is unbalanced, reasonable on snow and dry roads but potentially dangerous on wet roads, where it stopped far behind the rest of the field. It is also more expensive than the better-placed Laufenn and Kormoran.
Dry96.4%
Wet82.5%
Snow96.6%
Comfort91.3%
Rolling Resistance90.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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 / 846.2 m+1.60 m
Dry HandlingLower is better2nd / 853.3 s+0.20 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better5th / 86 Points-1.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better8th / 866.6 m+13.70 m
Wet HandlingLower is better8th / 896.8 s+10.90 s
Wet CircleHigher is better8th / 80.615 g-0.13 g
Straight AquaHigher is better8th / 869.9 km/h-16.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better7th / 82.59 m/sec2-1.13 m/sec2
Snow BrakingLower is better8th / 829.5 m+1.20 m
Snow TractionLower is better7th / 88.78 m+0.30 m
Snow TractionHigher is better8th / 82721 N-105.00 N
Snow HandlingLower is better5th / 876.6 s+2.00 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 86 Points-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better7th / 865.8 dB+2.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better6th / 80.835 kg/t+0.08 kg/t
Production
1724
Origin
China
Shore
64
Price
331.00

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 Motor 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