This is the 2024/25 Tyre Reviews All Season Tyre Test! For this test, I have selected six of the best all season tyres in the large 235/35 R19 tyre size, and I'm using a MK8 VW Golf GTI to find out exactly which all season tyre is best in the larger wheel size.
To give this test extra depth, I also have six ultra high performance winter tyres in exactly the same size, and I've included a summer tyre. With this relatively small test field I've managed to test everything as one test, which means a common control allowing us to cross reference the data. This has shown us how the very best all season tyres compare to the very best summer and winter tyres in the snow, ice, dry and wet. There's some really interesting insight into how the all season tyres compare to the other categories below.
Testing Methodology
Test Driver
Jonathan Benson
Tyre Size
235/35 R19
Test Location
Professional Proving Ground
Test Year
2024
Tyres Tested
6
Show full testing methodologyHide methodology
Every tyre is tested using calibrated instrumented measurement and structured subjective assessment. Reference tyres are retested throughout each session to correct for changing conditions, ensuring fair, repeatable comparisons. Multiple reference sets are used where needed so that control tyre wear does not affect accuracy.
We use professional-grade testing equipment including GPS data loggers, accelerometers, and calibrated microphones. All tyres are broken in and conditioned before testing begins. For full details on our equipment, preparation process, and calibration procedures, see our complete testing methodology.
Categories Tested
Dry Braking
For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.
Dry Handling
For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.
Subj. Dry Handling
Objective data is only part of the picture, so I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.
Wet Braking
For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tyre performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
Wet Braking - Cool
This test follows the same procedure as the standard wet braking test — entry speed of 88 km/h, full ABS braking, VBOX measurement over the 80–5 km/h window — but is conducted at cooler ambient temperatures, typically below 7°C. The lower temperature allows assessment of how each tyre's compound performs when cold, which is particularly relevant for all-season and winter tyre evaluation. Reference tyres are run at the same frequency as the standard wet braking programme.
Wet Handling
For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Subj. Wet Handling
Objective data is only part of the picture, so I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.
Straight Aqua
To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tyre set and average the valid results.
Curved Aquaplaning
For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 metres in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.
Snow Braking
For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.
Snow Traction
For snow traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a groomed snow surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients and powertrain irregularities. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tyre set and average the valid results. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing snow surface conditions.
Snow Handling
For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.
Subj. Snow Handling
Objective data is only part of the picture, so I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated snow handling circuit. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I score steering precision, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence on snow using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.
Ice Braking
For ice braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 35 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a prepared ice surface. Surface temperature is continuously monitored as ice friction properties vary substantially with temperature. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set but with ice testing, you often do many more. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing surface conditions.
Ice Traction
For ice traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared ice surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever accelerates on the same piece of ice twice. Surface temperature is continuously monitored. I complete multiple runs per tyre set and average the valid results, with reference tyres run typically every two candidate test sets.
Subj. Comfort
To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tyre's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tyre.
Noise
I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tyre is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.
How each category is weighted in the overall score:
Dry30%
Dry Braking50%
Dry Handling40%
Subj. Dry Handling10%
Wet40%
Wet Braking25%
Wet Braking - Cool25%
Wet Handling30%
Subj. Wet Handling10%
Straight Aqua5%
Curved Aquaplaning5%
Snow10%
Snow Braking40%
Snow Traction20%
Snow Handling30%
Subj. Snow Handling10%
Ice5%
Ice Braking60%
Ice Traction40%
Comfort5%
Subj. Comfort50%
Noise50%
Value10%
Rolling Resistance100%
Snow
In snow handling, as usual, the Michelin CrossClimate 2 performed the best, feeling like a winter tyre. Pirelli and Continental were very close, with Pirelli having an edge in fun factor, though it could improve its braking. The budget tyre was surprisingly good in the snow, just a little slow to react but with good grip. Bridgestone and Vredestein were last among the premium tyres, both lacking a little bite. The Vredestein had a particularly soft feel, making everything happen slowly.
All the all-season tyres were significantly better than the summer tyre in snow conditions. The summer tyre performed so poorly that the car got stuck on a very slight hill during traction and braking tests.
Snow Braking
Spread: 27.71 M (158.6%)|Avg: 21.64 M
Snow braking in meters (40 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature -6c] (Lower is better)
Snow Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
Snow Traction
Spread: 24.81 s (480.8%)|Avg: 8.22 s
Snow acceleration time (5 - 35 km/h) [Average Temperature -5c] (Lower is better)
Reference Winter Ref
5.16 s
Michelin CrossClimate 2
5.31 s
Reference Winter Avg Ref
5.38 s
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
5.42 s
Grenlander GreenWing AS
5.53 s
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
5.60 s
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
5.69 s
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
5.95 s
Reference Summer Ref
29.97 s
Snow Handling
Spread: 65.02 s (83.1%)|Avg: 88.81 s
Snow handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Reference Winter Ref
78.28 s
Michelin CrossClimate 2
79.65 s
Reference Winter Avg Ref
79.74 s
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
81.84 s
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
82.72 s
Grenlander GreenWing AS
83.33 s
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
84.76 s
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
85.69 s
Reference Summer Ref
143.30 s
Ice
This year I had the time to test ice traction. The Pirelli excelled in this area, closely followed by the Continental. Surprisingly, the budget tyre (Grenlander) also performed well in ice traction. This further supports the theory that the budget tyre might be using a winter compound molded into an all-season pattern.
Ice Traction
Spread: 13.05 s (290%)|Avg: 6.28 s
Ice acceleration time (5 - 25 km/h) (Lower is better)
Reference Winter Ref
4.50 s
Grenlander GreenWing AS
4.50 s
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
4.57 s
Michelin CrossClimate 2
4.70 s
Reference Winter Avg Ref
4.82 s
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
5.15 s
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
5.29 s
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
5.47 s
Reference Summer Ref
17.55 s
The budget all season tyre also performed well in ice braking. Among the premium tyres, Continental and Pirelli showed the best performance, closely followed by Michelin.
Ice Braking
Spread: 23.16 M (256.5%)|Avg: 12.66 M
Ice braking in meters (25 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
Ice Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
Wet
The budget tyre performed exceptionally poorly in wet conditions, being over 23 seconds slower than the group. This poor wet performance, combined with its good ice performance, suggests it might be using a single winter compound for various tyre types..
The Michelin CrossClimate 2 placed 5th, about 5% off the best performers. The top 4 tyres (Bridgestone, Pirelli, Vredestein, and Continental) were remarkably close in performance, within one-tenth of a second of each other. The Bridgestone stood out for its stability and predictability. Pirelli showed great turn-in and grip but was slightly slower to recover from slides. Vredestein was a bit vague on the front axle but still impressive. Continental was the fastest by a small margin, though not as sporty feeling as Bridgestone or Pirelli.
Wet Handling
Spread: 27.45 s (26.6%)|Avg: 110.70 s
Wet handling time in seconds [Average Temperature 21.5c] (Lower is better)
Reference Summer Ref
103.02 s
Reference Winter Ref
107.35 s
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
107.96 s
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
108.17 s
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
108.22 s
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
108.24 s
Reference Winter Avg Ref
110.41 s
Michelin CrossClimate 2
112.49 s
Grenlander GreenWing AS
130.47 s
Wet braking tests revealed significant differences among the tyres. The Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 clearly outperformed the competition with the shortest stopping distance of 25.14M. The Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 came in second at 26.6M, followed closely by the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 at 27.04M.
The Michelin CrossClimate 2, despite its overall strong performance in other areas, showed slightly longer stopping distances in wet conditions at 27.25M. The Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus was the least effective among the premium tyres with a distance of 27.47M.
The budget Grenlander GreenWing AS significantly underperformed in wet braking, with a stopping distance of 35.36M, much longer than the premium tyres, raising serious safety concerns.
The difference in stopping distances between the best performer (Pirelli) and the worst (Grenlander) was substantial at over 10 meters, emphasizing the critical importance of tyre choice for wet weather safety.
Wet Braking
Spread: 11.47 M (48%)|Avg: 28.30 M
Wet braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 26.5c] (Lower is better)
Wet Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
Wet Braking - Cool
Spread: 11.45 M (44.9%)|Avg: 27.86 M
Wet braking at cooler temperature in meters (80 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 8c] (Lower is better)
Wet Braking - Cool: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
The Pirelli was also the best in the deeper water of the aquaplaning tests.
Straight Aqua
Spread: 9.90 Km/H (12.5%)|Avg: 75.20 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
79.10 Km/H
Michelin CrossClimate 2
77.60 Km/H
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
77.10 Km/H
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
77.00 Km/H
Reference Summer Ref
76.50 Km/H
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
75.70 Km/H
Reference Winter Ref
73.00 Km/H
Reference Winter Avg Ref
71.62 Km/H
Grenlander GreenWing AS
69.20 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
Spread: 0.87 m/sec2 (33.2%)|Avg: 2.26 m/sec2
Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
2.62 m/sec2
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
2.55 m/sec2
Reference Summer Ref
2.54 m/sec2
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
2.46 m/sec2
Michelin CrossClimate 2
2.28 m/sec2
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
2.12 m/sec2
Reference Winter Avg Ref
2.07 m/sec2
Grenlander GreenWing AS
1.92 m/sec2
Reference Winter Ref
1.75 m/sec2
Dry
The dry performance tests revealed some interesting results. The budget tyre performed poorly, showing instability during lane change exercises. Michelin and Vredestein were adequate but not recommended for performance driving. Vredestein was a bit imprecise but had good grip, while Michelin performed well below the limit but showed extra understeer at the limit.
Continental felt more relaxed due to a wider steering dead spot, but showing good grip, especially over bumps. Pirelli impressed with strong braking and front-end grip. Surprisingly, Bridgestone came closest to matching summer tyre performance, showing amazing grip despite a slight deadspot in steering.
The summer tyre still had an edge in braking and mid-corner performance, but the gap has narrowed significantly, especially with the Bridgestone and Pirelli in this 19" size.
Dry Handling
Spread: 4.52 s (5.4%)|Avg: 86.68 s
Dry handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Reference Summer Ref
84.30 s
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
84.96 s
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
85.84 s
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
86.45 s
Reference Winter Ref
87.02 s
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
87.09 s
Michelin CrossClimate 2
87.41 s
Reference Winter Avg Ref
88.24 s
Grenlander GreenWing AS
88.82 s
The Pirelli was also the best in dry braking, followed by the Michelin and Bridgestone.
Dry Braking
Spread: 7.76 M (22.6%)|Avg: 38.72 M
Dry braking in meters (100 - 5 km/h) [Average Temperature 25.5c] (Lower is better)
Dry Braking: Safety Impact: Best vs Worst Tyre
Comfort
Noise levels were relatively close across all tested tyres, with only a small spread in decibel readings. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 and Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus were the quietest, while the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 was slightly louder than the group average.
While a comprehensive comfort analysis wasn't possible due to weather, subjective assessments suggest that the Pirelli and Continental offered the best overall comfort, both in terms of minor and big impacts. They are all 19" tyres with low sidewalls, so the differences were smaller than usual.
Noise
Spread: 2.40 dB (3.4%)|Avg: 72.62 dB
External noise in dB (Lower is better)
Reference Winter Ref
71.40 dB
Michelin CrossClimate 2
72.00 dB
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
72.10 dB
Grenlander GreenWing AS
72.40 dB
Reference Winter Avg Ref
72.72 dB
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
72.90 dB
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
73.00 dB
Reference Summer Ref
73.30 dB
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
73.80 dB
Subj. Comfort
Spread: 1.50 Points (15%)|Avg: 9.33 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
10.00 Points
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
10.00 Points
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
9.50 Points
Michelin CrossClimate 2
9.00 Points
Grenlander GreenWing AS
9.00 Points
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
8.50 Points
Value
Rolling resistance tests provided interesting insights into the energy efficiency of these tyres. The Michelin CrossClimate 2 demonstrated the lowest rolling resistance, which translates to better fuel efficiency and potentially lower CO2 emissions. It was closely followed by the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3.
The Bridgestone showed moderate rolling resistance, while the Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus had the highest rolling resistance among the tested tyres. The budget Grenlander tyre performed surprisingly well in this test, showing lower rolling resistance than some premium brands.
Rolling Resistance
Spread: 2.14 kg / t (27.6%)|Avg: 8.74 kg / t
Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)
Michelin CrossClimate 2
7.76 kg / t
Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3
7.99 kg / t
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
8.31 kg / t
Grenlander GreenWing AS
8.54 kg / t
Reference Winter Ref
8.65 kg / t
Reference Winter Avg Ref
8.78 kg / t
Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6
9.01 kg / t
Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus
9.68 kg / t
Reference Summer Ref
9.90 kg / t
19,000 km
£1.45/L
8.0 L/100km
--
Annual Difference
--
Lifetime Savings
--
Extra Fuel/Energy
--
Extra CO2
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
Below are the overall results from this all season test, be sure to keep an eye on Tyre Reviews for the winter test, then the in depth comparison of the all season, winter and summer tyres.
Joint highest dry performance rating, top-rated wet performance, second-highest snow performance, above-average ice traction, high comfort rating, second-lowest rolling resistance.
None.
It's a strong win for the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3. Pirelli have been rapidly evolving their aftermarket line of tyres recently, and the SF series has been through multiple iterations to get to this point, and it's been worth it. The tyre was joint best in the dry, the best in the wet, second best overall in the snow, good on ice, comfortable and had the second best rolling resistance. It's a hugely impressive tyre.
Highest dry performance rating, wet performance within 1% of top-rated, handling characteristics most similar to summer tyres.
Median snow performance, highest ride firmness, among the highest rolling resistance values.
The Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 is the tyre you'd fit of the second places if you live in a mild climate, it was the best in the dry, a whisker off the best in the wet and of all the tyres, it felt the closest to a summer tyre. It's drawbacks, well, it was very average in the snow, had a firmer ride than the other tyres and a high rolling resistance.
Consistent performance across all metrics, predominantly ranking 2nd or 3rd in 18 distinct tests.
No standout performance in any specific category.
The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is the tyre that tried to do everything well, which means while it didn't jump out in any one area, it doesn't have any major drawbacks either, finishing either 2nd or 3rd overall in nearly every single test which is mighty impressive. I think all season tyres should be balanced, and the Continental does that better than nearly any other tyre.
Highest overall snow performance rating, lowest noise emission, lowest rolling resistance, dry braking performance in top percentile.
Wet grip performance below average for test group.
The Michelin CrossClimate 2 is the tyre you'd fit if you're in climate that gets a lot of snow, as it was the best overall in the snow, had the lowest noise and the lowest rolling resistance. While its dry braking was also very good, its grip in the wet is still lacking compared to the best. I look forward to the next version improving this.
Below-average snow performance compared to other all-season tyres, dry braking distance longer than top performers.
The Vredestein Quatrac Pro Plus excelled in the wet and was pretty good in the dry. Its snow performance wasn't the best, but it was still a lot better than the summer tyre which is what we want from an all season tyre, especially if you're in a mild climate. I'd like to see a bit more dry braking but otherwise a good tyre from the dutch company. Remember, this is a mid range tyre in a test dominated by the biggest manufacturers in the world.
High performance in snow conditions, top-rated for ice traction, lowest noise levels in the test group.
Lowest dry grip performance, wet grip 45% below top performer, lowest aquaplaning resistance, below-average refinement, highest rolling resistance in test group.
The Grenlander Greenwing AS was good on snow, the best on ice and very quiet, but that's where the positives end. It had awful grip in the dry, really awful grip in the wet - 45% worse than the best, awful aquaplaning resistance, poor refinement and a high rolling resistance. It's an all season tyre that only works in the most extreme parts of winter, which I'm pretty sure indicates it's a cheap soft winter compound from a budget manufacturer that they just put an all season sidewall plate on to try and sell some tyres. Don't do it.