Menu

Sava Eskimo S3+

The Sava Eskimo S3 Plus is a Touring Winter tyre designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

7.4
Tyre Reviews Score Based on User Reviews
Limited Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
72%
Wet Grip
72%
Road Feedback
68%
Handling
71%
Wear
76%
Comfort
82%
Buy again
78%
Snow Grip
90%
Ice Grip
82%
32 Reviews
77% Average
363,002 miles driven
5 Tests (avg: 13th)
Sava Eskimo S3 Plus

Sava Eskimo S3 Plus

Winter Economy
BETA
7.4 / 10
Based on User Reviews · Limited Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tyre Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tyre scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 5
Publications: 2
Period: 2014 - 2019
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 32
Avg Rating: 76.9%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 2.21
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tyre tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2019 ADAC 185/65 R15 Winter Tyre Test ADAC 2019 185/65 R15 14/16 0 metrics
2018 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 175/65 R14 ADAC 2018 175/65 R14 8/12 0 metrics
2017 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 195/65 R15 ADAC 2017 195/65 R15 15/16 0 metrics
2015 Winter Tyre Market Overview Auto Bild 2015 185/60 R14 21/51 0 metrics
2014 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 175/65 R14 ADAC 2014 175/65 R14 9/14 0 metrics
5
Tests
13th
Average
8th
Best
21st
Worst
Latest Tyre Test Results
14th/16
Great results in the snow
Weak dry performance
Average
Good in the snow
Relatively weak in the dry and wet
15th/16
Especially good in the snow
Weak on dry roads, relatively weak in the wet

Questions and Answers for the Sava Eskimo S3 Plus

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Sava Eskimo S3 Plus. Why not submit a question to our tyre experts using the form below!
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Review Summary

Based on 26 user reviews

Most drivers rate the Sava Eskimo S3 Plus positively as a budget-friendly winter tyre with outstanding snow and solid ice traction, comfortable ride, and low noise. Dry and especially wet handling are commonly described as soft/spongy with longer braking and lower precision, and performance can decline after a few seasons. Overall, it's a safe, high-value choice for snowy conditions if you accept reduced grip and steering precision on wet/dry roads and avoid high-speed driving.

Strengths
  • Excellent snow grip
  • Good ice traction
  • Comfort/low noise
  • Value/price
  • Predictable and safe in winter
  • Decent wear for many users
Areas for Improvement
  • Soft/spongy handling
  • Weak wet grip/braking
  • Average to weak dry grip/precision
  • Performance drop-off after a few seasons

Top 3 Sava Eskimo S3 Plus Reviews

Given 48% while driving a Kia Motors ceed (195/65 R15) on a combination of roads for 25,000 average miles
They are on my Kia Ceed 2016 1.6 GDI since brand new. The performance seems to be consistent by the years. (car kept in garage all its life and driven easy till i got it a year ago from my dad) Snow performence is not bad, but oh boy, dry and wet is something. For normal driving conditions it seems to be quite alright. If your driving pace is just about standard. I had several situations, when i had to brake or steer heavily and the response was not the best. Skidding and when breaking, the car just kept going while ABS was going crazy.
So average driving is pretty alright, but cautious driving is advised. Had different car with the same tyre size and for example the Pirellis were much more predictable and better on hard brakes on dry and wet roads. Not getting them again. If you are on the budget and you know its weaknesses, it could be fine to get them.
tires had the same performance since new to this day (+-5,5 mm after 35k km of easy driving)
April 8, 2025
Given 79% while driving a Toyota Corolla AE101 (165/70 R14) on mostly country roads for 2 average miles
Very very good tyres. Dry6 Wet8 Snow10 Ice7.
January 8, 2025
Given 70% while driving a Ford B Max 1.5d 95hp (195/55 R15) on a combination of roads for 4,500 average miles
PROs: Pretty quiet Safe balance in the dry Pretty good in the snow Decent braking in all conditions CONs: Very, very spongy feeling in the steering wheel Wheelspin in the rain (less so when slightly wet but not currently raining) Road feedback exists, but is often misleading due to the sponginess I would say this is a safe tyre for the average driver, even for a few spirited trips. Except for the very apparent sponginess, I would say this is a very good value tyre.
March 6, 2023

How would you rate the Sava Eskimo S3 Plus?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Sava Eskimo S3 Plus Reviews

Given 53% while driving a BMW 320d efficient dynamics (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 3,000 spirited miles
l've been using these on my base model RDW E90 320d 2011, and ice and snow traction is amazing so much so l never needed to mount chains (they're mandatory) but in dry/wet these tires are awful, super spongy feel and feels like the car is riding on foam, l wouldnt trust these going more than 165km/h. l guess l'll keep fun driving during summer and for winter i'll just have fun by not getting stuck in snow since we got a lot of it here in Kosovo during winter (at least in my town where l live)
October 26, 2025
Given 86% while driving a Skoda (165/70 R13) on a combination of roads for 10,000 average miles
Snow: These tyres are pure snow tyres. Driving on snow is awesome - once I've tryed to go through really high snow like 40cm on dirt mountain road - the car was more likely sitting on snow by its bottom, rather than on tyres and I was still able to drive it through.

Dry: The opposite of this value is handling on dry roads - the high, soft and small rubber blocks are acting more like a gelly when it comes to sporty drive. It still has a good grip, but it has nothing in common with precise driving. You can really hear the sound of rolling rubber blocks even in decent cornering or accelerating. But its kind of funny aspect of driving these tyres :-)

Lifetime: I have two cars - one for winter and convertible for the summer, so i am wearing these tyres all season, while driving only few 100 miles in the summer, but the tire still has an ability to stay for 3 to 4 seasons while driving arround 5000 miles a year.

Summary: I would recommend these tyres for those who want to stay safe in mountains during the winter and accept its limitations during +0 degrees temperatures. Because I am buying them just for the snow, I am going to buy them for ever :D

PS: But please consider that every tyre acts differently in different tyre sizes! I was surprised how differently the same tyre model could act on different cars. My review is for 165/70 R13 on car which weight is about 1000kg without driver.
July 7, 2023
Given 64% while driving a Fiat croma (195/65 R15) on a combination of roads for 7,000 average miles
Good in snow and ice, average on wet, dry not suitable if you need to stop. For a budget tyre is good option in winter, slippery on wet in corners when applying some speed, great mileage.
October 4, 2022
Given 89% while driving a Lancia 1.6 Mjet 120hp (205/55 R16) on mostly country roads for 60,000 average miles
Bought on winter '19/'20 and driven approximately 60 thousand in next three winter seasons. Better handling then Conti Eco Contact. After three winter and 60k km it lost its properties
April 30, 2022
SEAT (205/55 R16) on mostly town for 10,000 average miles
Perfect tyre for winter. Excellent snow grip.
October 19, 2020
Given 80% while driving a Opel Vectra C 1.9CDTi 150bhp (205/55 R16 H) on a combination of roads for 10,000 average miles
Tire performs good both on dry and wet roads and is excellent on snow and icy roads. Great price/performance. Would buy again
October 18, 2020
Given 69% while driving a Toyota Auris (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 35,000 average miles
I bought them couple of years ago as I couldn't find anything better at the moment. I will be completely honest. The first 2 winter seasons they were amazing. Like premium ones. But after those 2 years they were below average. I mean sure.. they break and all but with water they worked only like 75% and in snow less than 50%. Twice I needed to go through ice and I wouldn't do it again.
April 8, 2020
Given 77% while driving a Volkswagen Golf Variant Estate 2.0 TDi 140 DSG (205/55 R16 T) on a combination of roads for 15,000 average miles
Tires have been driven for 3 winters and about 25000km. Grip is pretty good, not the best there is, but for the price it's great. Wet grip isn't quite the best, but it's far from bad. On snow the tires are perfect. Would buy again.
March 1, 2020
Given 64% while driving a Peugeot 407Hdi (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 5,000 average miles
Good cheap tyre with great snow grip.
August 7, 2019
Given 76% while driving a Volkswagen Golf 7 TDI (195/65 R16 H) on a combination of roads for 30,000 average miles
The tire has average dry grip but not even close to be dangerous. In wet its little better. In snow it's excellent. Grip in snow is outrageously good. Handling and breaking is very good in snowy conditions. On ice has good grip and breaking. Wear is very low. In comperison to continintal or michelin in my opinion is better in snow and worse in dry conditions. On average in my opinion very good snow tire.
March 4, 2019
Given 80% while driving a Volkswagen Golf Mk5 1.9 TDI (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 0 spirited miles
I have a good experience with them. Used the all seasons, 2 winters the tires are kinda done, only this winter are usable but still they have a good drip in the snow and ice.
On heavy rain i've had pretty good grip, almost drove like it was dry, never had aquaplane with them, the noise when they were new was a little high but it's not that much of a problem, after they worn out a little bit the noise disappears.
Handling was very good, didn't had any problem. I do recommend them, and they are pretty cheap.
January 27, 2019
Given 76% while driving a SEAT Toledo (185/60 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 7,000 average miles
Driven one winter season, very good on snow, soft tyre, comfortable and quiet, handling - medium rating, low price. These were made in Spain, XL version. I dont like Sava eskimo pattern. Estimated lasting on front tyres (front wheels drive) 20000+ km, on rear weels 30000+ km.
August 24, 2017
Rate the Sava Eskimo S3 Plus