2017 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tyre Test
Satisfactory
Where the Vredestein Wintrac xtreme S finished in each measured discipline, across every test that measured it against at least two other tyres. Field beaten is the share of the other tyres it outranked in that measurement.
| Discipline | Tests | Avg finish | Field beaten | Firsts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry | ||||
| Dry Braking | 1 | P6 of 11 | 50% | - |
| Dry Handling | 1 | P9 of 11 | 20% | - |
| Wet | ||||
| Wet Braking | 1 | P2 of 11 | 90% | - |
| Wet Handling | 1 | P3 of 11 | 80% | - |
| Straight Aqua | 1 | P7 of 11 | 40% | - |
| Snow | ||||
| Snow Braking | 1 | P8 of 11 | 30% | - |
| Snow Handling | 1 | P10 of 11 | 10% | - |
| Comfort | ||||
| Noise | 1 | P3 of 11 | 80% | - |
| Value | ||||
| Rolling Resistance | 1 | P9 of 11 | 20% | - |
Overall finishing position against the tyres that have most often shared a test with the Vredestein Wintrac xtreme S. Only tyres tested alongside it at least three times are listed.
| Rival | Shared tests | Ahead | Behind | Level | Finished ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | 0 | 10 | - | 0% | |
| 8 | 0 | 8 | - | 0% | |
| 7 | 1 | 6 | - | 14% | |
| 7 | 0 | 7 | - | 0% | |
| 6 | 0 | 6 | - | 0% | |
| 5 | 0 | 5 | - | 0% | |
| 4 | 0 | 4 | - | 0% | |
| 4 | 0 | 4 | - | 0% | |
| 3 | 2 | 1 | - | 67% | |
| 3 | 1 | 2 | - | 33% | |
| 3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
The same record for the tyre it replaced and the tyre that replaced it.
| Tyre | Tests | Wins | Avg finish | Field beaten |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vredestein Wintrac Xtreme Predecessor | 1 | 0 | 31st | 36% |
| Vredestein Wintrac xtreme S This tyre | 12 | 0 | 9th | 24% |
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Successor | 37 | 1 | 6th | 55% |
Drawn from 12 tests. Updated October 28, 2026.
The Vredestein Wintrac xtreme S usually finished in the lower half of its winter test fields, despite repeated praise for snow braking, low noise and dry handling. Sport Auto Recommended it at fourth of seven in 2015, but placed it last of six in 2016; Auto Zeitung placed it 12th of 14 in 2016. AMS and Sport Auto praised short snow stops in 2016, while Auto Bild Sportscars noted good snow braking and low noise but only conditionally recommended it. Snow braking was not uniformly strong: eighth of 11 in Auto Bild Allrad 2017 was an unusual weaker result.
Wet braking and aquaplaning resistance are the recurring concerns. Six of nine tester write-ups criticised wet braking, and four criticised aquaplaning. Auto Bild Allrad's 2017 wet-braking result, second of 11 and only 0.2% longer than best, was an unusual reversal of that pattern; ADAC also praised wet performance in 2016. Snow traction and handling were less dependable than snow braking, with repeated criticism and tenth of 11 for snow handling in Allrad 2017. Efficiency varied too: early Auto Bild tests praised low rolling resistance, but later reports included high fuel consumption and ninth of 11 for rolling resistance in Allrad 2017. The record therefore depends substantially on size and test.
Short braking distances on snow- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tyre Test (2016)
Good snow braking, sporty in the dry- 2016 Sport Auto Winter Tyre Test (2016)
Good snow braking and low noise- 2016 AutoBild Winter UHP Tyre Test (2016)
Good braking on snowy slopes- 2015 Auto Bild Performance Winter Tyre Test (2015)
Short braking distance and good traction on snow- 2015 Sport Auto 19 Inch Winter Tyre Test (2015)
Low noise level- 2017 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tyre Test (2017)
Good snow braking and low noise- 2016 AutoBild Winter UHP Tyre Test (2016)
very low noise level- 2015 Sport Auto 19 Inch Winter Tyre Test (2015)
very good handling on dry surfaces- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tyre Test (2016)
Good snow braking, sporty in the dry- 2016 Sport Auto Winter Tyre Test (2016)
good handling on dry surfaces- 2016 AZ Winter Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 (2016)
acceptable handling and precise steering response on dry and wet surfaces- 2015 Sport Auto 19 Inch Winter Tyre Test (2015)
High traction- 2016 AZ Winter Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 (2016)
good on dry roads- 2016 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 225/45 R17 (2016)
Short braking distance and generally high wet grip- 2017 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tyre Test (2017)
Especially good in the wet- 2016 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 225/45 R17 (2016)
Long wet braking, high rolling resistance and poor cornering in all conditions- 2016 AutoBild Winter UHP Tyre Test (2016)
Very weak in the wet, especially wet braking- 2016 Sport Auto Winter Tyre Test (2016)
long braking in the wet- 2016 AZ Winter Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 (2016)
long braking distances on wet and dry roads- 2015 Auto Bild Performance Winter Tyre Test (2015)
poor resistance to aquaplaning- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tyre Test (2016)
poor aquaplaning scores- 2016 AZ Winter Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 (2016)
poor resistance to aquaplaning- 2015 Sport Auto 19 Inch Winter Tyre Test (2015)
average aquaplaning qualities- 2014 AutoBild 235/35 R19 Winter Tyre Test (2014)
Poor snow grip- 2017 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tyre Test (2017)
Poor snow grip- 2016 AZ Winter Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 (2016)
Weak on snow- 2016 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 225/45 R17 (2016)
high rolling resistance- 2017 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tyre Test (2017)
Long wet braking, high rolling resistance and poor cornering in all conditions- 2016 AutoBild Winter UHP Tyre Test (2016)
high fuel consumption and wear- 2016 ADAC Winter Tyre Test - 225/45 R17 (2016)
long braking distances on wet and dry roads- 2015 Auto Bild Performance Winter Tyre Test (2015)
Long braking distances in the dry- 2014 AutoBild 235/35 R19 Winter Tyre Test (2014)
a tendency to understeer on wet surfaces- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tyre Test (2016)
Understeer on snow and wet roads- 2015 Auto Bild Performance Winter Tyre Test (2015)
Strong = top two of the field in that measurement. Weak = bottom two.
Satisfactory
Conditionally recommended.
Recommended
Quiet, but struggles in the wet
Owner reviews, sizes and EU label data, comparisons and the Tyre Reviews score. All Vredestein tyres