Menu

2020 Studded Winter Tire Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
5 min read Updated
Contents
  1. Introduction
  2. Dry
  3. Wet
  4. Snow
  5. Ice
  6. Environment
  7. Results
  8. Michelin X Ice North 4
  9. Continental IceContact 3
  10. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
  11. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
  12. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
  13. Nokian Nordman 7
  14. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
  15. GT Radial IcePro 3

Test Publication:
205/60 R16 8 tires 6 categories
Similar Tests
Images courtesy of Vi Bilagare
Test Publication:
Vi Bilagare
https://www.vibilagare.se/test/dacktest
Images courtesy of Vi Bilagare
Test Size: 205/60 R16
Tires Tested: 8 tires
Test Categories:
6 categories (13 tests)
Similar Tests
For the 2020 Vi Bilägare Winter studded tire test, the Swedish magazine has tested 8 of the most extreme studded winter tires in 205/60 R16.

As this is a studded winter tire test, the testers placed much more emphasis on snow and ice performance, so if you're in a region that sees a lot of compacted snow and ice on the road during normal winters, this is a very useful test.

Scroll down to see the full results.

 

Dry

The GT Radial IcePro 3 had a significant advantage during dry braking, with the next best Continental IceContact 3 nearly 2 meters behind.

Dry Braking

Spread: 4.42 M (15.3%)|Avg: 31.36 M
Dry braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. GT Radial IcePro 3
    28.88 M
  2. Continental IceContact 3
    30.75 M
  3. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    31.02 M
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    31.11 M
  5. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    31.60 M
  6. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    31.94 M
  7. Michelin X Ice North 4
    32.31 M
  8. Nokian Nordman 7
    33.30 M

The magazine didn't give dry handling lap times, instead just awarding the tires subjective handling scores.

Subj. Dry Handling

Spread: 3.00 Points (60%)|Avg: 3.13 Points
Subjective Dry Handling Score (Higher is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    5.00 Points
  2. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    4.00 Points
  3. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    3.00 Points
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    3.00 Points
  5. Continental IceContact 3
    3.00 Points
  6. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    3.00 Points
  7. Nokian Nordman 7
    2.00 Points
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    2.00 Points

Wet

In the wet the GT Radial held onto its advantage, with the Pirelli Ice Zero 2 a meter behind in second place.

Wet Braking

Spread: 5.04 M (14.9%)|Avg: 36.23 M
Wet braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. GT Radial IcePro 3
    33.87 M
  2. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    34.80 M
  3. Michelin X Ice North 4
    35.06 M
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    36.15 M
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    36.92 M
  6. Continental IceContact 3
    36.92 M
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    37.18 M
  8. Nokian Nordman 7
    38.91 M

The GT Radial continued its advantage during a wet handling lap.

Wet Handling

Spread: 2.64 s (6.1%)|Avg: 44.57 s
Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
  1. GT Radial IcePro 3
    43.11 s
  2. Continental IceContact 3
    43.77 s
  3. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    44.10 s
  4. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    44.12 s
  5. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    44.75 s
  6. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    45.17 s
  7. Nokian Nordman 7
    45.75 s
  8. Michelin X Ice North 4
    45.75 s

Pirelli and GT again scored well during straight aquaplaning testing.

Straight Aqua

Spread: 5.20 Km/H (8%)|Avg: 62.61 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
  1. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    64.60 Km/H
  2. GT Radial IcePro 3
    64.10 Km/H
  3. Continental IceContact 3
    63.70 Km/H
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    62.90 Km/H
  5. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    62.40 Km/H
  6. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    62.10 Km/H
  7. Nokian Nordman 7
    61.70 Km/H
  8. Michelin X Ice North 4
    59.40 Km/H

Snow

GT Radial couldn't continue its wins in the braking test, this time finishing last during snow braking. It's not unusual for a tire that performs well in the dry and wet to lack grip during snow and ice testing, however the Continental IceContact 3 proved to have a rounded ability.

Snow Braking

Spread: 0.23 M (2.2%)|Avg: 10.61 M
Snow braking in meters (35 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    10.50 M
  2. Continental IceContact 3
    10.50 M
  3. Nokian Nordman 7
    10.51 M
  4. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    10.58 M
  5. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    10.60 M
  6. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    10.71 M
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    10.71 M
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    10.73 M

Snow traction showed a similar story.

Snow Traction

Spread: 0.30 s (8.3%)|Avg: 3.75 s
Snow acceleration time (5 - 35 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    3.62 s
  2. Michelin X Ice North 4
    3.67 s
  3. Continental IceContact 3
    3.67 s
  4. Nokian Nordman 7
    3.72 s
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    3.75 s
  6. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    3.79 s
  7. GT Radial IcePro 3
    3.83 s
  8. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    3.92 s

The winter specialists Nokian took their first win with the Hakkapeliita 9 during the important snow handling test.

Snow Handling

Spread: 4.19 s (5.6%)|Avg: 75.89 s
Snow handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    74.62 s
  2. Continental IceContact 3
    75.04 s
  3. Nokian Nordman 7
    75.19 s
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    75.19 s
  5. Michelin X Ice North 4
    75.69 s
  6. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    75.74 s
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    76.85 s
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    78.81 s

Ice

Ice braking had the Nokian and Michelin leading with a significant advantage.

Ice Braking

Spread: 1.88 M (54.8%)|Avg: 4.33 M
Ice braking in meters (15 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    3.43 M
  2. Michelin X Ice North 4
    3.47 M
  3. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    4.07 M
  4. Continental IceContact 3
    4.20 M
  5. Nokian Nordman 7
    4.31 M
  6. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    4.68 M
  7. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    5.20 M
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    5.31 M

Michelin and Nokian continued to lead during the ice traction testing.

Ice Traction

Spread: 1.40 s (74.1%)|Avg: 2.35 s
Ice acceleration time (5 - 15 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    1.89 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    1.94 s
  3. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    2.08 s
  4. Continental IceContact 3
    2.18 s
  5. Nokian Nordman 7
    2.22 s
  6. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    2.42 s
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    2.80 s
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    3.29 s

Rounding off their excellent snow performance, Michelin and Nokian also led in ice handling.

Ice Handling

Spread: 10.19 s (19.9%)|Avg: 55.05 s
Ice handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    51.23 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    51.40 s
  3. Continental IceContact 3
    52.24 s
  4. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    53.52 s
  5. Nokian Nordman 7
    55.11 s
  6. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    56.42 s
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    59.02 s
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    61.42 s

Environment

Michelin proved to have the lowest rolling resistance on test.

Fuel Consumption

Spread: 0.12 l/100km (2.1%)|Avg: 5.72 l/100km
Fuel consumption in Litres per 100 km (90 - 90 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    5.66 l/100km
  2. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    5.67 l/100km
  3. Continental IceContact 3
    5.69 l/100km
  4. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    5.71 l/100km
  5. Nokian Nordman 7
    5.74 l/100km
  6. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    5.76 l/100km
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    5.76 l/100km
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    5.78 l/100km

Michelin also had the lowest subjective noise, being the only tire awarded 5/5.

Subj. Noise

Spread: 3.00 Points (60%)|Avg: 2.88 Points
Subjective in car noise levels (Higher is better)
  1. Michelin X Ice North 4
    5.00 Points
  2. Continental IceContact 3
    4.00 Points
  3. Hankook Winter i pike RS2
    3.00 Points
  4. Pirelli Ice Zero 2
    3.00 Points
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
    2.00 Points
  6. Nokian Nordman 7
    2.00 Points
  7. Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
    2.00 Points
  8. GT Radial IcePro 3
    2.00 Points

Results

1st

Michelin X Ice North 4

205/60 R16 96T
Michelin X Ice North 4
  • Origin: Russia
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 7th 32.31 M 28.88 M +3.43 M 89.38%
Subj. Dry Handling 1st 5 Points 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 3rd 35.06 M 33.87 M +1.19 M 96.61%
Wet Handling 7th 45.75 s 43.11 s +2.64 s 94.23%
Straight Aqua 8th 59.4 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -5.2 Km/H 91.95%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 1st 10.5 M 100%
Snow Traction 2nd 3.67 s 3.62 s +0.05 s 98.64%
Snow Handling 5th 75.69 s 74.62 s +1.07 s 98.59%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 2nd 3.47 M 3.43 M +0.04 M 98.85%
Ice Traction 1st 1.89 s 100%
Ice Handling 1st 51.23 s 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 1st 5 Points 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 1st 5.66 l/100km 100%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
2nd

Continental IceContact 3

205/60 R16 96T
Continental IceContact 3
  • Origin: Germany
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 2nd 30.75 M 28.88 M +1.87 M 93.92%
Subj. Dry Handling 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 5th 36.92 M 33.87 M +3.05 M 91.74%
Wet Handling 2nd 43.77 s 43.11 s +0.66 s 98.49%
Straight Aqua 3rd 63.7 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -0.9 Km/H 98.61%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 1st 10.5 M 100%
Snow Traction 2nd 3.67 s 3.62 s +0.05 s 98.64%
Snow Handling 2nd 75.04 s 74.62 s +0.42 s 99.44%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 4th 4.2 M 3.43 M +0.77 M 81.67%
Ice Traction 4th 2.18 s 1.89 s +0.29 s 86.7%
Ice Handling 3rd 52.24 s 51.23 s +1.01 s 98.07%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 2nd 4 Points 5 Points -1 Points 80%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 3rd 5.69 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.03 l/100km 99.47%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
2nd

Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9

205/60 R16 96T
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9
  • Origin: Finland
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 6th 31.94 M 28.88 M +3.06 M 90.42%
Subj. Dry Handling 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 5th 36.92 M 33.87 M +3.05 M 91.74%
Wet Handling 4th 44.12 s 43.11 s +1.01 s 97.71%
Straight Aqua 6th 62.1 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -2.5 Km/H 96.13%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 4th 10.58 M 10.5 M +0.08 M 99.24%
Snow Traction 5th 3.75 s 3.62 s +0.13 s 96.53%
Snow Handling 1st 74.62 s 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 1st 3.43 M 100%
Ice Traction 2nd 1.94 s 1.89 s +0.05 s 97.42%
Ice Handling 2nd 51.4 s 51.23 s +0.17 s 99.67%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 5th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 6th 5.76 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.26%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
4th

Hankook Winter i pike RS2

205/60 R16 96T
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
  • Origin: South Korea
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 4th 31.11 M 28.88 M +2.23 M 92.83%
Subj. Dry Handling 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 4th 36.15 M 33.87 M +2.28 M 93.69%
Wet Handling 5th 44.75 s 43.11 s +1.64 s 96.34%
Straight Aqua 4th 62.9 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -1.7 Km/H 97.37%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 5th 10.6 M 10.5 M +0.1 M 99.06%
Snow Traction 6th 3.79 s 3.62 s +0.17 s 95.51%
Snow Handling 3rd 75.19 s 74.62 s +0.57 s 99.24%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 6th 4.68 M 3.43 M +1.25 M 73.29%
Ice Traction 3rd 2.08 s 1.89 s +0.19 s 90.87%
Ice Handling 4th 53.52 s 51.23 s +2.29 s 95.72%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 2nd 5.67 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.01 l/100km 99.82%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
5th

Pirelli Ice Zero 2

205/60 R16 96T
Pirelli Ice Zero 2
  • Origin: Russia
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 3rd 31.02 M 28.88 M +2.14 M 93.1%
Subj. Dry Handling 2nd 4 Points 5 Points -1 Points 80%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 2nd 34.8 M 33.87 M +0.93 M 97.33%
Wet Handling 3rd 44.1 s 43.11 s +0.99 s 97.76%
Straight Aqua 1st 64.6 Km/H 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 6th 10.71 M 10.5 M +0.21 M 98.04%
Snow Traction 1st 3.62 s 100%
Snow Handling 6th 75.74 s 74.62 s +1.12 s 98.52%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 7th 5.2 M 3.43 M +1.77 M 65.96%
Ice Traction 6th 2.42 s 1.89 s +0.53 s 78.1%
Ice Handling 6th 56.42 s 51.23 s +5.19 s 90.8%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 4th 5.71 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.05 l/100km 99.12%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
6th

Nokian Nordman 7

205/60 R16 96T
Nokian Nordman 7
  • Origin: Russia
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 8th 33.3 M 28.88 M +4.42 M 86.73%
Subj. Dry Handling 7th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 8th 38.91 M 33.87 M +5.04 M 87.05%
Wet Handling 7th 45.75 s 43.11 s +2.64 s 94.23%
Straight Aqua 7th 61.7 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -2.9 Km/H 95.51%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 3rd 10.51 M 10.5 M +0.01 M 99.9%
Snow Traction 4th 3.72 s 3.62 s +0.1 s 97.31%
Snow Handling 3rd 75.19 s 74.62 s +0.57 s 99.24%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 5th 4.31 M 3.43 M +0.88 M 79.58%
Ice Traction 5th 2.22 s 1.89 s +0.33 s 85.14%
Ice Handling 5th 55.11 s 51.23 s +3.88 s 92.96%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 5th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 5th 5.74 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.08 l/100km 98.61%
Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £117.54 Results Table Test Charts
7th

Toyo Observe Ice Freezer

205/60 R16 96T
Toyo Observe Ice Freezer
  • Origin: Malaysia
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 5th 31.6 M 28.88 M +2.72 M 91.39%
Subj. Dry Handling 3rd 3 Points 5 Points -2 Points 60%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 7th 37.18 M 33.87 M +3.31 M 91.1%
Wet Handling 6th 45.17 s 43.11 s +2.06 s 95.44%
Straight Aqua 5th 62.4 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -2.2 Km/H 96.59%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 6th 10.71 M 10.5 M +0.21 M 98.04%
Snow Traction 8th 3.92 s 3.62 s +0.3 s 92.35%
Snow Handling 7th 76.85 s 74.62 s +2.23 s 97.1%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 3rd 4.07 M 3.43 M +0.64 M 84.28%
Ice Traction 7th 2.8 s 1.89 s +0.91 s 67.5%
Ice Handling 7th 59.02 s 51.23 s +7.79 s 86.8%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 5th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 6th 5.76 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.26%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
8th

GT Radial IcePro 3

205/60 R16 96T
GT Radial IcePro 3
  • Origin: China
  • 3PMSF: no
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 1st 28.88 M 100%
Subj. Dry Handling 7th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 1st 33.87 M 100%
Wet Handling 1st 43.11 s 100%
Straight Aqua 2nd 64.1 Km/H 64.6 Km/H -0.5 Km/H 99.23%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Snow Braking 8th 10.73 M 10.5 M +0.23 M 97.86%
Snow Traction 7th 3.83 s 3.62 s +0.21 s 94.52%
Snow Handling 8th 78.81 s 74.62 s +4.19 s 94.68%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Ice Braking 8th 5.31 M 3.43 M +1.88 M 64.6%
Ice Traction 8th 3.29 s 1.89 s +1.4 s 57.45%
Ice Handling 8th 61.42 s 51.23 s +10.19 s 83.41%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Noise 5th 2 Points 5 Points -3 Points 40%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Fuel Consumption 8th 5.78 l/100km 5.66 l/100km +0.12 l/100km 97.92%
Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £93.99 Results Table Test Charts

Similar Tire Tests

Show All winter tire tests
2025 High Performance Winter Tire Test
January 2026 275/35 R19 Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 7 tires
2025 TUV Test of Pirelli Cinturato Winter 3 vs Rivals
October 2025 Pirelli Cinturato Winter 3 5 tires
2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tire Test
October 2025 235/45 R18 Continental VikingContact 8 20 tires
2025 AZ Performance Winter Tire Test
October 2025 245/45 R19 Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 10 tires
2025 Autobild Winter Tire Test
October 2025 225/40 R18 Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 22 tires
2025 Winter Tire Braking Test - 52 Sets!
October 2025 225/40 R18 Dunlop Winter Response 2 52 tires
comments powered by Disqus