For this year's Tire Reviews winter tire test, we've got nine sets of the most popular winter tires, half of which are brand new tires for this year!
As always I'll be testing in the snow, wet and dry, and looking at rolling resistance, noise and comfort, to ensure you get the best overview of all the new winter tires!
Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Show full testing methodology
Recorded test conditions
- Dry Braking
- 62.1 → 3.1 mph
- Wet Braking
- 49.7 → 3.1 mph
- Snow Braking
- 28.0 → 3.1 mph
- Snow Traction
- 3.1 → 24.9 mph
Score Weighting
Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.
| Test | Within category | Share of overall score |
|---|---|---|
| Dry · 20% | ||
| Dry Braking | 55% | 11% |
| Dry Handling | 40% | 8% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 5% | 1% |
| Wet · 35% | ||
| Wet Braking | 50% | 17.5% |
| Wet Handling | 25% | 8.75% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 5% | 1.75% |
| Straight Aqua | 10% | 3.5% |
| Curved Aquaplaning | 10% | 3.5% |
| Snow · 30% | ||
| Snow Braking | 44.4% | 13.33% |
| Snow Traction | 11.1% | 3.33% |
| Snow Handling | 33.3% | 10% |
| Subj. Snow Handling | 11.1% | 3.33% |
| Comfort · 5% | ||
| Subj. Comfort | 50% | 2.5% |
| Noise | 50% | 2.5% |
| Value · 10% | ||
| Rolling Resistance | 100% | 10% |
Our standard methods
The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.
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 tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires 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 tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire 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 tires 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
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 behavior, 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 tire 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 tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
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 tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire 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 tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Subj. Wet Handling
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 behavior, 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 tire 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 tire set and average the valid results.
Curved Aquaplaning
For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 meters 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 tire ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyze 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 tires 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 tire ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tire set and average the valid results. Reference tires 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 tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire 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
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 tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I score steering precision, turn-in behavior, 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 tire before evaluating each candidate.
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 tire's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tire.
Noise
For cabin noise assessment, I drive at controlled speeds, typically 50, 80, 100, and 120 km/h, on NVH test surfaces with defined texture characteristics. Calibrated microphones are positioned at ear height within the cabin. Measurements are taken using A-weighting, with one-third octave analysis where required to identify tonal features such as cavity resonance. Windows remain closed, ventilation is off, and ambient conditions are controlled so the data reflects the tire rather than external interference.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tire 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.
Snow
The slowest tire on test was the Vredestein Wintrac Pro, 5.2% off the best. This tire was a joy to drive as everything it did was smooth and progressive, but it just lacked a little grip.
The next bundle of tires were less than 4% behind the best, and you're going to be surprised, it's the Semperit, Continental and Bridgestone. If you know your winter tires, you'll know this is unusual as the Continental and the Bridgestone are excellent in the snow, and they all were here too, there are just some very new tires in this group which have performed very well! The Bridgestone felt the most rounded, but they were all incredibly close.
The Michelin Alpin 6 was next, less than 3% off the best, again lovely to drive, just picked up a little more understeer than most hurting the lap time, perhaps it'll do better in traction and braking.
The new Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 was fourth, 2.3% off the best, and the new Hankook Winter ICept RS3 was third, just 1.2% behind the fastest! The Pirelli was subjectively lovely, you could drive it easily and quickly and I super enjoyed it, and the Hankook just had a huge amount of grip!
Kleber, which is a Michelin second tier brand came second. This will be no surprise if you've been following winter tire testing last year, the Krisalp HP3 is constantly one of the best, if not the best in the snow in all tests, so when I found out it was the Kleber here (I was testing blind) I wasn't overly surprised.
What I was surprised about was the best tire in snow handling being the Petlas, which is by far the cheapest tire here. This tire was simply exceptional in these very cold conditions, it was fastest in snow handling and had very good marks subjectively too, the only negative perhaps being slightly peaky grip.
You might be confused, as generally the message from testing is that budget tires are bad. In this example, it's not the biggest surprise that the Petlas has done well in the snow, as cheap tires can be very good at one thing, at the expense of everything else.
What will be a surprise is if this tire also does well in the wet.
Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet (28 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 89 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 89 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 91 ft | +2 ft | 12 mph | |
| 91 ft | +2 ft | 12 mph | |
| 95 ft | +6 ft | 19 mph | |
| 95 ft | +6 ft | 20 mph | |
| 96 ft | +7 ft | 21 mph | |
| 96 ft | +7 ft | 22 mph | |
| 97 ft | +8 ft | 23 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 8.8% (8 ft ≈ 0.5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Michelin Alpin 6 would still be travelling at 23 mph when the Kleber Krisalp HP3 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Snow Traction
Snow acceleration time (3 - 25 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 4.7 s | Best | |
| 4.7 s | Best | |
| 4.9 s | +0.20 s | |
| 5.1 s | +0.40 s | |
| 5.1 s | +0.40 s | |
| 5.1 s | +0.40 s | |
| 5.1 s | +0.40 s | |
| 5.4 s | +0.70 s | |
| 5.4 s | +0.70 s |
The difference between best and worst was 14.9% (0.7 s).
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 112.2 s | Best | |
| 113.3 s | +1.10 s | |
| 113.6 s | +1.40 s | |
| 114.9 s | +2.70 s | |
| 115.6 s | +3.40 s | |
| 116.2 s | +4.00 s | |
| 116.5 s | +4.30 s | |
| 116.5 s | +4.30 s | |
| 118.5 s | +6.30 s |
The difference between best and worst was 5.6% (6.3 s).
Wet
Unfortunately the Petlas was not a surprise in wet handling. The tire just slides around totally unpredictably, the steering really tells you nothing that's going on underneath you, and the grip is so limited it was the only tire I did two laps instead of four, though they were exactly the same, then gave up as I didn't want to risk coming off and damaging the test vehicle. It might only be 15 seconds in lap time but I can't explain how difficult it was to drive.
Kleber and Semperit were next, way ahead of the budget, but still around 5 seconds off the best. The both had a little oversteer in the balance but were otherwise fine, just lacking a bit of wet grip.
The Michelin Alpin 6 finished sixth. This tire had the safest balance of the group, with almost no unpredictability or oversteer, but lots of mid corner understeer really hurts a lap time.
Pirelli and Vredestein almost tie for fourth in time, and were two of the most fun tires to drive, both feeling playful and giving good steering feedback and response, these two were fun to drive.
The smallest margin ahead was the Hankook which was certainly grippy, but lost a little time on corner exit as you had to be a little more careful with the throttle.
That only leaves Continental and Bridgestone, and if you're familiar with winter tire testing, I bet you can guess who was fastest. The Continental put up a good fight, and rewarded a little more of a smoother driving style, but it couldn't knock bridgestone from it's almost guaranteed number one spot in wet handling. Once again the Blizzak LM005 was the best in wet handling, feeling extremely strong on the brakes, turn in and mid corner, with a safe understeer balance like the Michelin, just more grip.
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (50 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 90 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 91 ft | +1 ft | 8 mph | |
| 93 ft | +3 ft | 14 mph | |
| 97 ft | +7 ft | 22 mph | |
| 100 ft | +10 ft | 26 mph | |
| 104 ft | +14 ft | 30 mph | |
| 106 ft | +16 ft | 31 mph | |
| 114 ft | +24 ft | 37 mph | |
| 130 ft | +40 ft | 44 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 44.7% (40 ft ≈ 2.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Petlas Snow Master W651 would still be travelling at 44 mph when the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 97 s | Best | |
| 97.7 s | +0.70 s | |
| 98.8 s | +1.80 s | |
| 99 s | +2.00 s | |
| 99 s | +2.00 s | |
| 100.6 s | +3.60 s | |
| 102.2 s | +5.20 s | |
| 102.8 s | +5.80 s | |
| 111.8 s | +14.80 s |
The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (14.8 s).
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 51.9 mph | Best | |
| 51.2 mph | -0.7 mph | |
| 50.8 mph | -1.1 mph | |
| 50.5 mph | -1.4 mph | |
| 49.7 mph | -2.2 mph | |
| 49.6 mph | -2.3 mph | |
| 49.0 mph | -2.9 mph | |
| 47.8 mph | -4.1 mph | |
| 44.2 mph | -7.7 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 14.7% (7.7 mph).
Curved Aquaplaning
Remaining lateral acceleration
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 26.6 ft/s² | Best | |
| 26.2 ft/s² | -0.4 ft/s² | |
| 24.9 ft/s² | -1.7 ft/s² | |
| 24.0 ft/s² | -2.6 ft/s² | |
| 23.3 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² | |
| 23.3 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² | |
| 22.3 ft/s² | -4.3 ft/s² | |
| 21.3 ft/s² | -5.3 ft/s² | |
| 15.7 ft/s² | -10.9 ft/s² |
The difference between best and worst was 40.7% (10.9 ft/s²).
Dry
This is what I learnt during dry handling. They're all non performance winter tires. The data is below, and if you want a 17" non performance winter tire to handle well in the dry, I'd go with the Pirelli.
Ignoring the budget and the Kleber, they were all actually very impressive considering dry handling testing is WAY out of their designed operating parameters.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 120 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 121 ft | +1 ft | 7 mph | |
| 123 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 123 ft | +3 ft | 13 mph | |
| 124 ft | +4 ft | 14 mph | |
| 126 ft | +6 ft | 17 mph | |
| 129 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 129 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 129 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 7.7% (9 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 would still be travelling at 21 mph when the Michelin Alpin 6 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 79.8 s | Best | |
| 79.9 s | +0.10 s | |
| 79.9 s | +0.10 s | |
| 80.2 s | +0.40 s | |
| 80.3 s | +0.50 s | |
| 80.4 s | +0.60 s | |
| 80.7 s | +0.90 s | |
| 80.7 s | +0.90 s | |
| 81.9 s | +2.10 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Environment
The internal noise and subjective comfort of the tires was all extremely close, but the Pirelli and Bridgestone had a small edge. The Petlas was the most noisy tire internally, but the difference from best to worse was less than 2 dB.
Noise
Internal noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 68.5 dB | Best | |
| 68.9 dB | +0.40 dB | |
| 69.1 dB | +0.60 dB | |
| 69.2 dB | +0.70 dB | |
| 69.3 dB | +0.80 dB | |
| 69.5 dB | +1.00 dB | |
| 69.6 dB | +1.10 dB | |
| 69.8 dB | +1.30 dB | |
| 69.8 dB | +1.30 dB |
All the tires in the Noise test finished less than 3% apart.
Subj. Comfort
Subjective Comfort Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 100 Points | Best | |
| 100 Points | Best | |
| 100 Points | Best | |
| 90 Points | -10.00 Points | |
| 90 Points | -10.00 Points | |
| 90 Points | -10.00 Points | |
| 90 Points | -10.00 Points | |
| 90 Points | -10.00 Points | |
| 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 15% (15 Points).
The Petlas did have a huge lead in fuel use with an unusually low rolling resistance. The Bridgestone was the best of the rest.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.7 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 8 kg/t | +1.30 kg/t | $57 | |
| 8.2 kg/t | +1.50 kg/t | $66 | |
| 8.4 kg/t | +1.70 kg/t | $75 | |
| 8.8 kg/t | +2.10 kg/t | $92 | |
| 8.8 kg/t | +2.10 kg/t | $92 | |
| 8.9 kg/t | +2.20 kg/t | $96 | |
| 9.1 kg/t | +2.40 kg/t | $105 | |
| 9.2 kg/t | +2.50 kg/t | $110 |
The difference between best and worst was 37.3% (2.5 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Vredestein Wintrac Pro uses about 30 gal ($110) more fuel than the Petlas Snow Master W651.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
Results
2022/23 Tire Reviews Winter Tire TestWatch the full video of this test on YouTube Watch on YouTube
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
225/45 R17 94H XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 129 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 79.8 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 90 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 97 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 49.7 mph | -2.2 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 24.0 ft/s² | -2.6 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 89 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 4th / 9 | 5.1 s | +0.40 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 116.2 s | +4.00 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 68.9 dB | +0.40 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 8 kg/t | +1.30 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/71
- Weight
- 9.2 kgs
- Tread
- 8.1 mm
- Price
- 135.69
Continental WinterContact TS 870
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 129 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 80.2 s | +0.40 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 91 ft | +1 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 97.7 s | +0.70 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 51.2 mph | -0.7 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 26.6 ft/s² | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 91 ft | +2 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 4th / 9 | 5.1 s | +0.40 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 116.5 s | +4.30 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 6th / 9 | 69.5 dB | +1.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 4th / 9 | 8.4 kg/t | +1.70 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/70
- Weight
- 9.3 kgs
- Tread
- 8.3 mm
- Price
- 166.49
Hankook Winter I cept RS3
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 124 ft | +4 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 80.3 s | +0.50 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 93 ft | +3 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 98.8 s | +1.80 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 50.8 mph | -1.1 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 23.3 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 96 ft | +7 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 4.9 s | +0.20 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 113.6 s | +1.40 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 9 | 69.6 dB | +1.10 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 9 | 8.8 kg/t | +2.10 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/72
- Weight
- 9.1 kgs
- Tread
- 7.7 mm
- Price
- 119.99
Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 123 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 80.4 s | +0.60 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 100 ft | +10 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 99 s | +2.00 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 49.0 mph | -2.9 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 22.3 ft/s² | -4.3 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 96 ft | +7 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 4th / 9 | 5.1 s | +0.40 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 114.9 s | +2.70 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 68.5 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 9 | 8.9 kg/t | +2.20 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/72
- Weight
- 9.2 kgs
- Tread
- 8.6 mm
- Price
- 165.99
Semperit Speed Grip 5
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 123 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 79.9 s | +0.10 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 95 Points | -5.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 106 ft | +16 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 102.2 s | +5.20 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 50.5 mph | -1.4 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 26.2 ft/s² | -0.4 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 95 ft | +6 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 8th / 9 | 5.4 s | +0.70 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 116.5 s | +4.30 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.3 dB | +0.80 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 8.2 kg/t | +1.50 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/72
- Weight
- 9.3 kgs
- Tread
- 8.7 mm
- Price
- 119.39
Vredestein Wintrac Pro
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 121 ft | +1 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 79.9 s | +0.10 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 97 ft | +7 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 99 s | +2.00 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 95 Points | -5.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 47.8 mph | -4.1 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 21.3 ft/s² | -5.3 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 95 ft | +6 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 8th / 9 | 5.4 s | +0.70 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 118.5 s | +6.30 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 69.2 dB | +0.70 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 9th / 9 | 9.2 kg/t | +2.50 kg/t |
- EU Label
- D/B/72
- Weight
- 9.7 kgs
- Tread
- 8.2 mm
- Price
- 135.89
Michelin Alpin 6
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 120 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 80.7 s | +0.90 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 104 ft | +14 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 100.6 s | +3.60 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 49.6 mph | -2.3 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 24.9 ft/s² | -1.7 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 97 ft | +8 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 4th / 9 | 5.1 s | +0.40 s |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 115.6 s | +3.40 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 8th / 9 | 69.8 dB | +1.30 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 9 | 9.1 kg/t | +2.40 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 9.1 kgs
- Tread
- 7.9 mm
- Price
- 163.59
Kleber Krisalp HP3
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 126 ft | +6 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 80.7 s | +0.90 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 80 Points | -20.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 114 ft | +24 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 102.8 s | +5.80 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 51.9 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 23.3 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 89 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 1st / 9 | 4.7 s | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 113.3 s | +1.10 s |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 95 Points | -5.00 Points |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 90 Points | -10.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 69.1 dB | +0.60 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 9 | 8.8 kg/t | +2.10 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 9.3 kgs
- Tread
- 7.7 mm
- Price
- 151.39
Petlas Snow Master W651
225/45 R17 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (15)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 129 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 81.9 s | +2.10 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 70 Points | -30.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 130 ft | +40 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 111.8 s | +14.80 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 10 Points | -90.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 44.2 mph | -7.7 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 15.7 ft/s² | -10.9 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 91 ft | +2 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 1st / 9 | 4.7 s | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 112.2 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 100 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 85 Points | -15.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 8th / 9 | 69.8 dB | +1.30 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 9 | 6.7 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- EU Label
- B/C/70
- Weight
- 9.3 kgs
- Tread
- 8.8 mm
- Price
- 100.00
The tests for All Season and Winter Tires had started
https://reifenpresse.de/202...
https://reifenpresse.de/202...
I hope they fix the small picture
Thanks for the link, already on them though :) https://www.tyrereviews.com...
Does anyone know why tires in size 215/50/r17 are so much more expensive than 225/45/r17? The difference is often almost a quarter of the price. It used to be a rarely used size, but nowadays you see 215/50/r17 on more and more vehicles, including many EVs, so it is no longer a rare size.
225/50 is still a way less popular size than 225/45 so I believe it's still supply and demand.
For a mild winter that is often seen in southern England, do you recommend using a winter biased all season tire during the winter to get better wet/dry grip or is it still best to use a winter tire?
The same thought is running through my head. I live in Poland and most of the winter-tire season it's about 5-10 degrees C with occasional slushy snow. Currently i'm on Goodyear assymetric 6, but don't know what is the best option for me, especially in terms of wear during long, "hot" highway voyages
I'd use a summer bias all season tire.
Hello,
Do you know which one has the best wear ?
I did not test wear sadly, the Auto Bild test this year did, worth checking out
Hi Johnatan, great video, as usual.
I have a question.... Which is the difference between the Hankook Winter Icept Evo3 (W330) and the Hankook Winter Icept RS3 (W462) ... because in this vídeo you try the W462, but on the later winter tire test video you tried the W330 (https://www.tyrereviews.com...
Thank you very much!
The Evo 3 is more performance bias and available in larger wheel sizes.
Any plans to test the new Pirelli Weatheractive anytime soon?
I would like to, it probably won't be soon though :(
Dear Johnatan,
With many of the tests you publish I wonder how much the tire pressure influences the results. I assume that for the tests you use tire presessures prescribed for the vehicle by the manufacturer, however sometimes the manufacturer recommends more than one option (light load / full load / speeds above 160 km/h etc.) and in such cases which pressure would you use for the tests?
Please, would it be possible in the future to have a test where you would show how much tire pressure influences the results? On my car I have noticed that even 0,2 bar (3 psi) deviation makes a difference as for handling and +0,4 bar starts to have negative impact on ride comfort.
Just to make sure my pressures are not too low even when the temperature drops I prefer to have +0,1 bar above the manufacturer recommendation, but I would love to learn what I loose and what I gain when I deviate from the prescribed pressures (-0,2 bar, +0,2 bar, front axle/rear axle, both axles). Would be the change in udersteer/oversteer significant for you dry/wet lap times and dry/wet braking distances?
Increased pressures are good for fuel economy, however at some pressure we start to lose safety and comfort. A tire pressure focused video would be highly appreciated.
-----
As an engineer I really apreciate how in-depth information you try to provide. Tirereviews are a real gem. In the past years I have purchased quite a lot of tires for my family based on your tests and reviews. With the Michelin PS4 you even convinced me to give Michelin a second chance. After my repeated experience with Michelin Primacy (version 2003 - horrible on wet, average on dry, 2008 - bad on wet, average on dry) I have said "never ever Michelin". However, you were right and I was very happy with the Michelin PS4.
Thank You and Happy New Year 2023!
Happy new year! We usually use the standard load pressures, not the higher. We generate more heat than usual so I like to start as low as the car recommends.
I've actually tried to do a tire pressure test a number of times but not had much luck with the final result. It's definitely high on the list. A very interesting subject but I think application can vary the results quite a lot!
Hi, What was the temperature during dry and wet tests?
This is a great test. But... how do you test winter tires and not include Nokian?
Their CE winter tire was made in Russia so not really available at the moment.
Waiting for your comments on a topic. Since the performance of winter tires on dry roads is bad, which tire should be preferred in a place where it is usually cold (below 7 degrees) in winter but generally dry or wet roads. Thanks for answer.
I have the same question. Winter tires are mostly tested on snow. Where I'm at (Central Europe) I do very little driving on snow -- and it is mostly the last few hundred meters leading to a mountain hut. I'd rather not sacrifice safety on 99% of the roads I drive in winter by using winter tires.
In other words, what tire would be best for winter (not summer), cold temperatures (generally between -5 and +10°C) with dry or wet (salted) roads? Is it still a winter tire, or should I get an all season tire to drive with between November and April?
Premium all season tire is the solution requested, ideally bought just before or during the winter season.
Summer tires work better then winter tires on the dry and wet at temperatures above 0 and bellow +7 degrees C. It is a rule of thumb that you should switch to winter tires once the *average day temperature* is bellow +7 degrees C.
I think you might have gotten that a little backwards. Winter tires generally start working better in t he wet around 7c, more realistically 3-5c. In the dry the summer tire will be better no matter what the temperature is.
In the wet, OK. I meant it more in the sense of in a no snow/ice conditions.
A request for future tire tests: Can you please make photos of the tires on the rim because of rim protection bar? I searched for information on it but it´s impossible to find. Many manufacturers are write their tires have a RPB but on some tires you don´t see much of it.
The only tire I know with a very good RBP in 225/45R17 is the LM005, I see it live at my brothers car
II completely agree with this suggestion. It is incredibly difficult to find information about whether tires have rim protection and to what extent. I currently have Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 that are almost due for replacement and have beautiful thick rim protection, which makes these tires look very nice on the rim. Unfortunately, they make a lot of noise and I want to choose a different brand and possibly switch to all-weather tires (CrossClimate 2 for example) for my winter rims because I live in a very mild climate (the Netherlands) with hardly any snow. I don't understand why information about rim protection is so difficult to find. Even writing to tire manufacturers does not provide much clarity. So showing this clearly when testing tires would be a big plus!
I try and list rim protection metrics with the results in all of my tests, though i have forgotten it.
Pictures are very hard to get across though the last UHP test I posted a reel on instagram of all the rim protection.
Thanks!
I try to get my infos from the video but I´m not sure if I get it right.
Have the Hankook and Pirelli a big or small Rim Protection Bar?
I rather stupidly didn't rate this for the winters, but looking at the photos the unmounted photos hankook looks larger than the Pirelli.
This will hopefully help you:
https://imgur.com/a/N0H7Qnq
Yep, Thanks.
The Hankook is now my favorite, also because to get a Pirelli DOT2622 or newer is a gamble
Hello, I was waiting for a comparison of winter and all season tires, but it's getting time to make the decision for me and I can't wait much longer.
What would you recommend for a fwd passanger car for winter season (I have 2 sets of wheels) for this use:
Mostly weekend trips to mountains in Central Europe (Czechia) - 95% dry/wet and final few kilometers can be snowy and sometimes difficult to climb. Snow climbing capability can mean the difference between getting there or stopping on a side of the road and putting snow chains on.
Could Michelin Cross Climate 2 do it, or should I rather go with Brigestone Blizzak or Continental Winter Contact or anything else?
It won't be driven in summer.
The car is Renault Laguna 3 grandtour diesel, tire size 205/50-R17.
Thank you.
If you are ready (anyway very, very rarely, if at all) to use the front 2 snow chains then also all seasons tires fit very well. In those 95% dry/wet the new top all seasons Michelin Cross Climate 2 (or Hankook, Conti, GY, Dunlop or Bridge equivalent) will be better to much better, and in the remaining very rarely 5% they will be only around 15% worse than the real winter tires. But the Czech streets, even in the small mountains are pretty well maintained, so I would go and choose the fresh smelling Michelin Cross Climate 2! You can then safely cover also the autumn and the spring and therefore your summer tires will last more years. You will be positively surprised!, especially due to the global warming and more and more soft weather conditions...
I've a video coming pretty much concluding the same :)
Cool! When is that video coming up? I cannot wait much longer, have to make a purchase asap. Thanks!
On the channel now, I'm not sure if it's what you were after but it's what I meant :)
I am dropping my Michelin Crossclimate 2 after one year and 15K of use. Wear is insane, it is down to 4mm, both front tires show minor structural shoulder/upper sidewall unevenness (interrior structural damage?). Yes I have had the car to alignment twice. Never had a problem with my Crossclimate+ but I am moving away from Michelin and probably from all-seasons in general. Summer heat in Central Europe and highway speeds is killing it. The thermic shock is too much for the compound. For city trips as a second car or in tempered summer climate should probably be fine.
The cc2 certainly isn't the best wearing tire michelin have ever made. I'm sure there will be a big improvement with the CC3.
Based on my experience, the CC2 could do it for sure. The full winter will give you a few percent more but it's not night and day.
Wow I just found a bunch of useful info on the comment section.
I'm really torn between the a005 evo and the lm005. It's so close! I'll change back to the eagle f1 in the summer anyway so warm weather performance is of no concern. However as I will only drive on snow 1 or 2 days a year it seems like the a005 would provide a bit more fun during winter.
With my previous winter tire I had the confidence that the tire would always grip when it was dark and couldn't really see the road. Would hit puddles, mud, etc and the car would still grip.
Would the a005 evo provide that or should I look at the lm005?
If you would only drive 1-2 days on snow then surely prefer A005 Evo.
Yeah but in the test the lm005 brake better
There will always be a tire, which, in extreme situation test, breaks better than yours.
No i mean. The lm005 beat the a005 in dry and wet.
How substantionally, in which temperature? and what about remaining parameters?
Just noticed that Carwow did a winter traction test on that indoor ski slope people use ... it was so poor.
We learnt that summer are worse than winter and AWD better than 2WD ... golly.
They should have gone downhill at least and shown that reduced braking distances in snow are more important than just going as fast as possible from stopped !
Also, they should at least done an all season on AWD v winters on 2wd ! Mind you it is more Top Gear light entertainment rather than more studious stuff on here.
You need to ping them and tell them how to do it right !
Just sayin...
As you said, carwow is pure entertainment :)
And lets face it, now 8th November and my all season Yokohamas are once again trying to remove water ..
Not sure how many bad days with ice we can feel smug on even all season given the trends, at least in England and not Scotland.
Michelin Climate etc has to be the way to go, and they might get even more wet biased...
Thanks for the great insight you give through your tests and evaluation of other's tests. I've had a good read and I think I've narrowed it down to two tires that would suit my needs best over winter months.
I might be over-analysing it but I can't work out whether I'd be best fitting GY Vector 4seasons gen 3 or Vredestein Wintrac Pro.
It's for the winter wheels in 225-45-17 94v XL square setup for my BMW 330d. I live in Yorkshire. I need to be able to get up and down a steep hill with traffic lights in the snow/ice/slush and then up the motorway for work. I go to Wales and East Anglia over Christmas. I want to be able to use the car's performance in milder winter conditions so I'd like to retain as much of the wet and dry handling characteristics to normal as possible. For summer I have 225-35 and 255-30 staggered 19inch.
GYs about £100 cheaper for a set, perhaps better suited given most of the time above 0 temps but seem designed for lower powered and lighter cars as a touring tire and brake poorly in the dry. Vreds designed as UHP and stand out in tests as what I'm after. But with them being winter tires would they feel less stiff/direct than the GYs most of the time and even perform worse braking in milder temps? Can you offer any advice please?
Both tires will get you up the hill. As I've not directly compared them it would be tough to give you good advice but given the Goodyears are cheaper and will wear better, that's where my money would go.
Thanks. I did compare their respective outcomes in your 2022 tests (Vred generally better) but wasn't sure how reliable that would be. The Goodyear won the Autobild 2021 all season test on a 3-series so I don't think I'll go far wrong with it. I will update in the spring!
Hi Jonathan, thanks for your work. You cost me a lot of money in tires over the years! Will there be a review of ultra high Performance winter tires? I’ve got a 3.2 Mk1 AUDI TT and spend a lot of time on the continent as well as the UK.
I would rather sacrifice outright performance in the warmer months for winter safety.
Spirited but not aggressive high speed driving is my style, mostly motorway miles.
Crucially, I’m more interested in the grippiest tire on COLD and damp roads, not necessarily “wet” or “dry”. The tarmac and ambient temperatures from Nov-Mar are more of interest to me when it’s consistently cold. I’m interested in the effect of the tire compound and with only a minor interest in snow.
What is your opinion please on my 4 choices:
Eagle Asym 6
Cross Climate 2
TS870
Wintrac Pro
Or would you push for something more exotic like a P Zero Winter or do you have a personal choice not listed?
Cold and greasy roads, fast but not aggressive driving, Audi TT, quiet interior noise. Preferably a car specific tire rather than a generic tire nominally fitted to unnecessarily heavy vehicles like an SUV.
Cheers,
Mike
Bridgestone WeatherControl A005 Evo might be one to look at, a summer bias all season tire with excellent grip in the wet.
Would you rate that better than the CC2? My wife has the Cross Climate on her A1 and I don’t think it is has the performance necessary for my driving. Do you think the Bridgestone is ultimately gripper on cold damp surfaces, greasy roads not wet roads, than the Asym 6 then? Thanks for your opinion .
Yes, when it's cold and wet the all season tire should have the advantage.
Perfect, I promise this is the last question:
Do you think the Weather Control will ultimately out handle an Ultra High Perf winter tire specifically designed for sports cars? P Zero Winter, Wintrac Pro, 870 P etc.
I've just found the Cross Climate 2 runs out of grip quickly in anything other than adverse weather and my focus is on cold, damp fast road driving, not a very wet road.
That's a good question, I think it would be very very close and really depend on the situation and tires.
Hi jonathan, thanks for this extremely well prepared test.
My questions is, what was the weather temperature while you're dry testing the tires? My planned usage including too much extreme cold weather dry tarmac driving and cold dry performance is very important for me. Usually I don't take the car out when it snows (not because i don't like driving on snow, because people who can't drive on snow or going out with summer tires and causing traffic). Basically does the performance on hot surfaces differ greatly from the performance on cold surfaces?
Finally, do you have any data on winter tires wearing excessively above 7 degrees (on tarmac)?
Thanks.
Dry was around 20c and sunny. On the road winter tires shouldn't wear excessively above 7c.
Hi, thanks you for doing your tests Jonathan. Your testing and reporting is great.
I was particularly curious to compare the all-seasons (all-weathers) with the winter tires so appreciate that you tested both (https://www.tyrereviews.com... and https://www.tyrereviews.com....
Were the tests performed in similar conditions? I was expecting that the all-weathers would have an advantage on dry and wet but based on your results, for wet and dry braking, the winter tires had the advantage (althought the handling numbers were slightly better for the all-weathers) and for snow braking, your chart above says 45-5 km/h for the winter while your all-weather snow-braking was 40-5 km/h and the winters beat the all-weathers (which I expected) but if it's from a faster speed, that's a much more significant difference.
Let us know. Thanks.
There was quite a swing in snow temperature testing, I need to run the evolution of the control and explain that somewhere.
Hi,
I wonder how we should regard EU tire labels. I'm searching silent tire.
Kleber Krisalp HP3: EU label 69 dB, in you test 69,1 dB --> seams clear
Continental WinterContact: EU label 70 dB, in you test 69,5 dB --> seams clear
but:
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005: EU label 71 dB, in you test 68,9 dB --> 2 dB difference
Vredestein Wintrac Pro: EU label 72 dB, in you test 69,2 dB --> 3 dB difference
Why we have such differences?
I should rather focus on UE labels or test results?
I suspect that the tests may measure different things (I think that the UE labels show external noise [no use to people inside the car] rather than internal noise) or under different conditions (different car tested w[hich might affect how much sound is damped], maybe the UE ones under 'lab' rather than real-world conditions)?
EU does do external noise, a lot of tests do too though (not this one), it's not run in a lab, it's run on a set surface outside
I tested internal noise on this test, EU label is external. Sound can be directed into the car to get a lower EU label.
Hello,
In your test Bridgestone's dry braking is the worst and in the Auto Zeitung is the 2nd best .
In your test Bridgestone is 1st at braking on snow when tested by Auto Zeitung is not at the top.
Any idea why that happened ? Thanks.
Nice work! Unfortunately Continental WinterContact TS 870 aren't provided for 255/35/R19 size and for this size there is only previous model available - TS 860 S.
What would you recommend for that size? I live in Poland and average temperature in winter is around 0C, the main roads are mostly scraped to the asphalt and in addition there is salt, often there is a lot of slush. However, there can be some snowy days and temperature can go really low sometimes and especially on b-roads it can be not so comfortable.
Still many people drive here with all seasons tires but I'm afraid about those snowy days and icy roads that can sometimes be expected. The car is Audi A5 2017 quattro, 252HP.
It seems that I should choose from Continental TS 860 S (older ones), Blizzak LM005 and Hankook Winter I cept RS3.
I really like the RS3, so I'd probably go for that even if the LM005 won my test. I just prefered how it drove in the three conditions overall.
Are the results from this test directly comparable to the 2022 all season test?
If so, most of the winter tires seem to be better in the wet and dry than the all season tires!
There were different test conditions for each days of testing, I will make a video comparing the two properly
Useful for those considering (especially under the current economic conditions) whether its worth changing to, say, winter-bised all season tires than having to buy/store a set of summers + winters and smaller wheels. As you've said quite a bit in the past 2-3 years, all-season tires have come on a LOT.
I have winter Sebring SUV SNOW All time (summer-winter) in my Jeep and no problem, price 83€ one tire. 🙂
Interesting how price can by different in different country's
For ex I made price chart for Poland,
1. Petlas - 944 pln for a set
2. Hankook - 1034 pln
3. Semprit 1068 pln
4. Kleber 1100 pln
5. Michelin 1376 pln
6. Pirelli 1379 pln
7. Bridgestone 1384 pln
8. Continental 1392 pln
X. Vredestein - this particular model in unavailable
The biggest difference is at bridgestone.. it's more expensive here than pirelli or michelin, and almost the same price as continental, which is the most expensive tire.
https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
Some of it can also be down to supply and demand, and where the retailer used it sourcing stock from, but historically Michelin is one of the most expensive so that's a surprising list! Thanks for sharing
Great work :)
The Hankook and Pirelli are on my list
Thanks :)
Had to change because it´s easier for me to switch to 18" rims, so the iCept Evo³ would be my choice instead of the RS3. I think this is also a very good tire.
The Pirelli is a bit risky, my dealer can´t guarantee the DOT.
Hi Jonathan! I was eagerly anticipating this test to come out. Thank you!
I noticed there is no Goodyear in the written results (only in video).
Despite I watched all your winter and all season reviews, I m still in dilemma: should i go:
- winter (Conti 870 P, Blizzak LM005, GY UltraGrip Performance +) or
- all season ( Conti AllSeasonContact, GY Vector 4 Seasons Gen-3, Bridgestone Weather Control A005)
for Tiguan first gen. Also what size do you recommend: 235/55/17 or 215/60/17 , both are factory for him.
I m not Michelin fan, i feel like they are cheating with the thread depth, plus it looks like there is too big hype and marketing involved in CC2 reviews everywhere. Some users reports increased fuel consumption and rough ride. But if you honestly recommend them, i could try it ( i never ride all season tires)
Weather conditions here are sort of similar to yours, but some years could be really snowy. The roads are mostly scraped to the tarmac plus they put salt, so we end up with a lot of slush (except on some b-roads and parking lots)
Whit that being said, i would say: all seasons are for me. Most of the winter, temps are around -5 to 15C (20C) , but the problem is that we also have few months with low temps like -15C or less, and I m not sure how all seasons would behave on such temps on icy/snow roads. My main concern is safety, then comfort, fuel efficient... and i like to drive dynamically :)
Hope that you can get a good, full picture and that you could help me with decision.
Thank you for all. Cheers!
I would probably go with the TS870P, they're very all season like for a winter tire, and dynamically they should be amongst the best. That said, the allseasoncontact was surprisingly nice feeling in my 17" test this year.
As for size, if both are allowed I would go with whatever is cheaper, but if you enjoy driving, the 235/55 should feel a little more sporty everything else being equal.
Thank you! TS870P were my secret favorite :)
Cheers!
Good :) Let me know how you find them!
They arrived. For now, they smell great! :D
Temps are still going from 5C to 25C so I'll have to be more patient to put them on the car and check...
Fantastic :D
I am also not a great Michelin fan, but how do they cheat regarding the thread depth ? it is similar to all the other tires, or I am missing something.
They don't cheat, generally their compounding wears better than competition so they can start with less tread and in theory get the same or more mileage.
Thank you for the explanation by the way what happened to Dunlop they seem to have disappeared from test comparison with no new models since long time with last year all season tire being their last product absent from major tests.
Goodyear are focusing on Goodyear as they don't own the Dunlop brand world wide.
Hi, my opinion is based on the fact that Michelin tires have ~1 mm less tread depth than Continental while it weighs 1kg more (exact values vary between models, of course but this is a rule of thumb: less tread depth more weight). Most of the tests are done with brand new tires, and some results greatly depend on the tread dept, so If Conti can accomplish similar results (with deeper treads) as Michelin, in a year or two, when it wears, it will get even better results.
I m not covering too many miles a year (8k-10k, and less than half of that on winter tires) so I'm not interested in tire mileage (i will change it after ~5-6 years anyway) but rather how I spend those miles.
Again this is just my personal opinion.
Cheers!
thank you for the answer
this is very interesting insight; I tend to drive more than 30k per year and 15k approximately on winter tires, currently I have the Bridgestone Blizzak LM 005 but I need to equip the other family car with winter tires in november/december, for someone like me who wears tires in 2/3 years what would be better the deep tread ones or shallow tread ones ?
best regards
I couldn't find the link for my previous comment but here it is, the last year's winter test: https://www.tyrereviews.com...
you can see what I was talking about weight and tread depth.
Michelin Pilot Alpin 5: Weight: 10.10kgs; Tread: 7.6mm
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance+: Weight: 9.48kgs Tread: 9.1mm
Common sense says the GY would last longer due to the more tread, but the commercials say that Michelin makes wonders and their tires last longer than competitive brands. I never drive Michelin and I cannot comment on that.
I m definitely not the right person for an opinion on long-lasting tires. Check the reviews here and see what other ppl say.
What are your thoughts on Blizzak LM 005? Any experience with slush or icy roads? How do they behave in higher temps (up to 15C) and highway speeds?
Kind regards
I drive an Opel Astra and the tire size is 205/55/16 91 H . I drive mainly in the Netherlands but I also travel to Switzerland and Northern Italy. In the Netherlands winters are generally mild with often rainy weather but very seldom snow or ice. In the rain the tire feels exceptionally grippy and safe, and probably thanks to the excellent state of the roads and asphalt it feels very quiet and comfortable. In higher temperatures on dry asphalt in March and April the tire feels like a summer tire, but you should consider that speed limits are 100 kms on main roads and roads are generally straight therefore I cannot assess how it drives in dry conditions on a twisty road.. On long travels I was able to achieve 4.2 liters per 100 kms therefore the tire offers low resistance. driving in Switzerland and Northern italy I faced snow and lower temperatures around -10/-15 the tire still felt safe but in those conditions I was driving slow in a column of cars and trucks. However braking always felt safe and consistent without and signs of skidding. Regarding driving on icy roads it might have happened one or twice but again I was driving slowly and safely and never broke traction. Having read multiple tests and opinions the Bridgestone Blizzak LM 005 can be described as the most all season winter tire or a winter tire with with all season qualities.
Thanks Enrico! For the same reason "the most all season winter tire or a winter tire with with all season qualities." i took Conti TS870P :)
Jonathan, what would you say after how many years tire should be changed disregarding on the tread depth? When does a tire gets old? I try my best not to drive winter tires when it is hot (but you cannot help when you have 20C in February and below 0 i January and March o.O)
I got nasty surprise from Hankook Winter i*cept evo² on 5th winter and they were on ~5.5mm-6mm depth and they had ~22.000km on them. My 4x4 tiguan were dancing wile overtaking on snow uphill (almost touch the car I wanted to overtake). Couldn't properly exit roundabout and hit the curb (scratching the rim).
That is why Hankook were not on my list.
None of this would happen in first 4 winters. They were pretty good and felt secure. Maybe not amazing but i would give them 8 (out of 10)
Did I had to high expectation from them to last 5 years? What could i expect from Conti? Is there any brand that stand out in this field?
Thanks
5 years is the industry recommended maximum life and one I agree with, rubber ages with time sadly
Thanks for confirmation. I'm absolutely aware of it, but I thought that 5 year is more like rule of thumb or recommendation, like 7C for winter tires.
Cheers!
*7 oC average temperature (of the day).
How come this isn't posted on the main page? The only way to access this was through the link in the youtube video description.
I'm curious about the worse than usual performance of the Michelin Alpin 6. If there's a batch of worse performing tires, it's possible that people have bought some of them. So in that case you're receiving a worse product than the one you've paid for.
I haven't finished editing it properly yet so I didn't want to push it live, I will today :)
If it was a bad tire, it was a very small run as another test in the same size this year has the alpin 6 doing as expected. I wouldn't be concerned about buying the tire.