Sadly Tire Reviews won't be conducting a studded tire test this year, but thankfully the excellent testers at the Swedish magazine Vi Bilagare have, and as they're some of the best Nordic drivers in the world, you can be assured this is the best studded tire test you'll see this year.
As always for a studded tire test, the tires were all tested in the dry, wet, snow and importantly ice, which is where studs really make a difference. To add another element to the testing this year Vi Bilagare bought a "joker" tire, a lightly used Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8 (the current version is the Hakkapeliitta 10) which was manufactured in 2015, making the tire both old technology AND 8 years old. The testers noted that the tire still had around 7mm of tread depth (compared to 9.1mm of the new Hakka 10) and that some studs had fallen out, and those which hadn't were somewhat blunted compared to new.
The inclusion of the old tire is really interesting, as they've also included a cheap Chinese, so we can answer whether an old premium studded to tire is better than a new budget!
In our coverage below we'll concentrate on how the old vs new perform, but overall this is an excellent in depth test and well worth checking out the full version on the ViB website.
Dry braking started off with a win for the used tire! If you understand tires and braking tests, this won't be a huge surprise as lower tread depth really helps improve dry braking results, especially on siped tires like these.
Dry Braking
Spread: 1.92 M (6.1%)|Avg: 32.49 M
Dry braking in meters (80 - 5 ) (Lower is better)
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
31.40 M
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
32.11 M
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
32.36 M
Michelin X Ice North 4
32.37 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
32.74 M
Continental IceContact 3
32.77 M
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
32.82 M
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
33.32 M
The testers don't report lap time for this category of tire, but they do report subjective handling scores of which the Michelin X-Ice North 4 and Continental IceContact 3 lead the way.
Subj. Dry Handling
Spread: 3.00 Points (60%)|Avg: 3.38 Points
Subjective Dry Handling Score (Higher is better)
Michelin X Ice North 4
5.00 Points
Continental IceContact 3
5.00 Points
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
4.00 Points
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
4.00 Points
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
3.00 Points
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
2.00 Points
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
2.00 Points
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
2.00 Points
Wet
The Hankook Winter i*Pike RS2 had the best braking in the wet, closely followed by the new Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2. Surprisingly, the worn old tire finished fourth in wet braking, ahead of its new and "better" brother, the Hakkapeliitta 10. This is harder to explain, as the 8 year old rubber should have hardened up, however it's likely the lower tread depth was once again a factor on these very soft and highly siped tires.
Wet Braking
Spread: 3.34 M (9.3%)|Avg: 37.37 M
Wet braking in meters (80 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
35.85 M
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
35.94 M
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
36.98 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
37.02 M
Michelin X Ice North 4
37.56 M
Continental IceContact 3
37.87 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
38.58 M
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
39.19 M
Highlighting the tread depth vs tread compound factor, wet handling had the old tire second to last, only beating the budget tire which had disastrous wet braking. The Continental was back at the front.
Wet Handling
Spread: 1.50 s (3.6%)|Avg: 41.61 s
Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Continental IceContact 3
41.10 s
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
41.20 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
41.40 s
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
41.40 s
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
41.50 s
Michelin X Ice North 4
41.80 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
41.90 s
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
42.60 s
The Falken Winterpeak F-Ice 1 had the best aquaplaning resistance, and surprisingly the worn older tire out performed a number of the newer patterns, which was unexpected due to the lower tread depth. This is likely due to the newer tires prioritising more rubber on the road for improved grip, at the expense of aquaplaning performance.
Straight Aqua
Spread: 4.00 Km/H (6.8%)|Avg: 56.54 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
59.10 Km/H
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
57.30 Km/H
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
56.80 Km/H
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
56.50 Km/H
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
56.40 Km/H
Michelin X Ice North 4
55.90 Km/H
Continental IceContact 3
55.20 Km/H
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
55.10 Km/H
Snow
The budget Goodride IceMaster Spike was the best in snow braking with the Hankook a close second. The older tire was once again near the back of the back, though confusingly it still managed to beat the Michelin.
Snow Braking
Spread: 0.44 M (3.4%)|Avg: 12.96 M
Snow braking in meters (35 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
12.80 M
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
12.82 M
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
12.85 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
12.96 M
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
12.96 M
Continental IceContact 3
12.98 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
13.06 M
Michelin X Ice North 4
13.24 M
Fortunately Michelin jumped back to the front of the group for snow traction, beaten only by the Goodyear. The older Nokian again beat the newer Nokian in what was a very close table.
Snow Traction
Spread: 0.11 s (2.3%)|Avg: 4.85 s
Snow acceleration time (5 - 35 km/h) (Lower is better)
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
4.79 s
Michelin X Ice North 4
4.83 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
4.84 s
Continental IceContact 3
4.84 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
4.85 s
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
4.86 s
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
4.87 s
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
4.90 s
Thankfully the (new) Nokian was back at the front for snow handling, with the old right at the back.
Snow Handling
Spread: 4.20 s (5.6%)|Avg: 76.40 s
Snow handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
74.80 s
Continental IceContact 3
75.10 s
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
75.30 s
Michelin X Ice North 4
75.50 s
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
76.10 s
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
76.70 s
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
78.70 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
79.00 s
Ice
Ice is key for studded tires, and really shows where the older tire loses out. The new Nokian was best in the ice braking tests, and the old Nokian by far the worst.
Ice Braking
Spread: 6.26 M (49%)|Avg: 15.31 M
Ice braking in meters (25 - 5 km/h) (Lower is better)
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
12.77 M
Michelin X Ice North 4
12.93 M
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
12.97 M
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
14.60 M
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
15.87 M
Continental IceContact 3
17.14 M
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
17.16 M
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
19.03 M
Michelin snuck ahead of the new Nokian during ice traction testing but the old Nokian remained at the back.
Ice Traction
Spread: 3.11 s (56%)|Avg: 6.80 s
Ice acceleration time (5 - 25 km/h) (Lower is better)
Michelin X Ice North 4
5.55 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
5.74 s
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
6.09 s
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
6.41 s
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
6.51 s
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
7.53 s
Continental IceContact 3
7.88 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
8.66 s
Ice handling had the new Nokian back at the front, but this time the budget Goodride was the slowest by quite the margin.
Ice Handling
Spread: 4.80 s (12.2%)|Avg: 41.15 s
Ice handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
39.30 s
Michelin X Ice North 4
39.60 s
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
39.60 s
Continental IceContact 3
40.80 s
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
41.00 s
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
42.20 s
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
42.60 s
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
44.10 s
Comfort
The Continental proved to have the highest level of subjective comfort.
Subj. Comfort
Spread: 3.00 Points (60%)|Avg: 3.13 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
Continental IceContact 3
5.00 Points
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
4.00 Points
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
3.00 Points
Michelin X Ice North 4
3.00 Points
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
3.00 Points
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
3.00 Points
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
2.00 Points
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
2.00 Points
The Continental was also the quietest.
Noise
Spread: 1.00 dB (1.3%)|Avg: 75.51 dB
External noise in dB (Lower is better)
Continental IceContact 3
75.00 dB
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 8
75.40 dB
Hankook Winter i pike RS2
75.40 dB
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2
75.40 dB
Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506
75.50 dB
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
75.60 dB
Michelin X Ice North 4
75.80 dB
Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
76.00 dB
Value
Lower tread depth favours rolling resistance results which meant the older tire was the best, with the Hankook the best of the new tires.
The Finnish winter specialist scores many points for its high level of grip on ice. It is also the best at handling slippery curves on both snow and ice without losing its course. A lightly oversteering rear end helps to rotate the car around corners. This makes the tire somewhat prone to skidding under pressure, but it remains easy to control at the grip limit.
Its willingness to turn continues on asphalt rounds. However, its wet grip lags behind the best, and the steering feel on dry roads is nonlinear in character.
Nokian is suitable for those looking for the best possible winter grip on snow and ice and who appreciate the joy of driving on curvy roads.
A high baseline performance with peak winter features results in an overall test victory.
The Michelin tire exhibits short braking distances on all types of surfaces, especially on ice. It also has a high level of initial grip on winter roads. Compared to the best, it has slightly lower cornering grip and slower steering responses. The balance is clearly understeering, which also results in a stable rear that rarely breaks into a skid.
On dry ground, Michelin impresses with a natural steering feel. A shallower tread depth than others and many small studs have previously resulted in low noise, but this time the road noise is on par with competitors.
A good mix of high winter grip and fine asphalt characteristics brings Michelin close to winning a gold medal. This tire is suitable for those looking for a calm and safe option with good everyday comfort.
The second generation of the UltraGrip Arctic has short braking distances on all types of surfaces.
Despite having class-leading wet grip and the shortest braking distances on dry roads, Goodyear manages to match Nokian and Michelin when it comes to stopping on ice and snow. The initial grip on winter roads is also impressive.
However, the lateral grip is not quite on par with the very best, and the tire also has vague steering precision, making it somewhat difficult to place under pressure. This applies to both winter and dry roads. Nevertheless, it doesnt cause any trouble and never puts the driver in a tight spot.
Goodyear is suitable for those who often drive on dry roads but want studs for the treacherous black ice that lurks in the shadows.
Last year, the F-Ice 1 was disqualified after losing its studs from the unusually soft rubber. Falken identified a production error and promised new tires to all customers who received products from the affected production period. Was it just an excuse, or is Falken's claim true?
Upon testing Falken's latest studded tire, we find that the studs are securely in place. The Japanese tire has the best winter grip, second only to the more expensive brands. It also has good grip on wet asphalt and resists hydroplaning better than any other.
The downside is a vague steering feel on dry roads and elevated noise levels.
Falken offers a slightly more affordable option with a good mix of wet grip and winter traction.
Continental has failed at the most important aspect for a studded tire: achieving grip on ice. The stopping distance on ice lags far behind other premium brands. Despite having the highest price, the tire's braking performance is on par with Goodride and is only marginally better than a used tire.
However, the IceContact 3 communicates well with the driver about where the grip limit is and remains controllable when traction is about to be lost. This safe and easy-to-control behavior is consistent across all surfaces.
Continental scores the most points in the asphalt categories with a nice driving feel, good stability during evasive maneuvers, and low noise. But with a high price and poor ice grip, it's difficult to recommend the tire to anyone, regardless of driving type.
The South Korean tire is one of the oldest in the group. In previous tests, Hankook had prioritized winter road conditions, but this time we find that wet grip has been improved since the last test. It stops better than any other tire on wet roads and handles hydroplaning well. However, Hankook lags behind in the ice rounds.
Under pressure, Hankook easily breaks into a skid with an erratic behavior that is consistent across all surfaces.
On dry roads, the steering feel is vague and also lacks straight-line stability. However, it rolls more easily than the new tires and has an acceptable noise level.
At the right price, this is a reasonable option for those who prioritize economy.
Chinese brand Goodride boasts that their latest studded tire is developed in Finland and features 200 studs per tire. The studding is also unusually well-executed for a tire in the budget segment.
However, Goodride performs worst of all the new tires on ice and is worse than the used tire in corners. One explanation is that the rubber compound is the hardest in the group. It is also the only tire with a speed rating of H for higher speeds.
On snow, it performs better, where the tread pattern provides good braking grip, but the cornering grip remains low.
From a harder winter tire, we would expect good performance on dry roads, but unfortunately, Goodride shows the worst wet grip in the test. This results in a modest overall point score, on par with the used tire.
How do eight-year-old tires with a reasonable tread depth hold up? A tire is said to improve on dry asphalt as it wears, something we can confirm. The used tire shows the lowest consumption and best stopping distance on dry roads. The rubber also performs reasonably well on wet roads with an acceptable braking distance and is not far behind in cornering grip.
Snow grip is also not far off from the new tires.
The major downside is a clear deterioration in ice grip. However, in icy corners, it communicates well with the driver about where the grip limit is and remains easy to handle under pressure. In fact, it holds up well compared to the budget tire even on ice.
Investing in quality pays off for many years to come.
