2025 AMS Winter Tire Test

Auto Motor und Sport has published their winter tire test for 2025, testing ten tires in the popular 215/55 R17 size. The test field included nine new winter tires spanning from premium to budget segments, plus one retreaded tire. Testing was conducted on an Audi Q2 and SQ2, with testing covering snow, wet, and dry conditions.

Test Publication:

215/55 R17 10 tires 5 categories

Similar Tests

Images courtesy of Auto Motor Und Sport

Test Publication:

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/verkehr/reifen/

Images courtesy of Auto Motor Und Sport

Test Size: 215/55 R17

Tires Tested: 10 tires

Test Categories:
5 categories (16 tests)

Similar Tests

EU Label Reliability Concerns

A critical focus of this test was examining EU tire label accuracy through rigorous follow-up testing with retail purchases. The Linglong Sport Master Winter exposed significant issues, carrying an optimistic A-rating for wet grip despite mid-pack actual performance. More concerning, retail samples performed over four percent worse in wet braking than the original test sample, with variations also found in samples under the previous "Grip Master Winter" name. The testers concluded that the Serbian manufacturing facility's process stability remains below European standards, and the self-certification system allows misleadingly optimistic claims without adequate oversight.

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 showed the opposite pattern - retail samples performed four percent better in wet braking than initial test samples, suggesting early production batches hadn't reached optimal specification.

Test Results

Continental's TS 870 P took victory with the shortest wet braking distances (31.2 meters) and outstanding wet handling. It delivered reliable snow performance and excellent dry braking, with only slightly firm ride comfort as a minor weakness. The testers praised its trustworthy behavior across all conditions.

Goodyear's UltraGrip Performance 3 finished second and earned the recommendation for snow-rich regions. It achieved perfect subjective scores for wet handling, dry comfort, and snow dynamics, with the best rolling comfort in test. While braking distances were marginally longer than the Continental, it offered exceptional balance and confidence-inspiring handling.

Michelin's Alpin 7 excelled on snow with short wet braking distances but showed sluggish, heavily understeering wet handling. The magazine noted Michelin's reputation for exceptional tread life adds long-term value despite the wet handling quirks.

The Hankook i*cept RS3 emerged as the value recommendation with the shortest snow braking distances (27.2 meters) and best aquaplaning protection. It offered precise, almost summer-tire-like dry characteristics, though it exhibited strong understeer on snow and nervous wet handling requiring driver skill.

Vredestein's Wintrac Pro+ showed strong wet and dry performance but weaker snow braking. Follow-up testing revealed significant wet handling improvements over initial samples, suggesting early production refinement issues.

Bridgestone's Blizzak 6 led the snow category with outstanding winter performance but disappointed on wet roads with understeer and lift-off oversteer tendencies. The retail sample improvements suggest the tire's potential exceeds initial test results.

Pirelli's Cinturato Winter 2 delivered good wet and dry performance but struggled across all snow disciplines with low grip levels and limited reserves.

Budget and Retreaded Tires

The Linglong Sport Master Winter demonstrated balanced performance on reduced grip levels, with weak snow capability and sluggish wet handling showing lift-off oversteer. Beyond the label and consistency issues, the testers suggested it was optimized specifically for label criteria while neglecting handling dynamics and manufacturing consistency.

Falken's Eurowinter HS02 showed particularly weak snow performance across nearly all disciplines, with sluggish wet handling and poor dry steering response. The magazine suggested it might have been better developed as an all-season tire.

The Profil Winter Maxx retreaded tire proved catastrophically dangerous despite good snow performance. Wet braking required 52.5 meters - over 21 meters longer than the Continental - earning zero points. The tire simply slid away in wet corners with no resistance and showed unpredictable dry handling, likely due to mixed carcass structures from different original tires. At 480 euros per set, it wasn't genuinely cheap compared to budget new tires and cannot be recommended.

Conclusions

The test revealed that EU tire labels remain unreliable guides, particularly for manufacturers with less established quality control. Retreaded winter tires cannot deliver safe all-around performance for year-round winter use. The Continental suits wet-focused German conditions, the Goodyear excels in snowier regions with superior comfort, and the Hankook delivers the best value despite handling quirks. Budget options showed that aggressive pricing typically involves significant compromises in handling safety and manufacturing consistency.

Dry

Continental leads dry braking with the shortest stopping distances, followed closely by Linglong and Goodyear, while the retreaded Profil requires nearly 15% more distance to stop - a significant safety concern that foreshadows its wet weather struggles.

Goodyear takes the top spot in dry handling speed, with most premium tires clustered within 2 km/h of each other, though the Profil again falls dramatically behind at over 9 km/h slower, demonstrating its fundamental grip deficiencies.

Wet

Continental maintains its braking dominance on wet surfaces with the shortest distances, while the performance gap widens dramatically - the Profil requires an alarming 21.3 meters more to stop than the leader, a difference that could prove life-threatening in emergency situations.

Goodyear edges ahead in wet handling, with Continental and Vredestein matching its pace, while the Profil's catastrophic wet performance continues with speeds over 13 km/h slower than the leaders, earning it zero points in the overall wet assessment.

Hankook leads aquaplaning resistance with the highest float speed, though the premium field remains tightly grouped within 7 km/h, while the Profil's poor showing at 16.9 km/h below the leader confirms its lack of water clearing capability.

Snow

The Hankook delivers the shortest snow stopping distances, with the premium field separated by just 2 meters, while even the struggling Profil manages respectable performance here - the only test category where the retreaded tire approaches competitive standards.

Goodyear leads snow handling dynamics with Bridgestone close behind, while the performance spread of 5.6 km/h from best to worst is relatively modest, confirming that winter-specific capability remains strong across the test field even for budget options.

Comfort

Goodyear achieves the best subjective comfort rating with excellent noise suppression and smooth rolling, while Continental, Linglong, Hankook, and Falken show slightly firmer characteristics over cross joints, and the Profil's booming, wummering abrollgeräusch (rolling noise) earns it the poorest comfort assessment in the test.

Goodyear produces the quietest external noise at 71.1 dB(A), with Continental and Profil matching closely behind, while the noisiest tire (Pirelli at 73.4 dB(A)) remains only 2.3 dB(A) louder - a difference barely perceptible to the human ear, showing modern tires have largely solved the noise issue.

Value

The Profil achieves the lowest rolling resistance, followed by Michelin and Continental sharing second place, while Hankook and Linglong show the highest resistance - though the 26% difference between best and worst translates to minimal real-world fuel consumption impact.

Results

1^st

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: B/B/71
• Origin: Frankreich
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 8.93 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 187.00

The Continental TS 870 P takes the overall test victory with reliable and secure performance across all conditions. On snow, it delivers a safe and predictable driving experience, while on wet roads it provides outstanding grip for the shortest braking distances and excellent cornering stability. The testers found it to be particularly trustworthy and secure across all winter conditions. On dry asphalt, it also achieves the best braking performance with flawless overall capability. Minor limitations were noted in rolling comfort, where it can feel somewhat harsh over cross joints, but this doesn't detract from its status as the top choice for those prioritizing wet grip and all-around winter safety.

Dry

99.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	43.6 M			100%
Dry Handling	6th	108.9 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1.6 Km/H	98.55%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

97.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	31.2 M			100%
Wet Handling	2nd	65.6 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-0.3 Km/H	99.54%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	10 Points			100%
Wet Circle	5th	2.69 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.26 m/s	91.19%
Straight Aqua	5th	77.4 Km/H	80 Km/H	-2.6 Km/H	96.75%
Curved Aquaplaning	1st	7.52 m/sec2			100%

Snow

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	6th	28.7 M	27.2 M	+1.5 M	94.77%
Snow Handling	5th	96.1 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-1.7 Km/H	98.26%
Subj. Snow Handling	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Snow Circle	7th	3.73 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.21 ms/2	94.67%

Comfort

84.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Noise	2nd	71.4 dB	71.1 dB	+0.3 dB	99.58%

Value

92.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	2nd	7 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+0.5 kg / t	92.86%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/C/71
• Origin: Polen
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 8.91 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 177.00

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 is the recommended choice for snow-rich regions, combining winter strength with excellent all-around capability. It demonstrates dynamic, neutral, and very confident cornering on both snow and wet asphalt, with very good aquaplaning protection. The tire is easily controllable in dry conditions with ample reserves and offers the best rolling comfort in the test. Testers praised its stable handling characteristics and excellent noise suppression. The only marginal deficits noted were slightly longer braking distances on snow and wet surfaces compared to the very best, but overall it delivers a remarkably balanced and confidence-inspiring winter driving experience with outstanding comfort levels.

Dry

99.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	44.6 M	43.6 M	+1 M	97.76%
Dry Handling	1st	110.5 Km/H			100%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

98.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	32.8 M	31.2 M	+1.6 M	95.12%
Wet Handling	1st	65.9 Km/H			100%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	10 Points			100%
Wet Circle	2nd	2.91 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.04 m/s	98.64%
Straight Aqua	2nd	78.5 Km/H	80 Km/H	-1.5 Km/H	98.13%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	7.47 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.05 m/sec2	99.34%

Snow

98.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	3rd	28.1 M	27.2 M	+0.9 M	96.8%
Snow Handling	1st	97.8 Km/H			100%
Subj. Snow Handling	1st	10 Points			100%
Snow Circle	2nd	3.9 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.04 ms/2	98.98%

Comfort

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	10 Points			100%
Noise	1st	71.1 dB			100%

Value

84.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	4th	7.7 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.2 kg / t	84.42%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Michelin Alpin 7

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• Origin: Italien
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.61 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 190.00

The Michelin Alpin 7 provides secure and dynamic snow performance with good safety reserves in corners and short braking distances on wet roads. The tire delivers a balanced performance on dry asphalt as well. However, testers noted sluggish and heavily understeering behavior on wet surfaces, which doesn't inspire much confidence, and it showed some aquaplaning sensitivity. On snow, while generally good, the handling requires an experienced driver due to its characteristics. The tire can feel somewhat harsh over cross joints, affecting comfort. From experience, Michelin tires are known for particularly good durability and longevity, which adds value despite the handling quirks on wet roads.

Dry

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	8th	45.7 M	43.6 M	+2.1 M	95.4%
Dry Handling	5th	109 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1.5 Km/H	98.64%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

91.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	31.4 M	31.2 M	+0.2 M	99.36%
Wet Handling	5th	64.7 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.18%
Subj. Wet Handling	5th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Wet Circle	9th	2.33 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.62 m/s	78.98%
Straight Aqua	9th	73.5 Km/H	80 Km/H	-6.5 Km/H	91.88%
Curved Aquaplaning	5th	7.43 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.09 m/sec2	98.8%

Snow

93.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	5th	28.4 M	27.2 M	+1.2 M	95.77%
Snow Handling	4th	96.5 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.67%
Subj. Snow Handling	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Snow Circle	1st	3.94 ms/2			100%

Comfort

89.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Noise	4th	71.5 dB	71.1 dB	+0.4 dB	99.44%

Value

92.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	2nd	7 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+0.5 kg / t	92.86%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Hankook Winter I cept RS3

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/72
• Origin: Ungarn
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 10.02 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 131.00

The Hankook i*cept RS3 delivers the shortest braking distances on snow and provides confident cornering on wet surfaces with the best aquaplaning protection in the test. It offers very precise, almost summer-tire-like driving characteristics with pronounced reserves in dry corners. However, the tire exhibits strong and confidence-reducing understeer on snow, and can be nervous and sensitive to load changes on wet surfaces. In dry conditions, while the reserves are excellent, braking distances are somewhat longer than the leaders. The tire can also feel harsh over cross joints. Despite these handling quirks, it represents good value and delivers secure all-around performance, making it a solid choice for those seeking the most performance for their money.

Dry

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	7th	45.6 M	43.6 M	+2 M	95.61%
Dry Handling	7th	108.8 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1.7 Km/H	98.46%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

95.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	32.6 M	31.2 M	+1.4 M	95.71%
Wet Handling	4th	65 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-0.9 Km/H	98.63%
Subj. Wet Handling	5th	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Wet Circle	1st	2.95 m/s			100%
Straight Aqua	1st	80 Km/H			100%
Curved Aquaplaning	2nd	7.5 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.02 m/sec2	99.73%

Snow

90.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	1st	27.2 M			100%
Snow Handling	6th	95.4 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-2.4 Km/H	97.55%
Subj. Snow Handling	7th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Snow Circle	6th	3.74 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.2 ms/2	94.92%

Comfort

84.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Noise	6th	72.1 dB	71.1 dB	+1 dB	98.61%

Value

79.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	9th	8.2 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.7 kg / t	79.27%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

5^th

Vredestein Wintrac Pro plus

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• Origin: Ungarn
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.76 kgs
• Tread: 8.4 mm
• Price: 145.00

The Vredestein Wintrac Pro+ offers very decent winter performance with the exception of somewhat weaker braking on snow. It stands out particularly for its dynamic and reliable wet handling (ranked second-best on wet surfaces overall) and provides steering-responsive, dynamic performance in dry corners. The tire is always safely controllable in dry conditions and offers good comfort. However, the unbalanced and not very stable wet handling, combined with somewhat longer wet braking distances, are notable weaknesses that emerged in the main test but showed significant improvement in follow-up testing. On snow, while generally competent, the braking performance falls slightly behind. Overall, it represents a good value option with strong wet and dry traction capabilities for those in less snow-heavy regions.

Dry

97.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	46.4 M	43.6 M	+2.8 M	93.97%
Dry Handling	9th	107.8 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-2.7 Km/H	97.56%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

98.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	31.9 M	31.2 M	+0.7 M	97.81%
Wet Handling	2nd	65.6 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-0.3 Km/H	99.54%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	10 Points			100%
Wet Circle	3rd	2.81 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.14 m/s	95.25%
Straight Aqua	3rd	78.3 Km/H	80 Km/H	-1.7 Km/H	97.88%
Curved Aquaplaning	6th	7.42 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.1 m/sec2	98.67%

Snow

90.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	9th	29.6 M	27.2 M	+2.4 M	91.89%
Snow Handling	9th	93.7 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-4.1 Km/H	95.81%
Subj. Snow Handling	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Snow Circle	7th	3.73 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.21 ms/2	94.67%

Comfort

93.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	9 Points	10 Points	-1 Points	90%
Noise	7th	72.9 dB	71.1 dB	+1.8 dB	97.53%

Value

81.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	7th	8 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.5 kg / t	81.25%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Bridgestone Blizzak 6

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/70
• Origin: Polen
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.65 kgs
• Tread: 8.1 mm
• Price: 169.00

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 excels on snow and dry roads but lacks the necessary grip on wet surfaces. It demonstrates outstanding performance on snow with a balanced overall capability, leading the snow category. On dry asphalt, it provides secure braking and easily controllable driving behavior with pronounced reserves. However, testers found all snow disciplines delivered comparatively lower grip levels overall. The tire's main weakness is on wet roads where it tends toward understeer with strong front-axle grip and shows a tendency for lift-off oversteer, though it does brake and handle aquaplaning situations well. The unbalanced and somewhat less stable wet handling holds it back from a higher ranking despite its winter and dry road strengths.

Dry

94.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	45 M	43.6 M	+1.4 M	96.89%
Dry Handling	4th	109.3 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1.2 Km/H	98.91%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	9 Points	-1 Points	88.89%

Wet

90.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	9th	33.3 M	31.2 M	+2.1 M	93.69%
Wet Handling	8th	63.6 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-2.3 Km/H	96.51%
Subj. Wet Handling	7th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Wet Circle	7th	2.63 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.32 m/s	89.15%
Straight Aqua	7th	75.3 Km/H	80 Km/H	-4.7 Km/H	94.13%
Curved Aquaplaning	6th	7.42 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.1 m/sec2	98.67%

Snow

96%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	4th	28.3 M	27.2 M	+1.1 M	96.11%
Snow Handling	2nd	96.8 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-1 Km/H	98.98%
Subj. Snow Handling	2nd	9 Points	10 Points	-1 Points	90%
Snow Circle	3rd	3.89 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.05 ms/2	98.73%

Comfort

88.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Noise	7th	72.9 dB	71.1 dB	+1.8 dB	97.53%

Value

84.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	4th	7.7 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.2 kg / t	84.42%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• Origin: Rumänien
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.61 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 181.00

The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 is generally reliable but struggles somewhat on snow-covered roads. It provides strong grip in wet corners and good braking with safe aquaplaning behavior. In dry conditions, it offers secure braking and easily controllable handling with pronounced reserves, though it can be somewhat unbalanced with less stable wet handling. On snow, the tire has particular difficulty across all disciplines with comparatively low grip levels and limited reserves. Testers noted rough rolling characteristics and profile noise during cornering. The tire's wet performance is solid, but the noticeable weakness in snow capability means it's better suited for regions with milder winters and primarily wet, cold conditions rather than heavy snowfall.

Dry

98.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	45.5 M	43.6 M	+1.9 M	95.82%
Dry Handling	3rd	109.5 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1 Km/H	99.1%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	9 Points			100%

Wet

95.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	32.9 M	31.2 M	+1.7 M	94.83%
Wet Handling	6th	64.6 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.03%
Subj. Wet Handling	4th	9 Points	10 Points	-1 Points	90%
Wet Circle	4th	2.78 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.17 m/s	94.24%
Straight Aqua	4th	78.2 Km/H	80 Km/H	-1.8 Km/H	97.75%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	7.47 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.05 m/sec2	99.34%

Snow

88.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	7th	29.1 M	27.2 M	+1.9 M	93.47%
Snow Handling	8th	93.8 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-4 Km/H	95.91%
Subj. Snow Handling	7th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Snow Circle	9th	3.69 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.25 ms/2	93.65%

Comfort

83.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Noise	10th	73.4 dB	71.1 dB	+2.3 dB	96.87%

Value

80.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	8th	8.1 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.6 kg / t	80.25%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

8^th

Linglong Sport Master Winter

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: D/A/72
• Origin: Serbien
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9.52 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 80.00

The Linglong Sport Master Winter delivers balanced performance on reduced grip levels overall, but has pronounced weaknesses that limit its appeal. It provides decent braking on both wet and dry asphalt with good aquaplaning protection, and shows sluggish but easily controllable handling on dry roads. However, on snow it demonstrates weak performance across all disciplines except cornering grip. On wet surfaces, the tire exhibits sluggish steering with limited reserves and a tendency toward lift-off oversteer, which is concerning. In dry conditions, while cornering stability is weak, it maintains some basic competence. The tire feels somewhat harsh over cross joints. Most critically, the EU label's optimistic A-rating for wet grip proved misleading - the actual performance doesn't match this claim, and process stability in the Serbian manufacturing facility appears questionable based on follow-up testing showing significant variation between production batches.

Dry

95.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	44.5 M	43.6 M	+0.9 M	97.98%
Dry Handling	2nd	109.6 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-0.9 Km/H	99.19%
Subj. Dry Handling	7th	8 Points	9 Points	-1 Points	88.89%

Wet

87.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	32.2 M	31.2 M	+1 M	96.89%
Wet Handling	7th	63.7 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-2.2 Km/H	96.66%
Subj. Wet Handling	8th	6 Points	10 Points	-4 Points	60%
Wet Circle	8th	2.5 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.45 m/s	84.75%
Straight Aqua	8th	73.6 Km/H	80 Km/H	-6.4 Km/H	92%
Curved Aquaplaning	9th	7.27 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.25 m/sec2	96.68%

Snow

86%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	8th	29.4 M	27.2 M	+2.2 M	92.52%
Snow Handling	7th	94 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-3.8 Km/H	96.11%
Subj. Snow Handling	10th	6 Points	10 Points	-4 Points	60%
Snow Circle	5th	3.76 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.18 ms/2	95.43%

Comfort

83.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Noise	9th	73.1 dB	71.1 dB	+2 dB	97.26%

Value

79.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	9th	8.2 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.7 kg / t	79.27%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

9^th

Falken EUROWINTER HS02

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: C/B/70
• Origin: Türkei
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 10.2 kgs
• Tread: 8.2 mm
• Price: 132.00

The Falken Eurowinter HS02 rolls somewhat past its target with weak winter performance despite reasonable pricing. While it provides decent braking on wet and dry asphalt, the tire's snow capability is its major shortcoming. On snow, it delivers weak performance across nearly all disciplines with low reserves, making it unsuitable for snow-rich regions. The wet handling is sluggish with limited reserves and concerning lift-off oversteer tendencies. In dry conditions, while grip levels and reserves are adequate, the steering response is poor and it can feel harsh over cross joints. The tire also produces noticeable interior noise from both rolling and lateral scrubbing during cornering. Overall, it represents a compromised package that might have been better developed as an all-season tire rather than a dedicated winter tire.

Dry

90.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	45.2 M	43.6 M	+1.6 M	96.46%
Dry Handling	8th	108.6 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-1.9 Km/H	98.28%
Subj. Dry Handling	9th	7 Points	9 Points	-2 Points	77.78%

Wet

88.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	8th	33.2 M	31.2 M	+2 M	93.98%
Wet Handling	9th	62.5 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-3.4 Km/H	94.84%
Subj. Wet Handling	8th	6 Points	10 Points	-4 Points	60%
Wet Circle	6th	2.66 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.29 m/s	90.17%
Straight Aqua	6th	76.2 Km/H	80 Km/H	-3.8 Km/H	95.25%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	7.32 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	97.34%

Snow

85.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	10th	30.8 M	27.2 M	+3.6 M	88.31%
Snow Handling	10th	92.2 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-5.6 Km/H	94.27%
Subj. Snow Handling	7th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Snow Circle	10th	3.54 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.4 ms/2	89.85%

Comfort

84.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	7 Points	10 Points	-3 Points	70%
Noise	5th	72 dB	71.1 dB	+0.9 dB	98.75%

Value

82.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	6th	7.9 kg / t	6.5 kg / t	+1.4 kg / t	82.28%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

10^th

Profil Winter Maxx

215/55 R17 94H

• Origin: 9.86
• 3PMSF: no
• Weight: 9..86 kgs
• Tread: 8.5 mm
• Price: 120.00

The Profil Winter Maxx is a retreaded tire that can handle snow but is otherwise dangerous and unacceptable. On snow, it surprisingly delivers good performance - this is the only surface where it shows competence. However, on wet roads it's a catastrophe with non-existent grip: braking distances over 20 meters longer than average are simply dangerous, it slides away in corners with no resistance, offers no aquaplaning protection, and exhibits unpredictable handling. On dry asphalt, it also fails completely with poor braking, sliding in corners, booming rolling noise, and no definable driving behavior. The testers noted uneven side-to-side turn-in response and difficult-to-calculate self-steering characteristics, likely due to the use of different carcass structures in the retreading process. Despite being inexpensive and having the lowest rolling resistance, this tire received zero points for wet braking and an overall failing grade - it simply cannot be recommended under any circumstances except perhaps for dedicated snow-only use.

Dry

66.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	10th	50.1 M	43.6 M	+6.5 M	87.03%
Dry Handling	10th	101 Km/H	110.5 Km/H	-9.5 Km/H	91.4%
Subj. Dry Handling	10th	2 Points	9 Points	-7 Points	22.22%

Wet

64.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	10th	52.5 M	31.2 M	+21.3 M	59.43%
Wet Handling	10th	52.1 Km/H	65.9 Km/H	-13.8 Km/H	79.06%
Subj. Wet Handling	10th	2 Points	10 Points	-8 Points	20%
Wet Circle	10th	2.08 m/s	2.95 m/s	-0.87 m/s	70.51%
Straight Aqua	10th	63.1 Km/H	80 Km/H	-16.9 Km/H	78.88%
Curved Aquaplaning	10th	5.79 m/sec2	7.52 m/sec2	-1.73 m/sec2	76.99%

Snow

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Snow Braking	2nd	27.7 M	27.2 M	+0.5 M	98.19%
Snow Handling	3rd	96.7 Km/H	97.8 Km/H	-1.1 Km/H	98.88%
Subj. Snow Handling	3rd	8 Points	10 Points	-2 Points	80%
Snow Circle	4th	3.85 ms/2	3.94 ms/2	-0.09 ms/2	97.72%

Comfort

69.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	10th	4 Points	10 Points	-6 Points	40%
Noise	2nd	71.4 dB	71.1 dB	+0.3 dB	99.58%

Value

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	1st	6.5 kg / t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts