In this test, we selected 6 of the best ultra-high-performance winter tires, and compared them against all-season and summer tires to reveal their true capabilities. We evaluated their performance in dry, wet, snow, and ice conditions, along with comfort, noise, and rolling resistance. The results were remarkably close, and the data from the all season and summer tires is really interesting.

The BEST Performance Winter Tyres for 2024 / 2025

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 · 72–77 °F
Wet Braking: 49.7 → 3.1 mph · 75–84 °F
Wet Braking - Cool: 49.7 → 3.1 mph · 45–48 °F
Wet Handling: 68–73 °F
Snow Braking: 24.9 → 3.1 mph · 19–23 °F
Snow Traction: 3.1 → 21.7 mph · 19–23 °F
Snow Handling: 19–23 °F
Ice Braking: 15.5 → 3.1 mph
Ice Traction: 3.1 → 15.5 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	50%	10%
Dry Handling	40%	8%
Subj. Dry Handling	10%	2%
Wet · 30%
Wet Braking	20%	6%
Wet Braking - Cool	20%	6%
Wet Handling	30%	9%
Subj. Wet Handling	10%	3%
Straight Aqua	15%	4.5%
Curved Aquaplaning	5%	1.5%
Snow · 30%
Snow Braking	35%	10.5%
Snow Traction	20%	6%
Snow Handling	30%	9%
Subj. Snow Handling	15%	4.5%
Ice · 5%
Ice Braking	60%	3%
Ice Traction	40%	2%
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 Braking - Cool

This test follows the same procedure as the standard wet braking test — entry speed of 88 km/h, full ABS braking, VBOX measurement over the 80–5 km/h window — but is conducted at cooler ambient temperatures, typically below 7°C. The lower temperature allows assessment of how each tire's compound performs when cold, which is particularly relevant for all-season and winter tire evaluation. Reference tires are run at the same frequency as the standard wet braking programme.

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.

Ice Braking

For ice braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 35 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a prepared ice surface. Surface temperature is continuously monitored as ice friction properties vary substantially with temperature. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set but with ice testing, you often do many more. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing surface conditions.

Ice Traction

For ice traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared ice 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. 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 ice twice. Surface temperature is continuously monitored. I complete multiple runs per tire set and average the valid results, with reference tires run typically every two candidate test sets.

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

I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.

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.

Read our complete testing methodology →

Snow

Snow performance is crucial for winter tires, and this test saw a surprise victor. The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 outperformed the traditionally dominant Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 across all snow tests, including braking, traction, and handling. Both tires offered exceptional snow performance, with the Pirelli showing a slight edge in grip and overall handling characteristics.

The Hankook Winter I*Cept Evo3 performed well in snow handling and snow braking, but was a little down in snow traction.

Naturally the summer tire struggled, and the unusually strong performance of an all season tire in the snow test is thanks to the Michelin CrossClimate 2 being the best in class.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	57 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	58 ft	+1 ft	7 mph
RefReference All Season	59 ft	+2 ft	15 mph
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3	60 ft	+3 ft	16 mph
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	60 ft	+3 ft	17 mph
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	60 ft	+3 ft	17 mph
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	60 ft	+3 ft	18 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	62 ft	+5 ft	23 mph
RefReference Summer	145 ft	+88 ft	62 mph

The difference between best and worst was 152.9% (88 ft ≈ 5.9 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507 would still be travelling at 18 mph when the Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	5.16 s	Best
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	5.18 s	+0.02 s
RefReference All Season	5.31 s	+0.15 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	5.37 s	+0.21 s
4Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	5.42 s	+0.26 s
5Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	5.53 s	+0.37 s
RefReference All Season Avg	5.58 s	+0.42 s
6Hankook Winter i cept evo3	5.63 s	+0.47 s
RefReference Summer	29.97 s	+24.81 s

The difference between best and worst was 480.8% (24.81 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	78.28 s	Best
2Hankook Winter i cept evo3	79.07 s	+0.79 s
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	79.28 s	+1.00 s
RefReference All Season	79.65 s	+1.37 s
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	80.05 s	+1.77 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	80.25 s	+1.97 s
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	81.53 s	+3.25 s
RefReference All Season Avg	83 s	+4.72 s
RefReference Summer	143.3 s	+65.02 s

The difference between best and worst was 83.1% (65.02 s).

Ice

On ice, the Michelin, Pirelli, and Hankook demonstrated strong performance in both braking and traction tests. The Goodyear and Continental showed some weakness in these challenging conditions, highlighting the diverse demands placed on winter tires.

The all season tire you see topping the results was the budget all season tire, which almost certainly had a soft winter compound not suitable for all seasons.

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference All Season	30 ft	-1 ft	0 mph
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	31 ft	Best	0 mph
2Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	31 ft	0 ft	6 mph
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3	31 ft	0 ft	9 mph
4Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	32 ft	+1 ft	17 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	34 ft	+3 ft	24 mph
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	36 ft	+5 ft	31 mph
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	37 ft	+6 ft	31 mph
RefReference Summer	106 ft	+75 ft	67 mph

The difference between best and worst was 256.5% (76 ft ≈ 5.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 P would still be travelling at 31 mph when the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Ice Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference All Season	4.5 s	0.00 s
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	4.5 s	Best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	4.5 s	Best
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3	4.63 s	+0.13 s
4Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	4.82 s	+0.32 s
RefReference All Season Avg	4.95 s	+0.45 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	5.14 s	+0.64 s
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	5.32 s	+0.82 s
RefReference Summer	17.55 s	+13.05 s

The difference between best and worst was 290% (13.05 s).

Wet

Wet braking tests, conducted at both warm and cool temperatures, saw the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 shine, offering the shortest stopping distances. The Michelin and Pirelli also performed strongly, while the Hankook and Continental lagged slightly behind. The budget tire significantly underperformed in this crucial safety test.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference Summer	78 ft	-22 ft	0 mph
RefReference All Season	82 ft	-18 ft	0 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	92 ft	-8 ft	0 mph
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	100 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	100 ft	0 ft	6 mph
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	101 ft	+1 ft	8 mph
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	102 ft	+2 ft	11 mph
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3	103 ft	+3 ft	13 mph
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	114 ft	+14 ft	28 mph

The difference between best and worst was 45.6% (36 ft ≈ 2.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507 would still be travelling at 28 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Braking - Cool
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference All Season	82 ft	-9 ft	0 mph
RefReference Summer	86 ft	-5 ft	0 mph
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	91 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	91 ft	0 ft	8 mph
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	92 ft	+1 ft	9 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	92 ft	+1 ft	9 mph
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	94 ft	+3 ft	16 mph
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3	95 ft	+4 ft	17 mph
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	106 ft	+15 ft	31 mph

The difference between best and worst was 29.1% (24 ft ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507 would still be travelling at 31 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

In wet handling, the Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 narrowly edged out the competition, with the Michelin and Goodyear following closely. All three offered excellent grip and predictability. The Hankook and Continental, while still good, couldn't quite match the top performers' level of sporty dynamics in wet conditions.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Summer	103.02 s	-4.33 s
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	107.35 s	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	107.94 s	+0.59 s
RefReference All Season	107.96 s	+0.61 s
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	108.88 s	+1.53 s
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	109.92 s	+2.57 s
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3	110.83 s	+3.48 s
RefReference All Season Avg	112.59 s	+5.24 s
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	117.52 s	+10.17 s

The difference between best and worst was 14.1% (14.5 s).

Aquaplaning resistance tests revealed the Hankook's strength in straight-line aquaplaning, while the Pirelli showed the best overall performance when combining straight and curved aquaplaning results. This highlights the importance of tread design in managing deep water evacuation.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference All Season	49.2 mph	+3.8 mph
RefReference Summer	47.5 mph	+2.1 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	47.2 mph	+1.8 mph
1Hankook Winter i cept evo3	45.4 mph	Best
2Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	45.2 mph	-0.2 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	44.7 mph	-0.7 mph
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	44.7 mph	-0.7 mph
5Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	44.5 mph	-0.9 mph
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	42.4 mph	-3.0 mph

The difference between best and worst was 13.7% (6.8 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Summer	8.3 ft/s²	+1.0 ft/s²
RefReference All Season Avg	7.6 ft/s²	+0.3 ft/s²
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	7.3 ft/s²	Best
2Hankook Winter i cept evo3	7.1 ft/s²	-0.2 ft/s²
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	7.0 ft/s²	-0.3 ft/s²
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	6.9 ft/s²	-0.4 ft/s²
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	6.8 ft/s²	-0.5 ft/s²
RefReference All Season	6.3 ft/s²	-1.0 ft/s²
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	5.7 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 31.1% (2.6 ft/s²).

Dry

In dry braking, all winter tires performed well, with results within 3% of each other. The Hankook Winter i cept evo3 led the pack, showcasing the impressive capabilities of modern winter tires in dry conditions. However, it's worth noting that even the best winter tires struggled to match the average performance of the all-season tires in this test, and were way behind the summer tire.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
RefReference Summer	113 ft	-19 ft	0 mph
RefReference All Season	121 ft	-11 ft	0 mph
RefReference All Season Avg	128 ft	-4 ft	0 mph
1Hankook Winter i cept evo3	132 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	132 ft	0 ft	5 mph
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	133 ft	+1 ft	6 mph
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	134 ft	+2 ft	10 mph
5Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	135 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	136 ft	+4 ft	14 mph

The difference between best and worst was 20.5% (23 ft ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507 would still be travelling at 14 mph when the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry handling revealed some interesting insights. While the budget tire surprisingly performed better than expected, the premium tires showed their worth. The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2, Michelin Pilot Alpin 5, and Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 were virtually indistinguishable in terms of lap times and offered excellent driving dynamics. However, all winter tires were outperformed by the summer tire reference, which was about 6 seconds faster per lap and sigifincatly more sporty subjectively.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
RefReference Summer	84.3 s	-2.72 s
RefReference All Season	84.96 s	-2.06 s
RefReference All Season Avg	86.76 s	-0.26 s
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	87.02 s	Best
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	87.31 s	+0.29 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	87.79 s	+0.77 s
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	88.19 s	+1.17 s
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3	88.64 s	+1.62 s
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	90.46 s	+3.44 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (6.16 s).

Comfort

Comfort and noise tests revealed minor differences among the premium tires, with the Continental offering a slight edge in comfort. The Pirelli produced the lowest external noise, closely followed by the Michelin and Continental. It's worth noting that as ultra high performance winter tires in 19-inch sizes, comfort differences were minimal among the premium options.

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	10 Points	Best
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3	9 Points	-1.00 Points
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	9 Points	-1.00 Points
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	9 Points	-1.00 Points
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	7 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 30% (3 Points).

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	71.4 dB	Best
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	71.6 dB	+0.20 dB
RefReference All Season	72 dB	+0.60 dB
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	72.3 dB	+0.90 dB
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	72.5 dB	+1.10 dB
RefReference All Season Avg	72.7 dB	+1.30 dB
RefReference Summer	73.3 dB	+1.90 dB
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3	73.5 dB	+2.10 dB
6Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	75 dB	+3.60 dB

The difference between best and worst was 5% (3.6 dB).

Value

Rolling resistance results were remarkably close, with all six tires spread across just a 3.8% range. While the budget tire showed the lowest rolling resistance, its poor performance in other crucial areas makes it difficult to recommend based on this factor alone.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
RefReference All Season	7.76 kg/t	-0.89 kg/t	$0
RefReference All Season Avg	8.55 kg/t	-0.10 kg/t	$0
1Goodride ZuperSnow Z507	8.65 kg/t	Best	$0
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	8.67 kg/t	+0.02 kg/t	$1
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	8.69 kg/t	+0.04 kg/t	$1
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	8.71 kg/t	+0.06 kg/t	$2
5Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	8.95 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t	$10
6Hankook Winter i cept evo3	8.98 kg/t	+0.33 kg/t	$11
RefReference Summer	9.9 kg/t	+1.25 kg/t	$42

The difference between best and worst was 27.6% (2.14 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 uses about 3 gal ($11) more fuel than the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

Gas/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

12,000 mi

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

$3.60/gal

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tire age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Results

The BEST Performance Winter Tires for 2024 / 2025Watch the full video of this test on YouTube Watch on YouTube

Test Winner — Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 — 2024

Despite being one of the oldest tire in the test, the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 demonstrated why it has long been considered the benchmark in this category. It offered excellent all-round performance, with particularly strong showings in dry handling and comfort. The tire provided a well-balanced and predictable driving experience across all conditions. While it was slightly outperformed by the Pirelli in snow tests, the differences were minimal. The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 remains a top choice for drivers wanting a proven, well-rounded winter tire.

Dry99.7%

Wet98.2%

Snow99.3%

Ice100%

Comfort97.4%

Rolling Resistance99.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	2^nd / 6	132 ft	0 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 6	87.31 s	+0.29 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 6	100 ft	0 ft
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	2^nd / 6	91 ft	0 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 6	108.88 s	+1.53 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 6	44.5 mph	-0.9 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 6	7.0 ft/s²	-0.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 6	58 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	2^nd / 6	5.18 s	+0.02 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 6	79.28 s	+1.00 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better	1^st / 6	31 ft	Best in this discipline
Ice TractionLower is better	1^st / 6	4.5 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	2^nd / 6	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 6	71.6 dB	+0.20 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 6	8.71 kg/t	+0.06 kg/t

EU Label: D/B/70
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 7.2 mm
Price: 245.74

Test Winner — Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 — 2024

The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 emerged as a top performer, tying for first place with the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5. It excelled in snow performance, winning all snow tests, and showed strong results in wet and dry handling. The tire offered excellent grip and predictability across various conditions. Its only minor drawback was a slightly higher rolling resistance compared to some competitors. Overall, the Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 proves to be an excellent choice for drivers seeking top-tier performance in winter conditions.

Dry99.2%

Wet99.3%

Snow100%

Ice99.7%

Comfort95%

Rolling Resistance96.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	3^rd / 6	133 ft	+1 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 6	87.02 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 6	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 6	101 ft	+1 ft
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	3^rd / 6	92 ft	+1 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 6	107.35 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 6	44.7 mph	-0.7 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 6	7.3 ft/s²	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 6	57 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better	1^st / 6	5.16 s	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	1^st / 6	78.28 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 6	31 ft	0 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	1^st / 6	4.5 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 6	71.4 dB	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	5^th / 6	8.95 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t

EU Label: C/A/70
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 7.5 mm
Price: 208.12

Highly Recommended — Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 — 2024

Securing a solid third place, the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 distinguished itself as the wet grip specialist. It offered the best braking performance in wet conditions at both tested temperatures and excelled in wet handling. The tire also demonstrated good dry performance and had low rolling resistance. Its main weakness was slightly reduced performance on ice compared to the top two contenders. The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 is an excellent choice for regions with predominantly wet winter conditions.

Dry97.8%

Wet99.2%

Snow96.1%

Ice86.2%

Comfort94.2%

Rolling Resistance99.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	4^th / 6	134 ft	+2 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 6	87.79 s	+0.77 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 6	100 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	1^st / 6	91 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 6	107.94 s	+0.59 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 6	44.7 mph	-0.7 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	5^th / 6	6.8 ft/s²	-0.5 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 6	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	3^rd / 6	5.37 s	+0.21 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 6	80.25 s	+1.97 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
Ice BrakingLower is better	5^th / 6	36 ft	+5 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	5^th / 6	5.14 s	+0.64 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 6	72.5 dB	+1.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 6	8.67 kg/t	+0.02 kg/t

EU Label: C/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 7.6 mm
Price: 227.39

Recommended — Hankook Winter i cept evo3 — 2024

The Hankook Winter i cept evo3 showed some strong points, particularly in dry braking where it led the pack, and in aquaplaning resistance. It also performed well on ice. However, it struggled in snow traction, finishing last among the premium tires in this crucial winter performance aspect. Subjectively, it received positive feedback for its predictable and linear steering feel. While not matching the top performers' overall balance, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 still offers good performance in many areas.

Dry97.8%

Wet96%

Snow95.8%

Ice98.2%

Comfort93.6%

Rolling Resistance96.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	1^st / 6	132 ft	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	5^th / 6	88.64 s	+1.62 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 6	8.5 Points	-1.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 6	103 ft	+3 ft
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	5^th / 6	95 ft	+4 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 6	110.83 s	+3.48 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 6	8.5 Points	-1.50 Points
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 6	45.4 mph	Best in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 6	7.1 ft/s²	-0.2 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 6	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	6^th / 6	5.63 s	+0.47 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 6	79.07 s	+0.79 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9.5 Points	-0.50 Points
Ice BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 6	31 ft	0 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	3^rd / 6	4.63 s	+0.13 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 6	73.5 dB	+2.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 6	8.98 kg/t	+0.33 kg/t

EU Label: D/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 8.2 mm
Price: 153.17

Recommended — Continental WinterContact TS 870 P — 2024

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P stood out for its consistency across most tests, often finishing in fourth place. It offered the best comfort among all tested tires and performed well in deep water aquaplaning tests. The tire also boasted low rolling resistance. However, it showed some weakness on ice and couldn't quite match the top performers in most categories. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P is a solid, comfortable choice that performs consistently across a range of conditions.

Dry96.3%

Wet96.8%

Snow95%

Ice84.8%

Comfort99.4%

Rolling Resistance99.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	5^th / 6	135 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 6	88.19 s	+1.17 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 6	8 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 6	102 ft	+2 ft
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	4^th / 6	94 ft	+3 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 6	109.92 s	+2.57 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 6	45.2 mph	-0.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	4^th / 6	6.9 ft/s²	-0.4 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 6	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	5^th / 6	5.53 s	+0.37 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	4^th / 6	80.05 s	+1.77 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
Ice BrakingLower is better	6^th / 6	37 ft	+6 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	6^th / 6	5.32 s	+0.82 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 6	10 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 6	72.3 dB	+0.90 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 6	8.69 kg/t	+0.04 kg/t

EU Label: C/B/71
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 8.2 mm
Price: 230.05

As the budget option in the test, the Goodride ZuperSnow Z507 predictably lagged behind the premium offerings in most tests. It significantly underperformed in crucial areas such as wet braking and aquaplaning resistance. However, it wasn't without merits - it offered the best rolling resistance among all tested tires and performed better than expected in dry conditions. Despite these positives, its overall performance and less refined subjective feel make it difficult to recommend over the premium options for those prioritising safety and performance in winter conditions.

Dry91%

Wet85.9%

Snow94.6%

Ice94.7%

Comfort82.6%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (18)

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	6^th / 6	136 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 6	90.46 s	+3.44 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 6	4 Points	-6.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 6	114 ft	+14 ft
Wet Braking - CoolLower is better	6^th / 6	106 ft	+15 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	6^th / 6	117.52 s	+10.17 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 6	6 Points	-4.00 Points
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 6	42.4 mph	-3.0 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	6^th / 6	5.7 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	6^th / 6	60 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	4^th / 6	5.42 s	+0.26 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	6^th / 6	81.53 s	+3.25 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 6	9 Points	-1.00 Points
Ice BrakingLower is better	4^th / 6	32 ft	+1 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	4^th / 6	4.82 s	+0.32 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 6	7 Points	-3.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 6	75 dB	+3.60 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 6	8.65 kg/t	Best in this discipline

EU Label: C/C/72
3PMSF: Yes
Tread: 7.5 mm
Price: 62.85

Discussion

46 comments

Dr Towers Jan 23, 2025 archived

Fascinating and interesting how much better the summer tire is in those niche areas...would love to know which summer tire was used out of interest, suspect a Conti?

#9925
IcyTexx Dec 2, 2024 archived

I haven’t seen any coverage of Continental WinterContact 8 S yet.
Would it be a better choice than Michelin PA5 in wider sizes - 255 and 275/35R19?

#9857
1. TireReviews IcyTexx Dec 2, 2024 archived
  
  The S range are intended for OE, we need to wait for the 8P sadly
  
  #9858
  1. IcyTexx TireReviews Dec 2, 2024 archived
    
    Hmmm, interesting. Because i see it available for purchase already, without any special OE markings.
    Meanwhile, I’m struggling to find aftermarket non OE marked PA5 in those two sizes.
    
    #9862
    1. TireReviews IcyTexx Dec 3, 2024 archived
      
      I have asked Continental and they said there will be no non-OE marked 8S made, so it seems like it would be a retailer listing error. Maybe have them double check.
      
      #9863
      1. IcyTexx TireReviews Dec 3, 2024 archived
        
        I'm looking at the official Continental page (for Germany) as well as different retailers. Looks to me it's the opposite of being OE-only. Not sure what's happening. I'm kind of willing to go for it, to try them instead of Michelin PA5. I'm running a larger size than usual for 330e - 255/35R19 in the front, and 275/35R19 in the back.
        Continental WinterContact 8 S product range here .
        Direct link to a label without OE mention:
        https://www.contimediacenter.com/eulabel/en/03202300000/
        Another label with mention of OE (a different tire) as an example: https://www.contimediacenter.com/eulabel/de_DE/03143590000/
        https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
        
        #9864
        
        TireReviews IcyTexx Dec 3, 2024 archived
        
        I don't disagree with your findings, I'm just telling you what I know.
        What I'm assuming is that it is basically an OE based tire without the marking. It sounds like in the sizes you're running, that probably wouldn't be a bad thing as I'm assuming you have a big / powerful car. An OE winter tire like this will be more focused on good handling in the dry and wet so would give up some snow performance to an pure aftermarket tire, but will be much more stable on big powerful applications. Depending on your target use that could be a big win. But then so could the ASC2.
        Personally I like new and shiney so I'd get the 8S
        
        #9865
        
        IcyTexx TireReviews Dec 3, 2024 archived
        
        Thank you for your insight and feedback! As well as wealth of knowledge you’re sharing with us!
        I’ll pull the trigger on the 8S, I too like new and shiny! I’ll definitely leave a review how 8S handles 420HP and 750Nm on the rear axle. :)
        
        #9867
        
        TireReviews IcyTexx Dec 4, 2024 archived
        
        Excellent, look forward to the review!
        
        #9868
Delafrangas Nov 27, 2024 archived

Jonathan, I am quite sure I am missing something here. The Cross Climate 2 is basically on the same level as the best winter tires in snow/ice and better/way better in wet/dry.

#9850
1. TireReviews Delafrangas Dec 2, 2024 archived
  
  The CrossClimate was only the reference for the snow as it wasn't the best in the dry and wet, they are other tires
  
  #9861
Jamppa Nov 23, 2024 archived

A winter tire test without Nokian is like a German car test without Mercedes.

#9848
Istvan Kardkovacs Nov 4, 2024 archived

What's the point testing a winter tire in 23,5 Celsius?

#9787
1. xumix Istvan Kardkovacs Nov 11, 2024 archived
  
  For comparison with best case conditions of summer tires.
  But I agree, dry testing at 0C would be more beneficial for the test
  
  #9790
2. TireReviews Istvan Kardkovacs Nov 11, 2024 archived
  
  inability to control the weather
  
  #9794
santorini11 Oct 18, 2024 archived

Great review, just ordered Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 for my E 53 AMG, to be installed next week.
On my previous car, for 5 years had Pilot Alpin 5, fantastic tire.

#9766
1. Martin santorini11 Nov 5, 2024 archived
  
  Probably a decent choice. I had the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 on my E53 AMG Coupé and they were fantastic. Wet grip and snow performace was the best i have ever experienced on any of my cars. Once it was dry though they worn down super fast although driving 240 kph with winter tires did not help either.
  
  #9788
2. TireReviews santorini11 Nov 11, 2024 archived
  
  nice, let me know how you like them!
  
  #9810
Patrick Oct 16, 2024 archived

What is the reference all season?

#9761
Christian Oct 14, 2024 archived

Just what I needed - a review on low-profile all-seasons! After watching the review I'm torn between the Continentals and the Bridgestones for my Mk2 Audi TTS (Quattro) to replace the Goodyear Assym's which very slowly slid me into the curb last snowfall here in the S.E of England... however, I'm still curious about the Hankook Kinergy 4S2 as I just 'like' Hankook, although they don;t appear to be available in a Y rating (can't find a legal answer on dropping the speed rating) - What would you recommend?

#9748
1. TireReviews Christian Oct 15, 2024 archived
  
  I've not tried the hankook in this size, but you can drop speed ratings, just not load ratings.
  
  #9751
Milan Oct 11, 2024 archived

Why should anyone still buy a pure winter typre (like the winning Alpin5) when the all-season tire CrossClimate2 is even better in snow & ice as the best winer typre ?

#9744
1. TireReviews Milan Oct 15, 2024 archived
  
  It's an interesting question.
  
  #9754
  1. xumix TireReviews Nov 11, 2024 archived
    
    That really looks like a testing/measurement error. How can it be that all season tire is better on ice than the best dedicated winter tire?
    
    #9791
    1. TireReviews xumix Nov 11, 2024 archived
      
      Compound is key on ice, and a lot of all season tires use a winter compound just with less siping
      
      #9792
Paul Oct 7, 2024 archived

What about Alpin 7?

#9720
1. TireReviews Paul Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  Wasn't available in time for this test
  
  #9723
2. Glisse Paul Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  Michelin Alpin (insert number) is a touring level tire.
  Michelin Pilot Alpin (insert number) is a performance tire.
  This test is for performance tires.
  
  #9734
Marcin Oct 7, 2024 archived

What is difference between 870 and 870P?

#9719
1. TireReviews Marcin Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  P is performance versions
  
  #9724
Erik Asplund Oct 6, 2024 archived

Which was the reference AllSeason tire used in the test?

#9718
1. TireReviews Erik Asplund Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  It's the best from each category which can be found in the all season test on this site.
  
  #9725
2. Glisse Erik Asplund Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  You need to refer to the All-Season test that was done at the same time - the reference all-season tire is the top rated tire for each of the test categories. In other words, it varies. In most cases, it is the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF-3.
  
  #9733
Artur Oct 4, 2024 archived

What would you guys recommend for a Mini Cooper in Central Europe?
I just got the car and I've absolutely no idea whether I should get all-season tires, or should I use winter+summer. Any ideas? And if so, what would be the best choice in terms of price and performance?

#9716
1. TireReviews Artur Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  The data from the winter and all season tests should give you the information to answer this yourself based on your own needs.
  
  #9726
AleksaMK Oct 3, 2024 archived

Having had time to figure out why are you testing winter tires on dry @ 25C degrees. How about 5 or 0C, which is more realistic usage case...

#9712
1. TireReviews AleksaMK Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  The answer isn't overly complicated, I've not yet mastered the ability to control the weather sadly.
  
  #9729
Piotr Kicelman Oct 3, 2024 archived

Hi, in text you mention what is the all season tire you compare to, but I couldn't find info about what was the reference summer tire.
If all season tires are showing so good performance I also consider switching to them, but would like to better understand how they perform comparing to summer ones.

#9710
1. Mortiface Piotr Kicelman Oct 3, 2024 archived
  
  He mentions next article/video will be giving comparison between AS/Winter and Summer - looking forward to see this :)
  
  #9713
2. TireReviews Piotr Kicelman Oct 7, 2024 archived
  
  You can cross reference the best all season tire from each test on this site
  
  #9731
okrujko Oct 2, 2024 archived

So why I should buy winter tires now? If Allseasons are better in dry and wet and on par in snow and ice, I don't see the reason why to buy special winter tires. The best solution seems to be to fit Allseason from oct to april and from may to september fit summers.

#9709
Al Oct 2, 2024 archived

No Vredestein Wintrac Pro/Pro+ included?

#9706
1. TireReviews Al Oct 2, 2024 archived
  
  Sadly there was limited space and as I've tested it a bunch before I thought it would be ok to leave it out. There will be new data on the site in the coming week from other tests.
  
  #9707
  1. Petar TireReviews Oct 2, 2024 archived
    
    Just watched the video on YT and also wondered why for example the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 was left out. But it was in last year's review and I just compared some of the tests, seems to be not too far off from the winning duo. Anyways, great test again this year thanks for the work!
    
    #9708
    1. Mortiface Petar Oct 3, 2024 archived
      
      Plus probably Bridgestone are rolling out Blizzak 6 currently - not sure this size was available at time of test ... and LM005 might not be on the market for very long with Blizzak 6 arriving right now on the market.
      Autobild tested Blizzak 6 very recently on 205/55R16 (not sporty mount I know :( )
      
      #9714
      1. TireReviews Mortiface Oct 7, 2024 archived
        
        I tried to get the B6 but I couldn't get it in time
        
        #9728

Menu

Tire shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Score Weighting

Our standard methods

Dry Braking

Dry Handling

Subj. Dry Handling

Wet Braking

Wet Braking - Cool

Wet Handling

Subj. Wet Handling

Straight Aqua

Curved Aquaplaning

Snow Braking

Snow Traction

Snow Handling

Subj. Snow Handling

Ice Braking

Ice Traction

Subj. Comfort

Noise

Rolling Resistance

Snow

Ice

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Value

Results

Cross-check this test