Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 vs Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi32
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tires, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 finished ahead 3 times and the WinterCraft Ice Wi32 not once. The Hakkapeliitta 10 was stronger in dry, wet, snow, ice, comfort and value.
Performance profile
9 measurements from the 3 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Hakkapeliitta 10
WinterCraft Ice Wi32
Not ahead on any measurement here
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 118 ft stop against 112 ft is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 92%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 8 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Hakkapeliitta 10
WinterCraft Ice Wi32
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tires of the same season and class: 90 means this tire out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tires posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Wins count the tests in which each tire did better.
| Measurement | Hakkapeliitta 10 | Gap | WinterCraft Ice Wi32 | Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Dry Braking ft | 105 | 1.7% | 106 | 1-1 |
| Subj. Dry Handling pts | scored | 14.3% | scored | 1-0 |
| Wet Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Wet Braking ft | 120 | 6.2% | 128 | 2-0 |
| Wet Handling s | 38.4 | 2.4% | 39.3 | 2-0 |
| Subj. Wet Handling pts | scored | 16.7% | scored | 1-0 |
| Straight Aqua mph | 35.8 | = | 35.8 | 0-0 |
| Snow Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Snow Braking ft | 167 | 1.3% | 169 | 2-0 |
| Snow Traction s | 5.95 | = | 5.95 | 0-0 |
| Snow Handling s | 53.3 | 0.2% | 53.4 | 1-0 |
| Subj. Snow Handling pts | scored | 25% | scored | 1-0 |
| Ice Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Ice Braking ft | 115 | 5.7% | 124 | 1-1 |
| Ice Traction s | 4.2 | 6.1% | 4.45 | 1-1 |
| Ice Handling s | 54.1 | 2.7% | 55.6 | 1-0 |
| Subj. Ice Handling pts | scored | 25% | scored | 1-0 |
| Comfort Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Subj. Comfort pts | scored | 400% | scored | 1-0 |
| Subj. Noise pts | scored | 20% | scored | 1-0 |
| Value Hakkapeliitta 10 ahead | ||||
| Fuel Consumption l/100km | 5.95 | 0.1% | 5.95 | 1-0 |
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tires shared.
Head to head in 3 tests, 2021 to 2025
Each row is one published test in which both tires ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | Hakkapeliitta 10 | Field | WinterCraft Ice Wi32 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tire Test | P2 of 8 | P6 of 8 | |
| 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tire Test | P1 of 7 | P7 of 7 | |
| 2021 Studless and Studded Winter Tire Test | P1 of 9 | P8 of 9 |
Hakkapeliitta 10 vs WinterCraft Ice Wi32: your questions
Is the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 or the Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi32 the better tire?
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tires, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 finished ahead 3 times and the WinterCraft Ice Wi32 not once. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Hakkapeliitta 10 scores 8.8 and the WinterCraft Ice Wi32 4.7 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Hakkapeliitta 10 or the WinterCraft Ice Wi32?
The Hakkapeliitta 10 led 5 of the 7 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 6.2% shorter in the wet across 2 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Hakkapeliitta 10 led 2 of the 3 dry measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which is better in snow?
The Hakkapeliitta 10 led 4 of the 6 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 1.3% shorter on snow across 2 tests.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 6.3/10 for the Hakkapeliitta 10 and 4/10 for the WinterCraft Ice Wi32.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Hakkapeliitta 10 75% from 10 reviews and the WinterCraft Ice Wi32 67% from 2.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the Hakkapeliitta 10 was the dearer tire in 2 of them, by 59% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
More comparisons with these tires
vs 
Michelin X Ice North 4 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
0-7 in 7 shared tests
vs 
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
2-2 in 6 shared tests
vs
Continental IceContact 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
0-7 in 7 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
1-6 in 7 shared tests
vs
Michelin X Ice Snow vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
2-1 in 6 shared tests
vs
Continental VikingContact 8 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
2-0 in 4 shared tests
vs
Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi32 vs Michelin X Ice North 4
0-4 in 4 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10
2-0 in 4 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tire wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tires ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tire Reviews Score rates each tire out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tires can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tire Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tires independently since 2007.