Nokian Snowproof P vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tires, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 finished ahead 4 times and the Snowproof P not once. The Snowproof P was stronger in dry, ice and comfort, the Winter i cept evo3 in wet and snow.
Performance profile
8 measurements from the 4 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Snowproof P
Winter i cept evo3
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 90%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 17 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Snowproof P
Winter i cept evo3
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.
Where owners rate each higher
Snowproof P
Winter i cept evo3
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the Snowproof P 88% from 10 reviews and the Winter i cept evo3 86% from 23. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
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 | Snowproof P | Gap | Winter i cept evo3 | Wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Snowproof P ahead | ||||
| Dry Braking ft | 138 | 2.6% | 142 | 2-1 |
| Dry Handling (s) | 45.31 | 1.1% | 45.81 | 1-0 |
| Dry Handling (mph) | 59.7 | 0.4% | 60 | 0-1 |
| Wet Winter i cept evo3 ahead | ||||
| Wet Braking ft | 126 | 5.6% | 118 | 0-4 |
| Wet Braking - Concrete ft | 124 | 0.5% | 123 | 0-1 |
| Wet Handling (s) | 51.31 | 3.1% | 49.7 | 0-1 |
| Wet Handling (mph) | 47.6 | 1.6% | 48.3 | 0-1 |
| Wet Circle (mph) | 4.5 | 45% | 6.5 | 0-1 |
| Wet Circle (s) | 16.34 | 5.6% | 15.43 | 0-1 |
| Straight Aqua mph | 43.5 | 8.4% | 47.1 | 0-3 |
| Curved Aquaplaning ft/s² | 130.9 | 23.7% | 145.8 | 0-2 |
| Snow Winter i cept evo3 ahead | ||||
| Snow Braking ft | 64 | 0.3% | 64 | 2-2 |
| Snow Traction s | 5.55 | 3.1% | 5.38 | 0-1 |
| Snow Traction (lbf) | 440 | 2.9% | 447 | 0-2 |
| Snow Handling s | 90.1 | 2.4% | 87.95 | 0-1 |
| Snow Handling (mph) | 41.1 | 1.2% | 41.6 | 0-1 |
| Snow Circle s | 34.4 | 0.8% | 34.69 | 1-0 |
| Snow Slalom ft/s² | 13.5 | 7% | 14.5 | 0-1 |
| Ice Snowproof P ahead | ||||
| Ice Braking ft | 52 | 8% | 57 | 1-0 |
| Comfort Snowproof P ahead | ||||
| Subj. Comfort pts | scored | = | scored | 0-0 |
| Noise dB | 70.03 | 4.4 dB | 74.47 | 3-0 |
| Value Level | ||||
| Wear miles | 32,063 | 40.3% | 44,987 | 0-1 |
| Rolling Resistance kg / t | 7.94 | 18.3% | 9.69 | 2-0 |
| Fuel Consumption l/100km | 5.7 | = | 5.7 | 0-0 |
| Abrasion mg/km/t | 61 | 8.2% | 56 | 0-1 |
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 4 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 | Snowproof P | Field | Winter i cept evo3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 ADAC Winter Tire Test | P8 of 31 | P4 of 31 | |
| 2022 Auto Bild SUV Winter Tire Test | P9 of 10 | P5 of 10 | |
| 2022 Winter Tire Market Overview | P13 of 56 | P9 of 56 | |
| 2021 Tire Reviews Winter Tire Test | P7 of 9 | P3 of 9 |
Snowproof P vs Winter i cept evo3: your questions
Is the Nokian Snowproof P or the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 the better tire?
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tires, the Hankook Winter i cept evo3 finished ahead 4 times and the Snowproof P not once. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Snowproof P scores 9.2 and the Winter i cept evo3 9.2 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Snowproof P or the Winter i cept evo3?
The Winter i cept evo3 led 14 of the 14 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 5.6% shorter in the wet across 4 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Snowproof P led 3 of the 5 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.6% shorter in the dry across 3 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The Winter i cept evo3 led 8 of the 11 snow measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Snowproof P had 18.3% lower rolling resistance (2 tests). Owners rate wear 8.2/10 for the Snowproof P and 8.8/10 for the Winter i cept evo3.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
The Snowproof P was 4.4 dB quieter (3 tests). Owners rate comfort 8/10 for the Snowproof P and 7.8/10 for the Winter i cept evo3.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Snowproof P 88% from 10 reviews and the Winter i cept evo3 86% from 23. 80% of Snowproof P owners would buy it again, against 91% for the Winter i cept evo3.
Which is more expensive?
In the 3 tests that listed prices, the Snowproof P was the dearer tire in 3 of them, by 11.2% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Snowproof P is made in 46 sizes (17 to 21 inch) and the Winter i cept evo3 in 86 (17 to 22 inch). 35 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Snowproof P is graded B for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Winter i cept evo3 B and C.
Which is the newer tire?
The Winter i cept evo3 is the newer design: it reached the market in 2021, the Snowproof P in 2020. The Snowproof P replaced the Nokian WR A4. The Winter i cept evo3 replaced the Hankook Winter i cept evo2.
More comparisons with these tires
vs 
Hankook Winter i cept evo3 vs Kumho Winter Craft WP52
5-1 in 6 shared tests
vs 
Hankook Winter i cept evo3 vs Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
1-18 in 20 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
12-0 in 13 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
8-5 in 14 shared tests
vs
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
13-3 in 17 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Blizzak 6 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
6-0 in 6 shared tests
vs
Dunlop Winter Sport 5 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
2-6 in 9 shared tests
vs 
Hankook Winter i cept evo3 vs Uniroyal WinterExpert
5-1 in 6 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.