Hankook Winter I cept RS3 vs Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
- TR Score
- 8.8/10
- Owners say
- 77% · 28
- TR Score
- 9.3/10
- Owners say
- 91% · 6
The Winter I cept RS3 and the WinterCraft WP52+ have met in 2 independent tests and the record is level at 1-1. The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 3.8% shorter in the dry.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Pick the Hankook Winter I cept RS3 for its consistently stronger aquaplaning protection, particularly if wet-road security is your priority. Pick the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ for its repeatedly shorter braking distances, while bearing in mind its weaker aquaplaning results and ADAC's dry-handling criticism.
Where the Winter I cept RS3 is stronger
- Strong aquaplaning protection in both tests
- Secure, precise wet handling in ADAC's test
- Long predicted life and low rolling resistance in AvD's test
Where the WinterCraft WP52+ is stronger
- Shorter dry and wet braking in both tests
- Good snow traction and handling in both tests
- Longest predicted tread life in ADAC's test
Conclusion
The two overall rankings need reading alongside the measurements. In AvD's 2026 winter test, the Kumho was sixth and the Hankook seventh, both rated good. The Kumho's dry braking distance was about 5% shorter, and its wet braking distance about 2% shorter. Their snow-braking distances were effectively level. In ADAC's 2026 test, the Kumho again stopped sooner on dry and wet roads, by about 3% and 5% respectively, and had a clearer snow-braking advantage. Those repeated results make braking the Kumho's strongest case, even though the overall placings do not follow the same pattern.
Aquaplaning is the Hankook's clearest advantage. AvD rated its resistance among the best and identified the Kumho's protection, particularly in curves, as a weakness. ADAC measured the Hankook aquaplaning at about 10% higher speed in a straight line and producing about 25% more lateral grip in the curved test. ADAC also found its wet handling secure and precise. The wear results are unusually contradictory: AvD predicted about 18% more life from the Hankook, whereas ADAC predicted about 47% more from the Kumho and ranked it longest-lasting in that test. It would be misleading to promise either tire a longer life on the strength of both tests. AvD also measured lower rolling resistance for the Hankook, while ADAC recorded slightly lower fuel consumption for the Kumho.
ADAC's third place for the Hankook against twelfth for the Kumho is a much larger overall separation than AvD's one-place gap in the other direction. ADAC marked the Kumho down for imprecise dry handling and oversteer in evasive maneuvers, despite its short dry braking distance. The Hankook was not faultless on dry roads either: ADAC noted steering corrections and oversteer, while AvD found its dry braking weak among the recommended tires. Choose the Hankook if aquaplaning protection and secure wet handling matter most. Choose the Kumho if shorter braking distances are the priority, accepting its weaker aquaplaning results and ADAC's dry-handling concerns.
The bullet points are analysis of the shared tests and of owner reviews; the measured wins in each discipline are in the tables below. Where the two disagree, the figures are right.
Winter I cept RS3 vs WinterCraft WP52+ at a glance
| Category | Winter I cept RS3 | Gap | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won2 shared tests | 1 | 1 | |
| Dry2 measurements | 0 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 3.8% shorter in the dry (2 tests) | 2 |
| Wet5 measurements | 2 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 3.2% shorter in the wet (2 tests) | 3 |
| Snow3 measurements | 0 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 2.5% shorter on snow (2 tests) | 3 |
| Ice1 measurement | 0 | 1 | |
| Comfort1 measurement | 1 | 0 | |
| Value5 measurements | 3 | 2 | |
| Tire Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 8.8/10 | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 0.5 | 9.3/10 |
| Owner rating28 and 6 reviews | 77% | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 14 points | 91% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 74% | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 26 points | 100% |
| Pricein the 2 tests that listed prices | +27.3% | The Winter I cept RS3 was dearer in 2 of 2 | Cheaper |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 46 | 42 sizes made in both | 115 |
Wins count every measurement the shared tests recorded for both tires; a tick marks the tire ahead on that line. Subjective driver scores count as wins but are never averaged, because each test uses its own scale.
Head to head in 2 tests in 2026
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 | Winter I cept RS3 | Field | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 AvD Winter Tire Test | P7 of 15 | P6 of 15 | |
| 2026 ADAC Winter Tire Test - 185/65 R15 | P3 of 16 | P12 of 16 |
Performance profile
13 measurements from the 2 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Winter I cept RS3
WinterCraft WP52+
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.
Where each scores higher
Winter I cept RS3
WinterCraft WP52+
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
Winter I cept RS3
Not ahead in any category
WinterCraft WP52+
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the Winter I cept RS3 77% from 28 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. 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. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | Winter I cept RS3 | Gap | WinterCraft WP52+ | Wins | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 146 | 3.8% | 140 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 141 | 3.2% | 137 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 132 | 3% | 128 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 59.7 | 10.1% | 54.2 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 13.1 | 25% | 10.5 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 59 | 2.5% | 58 | 0-2 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 632 | 2% | 645 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 72 | 2.3% | 71 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 72.5 | 0.6 dB | 73.1 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 22,687 | 14.4% | 24,489 | 1-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 8.53 | 5.5% | 9.03 | 1-0 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 5.7 | 1.8% | 5.6 | 0-1 | |||||||||
|
||||||||||||
| 93 | 2.1% | 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. "Scored" rows are subjective driver ratings: each test uses its own scale, so only the wins are counted.
Scores beyond the shared tests
On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Winter I cept RS3 scores 8.8 and the WinterCraft WP52+ 9.3 out of 10.
| Winter I cept RS3 | Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 60 | Dry | 92 | ||
| 93 | Wet | 88 | ||
| 36 | Comfort | 46 | ||
| 52 | Value | 79 | ||
| 75 | Snow | 68 | ||
| 33 | Ice | 35 | ||
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.
What owners say
| Winter I cept RS3 | Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8.5 | Dry Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 8.3 | Wet Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 7.6 | Road Feedback | 9 | ||
| 8 | Handling | 9 | ||
| 7.6 | Wear | 8.3 | ||
| 6.7 | Comfort | 8.8 | ||
| 9 | Snow Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 7.7 | Ice Grip | 8.4 | ||
Owners rate the Winter I cept RS3 77% from 28 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Hankook Winter I cept RS3
- 77%from 28 reviews
- 74%would buy again
- 156,320 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners generally rate the Hankook Winter I cept RS3 as a capable winter tire with strong real-world grip, particularly in snow and wet conditions, backed up by solid dry grip and handling for a winter pattern. Around two in five owners specifically praise snow traction and wet grip, and a smaller but meaningful group also mention confident aquaplaning resistance and wet handling. The standout drawback is road noise: nearly two thirds of owners mention it and most of those are unhappy, often describing it as noticeably loud at speed. A smaller group also report softer, less responsive steering feel, with mixed feedback on tread life.
- Strong snow traction and confidence in winter conditions
- Reassuring wet grip
- Very good dry grip for a winter tire
- Secure wet handling
- Noticeably loud road noise, especially at speed
- Steering feels soft / less responsive
- Mixed or disappointing tread life
Summarised by AI from 25 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 28 Winter I cept RS3 reviewsI drove some 13000 km with them, once they got 3 years old dry rot cracks were already visible in the tread area around the tread blocks, my winter tires before them were Continental TS850 replaced at 10 years old, gave them away to my father, they were made in 2012, still no dry rot cracks in them at 14 years old, but they aren't as grippy as my new Hankooks. However, Continental is a premium class, Hankooks are middle and now I can see why.
What I misjudged about Hankooks is noise above some 95 km/h, it's more the engine getting more noisy similar noise to the tires humming excessively, once I distinguished that, I can say these Hankooks aren't noisy at all. However, dry rot at just 3 years old is not what I like, I almost wish I paid 80 euros per tire for premium class instead 60 for these Hankooks, they surely aren't going to last me 10 years due to dry rot. But for now, they do their job well, if you wear out tires within a few years, they are good tires
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
- 91%from 6 reviews
- 100%would buy again
- 40,507 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers report the Kumho WinterCraft WP52 plus delivers impressively strong winter performance for the price, with repeated praise for confident grip (especially in wet conditions) and secure handling. Reviews consistently highlight low road noise and noticeably improved ride comfort versus some premium or run-flat alternatives, with multiple users describing a premium feel and excellent value. No recurring performance drawbacks were reported across the reviews.
- Strong wet grip and water shedding
- Confident handling and traction in cold/winter conditions
- Low road noise / quiet ride
- Good ride comfort
Summarised by AI from 5 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 6 WinterCraft WP52+ reviewsI bought these after looking at the tests. They offer performance close to premium tires while being very affordable. That's actually the reason I chose this tire. If you don't have extreme winter conditions where you are, you can go for this tire. If the winter conditions are bad, Barum might be a good alternative since it's still reasonably priced.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tire: 46 sizes of the Winter I cept RS3 and 115 of the WinterCraft WP52+, 42 of them made in both.
| Category | Winter I cept RS3 | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| Sizes made | 46 sizes, 14 to 17 inch | 115 sizes, 13 to 21 inch |
| Made in both | 42 sizes 165/65 R14165/70 R14175/65 R14175/70 R14185/60 R14185/65 R14185/70 R14165/65 R15175/50 R15175/60 R15175/65 R15185/55 R15and 30 more | |
| EU label wet grip | B100% | B82%A18% |
| EU label rolling resistance | C58%D42% | C65%D32%B2%E1% |
| EU label noise | 70-72 dB B100% | 70-73 dB B100% |
| Severe snow (3PMSF) sizes | 189 of 189 | 209 of 211 |
| On the market since | - | 2025 |
| Replaced | Hankook Winter i cept RS2 (2021) | - |
| Awards | - | Winner: Winter Touring Tire of the Year (WhatTire, 2026/27) |
| Price in the shared tests | The Winter I cept RS3 was the dearer tire in 2 of the 2 tests that listed prices, by 27.3% on average. Each test priced the tires in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
Label grades are shown as the share of registered sizes carrying each grade, so "B (88%), C (12%)" means most sizes are B. Grades vary by size; check the label for yours.
Reading the results
Written from the test results and owner reviews above. It is analysis, not a measurement: where it and the tables disagree, the tables are right.
Two independent 2026 winter tire tests put the Hankook Winter I cept RS3 and Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ side by side: AvD's 225/45 R17 test and ADAC's 185/65 R15 test. AvD placed the Kumho sixth and the Hankook seventh, while ADAC placed the Hankook third and the Kumho twelfth. The overall result is split, but the measured braking results favor the Kumho in both sizes.
The Kumho stopped sooner on dry and wet roads in both tests. Its snow-braking advantage was negligible in AvD's test but clearer in ADAC's. The Hankook's more consistent distinction is aquaplaning protection: AvD rated it among the best, and ADAC measured a substantial lead over the Kumho in both straight and curved aquaplaning. Predicted tread life points in opposite directions across the two tire sizes, so neither has a consistent wear advantage. ADAC's much wider overall gap reflects its assessment of dry handling, not a Hankook lead in braking.
Winter I cept RS3 vs WinterCraft WP52+: your questions
Is the Hankook Winter I cept RS3 or the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ the better tire?
The Hankook Winter I cept RS3 and the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ have met in 2 independent tests and the record is level at 1-1. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Winter I cept RS3 scores 8.8 and the WinterCraft WP52+ 9.3 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Winter I cept RS3 or the WinterCraft WP52+?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 3 of the 5 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 3.2% shorter in the wet across 2 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 2 of the 2 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 3.8% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 3 of the 3 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.5% shorter on snow across 2 tests.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 6.7/10 for the Winter I cept RS3 and 8.8/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Winter I cept RS3 77% from 28 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. 74% of Winter I cept RS3 owners would buy it again, against 100% for the WinterCraft WP52+.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the Winter I cept RS3 was the dearer tire in 2 of them, by 27.3% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Winter I cept RS3 is made in 46 sizes (14 to 17 inch) and the WinterCraft WP52+ in 115 (13 to 21 inch). 42 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Winter I cept RS3 is graded B for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the WinterCraft WP52+ B and C.
More comparisons with these tires
vs
Bridgestone Blizzak 6 vs Hankook Winter I cept RS3
6-2 in 8 shared tests
vs
Continental WinterContact TS 870 vs Hankook Winter I cept RS3
10-0 in 10 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 vs Hankook Winter I cept RS3
11-2 in 13 shared tests
vs 
Hankook Winter I cept RS3 vs Kumho Winter Craft WP52
4-1 in 5 shared tests
vs 
Hankook Winter I cept RS3 vs Vredestein Wintrac
6-0 in 6 shared tests
vs 
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs Linglong Sport Master Winter
3-1 in 4 shared tests
vs 
Hankook Winter I cept RS3 vs Kleber Krisalp HP3
6-0 in 6 shared tests
vs
Falken EUROWINTER HS02 vs Hankook Winter I cept RS3
0-7 in 7 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.
Discussion