Kumho WinterCraft ice Wi32 vs Michelin X-Ice North 4
- TR Score
- 5.0/10
- Owners say
- 67% · 2
- TR Score
- 8.6/10
- Owners say
- 84% · 13
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tires, the X-Ice North 4 finished ahead 4 times and the WinterCraft ice Wi32 not once. The WinterCraft ice Wi32 used 2.6% less fuel; the X-Ice North 4 stopped 10.4% shorter on ice.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Choose the Michelin X Ice North 4 for the more consistent snow performance, better aquaplaning results and higher overall placings. Consider the Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi32 if lower fuel consumption matters most, while allowing for its inconsistent ice results and the poor comfort noted by Teknikens Värld.
Where the WinterCraft ice Wi32 is stronger
- Lower fuel consumption in both shared tests that measured it.
- Shorter ice braking and quicker ice acceleration in Tekniikan Maailma's 2025 test.
- Stable dry-road behavior in Vi Bilagare's 2026 test.
Where the X-Ice North 4 is stronger
- Dry 5/5 Stopped 1.9% shorter in the dry (3 tests)
- Wet 9/10 Resisted straight aquaplaning at a 8.1% higher speed (2 tests)
- Snow 9/9 Stopped 2.1% shorter on snow (3 tests)
- Ice 6/9 Stopped 10.4% shorter on ice (3 tests)
- Comfort 4/5 Was 0.8 dB quieter (1 tests)
Conclusion
Michelin finished above Kumho in all four shared tests, from third versus eighth among the studded tires in Teknikens Värld's 2021 test to fifth versus sixth in its 2025 test. The snow results point the same way: Michelin had shorter braking distances and quicker acceleration in all three tests with measurements, though those margins were generally small. It was also quicker through both measured snow-handling courses. On wet roads, Michelin's advantage is clearest in Tekniikan Maailma's 2025 wet braking result and in straight-line aquaplaning, where it held on at roughly 8% higher speeds in both measured tests. Its wet braking was effectively level with Kumho's in 2021.
Ice is less settled. In Vi Bilagare's 2026 test, Michelin stopped about 35% shorter than Kumho and accelerated much more quickly, a substantial difference for two studded tires. Michelin also led the measured ice tests in 2021. Unusually, Tekniikan Maailma's 2025 test reversed that picture: Kumho stopped about 12% shorter and accelerated about 8% more quickly on ice. Teknikens Värld's 2025 testers also rated Kumho higher for ice handling, while noting that Michelin's straight-line ice braking grip fell away when steering. It would be wrong to treat either tire's ice performance as identical across sizes and tests.
For everyday use, Michelin has the stronger overall case, but it is not without compromises. Its wet grip was a weakness against the wider field in Vi Bilagare's 2026 test, and Tekniikan Maailma's 2025 testers criticised its steering and asphalt evasive handling. Kumho's clearest repeatable advantage is fuel consumption. It also showed capable dry-road behavior in Vi Bilagare's test and excellent straight-line ice grip in Tekniikan Maailma's. Against that, the 2021 and 2025 Teknikens Värld testers found it noisy, with the 2025 test giving it a particularly poor comfort score. Michelin suits the driver seeking the more consistently strong winter result; Kumho's lower consumption and occasional ice advantage come with greater variation in grip and comfort.
Where to buy
Kumho WinterCraft ice Wi32 Michelin X-Ice North 4Affiliate links: we may earn a commission if you buy. It never changes our results.
The measured tallies (wins out of measurements in the shared tests) come straight from the tables below. The written verdict and bullet points are analysis of those tests and of owner reviews; where they and the figures disagree, the figures are right.
WinterCraft ice Wi32 vs X-Ice North 4 at a glance
| Category | WinterCraft ice Wi32 | Gap | X-Ice North 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won4 shared tests | 0 | 4 | |
| Dry5 measurements | 0 | The X-Ice North 4 stopped 1.9% shorter in the dry (3 tests) | 5 |
| Wet10 measurements | 0 | The X-Ice North 4 resisted straight aquaplaning at a 8.1% higher speed (2 tests) | 9 |
| Snow9 measurements | 0 | The X-Ice North 4 stopped 2.1% shorter on snow (3 tests) | 9 |
| Ice9 measurements | 3 | The X-Ice North 4 stopped 10.4% shorter on ice (3 tests) | 6 |
| Comfort5 measurements | 0 | The X-Ice North 4 was 0.8 dB quieter (1 test) | 4 |
| Value2 measurements | 2 | The WinterCraft ice Wi32 used 2.6% less fuel (2 tests) | 0 |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 5.0/10 | The X-Ice North 4 by 3.6 | 8.6/10 |
| Owner rating2 and 13 reviews | 67% | The X-Ice North 4 by 17 points | 84% |
| Pricein the 3 tests that listed prices | Cheaper | The X-Ice North 4 was dearer in 3 of 3 | +38.4% |
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 4 tests, 2021 to 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 | WinterCraft ice Wi32 | Field | X-Ice North 4 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Vi Bilagare Studded Tire Test | P7 of 8 | P3 of 8 | |
| 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tire Test | P6 of 8 | P5 of 8 | |
| 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tire Test | P7 of 7 | P4 of 7 | |
| 2021 Studless and Studded Winter Tire Test | P8 of 9 | P3 of 9 |
Performance profile
18 measurements from the 4 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
WinterCraft ice Wi32
X-Ice North 4
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 80%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow.
Where each scores higher
WinterCraft ice Wi32
X-Ice North 4
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. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | WinterCraft ice Wi32 | Gap | X-Ice North 4 | Wins | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 128 | 1.9% | 126 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 19.6% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 153 | 2.9% | 149 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 40.2 | 1.2% | 39.71 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 18.3% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 37.5 | 8.1% | 40.5 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 128 | 2.1% | 126 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 5.63 | 2% | 5.52 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 62.99 | 3.2% | 60.9 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 12.5% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 102 | 10.4% | 96 | 1-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 8.74 | 13.6% | 6.48 | 1-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 70.98 | 5.2% | 66.78 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 14.3% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 400% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 30% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 71.7 | 0.8 dB | 70.9 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 6.06 | 2.6% | 6.22 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
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 Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the WinterCraft ice Wi32 scores 5 and the X-Ice North 4 8.6 out of 10.
| WinterCraft ice Wi32 | Category | X-Ice North 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 27 | Dry | 60 | ||
| 3 | Wet | 24 | ||
| 10 | Comfort | 55 | ||
| 90 | Value | 52 | ||
| 35 | Snow | 78 | ||
| 51 | Ice | 87 | ||
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
| WinterCraft ice Wi32 | Category | X-Ice North 4 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | Dry Grip | 7.6 | ||
| 7 | Wet Grip | 7.2 | ||
| 7 | Road Feedback | 7.5 | ||
| 7 | Handling | 8.1 | ||
| 8 | Wear | 8.8 | ||
| 4 | Comfort | 8.2 | ||
| 8.5 | Snow Grip | 9.2 | ||
| 7.5 | Ice Grip | 9.8 | ||
Owners rate the WinterCraft ice Wi32 67% from 2 reviews and the X-Ice North 4 84% from 13. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Kumho WinterCraft ice Wi32
- 67%from 2 reviews
- 5,500 milesdriven by reviewers
All 2 WinterCraft ice Wi32 reviewsGood tires if you can accept the noice level. If you have otherwise a quiet car, you will definetly hear these and they will annoy you every time you drive. These has been the loudest stud tires I have ever tried and could not live with the noice so needed to switch to other brand in mid season.
Michelin X-Ice North 4
- 84%from 13 reviews
- 92%would buy again
- 132,767 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers rate the Michelin X Ice North 4 very highly overall, most often praising outstanding traction and braking on ice and snow along with impressively low road noise for a studded tire. Several reviews also highlight confident handling/feedback and generally strong longevity, with some users reporting long tread life and good stud seating after proper break-in. A smaller minority note trade-offs such as weaker grip on wet/dry pavement and occasional stud loss or faster wear later in the tire's life.
- Excellent grip and braking on ice and snow
- Low noise levels for a studded winter tire
- Confident handling/control and good road feedback in low-friction conditions
- Generally good durability/longevity for winter use (tread and/or studs)
- Wet/dry grip is not as strong as its winter (ice/snow) performance
- Some users report stud loss over time or after multiple seasons
Summarised by AI from 9 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 13 X-Ice North 4 reviewsI live in the middle parts of Sweden and have been using the Michelin X ice north 4 on my VW ID.4 GTX for one winter. It’s not my first time using these tires, I had them on my Volvo XC60 before that.
It is a good tire with good handling in the cold, snow or ice is no problem. It has a lot more studds than typical, giving it a firm grip in winter conditions. But in the dry and wet, early winter and early spring, it struggles. The noice in the dry, especilly on an ev is grueling.
It is not very Eco or efficent as you can notice it gripping on and lacking a bit in rolling.
I’m selling the car and will not buy this tire for my next car. But if I would buy a new tire for my Scoda Octavia I would by this.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
| Category | WinterCraft ice Wi32 | X-Ice North 4 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| On the market since | - | 2018 |
| Replaced | Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi31 (2014) | - |
| Price in the shared tests | The X-Ice North 4 was the dearer tire in 3 of the 3 tests that listed prices, by 38.4% on average. Each test priced the tires in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
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.
Four independent tests put the Kumho WinterCraft Ice Wi32 and Michelin X Ice North 4 side by side: Teknikens Värld in 2021 and 2025, Tekniikan Maailma in 2025, and Vi Bilagare in 2026. Both are studded winter tires. Michelin finished higher in their class in all four tests, although its advantage was only one place in Teknikens Värld's 2025 test.
Michelin generally brakes and handles better on snow, and it resisted straight-line aquaplaning better in both tests that measured it. Kumho used less fuel in the two tests that measured consumption. Ice results need a closer look: Michelin was markedly stronger in Vi Bilagare's 2026 test, but Kumho stopped and accelerated better on ice in Tekniikan Maailma's 2025 test. That reversal matters more than the overall placings alone suggest.
WinterCraft ice Wi32 vs X-Ice North 4: your questions
Is the Kumho WinterCraft ice Wi32 or the Michelin X-Ice North 4 the better tire?
In the 4 independent tests that ran both tires, the Michelin X-Ice North 4 finished ahead 4 times and the WinterCraft ice Wi32 not once. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the WinterCraft ice Wi32 scores 5 and the X-Ice North 4 8.6 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the WinterCraft ice Wi32 or the X-Ice North 4?
The X-Ice North 4 led 9 of the 10 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it resisted straight aquaplaning at a 8.1% higher speed across 2 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The X-Ice North 4 led 5 of the 5 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 1.9% shorter in the dry across 3 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The X-Ice North 4 led 9 of the 9 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 2.1% shorter on snow across 3 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The WinterCraft ice Wi32 used 2.6% less fuel (2 tests). Owners rate wear 8/10 for the WinterCraft ice Wi32 and 8.8/10 for the X-Ice North 4.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
The X-Ice North 4 was 0.8 dB quieter (1 test). Owners rate comfort 4/10 for the WinterCraft ice Wi32 and 8.2/10 for the X-Ice North 4.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the WinterCraft ice Wi32 67% from 2 reviews and the X-Ice North 4 84% from 13.
Which is more expensive?
In the 3 tests that listed prices, the X-Ice North 4 was the dearer tire in 3 of them, by 38.4% 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
Hankook Winter i pike RS2 vs Michelin X-Ice North 4
0-5 in 5 shared tests
vs 
Michelin X-Ice North 4 vs Michelin X-Ice Snow
1-1 in 6 shared tests
vs 
Michelin X-Ice North 4 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
1-2 in 5 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 vs Michelin X-Ice North 4
5-4 in 9 shared tests
vs
Continental IceContact 3 vs Michelin X-Ice North 4
3-6 in 11 shared tests
vs
Continental VikingContact 8 vs Michelin X-Ice North 4
2-0 in 4 shared tests
vs 
Michelin X-Ice North 4 vs Pirelli Ice Zero 2
4-3 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 Tyre 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 Tyre Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tires independently since 2007.
Discussion