Firestone Winterhawk 4 vs Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
- TR Score
- 8.1/10
- Owners say
- 72% · 6
- TR Score
- 9.3/10
- Owners say
- 91% · 6
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tires, the WinterCraft WP52+ finished ahead 3 times and the Winterhawk 4 not once. The Winterhawk 4 had 1.5% lower rolling resistance; the WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 6% shorter in the wet.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Choose the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ for mixed winter driving, particularly where wet and dry braking matter. Choose the Firestone Winterhawk 4 if you place greater weight on snow traction and can accept its dry and wet-road compromises.
Where the Winterhawk 4 is stronger
- Consistently stronger snow traction in Auto Bild's 2025 and 2026 winter tests
- Slightly shorter snow braking in both years
- Lower rolling resistance in both full winter tests
Where the WinterCraft WP52+ is stronger
- Shorter dry braking in both full winter tests
- Shorter wet braking in all three shared tests
- Better curved aquaplaning results in both full winter tests
Conclusion
The Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ is the more rounded choice in these shared Auto Bild tests. It finished well above the Firestone Winterhawk 4 in both full winter tests and in the 2026 braking test. Its most dependable advantage is stopping distance on clear or wet roads: it braked about 6% and 8% shorter in the dry in 2025 and 2026, and about 4% to 7% shorter in the wet across the three tests. It was also slightly quicker through the dry and wet handling courses in both full tests. The Firestone's dry handling was the slowest among the ranked tires in each of those tests, and its wet braking drew a safety penalty in 2026.
The Firestone deserves credit for its snow traction, which was about 3% stronger in 2025 and 2% stronger in 2026. Its snow braking was shorter too, although the 2025 difference was negligible and the 2026 gap was only about 2%; the braking-test snow figures repeat those from the full 2026 test. This is not an across-the-board snow advantage: the Kumho was slightly quicker in snow handling in both full tests, and their slalom results were close. The Firestone also had lower rolling resistance in both years, though the 2026 difference was negligible. The Kumho resisted curved aquaplaning better in both full tests, but neither tire was notably strong in straight-line aquaplaning in 2026.
Comfort and wear are less settled. Firestone scored better for subjective comfort in 2025, when Kumho shared the lowest rating, but Kumho scored much better in 2026 and was among the most comfortable tires. That reversal is unusual, so neither has a consistent comfort lead here. Predicted wear was almost level in 2025, then favored the Kumho by about 7% in 2026. Choose the Kumho if your winter driving regularly includes wet and dry roads and you want the stronger braking results. The Firestone makes more sense if snow traction is your priority and you accept its weaker dry performance and less convincing wet braking.
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.
Winterhawk 4 vs WinterCraft WP52+ at a glance
| Category | Winterhawk 4 | Gap | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won3 shared tests | 0 | 3 | |
| Dry4 measurements | 0 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 6.9% shorter in the dry (2 tests) | 4 |
| Wet11 measurements | 0 | The WinterCraft WP52+ stopped 6% shorter in the wet (3 tests) | 11 |
| Snow9 measurements | 6 | The Winterhawk 4 stopped 1.5% shorter on snow (3 tests) | 3 |
| Comfort4 measurements | 2 | Level between the two. | 2 |
| Value4 measurements | 3 | The Winterhawk 4 had 1.5% lower rolling resistance (2 tests) | 1 |
| Tire Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 8.1/10 | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 1.2 | 9.3/10 |
| Owner rating6 and 6 reviews | 72% | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 19 points | 91% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 67% | The WinterCraft WP52+ by 33 points | 100% |
| Pricein the 2 tests that listed prices | +4.5% | The Winterhawk 4 was dearer in 2 of 2 | Cheaper |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 83 | 68 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 3 tests, 2025 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 | Winterhawk 4 | Field | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Auto Bild Winter Tire Test | P16 of 20 | P8 of 20 | |
| 2026 Winter Tire Braking Test - 50 Sets | P19 of 50 | P10 of 50 | |
| 2025 Autobild Winter Tire Test | P16 of 20 | P3 of 20 |
Performance profile
15 measurements from the 3 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Winterhawk 4
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
Winterhawk 4
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
Winterhawk 4
Not ahead in any category
WinterCraft WP52+
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the Winterhawk 4 72% from 6 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 | Winterhawk 4 | Gap | WinterCraft WP52+ | Wins | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 153 | 6.9% | 142 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 68.7 | 1.9% | 70 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 173 | 6% | 162 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 49.5 | 1.3% | 50.1 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 12.62 | 0.7% | 12.53 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 50.9 | 0.7% | 51.3 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 7.3 | 6.9% | 7.8 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 95 | 1.5% | 96 | 3-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 878 | 2.5% | 859 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 35.6 | 1.2% | 36 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 10.4 | 0.4% | 10.3 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 7.1% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 69.1 | 0.1 dB | 69.2 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 29,096 | 3.1% | 30,034 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 8.11 | 1.5% | 8.24 | 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 Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Winterhawk 4 scores 8.1 and the WinterCraft WP52+ 9.3 out of 10.
| Winterhawk 4 | Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | Dry | 92 | ||
| 86 | Wet | 88 | ||
| 66 | Comfort | 46 | ||
| 49 | Value | 79 | ||
| 69 | Snow | 68 | ||
| 54 | 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
| Winterhawk 4 | Category | WinterCraft WP52+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.3 | Dry Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 7.3 | Wet Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 6.2 | Road Feedback | 9 | ||
| 5.5 | Handling | 9 | ||
| 7.6 | Wear | 8.3 | ||
| 7.7 | Comfort | 8.8 | ||
| 7.5 | Snow Grip | 9.3 | ||
| 6.8 | Ice Grip | 8.4 | ||
Owners rate the Winterhawk 4 72% from 6 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Firestone Winterhawk 4
- 72%from 6 reviews
- 67%would buy again
- 25,300 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers generally rate the Firestone Winterhawk 4 highly for everyday winter use, with strong confidence in snow and rain, short braking distances, and reassuring all-round performance. Many highlight its good value versus premium brands, along with a quiet, comfortable ride and responsive feel. Overall satisfaction is high across the majority of reviews.
- strong snow performance
- good wet grip and braking
- quiet and comfortable ride
- good value for money
Summarised by AI from 5 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 6 Winterhawk 4 reviewsGood quality for mid-range brand, cover winter needs. In general there is no high potential of performance for winter tires independently of brand!
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: 83 sizes of the Winterhawk 4 and 115 of the WinterCraft WP52+, 68 of them made in both.
| Category | Winterhawk 4 | WinterCraft WP52+ |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| Sizes made | 83 sizes, 14 to 20 inch | 115 sizes, 13 to 21 inch |
| Made in both | 68 sizes 155/65 R14165/65 R14165/70 R14175/65 R14175/70 R14185/60 R14185/65 R14165/65 R15175/65 R15185/55 R15185/60 R15185/65 R15and 56 more | |
| EU label wet grip | B100% | B82%A18% |
| EU label rolling resistance | D50%C50% | C65%D32%B2%E1% |
| EU label noise | 71 dB B100% | 70-73 dB B100% |
| Severe snow (3PMSF) sizes | 101 of 101 | 209 of 211 |
| On the market since | 2020 | 2025 |
| Replaced | Firestone Winterhawk 3 (2013) | - |
| Awards | - | Winner: Winter Touring Tire of the Year (WhatTire, 2026/27) |
| Price in the shared tests | The Winterhawk 4 was the dearer tire in 2 of the 2 tests that listed prices, by 4.5% 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.
Three Auto Bild tests put the Firestone Winterhawk 4 and Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ side by side: the 2025 winter tire test, the 2026 winter tire test and the 2026 Winter Tire Braking Test. The Kumho finished higher in all three, placing third against 16th in 2025, eighth against 16th in the full 2026 test, and tenth against 19th in the braking test.
The clearest difference is braking on ordinary roads. The Kumho stopped about 6% to 8% shorter in the dry across the two full tests, and about 4% to 7% shorter in the wet across the three tests. The Firestone has a narrower but consistent advantage in snow traction, while its snow-braking lead was small. Both tires were close in several snow-handling measures, and the Firestone recorded slightly lower rolling resistance in both full tests. For drivers choosing between them, the results favor the Kumho for mixed winter roads, but give the Firestone a case where pulling traction on snow matters most.
Winterhawk 4 vs WinterCraft WP52+: your questions
Is the Firestone Winterhawk 4 or the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ the better tire?
In the 3 independent tests that ran both tires, the Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ finished ahead 3 times and the Winterhawk 4 not once. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Winterhawk 4 scores 8.1 and the WinterCraft WP52+ 9.3 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Winterhawk 4 or the WinterCraft WP52+?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 11 of the 11 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 6% shorter in the wet across 3 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The WinterCraft WP52+ led 4 of the 4 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 6.9% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The Winterhawk 4 led 6 of the 9 snow measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 1.5% shorter on snow across 3 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Winterhawk 4 had 1.5% lower rolling resistance (2 tests). Owners rate wear 7.6/10 for the Winterhawk 4 and 8.3/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 7.7/10 for the Winterhawk 4 and 8.8/10 for the WinterCraft WP52+.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Winterhawk 4 72% from 6 reviews and the WinterCraft WP52+ 91% from 6. 67% of Winterhawk 4 owners would buy it again, against 100% for the WinterCraft WP52+.
Which is more expensive?
In the 2 tests that listed prices, the Winterhawk 4 was the dearer tire in 2 of them, by 4.5% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Winterhawk 4 is made in 83 sizes (14 to 20 inch) and the WinterCraft WP52+ in 115 (13 to 21 inch). 68 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Winterhawk 4 is graded B for wet grip and D for rolling resistance in most sizes; the WinterCraft WP52+ B and C.
Which is the newer tire?
The WinterCraft WP52+ is the newer design: it reached the market in 2025, the Winterhawk 4 in 2020. The Winterhawk 4 replaced the Firestone Winterhawk 3.
More comparisons with these tires
vs 
Firestone Winterhawk 4 vs Kleber Krisalp HP3
5-10 in 15 shared tests
vs 
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs Linglong Sport Master Winter
3-1 in 4 shared tests
vs 
Firestone Winterhawk 4 vs Hankook Winter I cept RS3
1-4 in 5 shared tests
vs
Dunlop Winter Sport 5 vs Firestone Winterhawk 4
10-2 in 12 shared tests
vs 
Firestone Winterhawk 4 vs Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
0-9 in 9 shared tests
vs 
Firestone Winterhawk 4 vs Hankook Winter i cept evo3
2-5 in 7 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Blizzak 6 vs Firestone Winterhawk 4
7-0 in 7 shared tests
vs
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P vs Firestone Winterhawk 4
12-2 in 14 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