Michelin X Ice North 4 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
- TR Score
- 8.6/10
- Owners say
- 84% · 12
- TR Score
- 8.7/10
- Owners say
- 86% · 17
In the 5 independent tests that ran both tires, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 finished ahead 2 times and the X Ice North 4 once. The X Ice North 4 resisted straight aquaplaning at a 13.4% higher speed; the Hakkapeliitta R5 stopped 4.6% shorter in the dry.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Check the studded tire rules where you drive first. Where studs are legal and you face real ice, the Michelin X Ice North 4 stops up to 25.1 percent shorter on ice and brakes better in the wet. Where studs are banned, or your winter is mostly cold tarmac and motorway miles, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is quieter, more economical and better in the dry.
Where the X Ice North 4 is stronger
- Shorter ice braking in both measurements, by 25.1 percent at Vi Bilägare
- Faster ice traction in both runs, 5.66s against 9.42s, 39.9 percent
- Shorter wet braking in both tests and better straight aquaplaning in both measurements
Where the Hakkapeliitta R5 is stronger
- Legal all season where studs are banned or date-restricted
- Shorter dry braking in both measurements and lower fuel use in both tests
- Quieter, 10 points against 7, and won both wet handling comparisons
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.
X Ice North 4 vs Hakkapeliitta R5 at a glance
| Category | X Ice North 4 | Gap | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won5 shared tests | 1 | 2 | |
| Dry6 measurements | 2 | The Hakkapeliitta R5 stopped 4.6% shorter in the dry (2 tests) | 3 |
| Wet10 measurements | 5 | The X Ice North 4 resisted straight aquaplaning at a 13.4% higher speed (3 tests) | 4 |
| Snow7 measurements | 2 | 4 | |
| Ice7 measurements | 4 | The X Ice North 4 stopped 23.2% shorter on ice (2 tests) | 2 |
| Comfort4 measurements | 0 | 4 | |
| Value3 measurements | 0 | The Hakkapeliitta R5 used 4.3% less fuel (3 tests) | 3 |
| Tire Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 8.6/10 | The Hakkapeliitta R5 by 0.1 | 8.7/10 |
| Owner rating12 and 17 reviews | 84% | The Hakkapeliitta R5 by 2 points | 86% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 92% | The X Ice North 4 by 4 points | 88% |
| Pricein the 3 tests that listed prices | +8.6% | The X Ice North 4 was dearer in 3 of 3 | Cheaper |
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 5 tests, 2024 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 | X Ice North 4 | Field | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Teknikens Värld Studded, Nordic and Central European Winter Tire Test | P3 of 7Studded Winter Tires | P4 of 5Nordic Friction Winter Tires | |
| 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tire Test | P5 of 8Studded Winter Tires | P4 of 7Nordic Friction Winter Tires | |
| 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tire Test | P4 of 7Studded Winter Tires | P2 of 7Nordic Friction Winter Tires | |
| 2024 Studded Tire Test | P3 of 8 | P7 of 8 | |
| The Best Studded / Friction Winter Tires for 2024 | P3 of 6Studded Winter Tires | P4 of 6Nordic Friction Winter Tires |
Performance profile
14 measurements from the 5 shared tests, each tire shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
X Ice North 4
Hakkapeliitta R5
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. 6 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
X Ice North 4
Hakkapeliitta R5
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
X Ice North 4
Hakkapeliitta R5
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the X Ice North 4 84% from 12 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17. 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 | X Ice North 4 | Gap | Hakkapeliitta R5 | Wins | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 107 | 4.6% | 102 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 68.8% | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 20% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 42.9 | = | 42.9 | 0-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 123 | 1.6% | 125 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 41.7 | 1.1% | 41.25 | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 11.4% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 39.6 | 13.4% | 34.9 | 3-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 103 | 0.3% | 102 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 5.06 | 0.5% | 5.05 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 76.2 | 0.8% | 75.6 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 5.6% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 84 | 23.2% | 108 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 5.38 | 31.9% | 8.06 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 48.2 | 0.4% | 48 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 6.3% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 30% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| scored | 42.9% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 74.6 | 3.1 dB | 71.5 | 0-1 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
| 5.9 | 4.3% | 5.64 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
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 X Ice North 4 scores 8.6 and the Hakkapeliitta R5 8.7 out of 10.
| X Ice North 4 | Category | Hakkapeliitta R5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 61 | Dry | 56 | ||
| 25 | Wet | 33 | ||
| 57 | Comfort | 28 | ||
| 52 | Value | 88 | ||
| 78 | Snow | 88 | ||
| 86 | Ice | 81 | ||
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
| X Ice North 4 | Category | Hakkapeliitta R5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7.7 | Dry Grip | 8.3 | ||
| 7.3 | Wet Grip | 7.7 | ||
| 7.7 | Road Feedback | 8.7 | ||
| 8.2 | Handling | 8.6 | ||
| 8.9 | Wear | 8.3 | ||
| 8.3 | Comfort | 8.9 | ||
| 9.2 | Snow Grip | 9 | ||
| 9.8 | Ice Grip | 8.5 | ||
Owners rate the X Ice North 4 84% from 12 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Michelin X Ice North 4
- 84%from 12 reviews
- 92%would buy again
- 132,021 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 12 X Ice North 4 reviewsVery good on ice - probably one of the very best. But I wouldn't buy them if most of the driving is on wet or dry roads. The amount of studs in them contributes to a great amount of noise, but in return you'll get very good grip on ice. I have used them mostly on ice tracks with 3 different cars and the speed and grip you can get with these is on another level. Probably only comparable to Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3, but these have longer studs and lose studs easily. Compared to the Blizzaks, straight line grip is not as good, but generally they perform exceptionally well. Have no comparison to newer tires.
Snow grip is also really good. On dry and wet, feels a little spongy as you would expect from a winter tire. Haven't really driven them much on the road.
My experience is purely based on RWD cars: 1990 BMW 318i; 1995 BMW 328i; 2004 Smart Roadster. Used the same size with all of them.
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
- 86%from 17 reviews
- 88%would buy again
- 117,745 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers largely praise the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 for exceptional winter capability, with standout grip and braking on snow and strong confidence on ice, plus a very quiet and comfortable ride. A minority report weaknesses in wet conditions and aquaplaning resistance, and some note slush performance can be shaky around 0°C. Overall sentiment is strongly positive, with most users finding it a top-tier studless winter tire for harsh climates.
- outstanding snow traction and handling
- strong ice grip and braking for a studless winter tire
- very quiet and comfortable ride
- confidence-inspiring winter performance
- wet grip and aquaplaning resistance
- slush performance around 0°C
Summarised by AI from 13 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tire page.
All 17 Hakkapeliitta R5 reviewsGood Tires in almost all conditions. Feels better in try and wet than previous version r2 or r3. Good on wear. Could be better on ice and snow braking. Continental vikingcontact 7 feels better on ice and snow braking.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
| Category | X Ice North 4 | Hakkapeliitta R5 |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Winter | Winter |
| On the market since | - | 2021 |
| Replaced | - | Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3 (2018) |
| Price in the shared tests | The X Ice North 4 was the dearer tire in 3 of the 3 tests that listed prices, by 8.6% 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.
Both of these are winter tires, but they are built for different rules. The Michelin X Ice North 4 is studded and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is a Nordic friction tire, so check what is allowed where you drive before anything else. Studs are banned or date-restricted across much of Europe.
Four shared Nordic tests split two to one for the Michelin with one dead heat, both 5th of 20 at Teknikens Värld in 2025. The Michelin was 3rd of 8 against 7th at Vi Bilägare and 3rd of 17 against 4th in Teknikens Värld's 2024 test; the Nokian was 2nd of 14 against 4th at Tekniikan Maailma.
Ice is where the studs earn their keep. The Michelin stopped shorter on ice in both measurements, 13.38m against 17.87m at Vi Bilägare, 25.1 percent, and 37.7m against 47.9m at Tekniikan Maailma, and it was quicker away in both ice traction runs, 5.66s against 9.42s, 39.9 percent.
Conclusion
Start with the law, because it may make the decision for you. The Michelin X Ice North 4 is studded and the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is a Nordic friction tire, so where studs are banned or restricted by date, only the Nokian can be run all season.
Where studs are legal and ice is what you face, the Michelin X Ice North 4 is a long way clear. It stopped shorter on ice in both measurements, 13.38m against 17.87m at Vi Bilägare, 25.1 percent, and 37.7m against 47.9m at Tekniikan Maailma, 21.3 percent, and it pulled away faster in both ice traction runs, 5.66s against 9.42s and 5.1s against 6.7s. It also braked shorter in the wet in both tests and resisted straight aquaplaning better in both measurements, 69.2 against 58.6 km/h at Vi Bilägare and 62.5 against 55.7 km/h at Teknikens Värld. Vi Bilägare's judges rated its dry handling far higher too, 5 points against 2.
The Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 is the better road tire of the two. It braked shorter in the dry in both measurements, 30.8m against 32.1m and 31.52m against 33.26m, used less fuel in both tests, 5.25 against 5.5 l/100km, was quieter, 10 points against 7 at Tekniikan Maailma, and it won both wet handling comparisons and the snow handling comparison. Its judges also preferred it on snow, 20 points against 18, and for comfort, 6 points against 5. It finished 2nd of 14 at Tekniikan Maailma with the Michelin 4th.
Note that the ice advantage does not always show up in the subjective scores: Teknikens Värld rated the two level for subjective ice handling in 2025 even though the Michelin's measured ice figures are far better. If your winter is glare ice and studs are legal, the Michelin. If it is cold tarmac, motorway miles and snow, or studs are not permitted, the Nokian.
X Ice North 4 vs Hakkapeliitta R5: your questions
Is the Michelin X Ice North 4 or the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 the better tire?
In the 5 independent tests that ran both tires, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 finished ahead 2 times and the X Ice North 4 once. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the X Ice North 4 scores 8.6 and the Hakkapeliitta R5 8.7 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the X Ice North 4 or the Hakkapeliitta R5?
The X Ice North 4 led 5 of the 10 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it resisted straight aquaplaning at a 13.4% higher speed across 3 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Hakkapeliitta R5 led 3 of the 6 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 4.6% shorter in the dry across 2 tests.
Which is better in snow?
The Hakkapeliitta R5 led 4 of the 7 snow measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Hakkapeliitta R5 used 4.3% less fuel (3 tests). Owners rate wear 8.9/10 for the X Ice North 4 and 8.3/10 for the Hakkapeliitta R5.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 8.3/10 for the X Ice North 4 and 8.9/10 for the Hakkapeliitta R5.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the X Ice North 4 84% from 12 reviews and the Hakkapeliitta R5 86% from 17. 92% of X Ice North 4 owners would buy it again, against 88% for the Hakkapeliitta R5.
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 8.6% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
More comparisons with these tires
vs
Michelin X Ice Snow vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
0-6 in 8 shared tests
vs
Continental VikingContact 8 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
6-0 in 6 shared tests
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
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
Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 vs Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
7-1 in 8 shared tests
vs
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 vs Michelin X Ice North 4
5-4 in 9 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