Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Show full testing methodology
Score Weighting
Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.
| Test | Within category | Share of overall score |
|---|---|---|
| Dry · 24% | ||
| Dry Braking | 50% | 12% |
| Dry Handling | 50% | 12% |
| Wet · 41% | ||
| Wet Braking | 50% | 20.5% |
| Wet Handling | 50% | 20.5% |
| Snow · 35% | ||
| Snow Braking | 46% | 16.1% |
| Snow Handling | 54% | 18.9% |
Our standard methods
The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.
Dry Braking
For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.
Dry Handling
For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.
Wet Braking
For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
Wet Handling
For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Snow Braking
For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tire ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tire set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.
Snow Handling
For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tires are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.
All tests were done using two cars, a VW Golf wearing 205/55 R16 tires, and a heavier, larger Volvo S90 fitted with 245/45 R18 tires.
To see how the testing went, watch the video below!
Dry
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 94 ft | Best | |
| 95 ft | +1 ft |
All the tires in the Dry Braking test finished less than 3% apart.
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 51.27 s | Best | |
| 51.57 s | +0.30 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Wet
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 104 ft | Best | |
| 116 ft | +12 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 11.1% (12 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths).
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 37.6 s | Best | |
| 38.2 s | +0.60 s |
All the tires in the Wet Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Snow
Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 118 ft | Best | |
| 144 ft | +26 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 21.9% (26 ft ≈ 1.8 Car Lengths).
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 97.2 s | Best | |
| 104.5 s | +7.30 s |
The difference between best and worst was 7.5% (7.3 s).
Results
Premium VS Budget Winter TiresWatch the full video of this test on YouTube Watch on YouTube
Nokian WR Snowproof
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (6)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 95 ft | +1 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 51.27 s | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 104 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 37.6 s | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 118 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 97.2 s | Best in this discipline |
Tristar SnowPower 2
205/55 R16
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (6)
Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.
| Test | Position in discipline | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 1st / 2 | 94 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 51.57 s | +0.30 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 116 ft | +12 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 38.2 s | +0.60 s |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 144 ft | +26 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 2 | 104.5 s | +7.30 s |
It will be interesting to compare a premium and budget winter tires after 15 000 to kilometers to see wich tires keep better preformance during the tires wear.
Hello Jonathan. I really enjoy your videos. You helped me understand so much about tire. Right now I want to buy good all season tires. I am going to buy VW Polo 1.4 TDI 2006, and it has a strange tire size. 185/60/14 I think. And I am also limited by budget. I live in Serbia in southern parts and we have per average 37 snow days, and thats nothing. Sometimes we get 20 snow days. Most of the time its just dry. So the tire need to be only good in dry and hot, becouse we can get a pretty hot summer sometimes. Right now I am looking at Fulda MultiControl 52e and Kleber Quadraxer 2 49e.
I want a nice riding, comfortable, low noise with good fuel economy tire that will survive summer.
Are there any other choices exept these? I will pay more for the right tire but for a right price.
The CrossClimate is the master of dry performance in the all season category, all the rest can only be described as average at the moment. The Bridgestone A005 looks to be very good in braking but has high wear.
How about Conti Allseasoncontact rr Vredestein Quatrac 5 ? I cant find CrossClimate Plus version in 14' size. They only sell regular version. Is it a still good choice?
The regular CrossClimate is still a great choice, they didn't change much for the + version
How about Vredestein Quatrac 5?
Hey TireReviews, I would love to see a test on the Michellin CrossClimate+ vs UHP Summer, vs UHP Winter Vs Budget Summer in the wet and dry in say 10 degree ish heat (plus or minis a bit). If it performs well at these temps (considering the mild UK winters we've been having) it could actually just be the best UK tire for most of the time.
Something like that in the works at the moment
Sounds great! Can't wait to see it.
Expected a bigger difference, interresting test.
Awesome video, as always.
And I have one question.
I live in south east europe and we very rarely have snow here but temps are low and it rains pretty often. Should i buy winter or all season or all weather tires for conditions like these?
Mild winter, buy all seasons, wow.
Thank you very much.
Very informative video/post, thank you for taking the time to do it. It convinced me to not go cheap on winter tires despite the short season where I live. I do have a follow up question if you have time.
I have a Tesla Model 3 with dual motor/AWD, How much difference in dry, wet, and snow/ice would there be between a "studless ice/snow" tire and a "performance winter/snow" tire? Looking at the difference between the Michelin X-Ice Xi3 and Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3. So how much worse in wet/dry is the X-Ice? And how much worse in the snow/ice is the Sottozero?
Where I live it rains a lot and low temps are in the 34f/2c - 41f/5c range. We only get snow once or twice during the winter, but I do drive through snowy passes a few times a month so I don't want to have sub-optimal snow/ice ability. Thank you!
Another great video! Just to add - the Golf starts around 1,400 kg, the Volvo around 1,800 kg, depending mainly on the engine and gearbox.
Thank you :)