Test Charts / Vi Bilagare

2020 Studded Winter Tire Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tire, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 205/60 R16
Tires tested: 8
Disciplines: 13

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tires can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tires does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1GT Radial IcePro 3	95 ft	Best	0 mph
2Continental IceContact 3	101 ft	+6 ft	20 mph
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	102 ft	+7 ft	21 mph
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	102 ft	+7 ft	21 mph
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	104 ft	+9 ft	23 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	105 ft	+10 ft	25 mph
7Michelin X Ice North 4	106 ft	+11 ft	26 mph
8Nokian Nordman 7	109 ft	+14 ft	29 mph

The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (14 ft ≈ 1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nokian Nordman 7 would still be travelling at 29 mph when the GT Radial IcePro 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5 Points	Best
2Pirelli Ice Zero 2	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Continental IceContact 3	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	3 Points	-2.00 Points
7Nokian Nordman 7	2 Points	-3.00 Points
7GT Radial IcePro 3	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1GT Radial IcePro 3	111 ft	Best	0 mph
2Pirelli Ice Zero 2	114 ft	+3 ft	13 mph
3Michelin X Ice North 4	115 ft	+4 ft	15 mph
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	119 ft	+8 ft	20 mph
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	121 ft	+10 ft	23 mph
5Continental IceContact 3	121 ft	+10 ft	23 mph
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	122 ft	+11 ft	24 mph
8Nokian Nordman 7	128 ft	+17 ft	29 mph

The difference between best and worst was 14.9% (17 ft ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nokian Nordman 7 would still be travelling at 29 mph when the GT Radial IcePro 3 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1GT Radial IcePro 3	43.11 s	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	43.77 s	+0.66 s
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	44.1 s	+0.99 s
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	44.12 s	+1.01 s
5Hankook Winter i pike RS2	44.75 s	+1.64 s
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	45.17 s	+2.06 s
7Nokian Nordman 7	45.75 s	+2.64 s
7Michelin X Ice North 4	45.75 s	+2.64 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.1% (2.64 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Ice Zero 2	40.1 mph	Best
2GT Radial IcePro 3	39.8 mph	-0.3 mph
3Continental IceContact 3	39.6 mph	-0.5 mph
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	39.1 mph	-1.0 mph
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	38.8 mph	-1.3 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	38.6 mph	-1.5 mph
7Nokian Nordman 7	38.3 mph	-1.8 mph
8Michelin X Ice North 4	36.9 mph	-3.2 mph

The difference between best and worst was 8% (3.2 mph).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin X Ice North 4	34 ft	Best	0 mph
1Continental IceContact 3	34 ft	Best	0 mph
3Nokian Nordman 7	34 ft	0 ft	2 mph
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	35 ft	+1 ft	7 mph
5Hankook Winter i pike RS2	35 ft	+1 ft	8 mph
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	35 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	35 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
8GT Radial IcePro 3	35 ft	+1 ft	12 mph

All the tires in the Snow Braking test finished less than 3% apart. From 80 mph, the GT Radial IcePro 3 would still be travelling at 12 mph when the Michelin X Ice North 4 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Ice Zero 2	3.62 s	Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4	3.67 s	+0.05 s
2Continental IceContact 3	3.67 s	+0.05 s
4Nokian Nordman 7	3.72 s	+0.10 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	3.75 s	+0.13 s
6Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3.79 s	+0.17 s
7GT Radial IcePro 3	3.83 s	+0.21 s
8Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	3.92 s	+0.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.3% (0.3 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	74.62 s	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	75.04 s	+0.42 s
3Nokian Nordman 7	75.19 s	+0.57 s
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	75.19 s	+0.57 s
5Michelin X Ice North 4	75.69 s	+1.07 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	75.74 s	+1.12 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	76.85 s	+2.23 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	78.81 s	+4.19 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.6% (4.19 s).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	11 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin X Ice North 4	11 ft	0 ft	9 mph
3Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	13 ft	+2 ft	32 mph
4Continental IceContact 3	14 ft	+3 ft	34 mph
5Nokian Nordman 7	14 ft	+3 ft	36 mph
6Hankook Winter i pike RS2	15 ft	+4 ft	41 mph
7Pirelli Ice Zero 2	17 ft	+6 ft	47 mph
8GT Radial IcePro 3	17 ft	+6 ft	48 mph

The difference between best and worst was 54.8% (6 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the GT Radial IcePro 3 would still be travelling at 48 mph when the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Ice Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	1.89 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	1.94 s	+0.05 s
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	2.08 s	+0.19 s
4Continental IceContact 3	2.18 s	+0.29 s
5Nokian Nordman 7	2.22 s	+0.33 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	2.42 s	+0.53 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	2.8 s	+0.91 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	3.29 s	+1.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 74.1% (1.4 s).

Ice Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	51.23 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	51.4 s	+0.17 s
3Continental IceContact 3	52.24 s	+1.01 s
4Hankook Winter i pike RS2	53.52 s	+2.29 s
5Nokian Nordman 7	55.11 s	+3.88 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero 2	56.42 s	+5.19 s
7Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	59.02 s	+7.79 s
8GT Radial IcePro 3	61.42 s	+10.19 s

The difference between best and worst was 19.9% (10.19 s).

Comfort

Subj. Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5 Points	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Hankook Winter i pike RS2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
3Pirelli Ice Zero 2	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5Nokian Nordman 7	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	2 Points	-3.00 Points
5GT Radial IcePro 3	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

Value

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin X Ice North 4	5.66 l/100km	Best	$0
2Hankook Winter i pike RS2	5.67 l/100km	+0.01 l/100km	$2
3Continental IceContact 3	5.69 l/100km	+0.03 l/100km	$6
4Pirelli Ice Zero 2	5.71 l/100km	+0.05 l/100km	$9
5Nokian Nordman 7	5.74 l/100km	+0.08 l/100km	$15
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9	5.76 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	$18
6Toyo Observe Ice Freezer	5.76 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	$18
8GT Radial IcePro 3	5.78 l/100km	+0.12 l/100km	$22

All the tires in the Fuel Consumption test finished less than 3% apart. Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the GT Radial IcePro 3 uses about 6 gal ($22) more fuel than the Michelin X Ice North 4.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.

Gas/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

12,000 mi

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

$3.60/gal

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tire age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.