Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Recorded test conditions
Recorded test conditions
- Dry Braking
- 49.7 → 3.1 mph
- Wet Braking
- 49.7 → 3.1 mph
- Snow Braking
- 21.7 → 3.1 mph
- Ice Braking
- 9.3 → 3.1 mph
As with the studded version, Vi Bilagare have performed a thorough test covering dry, wet, snow and ice, and should be considered one of the benchmarks for extreme winter testing in Europe.
This test is particularly interesting as it has the new Michelin X-Ice Snow, Bridgestone Blizzak Ice, Pirelli Ice Zero FR and Nexen Winguard Ice Plus WH43 placed against the established Nordic winter tires from Continental, Goodyear and Nokian.
Scroll down for the full results, and don't forget to checkout ViBilagare.se for the full details of the test!
Dry
While Nordic winter tires aren't intended to have the best outright dry performance, dry braking is still a key safety test. In this test, the new Bridgestone Blizzak Ice proved to have the best grip, stopping the test vehicle nearly one meter sooner than the next best tire on test, the Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 2.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (50 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 94 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 96 ft | +2 ft | 12 mph | |
| 97 ft | +3 ft | 14 mph | |
| 99 ft | +5 ft | 18 mph | |
| 99 ft | +5 ft | 18 mph | |
| 101 ft | +7 ft | 21 mph | |
| 103 ft | +9 ft | 24 mph | |
| 106 ft | +12 ft | 27 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 12.5% (12 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nexen Winguard Ice Plus WH43 would still be travelling at 27 mph when the Bridgestone Blizzak Ice had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The Goodyear was the best subjectively during dry handling, offering the best balance and high levels of grip.
Subj. Dry Handling
Subjective Dry Handling Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 5 Points | Best | |
| 5 Points | Best | |
| 4 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 4 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 3 Points | -2.00 Points | |
| 2 Points | -3.00 Points | |
| 2 Points | -3.00 Points | |
| 1 Points | -4.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 80% (4 Points).
Wet
Wet braking is another safety critical test, and again Goodyear was impressive, beating the rest of the group by nearly three meters. This sort of advantage is almost unheard of during wet braking.
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (50 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 113 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 122 ft | +9 ft | 22 mph | |
| 124 ft | +11 ft | 24 mph | |
| 125 ft | +12 ft | 25 mph | |
| 126 ft | +13 ft | 26 mph | |
| 129 ft | +16 ft | 28 mph | |
| 132 ft | +19 ft | 30 mph | |
| 141 ft | +28 ft | 36 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 25.3% (28 ft ≈ 1.9 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Bridgestone Blizzak Ice would still be travelling at 36 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 2 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The Goodyear retained its lead during wet handling, finishing the short lap over a second ahead of second placed Pirelli Ice Zero FR.
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 43.11 s | Best | |
| 44.13 s | +1.02 s | |
| 44.71 s | +1.60 s | |
| 44.78 s | +1.67 s | |
| 44.99 s | +1.88 s | |
| 45.31 s | +2.20 s | |
| 46.35 s | +3.24 s | |
| 47.14 s | +4.03 s |
The difference between best and worst was 9.3% (4.03 s).
Impressively the Goodyear rounded out its wet performance with another clear win in straight line aquaplaning.
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 45.5 mph | Best | |
| 40.6 mph | -4.9 mph | |
| 40.5 mph | -5.0 mph | |
| 39.8 mph | -5.7 mph | |
| 39.4 mph | -6.1 mph | |
| 39.3 mph | -6.2 mph | |
| 38.8 mph | -6.7 mph | |
| 38.2 mph | -7.3 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 16.2% (7.3 mph).
Snow
The new Nexen Winguard Ice Plus WH43 had a good lead in snow braking.
Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet (22 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 37 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 9 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 11 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 12 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 12 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 13 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 13 mph | |
| 38 ft | +1 ft | 15 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 3.5% (1 ft). From 80 mph, the Nereus NS805+ would still be travelling at 15 mph when the Nexen Winguard Ice Plus WH43 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The snow specialist Continental VikingContact 7 took its first win during snow handling, outperforming the pack by a small margin. Interestingly the snow braking winning Nexen could only manage seventh.
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 72.25 s | Best | |
| 72.73 s | +0.48 s | |
| 72.86 s | +0.61 s | |
| 73.09 s | +0.84 s | |
| 73.44 s | +1.19 s | |
| 73.6 s | +1.35 s | |
| 73.63 s | +1.38 s | |
| 75.24 s | +2.99 s |
The difference between best and worst was 4.1% (2.99 s).
Ice
Once again the Nexen proved to have an excellent braking ability, winning the ice braking testing by over half a meter.
Ice Braking
Ice braking in feet (9 - 3 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 8 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 10 ft | +2 ft | 33 mph | |
| 11 ft | +3 ft | 39 mph | |
| 11 ft | +3 ft | 39 mph | |
| 11 ft | +3 ft | 40 mph | |
| 11 ft | +3 ft | 41 mph | |
| 12 ft | +4 ft | 43 mph | |
| 12 ft | +4 ft | 44 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 42.5% (4 ft). From 80 mph, the Nereus NS805+ would still be travelling at 44 mph when the Nexen Winguard Ice Plus WH43 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Continental repeated its snow handling advantage, showing its rounded ability to also win ice handling.
Ice Handling
Ice handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 48.82 s | Best | |
| 49.09 s | +0.27 s | |
| 49.43 s | +0.61 s | |
| 49.83 s | +1.01 s | |
| 50.63 s | +1.81 s | |
| 52.2 s | +3.38 s | |
| 52.54 s | +3.72 s | |
| 53.46 s | +4.64 s |
The difference between best and worst was 9.5% (4.64 s).
Environment
The new Michelin X-Ice Snow had the lowest rolling resistance, but the group was close overall.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5.89 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 5.94 kg/t | +0.05 kg/t | $2 | |
| 6.03 kg/t | +0.14 kg/t | $7 | |
| 6.05 kg/t | +0.16 kg/t | $8 | |
| 6.11 kg/t | +0.22 kg/t | $11 | |
| 6.14 kg/t | +0.25 kg/t | $12 | |
| 6.18 kg/t | +0.29 kg/t | $14 | |
| 6.2 kg/t | +0.31 kg/t | $15 |
The difference between best and worst was 5.3% (0.31 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Bridgestone Blizzak Ice uses about 4 gal ($15) more fuel than the Michelin X Ice Snow.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
The Continental VikingContact 7 was the only tire to score 5/5 in subjective noise and comfort testing.
Subj. Noise
Subjective in car noise levels
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 5 Points | Best | |
| 4 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 4 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 4 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 3 Points | -2.00 Points | |
| 3 Points | -2.00 Points | |
| 2 Points | -3.00 Points | |
| 2 Points | -3.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).
The budget Nereus (also known as Firemax) was the cheapest tire on test, however the performance in other testing reflected this.
Results
Continental VikingContact 7
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 3rd / 8 | 97 ft | +3 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 4 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 126 ft | +13 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 44.99 s | +1.88 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 39.8 mph | -5.7 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 72.25 s | Best in this discipline |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 10 ft | +2 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 48.82 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 5 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 4th / 8 | 6.05 kg/t | +0.16 kg/t |
- Price
- 1621.00
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R3
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 4th / 8 | 99 ft | +5 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 3 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 125 ft | +12 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 44.78 s | +1.67 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 38.8 mph | -6.7 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 72.86 s | +0.61 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 11 ft | +3 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 49.09 s | +0.27 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 2 Points | -3.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 6.03 kg/t | +0.14 kg/t |
- Price
- 1465.00
Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 2
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 / 8 | 96 ft | +2 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 5 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 113 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 43.11 s | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 45.5 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 73.6 s | +1.35 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 11 ft | +3 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 53.46 s | +4.64 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 4 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 5.94 kg/t | +0.05 kg/t |
- Price
- 1311.00
Pirelli Ice Zero FR
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 5th / 8 | 99 ft | +5 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 5 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 124 ft | +11 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 44.13 s | +1.02 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 39.3 mph | -6.2 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 73.09 s | +0.84 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 11 ft | +3 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 49.43 s | +0.61 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 4 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 8 | 6.11 kg/t | +0.22 kg/t |
- Price
- 1312.00
Nexen Winguard Ice+ WH43
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 8th / 8 | 106 ft | +12 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 2 Points | -3.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 129 ft | +16 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 46.35 s | +3.24 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 39.4 mph | -6.1 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 37 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 73.63 s | +1.38 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 8 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 49.83 s | +1.01 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 4 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 8 | 6.18 kg/t | +0.29 kg/t |
- Price
- 982.00
Michelin X Ice Snow
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 7th / 8 | 103 ft | +9 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 4 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 132 ft | +19 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 44.71 s | +1.60 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 40.6 mph | -4.9 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 73.44 s | +1.19 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 11 ft | +3 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 52.54 s | +3.72 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 3 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 8 | 5.89 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- Price
- 1542.00
Bridgestone Blizzak Ice
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 / 8 | 94 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 2 Points | -3.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 141 ft | +28 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 47.14 s | +4.03 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 38.2 mph | -7.3 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 72.73 s | +0.48 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 12 ft | +4 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 52.2 s | +3.38 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 3 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 8 | 6.2 kg/t | +0.31 kg/t |
- Price
- 1586.00
Nereus NS805+
205/60 R16Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (11)
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 | 6th / 8 | 101 ft | +7 ft |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 1 Points | -4.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 122 ft | +9 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 45.31 s | +2.20 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 40.5 mph | -5.0 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 38 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 75.24 s | +2.99 s |
| Ice BrakingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 12 ft | +4 ft |
| Ice HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 50.63 s | +1.81 s |
| Subj. NoiseHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 2 Points | -3.00 Points |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 6th / 8 | 6.14 kg/t | +0.25 kg/t |
- Price
- 682.00


We can't find a Vi Bilagare test with an all season or winter tire as a reference. Maybe next year we see them test Nordic Friction winter tires with a Michelin CrossClimate 2, a Bridgestone WC A005 Evo or a Continental AllSeasonContact as an all season reference and/or a Nokian WR Snowproof, a Continental WC TS860 or a Bridgestone Blizzac LM005 as a winter tire reference. It should be interesting, since the only test where we can get all seasons vs winters vs Nordics is the one you did (great test, by the way):
https://www.tyrereviews.com...
Vi did make a test with the all season contact in, I've not published it yet though. I believe the reason it's not done often is because no manufacturer officially sells all season tires in Nordic climates as they're really not suitable for the heavy winters with a lot of ice.
I live in a warm climate, so I have to admit that I have no idea what tires one can buy in a nordic climate, but I thought that people in those countries fitted all season tires during spring and leave them throught the summer and autumn. That's why I thought it could be didactical to have an all season as a reference for them. In fact, all seasons are not appropriate for a harsh winter, up to the point where (and according to Michelin's website) the norwegian and swedish authorities decided to not recognize the Michelin CrossClimate as a legal tire to be used in the winter, despite its 3PMSF rating!...
I like your theory, however I fear if people had all seasons on in the summer, they would be more inclined to leave them on in winter, which is maybe why the extra law for the CC!
I will get that article up on the site though, so keep an eye out in the next few days
I just digged into this matter and found out at Continental's website that there may not exactly be an extra law for Michelin's CC. It's just that Norway demands that even tires that have the M+S had to be especially developed for winter conditions but Sweden, on the other hand, seems to have some special regulation against the CC, according to Michelin's sweden website. Check out this links:
https://www.continental-tir...
https://www.michelin.se/aut... (scroll down and click at "Villkor" for note 2, although it should rather be note 1)
Michelin seems to be the only responsible or respectful manufacturer that advises consumers from Sweden and Norway (in the respective country website) that the CC (their only all season tire) is not appropriate for their winter months (Oct-Apr in Norway and Dec-Mar in Sweden).
Good sleuthing! As I mentioned, I've not dug into this a huge amount but in casual conversations I've had with manufacturers, some don't offer them to sale to dealers. Obviously with the internet this doesn't mean they're not available though.
As you said, something like the CC2 would be a great "summer" tire for those climates for a lot of cars.