Test source Auto Motor Und Sport

2022 AMS Winter Tire Test

Joint test winnersContinental WinterContact TS 870 P Michelin Pilot Alpin 5

The first winter tire test for 2022 is here, and it's the Auto Motor Und Sport UHP winter tire test!

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson

September 25, 2022 5 min read Updated January 8, 2025

Tire shortlist Read the test

Tires tested: 8
Tested size: 245/45 R19

At a glance

Tire shortlist

8 Tires tested

Published finishing positions, with the strengths and considerations from this test. Owner reviews cover other sizes and driving conditions.

Joint1^st

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

+Despite small deficits in cornering grip, very easy to control handling on snow with wide reserves. Balanced in the wet, short braking distances, neutral and precise grip on dry roads.

−Comparatively weak on wet roads with limited braking, low aquaplaning resistance and reduced grip in curves.

33 owner reviews Test Results

Joint1^st

Michelin Pilot Alpin 5

+Excellent driving dynamics with direct steering response, high level of grip and the best balance on snow. Shortest braking distances, high cornering stability and great steering precision on dry roads.

−Deficits when braking in the wet, low aquaplaning resistance, faintly audible noise when cornering.

33 owner reviews Test Results

3^rd

Vredestein Wintrac Pro

+Very good traction and braking on snow. Quite balanced wet properties, safe lane changes.

−Unexpectedly low lateral grip on snow. Limited controllability in the wet at the limit of grip. Long dry braking with sensitive handling and lower grip during dry handling. Disturbing noise when cornering.

30 owner reviews Test Results

4^th

Bridgestone Blizzak LM005

+Very balanced, reliable and easy to control on snow. Very short braking distances thanks to very good grip in the wet. Dynamic, spontaneous steering and agile on dry roads.

−Longer dry braking distances, oversteer balance when driving fast in the dry.

115 owner reviews Test Results

5^th

Firestone Winterhawk 4

+Easy to control with very good driving dynamics, high level of grip and generous reserves on snow. Balanced cornering dynamics dry at a reduced level.

−Weak braking and limited liability reserves, plus sensitive to load changes in the wet, increased risk of aquaplaning. Long braking distances even on dry tracks. Audible internal noise and low levels of comfort.

6 owner reviews Test Results

Joint6^th

Cooper Discoverer Winter

+Still decent braking and traction on snow. Very quiet and quite comfortable tire.

−Unexpectedly low cornering on snow with respectable traction and braking grip. Poor performance with risk of oversteer in the wet and less secure balance in dry corners. High rolling resistance.

1 owner review Test Results

Joint6^th

Falken Eurowinter HS01

+Very decent wet performance with superior aquaplaning resistance but small limitations in cornering grip. Safe, understeering, reliable driving dynamics on dry roads, high levels of comfort.

−Long braking distances, sluggish steering response and little grip on snow. Disturbing rolling noise in curves.

23 owner reviews Test Results

Joint6^th

Uniroyal WinterExpert

+Still decent traction in snow, good cornering ability on dry asphalt.

−Poor driving stability and poor grip in the wet. Too long braking distances on wet and dry asphalt. Sensitive to load changes in fast corners. Audible rolling noises in the interior when cornering.

7 owner reviews Test Results

Tire shortlist

Compare selected tires

2022 AMS Winter Tire Test · 245/45 R19

Tire	Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	Vredestein Wintrac Pro	Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	Firestone Winterhawk 4	Cooper Discoverer Winter	Falken Eurowinter HS01	Uniroyal WinterExpert
Position	Joint 1^st	Joint 1^st	3^rd	4^th	5^th	Joint 6^th	Joint 6^th	Joint 6^th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry	99.2%	99.6%	95.2%	96.2%	94.3%	97.3%	97.9%	93.9%
Wet	94.3%	94%	99%	97.3%	92.6%	91.1%	97%	88.1%
Snow	94.4%	93.7%	93.9%	92.4%	93.5%	94.5%	88.6%	92.6%
Comfort	98.4%	99.6%	99.6%	98.3%	99.1%	100%	97.1%	98.6%
Rolling Resistance	100%	93.8%	96.2%	96.2%	95%	87.4%	76.8%	96.2%
Keep researching	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results

The full test

The evidence behind the verdict

The first winter tire test for 2022 is here, and it's the Auto Motor Und Sport UHP winter tire test! This year AMS tested eight patterns in 245/45 R19 using an Audi A6 test vehicle.

There's almost nothing surprising about this test, it's nice when a test makes sense. At the front we have the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 and Continental WinterContact TS870P (two of Tire Reviews favorite UHP Winter tires), with the wet masters Vredestein and Bridgestone following them up in third and fourth places overall.

Falken will likely be disappointed with last place, however the replacement to the HS01, the HS02, is now new to market so we expect this new tire to be vastly improved.

Read on for the full data!

Dry

Michelin winter tires always perform well in the dry, and this test was no exception with the Pilot Alpin 5 having a significant lead in dry braking over the second placed Continental, which in turn had a significant lead over the rest of the group.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	100 %
2Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	98 %
3Falken Eurowinter HS01	96 %
4Cooper Discoverer Winter	96 %
5Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	93 %
6Vredestein Wintrac Pro	92 %
7Firestone Winterhawk 4	90 %
8Uniroyal WinterExpert	89 %

The difference between best and worst was 11%.

Dry handling put the Continental back on top, with the Falken edging out the Michelin to second place.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	100 %
2Falken Eurowinter HS01	99 %
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	99 %
4Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	99 %
5Firestone Winterhawk 4	99 %
5Uniroyal WinterExpert	99 %
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro	99 %
8Cooper Discoverer Winter	98 %

All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.

Wet

The Vredestein Wintrac Pro had a 4 feet advantage during the wet braking test! Cooper and in particular Uniroyal struggled.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result
1Vredestein Wintrac Pro	100 %
2Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	96 %
3Falken Eurowinter HS01	94 %
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	92 %
5Firestone Winterhawk 4	92 %
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	90 %
7Cooper Discoverer Winter	83 %
8Uniroyal WinterExpert	81 %

The difference between best and worst was 19%.

Vredestein held its lead in wet handling and Falken once again jumped up to second place, this time ahead of the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 in third.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result
1Vredestein Wintrac Pro	100 %
2Falken Eurowinter HS01	99 %
3Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	98 %
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	98 %
5Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	97 %
6Firestone Winterhawk 4	97 %
7Cooper Discoverer Winter	96 %
8Uniroyal WinterExpert	92 %

The difference between best and worst was 8%.

Falken also had a large lead in the aquaplaning result.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result
1Falken Eurowinter HS01	100 %
2Cooper Discoverer Winter	97 %
3Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	97 %
4Vredestein Wintrac Pro	95 %
5Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	95 %
6Firestone Winterhawk 4	93 %
6Uniroyal WinterExpert	93 %
8Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	93 %

The difference between best and worst was 7%.

Snow

Snow braking was led by the new Firestone WinterHawk 4, with Vredestein once again proving it's ability at slowing the test car.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result
1Firestone Winterhawk 4	100 %
2Vredestein Wintrac Pro	98 %
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	97 %
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	97 %
5Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	96 %
6Uniroyal WinterExpert	94 %
7Cooper Discoverer Winter	92 %
8Falken Eurowinter HS01	83 %

The difference between best and worst was 17%.

Snow traction (figures in ms/2 not newtons) was led by Michelin, with Vredestein and Continental also performing well.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	100 %
2Vredestein Wintrac Pro	98 %
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	97 %
4Firestone Winterhawk 4	97 %
5Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	96 %
6Uniroyal WinterExpert	95 %
7Cooper Discoverer Winter	92 %
8Falken Eurowinter HS01	81 %

The difference between best and worst was 19%.

Continental and Michelin led the group during the snow handling testing with Falken continuing to struggle.

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	100 %
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	99 %
3Firestone Winterhawk 4	99 %
4Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	97 %
5Cooper Discoverer Winter	97 %
6Uniroyal WinterExpert	96 %
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro	96 %
8Falken Eurowinter HS01	91 %

The difference between best and worst was 9%.

Environment

The Cooper Discoverer Winter claimed its first test win during external noise measuring.

Noise
Position / Tire	Result
1Cooper Discoverer Winter	100 %
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	100 %
2Vredestein Wintrac Pro	100 %
4Firestone Winterhawk 4	99 %
5Uniroyal WinterExpert	99 %
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	98 %
7Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	98 %
8Falken Eurowinter HS01	97 %

All the tires in the Noise test finished less than 3% apart.

Impressively the Conti had the lowest rolling resistance, with Falken once again struggling.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	100 %
2Vredestein Wintrac Pro	96 %
2Bridgestone Blizzak LM005	96 %
2Uniroyal WinterExpert	96 %
5Firestone Winterhawk 4	95 %
6Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	94 %
7Cooper Discoverer Winter	87 %
8Falken Eurowinter HS01	77 %

The difference between best and worst was 23%.

The Falken was however one of the cheapest tires of the test.

Results

Very Good.

Dry99.6%

Wet94%

Snow93.7%

Comfort99.6%

Rolling Resistance93.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	1^st / 8	100%
Dry Handling	3^rd / 8	99.25%
Wet Braking	4^th / 8	91.91%
Wet Handling	5^th / 8	97.21%
Straight Aqua	5^th / 8	94.93%
Curved Aquaplaning	7^th / 8	88.89%
Snow Braking	3^rd / 8	96.89%
Snow Traction	1^st / 8	100%
Snow Handling	2^nd / 8	99.24%
Snow Circle	7^th / 8	76.72%
Noise	2^nd / 8	99.57%
Rolling Resistance	6^th / 8	93.83%

EU Label: C/B/72
Weight: 11.51 kgs
Tread: 7.9 mm
Price: 309.00

Very Good.

Dry99.2%

Wet94.3%

Snow94.4%

Comfort98.4%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	2^nd / 8	98.42%
Dry Handling	1^st / 8	100%
Wet Braking	6^th / 8	89.83%
Wet Handling	4^th / 8	98.14%
Straight Aqua	8^th / 8	92.52%
Curved Aquaplaning	3^rd / 8	98.92%
Snow Braking	3^rd / 8	96.89%
Snow Traction	3^rd / 8	97.29%
Snow Handling	1^st / 8	100%
Snow Circle	4^th / 8	82.15%
Noise	6^th / 8	98.44%
Rolling Resistance	1^st / 8	100%

EU Label: C/B/71
Weight: 10.81 kgs
Tread: 8.6 mm
Price: 270.00

Very Good.

Dry95.2%

Wet99%

Snow93.9%

Comfort99.6%

Rolling Resistance96.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	6^th / 8	91.97%
Dry Handling	7^th / 8	98.51%
Wet Braking	1^st / 8	100%
Wet Handling	1^st / 8	100%
Straight Aqua	4^th / 8	95.18%
Curved Aquaplaning	6^th / 8	94.62%
Snow Braking	2^nd / 8	98.03%
Snow Traction	2^nd / 8	98.1%
Snow Handling	7^th / 8	96.03%
Snow Circle	4^th / 8	82.15%
Noise	2^nd / 8	99.57%
Rolling Resistance	2^nd / 8	96.2%

EU Label: D/B/72
Weight: 12.46 kgs
Tread: 8.6 mm
Price: 223.00

Very Good.

Dry96.2%

Wet97.3%

Snow92.4%

Comfort98.3%

Rolling Resistance96.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	5^th / 8	93.35%
Dry Handling	4^th / 8	99.09%
Wet Braking	2^nd / 8	96.07%
Wet Handling	3^rd / 8	98.27%
Straight Aqua	3^rd / 8	96.58%
Curved Aquaplaning	4^th / 8	98.57%
Snow Braking	5^th / 8	95.77%
Snow Traction	5^th / 8	95.93%
Snow Handling	4^th / 8	97.35%
Snow Circle	6^th / 8	79.24%
Noise	7^th / 8	98.3%
Rolling Resistance	2^nd / 8	96.2%

EU Label: C/A/72
Weight: 11.94 kgs
Tread: 8.0 mm
Price: 257.00

Good.

Dry94.3%

Wet92.6%

Snow93.5%

Comfort99.1%

Rolling Resistance95%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	7^th / 8	89.69%
Dry Handling	5^th / 8	98.92%
Wet Braking	5^th / 8	91.64%
Wet Handling	6^th / 8	96.54%
Straight Aqua	6^th / 8	92.78%
Curved Aquaplaning	8^th / 8	80.29%
Snow Braking	1^st / 8	100%
Snow Traction	4^th / 8	97.02%
Snow Handling	3^rd / 8	99.05%
Snow Circle	8^th / 8	76.34%
Noise	4^th / 8	99.14%
Rolling Resistance	5^th / 8	95%

EU Label: C/B/71
Weight: 11.92 kgs
Tread: 7.9 mm
Price: 196.00

Sufficient.

Dry97.3%

Wet91.1%

Snow94.5%

Comfort100%

Rolling Resistance87.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	4^th / 8	96.24%
Dry Handling	8^th / 8	98.42%
Wet Braking	7^th / 8	82.6%
Wet Handling	7^th / 8	95.88%
Straight Aqua	2^nd / 8	97.21%
Curved Aquaplaning	2^nd / 8	99.64%
Snow Braking	7^th / 8	92.22%
Snow Traction	7^th / 8	92.14%
Snow Handling	5^th / 8	96.6%
Snow Circle	2^nd / 8	96.9%
Noise	1^st / 8	100%
Rolling Resistance	7^th / 8	87.36%

EU Label: C/B/71
Weight: 11.75 kgs
Tread: 7.9 mm
Price: 203.00

Sufficient.

Dry93.9%

Wet88.1%

Snow92.6%

Comfort98.6%

Rolling Resistance96.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	8^th / 8	88.78%
Dry Handling	5^th / 8	98.92%
Wet Braking	8^th / 8	80.51%
Wet Handling	8^th / 8	92.42%
Straight Aqua	6^th / 8	92.78%
Curved Aquaplaning	5^th / 8	96.77%
Snow Braking	6^th / 8	94.32%
Snow Traction	6^th / 8	94.58%
Snow Handling	6^th / 8	96.41%
Snow Circle	3^rd / 8	84.14%
Noise	5^th / 8	98.58%
Rolling Resistance	2^nd / 8	96.2%

EU Label: C/C/72
Weight: 12.46 kgs
Tread: 8.8 mm
Price: 220.00

Sufficient.

Dry97.9%

Wet97%

Snow88.6%

Comfort97.1%

Rolling Resistance76.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (12)

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	%
Dry Braking	3^rd / 8	96.45%
Dry Handling	2^nd / 8	99.42%
Wet Braking	3^rd / 8	93.53%
Wet Handling	2^nd / 8	99.07%
Straight Aqua	1^st / 8	100%
Curved Aquaplaning	1^st / 8	100%
Snow Braking	8^th / 8	83%
Snow Traction	8^th / 8	81.3%
Snow Handling	8^th / 8	91.12%
Snow Circle	1^st / 8	100%
Noise	8^th / 8	97.07%
Rolling Resistance	8^th / 8	76.77%

EU Label: D/B/72
Weight: 13.84 kgs
Tread: 8.9 mm
Price: 197.00

Menu

2022 AMS Winter Tire Test