Sadly here at Tire Reviews we've not had time to do a studded tire test for 2022, but fortunately the excellent testers at the Nordic publication Vibilagare have tested eight sets of studded winter tires to show us which of the studded tires on the market are the best! While the test size is an SUV size (235/55 R18) and the test vehicle a Volvo XC40, these results should give you an idea of the balance between the tires in all sizes.

As you would hope, the tires have been tested in the dry, wet, snow and ice. Which is of course the reason studded tires exist.

The data is interesting, and in full below, but as we saw in the Tire Reviews Studless Winter Tire Test there is a pretty clear inversion between the tires which priorities wet performance, and the tires which priorities ice performance. The score weighing is heavily in favor of ice (as it should be), but you can adjust the score weighting below to see if your own preferences change the overall result.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Recorded test conditions

Wet Braking: 49.7 → 3.1 mph
Snow Braking: 21.7 → 3.1 mph
Snow Traction: 3.1 → 15.5 mph
Ice Braking: 15.5 → 3.1 mph
Ice Traction: 3.1 → 9.3 mph

Ice

Ice is one of the highest priority for a studded tire, and ice braking is probably the most important aspect! In this safety critical test the Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 led the way with a small advantage over the new Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV! The Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord struggled, taking nearly 50% longer to stop the test vehicle.

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	37 ft	Best	0 mph
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	38 ft	+1 ft	16 mph
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	42 ft	+5 ft	28 mph
4Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	42 ft	+5 ft	28 mph
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	46 ft	+9 ft	36 mph
6Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	47 ft	+10 ft	37 mph
7Continental IceContact 3	47 ft	+10 ft	38 mph
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	54 ft	+17 ft	46 mph

The difference between best and worst was 48.2% (17 ft ≈ 1.2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV would still be travelling at 46 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 had stopped.

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

Ice traction, which is essentially ice braking reversed, almost perfectly matched the braking results, just Continental and Falken were inverted.

Ice Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	2.34 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	2.36 s	+0.02 s
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	2.39 s	+0.05 s
4Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	2.47 s	+0.13 s
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	2.56 s	+0.22 s
6Continental IceContact 3	2.79 s	+0.45 s
7Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	2.89 s	+0.55 s
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	3.05 s	+0.71 s

The difference between best and worst was 30.3% (0.71 s).

Ice handling challenges the tires and studs in a different way, this time with Nokian jumping to the top and the Michelin X-Ice North 4 SUV moving from third to second place. The Maxxis was still the least grippiest tire on test.

Ice Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	42.49 s	Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	43.01 s	+0.52 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	44.39 s	+1.90 s
4Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	44.82 s	+2.33 s
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	45.05 s	+2.56 s
6Continental IceContact 3	45.53 s	+3.04 s
7Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	46.31 s	+3.82 s
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	46.93 s	+4.44 s

The difference between best and worst was 10.4% (4.44 s).

Snow

Any climate which sees a lot of ice will also see a lot of snow. In the snow braking test the Michelin and Nokian were again the best, and the Maxxis was left trailing the group.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	36 ft	Best	0 mph
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	37 ft	+1 ft	6 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	37 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
4Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	38 ft	+2 ft	14 mph
5Continental IceContact 3	38 ft	+2 ft	19 mph
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	38 ft	+2 ft	19 mph
7Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	39 ft	+3 ft	22 mph
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	42 ft	+6 ft	30 mph

The difference between best and worst was 16.3% (6 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV would still be travelling at 30 mph when the Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV had stopped.

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

Michelin also led snow traction, with the Nokian surprisingly dropping to sixth place overall.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	5.41 s	Best
2Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	5.47 s	+0.06 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	5.5 s	+0.09 s
4Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	5.58 s	+0.17 s
5Continental IceContact 3	5.62 s	+0.21 s
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	5.63 s	+0.22 s
7Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	5.69 s	+0.28 s
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	6.31 s	+0.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 16.6% (0.9 s).

Nokian jumped back to the top during snow handling, with the Michelin close behind.

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	77.65 s	Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	77.99 s	+0.34 s
3Continental IceContact 3	78.53 s	+0.88 s
4Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	79.2 s	+1.55 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	79.41 s	+1.76 s
6Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	79.53 s	+1.88 s
7Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	80.86 s	+3.21 s
8Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	82.52 s	+4.87 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.3% (4.87 s).

Wet

As we touched on in the introduction, having a tire that works well on ice and in the wet is a difficult balance, which is highlighted by the Nokian and Michelin falling down the order to last place during wet braking. In their place, the Falken Winterpeak F-Ice 1 led the group with the Pirelli Scorpion IceZero a close second.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	119 ft	Best	0 mph
2Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	120 ft	+1 ft	2 mph
3Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	120 ft	+1 ft	6 mph
4Continental IceContact 3	122 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	125 ft	+6 ft	16 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	129 ft	+10 ft	21 mph
6Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	129 ft	+10 ft	21 mph
8Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	133 ft	+14 ft	26 mph

The difference between best and worst was 11.7% (14 ft ≈ 0.9 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV would still be travelling at 26 mph when the Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1 had stopped.

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

Maxxis, which had very low grip in the ice and snow tests was the fastest tire around the wet handling lap, with the Michelin a significant margin behind again.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	41.34 s	Best
2Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	41.41 s	+0.07 s
3Continental IceContact 3	41.52 s	+0.18 s
3Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	41.52 s	+0.18 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	41.53 s	+0.19 s
5Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	41.53 s	+0.19 s
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	41.82 s	+0.48 s
8Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	42.25 s	+0.91 s

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

The straight aquaplaning test had Maxxis back at the front.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	37.0 mph	Best
2Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	36.8 mph	-0.2 mph
3Continental IceContact 3	36.5 mph	-0.5 mph
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	34.6 mph	-2.4 mph
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	34.2 mph	-2.8 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	33.9 mph	-3.1 mph
6Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	33.9 mph	-3.1 mph
8Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	33.5 mph	-3.5 mph

The difference between best and worst was 9.4% (3.5 mph).

Dry

Maxxis was back at the front in the dry braking test.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	111 ft	Best
2Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	113 ft	+2 ft
3Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	116 ft	+5 ft
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	118 ft	+7 ft
5Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	118 ft	+7 ft
6Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	118 ft	+7 ft
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	119 ft	+8 ft
8Continental IceContact 3	120 ft	+9 ft

The difference between best and worst was 8% (9 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths).

The test report didn't include a dry handling laptime, this is quite far out of the tires intended design parameters (we'd still like to see it!) but they did score the tires in subjective handling, which was led by Michelin and Pirelli.

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	5 Points	Best
1Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	5 Points	Best
3Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	4 Points	-1.00 Points
5Continental IceContact 3	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	3 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 40% (2 Points).

Environment

The Michelin had the lowest rolling resistance of all the tires on test, with the rest of the group fairly close.

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	5.5 l/100km	Best	$0
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	5.73 l/100km	+0.23 l/100km	$42
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	5.88 l/100km	+0.38 l/100km	$70
4Continental IceContact 3	5.92 l/100km	+0.42 l/100km	$77
5Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	5.94 l/100km	+0.44 l/100km	$81
5Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	5.94 l/100km	+0.44 l/100km	$81
7Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	5.96 l/100km	+0.46 l/100km	$84
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	5.96 l/100km	+0.46 l/100km	$84

The difference between best and worst was 8.4% (0.46 l/100km). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Nokian Nordman 8 SUV uses about 23 gal ($84) more fuel than the Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

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.

The Michelin also had the quietest internal noise.

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	75.5 dB	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	75.6 dB	+0.10 dB
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	76.2 dB	+0.70 dB
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	76.4 dB	+0.90 dB
5Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	76.9 dB	+1.40 dB
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	77.1 dB	+1.60 dB
7Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1	77.5 dB	+2.00 dB
8Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	77.8 dB	+2.30 dB

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

But as usual, the Michelin was the most expensive tire to buy.

Results

The X-Ice North 4 has long been among the very best in car sizes, and it is in SUV sizes too. It will be a shared test victory with the Nokian. Many small steel studs (280!) contribute to good winter grip. The grip is most impressive in the longitudinal direction. In the curves, the French tire has a tangible understeer character that requires patience in case of larger steering deflections. That behavior repeats itself on both winter surfaces and asphalt.

The tire's disadvantages are the wet grip and low resistance to aquaplaning.

Michelin suits you who are looking for good ice and snow grip combined with good comfort. In addition to low road noise, there is a linear steering response and comfortable straight-ahead stability. This tire also has the lowest rolling resistance.

Dry95.2%

Wet93.3%

Snow99.8%

Ice94.8%

Comfort100%

Fuel Consumption100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	6^th / 8	118 ft	+7 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 8	5 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	133 ft	+14 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	42.25 s	+0.91 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 8	33.5 mph	-3.5 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	36 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better	1^st / 8	5.41 s	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	77.99 s	+0.34 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	42 ft	+5 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	3^rd / 8	2.39 s	+0.05 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	43.01 s	+0.52 s
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 8	75.5 dB	Best in this discipline
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 8	5.5 l/100km	Best in this discipline

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 3539.00

It will be a shared test victory for the Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV. As usual with Nokian, it achieves top marks on ice and snow, with the very best cornering grip of the test. It is quick to react and has great driving pleasure on winter roads, but the slight oversteer balance becomes wildest under pressure if you already have a car that changes direction nimbly. On asphalt, the Nokian passes the evasive maneuver tests gallantly with quick steering response and still manages to curb the risk of rollback.

The minuses are a somewhat non-linear steering feel, clear road noise and relatively early hydroplaning.

The Nokian is the choice for those who are looking for the best possible winter grip and appreciate the willingness to turn with alert reactions to the driver's input.

Dry88.7%

Wet95.7%

Snow98.5%

Ice98.3%

Comfort97.9%

Fuel Consumption96%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	4^th / 8	118 ft	+7 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	129 ft	+10 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	41.53 s	+0.19 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 8	33.9 mph	-3.1 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	37 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	6^th / 8	5.63 s	+0.22 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	77.65 s	Best in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	38 ft	+1 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	2^nd / 8	2.36 s	+0.02 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	42.49 s	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 8	77.1 dB	+1.60 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	2^nd / 8	5.73 l/100km	+0.23 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 3479.00

The second generation Arctic from American Goodyear exhibited an impressive ice grip that was enough for test victory last year. Again this year, Goodyear performs at its best when it comes to starting and braking on ice and snow. However, it does not impress as much in the curves, neither on ice and snow nor on wet or dry roads. The lateral grip is not quite on par with the very best and the tire also has a somewhat numb steering precision which makes it somewhat difficult to place. But it does not invent a lift and never puts the driver in trouble.

This is the tire for those who want the shortest braking distance on the winter road but don't care about perfect cornering behavior. However, the rolling resistance is among the highest in the test.

Dry87.8%

Wet96.9%

Snow98.1%

Ice98.6%

Comfort98.8%

Fuel Consumption92.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	7^th / 8	119 ft	+8 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	125 ft	+6 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	41.82 s	+0.48 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 8	34.6 mph	-2.4 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	37 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	3^rd / 8	5.5 s	+0.09 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	79.41 s	+1.76 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	37 ft	Best in this discipline
Ice TractionLower is better	1^st / 8	2.34 s	Best in this discipline
Ice HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	44.39 s	+1.90 s
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 8	76.4 dB	+0.90 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 8	5.96 l/100km	+0.46 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 2699.00

Scorpion in Pirelli language means SUV tire. Like the usual IceZero 2, it performs very well in the dry. This is the winter tire whose driving experience is closest to that of a summer tire. the speed rating is also the highest in the bunch (H, 131 mph). Pirelli boasts a nimble and natural steering response, exquisite stability under pressure and short braking distances on both wet and dry asphalt. On ice and snow, Pirelli has a slightly lower level of grip than the very best, but even then it excels with high driving pleasure through nimble steering and is able to enter the curves with easy co-steering rear axle.

"IZ2" is for those who want the best driving characteristics possible and can imagine compromising on winter grip.

Dry98.9%

Wet99.1%

Snow96.6%

Ice88.5%

Comfort99.1%

Fuel Consumption93.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	2^nd / 8	113 ft	+2 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 8	5 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	120 ft	+1 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	41.41 s	+0.07 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 8	34.2 mph	-2.8 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	38 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	4^th / 8	5.58 s	+0.17 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	79.2 s	+1.55 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	46 ft	+9 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	5^th / 8	2.56 s	+0.22 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	45.05 s	+2.56 s
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 8	76.2 dB	+0.70 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 8	5.88 l/100km	+0.38 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 2529.00

Continental has not quite got it right with "IC3". The general level of grip is a bit behind other premium brands in the price class on almost all surfaces. Above all, the IC3 lags behind in the corners, which is a big minus for a studded tire. However, the tire communicates well with the driver about where the grip limit is, which combined with a neutral balance makes the tire safe and predictable in the curves with a slightly understeer character. Highlights are the aquaplaning properties as well as good noise level for being a studded tire. The studs, which are vulcanized into the tire, show minimal movement throughout the test. Here, the studs are securely fastened! Often in the lower half of the semi-rounds gives a fifth place overall.

Dry87%

Wet98.6%

Snow96.7%

Ice84.8%

Comfort99.9%

Fuel Consumption92.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	8^th / 8	120 ft	+9 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	122 ft	+3 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	41.52 s	+0.18 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 8	36.5 mph	-0.5 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	38 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	5^th / 8	5.62 s	+0.21 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	78.53 s	+0.88 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	47 ft	+10 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	6^th / 8	2.79 s	+0.45 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	45.53 s	+3.04 s
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 8	75.6 dB	+0.10 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	4^th / 8	5.92 l/100km	+0.42 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 3029.00

Nordman is Nokian's cheaper brand that sells two generations old Nokian under a new name. The Nordman 8 SUV is thus a reincarnation of the Hakkapeliitta 8 SUV. But it is a tire with modification. Although the pattern is the same, Nordman has received a different, harder rubber compound. The level of grip is nowhere near the level that the Nokian tire had a few years ago, at least not in this SUV dimension. Nordman places himself in the bottom half of the results list in almost every round. The worst is the tire on dry roads, where the Nordman has a high noise level with troublesome resonances and nonlinear steering feel. The rolling resistance is also the highest in the test.

Dry88.6%

Wet95.7%

Snow94.6%

Ice91.3%

Comfort97%

Fuel Consumption92.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	5^th / 8	118 ft	+7 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	129 ft	+10 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	41.53 s	+0.19 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 8	33.9 mph	-3.1 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	39 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	7^th / 8	5.69 s	+0.28 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	80.86 s	+3.21 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	42 ft	+5 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	4^th / 8	2.47 s	+0.13 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	46.31 s	+3.82 s
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 8	77.8 dB	+2.30 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 8	5.96 l/100km	+0.46 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 2559.00

Taiwanese Maxxis has become a respected brand for summer tires. The Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV studded tire shows that the brand still has a long way to go before it can challenge in the Nordic winter market. An unexpected amount of stud movement during the break-in period meant that the Maxxis had by far the highest stud protrusion when the test moments began. Despite this, the grip on ice was far behind the others. It also had surprisingly poor grip on snow. Instead, the Maxxis performed all the better on asphalt with short braking distances, good stability and was best against aquaplaning. The inability to balance the characteristics on bare ground with sensible winter grip results in a clear last place.

Dry96.6%

Wet99.8%

Snow88.7%

Ice78.1%

Comfort98.2%

Fuel Consumption92.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	1^st / 8	111 ft	Best in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 8	4 Points	-1.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	120 ft	+1 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	41.34 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 8	37.0 mph	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	42 ft	+6 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	8^th / 8	6.31 s	+0.90 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	82.52 s	+4.87 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	54 ft	+17 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	8^th / 8	3.05 s	+0.71 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	46.93 s	+4.44 s
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 8	76.9 dB	+1.40 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	5^th / 8	5.94 l/100km	+0.44 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 2619.00

This year's stud news comes from the Japanese Falken with Winterpeak F-Ice 1. The rubber compound is unusually soft (Shore 52), which contributes to a calm character under pressure with a stable rear trailer on both snow and ice. Unfortunately, the actual level of grip on ice does not impress. Instead, the Falken thrives best on wet roads. It has really good aquaplaning resistance and the wet braking distance is the shortest of the test. Even in the dry, braking performance is good. However, it is spongy and somewhat difficult to place in the handling tests on wet and dry asphalt. However, the steering response during quieter driving is good. In terms of points, Falken reaches a fine fifth place, but we have never lost so many studs so quickly! This means that Falken is excluded from the final result.

Dry93.2%

Wet99.8%

Snow97.9%

Ice84.6%

Comfort97.4%

Fuel Consumption92.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (13)

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	3^rd / 8	116 ft	+5 ft
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 8	4 Points	-1.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	119 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	41.52 s	+0.18 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 8	36.8 mph	-0.2 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	38 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	2^nd / 8	5.47 s	+0.06 s
Snow HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	79.53 s	+1.88 s
Ice BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	47 ft	+10 ft
Ice TractionLower is better	7^th / 8	2.89 s	+0.55 s
Ice HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	44.82 s	+2.33 s
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 8	77.5 dB	+2.00 dB
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	5^th / 8	5.94 l/100km	+0.44 l/100km

3PMSF: Yes
Price: 2398.00

Discussion

2 comments

Rama Oct 25, 2022 archived

It should be noted that the Falken tire - according to Falken - had a manufacturing error. Here’s the statement from the manufacturer:
Our internal investigation identified that in a few cases during the manufacturing period DOT 4921 to 5021 in the above dimension the dubbing process has not been satisfactory. However, Falken can confirm that the other dimensions of the WINTERPEAK F-ICE 1 pattern produced and delivered are manufactured according to the latest specifications, including the 235/55R18 104T XL. Falken guarantees all customers that our WINTERPEAK F-ICE 1 studded tire is completely safe to use for periods other than the previously mentioned time span, and to top it all off, this tire is also covered by Falken's five-year consumer warranty.
As we want to ensure the highest possible customer satisfaction, we offer full exchange rights for Falken WINTERPEAK F-ICE 1 in size 235/55R18 104T XL for tires with manufacturing period DOT 4921 and 5021. For questions regarding the above, you can contact Falken's technical service department via the following e- mailing address: [email protected].
--
Published in the Swedish tire magazine Däckavisen. https://www.dackavisen.se/falken-svarar-pa-diskning-i-vi-bilagares-dubbdackstest/

#8453
1. TireReviews Rama Oct 26, 2022 archived
  
  Thanks for sharing, I'd not got around to updating the article. This is a great move by Falken and shows they care about customers!
  
  #8462

Tire	Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2	Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	Continental IceContact 3	Nokian Nordman 8 SUV	Maxxis Premitra Ice Nord 5 SUV	Falken Winterpeak F Ice 1
Position	Joint 1^st	Joint 1^st	3^rd	4^th	5^th	6^th	7^th	8^th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry	95.2%	88.7%	87.8%	98.9%	87%	88.6%	96.6%	93.2%
Wet	93.3%	95.7%	96.9%	99.1%	98.6%	95.7%	99.8%	99.8%
Snow	99.8%	98.5%	98.1%	96.6%	96.7%	94.6%	88.7%	97.9%
Ice	94.8%	98.3%	98.6%	88.5%	84.8%	91.3%	78.1%	84.6%
Comfort	100%	97.9%	98.8%	99.1%	99.9%	97%	98.2%	97.4%
Fuel Consumption	100%	96%	92.3%	93.5%	92.9%	92.3%	92.6%	92.6%
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

Menu

Tire shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Ice

Snow

Wet

Dry

Environment

Results

Cross-check this test