Test Charts / Vi Bilagare

2023 Studless Friction 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: 225/45 R17
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
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	96 ft	Best	0 mph
2Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	99 ft	+3 ft	13 mph
3Continental VikingContact 7	99 ft	+3 ft	15 mph
4Triangle Snowlink PL01	100 ft	+4 ft	15 mph
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	101 ft	+5 ft	17 mph
6Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	101 ft	+5 ft	19 mph
7Michelin X Ice Snow	102 ft	+6 ft	19 mph
8Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	103 ft	+7 ft	21 mph

The difference between best and worst was 7.6% (7 ft ≈ 0.5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico would still be travelling at 21 mph when the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2 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
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	5 Points	Best
1Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	5 Points	Best
3Continental VikingContact 7	4 Points	-1.00 Points
3Michelin X Ice Snow	4 Points	-1.00 Points
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Triangle Snowlink PL01	3 Points	-2.00 Points
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	2 Points	-3.00 Points
7Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	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
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	123 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin X Ice Snow	126 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
3Continental VikingContact 7	129 ft	+6 ft	17 mph
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	132 ft	+9 ft	21 mph
5Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	134 ft	+11 ft	22 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	134 ft	+11 ft	23 mph
7Triangle Snowlink PL01	138 ft	+15 ft	27 mph
8Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	142 ft	+19 ft	29 mph

The difference between best and worst was 15.4% (19 ft ≈ 1.3 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico would still be travelling at 29 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 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
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	41 s	Best
2Continental VikingContact 7	41.4 s	+0.40 s
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	42 s	+1.00 s
4Michelin X Ice Snow	42.1 s	+1.10 s
5Triangle Snowlink PL01	42.4 s	+1.40 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	42.8 s	+1.80 s
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	43.7 s	+2.70 s
8Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	43.9 s	+2.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.1% (2.9 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	41.0 mph	Best
2Michelin X Ice Snow	40.4 mph	-0.6 mph
3Continental VikingContact 7	39.0 mph	-2.0 mph
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	38.2 mph	-2.8 mph
5Triangle Snowlink PL01	37.9 mph	-3.1 mph
6Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	37.6 mph	-3.4 mph
7Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	37.2 mph	-3.8 mph
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	35.2 mph	-5.8 mph

The difference between best and worst was 14.2% (5.8 mph).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	40 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin X Ice Snow	40 ft	0 ft	3 mph
3Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	40 ft	0 ft	6 mph
4Continental VikingContact 7	40 ft	0 ft	9 mph
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	41 ft	+1 ft	13 mph
5Triangle Snowlink PL01	41 ft	+1 ft	13 mph
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	42 ft	+2 ft	16 mph
8Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	42 ft	+2 ft	17 mph

The difference between best and worst was 4.8% (2 ft). From 80 mph, the Bridgestone Blizzak Ice would still be travelling at 17 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 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
1Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	4.44 s	Best
2Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	4.49 s	+0.05 s
3Continental VikingContact 7	4.55 s	+0.11 s
4Michelin X Ice Snow	4.57 s	+0.13 s
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	4.57 s	+0.13 s
6Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	4.59 s	+0.15 s
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	4.6 s	+0.16 s
8Triangle Snowlink PL01	4.68 s	+0.24 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.4% (0.24 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	75.5 s	Best
2Continental VikingContact 7	75.7 s	+0.20 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	75.9 s	+0.40 s
4Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	76.4 s	+0.90 s
5Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	76.6 s	+1.10 s
6Michelin X Ice Snow	76.7 s	+1.20 s
7Triangle Snowlink PL01	79.9 s	+4.40 s
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	80.7 s	+5.20 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.9% (5.2 s).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin X Ice Snow	40 ft	Best	0 mph
2Continental VikingContact 7	40 ft	0 ft	11 mph
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	41 ft	+1 ft	14 mph
4Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	43 ft	+3 ft	21 mph
5Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	43 ft	+3 ft	23 mph
6Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	44 ft	+4 ft	24 mph
7Triangle Snowlink PL01	46 ft	+6 ft	29 mph
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	46 ft	+6 ft	30 mph

The difference between best and worst was 16.1% (6 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2 would still be travelling at 30 mph when the Michelin X Ice Snow 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 Snow	7.32 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	7.52 s	+0.20 s
3Continental VikingContact 7	7.82 s	+0.50 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	8.05 s	+0.73 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	8.43 s	+1.11 s
6Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	8.97 s	+1.65 s
7Triangle Snowlink PL01	9.17 s	+1.85 s
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	10.7 s	+3.38 s

The difference between best and worst was 46.2% (3.38 s).

Ice Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental VikingContact 7	44.5 s	Best
2Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	44.7 s	+0.20 s
3Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	44.9 s	+0.40 s
4Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	46 s	+1.50 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	46.7 s	+2.20 s
6Michelin X Ice Snow	47.1 s	+2.60 s
7Triangle Snowlink PL01	48.6 s	+4.10 s
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	49 s	+4.50 s

The difference between best and worst was 10.1% (4.5 s).

Comfort

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	73.7 dB	Best
2Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	73.9 dB	+0.20 dB
3Continental VikingContact 7	74 dB	+0.30 dB
3Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	74 dB	+0.30 dB
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	74.3 dB	+0.60 dB
5Triangle Snowlink PL01	74.3 dB	+0.60 dB
7Michelin X Ice Snow	74.5 dB	+0.80 dB
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	75.5 dB	+1.80 dB

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

Value

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2	4.8 l/100km	Best	$0
2Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3	4.85 l/100km	+0.05 l/100km	$9
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5	4.9 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	$18
4Continental VikingContact 7	5 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	$37
5Pirelli Ice Zero Asimmetrico	5.05 l/100km	+0.25 l/100km	$46
6Triangle Snowlink PL01	5.1 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	$55
7Michelin X Ice Snow	5.15 l/100km	+0.35 l/100km	$64
8Bridgestone Blizzak Ice	5.2 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	$73

The difference between best and worst was 8.3% (0.4 l/100km). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Bridgestone Blizzak Ice uses about 20 gal ($73) more fuel than the Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2.

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.