Menu

Test source ADAC

2024 ADAC 17 inch Winter Tire Test

Overall test winnerGoodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

Here is the 17" version of the excellent ADAC 2024 winter tire test! As with the 16" ADAC test, there's no huge surprises from the data, it's an impressive showing from Goodyear Dunlop to take the top two places, and Vredestein continues…

Tires tested
16
Tested size
215/55 R17
Disciplines
10

At a glance

Tire shortlist

16 Tires tested

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

2nd

Dunlop Winter Sport 5

3rd

Vredestein Wintrac Pro

4th

Semperit Speed Grip 5

5th

Hankook Winter I cept RS3

7th

Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2

9th

Giti GitiWinterW2

10th

Firestone Winterhawk 4

11th

Viking Wintech

12th

Kumho Winter Craft WP52

13th

Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6

14th

Triangle WinterX TW401

15th

Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501

16th

Davanti Wintoura+

Tire shortlist

Compare selected tires

2024 ADAC 17 inch Winter Tire Test · 215/55 R17

Explore the complete results →

The full test

The evidence behind the verdict

Here is the 17" version of the excellent ADAC 2024 winter tire test! As with the 16" ADAC test, there's no huge surprises from the data, it's an impressive showing from Goodyear Dunlop to take the top two places, and Vredestein continues to impress in winter tire tests with the Wintrac Pro (not the new Plus version.)

Continental will be surprised that its second tier brand Semperit out performed the TS 870 P, and the Davanti Wintoura + manages to offer the worst wet grip and snow grip, which is impressive in its own right. Unusually, there was no Michelin in this test.

Read on for the full data below.

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
62.1 → 0.0 mph
Wet Braking - Concrete
49.7 → 0.0 mph
Snow Braking
18.6 → 0.0 mph

Dry

The Kumho WinterCraft WP52 offered the shortest dry braking distance, coming to a stop in 138 feet. Several other tires also performed well, with stopping distances ranging between 42.9 and 144 feet. The Firestone Winterhawk 4 recorded the longest braking distance at 150 feet, highlighting the significant variation in dry braking performance among the tested tires.

Dry Braking

Dry braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Dry Braking
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
138 ft Best 0 mph
141 ft +3 ft 11 mph
141 ft +3 ft 11 mph
143 ft +5 ft 15 mph
143 ft +5 ft 15 mph
144 ft +6 ft 16 mph
144 ft +6 ft 16 mph
145 ft +7 ft 17 mph
145 ft +7 ft 18 mph
146 ft +8 ft 19 mph
146 ft +8 ft 19 mph
147 ft +9 ft 19 mph
148 ft +10 ft 20 mph
149 ft +11 ft 22 mph
150 ft +12 ft 22 mph
150 ft +12 ft 22 mph

The difference between best and worst was 8.6% (12 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Firestone Winterhawk 4 would still be travelling at 22 mph when the Kumho Winter Craft WP52 had stopped.

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

Wet

In wet braking tests on asphalt, the Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 delivered the best performance, stopping in 112 feet. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P, Dunlop Winter Sport 5, and Firestone Winterhawk 4 also performed respectably, with stopping distances ranging from 34.6 to 114 feet. At the other end of the scale, the Davanti Wintoura + took 135 feet to stop, underscoring the importance of wet braking capability when selecting winter tires.

Wet Braking

Wet braking in feet (80 - 0 )

Lower is better ↓
Wet Braking
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
112 ft Best 0 mph
114 ft +2 ft 9 mph
114 ft +2 ft 9 mph
114 ft +2 ft 10 mph
115 ft +3 ft 13 mph
116 ft +4 ft 15 mph
117 ft +5 ft 16 mph
118 ft +6 ft 17 mph
120 ft +8 ft 20 mph
120 ft +8 ft 21 mph
122 ft +10 ft 22 mph
122 ft +10 ft 23 mph
126 ft +14 ft 26 mph
135 ft +23 ft 33 mph
135 ft +23 ft 33 mph
135 ft +23 ft 33 mph

The difference between best and worst was 20.8% (23 ft ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Davanti Wintoura+ would still be travelling at 33 mph when the Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 had stopped.

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

The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 achieved the shortest wet braking distance on concrete, stopping in 123 feet. Close behind were the Continental WinterContact TS 870 P and the Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2, with distances of 38.2 and 124 feet, respectively. The Davanti Wintoura + was once again last, requiring 154 feet to stop.

Wet Braking - Concrete

Wet braking on Concrete in feet (50 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Wet Braking - Concrete
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
123 ft Best 0 mph
124 ft +1 ft 4 mph
125 ft +2 ft 10 mph
126 ft +3 ft 12 mph
129 ft +6 ft 17 mph
129 ft +6 ft 17 mph
131 ft +8 ft 19 mph
132 ft +9 ft 20 mph
133 ft +10 ft 21 mph
134 ft +11 ft 22 mph
135 ft +12 ft 24 mph
136 ft +13 ft 24 mph
140 ft +17 ft 28 mph
143 ft +20 ft 30 mph
146 ft +23 ft 32 mph
154 ft +31 ft 35 mph

The difference between best and worst was 24.5% (31 ft ≈ 2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Davanti Wintoura+ would still be travelling at 35 mph when the Dunlop Winter Sport 5 had stopped.

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

The Hankook Winter i*cept RS3 showed the best resistance to longitudinal hydroplaning, maintaining grip at 50.0 mph. The Firestone Winterhawk 4 and Semperit Speed-Grip 5 also performed admirably, holding grip at 78.6 and 48.9 mph, respectively. The Davanti Wintoura + and Triangle WinterX TW401 lost grip at 42.4 mph.

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in mph

Higher is better ↑
Straight Aqua
Position / TireResultGap to best
50.0 mph Best
48.9 mph -1.1 mph
48.8 mph -1.2 mph
48.1 mph -1.9 mph
48.0 mph -2.0 mph
47.7 mph -2.3 mph
47.5 mph -2.5 mph
47.1 mph -2.9 mph
47.0 mph -3.0 mph
46.8 mph -3.2 mph
46.4 mph -3.6 mph
45.7 mph -4.3 mph
44.5 mph -5.5 mph
43.2 mph -6.8 mph
42.5 mph -7.5 mph
42.4 mph -7.6 mph

The difference between best and worst was 15.2% (7.6 mph).

Snow

The Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501 achieved the shortest braking distance on snow, stopping in 31 feet. The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 and Triangle WinterX TW401 were also strong performers, with stopping distances of 9.6 and 31 feet, respectively. The Davanti Wintoura + required 36 feet.

Snow Braking

Snow braking in feet (19 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Snow Braking
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
31 ft Best 0 mph
31 ft 0 ft 12 mph
31 ft 0 ft 14 mph
32 ft +1 ft 16 mph
32 ft +1 ft 16 mph
32 ft +1 ft 16 mph
32 ft +1 ft 18 mph
32 ft +1 ft 20 mph
32 ft +1 ft 20 mph
33 ft +2 ft 21 mph
33 ft +2 ft 21 mph
33 ft +2 ft 23 mph
33 ft +2 ft 23 mph
33 ft +2 ft 23 mph
34 ft +3 ft 25 mph
36 ft +5 ft 31 mph

The difference between best and worst was 18.3% (5 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Davanti Wintoura+ would still be travelling at 31 mph when the Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501 had stopped.

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

The Vredestein Wintrac Pro provided the best traction on snow, achieving a traction rating of 238 DN. The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3, Hankook Winter i*cept RS3, Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501, Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2, and Triangle WinterX TW401 also performed well, with results between 230 and 234 DN. The Davanti Wintoura + offered the lowest traction at 202 DN, indicating a wide range of traction capabilities in snowy conditions.

Snow Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Snow Traction
Position / TireResultGap to best
54 lbf Best
53 lbf -1 lbf
53 lbf -1 lbf
53 lbf -1 lbf
52 lbf -2 lbf
52 lbf -2 lbf
52 lbf -2 lbf
52 lbf -2 lbf
52 lbf -2 lbf
51 lbf -3 lbf
51 lbf -3 lbf
50 lbf -4 lbf
50 lbf -4 lbf
49 lbf -5 lbf
48 lbf -6 lbf
45 lbf -9 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 15.1% (9 lbf).

Ice

The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 recorded the shortest braking distance on ice, stopping in 53 feet. Close contenders were the Continental WinterContact TS 870 P and Vredestein Wintrac Pro, with distances of 16.6 and 55 feet, respectively. The Davanti Wintoura + rounded out its excellent grip performance, last, over 16 feet behind from just 12 mph.

Ice Braking

Ice braking in feet

Lower is better ↓
Ice Braking
Position / TireResultGap to best
53 ft Best
54 ft +1 ft
55 ft +2 ft
56 ft +3 ft
56 ft +3 ft
56 ft +3 ft
56 ft +3 ft
57 ft +4 ft
58 ft +5 ft
58 ft +5 ft
58 ft +5 ft
59 ft +6 ft
61 ft +8 ft
65 ft +12 ft
66 ft +13 ft
70 ft +17 ft

The difference between best and worst was 31.7% (17 ft ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths).

Value

The Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501 was projected to offer the highest mileage at 40,451 miles. The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 also showed promising results with a predicted mileage of 35,729 miles. The shortest predicted mileage was for the Yokohama BluEarth-Winter V906, at 22,183 miles.

Wear

Predicted tread life in KM

Higher is better ↑
Wear
Position / TireResultGap to best
40,451 miles Best
35,729 miles -4,722 miles
33,740 miles -6,711 miles
33,554 miles -6,897 miles
33,243 miles -7,208 miles
30,634 miles -9,817 miles
29,764 miles -10,687 miles
29,391 miles -11,060 miles
28,956 miles -11,495 miles
28,645 miles -11,806 miles
26,905 miles -13,546 miles
25,787 miles -14,664 miles
25,538 miles -14,913 miles
23,674 miles -16,777 miles
22,991 miles -17,460 miles
22,183 miles -18,268 miles

The difference between best and worst was 45.2% (18,268 miles).

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 demonstrated the lowest tire abrasion, measured at 55.0 mg/km/t. The Hankook Winter i*cept RS3, Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501, Semperit Speed-Grip 5, Triangle WinterX TW401, and Viking WinTech followed with abrasion levels between 56.0 and 59.0 mg/km/t. The highest level of abrasion was recorded by the Yokohama BluEarth-Winter V906 at 95.0 mg/km/t, indicating significant variation in wear among the tires.

Abrasion

Weight of Tire Wear Particles Lost (mg/km/t)

Lower is better ↓
Abrasion
Position / TireResultGap to best
55 mg/km/t Best
56 mg/km/t +1.00 mg/km/t
57 mg/km/t +2.00 mg/km/t
58 mg/km/t +3.00 mg/km/t
59 mg/km/t +4.00 mg/km/t
59 mg/km/t +4.00 mg/km/t
64 mg/km/t +9.00 mg/km/t
64 mg/km/t +9.00 mg/km/t
69 mg/km/t +14.00 mg/km/t
70 mg/km/t +15.00 mg/km/t
71 mg/km/t +16.00 mg/km/t
73 mg/km/t +18.00 mg/km/t
79 mg/km/t +24.00 mg/km/t
82 mg/km/t +27.00 mg/km/t
83 mg/km/t +28.00 mg/km/t
95 mg/km/t +40.00 mg/km/t

The difference between best and worst was 72.7% (40 mg/km/t).

Results

1st

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

215/55 R17
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 delivers strong performance on dry, wet, and snowy roads, achieving a good overall result in driving safety. It offers precise steering, short braking distances, and reliable grip, particularly in wet and snowy conditions. It also performs above average on ice. Furthermore, the tire boasts excellent environmental credentials: long lifespan, low abrasion, and a weight significantly lower than the average of the test field make it an environmentally friendly choice.
Dry98.1%
Wet95.2%
Snow97.2%
Ice91.5%
Value93.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better2nd / 16141 ft+3 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better7th / 16117 ft+5 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better7th / 16131 ft+8 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 1648.1 mph-1.9 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better5th / 1610.2 ft/s²-1.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better2nd / 1653 lbf-1 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better9th / 1658 ft+5 ft
WearHigher is better2nd / 1635,729 miles-4,722 miles
AbrasionLower is better1st / 1655 mg/km/tBest in this discipline
3PMSF
Yes
2nd

Dunlop Winter Sport 5

215/55 R17
Dunlop Winter Sport 5
The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 provides good performance on dry, wet, and wintery surfaces, resulting in a good overall rating for driving safety. It offers precise steering, good braking distances, and reliable grip, particularly in snowy conditions. Although its aquaplaning performance on wet roads is only satisfactory, it excels in handling with ample safety reserves. The tire also boasts a good environmental record with a long lifespan, low abrasion, and good efficiency due to its low weight and fuel consumption.
Dry95.5%
Wet97.5%
Snow96.8%
Ice94.7%
Value81.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better8th / 16145 ft+7 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better4th / 16114 ft+2 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better1st / 16123 ftBest in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better10th / 1646.8 mph-3.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better3rd / 1610.8 ft/s²-0.4 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better3rd / 1631 ft0 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better7th / 1652 lbf-2 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better4th / 1656 ft+3 ft
WearHigher is better3rd / 1633,740 miles-6,711 miles
AbrasionLower is better9th / 1669 mg/km/t+14.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
3rd

Vredestein Wintrac Pro

215/55 R17
Vredestein Wintrac Pro
The Vredestein Wintrac Pro achieves a good overall rating for driving safety, despite some minor weaknesses. While it exhibits slight imprecision on dry surfaces and only average aquaplaning performance on wet roads, it delivers strong performance on wintery roads with good braking, traction, and handling. Its environmental performance is decent with good results for abrasion and efficiency, but a less impressive projected lifespan.
Dry96.3%
Wet94.1%
Snow98.1%
Ice95.8%
Value70.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better5th / 16143 ft+5 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better6th / 16116 ft+4 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better5th / 16129 ft+6 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better11th / 1646.4 mph-3.6 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better10th / 169.5 ft/s²-1.7 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better1st / 1654 lbfBest in this discipline
Ice BrakingLower is better3rd / 1655 ft+2 ft
WearHigher is better12th / 1625,787 miles-14,664 miles
AbrasionLower is better10th / 1670 mg/km/t+15.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
4th

Semperit Speed Grip 5

215/55 R17
Semperit Speed Grip 5
The Semperit Speed-Grip 5 achieves a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet and wintery roads but falling short on dry surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. However, it performs well on wet surfaces with good braking, aquaplaning resistance, and handling. On snow, it offers good braking and traction but only satisfactory handling. Its environmental performance is good, thanks to a long lifespan, low abrasion, low weight, and good fuel efficiency.
Dry94.6%
Wet96.5%
Snow95%
Ice93.1%
Value86.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better10th / 16146 ft+8 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better8th / 16118 ft+6 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better8th / 16132 ft+9 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better2nd / 1648.9 mph-1.1 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better1st / 1611.2 ft/s²Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better10th / 1633 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better7th / 1652 lbf-2 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better8th / 1657 ft+4 ft
WearHigher is better5th / 1633,243 miles-7,208 miles
AbrasionLower is better5th / 1659 mg/km/t+4.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
5th

Hankook Winter I cept RS3

215/55 R17
Hankook Winter I cept RS3
The Hankook Winter i*cept RS3 receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet and wintery roads but falling short on dry surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. However, it performs well on wet and snowy surfaces with good braking and handling. It also has good environmental performance with a long lifespan, low abrasion, and good fuel efficiency, though manufacturing residues on new tires are a negative point.
Dry94.6%
Wet95.8%
Snow96.5%
Ice90.5%
Value84.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better10th / 16146 ft+8 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better9th / 16120 ft+8 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better12th / 16136 ft+13 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better1st / 1650.0 mphBest in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better1st / 1611.2 ft/s²Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better6th / 1652 lbf-2 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better11th / 1658 ft+5 ft
WearHigher is better6th / 1630,634 miles-9,817 miles
AbrasionLower is better3rd / 1657 mg/km/t+2.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
6th

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

215/55 R17
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P achieves a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet and wintery roads but some weaknesses on dry surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. However, it performs well on wet surfaces with good braking and handling, although its longitudinal aquaplaning performance is only average. On snow, it offers good braking and handling. Its environmental performance is good, with a long lifespan, low abrasion, and good fuel efficiency.
Dry98.1%
Wet97.7%
Snow92.7%
Ice97%
Value74.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better2nd / 16141 ft+3 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better2nd / 16114 ft+2 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better3rd / 16125 ft+2 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better8th / 1647.1 mph-2.9 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better3rd / 1610.8 ft/s²-0.4 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better12th / 1633 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better12th / 1650 lbf-4 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better2nd / 1654 ft+1 ft
WearHigher is better11th / 1626,905 miles-13,546 miles
AbrasionLower is better7th / 1664 mg/km/t+9.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
7th

Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2

215/55 R17
Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 achieves a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet and wintery roads but exhibiting some weaknesses on dry surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections and displaying a tendency to oversteer. However, it performs well on wet surfaces with good braking and excellent handling, though its lateral aquaplaning performance is only average. On snow, it offers good braking, traction, and handling. Its environmental performance is good, with a long lifespan, low abrasion, and good fuel efficiency.
Dry96.6%
Wet97.3%
Snow96.7%
Ice100%
Value73.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better4th / 16143 ft+5 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better1st / 16112 ftBest in this discipline
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better2nd / 16124 ft+1 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better5th / 1648.0 mph-2.0 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better8th / 169.8 ft/s²-1.4 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better7th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better2nd / 1653 lbf-1 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better1st / 1653 ftBest in this discipline
WearHigher is better9th / 1628,956 miles-11,495 miles
AbrasionLower is better12th / 1673 mg/km/t+18.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
8th

Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906

215/55 R17
Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906
The Yokohama BluEarth-Winter V906 achieves a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on dry and wet roads but falling short on wintery surfaces. It offers precise steering and good braking on dry roads, while on wet surfaces it provides good grip and handling, but only average aquaplaning resistance. However, its performance on snow and ice is less impressive, with limited handling precision and a tendency to understeer or oversteer early. Its environmental performance is also only satisfactory, due to average lifespan, wear, and efficiency, as well as manufacturing residues on new tires.
Dry96.1%
Wet93.8%
Snow91.8%
Ice89.4%
Value56.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better6th / 16144 ft+6 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better5th / 16115 ft+3 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better4th / 16126 ft+3 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better9th / 1647.0 mph-3.0 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better11th / 168.9 ft/s²-2.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better12th / 1633 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better14th / 1649 lbf-5 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better12th / 1659 ft+6 ft
WearHigher is better16th / 1622,183 miles-18,268 miles
AbrasionLower is better16th / 1695 mg/km/t+40.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
9th

Giti GitiWinterW2

215/55 R17
Giti GitiWinterW2
The Giti GitiWinter W2 receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet roads but falling short on dry and wintery surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections. However, it offers good handling on wet surfaces but only average braking and aquaplaning performance. On snow and ice, its performance is less impressive, with limited handling precision and a tendency to understeer or oversteer early. Its environmental performance is also only satisfactory, due to average lifespan, wear, and efficiency, as well as manufacturing residues on new tires.
Dry94.2%
Wet92.5%
Snow90.7%
Ice93.6%
Value64.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better12th / 16147 ft+9 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better11th / 16122 ft+10 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better10th / 16134 ft+11 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better7th / 1647.5 mph-2.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better5th / 1610.2 ft/s²-1.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better12th / 1633 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better15th / 1648 lbf-6 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better7th / 1656 ft+3 ft
WearHigher is better13th / 1625,538 miles-14,913 miles
AbrasionLower is better14th / 1682 mg/km/t+27.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
10th

Firestone Winterhawk 4

215/55 R17
Firestone Winterhawk 4
The Firestone Winterhawk 4 achieves a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with good performance on wet and wintery roads but significant weaknesses on dry surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring frequent steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. However, it performs well on wet surfaces with good braking and handling, although its lateral aquaplaning performance is only average. On snow, it offers good braking, traction, and handling. Its environmental performance is average, with satisfactory lifespan and wear, but good fuel efficiency.
Dry92.1%
Wet97.3%
Snow95.4%
Ice94.2%
Value61.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better16th / 16150 ft+12 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better2nd / 16114 ft+2 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better6th / 16129 ft+6 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better3rd / 1648.8 mph-1.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better5th / 1610.2 ft/s²-1.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better8th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better7th / 1652 lbf-2 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better5th / 1656 ft+3 ft
WearHigher is better14th / 1623,674 miles-16,777 miles
AbrasionLower is better15th / 1683 mg/km/t+28.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
11th

Viking Wintech

215/55 R17
Viking Wintech
The Viking WinTech receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with weaknesses on dry roads limiting its overall performance. It lacks precision and feedback on dry surfaces, requiring frequent steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. While it offers satisfactory performance on wet and snowy roads, its handling is less precise, and it has a lower threshold for understeer and oversteer. However, it has strong environmental credentials, with a very long lifespan, low abrasion, and excellent fuel efficiency.
Dry93.6%
Wet86.3%
Snow92.8%
Ice91%
Value89.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better13th / 16148 ft+10 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better12th / 16122 ft+10 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better11th / 16135 ft+12 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better14th / 1643.2 mph-6.8 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better14th / 167.2 ft/s²-4.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better15th / 1634 ft+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better10th / 1651 lbf-3 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better10th / 1658 ft+5 ft
WearHigher is better4th / 1633,554 miles-6,897 miles
AbrasionLower is better2nd / 1656 mg/km/t+1.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
12th

Kumho Winter Craft WP52

215/55 R17
Kumho Winter Craft WP52
The Kumho WinterCraft WP52 receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with weaknesses on dry roads limiting its overall performance. It lacks precision and feedback on dry surfaces, requiring frequent steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. While its braking distance is good, its aquaplaning performance on wet roads is below average. However, it performs well on snow and ice, with good braking and handling. Its environmental performance is mixed, with a long lifespan and good fuel efficiency, but a higher weight and concerns about sustainability due to its production in Korea and China.
Dry100%
Wet88.7%
Snow93.8%
Ice94.2%
Value73.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better1st / 16138 ftBest in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better10th / 16120 ft+8 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better9th / 16133 ft+10 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better13th / 1644.5 mph-5.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better12th / 167.9 ft/s²-3.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better10th / 1633 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better11th / 1651 lbf-3 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better5th / 1656 ft+3 ft
WearHigher is better10th / 1628,645 miles-11,806 miles
AbrasionLower is better11th / 1671 mg/km/t+16.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
13th

Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6

215/55 R17
Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6
The Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6 receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, with weaknesses on dry roads limiting its overall performance. It lacks precision and feedback on dry surfaces, requiring frequent steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. While it offers satisfactory performance on wet and snowy roads, with good longitudinal aquaplaning resistance, its handling is less precise, and it has a lower threshold for understeer and oversteer. Its environmental performance is mixed, with a long lifespan and good fuel efficiency, but a higher weight and concerns about sustainability due to its production in China and manufacturing residues on new tires.
Dry92.3%
Wet90.1%
Snow93.4%
Ice87%
Value78.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better15th / 16150 ft+12 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better13th / 16126 ft+14 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better13th / 16140 ft+17 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better6th / 1647.7 mph-2.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better8th / 169.8 ft/s²-1.4 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better8th / 1632 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better13th / 1650 lbf-4 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better13th / 1661 ft+8 ft
WearHigher is better8th / 1629,391 miles-11,060 miles
AbrasionLower is better7th / 1664 mg/km/t+9.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
14th

Triangle WinterX TW401

215/55 R17
Triangle WinterX TW401
The Triangle WinterX TW401 receives a poor rating for driving safety due to its significant weaknesses on wet roads, despite decent performance on dry and snowy surfaces. It offers satisfactory feedback and precision on dry roads, with good control at its limits. However, on wet surfaces, it has a very low grip level and a tendency to understeer or oversteer early, resulting in poor handling. Its braking performance is also only just satisfactory, and its aquaplaning resistance is poor. On snow, it performs well with good braking, traction, and handling. Its environmental performance is average, with a satisfactory lifespan and low abrasion, weight, and fuel consumption, but negative marks for manufacturing residues on new tires.
Dry95%
Wet79.9%
Snow97.7%
Ice81.7%
Value73.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better9th / 16145 ft+7 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better14th / 16135 ft+23 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better15th / 16146 ft+23 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better15th / 1642.5 mph-7.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better15th / 166.9 ft/s²-4.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better2nd / 1631 ft0 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better5th / 1652 lbf-2 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better14th / 1665 ft+12 ft
WearHigher is better15th / 1622,991 miles-17,460 miles
AbrasionLower is better4th / 1658 mg/km/t+3.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
15th

Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501

215/55 R17
Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501
The Kenda Wintergen 2 KR501 receives a satisfactory rating for driving safety, but with weaknesses on dry roads impacting its overall score. It offers barely adequate feedback and precision on dry surfaces, requiring frequent steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. While it performs satisfactorily on wet roads, its handling is less precise with a low grip level. However, it excels on snow with good braking and traction, and very good handling. Its environmental performance is poor due to its high weight, despite a long lifespan and low abrasion. Concerns about sustainability due to its production in China and manufacturing residues on new tires further detract from its environmental rating.
Dry92.5%
Wet82.5%
Snow99.1%
Ice79.7%
Value97.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better14th / 16149 ft+11 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better14th / 16135 ft+23 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better14th / 16143 ft+20 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better12th / 1645.7 mph-4.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better12th / 167.9 ft/s²-3.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better1st / 1631 ftBest in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better2nd / 1653 lbf-1 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better15th / 1666 ft+13 ft
WearHigher is better1st / 1640,451 milesBest in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better5th / 1659 mg/km/t+4.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes
16th

Davanti Wintoura+

215/55 R17
Davanti Wintoura+
The Davanti Wintoura + receives a poor rating for driving safety due to its significant weaknesses on wet roads, despite satisfactory performance on dry and wintery surfaces. It lacks precision and feedback on dry roads, requiring steering corrections and exhibiting a tendency to oversteer. However, its braking distance on dry surfaces is good. On wet surfaces, it has a very low grip level and a tendency to understeer or oversteer early, resulting in poor handling. Its braking and aquaplaning resistance are also poor. On snow, it offers only satisfactory performance with limited handling precision. Its environmental performance is average, with a good lifespan and low abrasion, but a high weight impacting its efficiency. Negative marks are given for manufacturing residues on new tires.
Dry95.9%
Wet78.6%
Snow84.7%
Ice75.9%
Value71.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (10)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

TestPosition in disciplineResultGap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better7th / 16144 ft+6 ft
Wet BrakingLower is better16th / 16135 ft+23 ft
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better16th / 16154 ft+31 ft
Straight AquaHigher is better16th / 1642.4 mph-7.6 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better16th / 166.2 ft/s²-5.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better16th / 1636 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better16th / 1645 lbf-9 lbf
Ice BrakingLower is better16th / 1670 ft+17 ft
WearHigher is better7th / 1629,764 miles-10,687 miles
AbrasionLower is better13th / 1679 mg/km/t+24.00 mg/km/t
3PMSF
Yes

More tire tests

Cross-check this test

All tire tests

Where these tires were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

Discussion

  1. No comments yet — be the first.
Rate your tires

My tires

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tires

Save tires from a tire page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tires. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.