Auto Zeitung has conducted a comprehensive winter tire test in size 245/45 R19, evaluating ten current winter tires across snow, wet, and dry conditions, with additional laboratory analysis for durability and environmental impact. The test field includes five premium tires (Bridgestone Blizzak 6 Enliten, Continental WinterContact TS 870P, Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3, Michelin Pilot Alpin 5, and Pirelli P Zero Winter 2), two mid range segment tires (Vredestein Wintrac Pro+ and Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906), and three budget options from Chinese manufacturers (Linglong Sport Master Winter, Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6, and Triangle EffeXWinter TW421). Testing was conducted at Goodyear's facilities for winter conditions and Continental's proving grounds for wet and dry tests, with laboratory durability analysis performed at both Pirelli and Continental facilities. The test vehicle was a BMW 520d Touring.

Test setup & methodology

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

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 62.1 → 0.0 mph
Snow Braking: 31.1 → 0.0 mph

Test Results and Key Findings

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 secured the test victory with 414 points out of 450, demonstrating the most consistent performance across all conditions. The testers noted its ability to deliver very good to excellent results in every single discipline without significant weaknesses - a rare achievement in winter tire testing. Second place went to the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 with 397 points, which earned the environmental recommendation due to its outstanding projected mileage of 29,049 miles and lowest wear rate in the test. The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 claimed third with 393 points, distinguished by the shortest wet braking distance in the entire test and its construction from at least 55% recycled or bio-based materials.

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 Enliten finished fourth with 390 points and received the fuel efficiency recommendation, achieving the best rolling resistance result at just 7.6 kg/t thanks to its Enliten technology. The Continental WinterContact TS 870P rounded out the top five with 376 points, delivering the best aquaplaning protection in longitudinal testing at 56.5 mph. These five premium tires all received "sehr empfehlenswert" (highly recommended) ratings from Auto Zeitung.

Premium vs Budget Analysis

The test clearly demonstrates that winter tire performance cannot be separated from price considerations. The premium tires from Bridgestone, Continental, Goodyear, Michelin, and Pirelli all delivered consistent, balanced performance across all conditions with only minor weaknesses in specific areas. Their prices ranged from 975 to 1090 euros per set.

In stark contrast, the three Chinese budget tires (Linglong at 385 euros, Triangle at 350 euros, and Maxxis at 585 euros) all showed significant deficiencies. The Linglong Sport Master Winter, despite being manufactured in Serbia specifically for European customers, recorded the longest snow braking distance at 91 feet and generated the highest exterior noise at 76.2 dB(A). Its high wear rate of 0.215 mm per 1000 km and rolling resistance of 9.6 kg/t resulted in the worst environmental profile in the test.

The testers calculated cost per kilometer driven based on purchase price and laboratory-measured wear rates. While the Triangle offers the lowest absolute cost per kilometer at 3.18 euros per 1000 km, this calculation doesn't account for its safety compromises, particularly the instability during load changes and poor projected mileage of just 17,088 miles. In contrast, the Michelin - despite being the most expensive tire at 1090 euros per set - delivered a cost per kilometer of 5.83 euros while providing the longest projected life and best overall environmental characteristics.

Environmental and Efficiency Considerations

Auto Zeitung conducted extensive laboratory testing to measure wear rates, rolling resistance, and noise emissions - factors increasingly important to environmentally conscious consumers. The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 emerged as the clear environmental champion with the lowest wear rate (0.124 mm per 1000 km), longest projected mileage (29,049 miles), low rolling resistance (7.9 kg/t), and moderate noise (71.2 dB(A)).

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 Enliten demonstrated that efficiency technology works, achieving the absolute best rolling resistance at 7.6 kg/t - significantly better than any competitor. However, its projected mileage of 24,700 miles fell short of the Michelin's longevity, preventing it from claiming the overall environmental crown.

The budget tires performed poorly in environmental metrics. The Triangle, Linglong, and Maxxis all showed wear rates between 0.205 and 0.223 mm per 1000 km - up to 80% higher than the Michelin. Their projected mileages ranged from just 27,500 to 18,952 miles, meaning they would need replacing almost twice as often as the premium alternatives. The Linglong's combination of highest rolling resistance (9.6 kg/t) and loudest operation (76.2 dB(A)) represents the worst environmental impact in this test.

Dry

The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 achieves the shortest dry braking distance at 139 feet, with the budget Triangle surprisingly claiming second place just 1 foot behind, while the Maxxis trails the field by 12 feet

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	139 ft	Best	0 mph
2Triangle Effexwinter	140 ft	+1 ft	8 mph
3Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	142 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
4Linglong Sport Master Winter	142 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	143 ft	+4 ft	13 mph
5Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	143 ft	+4 ft	13 mph
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	146 ft	+7 ft	18 mph
8Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	147 ft	+8 ft	19 mph
9Bridgestone Blizzak 6	148 ft	+9 ft	20 mph
10Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	152 ft	+13 ft	23 mph

The difference between best and worst was 9% (13 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6 would still be travelling at 23 mph when the Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 had stopped.

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

The Linglong records the fastest lap time despite its budget positioning, completing the 1 miles circuit in 75.2 seconds, while the testers note this speed came at the cost of stability with a nervous rear axle requiring constant driver attention, and the Triangle falls 2.1 seconds behind in last place.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Linglong Sport Master Winter	75.2 s	Best
2Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	75.6 s	+0.40 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	75.8 s	+0.60 s
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	75.9 s	+0.70 s
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	75.9 s	+0.70 s
6Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	76.3 s	+1.10 s
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6	76.3 s	+1.10 s
8Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	76.6 s	+1.40 s
9Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	76.7 s	+1.50 s
10Triangle Effexwinter	77.3 s	+2.10 s

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

Wet

The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 establishes dominance in wet conditions with the shortest stopping distance of 159 feet from 62 mph, while the Maxxis requires a dangerous 27 feet more to stop - meaning where the Pirelli-equipped BMW has already halted, the Maxxis would still be traveling at nearly 25 mph.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	159 ft	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	162 ft	+3 ft
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	166 ft	+7 ft
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	168 ft	+9 ft
5Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	169 ft	+10 ft
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	172 ft	+13 ft
7Triangle Effexwinter	173 ft	+14 ft
8Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	175 ft	+16 ft
9Linglong Sport Master Winter	175 ft	+16 ft
10Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	186 ft	+27 ft

The difference between best and worst was 16.9% (27 ft ≈ 1.8 Car Lengths).

The Pirelli continues its wet weather superiority with the fastest lap time of 84.9 seconds on the 1 miles circuit, demonstrating the consistency of its wet performance, while the struggling Maxxis again finishes last at 91.5 seconds - 6.6 seconds slower and confirming its fundamental weakness in wet conditions.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	84.9 s	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	85.3 s	+0.40 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	86.3 s	+1.40 s
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	86.4 s	+1.50 s
5Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	86.5 s	+1.60 s
6Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	87.2 s	+2.30 s
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6	88.1 s	+3.20 s
8Triangle Effexwinter	88.4 s	+3.50 s
9Linglong Sport Master Winter	89.1 s	+4.20 s
10Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	91.5 s	+6.60 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.8% (6.6 s).

Lateral grip measured on the 58-meter diameter wet circle shows the Pirelli maintaining its wet performance advantage with the quickest time of 12.26 seconds, while the Maxxis once again trails at 13.16 seconds, a gap of 0.9 seconds that reinforces the tire's inadequate wet weather capabilities.

Wet Circle
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	12.26 s	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	12.35 s	+0.09 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	12.43 s	+0.17 s
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	12.52 s	+0.26 s
5Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	12.63 s	+0.37 s
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6	12.67 s	+0.41 s
6Linglong Sport Master Winter	12.67 s	+0.41 s
8Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	12.68 s	+0.42 s
9Triangle Effexwinter	12.72 s	+0.46 s
10Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	13.16 s	+0.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (0.9 s).

The Continental WinterContact TS 870P leads aquaplaning resistance at 56.5 mph, providing the best protection against straight-line hydroplaning, while the Yokohama offers the least resistance at 53.1 mph - a significant 3.5 mph difference that could mean the difference between control and losing grip in heavy rain.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	56.5 mph	Best
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6	56.1 mph	-0.4 mph
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	54.8 mph	-1.7 mph
3Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	54.8 mph	-1.7 mph
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	54.7 mph	-1.8 mph
6Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	54.7 mph	-1.8 mph
7Linglong Sport Master Winter	54.6 mph	-1.9 mph
8Triangle Effexwinter	53.9 mph	-2.6 mph
9Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	53.7 mph	-2.8 mph
10Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	53.1 mph	-3.4 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.2% (3.4 mph).

Snow

The Michelin achieves the shortest snow braking distance at 85 feet from 31 mph, closely followed by the Bridgestone at 84 feet, while the budget Linglong requires 6 feet more distance to stop - a concerning margin when winter conditions deteriorate.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6	84 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	85 ft	+1 ft	7 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	85 ft	+1 ft	9 mph
4Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	86 ft	+2 ft	10 mph
5Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	86 ft	+2 ft	12 mph
5Triangle Effexwinter	86 ft	+2 ft	12 mph
7Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	87 ft	+3 ft	13 mph
7Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	87 ft	+3 ft	13 mph
9Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	89 ft	+5 ft	18 mph
10Linglong Sport Master Winter	91 ft	+7 ft	21 mph

The difference between best and worst was 7.4% (7 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Linglong Sport Master Winter would still be travelling at 21 mph when the Bridgestone Blizzak 6 had stopped.

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

The Michelin generates the highest traction force at 3575 Newtons during repeated acceleration tests, enabling confident forward motion in deep snow, while the Yokohama musters only 3030 Newtons - a deficit of 545 Newtons that translates to noticeably reduced ability to climb snowy gradients or accelerate away from standstill.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	804 lbf	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	782 lbf	-22 lbf
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	773 lbf	-31 lbf
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	769 lbf	-35 lbf
5Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	754 lbf	-50 lbf
6Triangle Effexwinter	732 lbf	-72 lbf
7Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	722 lbf	-82 lbf
8Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	699 lbf	-105 lbf
9Linglong Sport Master Winter	695 lbf	-109 lbf
10Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	681 lbf	-123 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 15.2% (123 lbf).

The Michelin records the fastest snow lap at 68.0 seconds on the 1 miles circuit, with the Bridgestone just 0.1 seconds behind, demonstrating the premium tires' winter capabilities, while the Triangle struggles to 73.7 seconds - 5.7 seconds slower and exposing significant performance compromises.

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	68 s	Best
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6	68.1 s	+0.10 s
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	68.3 s	+0.30 s
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	70.7 s	+2.70 s
5Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	70.8 s	+2.80 s
6Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	71.1 s	+3.10 s
7Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	71.2 s	+3.20 s
8Linglong Sport Master Winter	71.6 s	+3.60 s
9Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	72.4 s	+4.40 s
10Triangle Effexwinter	73.7 s	+5.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.4% (5.7 s).

Comfort

Subjective comfort ratings show most tires scoring 7 or 8 out of 10 points with relatively little separation between premium and mid-range options, though the Maxxis falls to just 6 out of 10, reflecting its harsher ride quality that compounds its performance deficiencies in other areas.

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	8 Points	Best
1Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	8 Points	Best
1Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	8 Points	Best
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6	8 Points	Best
1Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	8 Points	Best
1Linglong Sport Master Winter	8 Points	Best
1Triangle Effexwinter	8 Points	Best
8Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	7 Points	-1.00 Points
8Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	7 Points	-1.00 Points
10Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	6 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 25% (2 Points).

The Triangle produces the quietest exterior noise at 70.3 dB(A) when passing at 50 mph, one of its few positive results, while the Linglong generates 76.2 dB(A) - a 5.9 dB(A) increase that represents a near-doubling of perceived noise intensity and contributes to environmental noise pollution.

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Triangle Effexwinter	70.3 dB	Best
2Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	70.5 dB	+0.20 dB
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	71.1 dB	+0.80 dB
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	71.2 dB	+0.90 dB
5Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	71.8 dB	+1.50 dB
6Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	72 dB	+1.70 dB
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	72.4 dB	+2.10 dB
8Bridgestone Blizzak 6	72.7 dB	+2.40 dB
9Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	73.3 dB	+3.00 dB
10Linglong Sport Master Winter	76.2 dB	+5.90 dB

The difference between best and worst was 8.4% (5.9 dB).

Value

The Michelin's superior wear resistance translates to a projected lifespan of 29,049 miles before reaching legal minimum tread depth, while the Triangle is expected to last only 17,088 miles - meaning drivers would need to purchase 1.7 sets of Triangle tires to match the distance covered by a single set of Michelins, fundamentally altering the value equation.

Wear
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	29,049 miles	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	27,185 miles	-1,864 miles
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	25,321 miles	-3,728 miles
4Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	24,855 miles	-4,194 miles
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6	24,700 miles	-4,349 miles
6Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	19,418 miles	-9,631 miles
7Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	19,263 miles	-9,786 miles
8Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	18,952 miles	-10,097 miles
9Linglong Sport Master Winter	17,709 miles	-11,340 miles
10Triangle Effexwinter	17,088 miles	-11,961 miles

The difference between best and worst was 41.2% (11,961 miles).

When purchase price is divided by projected mileage, the Triangle offers the lowest cost per 1000 km at 3.18 euros, but this calculation doesn't account for its safety compromises, while the Michelin at 5.83 euros per 1000 km proves that premium pricing can deliver competitive running costs when combined with exceptional durability and the highest levels of performance and safety.

Value
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	cost per 1,000 miles
1Triangle Effexwinter	12.72 Price/1000	Best	€27.93
2Linglong Sport Master Winter	13.52 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000	€36.87
3Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	19.2 Price/1000	+6.48 Price/1000	€37.92
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	22.52 Price/1000	+9.80 Price/1000	€44.96
5Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	23.08 Price/1000	+10.36 Price/1000	€50.26
6Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	23.32 Price/1000	+10.60 Price/1000	€41.61
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6	24.52 Price/1000	+11.80 Price/1000	€42.31
8Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	25.28 Price/1000	+12.56 Price/1000	€47.91
9Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	27.12 Price/1000	+14.40 Price/1000	€49.82
10Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	28 Price/1000	+15.28 Price/1000	€54.82

The difference between best and worst was 120.1% (15.28 Price/1000). Over 25,000 miles the cheapest tire to own (Triangle Effexwinter) works out €672 cheaper than the most expensive (Vredestein Wintrac Pro+).

How this is calculated

Assumes a typical car doing 29 mpg (rolling resistance causing 20% of fuel use), fuel at €6.25 per gallon and €70 fitting per set of four. Purchase prices are from the time of the 2025 test; financing costs are excluded.

The Bridgestone's Enliten technology delivers the lowest rolling resistance at just 7.6 kg/t, maximizing fuel efficiency and earning the economy recommendation, while the Linglong's 9.6 kg/t represents 26% higher resistance - translating directly to increased fuel consumption and CO2 emissions over the tire's lifetime.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6	7.6 kg/t	Best	$0
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	7.9 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t	$12
3Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t	$23
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t	$23
3Triangle Effexwinter	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t	$23
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	8.4 kg/t	+0.80 kg/t	$31
7Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	8.7 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t	$43
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	8.7 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t	$43
9Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	9.3 kg/t	+1.70 kg/t	$66
10Linglong Sport Master Winter	9.6 kg/t	+2.00 kg/t	$77

The difference between best and worst was 26.3% (2 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Linglong Sport Master Winter uses about 21 gal ($77) more fuel than the Bridgestone Blizzak 6.

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.

Laboratory testing reveals the Michelin wears at just 0.124 mm per 1000 km, the lowest rate in the test, while the Triangle sheds rubber at 0.223 mm per 1000 km - an 80% higher wear rate that means the budget tire will need replacing almost twice as often, negating much of its initial cost advantage.

Abrasion
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5	0.12 mm/1000km	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	0.14 mm/1000km	+0.02 mm/1000km
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P	0.15 mm/1000km	+0.03 mm/1000km
3Bridgestone Blizzak 6	0.15 mm/1000km	+0.03 mm/1000km
3Pirelli P Zero Winter 2	0.15 mm/1000km	+0.03 mm/1000km
6Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906	0.19 mm/1000km	+0.07 mm/1000km
7Vredestein Wintrac Pro+	0.2 mm/1000km	+0.08 mm/1000km
8Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6	0.21 mm/1000km	+0.09 mm/1000km
9Linglong Sport Master Winter	0.22 mm/1000km	+0.10 mm/1000km
9Triangle Effexwinter	0.22 mm/1000km	+0.10 mm/1000km

The difference between best and worst was 83.3% (0.1 mm/1000km).

Results

Auto Zeitung Test Winner / Highly Recommended Testsieger / sehr empfehlenswert

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 delivers a masterclass in balanced winter tire performance, earning the test victory with consistently excellent results across all conditions. On snow, it demonstrates short braking distances, strong traction, and exceptional lateral grip of 3.88 m/s², while its driving safety scores of 23/30 make it both sporty-responsive and stoically stable. The tire transitions seamlessly to wet conditions where it leads the field alongside Pirelli, offering very good grip reserves and superb handling characteristics that inspire confidence. In dry conditions, the Goodyear continues to impress with neutral, predictable behavior and strong stability, though comfort is rated slightly lower at 7/10. Its environmental credentials are strong as the second-best tire for sustainability factors including wear, longevity, rolling resistance and noise. The tire's ability to maintain composure and precision regardless of weather conditions makes it the most complete package in this test.

Dry98.4%

Wet98.6%

Snow97.5%

Comfort93.2%

Value82.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	143 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	75.8 s	+0.60 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 10	30 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	162 ft	+3 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 10	85.3 s	+0.40 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 10	42 Points	-3.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	2^nd / 10	12.35 s	+0.09 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 10	54.7 mph	-1.8 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	85 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	2^nd / 10	782 lbf	-22 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	68.3 s	+0.30 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 10	23 Points	-6.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	1^st / 10	12.7 ft/s²	Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	8^th / 10	7 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 10	71.1 dB	+0.80 dB
WearHigher is better	2^nd / 10	27,185 miles	-1,864 miles
ValueLower is better	4^th / 10	22.52 Price/1000	+9.80 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 10	8.7 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	2^nd / 10	0.14 mm/1000km	+0.02 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/C/70
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 11.4 kgs
Tread: 7.9 mm
Price: 985.00

Auto Zeitung Eco Recommendation / Highly Recommended Umwelt-Empfehlung / sehr empfehlenswert

The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 secures second place overall and earns the environmental recommendation as the most sustainable tire in the test. On snow, it achieves the shortest braking distance at 85 feet and delivers the highest traction force of 3575 Newtons, though testers note it lacks some feedback and precision at the limit, scoring 25/30 for driving safety. In wet conditions, the Michelin provides solid and reliable grip with good handling, though it struggles slightly with feedback during dynamic maneuvers, earning 33/45 for safety. The tire truly excels in dry performance with the absolute shortest braking distance of 139 feet and clear, precise responses scoring 20/30 for handling character. With an outstanding projected mileage of 29,049 miles, the lowest wear rate of 0.124 mm per 1000 km, very low rolling resistance, and quiet operation at 71.2 dB(A), it represents the best long-term value proposition. The tire's efficiency and longevity mean that despite its premium price, it offers excellent cost per kilometer.

Dry96.6%

Wet95.7%

Snow98.2%

Comfort99.4%

Value89.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	139 ft	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 10	75.9 s	+0.70 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 10	20 Points	-10.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	166 ft	+7 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 10	86.4 s	+1.50 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 10	33 Points	-12.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	4^th / 10	12.52 s	+0.26 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 10	54.8 mph	-1.7 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	85 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	1^st / 10	804 lbf	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	1^st / 10	68 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 10	25 Points	-4.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	3^rd / 10	12.3 ft/s²	-0.4 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 10	71.2 dB	+0.90 dB
WearHigher is better	1^st / 10	29,049 miles	Best in this discipline
ValueLower is better	6^th / 10	23.32 Price/1000	+10.60 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 10	7.9 kg/t	+0.30 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	1^st / 10	0.124 mm/1000km	Best in this discipline

EU Label: C/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 11.4 kgs
Tread: 7.45 mm
Price: 1090.00

Auto Zeitung Highly Recommended sehr empfehlenswert

The Pirelli P Zero Winter 2 claims third place with particularly impressive wet weather capabilities and a sustainability focus, being manufactured from at least 55% recycled or bio-based materials. On snow, it delivers good performance with strong braking and traction, though handling reveals an uncharacteristically clear understeer tendency for Pirelli, scoring 21/30 for driving safety. Where this tire truly shines is on wet surfaces, achieving the absolute shortest braking distance at 159 feet with near-exemplary grip and handling that earns a perfect 45/45 safety score - no other winter tire in this test stops as safely in the wet. Its only weakness appears in lateral aquaplaning resistance. In dry conditions, the Pirelli maintains its flawless performance with balanced characteristics between longevity, comfort (8/10), efficiency, safety (26/30) and driving enjoyment. The tire's well-rounded nature and environmental credentials make it a strong choice for those seeking both performance and sustainability, though buyers should be aware of its slightly reduced aquaplaning protection in curves.

Dry97.3%

Wet99.6%

Snow94.2%

Comfort99.9%

Value78.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	143 ft	+4 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 10	75.6 s	+0.40 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 10	26 Points	-4.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	159 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 10	84.9 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 10	45 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet CircleLower is better	1^st / 10	12.26 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 10	53.7 mph	-2.8 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	86 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	3^rd / 10	773 lbf	-31 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 10	70.8 s	+2.80 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 10	21 Points	-8.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	5^th / 10	11.8 ft/s²	-0.9 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 10	70.5 dB	+0.20 dB
WearHigher is better	4^th / 10	24,855 miles	-4,194 miles
ValueLower is better	9^th / 10	27.12 Price/1000	+14.40 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 10	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	5^th / 10	0.154 mm/1000km	+0.03 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/A/70
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 11.6 kgs
Tread: 7.5 mm
Price: 1085.00

Auto Zeitung Fuel-Saving Recommendation / Highly Recommended Spritspar-Empfehlung / sehr empfehlenswert

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 Enliten takes fourth place and earns the fuel efficiency recommendation thanks to its class-leading Enliten technology. On snow, this tire achieves the highest performance rating in the test with the joint-shortest braking distance, excellent traction, outstanding lateral grip of 3.86 m/s², and a very high driving safety score of 29/30 - its balanced nature and strong grip inspire confidence through winter conditions. In wet weather, the Bridgestone offers very high aquaplaning reserves and stable driving characteristics with willing turn-in response, scoring 34/45 for safety, though braking distances are somewhat longer than the best. The tire delivers best-in-class results for rolling resistance at just 7.6 kg/t and excels in slalom testing at 36.7 mph, though it shows lively responses to load changes and scores 23/30 for dry safety. With small steering angles and stable support characteristics, it provides an engaging driving experience. The Enliten technology makes it exceptionally efficient, though its mileage of 24,700 miles doesn't quite match the longevity leaders, preventing it from claiming the top environmental spot.

Dry94.4%

Wet94.8%

Snow98.8%

Comfort98.4%

Value82.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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	9^th / 10	148 ft	+9 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	76.3 s	+1.10 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 10	23 Points	-7.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	168 ft	+9 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 10	88.1 s	+3.20 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 10	34 Points	-11.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	6^th / 10	12.67 s	+0.41 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 10	56.1 mph	-0.4 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	84 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better	4^th / 10	769 lbf	-35 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 10	68.1 s	+0.10 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 10	29 Points	Best in this discipline
Snow CircleHigher is better	2^nd / 10	12.7 ft/s²	0.0 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 10	72.7 dB	+2.40 dB
WearHigher is better	5^th / 10	24,700 miles	-4,349 miles
ValueLower is better	7^th / 10	24.52 Price/1000	+11.80 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 10	7.6 kg/t	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	3^rd / 10	0.147 mm/1000km	+0.02 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 11.0 kgs
Tread: 7.6 mm
Price: 975.00

Auto Zeitung Highly Recommended sehr empfehlenswert

The Continental WinterContact TS 870P rounds out the top five recommendations with consistently reliable performance and the best aquaplaning protection in the test. On snow, the tire handles the winter disciplines capably without setting any particular highlights, offering medium traction and a good-natured character that scores 27/30 for driving safety, though it doesn't quite match the grip levels of the leading snow specialists. Where the Continental excels is in wet conditions, providing the absolute best protection against aquaplaning at 56.5 mph longitudinally, combined with fine feedback and precise handling that earns 38/45 for safety - drivers will appreciate its clear communication and predictable behavior. In the dry, it delivers consistently dependable grip and handling with crystal-clear feedback scoring 28/30 for safety, though comfort is rated slightly lower at 7/10, and gentle load change reactions make it easy to control. The tire offers solid all-around capabilities with good longevity of 25,321 miles and reasonable efficiency. While it may not lead in any single category, its balanced nature and particularly strong aquaplaning resistance make it a sensible choice for drivers prioritizing safety in heavy rain.

Dry96.5%

Wet96%

Snow94.4%

Comfort92.7%

Value79.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	147 ft	+8 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 10	75.9 s	+0.70 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 10	28 Points	-2.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	172 ft	+13 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	86.3 s	+1.40 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 10	38 Points	-7.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	3^rd / 10	12.43 s	+0.17 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 10	56.5 mph	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	87 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	7^th / 10	722 lbf	-82 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	4^th / 10	70.7 s	+2.70 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 10	27 Points	-2.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	4^th / 10	12.1 ft/s²	-0.6 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	8^th / 10	7 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 10	71.8 dB	+1.50 dB
WearHigher is better	3^rd / 10	25,321 miles	-3,728 miles
ValueLower is better	8^th / 10	25.28 Price/1000	+12.56 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 10	8.4 kg/t	+0.80 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	3^rd / 10	0.147 mm/1000km	+0.02 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/B/71
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 11.4 kgs
Tread: 8.4 mm
Price: 1030.00

The Vredestein Wintrac Pro+ finishes in sixth place, showing solid competence across conditions but lacking the standout qualities of the premium leaders. On snow, it achieves respectable braking performance and handles predictably with an understeer-biased setup scoring 19/30 for driving safety, though it can't match the grip levels of the top performers. In wet conditions, the tire's main weakness emerges with extended braking distances and only moderate grip levels scoring 35/45 for safety, though its handling remains stable and controllable. The dry performance continues this theme of adequacy rather than excellence - mediocre steering precision and a handling characteristic that tends toward oversteer at the limit earn just 15/30 for safety, though comfort is rated at a respectable 8/10. The tire's high wear rate of 0.201 mm per 1000 km and modest projected mileage of just 19,418 miles hurt its value proposition. For drivers who can accept compromises in wet braking performance and somewhat vague steering response in exchange for a lower price point than the premium options, the Vredestein remains a viable choice, though it requires driver adaptation to its characteristics.

Dry92.4%

Wet94.3%

Snow90.3%

Comfort98.6%

Value67.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	146 ft	+7 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	9^th / 10	76.7 s	+1.50 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	9^th / 10	15 Points	-15.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	175 ft	+16 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 10	86.5 s	+1.60 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 10	35 Points	-10.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	5^th / 10	12.63 s	+0.37 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 10	54.8 mph	-1.7 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	86 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	8^th / 10	699 lbf	-105 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	71.1 s	+3.10 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 10	19 Points	-10.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	8^th / 10	11.3 ft/s²	-1.4 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 10	72.4 dB	+2.10 dB
WearHigher is better	6^th / 10	19,418 miles	-9,631 miles
ValueLower is better	10^th / 10	28 Price/1000	+15.28 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 10	8.7 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	7^th / 10	0.201 mm/1000km	+0.08 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/C/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 12.9 kgs
Tread: 8.45 mm
Price: 875.00

The Triangle EffeXWinter TW421 represents the cheapest option in this test at just 87.50 euros per tire, but significant performance compromises accompany that low price. On snow, the tire manages acceptable grip levels though it becomes unstable in borderline conditions and exhibits sensitive responses to load changes that score only 12/30 for driving safety - not confidence-inspiring when conditions deteriorate. In wet weather, it delivers the second-best braking result surprisingly, and drives with pleasingly stable characteristics scoring 30/45 for safety, showing that budget tires can perform respectably in some areas. Dry performance reveals the best exterior noise result at 70.3 dB(A) and strong braking, though the handling suffers from instability during load changes scoring 13/30 for safety. The tire's environmental credentials are poor with high wear of 0.223 mm per 1000 km, short projected life of only 17,088 miles, and the shortest actual lifespan in the test. While it offers the lowest cost per kilometer at 3.18 euros, this calculation doesn't account for the safety compromises. The Triangle might suit extremely budget-conscious buyers in regions with minimal winter conditions, but its unpredictable handling and poor durability make it difficult to recommend.

Dry93.2%

Wet92.9%

Snow88.6%

Comfort100%

Value76.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	140 ft	+1 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	10^th / 10	77.3 s	+2.10 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	10^th / 10	13 Points	-17.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	173 ft	+14 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	88.4 s	+3.50 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 10	30 Points	-15.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	9^th / 10	12.72 s	+0.46 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 10	53.9 mph	-2.6 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	86 ft	+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	6^th / 10	732 lbf	-72 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	10^th / 10	73.7 s	+5.70 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	10^th / 10	12 Points	-17.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	9^th / 10	11.1 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 10	70.3 dB	Best in this discipline
WearHigher is better	10^th / 10	17,088 miles	-11,961 miles
ValueLower is better	1^st / 10	12.72 Price/1000	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 10	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	10^th / 10	0.223 mm/1000km	+0.10 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 12.5 kgs
Tread: 7.75 mm
Price: 350.00

The Yokohama BluEarth Winter V906 finishes in eighth place, showing a clear weakness on snow that undermines its otherwise acceptable performance. The tire's winter credentials are immediately questioned by its poor snow performance - it achieves the worst results for traction and lateral grip with just 3.19 m/s², exhibits restricted driving stability, and delivers an inadequate 13/30 safety score that places it at the back of the field. For anyone prioritizing snow capability, this tire simply cannot be recommended. In wet conditions, the Yokohama recovers somewhat with predictable, controllable handling and average grip levels scoring 31/45 for safety, though it still trails the leaders. Dry performance is similarly middle-of-the-road with good braking at 142 feet, orderly grip, and decent precision earning 22/30 for safety, while comfort rates a respectable 8/10. The tire's high rolling resistance of 9.3 kg/t, loud operation at 73.3 dB(A), and poor wear characteristics with only 19,263 miles projected mileage further damage its case. The Yokohama might work for drivers in mild climates who rarely encounter snow and simply need to satisfy legal winter tire requirements, but it fails to deliver the winter performance most buyers expect.

Dry96%

Wet94.1%

Snow85.9%

Comfort98%

Value68.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	142 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	76.3 s	+1.10 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 10	22 Points	-8.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	169 ft	+10 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	87.2 s	+2.30 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 10	31 Points	-14.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	8^th / 10	12.68 s	+0.42 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 10	53.1 mph	-3.4 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	9^th / 10	89 ft	+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	10^th / 10	681 lbf	-123 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	9^th / 10	72.4 s	+4.40 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	9^th / 10	13 Points	-16.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	10^th / 10	10.5 ft/s²	-2.2 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	9^th / 10	73.3 dB	+3.00 dB
WearHigher is better	7^th / 10	19,263 miles	-9,786 miles
ValueLower is better	5^th / 10	23.08 Price/1000	+10.36 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	9^th / 10	9.3 kg/t	+1.70 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	6^th / 10	0.185 mm/1000km	+0.06 mm/1000km

EU Label: D/B/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 13.2 kgs
Tread: 8.0 mm
Price: 715.00

The Linglong Sport Master Winter, manufactured in Serbia specifically for European customers, finishes ninth overall and represents a tire that hasn't yet met expectations despite its regional focus. On snow, the tire provides only marginal grip resulting in the longest braking distance at 91 feet and the lowest driving safety rating of 15/30 - when winter conditions arrive, this tire struggles to provide adequate security. Interestingly, in wet conditions the Linglong proves less problematic, though extended braking distances of 175 feet still concern, and lateral aquaplaning protection in curves needs improvement, scoring 25/45 for safety. The tire surprises in dry handling by posting the fastest lap time at 75.2 seconds and demonstrating respectable grip at 142 feet braking, though its nervous rear axle behavior demands driver attention and scores 25/30 for safety. Environmental performance is deeply disappointing with the highest wear rate of 0.215 mm per 1000 km after Triangle, shortest projected life of 17,709 miles, highest rolling resistance at 9.6 kg/t, and loudest operation at 76.2 dB(A). While it offers low cost per kilometer at 3.38 euros, the Linglong's poor snow performance, high environmental impact, and demanding handling characteristics make it a questionable choice even at its budget price point.

Dry97.4%

Wet91.8%

Snow88.2%

Comfort96.1%

Value72.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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 / 10	142 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 10	75.2 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 10	25 Points	-5.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 10	175 ft	+16 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	9^th / 10	89.1 s	+4.20 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	9^th / 10	25 Points	-20.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	6^th / 10	12.67 s	+0.41 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 10	54.6 mph	-1.9 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	10^th / 10	91 ft	+7 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	9^th / 10	695 lbf	-109 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	71.6 s	+3.60 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 10	15 Points	-14.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	7^th / 10	11.4 ft/s²	-1.3 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 10	8 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 10	76.2 dB	+5.90 dB
WearHigher is better	9^th / 10	17,709 miles	-11,340 miles
ValueLower is better	2^nd / 10	13.52 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	10^th / 10	9.6 kg/t	+2.00 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	9^th / 10	0.215 mm/1000km	+0.09 mm/1000km

EU Label: D/A/72
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 12.7 kgs
Tread: 7.6 mm
Price: 385.00

The Maxxis Premitra Snow WP6 brings up the rear in tenth place, requiring a general overhaul according to the testers due to significant weaknesses across multiple conditions. On snow, the tire still manages to hold its own with acceptable grip and scores 18/30 for driving safety - this is actually one of its better showings among the budget profiles. However, the wheels fall off in wet conditions where the Maxxis records by far the longest braking distance at 186 feet - nearly 26 feet more than the winning Pirelli - combined with hectic load change reactions and severely compromised safety scoring just 19/45. At 62 mph on wet roads, where the BMW stops with other tires, the Maxxis would still be traveling at nearly 25 mph - an unacceptable safety margin. Dry performance continues the disappointment with the longest braking distance at 152 feet, struggles with rear axle stability, and inadequate driving safety at 18/30, while comfort suffers at just 6/10. The tire also disappoints in durability with high wear and a projected life of only 18,952 miles. Despite costing less than premium options, the Maxxis cannot be recommended due to its dangerous wet braking performance and overall lack of refinement across conditions.

Dry91.8%

Wet87.5%

Snow91.9%

Comfort86.3%

Value72.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (19)

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	10^th / 10	152 ft	+13 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	76.6 s	+1.40 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 10	18 Points	-12.00 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	10^th / 10	186 ft	+27 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	10^th / 10	91.5 s	+6.60 s
Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better	10^th / 10	19 Points	-26.00 Points
Wet CircleLower is better	10^th / 10	13.16 s	+0.90 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 10	54.7 mph	-1.8 mph
Snow BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	87 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	5^th / 10	754 lbf	-50 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	7^th / 10	71.2 s	+3.20 s
Subj. Snow HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 10	18 Points	-11.00 Points
Snow CircleHigher is better	6^th / 10	11.4 ft/s²	-1.3 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	10^th / 10	6 Points	-2.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 10	72 dB	+1.70 dB
WearHigher is better	8^th / 10	18,952 miles	-10,097 miles
ValueLower is better	3^rd / 10	19.2 Price/1000	+6.48 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 10	8.2 kg/t	+0.60 kg/t
AbrasionLower is better	8^th / 10	0.205 mm/1000km	+0.08 mm/1000km

EU Label: C/B/69
3PMSF: Yes
Weight: 12.2 kgs
Tread: 8.3 mm
Price: 585.00

Menu

Tire shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Test Results and Key Findings

Premium vs Budget Analysis

Environmental and Efficiency Considerations

Dry

Wet

Snow

Comfort

Value

Results

Cross-check this test