Menu

Test source Auto Bild

2025 Autobild Winter Tire Test

Overall test winnerMichelin Pilot Alpin 5

Moving on from the 51 set braking test, the full Auto Bild winter tire test is once again, excellent.

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson
15 min read
Tire shortlist Read the test
2025 Autobild Winter Tyre Test
225/40 R18 / 2025 View full image
2025 Autobild Winter Tyre Test
Tires tested
20
Tested size
225/40 R18
Test vehicle
BMW M135i
Disciplines
16

At a glance

Tire shortlist

20 Tires tested

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

1st

Michelin Pilot Alpin 5

+The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 is the most even-handed tire in the test. It stops shortest on dry roads and second shortest in the wet, is second fastest through the dry handling course, is top three on both wet handling tracks and shares the quickest snow handling time. It is also joint quietest on the noise test.

−It is the most expensive tire to buy and, with only average wear, one of the dearest per kilometer. Aquaplaning resistance, both straight and in bends, is in the lower half of the field, and it is behind the snow specialists for traction and in the slalom.

33 owner reviews Test Results
2nd

Dunlop Winter

+The Dunlop Winter is one of the strongest tires on snow, top four for braking, traction and the slalom, and it shares the third-shortest wet stop. It also shares the top comfort rating, is one of the quietest tires measured and has the fifth-highest predicted mileage.

−Dry braking is only mid-field and it is in the bottom half for dry handling. Its lap times on both wet handling tracks are in the bottom half too, and straight-line aquaplaning resistance is one of the weaker results.

2 owner reviews Test Results
Joint3rd

Bridgestone Blizzak 6

+The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 is the fastest tire through the dry handling course, with the sporty, precise feel that high lateral grip brings, and it shares the highest predicted mileage in the test. It is also joint fifth for snow braking and in the top five for straight-line aquaplaning.

−Wet performance is only mid-field, with braking and both wet handling times around the middle of the order, and it is one of the louder tires on the noise test. Snow traction is below average.

9 owner reviews Test Results
Joint3rd

Kumho WinterCraft WP52+

+The Kumho WinterCraft WP52 plus shares third place at a much lower price than the tires around it. It is in the top five for wet braking, fourth in both wet handling and snow handling, stays around mid-field or better in every grip test, and carries a high speed rating for a winter tire.

−Ride comfort shares the lowest rating in the test and predicted wear is in the bottom five. It is also a little slow through the dry handling course.

6 owner reviews Test Results
5th

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

+The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 is the best tire in the wet. It stops shortest, is fastest on the wet circle, second fastest round the wet handling track and second best for aquaplaning in bends. It also shares the highest predicted mileage in the test.

−It is weaker on dry roads, with braking in the bottom half, and only mid-field or below on snow, where its traction is among the lowest. Rolling resistance is the third highest in the test.

15 owner reviews Test Results
6th

Hankook Winter i cept evo3

+The Hankook Winter i*cept evo3 is the best tire for aquaplaning in bends and third best in a straight line. It is strong on snow, third fastest through the snow handling course and top six for traction and the slalom, and it wears well, which makes it one of the better-value tires per kilometer.

−Wet braking is only mid-pack and its time on the wet circle is in the bottom five.

23 owner reviews Test Results
7th

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

+The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P has the second-lowest rolling resistance in the test, is fourth for dry braking and third fastest through the dry handling course. It also shares the top comfort rating, is joint fifth for snow braking and third best for aquaplaning in bends.

−Wet braking and wet handling are both in the bottom half, which is where it loses ground to the leaders. It is also one of the more expensive tires to run per kilometer.

33 owner reviews Test Results
Joint8th

Barum Polaris 6

+The Barum Polaris 6 has the lowest rolling resistance in the test, is one of the quietest tires and one of the cheapest to buy, which makes it third best per kilometer. Dry handling and snow braking are both around the middle of the field.

−It is weak against aquaplaning, second from last in a straight line and in the bottom five in bends, and its wet braking and handling are mid-field at best. Dry braking is in the bottom five.

6 owner reviews Test Results
Joint8th

Uniroyal WinterExpert

+The Uniroyal WinterExpert has the third-lowest rolling resistance in the test, the sixth-shortest wet stop and the sixth-fastest time through the dry handling course. It is also good value per kilometer.

−Snow is its weaker side, with braking, traction, handling and the slalom all in the bottom half, and dry braking is below average too. Ride comfort shares the lowest rating and it is one of the noisier tires.

7 owner reviews Test Results
10th

Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2

+The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 is the fastest tire round the wet handling track and second fastest on the wet circle, and it is fifth for dry braking and snow handling. It also shares the top comfort rating.

−Dry handling is imprecise and third from last in the test, and snow traction and braking are both in the bottom half. It is one of the more expensive tires to buy and to run, and Pirelli has since replaced it with the Cinturato Winter 3.

3 owner reviews Test Results
11th

Semperit Speed Grip 5

+The Semperit Speed-Grip 5 is fifth fastest through the dry handling course, has the fourth-lowest rolling resistance and is solid on wet roads, with braking and handling in the top half and good aquaplaning resistance.

−Snow is its weak point, especially cornering, with braking and handling both third from last. It is the loudest tire measured, shares the lowest comfort rating and its predicted wear is in the bottom four.

3 owner reviews Test Results
12th

BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2

+The BFGoodrich g-Force Winter 2 is one of the two best snow tires in the test: it shares the quickest snow handling and slalom times, is second for snow braking and traction, and resists straight-line aquaplaning better than any other tire.

−The snow focus costs it elsewhere. Wet braking and both wet handling times are in the bottom five, and it is slow through the dry handling course, with dry braking only mid-field.

30 owner reviews Test Results
13th

Vredestein Wintrac Pro+

+The Vredestein Wintrac Pro plus has good lateral grip in the wet, fifth fastest on the wet circle and sixth on the wet handling track.

−Dry braking is among the longest in the test and its predicted wear is the second lowest, which makes it one of the most expensive tires per kilometer. Rolling resistance is the second highest, it is one of the louder tires, and its snow results and wet braking are in the bottom half.

3 owner reviews Test Results
14th

Kleber Krisalp HP3

+The Kleber Krisalp HP3 stops shortest on snow, has the most traction there and shares the best slalom result. It is also second best for straight-line aquaplaning and sixth for aquaplaning in bends.

−It has the longest dry braking distance in the test and is second slowest through the dry handling course. Wet braking is the third longest, and ride comfort shares the lowest rating.

36 owner reviews Test Results
15th

Ceat WinterDrive

+The Ceat WinterDrive is the cheapest tire per kilometer in the test, combining a low price with the joint third-highest predicted mileage. It is third shortest for dry braking, sixth for snow traction and one of the quieter tires.

−Wet roads are the weak point. It shares the longest wet stop, is slowest round the wet handling track, second slowest on the wet circle and in the bottom five for aquaplaning, both straight and in bends. Rolling resistance is on the high side too.

Read owner reviews Test Results
Joint16th

Firestone Winterhawk 4

+The Firestone Winterhawk 4 has the third-highest snow traction in the test and the fifth-lowest rolling resistance. Its wet braking and wet handling are around the middle of the field, and it is reasonable value per kilometer.

−Dry handling feels spongy and is the slowest in the test, and its dry braking distance is the second longest.

6 owner reviews Test Results
Joint16th

Toyo Observe EWS1

+The Toyo Observe EWS1 is strong on asphalt: second shortest for dry braking, joint third for wet braking, and in the top five on both wet handling tracks and for aquaplaning in bends. It also wears well and is good value per kilometer.

−Snow is a serious weakness. It is last for snow braking, snow handling and the slalom and third from last for traction, and it is the second loudest tire measured.

2 owner reviews Test Results
18th

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

+The Fulda Kristall Control HP2 is good on snow, with the third-best slalom result, joint fifth place for snow braking and seventh for traction. It also shares the top comfort rating and is fourth best for aquaplaning in bends.

−Wet roads are its weak point: it shares the longest wet stop, is slowest on the wet circle and second slowest round the wet handling track. Dry braking is also among the longest and predicted wear is in the bottom four.

12 owner reviews Test Results
19th

Linglong Sport Master Winter

+The Linglong Sport Master Winter is the cheapest tire in the test and second best per kilometer. On dry roads it is in the top seven for both braking and handling.

−It has the highest rolling resistance in the test, is second from last for snow traction and last for aquaplaning in bends. It is in the bottom four on both wet handling tracks, and its snow braking and handling are in the bottom half.

4 owner reviews Test Results
20th

Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro

+The Falken Eurowinter HS02 Pro is fourth fastest through the dry handling course and sixth on the wet circle. It also shares the top comfort rating and is joint quietest on the noise test.

−It is near the bottom on snow, last for traction and second from last for braking, handling and the slalom, and it is last for straight-line aquaplaning. Its predicted wear is the lowest in the test by a wide margin, which makes it the most expensive tire per kilometer.

4 owner reviews Test Results

Tire shortlist

Compare selected tires

2025 Autobild Winter Tire Test · 225/40 R18

TireMichelin Pilot Alpin 5Dunlop WinterBridgestone Blizzak 6Kumho WinterCraft WP52+Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3Hankook Winter i cept evo3Continental WinterContact TS 870 PBarum Polaris 6Uniroyal WinterExpertPirelli Cinturato Winter 2Semperit Speed Grip 5BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2Vredestein Wintrac Pro+Kleber Krisalp HP3Ceat WinterDriveFirestone Winterhawk 4Toyo Observe EWS1Fulda Kristall Control HP2Linglong Sport Master WinterFalken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
Position1st2ndJoint 3rdJoint 3rd5th6th7thJoint 8thJoint 8th10th11th12th13th14th15thJoint 16thJoint 16th18th19th20th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry99.9%95.7%97.4%96.8%95.7%97.2%98.6%95.5%96%97.1%95.9%95.6%94.3%93.5%98%93.4%98.7%94.3%97.5%97.4%
Wet97.5%95.6%95.1%96.6%99.6%95.2%95%93.3%95.5%96.5%95.5%93.9%93.7%94.3%91.4%94.5%97.8%92.6%92.3%93.5%
Snow96.5%98.5%96.5%96.6%94.9%97.7%97.3%94.9%94%94.6%93.9%99.7%94.6%99.7%96.3%97%90.2%97.5%93.3%91.1%
Comfort95.6%99.8%94.3%91.3%95.2%94.6%99.3%95.5%90.6%99.5%90%94.6%90.5%90.7%95.2%94.6%94.1%98.7%94.9%100%
Value79.9%87.8%87.2%83.7%85.6%89.1%82.5%90.9%88.4%79.9%82.8%81.6%71.2%81.3%94.1%84.2%87.6%81.9%84.5%67.8%
Keep researchingRead owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results		Read owner reviews
Test Results

Explore the complete results →

The full test

The evidence behind the verdict

Moving on from the 51 set braking test, the full Auto Bild winter tire test is once again, excellent. Testing 225/40 R18 using an AWD BMW M135i (but also fitted to the Audi S3, VW Golf GTI and R, Mercedes-AMG A35, and Hyundai i30 N and more) Auto Bild have once again put all the tires through snow, wet and dry testing, and tested wear, noise, comfort and rolling resistance.

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
62.1 → 0.0 mph
Snow Braking
31.1 → 0.0 mph

The test revealed a clear dominance of established manufacturers and their secondary brands among top performers. Michelin secured first place with the Pilot Alpin 5, while its secondary brands BF Goodrich and Kleber achieved notable success in snow-specific disciplines, often outperforming the premium parent product in individual snow tests. Kumho emerged as a surprising success story, placing fourth overall and earning recognition as a price-performance winner.

The test identified a fundamental development challenge in winter tire design: the inherent conflict between snow performance and wet/dry capabilities. BF Goodrich and Kleber exemplified this trade-off, achieving the shortest snow braking distances in the entire test (27.1 and 90 feet respectively) but struggling with extended wet braking distances (36.0 and 119 feet). Conversely, Goodyear established itself as the rain specialist with excellent wet performance across all disciplines but slightly compromised snow capability. This pattern highlights that truly balanced winter tires require significant development resources and experience.

Unexpected Weaknesses in Premium Products

Several premium manufacturers delivered surprisingly inconsistent results. Continental's WinterContact TS 870 P, Hankook's Winter i*Cept evo3, and Vredestein's Wintrac Pro+ all showed extended wet braking distances despite their premium positioning and typically well-rounded product portfolios. Pirelli's Cinturato Winter 2 achieved strong wet performance but suffered notably imprecise dry handling, an unusual weakness for Pirelli.

Toyo's Observe Winter Sport 1 and Falken's Eurowinter HS02 Pro also performed below expectations, with extended braking distances across multiple conditions and, in Falken's case, the lowest projected mileage in the test. 

Consistent Performers

Michelin's Pilot Alpin 5 demonstrated the most balanced performance profile, achieving what testers described as the "golden middle" across all road conditions. It never claimed the absolute best result in any single discipline but maintained consistently strong performance in every test, justifying its premium pricing through reliability rather than singular excellence. Bridgestone's Blizzak 6 and Goodyear's UltraGrip Performance 3 both delivered consistent competence across their respective focuses—Bridgestone leaning toward dry handling and longevity, Goodyear dominating wet performance—while achieving the highest projected mileage of 32,933 miles.

Reference Summer Tire Performance

AUTO BILD included a reference summer tire in all testing disciplines to provide performance context. The results clearly illustrated the fundamental differences between tire categories. On snow, the summer tire was essentially non-functional, requiring 168 feet to stop from 31 mph compared to 27-98 feet for winter tires, and recording such poor handling performance that it was rated "not drivable" in the snow handling test. However, the summer tire demonstrated its intended superiority in dry conditions, stopping from 62 mph in just 124 feet—nearly 16 feet shorter than the best winter tire (Michelin at 140 feet).

In wet conditions, the comparison proved more nuanced. The summer tire achieved a 47.8-meter braking distance from 62 mph, outperforming all winter tires (best winter: Goodyear at 167 feet.) The summer tire also completed the wet handling course at 52.1 mph compared to the best winter tire (Pirelli at 52.4 mph), showing minimal difference in this discipline. This data reinforces why enthusiastic drivers of compact sports cars continue to maintain seasonal tire changes despite the convenience of all-season alternatives—summer tires provide measurably better performance and precision during warmer months.

Cost Analysis and Longevity

The test conducted wear simulation to project real-world mileage, revealing significant differences in long-term value. Bridgestone and Goodyear led with 53,000-kilometer projections, while Falken managed only 21,077 miles—a difference of nearly 12,427 miles that dramatically affects cost per kilometer. When purchase price was factored against projected mileage, Ceat emerged as the value leader at €7.32 per 1,000 kilometers despite modest purchase pricing, while Falken became the most expensive at €15.04 per 1,000 kilometers due to rapid wear. This proved that premium-priced tires with high mileage can offer better value than cheap tires that wear quickly.

Safety Implications of Budget Tires

The deliberate inclusion of an anonymous budget tire provided evidence of the safety risks associated with extremely low-priced products. While achieving acceptable snow braking (94 feet), this tire became progressively dangerous in other conditions. Its 70.5-meter wet braking distance from 62 mph represented a 13.2-meter disadvantage versus the best performer—equivalent to nearly three car lengths and potentially the difference between collision avoidance and impact. The dry braking distance of 153 feet and wet handling speed of just 44.8 mph (versus 52.4 mph for Pirelli) further demonstrated comprehensive performance deficiencies. The testers concluded explicitly that "cheap no-name tires are a real danger in traffic," providing quantitative justification for this warning.

Dry

Michelin leads the dry braking results with the shortest stopping distance of 140 feet from 62 mph, though even this best performer stands 16 feet behind the reference summer tire, demonstrating the fundamental trade-off winter tires make with their softer compounds and more aggressive tread patterns optimized for cold conditions.

Dry Braking

Dry braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
RefReference Summer
 124 ft -16 ft 0 mph
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 140 ft Best 0 mph
2Toyo Observe EWS1
 141 ft +1 ft 7 mph
3Ceat WinterDrive
 143 ft +3 ft 12 mph
4Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 143 ft +3 ft 13 mph
5Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 145 ft +5 ft 15 mph
6Linglong Sport Master Winter
 145 ft +5 ft 15 mph
7Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 145 ft +5 ft 16 mph
8Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 146 ft +6 ft 17 mph
9Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 147 ft +7 ft 17 mph
10Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 147 ft +7 ft 18 mph
11Dunlop Winter
 149 ft +9 ft 20 mph
12BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 150 ft +10 ft 21 mph
13Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 150 ft +10 ft 21 mph
14Uniroyal WinterExpert
 150 ft +10 ft 21 mph
15Semperit Speed Grip 5
 151 ft +11 ft 21 mph
16Barum Polaris 6
 151 ft +11 ft 22 mph
RefReference Budget
 153 ft +13 ft 23 mph
17Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 154 ft +14 ft 24 mph
17Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 154 ft +14 ft 24 mph
19Firestone Winterhawk 4
 155 ft +15 ft 25 mph
20Kleber Krisalp HP3
 155 ft +15 ft 25 mph

The difference between best and worst was 25.1% (31 ft ≈ 2.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 would still be travelling at 25 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.

Bridgestone claims top honors in dry handling with the most car-like precision and highest average speed through the test course, followed closely by Michelin and Continental, while the anonymous budget tire trails significantly at 69.0 mph compared to the leader's 72.6 mph.

Dry Handling

Dry Handling Average Speed

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
RefReference Summer
 73.3 mph +0.7 mph
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 72.6 mph Best
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 72.5 mph -0.1 mph
3Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 72.4 mph -0.2 mph
4Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 72.3 mph -0.3 mph
5Semperit Speed Grip 5
 72.0 mph -0.6 mph
6Uniroyal WinterExpert
 71.8 mph -0.8 mph
7Linglong Sport Master Winter
 71.6 mph -1.0 mph
8Barum Polaris 6
 71.5 mph -1.1 mph
9Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 71.4 mph -1.2 mph
10Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 71.3 mph -1.3 mph
11Toyo Observe EWS1
 71.3 mph -1.3 mph
11Ceat WinterDrive
 71.3 mph -1.3 mph
13Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 71.1 mph -1.5 mph
14Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 71.1 mph -1.5 mph
14Dunlop Winter
 71.1 mph -1.5 mph
14Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 71.1 mph -1.5 mph
17BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 71.0 mph -1.6 mph
18Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 70.9 mph -1.7 mph
19Kleber Krisalp HP3
 70.5 mph -2.1 mph
20Firestone Winterhawk 4
 70.1 mph -2.5 mph
RefReference Budget
 69.0 mph -3.6 mph

The difference between best and worst was 5.9% (4.3 mph).

Wet

Goodyear dominates wet braking with a 50.9-meter stopping distance, establishing itself as the rain specialist, while the anonymous budget tire posts a catastrophic 70.5-meter result—a 19.6-meter disadvantage that could mean the difference between accident avoidance and collision.

Wet Braking

Wet braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
RefReference Summer
 157 ft -10 ft 0 mph
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 167 ft Best 0 mph
2Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 170 ft +3 ft 11 mph
3Toyo Observe EWS1
 171 ft +4 ft 12 mph
3Dunlop Winter
 171 ft +4 ft 12 mph
5Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 172 ft +5 ft 13 mph
6Uniroyal WinterExpert
 175 ft +8 ft 17 mph
7Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 177 ft +10 ft 19 mph
8Firestone Winterhawk 4
 178 ft +11 ft 20 mph
9Semperit Speed Grip 5
 179 ft +12 ft 21 mph
10Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 179 ft +12 ft 21 mph
11Barum Polaris 6
 180 ft +13 ft 21 mph
12Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 182 ft +15 ft 23 mph
12Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 182 ft +15 ft 23 mph
14Linglong Sport Master Winter
 183 ft +16 ft 24 mph
15Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 183 ft +16 ft 24 mph
16Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 185 ft +18 ft 25 mph
16BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 185 ft +18 ft 25 mph
18Kleber Krisalp HP3
 186 ft +19 ft 25 mph
19Ceat WinterDrive
 189 ft +22 ft 27 mph
19Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 189 ft +22 ft 27 mph
RefReference Budget
 231 ft +64 ft 42 mph

The difference between best and worst was 47.5% (74 ft ≈ 5 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 would still be travelling at 27 mph when the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 had stopped.

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

Pirelli takes the wet handling victory with the highest average speed, marginally ahead of Goodyear which continues its wet-weather dominance, while the budget tire again finishes last with handling speeds 7.6 mph slower than the leader, demonstrating comprehensively compromised wet performance.

Wet Handling

Wet Handling Average Speed

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 52.4 mph Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 52.1 mph -0.3 mph
RefReference Summer
 52.1 mph -0.3 mph
3Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 51.8 mph -0.6 mph
4Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 51.3 mph -1.1 mph
5Toyo Observe EWS1
 51.1 mph -1.3 mph
6Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 51.1 mph -1.3 mph
7Semperit Speed Grip 5
 51.0 mph -1.4 mph
8Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 50.7 mph -1.7 mph
8Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 50.7 mph -1.7 mph
10Firestone Winterhawk 4
 50.6 mph -1.8 mph
11Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 50.4 mph -2.0 mph
12Uniroyal WinterExpert
 50.3 mph -2.1 mph
13Kleber Krisalp HP3
 50.3 mph -2.1 mph
14Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 50.2 mph -2.2 mph
14Barum Polaris 6
 50.2 mph -2.2 mph
16Dunlop Winter
 50.0 mph -2.4 mph
17BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 49.9 mph -2.5 mph
18Linglong Sport Master Winter
 49.8 mph -2.6 mph
19Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 49.8 mph -2.6 mph
20Ceat WinterDrive
 49.6 mph -2.8 mph
RefReference Budget
 44.8 mph -7.6 mph

The difference between best and worst was 14.6% (7.6 mph).

The reference summer tire demonstrates its superiority in lateral aquaplaning resistance, while among winter tires Hankook leads with the highest lateral acceleration before losing grip, and the budget tire again finishes last with less than half the performance of the leader.

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in mph

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 48.0 mph Best
RefReference Summer
 47.8 mph -0.2 mph
2Kleber Krisalp HP3
 47.8 mph -0.2 mph
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 47.5 mph -0.5 mph
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 47.5 mph -0.5 mph
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 47.5 mph -0.5 mph
6Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 47.4 mph -0.6 mph
6Semperit Speed Grip 5
 47.4 mph -0.6 mph
8Toyo Observe EWS1
 47.2 mph -0.8 mph
8Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 47.2 mph -0.8 mph
10Firestone Winterhawk 4
 47.2 mph -0.8 mph
11Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 46.9 mph -1.1 mph
12Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 46.7 mph -1.3 mph
13Uniroyal WinterExpert
 46.6 mph -1.4 mph
13Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 46.6 mph -1.4 mph
15Dunlop Winter
 46.0 mph -2.0 mph
16Ceat WinterDrive
 44.7 mph -3.3 mph
17Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 44.6 mph -3.4 mph
18Linglong Sport Master Winter
 44.5 mph -3.5 mph
19Barum Polaris 6
 44.4 mph -3.6 mph
20Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 44.2 mph -3.8 mph
RefReference Budget
 40.1 mph -7.9 mph

The difference between best and worst was 16.6% (7.9 mph).

Snow

Kleber achieves the shortest snow braking distance at 89 feet, narrowly ahead of stablemate BF Goodrich at 90 feet—both Michelin secondary brands outperforming their premium parent—while the reference summer tire requires 168 feet, nearly double the distance and effectively undrivable in winter conditions.

Snow Braking

Snow braking in feet (31 - 0 mph)

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to bestResidual speed
1Kleber Krisalp HP3
 89 ft Best 0 mph
2BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 90 ft +1 ft 7 mph
3Dunlop Winter
 90 ft +1 ft 10 mph
4Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 91 ft +2 ft 13 mph
5Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 92 ft +3 ft 14 mph
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 92 ft +3 ft 14 mph
5Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 92 ft +3 ft 14 mph
8Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 92 ft +3 ft 15 mph
9Firestone Winterhawk 4
 93 ft +4 ft 16 mph
9Barum Polaris 6
 93 ft +4 ft 16 mph
9Ceat WinterDrive
 93 ft +4 ft 16 mph
12Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 93 ft +4 ft 16 mph
13Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 94 ft +5 ft 18 mph
14Uniroyal WinterExpert
 94 ft +5 ft 18 mph
RefReference Budget
 94 ft +5 ft 18 mph
15Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 94 ft +5 ft 19 mph
15Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 94 ft +5 ft 19 mph
15Linglong Sport Master Winter
 94 ft +5 ft 19 mph
18Semperit Speed Grip 5
 95 ft +6 ft 20 mph
19Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 97 ft +8 ft 23 mph
20Toyo Observe EWS1
 97 ft +8 ft 24 mph
RefReference Summer
 168 ft +79 ft 55 mph

The difference between best and worst was 88.6% (79 ft ≈ 5.3 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Toyo Observe EWS1 would still be travelling at 24 mph when the Kleber Krisalp HP3 had stopped.

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

Kleber continues its snow dominance in the traction test with the highest measured force, again marginally ahead of BF Goodrich, demonstrating these two Michelin secondary brands' clear optimization for maximum snow grip, while the reference summer tire produces only 248 Newtons compared to the leader's 2,619 Newtons.

Snow Traction

Pulling Force in pounds-force

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1Kleber Krisalp HP3
 589 lbf Best
2BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 586 lbf -3 lbf
3Firestone Winterhawk 4
 579 lbf -10 lbf
4Dunlop Winter
 579 lbf -10 lbf
5Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 576 lbf -13 lbf
6Ceat WinterDrive
 573 lbf -16 lbf
7Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 570 lbf -19 lbf
8Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 567 lbf -22 lbf
9Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 562 lbf -27 lbf
RefReference Budget
 562 lbf -27 lbf
10Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 560 lbf -29 lbf
11Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 559 lbf -30 lbf
12Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 558 lbf -31 lbf
13Barum Polaris 6
 556 lbf -33 lbf
14Semperit Speed Grip 5
 548 lbf -41 lbf
15Uniroyal WinterExpert
 543 lbf -46 lbf
16Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 542 lbf -47 lbf
17Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 532 lbf -57 lbf
18Toyo Observe EWS1
 529 lbf -60 lbf
19Linglong Sport Master Winter
 526 lbf -63 lbf
20Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 520 lbf -69 lbf
RefReference Summer
 56 lbf -533 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 90.5% (533 lbf).

BF Goodrich and Michelin tie for the highest average speed through the snow handling course, though notably the top snow brakers Kleber and BF Goodrich don't maintain this advantage in handling where steering precision and feedback become as important as pure grip.

Snow Handling

Snow handling average speed

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 36.8 mph Best
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 36.8 mph Best
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 36.8 mph 0.0 mph
4Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 36.7 mph -0.1 mph
5Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 36.7 mph -0.1 mph
6Kleber Krisalp HP3
 36.5 mph -0.3 mph
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 36.4 mph -0.4 mph
7Dunlop Winter
 36.4 mph -0.4 mph
9Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 36.4 mph -0.4 mph
10Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 36.3 mph -0.5 mph
11Firestone Winterhawk 4
 36.1 mph -0.7 mph
12Barum Polaris 6
 36.0 mph -0.8 mph
12Ceat WinterDrive
 36.0 mph -0.8 mph
14Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 36.0 mph -0.8 mph
15Uniroyal WinterExpert
 35.9 mph -0.9 mph
16Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 35.8 mph -1.0 mph
16Linglong Sport Master Winter
 35.8 mph -1.0 mph
18Semperit Speed Grip 5
 35.5 mph -1.3 mph
RefReference Budget
 34.9 mph -1.9 mph
19Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 34.6 mph -2.2 mph
20Toyo Observe EWS1
 34.4 mph -2.4 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.7% (2.4 mph).

Comfort

Michelin receives the highest comfort rating for its combination of refined ride quality and low noise levels, while the anonymous budget tire finishes last with noticeably harsher impact absorption and less controlled damping over road irregularities.

Subj. Comfort

Subjective Comfort Score

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 8 Points Best
1Dunlop Winter
 8 Points Best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 8 Points Best
1Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 8 Points Best
1Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 8 Points Best
6Toyo Observe EWS1
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Linglong Sport Master Winter
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Ceat WinterDrive
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Barum Polaris 6
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Firestone Winterhawk 4
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
6BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 7.3 Points -0.70 Points
16Uniroyal WinterExpert
 6.7 Points -1.30 Points
16Semperit Speed Grip 5
 6.7 Points -1.30 Points
16Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 6.7 Points -1.30 Points
16Kleber Krisalp HP3
 6.7 Points -1.30 Points
16Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 6.7 Points -1.30 Points

The difference between best and worst was 16.3% (1.3 Points).

Barum and Michelin emerge as the quietest tires with the lowest exterior noise measurements, while Semperit records the highest noise levels—though all finalists remain within acceptable ranges, demonstrating that modern winter tire design has largely solved historical noise concerns.

Noise

External noise in dB

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to best
RefReference Summer
 64.9 dB -0.10 dB
1Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 65 dB Best
1Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 65 dB Best
3Dunlop Winter
 65.2 dB +0.20 dB
3Barum Polaris 6
 65.2 dB +0.20 dB
5Ceat WinterDrive
 65.5 dB +0.50 dB
6Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 65.6 dB +0.60 dB
6Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 65.6 dB +0.60 dB
8Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 65.7 dB +0.70 dB
9Linglong Sport Master Winter
 65.9 dB +0.90 dB
9Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 65.9 dB +0.90 dB
RefReference Budget
 66.1 dB +1.10 dB
11BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 66.3 dB +1.30 dB
11Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 66.3 dB +1.30 dB
11Firestone Winterhawk 4
 66.3 dB +1.30 dB
14Kleber Krisalp HP3
 66.5 dB +1.50 dB
15Uniroyal WinterExpert
 66.7 dB +1.70 dB
15Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 66.7 dB +1.70 dB
17Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 66.8 dB +1.80 dB
18Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 66.9 dB +1.90 dB
19Toyo Observe EWS1
 67 dB +2.00 dB
20Semperit Speed Grip 5
 67.6 dB +2.60 dB

The difference between best and worst was 4.2% (2.7 dB).

Value

Bridgestone and Goodyear project the longest service life at 32,933 miles based on wear testing, while Falken suffers the most rapid wear with only 21,077 miles expected—a nearly 20,000-kilometer difference that dramatically impacts long-term value regardless of purchase price.

Wear

Predicted tread life in KM

Higher is better ↑
Position / TireResultGap to best
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 32,933 miles Best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 32,933 miles Best
3Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 32,274 miles -659 miles
3Ceat WinterDrive
 32,274 miles -659 miles
5Dunlop Winter
 31,615 miles -1,318 miles
6Toyo Observe EWS1
 30,957 miles -1,976 miles
7Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 29,969 miles -2,964 miles
8Uniroyal WinterExpert
 29,639 miles -3,294 miles
9Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 29,310 miles -3,623 miles
10Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 28,981 miles -3,952 miles
11Linglong Sport Master Winter
 28,651 miles -4,282 miles
12BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 28,322 miles -4,611 miles
13Barum Polaris 6
 27,993 miles -4,940 miles
13Firestone Winterhawk 4
 27,993 miles -4,940 miles
13Kleber Krisalp HP3
 27,993 miles -4,940 miles
16Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 27,663 miles -5,270 miles
17Semperit Speed Grip 5
 27,334 miles -5,599 miles
17Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 27,334 miles -5,599 miles
19Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 23,382 miles -9,551 miles
20Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 21,077 miles -11,856 miles

The difference between best and worst was 36% (11,856 miles).

When purchase price is divided by projected mileage, Ceat delivers the best value at just €7.32 per 1,000 kilometers despite modest pricing, while Falken becomes the most expensive option at €15.04 per 1,000 kilometers due to its combination of mid-range pricing and rapid wear.

Value

Euros/1000km based on cost/wear

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to bestcost per 1,000 miles
1Ceat WinterDrive
 7.32 Price/1000 Best €21.05
2Linglong Sport Master Winter
 7.81 Price/1000 +0.49 Price/1000 €29.22
3Barum Polaris 6
 8.44 Price/1000 +1.12 Price/1000 €16.08
4Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 9.24 Price/1000 +1.92 Price/1000 €23.22
5Toyo Observe EWS1
 9.63 Price/1000 +2.31 Price/1000 €22.58
6Uniroyal WinterExpert
 9.64 Price/1000 +2.32 Price/1000 €19.63
7Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 9.66 Price/1000 +2.34 Price/1000 €23.16
8Firestone Winterhawk 4
 9.99 Price/1000 +2.67 Price/1000 €22.46
9Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 10 Price/1000 +2.68 Price/1000 €24.84
10Dunlop Winter
 10.02 Price/1000 +2.70 Price/1000 €22.77
11Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 10.94 Price/1000 +3.62 Price/1000 €27.34
12Kleber Krisalp HP3
 11.1 Price/1000 +3.78 Price/1000 €25.56
13Semperit Speed Grip 5
 11.14 Price/1000 +3.82 Price/1000 €22.57
14BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 11.19 Price/1000 +3.87 Price/1000 €25.67
15Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 11.32 Price/1000 +4.00 Price/1000 €24.55
16Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 12.86 Price/1000 +5.54 Price/1000 €30.02
17Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 13.08 Price/1000 +5.76 Price/1000 €24.83
18Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 13.29 Price/1000 +5.97 Price/1000 €32.80
19Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 13.36 Price/1000 +6.04 Price/1000 €28.97
20Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 15.04 Price/1000 +7.72 Price/1000 €34.41

The difference between best and worst was 105.5% (7.72 Price/1000). Over 25,000 miles the cheapest tire to own (Barum Polaris 6) works out €458 cheaper than the most expensive (Falken EUROWINTER HS02 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.

Barum achieves the lowest rolling resistance and highest fuel efficiency at 7.77 kg/tonne, closely followed by Continental and Uniroyal, while the budget tire posts the worst result at 10.37 kg/tonne—meaning noticeably higher fuel consumption in addition to its safety deficiencies.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Position / TireResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
1Barum Polaris 6
 7.77 kg/t Best $0
2Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
 8.02 kg/t +0.25 kg/t $9
3Uniroyal WinterExpert
 8.09 kg/t +0.32 kg/t $12
4Semperit Speed Grip 5
 8.15 kg/t +0.38 kg/t $14
5Firestone Winterhawk 4
 8.48 kg/t +0.71 kg/t $27
RefReference Summer
 8.54 kg/t +0.77 kg/t $29
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6
 8.54 kg/t +0.77 kg/t $29
7Dunlop Winter
 8.58 kg/t +0.81 kg/t $31
8Toyo Observe EWS1
 8.65 kg/t +0.88 kg/t $33
9Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
 8.7 kg/t +0.93 kg/t $35
9Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
 8.7 kg/t +0.93 kg/t $35
11BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
 8.72 kg/t +0.95 kg/t $36
11Kleber Krisalp HP3
 8.72 kg/t +0.95 kg/t $36
13Hankook Winter i cept evo3
 8.9 kg/t +1.13 kg/t $43
13Fulda Kristall Control HP2
 8.9 kg/t +1.13 kg/t $43
15Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
 9.03 kg/t +1.26 kg/t $48
16Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
 9.05 kg/t +1.28 kg/t $48
17Ceat WinterDrive
 9.07 kg/t +1.30 kg/t $49
18Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
 9.16 kg/t +1.39 kg/t $53
19Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
 9.31 kg/t +1.54 kg/t $58
RefReference Budget
 9.9 kg/t +2.13 kg/t $81
20Linglong Sport Master Winter
 10.37 kg/t +2.60 kg/t $98

The difference between best and worst was 33.5% (2.6 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Linglong Sport Master Winter uses about 27 gal ($98) more fuel than the Barum Polaris 6.

Adjust the assumptions

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

12,000 mi
$3.60/gal
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.

Results

1st

Michelin Pilot Alpin 5

225/40 R18 92V XL
Michelin Pilot Alpin 5
Auto Bild Test Winner / Exemplary Testsieger / vorbildlich
The Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 emerges as the overall test winner, described as an allrounder that strikes the golden balance across all road conditions. Its standout quality is being extremely quiet, making it the most refined choice for daily driving. The tire excels particularly in dry conditions with strong lateral grip and precise handling, though it requires a slightly longer braking distance on dry pavement compared to summer tires. On snow, it delivers solid performance with good traction and braking, while on wet roads it maintains predictable handling and stable braking. The tire's main weakness is its premium pricing, making it the most expensive option in the test at approximately €630 per set. Despite the high cost, its balanced performance across all conditions and exceptional comfort make it the top recommendation for drivers seeking the best overall winter tire experience.
Dry99.9%
Wet97.5%
Snow96.5%
Comfort95.6%
Value79.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20140 ftBest in this discipline
Dry HandlingHigher is better2nd / 2072.5 mph-0.1 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better2nd / 20170 ft+3 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better3rd / 2051.8 mph-0.6 mph
Wet CircleLower is better3rd / 2012.12 s+0.08 s
Straight AquaHigher is better12th / 2046.7 mph-1.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better13th / 207.3 ft/s²-1.6 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better4th / 2091 ft+2 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better9th / 20562 lbf-27 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better1st / 2036.8 mphBest in this discipline
Snow SlalomHigher is better13th / 209.2 ft/s²-0.7 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better1st / 2065 dBBest in this discipline
WearHigher is better9th / 2029,310 miles-3,623 miles
ValueLower is better19th / 2013.36 Price/1000+6.04 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better9th / 208.7 kg/t+0.93 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/70
3PMSF
Yes
Price
630.00
2nd

Dunlop Winter

225/40 R18 92V XL
Dunlop Winter
Auto Bild Eco Champion / Exemplary Eco-Meister / vorbildlich
The Dunlop Winter proves itself as a snow specialist that combines excellent winter performance with strong value for money. It particularly shines on snow-covered roads with high traction and exceptional lateral grip, making it one of the most confident choices for severe winter conditions. The tire also performs admirably on wet surfaces, delivering short braking distances and stable handling. Its main compromise comes in dry conditions, where it requires slightly longer braking distances than some competitors, though this is typical for winter tires with aggressive snow-focused tread designs. The handling on dry pavement is still more than adequate for safe daily driving. At around €510 per set, it offers compelling value, especially for drivers in regions with regular snowfall who prioritize winter grip over ultimate dry road performance.
Dry95.7%
Wet95.6%
Snow98.5%
Comfort99.8%
Value87.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better11th / 20149 ft+9 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better14th / 2071.1 mph-1.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better3rd / 20171 ft+4 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better16th / 2050.0 mph-2.4 mph
Wet CircleLower is better14th / 2012.56 s+0.52 s
Straight AquaHigher is better15th / 2046.0 mph-2.0 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better10th / 207.7 ft/s²-1.2 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better3rd / 2090 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better4th / 20579 lbf-10 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better7th / 2036.4 mph-0.4 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better4th / 209.8 ft/s²-0.1 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 208 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better3rd / 2065.2 dB+0.20 dB
WearHigher is better5th / 2031,615 miles-1,318 miles
ValueLower is better10th / 2010.02 Price/1000+2.70 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better7th / 208.58 kg/t+0.81 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/71
3PMSF
Yes
Price
510.00
Joint 3rd

Bridgestone Blizzak 6

225/40 R18 92V XL
Bridgestone Blizzak 6
Auto Bild Exemplary vorbildlich
The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 positions itself as a sporty choice with particularly high lateral grip in dry conditions, making it feel more responsive and agile than typical winter tires. This performance-oriented character extends to impressive wear resistance, achieving the highest mileage potential in the test alongside Goodyear. The tire handles predictably across all conditions with strong overall balance. However, it shows a slight weakness in wet cornering situations, where lateral grip isn't quite as strong as in other conditions. On snow, it delivers reliable performance with good braking and traction. The tire's sporty nature and long lifespan make it an excellent choice for enthusiastic drivers of compact sports cars who don't want to sacrifice too much handling precision during winter months, though the approximately €600 price tag reflects its premium positioning.
Dry97.4%
Wet95.1%
Snow96.5%
Comfort94.3%
Value87.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20147 ft+7 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better1st / 2072.6 mphBest in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better10th / 20179 ft+12 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better11th / 2050.4 mph-2.0 mph
Wet CircleLower is better10th / 2012.46 s+0.42 s
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 2047.5 mph-0.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better9th / 208.0 ft/s²-0.9 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better5th / 2092 ft+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better12th / 20558 lbf-31 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better7th / 2036.4 mph-0.4 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better7th / 209.5 ft/s²-0.4 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better17th / 2066.8 dB+1.80 dB
WearHigher is better1st / 2032,933 milesBest in this discipline
ValueLower is better15th / 2011.32 Price/1000+4.00 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better6th / 208.54 kg/t+0.77 kg/t
EU Label
C/B/70
3PMSF
Yes
Price
600.00
Joint 3rd

Kumho WinterCraft WP52+

225/40 R18 92W XL
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
Auto Bild Exemplary vorbildlich
The Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ delivers a remarkable combination of performance and value, earning its place as a price-performance winner. This Korean tire impresses particularly on snow with strong grip and confident handling, while also performing admirably on wet roads. Its standout feature is the W-speed rating (168 mph), making it suitable for high-performance compact sports cars that might occasionally be driven at higher speeds. The tire maintains balanced characteristics across all conditions without any major weaknesses, though it's slightly less sharp in dry handling compared to the most sporty options. At approximately €430 per set, it represents exceptional value, offering near-premium performance at a mid-range price. This makes it an ideal choice for budget-conscious drivers who refuse to compromise significantly on safety and performance during winter.
Dry96.8%
Wet96.6%
Snow96.6%
Comfort91.3%
Value83.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20146 ft+6 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better13th / 2071.1 mph-1.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better5th / 20172 ft+5 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better4th / 2051.3 mph-1.1 mph
Wet CircleLower is better8th / 2012.43 s+0.39 s
Straight AquaHigher is better8th / 2047.2 mph-0.8 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better11th / 207.6 ft/s²-1.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better12th / 2093 ft+4 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better10th / 20560 lbf-29 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better4th / 2036.7 mph-0.1 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better7th / 209.5 ft/s²-0.4 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better16th / 206.7 Points-1.30 Points
NoiseLower is better8th / 2065.7 dB+0.70 dB
WearHigher is better16th / 2027,663 miles-5,270 miles
ValueLower is better7th / 209.66 Price/1000+2.34 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better9th / 208.7 kg/t+0.93 kg/t
EU Label
D/A/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
430.00
5th

Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3

225/40 R18 92V XL
Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
Auto Bild Exemplary vorbildlich
The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 establishes itself as the rain specialist of the test, excelling particularly in wet conditions across all disciplines. It delivers the shortest wet braking distances and most confident wet handling, making it the safest choice for regions with frequent winter rainfall rather than consistent snow. The tire also achieves the joint-highest mileage projection in the test, promising excellent long-term value through extended wear life. However, this wet-weather optimization comes with a tradeoff in dry performance, where handling and braking aren't quite as sharp as the most performance-focused competitors. On snow, it provides solid if not exceptional performance. At around €580, it's positioned in the premium segment but justifies the cost through its outstanding wet weather safety and longevity, making it ideal for drivers in milder, wetter winter climates.
Dry95.7%
Wet99.6%
Snow94.9%
Comfort95.2%
Value85.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20150 ft+10 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better10th / 2071.3 mph-1.3 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better1st / 20167 ftBest in this discipline
Wet HandlingHigher is better2nd / 2052.1 mph-0.3 mph
Wet CircleLower is better1st / 2012.04 sBest in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better4th / 2047.5 mph-0.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better2nd / 208.7 ft/s²-0.2 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better13th / 2094 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better16th / 20542 lbf-47 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better9th / 2036.4 mph-0.4 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better11th / 209.3 ft/s²-0.6 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better6th / 2065.6 dB+0.60 dB
WearHigher is better1st / 2032,933 milesBest in this discipline
ValueLower is better11th / 2010.94 Price/1000+3.62 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better18th / 209.16 kg/t+1.39 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/71
3PMSF
Yes
Price
580.00
6th

Hankook Winter i cept evo3

225/40 R18 92V XL
Hankook Winter i cept evo3
Auto Bild Good gut
The Hankook Winter i*Cept evo3 proves itself as a snow expert delivering excellent value for money. It shines particularly on snow-covered roads with strong performance across all winter disciplines, providing confident grip and handling when temperatures drop. The tire maintains respectable performance on wet roads, though it doesn't quite match the wet-weather specialists in this category. Its main weakness appears in damp conditions where braking distances are slightly extended compared to the best performers. The tire offers a compelling package for drivers prioritizing snow capability, with solid all-around performance that doesn't embarrass itself in any condition. At approximately €480 per set, it represents strong value in the premium mid-range segment, making it an intelligent choice for drivers who experience regular snowfall but don't want to pay top-tier prices.
Dry97.2%
Wet95.2%
Snow97.7%
Comfort94.6%
Value89.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20145 ft+5 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better9th / 2071.4 mph-1.2 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better12th / 20182 ft+15 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better8th / 2050.7 mph-1.7 mph
Wet CircleLower is better16th / 2012.63 s+0.59 s
Straight AquaHigher is better3rd / 2047.5 mph-0.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better1st / 208.9 ft/s²Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better8th / 2092 ft+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better5th / 20576 lbf-13 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better3rd / 2036.8 mph0.0 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better6th / 209.6 ft/s²-0.3 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better11th / 2066.3 dB+1.30 dB
WearHigher is better3rd / 2032,274 miles-659 miles
ValueLower is better4th / 209.24 Price/1000+1.92 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better13th / 208.9 kg/t+1.13 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
480.00
7th

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

225/40 R18 92V XL
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
Auto Bild Good gut
The Continental WinterContact TS 870 P demonstrates the German manufacturer's expertise with a tire that emphasizes efficiency and balanced behavior across snow and dry conditions. It features low rolling resistance, making it one of the most fuel-efficient options in the test while maintaining strong environmental credentials. The handling characteristics are well-sorted and predictable across different road surfaces, with particularly good performance on snow. However, the tire shows a weakness on wet roads with slightly extended braking distances compared to wet-weather specialists, which is unusual for Continental's typically well-rounded products. The dry performance is solid with good handling precision. At around €610, it's positioned at premium pricing, making it best suited for drivers who value brand heritage, efficiency, and balanced winter performance, particularly those who prioritize snow capability over ultimate wet braking performance.
Dry98.6%
Wet95%
Snow97.3%
Comfort99.3%
Value82.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20143 ft+3 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better3rd / 2072.4 mph-0.2 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better12th / 20182 ft+15 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better14th / 2050.2 mph-2.2 mph
Wet CircleLower is better9th / 2012.45 s+0.41 s
Straight AquaHigher is better6th / 2047.4 mph-0.6 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better3rd / 208.6 ft/s²-0.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better5th / 2092 ft+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better8th / 20567 lbf-22 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better10th / 2036.3 mph-0.5 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better5th / 209.7 ft/s²-0.2 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 208 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better9th / 2065.9 dB+0.90 dB
WearHigher is better10th / 2028,981 miles-3,952 miles
ValueLower is better17th / 2013.08 Price/1000+5.76 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better2nd / 208.02 kg/t+0.25 kg/t
EU Label
C/B/71
3PMSF
Yes
Price
610.00
Joint 8th

Uniroyal WinterExpert

225/40 R18 92V XL
Uniroyal WinterExpert
Auto Bild Good gut
The Uniroyal WinterExpert stands out as a well-rounded performer with particular emphasis on fuel efficiency. It achieves the highest fuel-saving potential in the test thanks to exceptionally low rolling resistance, making it an economical choice for high-mileage drivers concerned about operating costs. The tire delivers balanced performance across all conditions without any severe weaknesses, showing competent behavior on snow, wet, and dry surfaces. However, it doesn't claim top honors in any single discipline, representing a jack-of-all-trades approach. Dry braking distances are slightly longer than the sportiest options, but still within acceptable limits for safe winter driving. At approximately €460 per set, it offers solid value, particularly when factoring in the fuel savings over its lifetime. This makes it an intelligent choice for practical drivers who want dependable winter performance combined with low running costs.
Dry96%
Wet95.5%
Snow94%
Comfort90.6%
Value88.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20150 ft+10 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better6th / 2071.8 mph-0.8 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better6th / 20175 ft+8 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better12th / 2050.3 mph-2.1 mph
Wet CircleLower is better7th / 2012.38 s+0.34 s
Straight AquaHigher is better13th / 2046.6 mph-1.4 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better11th / 207.6 ft/s²-1.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better14th / 2094 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better15th / 20543 lbf-46 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better15th / 2035.9 mph-0.9 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better17th / 209.1 ft/s²-0.8 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better16th / 206.7 Points-1.30 Points
NoiseLower is better15th / 2066.7 dB+1.70 dB
WearHigher is better8th / 2029,639 miles-3,294 miles
ValueLower is better6th / 209.64 Price/1000+2.32 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better3rd / 208.09 kg/t+0.32 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
460.00
Joint 8th

Barum Polaris 6

225/40 R18 92V XL
Barum Polaris 6
Auto Bild Good gut
The Barum Polaris 6, as Continental's budget brand, delivers impressive value as a genuine bargain option with the highest fuel-saving potential in the test. Its exceptionally low rolling resistance translates directly to lower fuel consumption, making it economical to run over its lifetime. The tire proves itself safe and reliable on both snow and dry roads, providing confidence-inspiring performance in typical winter conditions without breaking the bank. However, it shows its budget positioning more clearly on wet roads, where overall performance lags slightly behind premium competitors. Despite this, it never falls into the dangerous category, maintaining acceptable safety standards. At approximately €380 per set—the lowest price among quality brand tires in the test—it represents outstanding value for budget-conscious drivers who need a reliable winter tire but can't justify premium pricing. The tire proves that low cost doesn't necessarily mean compromised safety.
Dry95.5%
Wet93.3%
Snow94.9%
Comfort95.5%
Value90.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20151 ft+11 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better8th / 2071.5 mph-1.1 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better11th / 20180 ft+13 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better14th / 2050.2 mph-2.2 mph
Wet CircleLower is better15th / 2012.62 s+0.58 s
Straight AquaHigher is better19th / 2044.4 mph-3.6 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better16th / 206.9 ft/s²-2.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better9th / 2093 ft+4 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better13th / 20556 lbf-33 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better12th / 2036.0 mph-0.8 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better17th / 209.1 ft/s²-0.8 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better3rd / 2065.2 dB+0.20 dB
WearHigher is better13th / 2027,993 miles-4,940 miles
ValueLower is better3rd / 208.44 Price/1000+1.12 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better1st / 207.77 kg/tBest in this discipline
EU Label
C/C/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
380.00
10th

Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2

225/40 R18 92V XL
Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
Auto Bild Good gut
The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 establishes itself as a wet-weather specialist with exceptional grip talent on damp and rainy roads. It delivers particularly strong performance in wet conditions, providing confident handling and reliable braking when rain falls. However, this wet-focused optimization creates an imbalanced character with notably imprecise and vague handling on dry pavement, which is disappointing for a premium Italian brand typically known for sporty characteristics. The tire also carries a high price tag at approximately €620 per set, making it one of the most expensive options. An important note is that this tire has since been succeeded by the Cinturato Winter 3, so availability may be limited. The Pirelli is best suited for drivers in regions with wet but relatively mild winters who rarely encounter snow and prioritize wet-weather safety above all else, though the handling compromises and high price may steer many toward more balanced alternatives.
Dry97.1%
Wet96.5%
Snow94.6%
Comfort99.5%
Value79.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20145 ft+5 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better18th / 2070.9 mph-1.7 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better7th / 20177 ft+10 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better1st / 2052.4 mphBest in this discipline
Wet CircleLower is better2nd / 2012.11 s+0.07 s
Straight AquaHigher is better13th / 2046.6 mph-1.4 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better15th / 207.0 ft/s²-1.9 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better15th / 2094 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better17th / 20532 lbf-57 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better5th / 2036.7 mph-0.1 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better10th / 209.4 ft/s²-0.5 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 208 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better6th / 2065.6 dB+0.60 dB
WearHigher is better7th / 2029,969 miles-2,964 miles
ValueLower is better16th / 2012.86 Price/1000+5.54 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better16th / 209.05 kg/t+1.28 kg/t
EU Label
C/A/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
620.00
11th

Semperit Speed Grip 5

225/40 R18 92V XL
Semperit Speed Grip 5
Auto Bild Good gut
The Semperit Speed-Grip 5 presents a somewhat mixed character with strengths and weaknesses across different conditions. On dry and wet roads, it delivers balanced and predictable performance that inspires confidence in typical autumn and early spring conditions. However, it reveals its main weakness on snow, where it struggles particularly with lateral grip and cornering stability, making it less suitable for regions with consistent winter snowfall. The tire doesn't excel in any particular area but maintains acceptable performance across most disciplines. At around €490 per set, it sits in the mid-premium price range, though the compromised snow performance makes the value proposition questionable for drivers who regularly face winter conditions. It might be best suited for urban drivers in milder climates who occasionally encounter light snow but primarily drive on cleared roads, where its decent wet and dry characteristics can shine without exposing its winter weaknesses.
Dry95.9%
Wet95.5%
Snow93.9%
Comfort90%
Value82.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20151 ft+11 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better5th / 2072.0 mph-0.6 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better9th / 20179 ft+12 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better7th / 2051.0 mph-1.4 mph
Wet CircleLower is better11th / 2012.52 s+0.48 s
Straight AquaHigher is better6th / 2047.4 mph-0.6 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better8th / 208.1 ft/s²-0.8 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better18th / 2095 ft+6 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better14th / 20548 lbf-41 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better18th / 2035.5 mph-1.3 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better14th / 209.2 ft/s²-0.7 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better16th / 206.7 Points-1.30 Points
NoiseLower is better20th / 2067.6 dB+2.60 dB
WearHigher is better17th / 2027,334 miles-5,599 miles
ValueLower is better13th / 2011.14 Price/1000+3.82 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better4th / 208.15 kg/t+0.38 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
490.00
12th

BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2

225/40 R18 92V XL
BFGoodrich gForce Winter 2
Auto Bild Good gut
The BF Goodrich g-Force Winter 2 establishes itself as an absolute snow king with outstanding performance on snow-covered surfaces across all disciplines. As one of Michelin's secondary brands, it achieves the shortest braking distance on snow in the entire test and delivers exceptional traction and grip when temperatures plunge. However, this intense focus on winter performance creates a notably unbalanced tire. It struggles on both wet and dry roads, with the dry performance being particularly compromised—handling feels spongy and imprecise, while braking distances are extended. The tire essentially sacrifices three-season capability for maximum winter competence. At approximately €510 per set, it's reasonably priced for a specialized product. This tire is specifically suited for drivers in harsh winter climates with consistent snow cover who primarily drive during winter months and are willing to sacrifice dry and wet performance for ultimate snow confidence and safety.
Dry95.6%
Wet93.9%
Snow99.7%
Comfort94.6%
Value81.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20150 ft+10 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better17th / 2071.0 mph-1.6 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better16th / 20185 ft+18 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better17th / 2049.9 mph-2.5 mph
Wet CircleLower is better18th / 2012.67 s+0.63 s
Straight AquaHigher is better1st / 2048.0 mphBest in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better7th / 208.2 ft/s²-0.7 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better2nd / 2090 ft+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better2nd / 20586 lbf-3 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better1st / 2036.8 mphBest in this discipline
Snow SlalomHigher is better1st / 209.9 ft/s²Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better11th / 2066.3 dB+1.30 dB
WearHigher is better12th / 2028,322 miles-4,611 miles
ValueLower is better14th / 2011.19 Price/1000+3.87 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better11th / 208.72 kg/t+0.95 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/69
3PMSF
Yes
Price
510.00
13th

Vredestein Wintrac Pro+

225/40 R18 92W XL
Vredestein Wintrac Pro+
The Vredestein Wintrac Pro+ demonstrates strong lateral grip and handling precision on wet roads, making it a confident performer when rain falls during the winter months. It also shows respectable performance on snow with reliable traction. However, the tire reveals a significant weakness with extended braking distances in dry conditions, which is concerning for a tire from a brand positioning itself in the premium segment. The handling on dry roads also feels less precise and communicative than competitors. This combination of compromised dry performance and premium pricing around €500 per set makes the value proposition questionable. The tire might appeal to drivers in regions with very wet but mild winters who rarely encounter dry cold conditions, but for most drivers seeking balanced winter performance, there are better options that don't sacrifice dry safety for wet grip.
Dry94.3%
Wet93.7%
Snow94.6%
Comfort90.5%
Value71.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better17th / 20154 ft+14 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better14th / 2071.1 mph-1.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better16th / 20185 ft+18 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better6th / 2051.1 mph-1.3 mph
Wet CircleLower is better5th / 2012.3 s+0.26 s
Straight AquaHigher is better17th / 2044.6 mph-3.4 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better17th / 206.9 ft/s²-2.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better15th / 2094 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better11th / 20559 lbf-30 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better16th / 2035.8 mph-1.0 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better16th / 209.1 ft/s²-0.8 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better16th / 206.7 Points-1.30 Points
NoiseLower is better18th / 2066.9 dB+1.90 dB
WearHigher is better19th / 2023,382 miles-9,551 miles
ValueLower is better18th / 2013.29 Price/1000+5.97 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better19th / 209.31 kg/t+1.54 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/71
3PMSF
Yes
Price
500.00
14th

Kleber Krisalp HP3

225/40 R18 92V XL
Kleber Krisalp HP3
The Kleber Krisalp HP3, as another Michelin secondary brand alongside BF Goodrich, proves itself as an exceptional snow specialist with absolute top-tier performance on snow-covered roads. It achieves the shortest braking distance on snow in the test and delivers outstanding traction, making it supremely confident in harsh winter conditions. However, like its BF Goodrich sibling, this snow focus creates significant compromises elsewhere. The tire receives downgrades for extended dry braking distances, which raise safety concerns on clear winter days. Wet and dry handling also suffer from the soft compound and aggressive tread design optimized for snow. At approximately €500 per set, it's priced similarly to premium all-rounders that offer better balance. The Kleber is best reserved for drivers in mountainous or consistently snowy regions who prioritize maximum snow safety above all else and accept the compromises on other surfaces as a necessary trade-off.
Dry93.5%
Wet94.3%
Snow99.7%
Comfort90.7%
Value81.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better20th / 20155 ft+15 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better19th / 2070.5 mph-2.1 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better18th / 20186 ft+19 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better13th / 2050.3 mph-2.1 mph
Wet CircleLower is better11th / 2012.52 s+0.48 s
Straight AquaHigher is better2nd / 2047.8 mph-0.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better6th / 208.3 ft/s²-0.6 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better1st / 2089 ftBest in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better1st / 20589 lbfBest in this discipline
Snow HandlingHigher is better6th / 2036.5 mph-0.3 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better1st / 209.9 ft/s²Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better16th / 206.7 Points-1.30 Points
NoiseLower is better14th / 2066.5 dB+1.50 dB
WearHigher is better13th / 2027,993 miles-4,940 miles
ValueLower is better12th / 2011.1 Price/1000+3.78 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better11th / 208.72 kg/t+0.95 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/69
3PMSF
Yes
Price
500.00
15th

Ceat WinterDrive

225/40 R18 92V XL
Ceat WinterDrive
The Ceat WinterDrive from this Indian manufacturer manages to deliver the absolute best cost-per-kilometer ratio in the test while maintaining respectable snow and dry road performance. This achievement comes from combining a competitive purchase price of approximately €380 per set with good projected mileage, making it extremely economical for high-mileage drivers on tight budgets. The tire performs adequately on snow with acceptable grip and braking, while dry road behavior remains within safe parameters. However, it shows its budget positioning most clearly on wet roads, where overall performance is weaker across handling, braking, and aquaplaning resistance. Despite these wet-weather limitations, it never enters truly dangerous territory. The Ceat represents a pragmatic choice for cost-conscious drivers who need winter capability but experience limited severe weather, making it suitable for urban environments where roads are typically cleared and wet performance is less critical than absolute bargain pricing.
Dry98%
Wet91.4%
Snow96.3%
Comfort95.2%
Value94.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better3rd / 20143 ft+3 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better11th / 2071.3 mph-1.3 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better19th / 20189 ft+22 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better20th / 2049.6 mph-2.8 mph
Wet CircleLower is better19th / 2012.69 s+0.65 s
Straight AquaHigher is better16th / 2044.7 mph-3.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better18th / 206.8 ft/s²-2.1 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better9th / 2093 ft+4 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better6th / 20573 lbf-16 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better12th / 2036.0 mph-0.8 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better11th / 209.3 ft/s²-0.6 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better5th / 2065.5 dB+0.50 dB
WearHigher is better3rd / 2032,274 miles-659 miles
ValueLower is better1st / 207.32 Price/1000Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better17th / 209.07 kg/t+1.30 kg/t
EU Label
D/C/70
3PMSF
Yes
Price
380.00
Joint 16th

Firestone Winterhawk 4

225/40 R18 92V XL
Firestone Winterhawk 4
The Firestone Winterhawk 4, as Bridgestone's budget brand, positions itself as a snow specialist with very high traction on snow-covered surfaces, making it confident and reassuring when winter conditions are at their worst. It also delivers respectable performance on wet roads, maintaining acceptable safety margins. However, the tire shows its budget orientation and snow-focused design through spongy, imprecise handling on dry pavement, where the soft compound and flexible tread blocks compromise steering response and cornering stability. Extended dry braking distances also raise some safety concerns. At approximately €450 per set, it's positioned in the mid-range price bracket, though the handling compromises make competitors at similar prices more appealing for balanced performance. The Firestone is best suited for drivers in consistently snowy climates who prioritize winter grip and can tolerate vague dry handling, particularly those who drive conservatively and value the Bridgestone connection for quality assurance.
Dry93.4%
Wet94.5%
Snow97%
Comfort94.6%
Value84.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better19th / 20155 ft+15 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better20th / 2070.1 mph-2.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better8th / 20178 ft+11 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better10th / 2050.6 mph-1.8 mph
Wet CircleLower is better13th / 2012.55 s+0.51 s
Straight AquaHigher is better10th / 2047.2 mph-0.8 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better14th / 207.2 ft/s²-1.7 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better9th / 2093 ft+4 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better3rd / 20579 lbf-10 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better11th / 2036.1 mph-0.7 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better9th / 209.4 ft/s²-0.5 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better11th / 2066.3 dB+1.30 dB
WearHigher is better13th / 2027,993 miles-4,940 miles
ValueLower is better8th / 209.99 Price/1000+2.67 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better5th / 208.48 kg/t+0.71 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/71
3PMSF
Yes
Price
450.00
Joint 16th

Toyo Observe EWS1

225/40 R18 92W XL
Toyo Observe EWS1
The Toyo Observe Winter Sport 1 delivers surprisingly strong performance on wet and dry roads but suffers from significant weaknesses on snow that undermine its credibility as a winter tire. On dry pavement, the tire achieves an impressive second-place finish in braking, while wet braking is also competitive at fourth place. However, the snow performance is deeply concerning—the Toyo finishes dead last among all finalists in snow slalom, braking, handling, and near the bottom in traction. For a tire marketed as a winter sport tire, this failure to deliver adequate snow capability is disqualifying for many buyers. The tire might work for drivers in regions with very mild winters who face mostly wet conditions, but anyone expecting real snow should look elsewhere. The imbalanced performance profile suggests Toyo prioritized dry and wet capability at the expense of winter-specific characteristics, resulting in a tire that fails to meet the core requirements of its category.
Dry98.7%
Wet97.8%
Snow90.2%
Comfort94.1%
Value87.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20141 ft+1 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better11th / 2071.3 mph-1.3 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better3rd / 20171 ft+4 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better5th / 2051.1 mph-1.3 mph
Wet CircleLower is better4th / 2012.17 s+0.13 s
Straight AquaHigher is better8th / 2047.2 mph-0.8 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better5th / 208.3 ft/s²-0.6 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better20th / 2097 ft+8 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better18th / 20529 lbf-60 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better20th / 2034.4 mph-2.4 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better20th / 208.6 ft/s²-1.3 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better19th / 2067 dB+2.00 dB
WearHigher is better6th / 2030,957 miles-1,976 miles
ValueLower is better5th / 209.63 Price/1000+2.31 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better8th / 208.65 kg/t+0.88 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
480.00
18th

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

225/40 R18 92V XL
Fulda Kristall Control HP2
The Fulda Kristall Control HP 2, as another Continental budget brand alongside Barum, demonstrates respectable dry road performance with decent handling characteristics that feel more car-like than many winter tires. However, this dry-biased behavior creates an unbalanced package with particular weaknesses on wet roads, where performance across handling, braking, and aquaplaning resistance falls short of acceptable standards for safe winter driving. The snow performance is adequate but unremarkable. At approximately €440 per set, it sits in a challenging price position—more expensive than the better-balanced Barum sibling but lacking the performance to justify the premium over that proven budget option. The tire struggles to find a clear identity or target customer, as drivers seeking dry performance would choose sportier options while those prioritizing winter safety would select better wet and snow performers. It represents a compromise that doesn't particularly excel at anything.
Dry94.3%
Wet92.6%
Snow97.5%
Comfort98.7%
Value81.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 better17th / 20154 ft+14 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better14th / 2071.1 mph-1.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better19th / 20189 ft+22 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better19th / 2049.8 mph-2.6 mph
Wet CircleLower is better20th / 2012.93 s+0.89 s
Straight AquaHigher is better11th / 2046.9 mph-1.1 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better4th / 208.4 ft/s²-0.5 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better5th / 2092 ft+3 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better7th / 20570 lbf-19 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better14th / 2036.0 mph-0.8 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better3rd / 209.8 ft/s²-0.1 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 208 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better15th / 2066.7 dB+1.70 dB
WearHigher is better17th / 2027,334 miles-5,599 miles
ValueLower is better9th / 2010 Price/1000+2.68 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better13th / 208.9 kg/t+1.13 kg/t
EU Label
D/C/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
440.00
19th

Linglong Sport Master Winter

225/40 R18 92W XL
Linglong Sport Master Winter
The Linglong Sport Master Winter from the Chinese manufacturer manages to deliver respectable driving characteristics on both dry and snow-covered roads, showing that emerging brands are improving their winter tire development capabilities. High lateral grip on wet surfaces is another positive attribute. However, the tire is severely let down by extended braking distances on snow—ironic given its winter designation—which create serious safety concerns in the most critical winter driving situation. Overall snow performance beyond straight-line braking is also weaker than established competitors. At approximately €360 per set, it's among the cheapest options from recognized brands, but the snow braking weakness is too significant to overlook, even at this bargain price. The tire might be acceptable for mild-winter regions where snow is rare and quickly cleared, but for actual winter driving conditions, the compromised emergency braking capability makes it impossible to recommend over similarly priced but safer alternatives from established budget brands.
Dry97.5%
Wet92.3%
Snow93.3%
Comfort94.9%
Value84.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20145 ft+5 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better7th / 2071.6 mph-1.0 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better14th / 20183 ft+16 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better18th / 2049.8 mph-2.6 mph
Wet CircleLower is better17th / 2012.66 s+0.62 s
Straight AquaHigher is better18th / 2044.5 mph-3.5 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better20th / 206.6 ft/s²-2.3 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better15th / 2094 ft+5 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better19th / 20526 lbf-63 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better16th / 2035.8 mph-1.0 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better14th / 209.2 ft/s²-0.7 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better6th / 207.3 Points-0.70 Points
NoiseLower is better9th / 2065.9 dB+0.90 dB
WearHigher is better11th / 2028,651 miles-4,282 miles
ValueLower is better2nd / 207.81 Price/1000+0.49 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better20th / 2010.37 kg/t+2.60 kg/t
EU Label
D/A/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
360.00
20th

Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro

225/40 R18 92V XL
Falken EUROWINTER HS02 Pro
The Falken Eurowinter HS02 Pro demonstrates respectable driving performance on dry pavement, maintaining decent handling characteristics and acceptable behavior in clear conditions. However, this Japanese-branded tire (developed by Sumitomo) reveals significant weaknesses where they matter most for winter safety. It shows weaker overall performance on snow with compromised grip and handling, while extended braking distances in both wet and dry conditions raise serious safety concerns. The tire also suffers from particularly rapid wear, resulting in the lowest projected mileage in the entire test—nearly 12,427 miles less than the longest-lasting competitors. This accelerated wear makes it extremely expensive over its shortened lifetime despite a mid-range purchase price around €510. The combination of safety compromises and poor durability makes the Falken impossible to recommend, as drivers would face both increased risk and the inconvenience and cost of premature replacement.
Dry97.4%
Wet93.5%
Snow91.1%
Comfort100%
Value67.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (16)

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 / 20147 ft+7 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better4th / 2072.3 mph-0.3 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better15th / 20183 ft+16 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better8th / 2050.7 mph-1.7 mph
Wet CircleLower is better6th / 2012.33 s+0.29 s
Straight AquaHigher is better20th / 2044.2 mph-3.8 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better19th / 206.7 ft/s²-2.2 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better19th / 2097 ft+8 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better20th / 20520 lbf-69 lbf
Snow HandlingHigher is better19th / 2034.6 mph-2.2 mph
Snow SlalomHigher is better19th / 209.0 ft/s²-0.9 ft/s²
Subj. ComfortHigher is better1st / 208 PointsBest in this discipline
NoiseLower is better1st / 2065 dBBest in this discipline
WearHigher is better20th / 2021,077 miles-11,856 miles
ValueLower is better20th / 2015.04 Price/1000+7.72 Price/1000
Rolling ResistanceLower is better15th / 209.03 kg/t+1.26 kg/t
EU Label
D/B/72
3PMSF
Yes
Price
510.00

More tire tests

Cross-check this test

All tire tests

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

More tire tests2026 Auto Bild Winter Tire Test2026 Tire Rack New Winter Tire Test2026 Auto Bild Sportscars Winter Tire TestThe BEST Winter Tires for 2026/27All tests: Winter Tires
Best tiresBest Winter TiresBest UHP Winter TiresBest Studless Winter Tires

Discussion

10 comments
  1. Koen archived

    Why does the Toyo get this summary "extended braking distances on both wet and dry roads, which represent safety compromises that lead to downgrades in critical disciplines." while it's the 2nd best and 3rd best in dry and wet braking?

    #10414
    1. TireReviews Koen archived

      Thanks for letting me know, I'll look into this now

      #10415
    2. TireReviews Koen archived

      Thanks, I've updated that, it should go through the cache in the next few hours. It seems its results got combined with another tire when generating the texts - not ideal!

      #10416
      1. Koen TireReviews archived

        Thank You for the quick response and update 👍 as always, excellent work 👏

        #10417
  2. Thomas archived

    Kumho again with very strong result. let's see if other tests can confirm this

    #10362
  3. Driver archived

    Somebody seams very very scared from cheap Linglong competition. New models made in Europe are very good and almost matches performance of much more expensive premium tires.

    #10357
    1. TB Driver archived

      source: trust me bro!

      Btw. it's the Kumho WP52+, not the regular WP52. The link is not correct.

      #10360
      1. TireReviews TB archived

        Thanks, I'll get that updated

        #10361
  4. mark archived

    There is a mistake. It’s not the Dunlop “Winter Response 2”; it’s the new “Dunlop Winter” tire. Please check the original AutoBild test.

    #10352
    1. TireReviews mark archived

      Thank you, that should be fixed

      #10353
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.