Polish magazine Motor has tested eight winter tires in 205/55 R16, a size fitted to cars such as the VW Golf, Ford Focus, Opel Astra and Audi A3, using a Golf as the test car. Premium tires from Bridgestone, Continental, Goodyear and Michelin are joined by the Nokian Snowproof 2, and by three budget tires: the Polish Kormoran Snow, the Laufenn i Fit+ from Hankook's budget brand and the Chinese Tomket Snowroad Pro 3. Prices ranged from 226 to 485 zloty per tire.

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 won with a clear lead, scoring almost full marks and coming out on top on snow, wet and dry roads. The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 was second, losing most of its points on dry roads, and the Michelin Alpin 7 edged the Bridgestone Blizzak 6 for third thanks to slightly better snow results. The Laufenn i Fit+ was the best of the budget tires by a wide margin, and Motor recommends it as good value, while the Kormoran and the Tomket fell well behind on wet roads.

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
Wet Braking: 62.1 → 0.0 mph
Snow Braking: 31.1 → 0.0 mph
Snow Traction: 0.0 → 12.4 mph

The tires, all made in 2024, were bought from an online shop and run in on wet asphalt at a test center in Germany. The snow tests took place in Sweden, and the wet and dry tests in Germany in the spring. Motor used a VW Golf for every test except straight aquaplaning, which was run on a Skoda Octavia, and rolling resistance was measured in a laboratory. This is our summary of the headline findings; for the full scoring and Motor's methodology, see the original test.

Snow

The Continental stopped shortest on snow, with the Michelin and Laufenn next. The Bridgestone and Tomket needed the longest distances, but the whole field was separated by less than 5 feet and Motor considers every tire safe on snow.

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	93 ft	Best	0 mph
2Michelin Alpin 7	94 ft	+1 ft	8 mph
3Laufenn I Fit+	94 ft	+1 ft	9 mph
4Nokian Snowproof 2	94 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	94 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
4Kormoran Kormoran Snow	94 ft	+1 ft	11 mph
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6	96 ft	+3 ft	15 mph
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	97 ft	+4 ft	16 mph

The difference between best and worst was 4.2% (4 ft). From 80 mph, the Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 would still be travelling at 16 mph when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

The Continental and Goodyear shared the most traction on snow, with the Michelin just behind. The Tomket had the least.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	635 lbf	Best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	635 lbf	Best
3Michelin Alpin 7	635 lbf	0 lbf
4Laufenn I Fit+	631 lbf	-4 lbf
5Kormoran Kormoran Snow	631 lbf	-4 lbf
6Nokian Snowproof 2	627 lbf	-8 lbf
7Bridgestone Blizzak 6	624 lbf	-11 lbf
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	612 lbf	-23 lbf

The difference between best and worst was 3.7% (23 lbf).

In the acceleration test from standstill to 12 mph the Continental needed the shortest distance, ahead of the Bridgestone and Michelin. The Nokian needed the longest.

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	28 ft	Best
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6	28 ft	0 ft
3Michelin Alpin 7	28 ft	0 ft
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	29 ft	+1 ft
5Laufenn I Fit+	29 ft	+1 ft
5Kormoran Kormoran Snow	29 ft	+1 ft
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	29 ft	+1 ft
8Nokian Snowproof 2	29 ft	+1 ft

The difference between best and worst was 6% (1 ft).

The Michelin was fastest round the snow handling course, with the Kormoran and Continental close behind. The Bridgestone was the slowest.

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Alpin 7	74.6 s	Best
2Kormoran Kormoran Snow	74.8 s	+0.20 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870	75.1 s	+0.50 s
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	76.2 s	+1.60 s
5Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	76.6 s	+2.00 s
5Laufenn I Fit+	76.6 s	+2.00 s
7Nokian Snowproof 2	76.8 s	+2.20 s
8Bridgestone Blizzak 6	77 s	+2.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.2% (2.4 s).

Wet

The Continental stopped shortest on wet roads, with the Bridgestone and Goodyear close behind. The budget tires split widely here: the Laufenn stopped slightly shorter than the Nokian, but the Kormoran needed more than 30 feet further than the Continental, and the Tomket almost 46 feet further, a result Motor calls dangerous.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	174 ft	Best	0 mph
2Bridgestone Blizzak 6	175 ft	+1 ft	6 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	176 ft	+2 ft	8 mph
4Michelin Alpin 7	180 ft	+6 ft	15 mph
5Laufenn I Fit+	184 ft	+10 ft	19 mph
6Nokian Snowproof 2	185 ft	+11 ft	20 mph
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow	204 ft	+30 ft	31 mph
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	219 ft	+45 ft	36 mph

The difference between best and worst was 25.9% (45 ft ≈ 3 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 would still be travelling at 36 mph when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

The Goodyear was fastest round the wet handling course, ahead of the Continental and Laufenn. The Tomket was by far the slowest, and Motor rated its handling as only just acceptable.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	85.9 s	Best
2Continental WinterContact TS 870	86.3 s	+0.40 s
3Laufenn I Fit+	87.2 s	+1.30 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	87.7 s	+1.80 s
5Michelin Alpin 7	88.4 s	+2.50 s
6Nokian Snowproof 2	89 s	+3.10 s
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow	91.6 s	+5.70 s
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	96.8 s	+10.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 12.7% (10.9 s).

On the wet circle the Continental held the most grip, ahead of the Goodyear and Bridgestone, while the Kormoran and Tomket held the least.

Wet Circle
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	0.74 g	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	0.73 g	-0.01 g
3Bridgestone Blizzak 6	0.72 g	-0.02 g
4Michelin Alpin 7	0.7 g	-0.04 g
4Laufenn I Fit+	0.7 g	-0.04 g
4Nokian Snowproof 2	0.7 g	-0.04 g
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow	0.62 g	-0.12 g
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	0.62 g	-0.12 g

The difference between best and worst was 16.2% (0.12 g).

The Continental resisted straight-line aquaplaning longest, only just ahead of the Goodyear, with the Nokian next. The Laufenn, Kormoran and Tomket were the first to float.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	53.6 mph	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	53.4 mph	-0.2 mph
3Nokian Snowproof 2	52.6 mph	-1.0 mph
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	51.3 mph	-2.3 mph
4Michelin Alpin 7	51.3 mph	-2.3 mph
6Laufenn I Fit+	47.7 mph	-5.9 mph
7Kormoran Kormoran Snow	44.5 mph	-9.1 mph
8Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	43.4 mph	-10.2 mph

The difference between best and worst was 18.9% (10.2 mph).

The Continental also kept the most grip in curved aquaplaning, with the Nokian and Goodyear close behind. The Tomket and Kormoran held the least.

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	12.2 ft/s²	Best
2Nokian Snowproof 2	12.1 ft/s²	-0.1 ft/s²
2Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	12.1 ft/s²	-0.1 ft/s²
4Michelin Alpin 7	11.2 ft/s²	-1.0 ft/s²
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6	11.0 ft/s²	-1.2 ft/s²
6Laufenn I Fit+	10.1 ft/s²	-2.1 ft/s²
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	8.5 ft/s²	-3.7 ft/s²
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	8.3 ft/s²	-3.9 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 31.7% (3.9 ft/s²).

Dry

The Continental stopped shortest on dry roads too, ahead of the Nokian and Goodyear. The Kormoran needed the longest distance, and Motor notes that at the point where the Golf on Continental tires had stopped, the same car on Kormoran tires was still travelling at about 16 mph.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	146 ft	Best	0 mph
2Nokian Snowproof 2	148 ft	+2 ft	8 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	149 ft	+3 ft	11 mph
4Laufenn I Fit+	151 ft	+5 ft	13 mph
5Michelin Alpin 7	151 ft	+5 ft	14 mph
6Bridgestone Blizzak 6	151 ft	+5 ft	14 mph
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	152 ft	+6 ft	15 mph
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	156 ft	+10 ft	20 mph

The difference between best and worst was 7% (10 ft ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Kormoran Kormoran Snow would still be travelling at 20 mph when the Continental WinterContact TS 870 had stopped.

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

The fastest lap of the dry handling course was set on the budget Laufenn, with the Tomket and Continental next. The Goodyear and Nokian were a little over a second behind the Laufenn, and the Kormoran was clearly the slowest.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Laufenn I Fit+	53.1 s	Best
2Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	53.3 s	+0.20 s
3Continental WinterContact TS 870	53.5 s	+0.40 s
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	53.7 s	+0.60 s
5Michelin Alpin 7	54 s	+0.90 s
6Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	54.2 s	+1.10 s
7Nokian Snowproof 2	54.3 s	+1.20 s
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	55.4 s	+2.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.3% (2.3 s).

Motor's testers rated the Continental best for dry handling, with the Laufenn and Michelin next. The Kormoran was rated lowest, and Motor says it is not suited to a sporty driving style.

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	7.5 Points	Best
2Laufenn I Fit+	7 Points	-0.50 Points
3Michelin Alpin 7	6.7 Points	-0.80 Points
4Bridgestone Blizzak 6	6.2 Points	-1.30 Points
5Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	6 Points	-1.50 Points
5Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	6 Points	-1.50 Points
7Nokian Snowproof 2	5.9 Points	-1.60 Points
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	4.9 Points	-2.60 Points

The difference between best and worst was 34.7% (2.6 Points).

Comfort

The Continental was the quietest tire in the exterior noise measurement at 31 mph, with the Michelin and Nokian next. The Kormoran, with its aggressive tread pattern, was the loudest.

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	63.7 dB	Best
2Michelin Alpin 7	64.3 dB	+0.60 dB
3Nokian Snowproof 2	64.8 dB	+1.10 dB
4Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	65.1 dB	+1.40 dB
5Bridgestone Blizzak 6	65.4 dB	+1.70 dB
6Laufenn I Fit+	65.5 dB	+1.80 dB
7Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	65.8 dB	+2.10 dB
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	66.9 dB	+3.20 dB

The difference between best and worst was 5% (3.2 dB).

The Continental and Bridgestone were rated the most comfortable, and the Kormoran the least.

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental WinterContact TS 870	7 Points	Best
1Bridgestone Blizzak 6	7 Points	Best
3Nokian Snowproof 2	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
3Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
3Michelin Alpin 7	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
6Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	6 Points	-1.00 Points
6Laufenn I Fit+	6 Points	-1.00 Points
8Kormoran Kormoran Snow	5.5 Points	-1.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 21.4% (1.5 Points).

Value

The Michelin had the lowest rolling resistance, with the Nokian next, and the Goodyear had the highest. Motor estimates that for a car using 10 liters per 100 km, the difference between the Michelin and the Goodyear is worth around half a liter per 100 km.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin Alpin 7	0.76 kg/t	Best	$0
2Nokian Snowproof 2	0.79 kg/t	+0.03 kg/t	$12
3Bridgestone Blizzak 6	0.81 kg/t	+0.05 kg/t	$19
3Continental WinterContact TS 870	0.81 kg/t	+0.05 kg/t	$19
5Laufenn I Fit+	0.83 kg/t	+0.07 kg/t	$27
6Tomket Snowroad Pro 3	0.84 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t	$31
6Kormoran Kormoran Snow	0.84 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t	$31
8Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	0.89 kg/t	+0.13 kg/t	$50

The difference between best and worst was 17.1% (0.13 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 uses about 14 gal ($50) more fuel than the Michelin Alpin 7.

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.

Results

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 wins with almost full marks, the best tire on snow, wet and dry roads and the choice for the most demanding drivers. The Goodyear is excellent on wet roads and very good on snow but loses points on dry roads, and the Michelin beats the Bridgestone for third by a whisker. The Nokian Snowproof 2 is close behind the premium tires at a lower price, and the Laufenn i Fit+ is the clear winner of the budget class. Motor finds the Kormoran very good on snow but well behind the Laufenn on wet and dry roads despite costing only a little less, and says the Tomket can be dangerous on wet roads. For the full data and methodology, see Motor's original test.

Motor Test Winner Zwycięzca testu

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 wins the test with a clear lead and almost full marks. It was the best tire on snow, wet and dry roads, with no real weakness anywhere in the test, and it was also quiet and comfortable. Motor recommends it to the most demanding drivers, and it is the tire to choose if safety in every condition is the priority.

Dry99.7%

Wet99.9%

Snow99.8%

Comfort100%

Rolling Resistance93.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	146 ft	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	53.5 s	+0.40 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 8	7.5 Points	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	174 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	86.3 s	+0.40 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	1^st / 8	0.742 g	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 8	53.6 mph	Best in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 8	12.2 ft/s²	Best in this discipline
Snow BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	93 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionLower is better	1^st / 8	28 ft	Best in this discipline
Snow TractionHigher is better	1^st / 8	635 lbf	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	75.1 s	+0.50 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 8	7 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 8	63.7 dB	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 8	0.81 kg/t	+0.05 kg/t

Production: 4524
Origin: Slovakia
Shore: 63
Price: 439.00

Motor Recommended Godna polecenia

The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 finishes second and is recommended by Motor. It is excellent on wet roads, the fastest on the wet handling course and close to the Continental in every other wet test, and very good on snow. It loses most of its points on dry roads, though it remains safe there, and its high rolling resistance and price count against it.

Dry96.5%

Wet99.1%

Snow98.7%

Comfort95.4%

Rolling Resistance84.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	149 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	54.2 s	+1.10 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	6 Points	-1.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	176 ft	+2 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	85.9 s	Best in this discipline
Wet CircleHigher is better	2^nd / 8	0.728 g	-0.01 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 8	53.4 mph	-0.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 8	12.1 ft/s²	-0.1 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	94 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	4^th / 8	29 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	1^st / 8	635 lbf	Best in this discipline
Snow HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	76.2 s	+1.60 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 8	65.1 dB	+1.40 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	8^th / 8	0.893 kg/t	+0.14 kg/t

Production: 1824
Origin: Germany
Shore: 65
Price: 485.00

Motor Recommended Godna polecenia

The Michelin Alpin 7 finishes third and is recommended by Motor. It is a well-balanced tire with excellent snow performance and the lowest rolling resistance in the test, and it edged the Bridgestone thanks to its stronger snow results. On wet and dry roads it was a step behind the leaders, but still safe, so it suits drivers who see a lot of snow and care about efficiency.

Dry96.9%

Wet95.8%

Snow99.7%

Comfort96%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	151 ft	+5 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	54 s	+0.90 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 8	6.7 Points	-0.80 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	180 ft	+6 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	88.4 s	+2.50 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	4^th / 8	0.704 g	-0.04 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 8	51.3 mph	-2.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	4^th / 8	11.2 ft/s²	-1.0 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	94 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	3^rd / 8	28 ft	0 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	3^rd / 8	635 lbf	0 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	74.6 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 8	64.3 dB	+0.60 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 8	0.757 kg/t	Best in this discipline

Production: 3824
Origin: Italy
Shore: 67
Price: 447.00

Motor Recommended Godna polecenia

The Bridgestone Blizzak 6 finishes fourth, only just behind the Michelin, and is recommended by Motor. It is strong on wet and dry roads, with very good wet braking and wet grip, and it is comfortable. Its snow results were uneven, which cost it third place, though Motor considers it safe in winter conditions.

Dry96.4%

Wet97.5%

Snow97.3%

Comfort98.7%

Rolling Resistance94%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	151 ft	+5 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	53.7 s	+0.60 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 8	6.2 Points	-1.30 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	175 ft	+1 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	87.7 s	+1.80 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	3^rd / 8	0.722 g	-0.02 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 8	51.3 mph	-2.3 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	5^th / 8	11.0 ft/s²	-1.2 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	96 ft	+3 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	2^nd / 8	28 ft	0 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	7^th / 8	624 lbf	-11 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	77 s	+2.40 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 8	7 Points	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 8	65.4 dB	+1.70 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 8	0.805 kg/t	+0.05 kg/t

Production: 2024
Origin: Spain
Shore: 70
Price: 410.00

The Nokian Snowproof 2 finishes fifth, close behind the four premium tires. Motor describes it as a tire that never surprises the driver, with consistent results across every surface, strong aquaplaning resistance and low rolling resistance. It offers a stable level of safety at a lower price than the premium tires.

Dry96.7%

Wet95.2%

Snow98%

Comfort95.6%

Rolling Resistance95.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	148 ft	+2 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	54.3 s	+1.20 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 8	5.9 Points	-1.60 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	185 ft	+11 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	89 s	+3.10 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	6^th / 8	0.695 g	-0.05 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 8	52.6 mph	-1.0 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 8	12.1 ft/s²	-0.1 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	94 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	8^th / 8	29 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	6^th / 8	627 lbf	-8 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	76.8 s	+2.20 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	6.5 Points	-0.50 Points
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 8	64.8 dB	+1.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 8	0.79 kg/t	+0.03 kg/t

Production: 4124
Origin: Finland
Shore: 65
Price: 369.00

Motor Recommended Godna polecenia

The Laufenn i Fit+ finishes sixth and is the clear winner of the budget class, recommended by Motor as good value for money. It is mid-field in most tests but surprises in some, setting the fastest dry lap of all. Its wet braking was far ahead of the other budget tires, and it suits drivers looking for a capable winter tire at a low price.

Dry98.1%

Wet94.2%

Snow98.4%

Comfort91.5%

Rolling Resistance90.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	151 ft	+5 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	53.1 s	Best in this discipline
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 8	7 Points	-0.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	184 ft	+10 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	87.2 s	+1.30 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	5^th / 8	0.697 g	-0.05 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 8	47.7 mph	-5.9 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	6^th / 8	10.1 ft/s²	-2.1 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	94 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	5^th / 8	29 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	4^th / 8	631 lbf	-4 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	76.6 s	+2.00 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 8	6 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 8	65.5 dB	+1.80 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	5^th / 8	0.833 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t

Production: 2924
Origin: China
Shore: 73
Price: 250.00

The Kormoran Snow finishes seventh. It is very good on snow and the cheapest tire here, but on wet and dry roads it cannot compete with the Laufenn, which costs only a little more. Motor considers its wet braking only just safe, so for drivers who mostly see wet and dry roads, the Laufenn is the better budget choice.

Dry92%

Wet85.9%

Snow99.1%

Comfort86.9%

Rolling Resistance90.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	156 ft	+10 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	55.4 s	+2.30 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 8	4.9 Points	-2.60 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	204 ft	+30 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	91.6 s	+5.70 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	7^th / 8	0.622 g	-0.12 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 8	44.5 mph	-9.1 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 8	8.3 ft/s²	-3.9 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	94 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	5^th / 8	29 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	5^th / 8	631 lbf	-4 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	74.8 s	+0.20 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	8^th / 8	5.5 Points	-1.50 Points
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 8	66.9 dB	+3.20 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 8	0.838 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t

Production: 4224
Origin: Serbia
Shore: 60
Price: 226.00

The Tomket Snowroad Pro 3 finishes last. Motor says it is unbalanced, reasonable on snow and dry roads but potentially dangerous on wet roads, where it stopped far behind the rest of the field. It is also more expensive than the better-placed Laufenn and Kormoran.

Dry96.4%

Wet82.5%

Snow96.6%

Comfort91.3%

Rolling Resistance90.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (15)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	152 ft	+6 ft
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	53.3 s	+0.20 s
Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 8	6 Points	-1.50 Points
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	219 ft	+45 ft
Wet HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	96.8 s	+10.90 s
Wet CircleHigher is better	8^th / 8	0.615 g	-0.13 g
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 8	43.4 mph	-10.2 mph
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	7^th / 8	8.5 ft/s²	-3.7 ft/s²
Snow BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	97 ft	+4 ft
Snow TractionLower is better	7^th / 8	29 ft	+1 ft
Snow TractionHigher is better	8^th / 8	612 lbf	-23 lbf
Snow HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	76.6 s	+2.00 s
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 8	6 Points	-1.00 Points
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 8	65.8 dB	+2.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 8	0.835 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t

Production: 1724
Origin: China
Shore: 64
Price: 331.00

Tire	Continental WinterContact TS 870	Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3	Michelin Alpin 7	Bridgestone Blizzak 6	Nokian Snowproof 2	Laufenn I Fit+	Kormoran Kormoran Snow	Tomket Snowroad Pro 3
Position	1^st	2^nd	3^rd	4^th	5^th	6^th	7^th	8^th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry	99.7%	96.5%	96.9%	96.4%	96.7%	98.1%	92%	96.4%
Wet	99.9%	99.1%	95.8%	97.5%	95.2%	94.2%	85.9%	82.5%
Snow	99.8%	98.7%	99.7%	97.3%	98%	98.4%	99.1%	96.6%
Comfort	100%	95.4%	96%	98.7%	95.6%	91.5%	86.9%	91.3%
Rolling Resistance	93.5%	84.8%	100%	94%	95.8%	90.9%	90.3%	90.7%
Keep researching	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results

Menu

Tire shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Snow

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Value

Results

Cross-check this test