Polish magazine Motor has tested eight all-season 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. The field covers every market segment: premium tires from Continental, Michelin and Dunlop, the mid-range Nokian Seasonproof 2, and budget options from Debica, Laufenn, GT Radial and Compasal. To answer the question of whether a cheap winter tire is a better choice than an all-season tire, Motor also ran a budget winter tire, which it did not name. Prices ranged from 203 to 432 zloty per tire.
The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 won by just 0.2 points from the Michelin CrossClimate 3, the Continental the stronger tire on wet roads and the Michelin the better on snow. The Nokian Seasonproof 2 was third, the best tire for aquaplaning resistance, and the Polish Debica Navigator 3 was a strong fourth for a budget tire, with the lowest rolling resistance in the test. All four are recommended by Motor. The cheapest tire, the Compasal Crosstop A/S II, finished last and was the weakest on both wet roads and snow, while the budget winter tire scored best on snow, only just ahead of the Michelin, but was clearly behind the all-season tires on wet and dry roads.
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
- Snow Traction
- 0.0 → 12.4 mph
The tires were bought from an online shop and run in on a wet track at a test center in Germany. They were then tested on snow in northern Sweden before returning to Germany for the wet and dry tests, 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.
Motor scored the budget winter tire in its points table alongside the all-season tires, where it finished eighth of nine, ahead of the Compasal. As it is an unnamed comparison tire rather than an all-season product, we show it as a reference tire, outside the ranking.
Snow
The Michelin stopped shortest on snow, just ahead of the budget winter tire, which Motor says shows that a premium all-season tire can match a winter tire on snow. The Laufenn and Debica were next, while the Compasal and Nokian needed the longest distances.
Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet (31 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 93 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
94 ft | +1 ft | 7 mph |
| 95 ft | +2 ft | 12 mph | |
| 97 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 97 ft | +4 ft | 17 mph | |
| 98 ft | +5 ft | 18 mph | |
| 102 ft | +9 ft | 24 mph | |
| 106 ft | +13 ft | 28 mph | |
| 109 ft | +16 ft | 30 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 16.5% (16 ft ≈ 1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nokian Seasonproof 2 would still be travelling at 30 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate 3 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The budget winter tire had the most traction on snow, but the Dunlop and Debica were only slightly behind it. The Nokian and Compasal had the least.
Snow Traction
Pulling Force in pounds-force
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
RefReference Winter Budget |
593 lbf | +5 lbf |
| 588 lbf | Best | |
| 586 lbf | -2 lbf | |
| 578 lbf | -10 lbf | |
| 574 lbf | -14 lbf | |
| 571 lbf | -17 lbf | |
| 544 lbf | -44 lbf | |
| 530 lbf | -58 lbf | |
| 520 lbf | -68 lbf |
The difference between best and worst was 12.3% (73 lbf).
In the acceleration test from standstill to 12 mph the Dunlop needed the shortest distance, ahead of the winter tire and the Debica. The Compasal was the slowest.
Snow Traction
Snow acceleration distance in feet (0 - 12 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 30 ft | Best | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
30 ft | 0 ft |
| 31 ft | +1 ft | |
| 31 ft | +1 ft | |
| 31 ft | +1 ft | |
| 31 ft | +1 ft | |
| 32 ft | +2 ft | |
| 32 ft | +2 ft | |
| 33 ft | +3 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 11.8% (3 ft).
The Michelin and the winter tire set identical times on the snow handling course, the fastest in the test, with the Dunlop, Nokian and Debica close behind. The Compasal was the slowest by a clear margin.
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
RefReference Winter Budget |
82.1 s | 0.00 s |
| 82.1 s | Best | |
| 82.7 s | +0.60 s | |
| 82.9 s | +0.80 s | |
| 83 s | +0.90 s | |
| 83.8 s | +1.70 s | |
| 85.2 s | +3.10 s | |
| 86 s | +3.90 s | |
| 88.1 s | +6.00 s |
The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (6 s).
Wet
The Continental and Nokian shared the shortest wet braking distance, with the Michelin next. The winter tire needed more than 26 feet further than the leaders, and the Compasal more than 30 feet further, a result Motor describes as dangerous. The Debica stopped within a meter of the Laufenn, GT Radial and Dunlop, and Motor singles out its result for praise.
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 157 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 157 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 163 ft | +6 ft | 15 mph | |
| 170 ft | +13 ft | 22 mph | |
| 171 ft | +14 ft | 22 mph | |
| 172 ft | +15 ft | 23 mph | |
| 174 ft | +17 ft | 25 mph | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
184 ft | +27 ft | 31 mph |
| 188 ft | +31 ft | 32 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 19.4% (31 ft ≈ 2.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Compasal Crosstop AS II would still be travelling at 32 mph when the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The Continental was fastest round the wet handling course, with the Nokian and Michelin next. The winter tire and the Compasal were the slowest, and Motor's driver found both unpredictable.
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 85.9 s | Best | |
| 86.3 s | +0.40 s | |
| 87.7 s | +1.80 s | |
| 88 s | +2.10 s | |
| 88.4 s | +2.50 s | |
| 89.1 s | +3.20 s | |
| 89.7 s | +3.80 s | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
91.6 s | +5.70 s |
| 95.2 s | +9.30 s |
The difference between best and worst was 10.8% (9.3 s).
On the wet circle the Continental held the most grip, ahead of the Nokian and Michelin, while the winter tire and the Compasal held the least.
Wet Circle
Average cornering G force in the wet
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 0.77 g | Best | |
| 0.75 g | -0.02 g | |
| 0.72 g | -0.05 g | |
| 0.72 g | -0.05 g | |
| 0.71 g | -0.06 g | |
| 0.7 g | -0.07 g | |
| 0.7 g | -0.07 g | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
0.64 g | -0.13 g |
| 0.63 g | -0.14 g |
The difference between best and worst was 18.2% (0.14 g).
The Nokian resisted straight-line aquaplaning longest, well ahead of the Continental and Michelin. The Compasal was the first to float, some way behind even the winter tire.
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 54.2 mph | Best | |
| 52.1 mph | -2.1 mph | |
| 51.0 mph | -3.2 mph | |
| 50.3 mph | -3.9 mph | |
| 50.1 mph | -4.1 mph | |
| 48.8 mph | -5.4 mph | |
| 48.5 mph | -5.7 mph | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
46.9 mph | -7.3 mph |
| 44.0 mph | -10.2 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 18.8% (10.2 mph).
The Nokian also kept the most grip in curved aquaplaning, with the GT Radial and Continental next. The Compasal held far less than any other tire.
Curved Aquaplaning
Remaining lateral acceleration
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 11.8 ft/s² | Best | |
| 10.7 ft/s² | -1.1 ft/s² | |
| 10.5 ft/s² | -1.3 ft/s² | |
| 10.4 ft/s² | -1.4 ft/s² | |
| 10.0 ft/s² | -1.8 ft/s² | |
| 9.7 ft/s² | -2.1 ft/s² | |
| 9.3 ft/s² | -2.5 ft/s² | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
8.5 ft/s² | -3.3 ft/s² |
| 6.6 ft/s² | -5.2 ft/s² |
The difference between best and worst was 44% (5.2 ft/s²).
Dry
The Michelin stopped shortest on dry roads, ahead of the Continental and Nokian. The Dunlop needed the longest distance of the all-season tires, and the winter tire needed almost 26 feet more than the Michelin.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 133 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 137 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 138 ft | +5 ft | 16 mph | |
| 141 ft | +8 ft | 19 mph | |
| 144 ft | +11 ft | 23 mph | |
| 145 ft | +12 ft | 23 mph | |
| 146 ft | +13 ft | 24 mph | |
| 149 ft | +16 ft | 26 mph | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
158 ft | +25 ft | 32 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 19.3% (25 ft ≈ 1.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Dunlop All Season 2 would still be travelling at 26 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate 3 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The Continental set the fastest dry lap, with the Laufenn and Michelin close behind. The Compasal was the slowest of the all-season tires, and the winter tire was slower again.
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 53.42 s | Best | |
| 53.53 s | +0.11 s | |
| 53.79 s | +0.37 s | |
| 54.05 s | +0.63 s | |
| 54.07 s | +0.65 s | |
| 54.14 s | +0.72 s | |
| 54.17 s | +0.75 s | |
| 55.27 s | +1.85 s | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
56.59 s | +3.17 s |
The difference between best and worst was 5.9% (3.17 s).
Motor's testers also rated the Continental best for dry handling, with the Laufenn and Michelin next. The winter tire was rated lowest, followed by the Compasal.
Subj. Dry Handling
Subjective Dry Handling Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 7.06 Points | Best | |
| 7 Points | -0.06 Points | |
| 7 Points | -0.06 Points | |
| 6.5 Points | -0.56 Points | |
| 6.25 Points | -0.81 Points | |
| 6.06 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 6 Points | -1.06 Points | |
| 5.5 Points | -1.56 Points | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
4.75 Points | -2.31 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 32.7% (2.31 Points).
Comfort
The Dunlop was the quietest tire in the exterior noise measurement at 31 mph, with the Debica, Michelin and Nokian close behind. The Laufenn was the loudest of the all-season tires, and the winter tire was louder still.
Noise
External noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 64.4 dB | Best | |
| 64.5 dB | +0.10 dB | |
| 64.8 dB | +0.40 dB | |
| 64.8 dB | +0.40 dB | |
| 65.2 dB | +0.80 dB | |
| 65.2 dB | +0.80 dB | |
| 65.5 dB | +1.10 dB | |
| 66 dB | +1.60 dB | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
67.3 dB | +2.90 dB |
The difference between best and worst was 4.5% (2.9 dB).
The Continental, Michelin, Nokian and Debica were rated the most comfortable, and the Laufenn and GT Radial the least.
Subj. Comfort
Subjective Comfort Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 7 Points | Best | |
| 7 Points | Best | |
| 7 Points | Best | |
| 7 Points | Best | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
6.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| 6.5 Points | -0.50 Points | |
| 6.5 Points | -0.50 Points | |
| 6 Points | -1.00 Points | |
| 6 Points | -1.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 14.3% (1 Points).
Value
The Debica had the lowest rolling resistance, with the Dunlop and GT Radial next. The Laufenn's rolling resistance was by far the highest, and Motor says this decided its final place.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.62 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 7.7 kg/t | +0.08 kg/t | $3 | |
| 7.79 kg/t | +0.17 kg/t | $7 | |
| 7.98 kg/t | +0.36 kg/t | $14 | |
| 7.99 kg/t | +0.37 kg/t | $14 | |
| 8.18 kg/t | +0.56 kg/t | $22 | |
| 8.25 kg/t | +0.63 kg/t | $24 | |
RefReference Winter Budget |
8.34 kg/t | +0.72 kg/t | $28 |
| 9.42 kg/t | +1.80 kg/t | $69 |
The difference between best and worst was 23.6% (1.8 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Laufenn G Fit 4S uses about 19 gal ($69) more fuel than the Debica Navigator 3.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
Results
The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 wins thanks to the best balance across wet, dry and snow, with the Michelin CrossClimate 3 a fraction behind. The Nokian Seasonproof 2 shows that a mid-range tire can compete with the premium tires, and the Debica Navigator 3 finished fourth at a much lower price, only 0.2 points ahead of the Laufenn. Motor was disappointed by the Dunlop in sixth, which costs considerably more than the Debica and Laufenn, and says the Compasal does not offer the safety it requires. The budget winter tire scored best on snow, but only just ahead of the Michelin, and its weaker results on wet and dry roads left it behind every all-season tire except the Compasal. For the full data and methodology, see Motor's original test.
Continental AllSeasonContact 2
205/55 R16Category 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 | 2nd / 8 | 137 ft | +4 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 53.42 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 7.063 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 157 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 85.9 s | Best in this discipline |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 0.771 g | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 52.1 mph | -2.1 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 10.5 ft/s² | -1.3 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 98 ft | +5 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 5th / 8 | 31 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 571 lbf | -17 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 83.8 s | +1.70 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 7 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 5th / 8 | 65.2 dB | +0.80 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 6th / 8 | 8.18 kg/t | +0.56 kg/t |
- Production
- 3825
- Origin
- Czech Republic
- Shore
- 69
- Price
- 421.00
Michelin CrossClimate 3
205/55 R16Category 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 | 1st / 8 | 133 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 53.79 s | +0.37 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 7 Points | -0.06 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 163 ft | +6 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 87.7 s | +1.80 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 0.72 g | -0.05 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 51.0 mph | -3.2 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 10.4 ft/s² | -1.4 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 93 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 31 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 3rd / 8 | 578 lbf | -10 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 82.1 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 7 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 64.8 dB | +0.40 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 4th / 8 | 7.98 kg/t | +0.36 kg/t |
- Production
- 3625
- Origin
- Germany
- Shore
- 64
- Price
- 432.00
Nokian Seasonproof 2
205/55 R16Category 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 | 3rd / 8 | 138 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 54.17 s | +0.75 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 6 Points | -1.06 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 8 | 157 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 86.3 s | +0.40 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 0.749 g | -0.02 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 54.2 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 11.8 ft/s² | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 109 ft | +16 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 7th / 8 | 32 ft | +2 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 530 lbf | -58 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 82.9 s | +0.80 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 7 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 64.8 dB | +0.40 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 8 | 7.99 kg/t | +0.37 kg/t |
- Production
- 3725
- Origin
- Romania
- Shore
- 63
- Price
- 349.00
Debica Navigator 3
205/55 R16Category 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 | 7th / 8 | 146 ft | +13 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 54.14 s | +0.72 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 6.25 Points | -0.81 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 172 ft | +15 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 88 s | +2.10 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 0.704 g | -0.07 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 48.8 mph | -5.4 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 9.3 ft/s² | -2.5 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 97 ft | +4 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 31 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 586 lbf | -2 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 83 s | +0.90 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 7 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 64.5 dB | +0.10 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 8 | 7.62 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- Production
- 4825
- Origin
- Serbia
- Shore
- 63
- Price
- 269.00
Laufenn G Fit 4S
205/55 R16Category 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 | 6th / 8 | 145 ft | +12 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 53.53 s | +0.11 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 7 Points | -0.06 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 170 ft | +13 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 89.7 s | +3.80 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 0.716 g | -0.06 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 50.1 mph | -4.1 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 10.0 ft/s² | -1.8 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 95 ft | +2 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 4th / 8 | 31 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 574 lbf | -14 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 85.2 s | +3.10 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 6 Points | -1.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 8th / 8 | 66 dB | +1.60 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 8 | 9.42 kg/t | +1.80 kg/t |
- Production
- 0325
- Origin
- China
- Shore
- 77
- Price
- 250.00
Dunlop All Season 2
205/55 R16Category 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 | 8th / 8 | 149 ft | +16 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 54.07 s | +0.65 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 6.5 Points | -0.56 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 174 ft | +17 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 88.4 s | +2.50 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 0.7 g | -0.07 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 48.5 mph | -5.7 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 9.7 ft/s² | -2.1 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 97 ft | +4 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 1st / 8 | 30 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 1st / 8 | 588 lbf | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 82.7 s | +0.60 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 6.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 8 | 64.4 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 7.7 kg/t | +0.08 kg/t |
- Production
- 3625
- Origin
- Poland
- Shore
- 64
- Price
- 349.00
GT Radial ClimateActive
205/55 R16Category 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 | 4th / 8 | 141 ft | +8 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 8 | 54.05 s | +0.63 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 6.063 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 8 | 171 ft | +14 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 89.1 s | +3.20 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 0.713 g | -0.06 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 8 | 50.3 mph | -3.9 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 2nd / 8 | 10.7 ft/s² | -1.1 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 8 | 102 ft | +9 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 6th / 8 | 32 ft | +2 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 6th / 8 | 544 lbf | -44 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 86 s | +3.90 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 7th / 8 | 6 Points | -1.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 5th / 8 | 65.2 dB | +0.80 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 7.79 kg/t | +0.17 kg/t |
- Production
- 1725
- Origin
- China
- Shore
- 69
- Price
- 312.00
Compasal Crosstop AS II
205/55 R16Category 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 | 5th / 8 | 144 ft | +11 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 55.27 s | +1.85 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 5.5 Points | -1.56 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 188 ft | +31 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 95.2 s | +9.30 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 0.632 g | -0.14 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 44.0 mph | -10.2 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 6.6 ft/s² | -5.2 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 7th / 8 | 106 ft | +13 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 8th / 8 | 33 ft | +3 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 8th / 8 | 520 lbf | -68 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 8th / 8 | 88.1 s | +6.00 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 5th / 8 | 6.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 8 | 65.5 dB | +1.10 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 8 | 8.25 kg/t | +0.63 kg/t |
- Production
- 0825
- Origin
- China
- Shore
- 65
- Price
- 203.00
Reference Winter Budget
205/55 R16All 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 | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 158 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 56.59 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 4.75 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 184 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 91.6 s |
| Wet CircleHigher is better | 0.639 g |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 46.9 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 8.5 ft/s² |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 94 ft |
| Snow TractionLower is better | 30 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 593 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 82.1 s |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 6.5 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 67.3 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8.34 kg/t |
- Production
- 1925
- Origin
- Serbia
- Shore
- 59
- Price
- 228.00

Discussion