Test Charts / Vi Bilagare

The BEST Studded Tires for 2025

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tire, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 235/60 R18
Tires tested: 8
Disciplines: 13
Test vehicle: Volvo XC60

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tires can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tires does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Triangle IcelynX TI501	145 ft	Best	0 mph
2Continental IceContact 3	148 ft	+3 ft	10 mph
3Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	148 ft	+3 ft	12 mph
4Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	150 ft	+5 ft	14 mph
5Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	151 ft	+6 ft	15 mph
6Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	151 ft	+6 ft	16 mph
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	154 ft	+9 ft	19 mph
8Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	155 ft	+10 ft	20 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.6% (10 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV would still be travelling at 20 mph when the Triangle IcelynX TI501 had stopped.

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

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental IceContact 3	5 Points	Best
1Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	5 Points	Best
1Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	5 Points	Best
4Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	4 Points	-1.00 Points
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	4 Points	-1.00 Points
4Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	4 Points	-1.00 Points
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	3 Points	-2.00 Points
8Triangle IcelynX TI501	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Triangle IcelynX TI501	142 ft	Best
2Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	153 ft	+11 ft
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	154 ft	+12 ft
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	157 ft	+15 ft
5Continental IceContact 3	158 ft	+16 ft
6Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	159 ft	+17 ft
7Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	163 ft	+21 ft
8Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	166 ft	+24 ft

The difference between best and worst was 17.3% (24 ft ≈ 1.7 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	63.31 s	Best
2Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	63.46 s	+0.15 s
3Continental IceContact 3	63.71 s	+0.40 s
4Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	63.96 s	+0.65 s
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	64.09 s	+0.78 s
6Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	64.78 s	+1.47 s
7Triangle IcelynX TI501	64.79 s	+1.48 s
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	64.79 s	+1.48 s

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

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	44.4 mph	Best
2Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	43.8 mph	-0.6 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	43.1 mph	-1.3 mph
4Triangle IcelynX TI501	42.8 mph	-1.6 mph
5Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	42.6 mph	-1.8 mph
6Continental IceContact 3	42.3 mph	-2.1 mph
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	42.1 mph	-2.3 mph
8Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	41.0 mph	-3.4 mph

The difference between best and worst was 7.7% (3.4 mph).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental IceContact 3	37 ft	Best	0 mph
2Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	37 ft	0 ft	6 mph
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	37 ft	0 ft	8 mph
4Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	37 ft	0 ft	8 mph
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	37 ft	0 ft	11 mph
6Triangle IcelynX TI501	37 ft	0 ft	11 mph
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	37 ft	0 ft	12 mph
8Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	39 ft	+2 ft	19 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.2% (2 ft). From 80 mph, the Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3 would still be travelling at 19 mph when the Continental IceContact 3 had stopped.

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

Snow Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental IceContact 3	1.77 s	Best
2Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	1.78 s	+0.01 s
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	1.79 s	+0.02 s
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	1.79 s	+0.02 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	1.8 s	+0.03 s
6Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	1.83 s	+0.06 s
7Triangle IcelynX TI501	1.85 s	+0.08 s
8Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	1.9 s	+0.13 s

The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (0.13 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	68.4 s	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	68.6 s	+0.20 s
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	69.1 s	+0.70 s
4Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	69.6 s	+1.20 s
5Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	70.2 s	+1.80 s
6Triangle IcelynX TI501	71.9 s	+3.50 s
7Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	72.2 s	+3.80 s
8Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	72.3 s	+3.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.7% (3.9 s).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	38 ft	Best	0 mph
2Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	41 ft	+3 ft	21 mph
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	47 ft	+9 ft	35 mph
4Continental IceContact 3	52 ft	+14 ft	42 mph
5Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	55 ft	+17 ft	45 mph
6Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	58 ft	+20 ft	48 mph
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	58 ft	+20 ft	48 mph
8Triangle IcelynX TI501	84 ft	+46 ft	59 mph

The difference between best and worst was 121.8% (46 ft ≈ 3.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Triangle IcelynX TI501 would still be travelling at 59 mph when the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV had stopped.

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

Ice Traction
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	2.72 s	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	2.83 s	+0.11 s
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	2.95 s	+0.23 s
4Continental IceContact 3	3.26 s	+0.54 s
5Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	3.45 s	+0.73 s
6Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	3.47 s	+0.75 s
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	3.73 s	+1.01 s
8Triangle IcelynX TI501	5.19 s	+2.47 s

The difference between best and worst was 90.8% (2.47 s).

Ice Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	84 s	Best
2Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	85.9 s	+1.90 s
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	86.5 s	+2.50 s
4Continental IceContact 3	86.9 s	+2.90 s
5Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	91.7 s	+7.70 s
6Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	93.2 s	+9.20 s
7Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	94 s	+10.00 s
8Triangle IcelynX TI501	96.6 s	+12.60 s

The difference between best and worst was 15% (12.6 s).

Comfort

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Triangle IcelynX TI501	72.6 dB	Best
2Continental IceContact 3	73.6 dB	+1.00 dB
3Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	73.9 dB	+1.30 dB
3Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	73.9 dB	+1.30 dB
5Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	74.5 dB	+1.90 dB
6Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	74.7 dB	+2.10 dB
7Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	74.8 dB	+2.20 dB
8Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	75.5 dB	+2.90 dB

The difference between best and worst was 4% (2.9 dB).

Value

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Continental IceContact 3	6.3 l/100km	Best	$0
2Michelin X Ice North 4 SUV	6.45 l/100km	+0.15 l/100km	$28
3Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 SUV	6.5 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	$37
3Pirelli Scorpion IceZero 2	6.5 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	$37
3Goodride IceMaster Spike Z 506	6.5 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	$37
3Nexen WinGuard WinSpike 3	6.5 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	$37
7Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 SUV	6.6 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	$55
8Triangle IcelynX TI501	6.7 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	$73

The difference between best and worst was 6.3% (0.4 l/100km). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Triangle IcelynX TI501 uses about 20 gal ($73) more fuel than the Continental IceContact 3.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.

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.