P6 of 11
Beat 50% of the field
Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV Test Results
Tested 2016 to 2019
3 publications
Tested 4 times by independent publications, the Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV averages a finish of 6th.
- 4Independent tests
- 0Test wins
- 0Podium finishes
- 6thAverage finish
- 37%Field beaten on average
- 3Publications
4 tests, 2016 to 2019
- Test win
- Second
- Third
- Average 37%
Record by discipline
Where the Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV finished in each measured discipline, across every test that measured it against at least two other tires. Field beaten is the share of the other tires it outranked in that measurement.
| Discipline | Tests | Avg finish | Field beaten | Firsts |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry | ||||
| Dry Braking | 1 | P11 of 11 | 0% | - |
| Dry Handling | 1 | P2 of 11 | 90% | - |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 1 | P6 of 11 | 50% | - |
| Wet | ||||
| Wet Braking | 1 | P5 of 11 | 60% | - |
| Wet Handling | 1 | P7 of 11 | 40% | - |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 1 | P8 of 11 | 30% | - |
| Straight Aqua | 1 | P9 of 11 | 20% | - |
| Snow | ||||
| Snow Braking | 1 | P4 of 11 | 70% | - |
| Snow Handling | 1 | P2 of 11 | 90% | - |
| Subj. Snow Handling | 1 | P2 of 11 | 90% | - |
| Comfort | ||||
| Subj. Comfort | 1 | P2 of 11 | 90% | - |
| Noise | 1 | P1 of 11 | 100% | 1 |
| Value | ||||
| Rolling Resistance | 1 | P10 of 11 | 10% | - |
Head-to-head record
Overall finishing position against the tires that have most often shared a test with the Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV. Only tires tested alongside it at least three times are listed.
| Rival | Shared tests | Ahead | Behind | Level | Finished ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Goodyear UltraGrip Performance SUV Gen 1
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Continental Winter Contact TS 850 P SUV
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
 Dunlop Winter Sport 5 SUV
3 shared: 0 ahead, 3 behind
|
3 | 0 | 3 | - | 0% |
Performance Analysis
Drawn from 4 tests. Updated December 1, 2025.
Across four winter SUV tests, the Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV delivers balanced mid-pack performance with standout strengths in snow handling/subjective control and comfort/noise, plus competitive dry handling. However, it shows clear weaknesses in dry braking, aquaplaning resistance, and rolling resistance. Overall placements (5/10 to 7/8, average 6th) indicate a capable but not class-leading tire, excelling in subjective feel on snow and cabin refinement while conceding objective safety margins in certain wet/dry metrics.
Performance Strengths
-
Snow Performance
Strong
Details
- 2nd place snow handling (49.2 km/h) in 2019 AMS, +0.4% from best
- 2nd place subjective snow handling (9 pts) in 2019 AMS, +10% from best
- 4th place snow braking (26.5 m) in 2019 AMS, +3.5% from best
-
Dry Handling and Comfort/Noise
Strong
Details
- 2nd place dry handling (115.9 km/h) in 2019 AMS, +0.2% from best
- 2nd place subjective comfort (9 pts) in 2019 AMS, +10% from best
- 1st place noise (69.3 dB) in 2019 AMS
-
Overall Consistency (Mid-pack)
Moderate
Details
- Average overall position 6 across 4 tests
- Overall results: 5/10 (2016 AMS), 6/8 (2016 AutoBild 4x4), 7/8 (2017 ACE/ARBO/GTU), 6/11 (2019 AMS)
-
Snow traction
Strong
in 2 of 3 tests
Details
Good traction and handling in the snow
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)Good on snow
- 2016 AutoBild 4x4 Winter Tire Test (2016)
-
Snow handling
Strong
in 2 of 3 tests
Details
Good traction and handling in the snow
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)Balanced and safe behavior in the snow
- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2016)
-
Dry handling
Strong
in 2 of 3 tests
Details
good dry handling
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)good handling on dry roads
- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2016)
-
Road noise
Minor
in 1 of 3 tests
Details
very quiet
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)
Performance Weaknesses
-
Dry Braking
Strong
in 1 of 3 tests
Details
- 11th/11 dry braking (46.8 m), +6.1% from best in 2019 AMS
Long dry braking
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)
-
Aquaplaning and Wet Control
Moderate
Details
- 9th/11 straight aquaplaning (72.3 km/h), +13% from best in 2019 AMS
- 8th/11 subjective wet handling (6 pts), +40% from best in 2019 AMS
- 7th/11 wet handling (70.7 km/h), +3.5% from best in 2019 AMS
-
Efficiency (Rolling Resistance/Price)
Minor
Details
- 10th/11 rolling resistance (9 kg/t), +21.6% from best in 2019 AMS
- Price ranking 4th/11 (+57.5% from best) in 2019 AMS
-
Rolling resistance
Strong
in 2 of 3 tests
Details
high rolling resistance
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)High rolling resistance
- 2016 AutoBild 4x4 Winter Tire Test (2016)
-
Wet handling
Strong
in 2 of 3 tests
Details
unbalanced in the wet
- 2019 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2019)poor lateral stability on wet surfaces
- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2016)
-
Road noise
Minor
in 1 of 3 tests
Details
high levels of noise
- 2016 AutoBild 4x4 Winter Tire Test (2016)
-
Wet braking
Minor
in 1 of 3 tests
Details
Long braking distances and poor lateral stability on wet surfaces
- 2016 AMS Winter SUV Tire Test (2016)
Every test, newest first 4
Strong = top two of the field in that measurement. Weak = bottom two.
2019 1 test
2017 1 test
P7 of 8
Beat 14% of the field
2017 235/55 R17 SUV Winter Tire Test
Recommended.
2016 2 tests
P5 of 10
Beat 56% of the field
P6 of 8
Beat 29% of the field
Back to the Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV overview
Owner reviews, sizes and EU label data, comparisons and the Tire Reviews score. All Hankook tires