Menu
Kumho Winter Craft WP51 View Gallery (1)
175-255/35-70 R14-20 84 sizes Winter rated

Kumho Winter Craft WP51

The Kumho Winter Craft WP51 is a Premium Touring Winter tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

7.0
Tire Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
High Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
77%
Wet Grip
74%
Road Feedback
70%
Handling
71%
Wear
79%
Comfort
84%
Buy again
70%
Snow Grip
90%
Ice Grip
84%
15 Reviews
78% Average
51,600 miles driven
13 Tests (avg: 16th)
Kumho Winter Craft WP51

Kumho Winter Craft WP51

Winter Mid-Range
BETA
7 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · High Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tire Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tire scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Comfort
100
0.32x / 1 test
Snow
68.8
1.5x / 5 tests
Wet
65.3
1.93x / 7 tests
Ice
64.4
1.2x / 3 tests
Dry
54.1
1.13x / 3 tests
Value
47.6
0.42x / 3 tests

Cross-category scores are derived metrics that combine data from multiple test disciplines to evaluate real-world performance characteristics.

Braking
66.2
9 tests
Traction
62.3
2 tests
Handling
59.6
5 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 13
Publications: 5
Period: 2014 - 2021
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 15
Avg Rating: 77.6%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.24
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tire tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2021 ADAC 15 Inch Winter Tire Test ADAC 2021 195/65 R15 16/16 0 metrics
2021 Winter Tire Market Overview Auto Bild 2021 205/55 R16 31/49 2 metrics
2019 ADAC 185/65 R15 Winter Tire Test ADAC 2019 185/65 R15 11/16 0 metrics
2018 AMS Winter Tire Test Auto Motor Und Sport 2018 205/55 R16 11/11 10 metrics
2018 ACE All Season and Winter Tire Test ACE 2018 185/65 R15 7/12 0 metrics
2018 ADAC Winter Tire Test - 205/55 R16 ADAC 2018 205/55 R16 12/16 0 metrics
2018 51 Winter Tire Shootout Auto Bild 2018 195/65 R15 23/52 0 metrics
2017 AC Winter Tire Test - 185/65 R15 Auto Centrum 2017 185/65 R15 7/8 10 metrics
2017 ADAC Winter Tire Test - 195/65 R15 ADAC 2017 195/65 R15 14/16 0 metrics
2016 Winter Tire Market Overview Auto Bild 2016 205/55 R16 30/43 0 metrics
2015 ADAC Winter Tire Test - 205/55 R16 ADAC 2015 205/55 R16 15/19 0 metrics
2015 Winter Tire Market Overview Auto Bild 2015 185/60 R14 26/51 0 metrics
2014 ADAC Winter Tire Test - 195/65 R15 ADAC 2014 195/65 R15 10/14 0 metrics
13
Tests
16th
Average
7th
Best
31st
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
31st/49
16th/16
Good on snow and ice.
Significant weakness in the dry and wet.
11th/16
None mentioned
Relatively wear grip in snow, high wear.
Good
Size Fuel Wet Noise
14 inch
175/65 R14 86 T XL D E 71
185/70 R14 92 T XL C E 71
185/60 R14 86 T XL D E 71
175/65 R14 86 T XL D E 71
15 inch
185/65 R15 92 T XL C D 71
195/65 R15 95 T XL C D 72
185/65 R15 92 T XL C D 71
195/65 R15 95 T XL C D 72
16 inch
205/55 R16 94 T C D 72
205/60 R16 96 T XL C D 72
215/60 R16 99 T XL C D 72
215/60 R16 99 T XL C D 72
205/55 R16 94 T XL C D 72
205/60 R16 96 T XL C D 72
17 inch
215/55 R17 98 T XL D D 72
225/45 R17 94 T XL D D 72
225/50 R17 98 T XL C D 72
205/50 R17 93 T XL C E 72
215/55 R17 98 T XL D D 72
225/50 R17 98 T XL C D 72
225/45 R17 94 T XL D D 72
18 inch
225/40 R18 92 T XL D D 72
245/40 R18 97 T XL D D 72
245/45 R18 100 T XL D D 72
20 inch
255/45R20 105 H XL C D 73
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Kumho Winter Craft WP51 >>

Questions and Answers for the Kumho Winter Craft WP51

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Kumho Winter Craft WP51. Why not submit a question to our tire experts using the form below!
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Review Summary

Based on 14 user reviews

Most drivers report the Kumho Winter Craft WP51 excels in snow and ice with strong traction and confidence, and many praise its value and durability/wear. Wet grip is generally good but with some mixed feedback on braking/initial tread block movement, while dry performance is adequate in cold but poorer in warm conditions with reduced feedback. Noise and fuel consumption are slightly higher than average. Overall sentiment is positive, with minority complaints about wet braking/handling and dry grip/feedback.

Strengths
  • Snow and ice traction
  • Value for money
  • Durability and tread wear
  • Overall confidence in severe winter
  • Comfort (many)
Areas for Improvement
  • Dry grip/feedback in warm conditions
  • Wet braking/handling for some
  • Higher noise
  • Increased fuel consumption

Top 3 Kumho Winter Craft WP51 Reviews

Given 62% while driving a Fiat croma (205/55 R16) on for 0 average miles
Winter tire for snow, wet ok and dry bad.
Suitable tire for real winter snow and ice exceptional.
August 31, 2025
Given 92% while driving a Skoda (215/45 R16) on mostly country roads for 0 easy going miles
I have bought several sets of these tires for different cars over the years. 2 VW Golfs and a Skoda Fabia. I live in a rural area with a lot of hills and when it snows it snows. These tires cope in even the worst weather conditions - ice, snow, slush, rain and I can’t recommend them enough. Cars sliding and stranded everywhere and I breeze past them. No slipping, no sliding. Just brilliant.
November 25, 2021
Given 100% while driving a Toyota Avensis (225/45 R17) on mostly town for 0 easy going miles
For the price the tire is really premium class.Overall good tire for city driving standard car.
October 27, 2020

How would you rate the Kumho Winter Craft WP51?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Kumho Winter Craft WP51 Reviews

Given 68% while driving a Renault Clio 172 (205/45 R16 H) on a combination of roads for 9,000 spirited miles
In the winter they're good, not excellent, but good. Enough grip in snow and rain. The performance reflects in the price, they not the best, but great value for money. The downside is in the dry or in the summer. There's no feedback, no grip and the tire simply melts if you want to take a corner faster. But ofcourse they're winter tires, so not meant to be used in hot conditions, and in the cold they're good. Probably I will buy them again because value for money and wear.
May 23, 2020
Given 86% while driving a Mitsubishi mirage dohc (225/45 R17) on mostly motorways for 500 spirited miles
I have had 4 seperate winter tires on my car in the past. These would be my 5th winter season in Canada. I live in NB and winters can be wild at times and completely mild at other points. We experience 25 to 40 cm of snow falls in less then a few hours at times and these tires so far have been the best I've used. I've tried hankook, bridgestone, Rotalla, and Momo and these hands down give me more peice of mind then any if those other brands. They are loud in dry roads and have a very aggressive tread so they do wear on your feul economy but you will feel like a tank on the road in any condition.
December 1, 2018
Given 39% while driving a Audi A6 2.5 TDI Quattro (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 3,000 average miles
Probably the worst off all tires I ever used on my audi A4 and A6 quattro. Wet handling and grip in second season and only 5k km is terrible. Even new one was really bad. Dry is ok. Snow grip is average. It's not loud and relativly comfortable. Overall, total disapointment.
November 20, 2018
Toyota (195/50 R16 V) on mostly town for 2,500 miles
Quite good on dry and wet on my yaris hybrid 2017. Impressed how they performerd in snow, I have to drive a lot steep uphill and downhill, during the record snowfall of December 2017 I thought I couldn't get home on the evening because roads were horrible and couldn't stay clean for more than 30/45 minutes, I afforded a strong uphill road with some 7 inches slush/snow, in the worst passage the car almost stopped climbing but it somehow managed to get on top and take me home.
I found the kumho tires very good stopping and gripping on ice.
November 12, 2018
Given 75% while driving a Opel Zafira TDCI (225/55 R16 V) on a combination of roads for 0 average miles
good tire for this money!
November 9, 2018
Given 42% while driving a Kia Motors ceed (225/45 R17) on mostly country roads for 100 spirited miles
Recently fitted two of these to the rear of my vehicle replacing the summer tires that were on(two Michelin winters were already on the front).Within 10 miles I knew I was going to have to swap them to the front. These kumos suffer from a trate that other mid range winter tires have which is the way the tread block initially moves when steering input is applied, something Michelin manages to avoid. The feeling is unnerving to say the least and if the inputs are exaggerated the back of the car can be made to slide at relatively low speeds,this at a temperature of around 2/3 degrees,so the temperature a winter really should be starting to work. In fact the summer hankook's were far better. Fitting to the front resulted in a poorer turn in and more understeer but ultimately safer than oversteer. Stopping in ice and frost is decent enough but again not a patch on the Michelin's. Can't comment on bone dry surface performance or wear as yet obviously due to lack of miles covered. Result is spend 40 percent more and get Michelin alpin 4 or 5's fitted.
December 18, 2017
Given 80% while driving a Mercedes Benz E220Cdi (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 6,000 spirited miles
Was driving these tire for around 6k km fitted on a Mercedes E220D without any safety systems. On dry road the tires feel really solid. They have really stiff sidewalls and handle potholes well. Feedback was much better than my Fulda ecocontact HP. Wet grip in cornering is okey, but when you have to stop or go these kumhos are bad. Such a low powered car could easily break traction. In snow they were awesome, the car went nearly everywhere. On icy roads it was really good for a non-studded tire. For 6k km there is hardly any noticeable wear. I think they will easy last around 35-40k km. Comfort was decent. They are good tires for this price, but I would like to try sth new.
March 26, 2017
Given 81% while driving a Kia Motors Picanto (175/50 R15 W) on mostly country roads for 3,000 spirited miles
These do not seem to perform any better than my pirelli summer tires. I have 2 cars and have been grip testing these in the wet in a car park by going in a circle and they seemed to have the same level of grip as the summer tires. Temperature was about 4 degrees. They seem to cause a bit of noise and you can hear the grip noise change when accelerating or braking vs rolling. They are pretty good. But I get the impression that they will not be great in the snow as I have a 1 litre car and in the wet its fairly easy to get a tiny bit of wheel spin if pulling away fast.
February 27, 2017
Given 83% while driving a Mazda 3 2014 (205/60 R16) on track for 8,000 spirited miles
Safe and durable tire. Had no issues with it during 12000km. Warm,cold and wet weathers. Litle bit louder than I expected and consumption is 15-20% higher,but no metter when it is for reliable drive. Recommended to me by salesman in tire shop and told me will not regret. He was right. He owns the same on his both cars. Car Mazda 3 Sport 2.0
December 30, 2016
Given 90% while driving a SEAT Leon SE Ecomotive 1.6 (205/55 R16 T) on mostly town for 4,000 average miles
I highly recommend these tires. These tires have the highest price/performance ratio and does not differ from any expensive brand.
November 3, 2016
Given 90% while driving a Fiat croma (205/55 R16 T) on a combination of roads for 14,000 spirited miles
I got these tires when I blew one of my previous set Nokian WR D3 and then blew my spare wheel as well after 10 miles so I went to first available tire shop along the road. My Nokians were giving the last of them after 30000 miles and I was determined to buy them again, because they were best winter tires I ever had and performed magnificently, only downside was extensive wear but I made 10000 miles during summer with them (south Europe) - so they lasted well I must say.
So, I got to the first shop and Kumho Wintercraft WP51 were all they had. It was early in the morning, actually I waited in car in front of the shop to open, and then had tires hastily put on and rushed to work. First drive on them was horrible, I felt like I had worst tires ever. But then I found that guy who put them on, inflated them on 3.0 bar !!!!! ( Fiat Croma is rated 2.2) so I put right pressure in them and drove them extensively on all kind of roads, and pushing them to the limit. And I can say this - 1). they are most comfortable tires I ever had. You don't get much road feedback but once you get into them, you start feeling little finesses and they work well. 2). they perform excellent on wet roads, grip is fantastic and cornering is awesome. 3). on dry, you feel a little skid but interestingly, after 2-3 months, when they wear out just a bit, kinda to get them flat strong on the road, this happens no more and dry grip gets much better. 4) on snow, they are not amazing like Nokian, but not far either. Let's say if Nokian are 10 on snow, Kumho are 8.9 which is more than good, because on ice they are even better. 5) Wear is what puts them on the top, because after 14000 miles, I can see the wear just a little, they are much better than Nokian or BFGoodrich and still, they feel like new. 6) driving them on late April, 15-30 C temperature, haven't seen much difference than driving 2-10C which sets them apart from other winter tires that feel much worse during summer.
All in all, I believe I have one more season and at least 10000 miles on them, if not more.
All in all , these tires surprised me quite a bit, and I would buy them again because, although not 10/10 like Nokians for winter, they are a bit cheaper and give much more back, in terms of durability and usability in different conditions.
Downside is that I have them on T ratings for speed (180 km/h max) and I pushed them to this limit often and for prolonged time on long highway drives and I can say they excelled and passed ever test.
One more note: my set was made in Korea, not in China, if that makes any difference....
I can recommend these tires.
April 22, 2016
Rate the Kumho Winter Craft WP51