Below are all the data points for the 2018 51 Winter Tyre Shootout, displaying how each tyre performed across all test categories. The spider chart below provides a complete overview of performance, where one hundred percent represents the best performance in each category. The larger the area covered by each tyre's plot, the better its overall performance.
How to read these charts:
For each test category, data is presented relative to the best performing tire. The direction indicates whether lower or higher values are better - pay close attention to this when interpreting results.
Spider chart cannot be displayed because there are no test categories common to all tires.
Here's one I haven't seen addressed ref winter tyres.
With most UK drivers who swap to winters and may not cover more than 2,500 miles over the three months or so they have them on, what's your view as to how many seasons or specifically how many years is it safe to keep and use them?
If they are stored well, do the usual rules over tyre deg and UV aging apply?
My Hankooks are just 4 years old and about to go on their 5th winter with perhaps 10,000 miles and little wear on them (as you drive well within limits in the winter) but your advice appreciated on how many more winters I should safely use them?
Cheers
Hi,
Can you please recommend Winter or Summer tyres that will lean more towards
All-Seasons types tyres. For my car it`s hard to find all seasons in the size of 245/40 high. Thanks!
I'm afraid there's no summer tyres which will work in the snow and ice, and there's no winter tyres which will be great in the warmer dry conditions, where they can give up 20% dry braking. You might need to run two sets!
Have you considered looking into the consequences of using different tyres in the same brand and model range? What happens when you chose a slightly smaller/larger size or chose a higher loadindex? Sometimes you can't find the tyre you want in the proper size or the tyre is just cheaper. Of course I do mean that it should still work, circumference of the tyre should be within 2% of the original (right?) and it should fit on the rim.
We've done wheel size and tyre width tests (on youtube and the site), but in the UK you start getting into insurance issues changing tyre sizes, plus you can start the tyre rubbing on various bits of bodywork, so it's not something we ever advise you do. Always stick with OE.
Thanks for the response. Yeah, I'm not from the UK so didn't know that. I don't believe this is an issue on the other side of the Chanel in the Netherlands.
I've seen that video, but forgot about most of it. Rewatched it now and as I understand it changing to a slightly smaller width will give you less grip in de dry and more in the wet, but both also just slightly. Can I conclude that it is fine to go for it if the pricing is very different? I did mean it exactly as you chose the tyres in the video, keeping the overall diameter/hight of the tyre (almost) the same. But for me it would be a choice between 185/60 R15 and 175/65 R15.
Maybe in theory you could chose between
- A smaller width tyre with more grip in the dry and less in the wet
- A wider tyre with less grip in the dry and more in the wet giving them both similar performance
What I'm also wondering is if it will have any consequences if you chose tyres with a different load or speed index (always higher then standard of course)? I can see that some of the same tyres with just a different loadindex have different EU labels.
I will give you an example:
2 Good Year Ultragip 9 tyres, both 185/60 R15 ..T tyres
Only the loadindex is different: 84 or 88
The 84 has the label E (fuel economy) - B (wet grip) - 68 dB
The 88 has the label C (fuel economy) - C (wet grip) - 68 dB
This is kind of weird to me, I also don't always trust this label as it often is different to most tests?
Ps. I have already ordered 4 new tyres, Good Year Ultragrip 9 in the size 185/60 R15 84T. This is the original tyre size, but I still am interested in answers to the above as I will be buying many more tyres in the future :)
Honestly, the differences between the two sizes would be so small in the real world I'm not sure I'd worry about it. As said, I'd always prefer to stick with OE sizes where possible, even if that means getting the second choice of rubber.
The results are those that I expected. For sure, Continental will remain, after full results, the winner of the tests. The rest of the hierarchy will be modified. I'm sure that Nokian will remain somewhere around 10th place, good at snow traction, but week at wet braking, durability and price. Michelin also around 10th place. Pirelli, Uniroyal and Fulda will drop few places, in particular Pirelli. The "real" tyres demonstrates once again their real abilities. By "real" I reffer to really good tyres at a fair price. In this category I include Kleber, Fulda, Barum, and Debica. Winter tyres category. Anyway, the perfect tyre doesn't exists. Good to be fitted by geographic area (weather conditions), driving style, car type and so on
Great comment :) And your guesses of the final results are really close! Full article on the site next week :)
Have you ever considered testing which is best in the wet: worn tyres in front and new tyres on the back (same brand and model) or vice versa (either summer or winter tyres)? Wet braking, cornering and aquaplaning tests would be very interesting.
There are a few videos on Youtube about the subject but they used old cars (with no ESP) with rear wheel drive. With those experiments, in the past, there was the belief that the best combination is worn tyres in front due to handling (with easy oversteer otherwise) but nowadays, with every car equipped with ESP it must be somehow different. Braking, which was never tested, should be much better with the worn tyres in the back if you consider that way over 50% of the emergency braking force is applied to the front wheels and, if you consider aquaplaning (straight and curved), that the front wheels clean up the pavement for the rear tyres to roll on and the ESP is always backing you up (or maybe not...).
It would be better to test them with a front wheel drive car since these are the majority on the road today.
It should also be interesting to test them in the dry, not to mention in the snow.
It must be easy for you to borrow used tyres (but not damaged) in a tyre shop...
A good idea for a video, I'll add it to the list. The tyre manufacturers still recommend newest on the front for a good reason, and that's aquaplaning. All the electronics in the world can't help you if the tyre is floating, and that's easier and safer to manage with the front end floating rather than the rear.
Still, all good points and I'll put it on the list :)
Sorry, did you mean manufacturers recommend newest on the front or on the rear?
Newest on the front :)
So, it makes sense after all, and regardless some old tests, to install newest on the front.
Due to low budgets, some drivers consider buying 4 new but cheap tyres instead of 2 new renowned brand tyres and keep for a while the other 2 old but renowned branded tyres on their cars.
How about adding to the wet test a comparison between 2 new in the front vs 2 old in the front versus 4 new but low budget tyres like: Infinity Ecosis, Matador, Cooper Zeon, Dayton Touring, Nankang Green Sport, GT Radial Champiro, Laufenn S Fit, Rottalla or even the more popular (but also terrible in the wet) Maxxis?
As every tyre performs differently when worn I'm not sure how much solid data we'd get from a test like that, however I would like to do a video on mix fitment of premium vs budgets, for instance on a rwd car with premium tyres on the front and budgets on the rear. I've done that test before and it's quite scary!
That's a great ideia for a video, as well! Actually it's a very real cenario that most of the drivers face. They make an effort to buy the most sporty and expensive car they can (even second hand) but then realize they can't afford new tyres because they are simply too expensive.
It's particularlly frequent on SUVs too. I've seen Volvos XC-60 with ridicularlly cheap tyres. Why would they buy such safe cars like that to install dangerous tyres afterwards!... It can't be just ignorance!
I've even seen that on Nissans Qashqai and it's a much cheaper car.
If you're still thinking in testing worn vs new (front vs rear installation) just make sure you go for great wet perfoming tyres like Continentals (PC5 or PC6), Michelin PS4, Goodyear Eagle F1 Assim 3 or maybe Falken FK510. I would suggest 16 inch wheels or 18, particularlly this one, where tyres begin to get quite expensive.
Whilst I appreciate Tyre Reviews test a huge number of tyres in different senarios each year, I am afraid that new tyres should go on the rear. Please see the Auto Express review were they tested a couple of Golfs with new on the front and new on the rear. Huge difference. So if you are only replacing a pair, then the new tyres need to go on the rear. FWD, RWD or 4x4 it doesn't make a difference.
You are correct, I the first 'front' should be 'rear', what a typo
Don't worry, we have all done it, thank you for the reviews, very interesting. Pete, Portsmouth UK.
Which 3 series did they use? An E9X or F3X has at least 16"...
You make an excellent point - they used a VW Golf, I'm struggling a little with jetlag today!