Adjust Result Weighting
The overall scores below are calculated using our weighting system based on the test methodology. You can adjust the weightings below to explore how different priorities affect the results.
Test Results Data
BEST
Good
Average
Below Average
Cells are colour-coded from green (best) to red (worst). The Total Score reflects the weighted sum of all categories. A ★ marks the best tyre in each test.
| # | Tyre | Total Score | Dry | Wet | Snow | Ice | Comfort | Value | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braking M | Handling s | Subj. Dry Handling Points | % | Braking M | Handling s | Subj. Wet Handling Points | Straight Aqua Km/H | Curved Aquaplaning m/sec2 | % | Braking M | Traction s | Handling s | Subj. Snow Handling Points | Circle S | % | Braking M | Traction s | Handling s | Subj. Ice Handling Points | % | Subj. Comfort Points | Noise dB | % | Rolling Resistance kg / t | % | |||
| 1 | Michelin X Ice Snow | 83.5% | 47.88 | 73.01 | 98 | 90.8% | 35.59 | 81.55 3 | 100 2 | 80.11 2 | 63.8 2 | 79.4% | 15.81 | 5.66 | 88.56 | 95 2 | 29.09 3 | 97.7% | 10.14 2 | 6.12 | 52.92 2 | 100 ★ | 75.9% | 95 | 62.1 3 | 97.3% | 7.25 ★ | 100% |
| 2 ▼1 | Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 | 83.5% | 47.45 | 72.96 | 100 2 | 91.3% | 35.21 | 83.2 | 95 3 | 71.46 | 55.8 | 77.3% | 15.51 3 | 5.55 ★ | 87.8 2 | 95 2 | 28.98 2 | 99.2% | 10.18 3 | 6.06 2 | 53.5 3 | 95 2 | 75.4% | 100 ★ | 61.9 ★ | 100% | 7.34 2 | 98.8% |
| 3 ▼2 | Continental VikingContact 7 | 83.4% | 45.87 2 | 72.6 2 | 100 2 | 93.2% | 35.03 3 | 80.8 2 | 95 3 | 75.12 | 58.1 | 78.8% | 15.63 | 5.62 2 | 88.08 | 95 2 | 29.49 | 98.6% | 10.34 | 6.1 3 | 52.17 ★ | 95 2 | 75.4% | 95 | 61.9 ★ | 97.5% | 7.56 | 95.9% |
| 4 ▲3 | Continental WinterContact TS 870 | 81.1% | 41.27 ★ | 71.03 ★ | 110 ★ | 100% | 25.78 ★ | 74.29 ★ | 120 ★ | 99.45 ★ | 77.4 ★ | 100% | 16 | 5.85 | 92.12 | 80 | 29.33 | 94.8% | 12.71 | 9.13 | 59.99 | 70 | 60.1% | 95 | 62.1 3 | 97.3% | 8.02 | 90.4% |
| 5 ▼1 | Pirelli Ice Zero FR | 81% | 46.66 3 | 72.88 3 | 98 | 92.1% | 35.94 | 82.65 | 92 | 75.71 | 58.7 | 77.4% | 15.9 | 5.63 3 | 88 3 | 100 ★ | 29.21 | 98% | 10.68 | 6.51 | 54.18 | 90 | 72.3% | 95 | 62.7 | 96.9% | 8.38 | 86.5% |
| 6 ▼1 | Yokohama iceGUARD iG53 | 80.8% | 49.49 | 73.31 | 95 | 88.9% | 38.72 | 84.16 | 75 | 75.99 | 59.4 | 73.8% | 15.37 ★ | 5.92 | 90.99 | 80 | 30.35 | 97% | 10.97 | 6.41 | 54.74 | 90 | 71.5% | 100 ★ | 63.4 | 98.8% | 7.5 3 | 96.7% |
| 7 ▼1 | Cooper Weathermaster S100 | 77.6% | 49.47 | 73.15 | 90 | 88.8% | 37.76 | 85.41 | 80 | 76.46 | 59.8 3 | 74.6% | 15.85 | 5.92 | 89.87 | 80 | 30.15 | 95.8% | 11.97 | 7.92 | 54.63 | 85 | 66.1% | 90 | 63.3 | 93.9% | 8.45 | 85.8% |
| 8 ▼1 | Federal Himalaya ICEO | 75.7% | 46.88 | 73.8 | 80 | 90.6% | 33.61 2 | 83.5 | 80 | 79.61 3 | 58.7 | 79.7% | 15.74 | 6.03 | 89.24 | 75 | 29.94 | 95.9% | 12.66 | 9.18 | 58.28 | 80 | 61.3% | 100 ★ | 62.9 | 99.2% | 10.54 | 68.8% |
| 9 ▼2 | Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 | 63.6% | 15.5 2 | 5.64 | 87.73 ★ | 95 2 | 28.9 ★ | 7.7 ★ | 3.23 ★ | 54.33 | 90 | 8.29 | ||||||||||||||||
Scroll for more
Dry
91%
Wet
79%
Snow
98%
Ice
76%
Comfort
97%
Value
100%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
47.88 M
Dry Handling
73.01 s
Subj. Dry Handling
98 Points
Wet
Wet Braking
35.59 M
Wet Handling
81.55 s
3
Subj. Wet Handling
100 Points
2
Straight Aqua
80.11 Km/H
2
Curved Aquaplaning
63.8 m/sec2
2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.81 M
Snow Traction
5.66 s
Snow Handling
88.56 s
Subj. Snow Handling
95 Points
2
Snow Circle
29.09 S
3
Ice
Ice Braking
10.14 M
2
Ice Traction
6.12 s
Ice Handling
52.92 s
2
Subj. Ice Handling
100 Points
★
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
95 Points
Noise
62.1 dB
3
Value
Rolling Resistance
7.25 kg / t
★
Dry
91%
Wet
77%
Snow
99%
Ice
75%
Comfort
100%
Value
99%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
47.45 M
Dry Handling
72.96 s
Subj. Dry Handling
100 Points
2
Wet
Wet Braking
35.21 M
Wet Handling
83.2 s
Subj. Wet Handling
95 Points
3
Straight Aqua
71.46 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
55.8 m/sec2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.51 M
3
Snow Traction
5.55 s
★
Snow Handling
87.8 s
2
Subj. Snow Handling
95 Points
2
Snow Circle
28.98 S
2
Ice
Ice Braking
10.18 M
3
Ice Traction
6.06 s
2
Ice Handling
53.5 s
3
Subj. Ice Handling
95 Points
2
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
100 Points
★
Noise
61.9 dB
★
Value
Rolling Resistance
7.34 kg / t
2
Dry
93%
Wet
79%
Snow
99%
Ice
75%
Comfort
98%
Value
96%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
45.87 M
2
Dry Handling
72.6 s
2
Subj. Dry Handling
100 Points
2
Wet
Wet Braking
35.03 M
3
Wet Handling
80.8 s
2
Subj. Wet Handling
95 Points
3
Straight Aqua
75.12 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
58.1 m/sec2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.63 M
Snow Traction
5.62 s
2
Snow Handling
88.08 s
Subj. Snow Handling
95 Points
2
Snow Circle
29.49 S
Ice
Ice Braking
10.34 M
Ice Traction
6.1 s
3
Ice Handling
52.17 s
★
Subj. Ice Handling
95 Points
2
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
95 Points
Noise
61.9 dB
★
Value
Rolling Resistance
7.56 kg / t
Dry
100%
Wet
100%
Snow
95%
Ice
60%
Comfort
97%
Value
90%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
41.27 M
★
Dry Handling
71.03 s
★
Subj. Dry Handling
110 Points
★
Wet
Wet Braking
25.78 M
★
Wet Handling
74.29 s
★
Subj. Wet Handling
120 Points
★
Straight Aqua
99.45 Km/H
★
Curved Aquaplaning
77.4 m/sec2
★
Snow
Snow Braking
16 M
Snow Traction
5.85 s
Snow Handling
92.12 s
Subj. Snow Handling
80 Points
Snow Circle
29.33 S
Ice
Ice Braking
12.71 M
Ice Traction
9.13 s
Ice Handling
59.99 s
Subj. Ice Handling
70 Points
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
95 Points
Noise
62.1 dB
3
Value
Rolling Resistance
8.02 kg / t
Dry
92%
Wet
77%
Snow
98%
Ice
72%
Comfort
97%
Value
87%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
46.66 M
3
Dry Handling
72.88 s
3
Subj. Dry Handling
98 Points
Wet
Wet Braking
35.94 M
Wet Handling
82.65 s
Subj. Wet Handling
92 Points
Straight Aqua
75.71 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
58.7 m/sec2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.9 M
Snow Traction
5.63 s
3
Snow Handling
88 s
3
Subj. Snow Handling
100 Points
★
Snow Circle
29.21 S
Ice
Ice Braking
10.68 M
Ice Traction
6.51 s
Ice Handling
54.18 s
Subj. Ice Handling
90 Points
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
95 Points
Noise
62.7 dB
Value
Rolling Resistance
8.38 kg / t
Dry
89%
Wet
74%
Snow
97%
Ice
72%
Comfort
99%
Value
97%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
49.49 M
Dry Handling
73.31 s
Subj. Dry Handling
95 Points
Wet
Wet Braking
38.72 M
Wet Handling
84.16 s
Subj. Wet Handling
75 Points
Straight Aqua
75.99 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
59.4 m/sec2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.37 M
★
Snow Traction
5.92 s
Snow Handling
90.99 s
Subj. Snow Handling
80 Points
Snow Circle
30.35 S
Ice
Ice Braking
10.97 M
Ice Traction
6.41 s
Ice Handling
54.74 s
Subj. Ice Handling
90 Points
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
100 Points
★
Noise
63.4 dB
Value
Rolling Resistance
7.5 kg / t
3
Dry
89%
Wet
75%
Snow
96%
Ice
66%
Comfort
94%
Value
86%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
49.47 M
Dry Handling
73.15 s
Subj. Dry Handling
90 Points
Wet
Wet Braking
37.76 M
Wet Handling
85.41 s
Subj. Wet Handling
80 Points
Straight Aqua
76.46 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning
59.8 m/sec2
3
Snow
Snow Braking
15.85 M
Snow Traction
5.92 s
Snow Handling
89.87 s
Subj. Snow Handling
80 Points
Snow Circle
30.15 S
Ice
Ice Braking
11.97 M
Ice Traction
7.92 s
Ice Handling
54.63 s
Subj. Ice Handling
85 Points
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
90 Points
Noise
63.3 dB
Value
Rolling Resistance
8.45 kg / t
Dry
91%
Wet
80%
Snow
96%
Ice
61%
Comfort
99%
Value
69%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking
46.88 M
Dry Handling
73.8 s
Subj. Dry Handling
80 Points
Wet
Wet Braking
33.61 M
2
Wet Handling
83.5 s
Subj. Wet Handling
80 Points
Straight Aqua
79.61 Km/H
3
Curved Aquaplaning
58.7 m/sec2
Snow
Snow Braking
15.74 M
Snow Traction
6.03 s
Snow Handling
89.24 s
Subj. Snow Handling
75 Points
Snow Circle
29.94 S
Ice
Ice Braking
12.66 M
Ice Traction
9.18 s
Ice Handling
58.28 s
Subj. Ice Handling
80 Points
Comfort
Subj. Comfort
100 Points
★
Noise
62.9 dB
Value
Rolling Resistance
10.54 kg / t
Snow
99%
Ice
99%
Value
88%
View detailed scores
Snow
Snow Braking
15.5 M
2
Snow Traction
5.64 s
Snow Handling
87.73 s
★
Subj. Snow Handling
95 Points
2
Snow Circle
28.9 S
★
Ice
Ice Braking
7.7 M
★
Ice Traction
3.23 s
★
Ice Handling
54.33 s
Subj. Ice Handling
90 Points
Value
Rolling Resistance
8.29 kg / t
Not every driver has the same priorities. Adjust the category weightings above to re-rank the tyres based on what matters most to your driving style.
Scores are colour-coded from red (weakest) through yellow to green (strongest) to help you quickly spot each tyre's strengths and weaknesses.
The original test ranking is shown in the # column. Arrows indicate how each tyre moves when your custom weighting is applied.
When can we see test done on minivans? I’m curious to see how these winter tires handle in a minivan or similar size vehicles (FWD). Something bigger that isn’t AWD.
Thanks for the review. Very educational! Cheers!
In theory it should translate across vehicle types
-- Performances of studded tires but without studs.--
I did saw a lot of review of winter tires but never saw any that is reviewing the Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 that are not set with any studs. I do understands that studs clearly help for gripping on ice, but what's if there are no studs on these tires? Are they as good as the Hakkapeliitta R5, acceptable or simply not good at all?
Location Montreal
Vehicle: all wheel drive SUV
Winter Tire size: 255/55 R19
Driving under unpredictable slushy conditions is kind of my main concern during winter driving. The Hakka R5 didn't look to be a king under such conditions. Also dont want want to drive on studs.
Why wouldn't you buy the R5 if that's what you want?
Studded tyres usually have a slightly harder compound so an unstudded Hakka 10 would be worse than the R5.
I live in the Northeast, and the snow we get is much wetter than what they get in the Midwest or the Pacific Northwest. Quick to become slush, studless winters are way overkill.
I am however quite curious about how these tires would perform in slushy conditions. I know you've mentioned it is difficult to test. But what would you guess?
My suspicion is that the lack of hydro performance would be detrimental. And the michelins x ice would probably beat the rest because of hydroplaning. I also suspect that an all-weather tire like the cross climate twos would dominate in slushy snow, Even better than a central European all season I would guess.
i tend to agree, but the biggest factor is what's below the snow. If you're getting through to the road surface then yet, if you're only getting to another layer of snow, then no.
Hi. What about the Nokian R5 EV compared to these non EV tires? I am struggling to find any good data on the web and would be nice to have it into this test.
Hello.
First off: thanks for the huge amount of effort required to create all this data. :-)
Second: I'd like to make a suggestion. Would it be possible to get the option of showing the graphs going down all the way to 0?
It would make it a lot easier to compare actual results. For example, in the "Dry Handling", as the graphs are now, the Continental Winter Contacts seem *infinitely* better than the worse ones (Federal Himalaya). But when we check the actual values, we find that there is only a 4% difference in performance between the best and worse. In other words, for this test, the actual difference in performance is very small.
I'm not saying that you should replace the actual graphs with graphs that go to 0, but an option to toggle between the two would be nice.
Thanks!
I like that idea :) I'm not sure it's possible with google charts which the site currently uses, but maybe it's possible with another javascript library such as chart.js or similar.
Great video. I have a set of Nokian Hakkapeliitta R2's for my GX470 but I live in North Carolina. I am thinking Central European winter tires would be more appropriate. The tough part is trying to filter through all the winter tires when they are all lumped together in most retailer websites, it would be nice with filter through them with a CE or Nordic Winter filter.
Some retailers call them "performance winter tires" but I'm afraid you might struggle to find something that fits. Maybe a good snow bias all season or all weather would be smart, something like the CC2 is great as a winter tire.
Good video, thank you, I’m always interested to see a good unbiased review. I like how you did it.
I live in Northern Ontario, Canada. I’ve run a wide range/type and brands of tires and snow tires over the years. I typically run summer and winter tires. Tire technology has changed quite a lot over the past 30-40 years in my experience.
I have become a big fan of Nokian winter tires over the past 8 years on cars and light duty SUV’s and have bought 3 sets, and will continue to do so in the future. Non studded. The traction is incredible in all conditions. And they seem to be very durable, long lasting. Work well on the highway, city and gravel roads.
As well, I know they are not covered here in this review, but I have also become a big fan of Toyo tires. The new ATIII are supposed to work well in the snow/winter and I have just installed a set on a GMC Yukon (10ply E rated) which is used on and off road, to run year round. I’ll be testing those this winter. I am interested to see how well they work in cold temps -30/40.
I actually tested the AT3s and wasn't overly impressed, though I didn't do any winter running.
https://www.tire-reviews.co...
I live in Latvia.
During winter we have both CE climate and Northern winter. Usually half and half of the winter season. So for my SUV I use AT tire with M+S thread = CE tire for the summer and I drive it untill I see, that this is safe and reasonable to use. Usually November and sometimes part or even whole December is still OK for CE tire. For the rest of the winter I change for the Friction tires. I've tried Nokian HKPL R1, Dunlop SJ6, Continental VikingContact 6 and 7. All are good, but Nokian, I think had little bit longer braking distance.
Nice little combination! Is your AT tire 3 peak rated? M+S doesn't really mean anything for snow these days!
Some of the tyre performance descriptions are for the incorrect tyres
Thanks, fixed.