Menu

The Best Snow Tyres for 2025/26

Jonathan Benson
Tested and written by Jonathan Benson
11 min read
Below are all the data points for the The Best Snow Tyres for 2025/26, 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.

Performance Overview

This radar chart shows relative performance across all test categories, with 100% representing the best performance in each category. Reference tires may have gaps where data is not available.

Reference Tyres: Reference tyres are highlighted with a yellow background and are included as benchmarks rather than competitive entries.
Michelin X Ice Snow
Continental WinterContact TS 870 (Reference)
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
Continental VikingContact 8
Marshal iZen KW31
Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 (Reference)

Quick Navigation

Dry Performance Overview

Dry Braking (M)

Spread: 5.20 M (12%) | Avg: 46.52 M

Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 45.3 M. The difference between best and worst was 6.8%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 4.2% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    43.4 M
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    45.3 M
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    45.6 M
  4. Marshal iZen KW31
    47.7 M
  5. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    48.5 M
  6. Michelin X Ice Snow
    48.6 M

Dry Handling (s)

Spread: 2.20 s (3.9%) | Avg: 58.30 s

Dry handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: All the tyres in the dry handling test finished less than 3% apart.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    56.8 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    58.1 s
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    58.4 s
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    58.5 s
  5. Michelin X Ice Snow
    59 s
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    59 s

Subj. Dry Handling ( Points)

Spread: 2.75 Points (22.9%) | Avg: 10.13 Points

Subjective Dry Handling Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 10 Points. The difference between best and worst was 7.5%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 20% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    12 Points
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    10 Points
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    10 Points
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    10 Points
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    9.5 Points
  6. Michelin X Ice Snow
    9.25 Points

Wet Performance Overview

Wet Braking (M)

Spread: 12.80 M (38.3%) | Avg: 41.30 M

Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 37.7 M. The difference between best and worst was 18.4%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 11.4% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    33.4 M
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    37.7 M
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    42.4 M
  4. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    43.7 M
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    44.4 M
  6. Michelin X Ice Snow
    46.2 M

Wet Handling (s)

Spread: 11.71 s (13.6%) | Avg: 93.13 s

Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 90.64 s. The difference between best and worst was 7.5%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 4.8% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    86.3 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    90.64 s
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    93.12 s
  4. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    93.51 s
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    97.2 s
  6. Michelin X Ice Snow
    98.01 s

Subj. Wet Handling ( Points)

Spread: 3.00 Points (25%) | Avg: 9.88 Points

Subjective Wet Handling Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 10 Points. The difference between best and worst was 10%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 20% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    12 Points
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    10 Points
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    9.75 Points
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    9.5 Points
  5. Michelin X Ice Snow
    9 Points
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    9 Points

Wet Circle (s)

Spread: 1.98 s (16%) | Avg: 13.47 s

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 13.02 s. The difference between best and worst was 9.1%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 5.2% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    12.34 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    13.02 s
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    13.44 s
  4. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    13.64 s
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    14.08 s
  6. Michelin X Ice Snow
    14.32 s

Straight Aqua (Km/H)

Spread: 29.80 Km/H (34.7%) | Avg: 62.50 Km/H

Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 with a result of 60.4 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 7%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 42.4% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    86 Km/H
  2. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    60.4 Km/H
  3. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    58.5 Km/H
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    57.3 Km/H
  5. Continental VikingContact 8
    56.6 Km/H
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    56.2 Km/H

Curved Aquaplaning (m/sec2)

Spread: 1.85 m/sec2 (55.1%) | Avg: 2.00 m/sec2

Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 with a result of 2.02 m/sec2. The difference between best and worst was 25.2%. The Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre] was 66.3% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    3.36 m/sec2
  2. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    2.02 m/sec2
  3. Marshal iZen KW31
    1.79 m/sec2
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    1.69 m/sec2
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    1.63 m/sec2
  6. Continental VikingContact 8
    1.51 m/sec2

Snow Performance Overview

Snow Braking (M)

Spread: 0.67 M (4.1%) | Avg: 16.75 M

Snow braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 with a result of 16.44 M. The difference between best and worst was 3.9%. The best competitive tyre was 0.4% better than Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre].
  1. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    16.44 M
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    16.51 M
  3. Michelin X Ice Snow
    16.67 M
  4. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    16.67 M
  5. Continental VikingContact 8
    16.81 M
  6. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    17.02 M
  7. Marshal iZen KW31
    17.11 M

Snow Traction (s)

Spread: 0.44 s (15.8%) | Avg: 3.08 s

Snow acceleration time (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental VikingContact 8 with a result of 3 s. The difference between best and worst was 5.7%. The Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre] was 7% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    2.79 s
  2. Continental VikingContact 8
    3 s
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    3.08 s
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    3.12 s
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    3.13 s
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    3.18 s
  7. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    3.23 s

Snow Handling (s)

Spread: 3.30 s (4.1%) | Avg: 81.12 s

Snow handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 with a result of 79.64 s. The difference between best and worst was 4%. The best competitive tyre was 2.2% better than Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre].
  1. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    79.64 s
  2. Continental VikingContact 8
    80.2 s
  3. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    80.64 s
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    81.06 s
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    81.44 s
  6. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    81.91 s
  7. Marshal iZen KW31
    82.94 s

Subj. Snow Handling ( Points)

Spread: 3.00 Points (30%) | Avg: 9.29 Points

Subjective Snow Handling Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 10 Points. The difference between best and worst was 15%.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    10 Points
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    10 Points
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    10 Points
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    10 Points
  5. Michelin X Ice Snow
    9.5 Points
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    8.5 Points
  7. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    7 Points

Snow Slalom (m/sec2)

Spread: 0.49 m/sec2 (13.4%) | Avg: 3.31 m/sec2

Lateral acceleration (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental VikingContact 8 with a result of 3.39 m/sec2. The difference between best and worst was 6.8%. The Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre] was 7.7% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    3.65 m/sec2
  2. Continental VikingContact 8
    3.39 m/sec2
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    3.31 m/sec2
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    3.27 m/sec2
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    3.25 m/sec2
  6. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    3.16 m/sec2
  7. Marshal iZen KW31
    3.16 m/sec2

Ice Performance Overview

Ice Braking (M)

Spread: 5.49 M (90%) | Avg: 8.04 M

Ice braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Michelin X Ice Snow with a result of 6.97 M. The difference between best and worst was 18.9%. The Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre] was 12.5% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    6.1 M
  2. Michelin X Ice Snow
    6.97 M
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    7.29 M
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    7.31 M
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    8.41 M
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    8.59 M
  7. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    11.59 M

Ice Traction (s)

Spread: 6.03 s (134.3%) | Avg: 7.17 s

Ice acceleration time (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Michelin X Ice Snow with a result of 6.46 s. The difference between best and worst was 21.2%. The Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre] was 30.5% better than the best competitive tyre.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    4.49 s
  2. Michelin X Ice Snow
    6.46 s
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    6.48 s
  4. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    6.5 s
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    7.54 s
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    8.2 s
  7. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    10.52 s

Ice Handling (s)

Spread: 4.71 s (8.6%) | Avg: 56.60 s

Ice handling time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 with a result of 54.53 s. The difference between best and worst was 4.9%. The best competitive tyre was 7.2% better than Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 [reference tyre].
  1. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    54.53 s
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    54.76 s
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    54.99 s
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    56.59 s
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    57.31 s
  6. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    58.77 s
  7. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    59.24 s

Subj. Ice Handling ( Points)

Spread: 1.50 Points (15%) | Avg: 9.43 Points

Subjective Ice Handling Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 10 Points. The difference between best and worst was 15%.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 Ref
    10 Points
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    10 Points
  3. Continental VikingContact 8
    10 Points
  4. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    9.5 Points
  5. Michelin X Ice Snow
    9 Points
  6. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    9 Points
  7. Marshal iZen KW31
    8.5 Points

Comfort Performance Overview

Subj. Comfort ( Points)

Spread: 0.75 Points (7.5%) | Avg: 9.75 Points

Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 with a result of 10 Points. The difference between best and worst was 7.5%.
  1. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    10 Points
  2. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    10 Points
  3. Michelin X Ice Snow
    9.75 Points
  4. Continental VikingContact 8
    9.75 Points
  5. Marshal iZen KW31
    9.25 Points

Noise (dB)

Spread: 2.70 dB (3.9%) | Avg: 70.30 dB

External noise in dB (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental VikingContact 8 with a result of 69.1 dB. The difference between best and worst was 3.8%. The best competitive tyre was 2% better than Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre].
  1. Continental VikingContact 8
    69.1 dB
  2. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    69.3 dB
  3. Michelin X Ice Snow
    69.6 dB
  4. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    70.5 dB
  5. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    71.5 dB
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    71.8 dB

Value Performance Overview

Rolling Resistance (kg / t)

Spread: 2.26 kg / t (31%) | Avg: 8.06 kg / t

Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental VikingContact 8 with a result of 7.29 kg / t. The difference between best and worst was 23.7%. The best competitive tyre was 12.1% better than Continental WinterContact TS 870 [reference tyre].
  1. Continental VikingContact 8
    7.29 kg / t
  2. Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5
    7.48 kg / t
  3. Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3
    7.59 kg / t
  4. Michelin X Ice Snow
    8.14 kg / t
  5. Continental WinterContact TS 870 Ref
    8.29 kg / t
  6. Marshal iZen KW31
    9.55 kg / t

Overall Findings

Based on the weighted scoring from all tests, here are the overall results:

Reference Tyres: Reference tyres (highlighted with yellow background) are included as benchmarks rather than competitive entries. They typically show as 0% in overall scoring as they are not part of the final ranking.
Position Tyre Score
Continental VikingContact 8 94.5%
2 Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3 94.2%
3 Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 93.3%
4 Michelin X Ice Snow 92%
5 Marshal iZen KW31 87.5%
- Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10 (Reference) 0%
- Continental WinterContact TS 870 (Reference) 0%

Test Winner

Marshal iZen KW31
Marshal iZen KW31

87.5%

Similar Tyre Tests

Show All winter tyre tests
2025 High Performance Winter Tyre Test
January 2026 275/35 R19 Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 7 tyres
2025 TUV Test of Pirelli Cinturato Winter 3 vs Rivals
October 2025 Pirelli Cinturato Winter 3 5 tyres
2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tyre Test
October 2025 235/45 R18 Continental VikingContact 8 20 tyres
2025 AZ Performance Winter Tyre Test
October 2025 245/45 R19 Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 10 tyres
2025 Autobild Winter Tyre Test
October 2025 225/40 R18 Michelin Pilot Alpin 5 22 tyres
2025 Winter Tyre Braking Test - 52 Sets!
October 2025 225/40 R18 Dunlop Winter Response 2 52 tyres

Discussion

9 comments
  1. Sam_ archived

    I was a bit suprised that Nokian updated the compond and it made me hesitate to buy them this year (last year I had a set of Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5, they were excelent tires.
    So after a couple of weeks, i ordered a set of Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3.
    The price were good in my region.
    Looking forward to see how they are.

    Thanks for a great winter review!

    #10424
  2. TomV archived

    Marketing is all this is. Look around, shop around. Read personal reviews. There are other brands at much cheaper prices. Stopped buying these ripoff brands long ago.

    #10380
  3. Hbh archived

    Would love to see the WS90 in this comparo as well for the north americans

    #10372
    1. TyreReviews Hbh archived

      Me too sadly we buy the tyres in europe where it's not sold.

      #10375
  4. 4cvg archived

    The dry test comments & graphs seem out of alignment.

    #10366
    1. TyreReviews 4cvg archived

      Which part, in the final results or the text around the dry graphs?

      #10371
        1. TyreReviews 4cvg archived

          I had a re-read and it seems to make sense to me, which bit don't you like?

          #10374
          1. 4cvg TyreReviews archived

            My bungle, I was forgetting that the Conti TS 870 wasn't part of the test proper.

            #10378