Large Winter Tire Test from UTAC — 2025
The Finnish organization UTAC Ivalo conducted a major tire test for the northern winter, comparing 14 studded and friction models in the popular 205/55 R16 size on ice, snow, wet and dry asphalt, using a Volkswagen Golf in the tests.
The test included mainly premium-level tires from brands such as Bridgestone, Continental, Goodyear, Michelin, and Nokian, as well as mid-range tires from Korean companies Kumho and Hankook, and budget-friendly Radar from the private brand line owned by the Singaporean company Omni United.
The following tires were tested:
studded:
friction Scandinavian type:
Radar Dimax Ice
According to the test results, two tire ratings were compiled: studded and friction. According to the experts, the difference between tires of the two categories is becoming smaller, and if the two best "friction" tires were included in the studded tire rating, they would have been able to share second place. At the same time, studded tires still have an advantage in complex conditions, namely on ice at near-zero temperatures, so, the testers conclude, non-studded premium-class tires can be recommended to owners of modern cars that move in relatively mild winter conditions, but if the maximum level of safety is needed, then "studs" are still needed, especially in the case of old cars and less experienced drivers.
Although premium-class friction tires are becoming more and more effective on ice, they still lag behind "studded" tires in terms of braking performance, which was also confirmed by the new test, in which the entire top of the rating is occupied by studded tires, and the best are Bridgestone and Kumho.
The same leaders were in the traction test on ice, and the worst in both disciplines were frictional Radar and Hankook.
In the snow braking efficiency test, the first places were taken by frictional Nokian and Continental, but some studded tires also showed excellent results, except for Kumho, which clearly lagged behind the rest.
The best traction on snow was shown by frictional Continental, and overall, all tires showed good results, except for non-studded Michelin.
On wet pavement, the shortest braking distance is provided by studded tires, led by Pirelli, and among frictional tires, Michelin again showed the lowest result.
In the wet asphalt handling test, the time to complete a circle was measured, and here the leaders are frictional Goodyear and Hankook, and the greatest difficulties arose with studded Kumho.
Experts also assigned subjective ratings to tires for handling on a wet track, and they put two models from Goodyear in first place.
On dry asphalt, the car is stopped fastest by frictional Nokian and Falken, and the longest braking distance was recorded by studded Bridgestone.
The highest subjective ratings for handling on dry asphalt were received by frictional tires Nokian and Continental, and the last line was taken by tires Radar of the same category.
It is believed that studded tires are always noisier, and the test results do not refute this opinion, and the noisiest were Bridgestone and Continental.
Studded tire rating
The best studded tires were recognized as Nokian Hakkapeliitta 10, which work excellently on ice, maintaining predictability in any situation and responding accurately to the driver's actions (but without excessive sharpness of reactions). At the same time, on asphalt, the indicators leave much to be desired, and in situations that require a quick turn of the wheel, the tires respond slowly, although the behavior is generally stable and without unpleasant surprises.
Silver is awarded to Continental IceContact 3, which provide excellent traction on snow, making it easier to handle. The grip on ice is not the highest among the tested tires, but it is quite acceptable, and on asphalt, the tires behave confidently and logically, which means Continental has a good balance of characteristics.
Goodyear UltraGrip Arctic 2 also did not allow themselves obvious weaknesses, and the tires showed themselves especially well on snow, while on ice, it would be possible to improve lateral stability, but in general, the behavior of the tires is stable, and on asphalt, high traction helps the tires to effectively cope with extreme situations.
Michelin X-Ice North 4 takes fourth place, which on ice has high longitudinal traction combined with inaccurate reactions to steering wheel turns. On snow, the tires also respond relatively slowly to the driver's actions, but they maintain good traction on the rear axle, and on asphalt, the situation is worse, and when maneuvering, there is a noticeable tendency to skid, which makes it difficult to bypass obstacles — at the same time, the traction of the rear tires remains stable.
On ice, Bridgestone Blizzak Spike 3 outperformed all competitors in traction and acceleration tests, but in complex situations, inaccuracy of handling appears, and the rear tires can easily start sliding. On snow, the tires behave confidently, despite the generally not very high level of traction, and on asphalt, they showed the worst results: reactions are slowed down, and it is difficult to feel the achievement of the traction limit, and on wet pavement, there is a tendency to skid when performing sharp maneuvers.
Pirelli Ice Zero 2 took the last place among premium tires, including due to the tendency to skid on ice, which can make handling difficult. On snow, traction during maneuvering is also not the most reliable, and on wet asphalt, the tires have low lateral stability during fast maneuvers. On dry pavement, Pirelli responds slowly to steering wheel turns, but the behavior is generally stable.
Kumho WinterCraft ice Wi32, as expected, conceded to premium-class tires, and although longitudinal traction on ice is excellent, in turns, the grip is weaker, and at high speed, a tendency to skid appears. On snow, Kumho behaves confidently, despite a certain inaccuracy of handling, and the characteristics on asphalt were recognized as mediocre, since the front tires easily lose traction on both wet and dry pavement.
Friction tire rating
The first place in the non-studded tire rating is occupied by Continental VikingContact 8, which function excellently on both ice and snow, while on wet asphalt, despite not the best sensitivity of handling, they do not present surprises and are not prone to sudden loss of traction. On dry pavement, reactions are also slowed down, but good ease of handling is provided.
Nokian Hakkapeliitta R5 also received very high ratings on ice and snow, and in the latter case, they have excellent lateral stability in extreme situations. On asphalt, Nokian has a slowed-down response, but overall, reliable behavior, which means that no significant drawbacks were found.
The top three are closed by Goodyear UltraGrip Ice 3, which are very effective on ice, but on snow, traction on the front axle can be lost at large steering wheel angles. On wet asphalt, Goodyear turned out to be the best in their class, as they provide a pleasant ease of handling and effectively cope with emergency maneuvers, and on dry pavement, the behavior is also logical and safe.
Hankook Winter i*cept IZ3 is ranked one line below, which generally work effectively on ice and snow, but in terms of maximum traction, they slightly lag behind the leaders. In addition, on the icy surface, there is a possibility of skidding in an emergency situation. On wet pavement, the indicators are good, and on dry pavement, the sensitivity of handling deteriorates, but the tires behave predictably.
Falken Winterpeak F-Snow 1 from the Japanese company Sumitomo coped well with ice tests, and when making an emergency bypass, they do not have a tendency to sudden skidding, but on snow, the behavior of the tires is unstable, and skidding can start sharply on both the front and rear axles. On asphalt, Falken has slow and inaccurate reactions to steering wheel turns, as well as a tendency to skid in complex situations.
Michelin X-Ice Snow, which took sixth place, this time lagged behind other premium-class tires, and the reason was unbalanced characteristics: if the longitudinal traction on ice is excellent, then the transverse one is noticeably weaker, due to which there is a noticeable tendency to skid when performing sharp maneuvers. On snow, reactions are slowed down, but the tires behave predictably, while on asphalt, both dry and wet, Michelin has an obvious deficit of traction, which worsens handling and reduces the level of safety.
Although the traction on ice of Radar Dimax Ice tires is generally worse than that of tires in higher positions, they still do not present surprises and are able to provide good stability in a sharp turn. On snow, the behavior is also logical, but under load, skidding can start on the front axle, and on asphalt, Radar has an obviously insufficient level of traction, which makes handling difficult and increases the braking distance.