For 2024 ADAC have tested two sizes of winter tyres. The below test covers the 16" version. There's nothing particularly shocking in the overall results, so enjoy the data, which includes wear, below!

Dry

The Falken EUROWINTER HS02 performed best in dry braking, stopping in 43.3 meters. The worst performer was the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22, taking 46.5 meters to stop - a difference of 3.2 meters. Most tyres clustered between 44-46 meters, with the top 3 (Falken, Nokian, and Goodyear) showing noticeably shorter braking distances.

Wet

In wet braking, there was a tie for first place between the Continental WinterContact TS 870 and Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2, both stopping in 35.1 meters. The worst performer was the Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 at 40.7 meters - a significant 5.6 meter difference. The top 5 tyres were closely grouped within 0.8 meters of each other, while there was a clear performance drop-off for the bottom 3 tyres.

On concrete in wet conditions, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best, stopping in 38.5 meters. The Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 again performed worst, taking 46.6 meters - a substantial 8.1 meter difference. There was a noticeable performance gap between the top 4 tyres and the rest of the field.

The Hankook Winter I cept RS3 performed best in straight aquaplaning, maintaining control up to 84.4 km/h. The worst performer was the Zeetex WH 1000 at 68.9 km/h - a significant 15.5 km/h difference. There was a clear performance divide, with the top 7 tyres maintaining control above 80 km/h, while the bottom 5 dropped below 77 km/h.

In curved aquaplaning, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best with 3.7 m/sec2 of lateral acceleration. The Zeetex WH 1000 and Winrun Winter max A1 WR22 tied for worst at 2.4 m/sec2 - a difference of 1.3 m/sec2. There was a notable performance gap between the top 5 tyres and the rest of the field.

Snow

The Continental WinterContact TS 870 and Dunlop Winter Sport 5 tied for best snow braking performance, stopping in 9.9 meters. The Zeetex WH 1000 and Falken EUROWINTER HS02 tied for worst at 11.0 meters - a difference of 1.1 meters. Most tyres performed relatively closely, with only 1.1 meters separating the best from worst.

The Michelin Alpin 6 provided the best snow traction at 236 N. The Zeetex WH 1000 performed worst at 208 N - a difference of 28 N. There was a clear performance divide, with the top 9 tyres providing over 229 N of traction, while the bottom 3 dropped below 222 N.

Ice

On ice, the Continental WinterContact TS 870 performed best, stopping in 18.3 meters. The Nokian Snowproof 2 performed worst at 21.6 meters - a difference of 3.3 meters. There was a notable performance gap between the top 6 tyres and the rest of the field.

Comfort

The Vredestein Wintrac was the quietest tyre at 70.4 dB. The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 was the noisiest at 73.0 dB - a difference of 2.6 dB. Most tyres performed relatively closely, with only 2.6 dB separating the quietest from the noisiest.

Value

The Michelin Alpin 6 showed the best projected tread life at 53,200 km. The Vredestein Wintrac had the shortest projected life at 33,400 km - a significant difference of 19,800 km. There was a wide range of performance, with clear tiers of durability among the tested tyres.

Several tyres tied for best fuel consumption at 5.1 l/100km. The worst performers (including Zeetex WH 1000 and Winrun Winter max A1 WR22) consumed 5.2 l/100km - a minor 0.1 l/100km difference. Overall, fuel consumption was very similar across all tested tyres.

The Hankook Winter I cept RS3 and Michelin Alpin 6 tied for best (lowest) abrasion at 48 mg/km/t. The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 had the highest abrasion at 79 mg/km/t - a significant difference of 31 mg/km/t. There was a wide range of performance, with clear groupings of tyres at different abrasion levels.

Results

1st: Continental WinterContact TS 870
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.4kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 5th 44.7 M 43.3 M +1.4 M 96.87% Wet Braking 1st 35.1 M 100% Wet Braking - Concrete 1st 38.5 M 100% Straight Aqua 2nd 84 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -0.4 Km/H 99.53% Curved Aquaplaning 1st 3.7 m/sec2 100% Snow Braking 1st 9.9 M 100% Snow Traction 9th 229 N 236 N -7 N 97.03% Ice Braking 1st 18.3 M 100% Noise 4th 71.1 dB 70.4 dB +0.7 dB 99.02% Wear 7th 43800 KM 53200 KM -9400 KM 82.33% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 5th 59 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +11 mg/km/t 81.36% The Continental WinterContact TS 870 tyre performs excellently in safety tests across all road surfaces. It scores particularly well in wet and winter conditions, offering good handling, short braking distances, and high safety reserves. The tyre also has a good environmental rating due to its durability, low wear, light weight, and fuel efficiency. Read Reviews    Buy from £124.49
2nd: Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
205/55 R16 Weight: 8kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 3rd 44.2 M 43.3 M +0.9 M 97.96% Wet Braking 4th 35.5 M 35.1 M +0.4 M 98.87% Wet Braking - Concrete 4th 39.2 M 38.5 M +0.7 M 98.21% Straight Aqua 3rd 83.1 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -1.3 Km/H 98.46% Curved Aquaplaning 2nd 3.6 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.1 m/sec2 97.3% Snow Braking 4th 10.1 M 9.9 M +0.2 M 98.02% Snow Traction 6th 231 N 236 N -5 N 97.88% Ice Braking 11th 21.2 M 18.3 M +2.9 M 86.32% Noise 5th 71.2 dB 70.4 dB +0.8 dB 98.88% Wear 3rd 49100 KM 53200 KM -4100 KM 92.29% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 3rd 57 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +9 mg/km/t 84.21% The Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3 tyre demonstrates varied capabilities across different road conditions. While it performs adequately on dry surfaces with good steering feel but some weaknesses in borderline situations, it excels on wet roads with above-average braking, aquaplaning resistance, and handling. In winter conditions, it shows strong handling performance and slightly above-average braking, but struggles on ice. The tyre's environmental impact is positive, with good projected mileage, wear ratings, and fuel efficiency. Overall, the UltraGrip Performance 3 is most impressive on wet and general winter roads, with room for improvement on dry surfaces and icy conditions, making it a well-rounded option with particular strengths in challenging weather. Read Reviews    Buy from £109.99
3rd: Michelin Alpin 6
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.2kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 7th 45.5 M 43.3 M +2.2 M 95.16% Wet Braking 3rd 35.4 M 35.1 M +0.3 M 99.15% Wet Braking - Concrete 3rd 39.1 M 38.5 M +0.6 M 98.47% Straight Aqua 8th 77.2 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -7.2 Km/H 91.47% Curved Aquaplaning 8th 3.2 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.5 m/sec2 86.49% Snow Braking 8th 10.3 M 9.9 M +0.4 M 96.12% Snow Traction 1st 236 N 100% Ice Braking 10th 20.8 M 18.3 M +2.5 M 87.98% Noise 9th 71.9 dB 70.4 dB +1.5 dB 97.91% Wear 1st 53200 KM 100% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 1st 48 mg/km/t 100% The Michelin Alpin 6 tyre demonstrates good overall performance across various driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback and precise handling with adequate safety reserves, though its braking distance is slightly below average. In wet conditions, it excels in braking tests and performs well in aquaplaning resistance and handling. The tyre's best performance is on winter roads, with average to above-average results in braking and traction, and very good handling due to its safety reserves and precise control. Ice braking is rated as satisfactory. Environmentally, the Alpin 6 stands out with the highest mileage and lowest wear in the test, as well as good efficiency due to its low weight and fuel consumption. However, it's slightly noisier than average. Overall, the Michelin Alpin 6 is a well-rounded tyre with particular strengths in winter conditions and environmental performance. Read Reviews
4th: Hankook Winter I cept RS3
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.4kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 9th 45.7 M 43.3 M +2.4 M 94.75% Wet Braking 9th 37.1 M 35.1 M +2 M 94.61% Wet Braking - Concrete 9th 42.1 M 38.5 M +3.6 M 91.45% Straight Aqua 1st 84.4 Km/H 100% Curved Aquaplaning 2nd 3.6 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.1 m/sec2 97.3% Snow Braking 3rd 10 M 9.9 M +0.1 M 99% Snow Traction 4th 233 N 236 N -3 N 98.73% Ice Braking 6th 19.8 M 18.3 M +1.5 M 92.42% Noise 8th 71.7 dB 70.4 dB +1.3 dB 98.19% Wear 2nd 52800 KM 53200 KM -400 KM 99.25% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 1st 48 mg/km/t 100% The Hankook Winter icept RS3 tyre shows mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback, precise handling, and good safety reserves during sudden evasive maneuvers, though its braking distance is slightly longer than average. Its performance on wet roads is less impressive, barely missing a good rating. While it handles aquaplaning well, it struggles with wet braking and handling, showing weak grip and a tendency to oversteer. The tyre performs well on winter roads, with above-average braking and acceleration on snow, and safe, precise handling on snowy courses. Ice braking performance is average. Environmentally, the tyre scores well with above-average mileage, very low wear, light weight, and low fuel consumption. However, it's noted that production residues on new tyres unnecessarily end up in nature during the first few kilometers of use. Overall, the Hankook Winter icept RS3 excels in dry and winter conditions but has room for improvement on wet surfaces. Read Reviews
5th: Dunlop Winter Sport 5
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.2kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 8th 45.6 M 43.3 M +2.3 M 94.96% Wet Braking 10th 37.2 M 35.1 M +2.1 M 94.35% Wet Braking - Concrete 8th 41.7 M 38.5 M +3.2 M 92.33% Straight Aqua 9th 76.5 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -7.9 Km/H 90.64% Curved Aquaplaning 2nd 3.6 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.1 m/sec2 97.3% Snow Braking 1st 9.9 M 100% Snow Traction 2nd 235 N 236 N -1 N 99.58% Ice Braking 7th 20 M 18.3 M +1.7 M 91.5% Noise 12th 73 dB 70.4 dB +2.6 dB 96.44% Wear 4th 48700 KM 53200 KM -4500 KM 91.54% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 3rd 57 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +9 mg/km/t 84.21% The Dunlop Winter Sport 5 tyre shows mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it struggles with precision and steering feedback, requiring frequent corrections to maintain the desired path. It also shows weaknesses in sudden evasive maneuvers and has below-average dry braking distances. Performance on wet roads is marginally good, with satisfactory results in braking and longitudinal aquaplaning, but excelling in lateral aquaplaning resistance and handling. The tyre's strongest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves clearly good ratings. It offers some of the shortest braking distances on snow, above-average traction, and excellent handling with good combination of longitudinal and lateral forces. Ice braking narrowly misses a good rating. Environmentally, the Winter Sport 5 scores well, offering above-average mileage, low wear, and good efficiency due to its low weight and fuel consumption. Overall, the Dunlop Winter Sport 5 excels in winter conditions and environmental performance but has notable room for improvement on dry surfaces. Read Reviews    Buy from £89.40
6th: Nokian Snowproof 2
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.2kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 2nd 44.1 M 43.3 M +0.8 M 98.19% Wet Braking 7th 36.4 M 35.1 M +1.3 M 96.43% Wet Braking - Concrete 7th 41 M 38.5 M +2.5 M 93.9% Straight Aqua 5th 80.7 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -3.7 Km/H 95.62% Curved Aquaplaning 2nd 3.6 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.1 m/sec2 97.3% Snow Braking 6th 10.2 M 9.9 M +0.3 M 97.06% Snow Traction 10th 222 N 236 N -14 N 94.07% Ice Braking 12th 21.6 M 18.3 M +3.3 M 84.72% Noise 11th 72.5 dB 70.4 dB +2.1 dB 97.1% Wear 9th 38500 KM 53200 KM -14700 KM 72.37% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 7th 62 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +14 mg/km/t 77.42% The Nokian Tyres Snowproof 2 demonstrates mixed performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it shows slight weaknesses in precision and steering feedback, requiring minor corrections to maintain the desired path. Its performance in sudden evasive maneuvers is not entyrely convincing, with a tendency to oversteer. However, it achieves good dry braking distances. On wet surfaces, the tyre performs well overall, with good results in aquaplaning resistance and handling, though narrowly missing a good rating in wet braking. Its weakest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves good snow braking but only satisfactory results in traction and handling due to average grip levels and suboptimal force combination. Ice braking is below average. Environmentally, the tyre's performance is mixed, with below-average projected mileage but good wear resistance and efficiency due to low weight and fuel consumption. Overall, the Nokian Tyres Snowproof 2 excels on wet roads but has room for improvement on dry and winter surfaces, as well as in terms of longevity. Read Reviews
7th: Falken EUROWINTER HS02
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.3kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 1st 43.3 M 100% Wet Braking 5th 35.9 M 35.1 M +0.8 M 97.77% Wet Braking - Concrete 5th 40.2 M 38.5 M +1.7 M 95.77% Straight Aqua 7th 80.4 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -4 Km/H 95.26% Curved Aquaplaning 6th 3.3 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.4 m/sec2 89.19% Snow Braking 11th 11 M 9.9 M +1.1 M 90% Snow Traction 11th 216 N 236 N -20 N 91.53% Ice Braking 3rd 19.4 M 18.3 M +1.1 M 94.33% Noise 3rd 71 dB 70.4 dB +0.6 dB 99.15% Wear 8th 42300 KM 53200 KM -10900 KM 79.51% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 8th 71 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +23 mg/km/t 67.61% The Falken Eurowinter HS02 tyre shows varied performance across different driving conditions. On dry roads, it excels with the best rating in the test, offering precise steering, good safety reserves, and the shortest braking distance. Wet performance is marginally good, with above-average results in braking and aquaplaning resistance, though it narrowly misses a good rating in handling due to slightly lower precision. The tyre's weakest performance is on winter roads, where it achieves only satisfactory results in braking, traction, and handling, with early tendencies to under- and oversteer. Ice braking is average. Environmentally, the tyre narrowly misses a good rating despite good projected mileage, wear resistance, and efficiency. Average noise levels and only adequate sustainability in its Turkish production prevent a higher environmental score. Overall, the Falken Eurowinter HS02 performs best on dry and wet roads but struggles in winter conditions, with room for improvement in environmental aspects. Read Reviews    Buy from £79.45
8th: Zeetex WH 1000
205/55 R16 Weight: 9kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 11th 46 M 43.3 M +2.7 M 94.13% Wet Braking 11th 39.7 M 35.1 M +4.6 M 88.41% Wet Braking - Concrete 11th 44.3 M 38.5 M +5.8 M 86.91% Straight Aqua 12th 68.9 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -15.5 Km/H 81.64% Curved Aquaplaning 11th 2.4 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -1.3 m/sec2 64.86% Snow Braking 11th 11 M 9.9 M +1.1 M 90% Snow Traction 12th 208 N 236 N -28 N 88.14% Ice Braking 7th 20 M 18.3 M +1.7 M 91.5% Noise 7th 71.6 dB 70.4 dB +1.2 dB 98.32% Wear 6th 44100 KM 53200 KM -9100 KM 82.89% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 9th 72 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +24 mg/km/t 66.67% The Zeetex WH 1000 tyre demonstrates below-average performance across most driving conditions. On dry roads, it offers only adequate steering feedback and precision, requiring frequent corrections. It tends to oversteer during dynamic maneuvers, and its braking distance is longer than average. Wet performance is also rated as merely adequate, with satisfactory results in braking and aquaplaning tests but weak handling due to low grip and poor combination of longitudinal and lateral forces. Winter performance is slightly better, rated as satisfactory overall. Snow and ice braking narrowly miss good ratings, but snow traction is clearly satisfactory, and handling is again rated as just adequate due to early under- and oversteering tendencies and lack of precision. Environmentally, the tyre achieves a satisfactory rating. It scores well in projected mileage and wear resistance but misses a good efficiency rating due to its weight. Sustainability is impacted by rubber protrusions on new tyres. Overall, the Zeetex WH 1000, produced in China, shows significant room for improvement across all performance aspects, particularly in dry and wet conditions. Read Reviews
9th: GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.8kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 10th 45.8 M 43.3 M +2.5 M 94.54% Wet Braking 8th 36.9 M 35.1 M +1.8 M 95.12% Wet Braking - Concrete 10th 42.3 M 38.5 M +3.8 M 91.02% Straight Aqua 10th 76.1 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -8.3 Km/H 90.17% Curved Aquaplaning 10th 2.9 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.8 m/sec2 78.38% Snow Braking 8th 10.3 M 9.9 M +0.4 M 96.12% Snow Traction 8th 230 N 236 N -6 N 97.46% Ice Braking 9th 20.3 M 18.3 M +2 M 90.15% Noise 6th 71.3 dB 70.4 dB +0.9 dB 98.74% Wear 10th 37100 KM 53200 KM -16100 KM 69.74% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 9th 72 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +24 mg/km/t 66.67% The GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo tyre demonstrates mixed performance across different driving conditions, with notable weaknesses on dry roads. It struggles with steering precision and feedback on dry surfaces, requiring frequent corrections and showing a tendency to oversteer in dynamic maneuvers. Wet performance is slightly better, rated as clearly satisfactory overall, though handling remains a weak point due to low grip and imprecise control. The tyre's best performance is in winter conditions, where it nearly achieves a good rating with strong snow braking and traction, but still shows room for improvement in handling precision and combining longitudinal and lateral forces. Environmentally, the tyre receives a satisfactory rating, with good wear resistance and efficiency but only satisfactory projected mileage. Produced in China, its sustainability rating is adequate. Overall, while the GT Radial WinterPro2 Evo shows some strengths in winter conditions, it requires significant improvements across all performance aspects, particularly in dry conditions and environmental factors. Read Reviews
10th: Vredestein Wintrac
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.3kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 4th 44.5 M 43.3 M +1.2 M 97.3% Wet Braking 6th 36.1 M 35.1 M +1 M 97.23% Wet Braking - Concrete 6th 40.3 M 38.5 M +1.8 M 95.53% Straight Aqua 4th 81 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -3.4 Km/H 95.97% Curved Aquaplaning 6th 3.3 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.4 m/sec2 89.19% Snow Braking 10th 10.5 M 9.9 M +0.6 M 94.29% Snow Traction 2nd 235 N 236 N -1 N 99.58% Ice Braking 3rd 19.4 M 18.3 M +1.1 M 94.33% Noise 1st 70.4 dB 100% Wear 12th 33400 KM 53200 KM -19800 KM 62.78% Fuel Consumption 1st 5.1 l/100km 100% Abrasion 9th 72 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +24 mg/km/t 66.67% The Vredestein Wintrac tyre receives mixed ratings for driving safety. It performs adequately on dry roads, narrowly misses a good rating on wet surfaces, and earns a clear "good" rating on winter roads. On dry surfaces, it lacks precision and requires frequent steering corrections. In wet conditions, it excels in braking and aquaplaning resistance but falls short in handling. The tyre performs well on winter roads, offering good traction, excellent handling, and strong performance in icy conditions. However, its environmental assessment is only satisfactory, with a mediocre predicted lifespan. The tyre's efficiency is praised for its low fuel consumption and light weight. Read Reviews
11th: Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2
205/55 R16 Weight: 8.5kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 6th 45.2 M 43.3 M +1.9 M 95.8% Wet Braking 1st 35.1 M 100% Wet Braking - Concrete 2nd 39 M 38.5 M +0.5 M 98.72% Straight Aqua 6th 80.6 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -3.8 Km/H 95.5% Curved Aquaplaning 9th 3 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -0.7 m/sec2 81.08% Snow Braking 6th 10.2 M 9.9 M +0.3 M 97.06% Snow Traction 4th 233 N 236 N -3 N 98.73% Ice Braking 2nd 19.1 M 18.3 M +0.8 M 95.81% Noise 2nd 70.9 dB 70.4 dB +0.5 dB 99.29% Wear 11th 34000 KM 53200 KM -19200 KM 63.91% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 12th 79 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +31 mg/km/t 60.76% The Pirelli Cinturato Winter 2 tyre receives mixed ratings for driving safety. It performs adequately on dry roads, earning only a satisfactory rating due to insufficient steering precision and a tendency to oversteer during dynamic maneuvers. However, it achieves good ratings on both wet and winter roads. On wet surfaces, it excels in braking and longitudinal aquaplaning resistance, narrowly missing good ratings in lateral aquaplaning and handling. The tyre performs well on winter roads, with good braking on snow and ice, excellent snow traction, and very good handling characteristics. Its environmental assessment falls short of a good rating, with satisfactory wear resistance and only average predicted lifespan. However, the tyre scores well in efficiency, particularly due to its low weight. Read Reviews    Buy from £105.99
12th: Winrun Winter max A1 WR22
205/55 R16 Weight: 9.2kgs 3PMSF: yes	Test # Result Best Difference % Dry Braking 12th 46.5 M 43.3 M +3.2 M 93.12% Wet Braking 12th 40.7 M 35.1 M +5.6 M 86.24% Wet Braking - Concrete 12th 46.6 M 38.5 M +8.1 M 82.62% Straight Aqua 11th 69 Km/H 84.4 Km/H -15.4 Km/H 81.75% Curved Aquaplaning 11th 2.4 m/sec2 3.7 m/sec2 -1.3 m/sec2 64.86% Snow Braking 4th 10.1 M 9.9 M +0.2 M 98.02% Snow Traction 6th 231 N 236 N -5 N 97.88% Ice Braking 3rd 19.4 M 18.3 M +1.1 M 94.33% Noise 10th 72 dB 70.4 dB +1.6 dB 97.78% Wear 5th 47000 KM 53200 KM -6200 KM 88.35% Fuel Consumption 7th 5.2 l/100km 5.1 l/100km +0.1 l/100km 98.08% Abrasion 6th 61 mg/km/t 48 mg/km/t +13 mg/km/t 78.69% The Winrun Winter-max A1 WR22 tyre receives a poor overall safety rating, primarily due to significant weaknesses on wet surfaces. On dry roads, it offers good steering feedback and borderline behavior, though with longer than average braking distances. Its performance on wet roads is inadequate, with early understeer and oversteer tendencies, poor grip, and barely satisfactory aquaplaning resistance. However, the tyre performs well on winter roads, demonstrating good braking and traction on snow and ice, as well as precise handling on snowy surfaces. In terms of environmental impact, the Chinese-made tyre narrowly misses a good rating. It scores well in predicted mileage and wear resistance but only achieves a satisfactory efficiency rating due to its high weight. Read Reviews