Looking for a comparison of Barum Polaris 5 to tyres that are made in similar dimensions? Here you can find detailed information based on tests, reviews and manufacturer's data.
Both the Barum Polaris 5 and the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 occupy the same honest corner of the budget winter market — affordable tyres that do the seasonal job without pretending to be something they're not. But their strengths fall in different places. The Barum is the more balanced all-weather performer, holding its own in wet braking and offering the broader size range, while the Fulda is more of a dedicated snow and ice specialist with outstanding aquaplaning resistance but softer dry-road manners. Across ten direct head-to-head encounters, Barum edged the overall count six to four — but that headline doesn't capture how differently talented these two budget tyres really are.
Dry performance is where neither tyre covers itself in glory, but the Barum Polaris 5 holds a clear advantage. Its dry driving character is described as safe and composed, with dynamic handling that punches above its low-cost price point — a genuine surprise given its segment. The Fulda Kristall Control HP2, by contrast, consistently draws criticism for pronounced understeer in dry conditions and noticeably extended dry stopping distances; this is its most repeated test weakness across multiple years of evaluation. For drivers who regularly use their winter tyres on dry winter roads, this difference matters. The Barum isn't a precision instrument on dry tarmac either, but it is meaningfully less compromised than the Fulda when conditions are cold and clear rather than snowy.
Wet performance produces a more interesting split. Across six measured braking tests, the Barum averages 36.0m versus the Fulda's 36.6m — a small but consistent gap that echoes through the head-to-head record. The Fulda has historically suffered from extended wet stopping distances and a tendency to understeer in rain, and recent testing has flagged that its wet performance is aging relative to newer rivals. However, the Fulda lands an important counter-punch: its aquaplaning resistance is dramatically stronger, scoring 77.9 versus the Barum's 64.5 — one of the Polaris 5's most significant documented weaknesses. In heavy rain with standing water, the Fulda offers considerably more margin before losing contact with the road. The Barum's EU wet grip label of C-rated across its entire range also tells a story the Fulda's mix of B and C ratings partially improves upon. Both tyres understeer in the wet, but for drivers in flood-prone areas, the Fulda's aquaplaning composure is a genuine safety argument.
Snow is where the Fulda Kristall Control HP2 makes its strongest case. Its overall snow score of 82.1 outpaces the Barum's 76.1, and in the six measured snow braking tests the Fulda averages 27.3m versus 27.8m for the Barum — a margin that's small but consistent. Testing has praised the Fulda's high lateral guidance and traction on snow, and its ice lateral guidance score of 85 points to genuine competence on frozen surfaces too. The Barum Polaris 5 is no slouch — Barum explicitly positions it around excellent snow traction and short braking distances on snowy roads, and real owners with over 2,400 reviews broadly confirm it performs as a credible winter option. But when snow and ice are the primary concern, the Fulda's specialist focus gives it an edge. The Barum is the better pick if your winter driving is a mix of wet, dry, and occasional snow; the Fulda earns its place if proper winter conditions are the norm.
Comfort and economy both lean toward the Barum. Its rolling resistance is notably lower, its projected mileage score of 72.4 versus the Fulda's 62 suggests meaningfully longer tread life, and at highway speeds it is the quieter tyre — the Fulda draws consistent criticism for loud rolling noise above 100 km/h. The Barum also benefits from a significantly wider size range: 63 dimensions from R13 to R19 versus the Fulda's 40 from R15 upward, making it accessible to small city cars that the Fulda simply can't fit. For cost-conscious drivers watching fuel and replacement bills, the Barum's efficiency and longevity numbers make it the smarter long-term choice. The Fulda offers decent ride comfort in its own right, but the noise penalty at speed is real and repeatedly noted.
Both are respectable budget winter tyres, but they suit different buyers. The Barum Polaris 5 is the better all-rounder — more balanced across wet, dry and comfort, longer-lasting, quieter, and available in a wider range of sizes including smaller rims. Its predecessor the Barum Polaris 3 was already a solid performer, and the Polaris 5 builds on that reputation well. The Fulda Kristall Control HP2 earns its place for drivers who face regular snow and ice and are willing to accept softer dry and wet performance in exchange — its aquaplaning resistance and snow grip are genuine strengths that justify the trade-off in the right climate. If your winters are mild and mixed, buy the Barum. If you live somewhere that genuinely freezes, the Fulda's snow credentials make it worth the compromise.
1. Michelin ALPIN 6 Premium2. Nokian WR Snowproof Upper-middle3. Barum Polaris 5 Lowcost4. Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Lowcost5. Giti Gitiwinter W2 Lowcost6. Semperit Speed-Grip 5 Lowcost7. Barum Polaris 6 Lowcost8. Matador MP93 Nordicca Lowcost
1. Michelin ALPIN 6 4.354. Nokian WR Snowproof 11.076. Giti Gitiwinter W2 13.777. Barum Polaris 5 15.158. Matador MP93 Nordicca 23.75
1. Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Exemplary2. Michelin ALPIN 6 Exemplary3. Semperit Speed-Grip 5 Exemplary4. Barum Polaris 5 Good5. Barum Polaris 6 Good7. Nokian WR Snowproof Satisfactory8. Matador MP93 Nordicca Satisfactory
1. Michelin ALPIN 6 Good3. Barum Polaris 6 Good4. Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Satisfactory5. Nokian WR Snowproof Satisfactory6. Matador MP93 Nordicca Satisfactory7. Barum Polaris 5 Sufficient8. Giti Gitiwinter W2 Sufficient
These tyres were tested together in 10 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 1 | 2+ | |||
| Barum Polaris 5 Rating: Satisfactory | 3 | 3+ | 3 | 2 | |||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 3 | 3 | 3 | |||
| Giti Gitiwinter W2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2 | 2- | 2 | 2 | |||
| Semperit Speed-Grip 5 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | |||
| Michelin Alpin 6 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34.6 | 28.9 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 37.7 | 30.0 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 38.6 | 29.6 | |||||
| Giti GitiWinter W2 | 37.4 | 29.2 | |||||
| Semperit Speed-Grip 5 | 36.8 | 29.1 | |||||
| Michelin Alpin 6 | 36.2 | 29.7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2 | 2.1 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 Rating: Satisfactory | 2.3 | 3.4 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2 | 2.9 | |||||
| Michelin Alpin 6 Rating: Good | 2 | 2.3 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 31,4 | 29,2 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 35,6 | 31,0 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 37,4 | 30,7 | |||||
| Giti Gitiwinter W2 | 37,9 | 31,2 | |||||
| Semperit Speed-Grip 5 | 35,9 | 31,3 | |||||
| Matador MP93 Nordicca | 38,6 | - | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,8 | 25,4 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 37,5 | 26,9 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 36,8 | 26,3 | |||||
| Michelin Alpin 6 | 34,1 | 26,4 | |||||
| Matador MP93 Nordicca | 37,8 | ||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Rolling resistance | Wear | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 1 | 2+ | 1 | ||
| Barum Polaris 5 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 3+ | 2+ | 1- | 2+ | ||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 3+ | 2- | 2 | 1 | ||
| Michelin Alpin 6 Rating: Exemplary | 2 | 2 | 2+ | 2- | 1 | ||
| Nokian WR Snowproof Rating: Satisfactory | 3 | 2 | 2- | 1- | 2+ | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,1 | 27,3 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 36,1 | 28,8 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 36,8 | 28,6 | |||||
| Giti GitiWinter W2 | 38 | 29,1 | |||||
| Michelin Alpin 6 | 34,9 | 29,1 | |||||
| Nokian WR Snowproof | 36,5 | 29,2 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 1- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Barum Polaris 5 Rating: Good | 2- | 2 | 2 | 2- | |||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 Rating: Good | 2- | 2- | 2+ | 2+ | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 30,3 | 24,3 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 35,2 | 24,9 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 36,3 | 24,5 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 29,2 | 24 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 5 | 33,9 | 25 | |||||
| Fulda Kristall Control HP2 | 33,5 | 24,3 | |||||
| Michelin Alpin 6 | 30,4 | 24,7 | |||||
| Nokian WR Snowproof | 32,2 | 24,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
