Segment
1. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Upper-middle2. Apollo Alnac 4G Winter Lowcost3. Tristar Snowpower HP Lowcost
Comparison: Apollo Alnac 4G Winter vs. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 vs. Tristar Snowpower HP
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
2. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
2. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Snow
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Add to comparison
Mutual Tests Available
These tyres were tested together in 2 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
2
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 1 | 2+ | |||
| Apollo Alnac 4G Winter Rating: Good | 2 | 2- | 2 | 2 | |||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 3 | 2+ | 3 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34.6 | 28.9 | |||||
| Apollo Alnac 4G Winter | 36.4 | 30.6 | |||||
| Kumho Wintercraft WP52 | 34.6 | 30.3 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
