18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Ceat WinterDrive vs. Kumho WinterCraft WP52+ vs. Hankook ION Evo vs. Falken e.Ziex

Test Profile

Ceat
WinterDrive
Kumho
WinterCraft WP52+
Hankook
ION Evo
Falken
e.Ziex
Number of tests
4
3
1
3
Best position
#10
#4
#1
#2
Average position
17.0
4.3
1.0
3.7
Latest test
2025
2025
2025
2025
Available sizes
37
97
64
34

Wet

Wet
Ceat WinterDrive
27%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
79%
Hankook ION Evo
89%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Aquaplaning - cross
Ceat WinterDrive
9%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
66%
Hankook ION Evo
87%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Wet braking
Ceat WinterDrive
25%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
84%
Hankook ION Evo
97%
Falken e.Ziex
87%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Ceat WinterDrive
2%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
72%
Hankook ION Evo
77%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Wet circle cornering
Ceat WinterDrive
55%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
81%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
77%
Wet handling
Ceat WinterDrive
51%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
86%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
69%

Snow

Snow
Ceat WinterDrive
54%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
81%

Costs

Costs
Ceat WinterDrive
70%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
71%
Hankook ION Evo
71%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Mileage
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
69%
Hankook ION Evo
82%
Falken e.Ziex
60%
Rolling resistance
Ceat WinterDrive
65%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
69%
Hankook ION Evo
69%
Falken e.Ziex
95%

Dry

Dry
Ceat WinterDrive
73%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
78%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
85%
Dry braking
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
84%
Hankook ION Evo
91%
Falken e.Ziex
88%
Dry handling
Ceat WinterDrive
73%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
72%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Falken e.Ziex
81%

Comfort

Comfort
Ceat WinterDrive
78%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
72%
Hankook ION Evo
72%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Exterior noise
Ceat WinterDrive
78%
Kumho WinterCraft WP52+
72%
Hankook ION Evo
66%
Falken e.Ziex
78%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison