Segment
1. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Upper-middle2. Giti Gitiwinter W2 Lowcost3. Viking WinTech Lowcost4. Laufenn i*Fit + LW31 Lowcost
Comparison: Giti Gitiwinter W2 vs. Viking WinTech vs. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 vs. Laufenn i*Fit + LW31
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
2. Giti Gitiwinter W2 13.773. Viking WinTech 20.83
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
2. Viking WinTech Recommended3. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Viking WinTech Conditionally recommended2. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Sufficient3. Giti Gitiwinter W2 Sufficient
Snow
(Overall rating)Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Offroad
(Overall rating)Ice
(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 | Winter | Wet | Dry | Enviromental impact | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1.7 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 1.7 | 2.7 | 1.6 | 1.3 |
| Giti GitiWinter W2 Rating: Satisfactory | 2.5 | 2.5 | 3.2 | 2.9 | 4.0 | 2.6 | 1.6 |
| Viking WinTech Rating: Satisfactory | 2.8 | 2.8 | 3.6 | 3.1 | 4.3 | 3.0 | 2.2 |
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Sufficient | 2.3 | 2.6 | 3.6 | 2.6 | 3.9 | 1.8 | 1.5 |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 31,4 | 29,2 | |||||
| Giti Gitiwinter W2 | 37,9 | 31,2 | |||||
| Viking WinTech | 36,0 | 31,0 | |||||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 | 36,9 | 31,4 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
