Segment
1. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Premium2. Vredestein Snowtrac 5 Premium3. Kleber Krisalp HP2 Upper-middle4. Uniroyal MS plus 77 Upper-middle5. Nokian WR D4 Upper-middle6. Barum Polaris 3 Lowcost
Comparison: Kleber Krisalp HP2 vs. Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 vs. Barum Polaris 3 vs. Uniroyal MS plus 77 vs. Vredestein Snowtrac 5 vs. Nokian WR D4
Table of contents:
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
1. Nokian WR D4 14.
Average position in tests
1. Nokian WR D4 6.043. Barum Polaris 3 10.64. Uniroyal MS plus 77 11.215. Vredestein Snowtrac 5 12.58
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Barum Polaris 3 Exemplary2. Nokian WR D4 Highly recommended4. Vredestein Snowtrac 5 Satisfactory5. Uniroyal MS plus 77 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
2. Nokian WR D4 Recommended3. Barum Polaris 3 Satisfactory4. Uniroyal MS plus 77 Satisfactory5. Vredestein Snowtrac 5 Still recommended
Add to comparison
Mutual Tests Available
These tyres were tested together in 5 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
5
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1- | 2 | 2+ | 1 | |||
| Kleber Krisalp HP2 Rating: - | 3+ | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2 | 3+ | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Barum Polaris 3 Rating: - | 2 | 3+ | 2+ | 2+ | |||
| Uniroyal MS plus 77 Rating: - | 2- | 3 | 1- | 2+ | |||
| Vredestein Snowtrac 5 Rating: - | 3+ | 2 | 2- | 2- | |||
| Nokian WR D4 Rating: - | 2 | 2- | 2+ | 2- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 25 | |||||
| Kleber Krisalp HP2 | 38,9 | 26,4 | |||||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 38,5 | 25,9 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 3 | 37,2 | 26,1 | |||||
| Uniroyal MS plus 77 | 39,1 | 25,7 | |||||
| Vredestein Snowtrac 5 | 38,9 | 27,0 | |||||
| Nokian WR D4 | 37,3 | 26,0 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,8 | 1,9 | 1,7 | 2,2 | 2,8 | 1 | 1,5 |
| Kleber Krisalp HP2 Rating: - | 4,6 | 2,2 | 2,3 | 2,7 | 4,4 | 1,5 | 2,0 |
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2,8 | 2,6 | 1,9 | 2,9 | 3,6 | 2,5 | 2,0 |
| Barum Polaris 3 Rating: - | 3,4 | 2,2 | 2,1 | 2,8 | 3,6 | 1,5 | 2,0 |
| Uniroyal MS plus 77 Rating: - | 2,7 | 3,3 | 1,7 | 2,9 | 3,7 | 2,5 | 2,0 |
| Vredestein Snowtrac 5 Rating: - | 2,7 | 2,3 | 2,6 | 2,6 | 3,6 | 2,5 | 2,4 |
| Nokian WR D4 Rating: - | 2,7 | 2,4 | 2,4 | 2,5 | 3,8 | 2,5 | 2,0 |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 36,8 | 27,7 | |||||
| Kleber Krisalp HP2 | 42,9 | 28,7 | |||||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 | 43,4 | 28,1 | |||||
| Barum Polaris 3 | 40,8 | 28,6 | |||||
| Uniroyal MS plus 77 | 41,7 | 28,6 | |||||
| Vredestein Snowtrac 5 | 44,8 | - | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1 | 2+ | 1 | 1 | |||
| Kleber Krisalp HP2 Rating: - | 3 | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Bridgestone Blizzak LM-001 Rating: - | 2- | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Barum Polaris 3 Rating: Exemplary | 2- | 2 | 2+ | 2- | |||
| Uniroyal MS plus 77 Rating: - | 2- | 3+ | 1- | 2- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
