Segment
1. Vredestein Wintrac Pro Premium2. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Upper-middle3. Kleber Quadraxer 3 Upper-middle4. Avon ZV7 Lowcost
Comparison: Kumho WinterCraft WP52 vs. Vredestein Wintrac Pro vs. Kleber Quadraxer 3 vs. Avon ZV7
Number of sizes available
1. Avon ZV7 278
Number of tests
Best position in test
4. Avon ZV7 8.
Worst position in test
4. Avon ZV7 42.
Average position in tests
4. Avon ZV7 18.55
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Vredestein Wintrac Pro Exemplary2. Kleber Quadraxer 3 Highly recommended3. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Satisfactory4. Avon ZV7 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
2. Vredestein Wintrac Pro Recommended3. Avon ZV7 Sufficient4. Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Aquaplaning - cross
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Wet handling
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Wet circle cornering
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Wet braking according to EU label
Snow
(Overall rating)Snow traction
4. Avon ZV7 0%
Snow braking
4. Avon ZV7 0%
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
4. Avon ZV7 0%
Mileage
4. Avon ZV7 0%
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Offroad
(Overall rating)Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Dry handling
3. Avon ZV7 0%
Add to comparison
Mutual Tests Available
These tyres were tested together in 8 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
8
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Good | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Rating: Good | 2- | 2 | 2+ | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| 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 |
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Sufficient | 2.3 | 2.6 | 3.6 | 2.6 | 3.9 | 1.8 | 1.5 |
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Rating: Good | 2.4 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.9 | 2.0 | 2.1 |
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Good | |||||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Rating: Good | |||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 | |||||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro | |||||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Enviromental impact | Driving safety | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,8 | 2,0 | |||||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,8 | 2,7 | |||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Rating: Satisfactory | 2,3 | 2,7 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 31,4 | 29,2 | |||||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 | 36,9 | 31,4 | |||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro | 36,4 | 30,6 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on wet | Stopping distance on snow | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 32,8 | 25,4 | |||||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 | 35,9 | 27,3 | |||||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro | 36,9 | 26,3 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Snow | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 2+ | 2+ | 2+ | |||
| Kumho WinterCraft WP52 Rating: Satisfactory | 3+ | 2 | 2- | 2 | |||
| Vredestein Wintrac Pro Rating: Good | 2- | 2 | 2+ | 3+ | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
