Comparison: Nokian WR Snowproof vs. Fulda Kristall Control HP2 vs. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 vs. Continental WinterContact TS 870

Upper-middle

Nokian

WR Snowproof

VS

1 mutual test(s) with detailed data

Also compare with

PILOT ALPIN 5

UltraGrip Performance 3

Winter

Test Profile

WR Snowproof

Kristall Control HP2

G-FORCE WINTER 2

WinterContact TS 870

Number of tests

14

25

23

17

Best position

#5

#2

#1

Average position

11.1

12.4

6.7

1.7

Latest test

2023

2025

Available sizes

60

54

107

80

Performance comparison

Wet Performance

54%

Nokian

WR Snowproof

61%

Fulda

Kristall Control HP2

74%

BFGoodrich

G-FORCE WINTER 2

85%

Continental

WinterContact TS 870

Wet Braking

Nokian WR Snowproof

46%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

46%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

63%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

79%

Wet Handling

Nokian WR Snowproof

50%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

57%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

81%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

81%

Wet Circle Cornering

Nokian WR Snowproof

57%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

50%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

73%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

81%

Aquaplaning Longitudinal

Nokian WR Snowproof

46%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

63%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

79%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

88%

Aquaplaning Cross

Nokian WR Snowproof

69%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

90%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

76%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

97%

Dry Performance

84%

Nokian

WR Snowproof

55%

Fulda

Kristall Control HP2

59%

BFGoodrich

G-FORCE WINTER 2

80%

Continental

WinterContact TS 870

Dry Braking

Nokian WR Snowproof

79%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

55%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

63%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

71%

Dry Handling

Nokian WR Snowproof

88%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

55%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

55%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

88%

Snow Performance

57%

Nokian

WR Snowproof

63%

Fulda

Kristall Control HP2

85%

BFGoodrich

G-FORCE WINTER 2

87%

Continental

WinterContact TS 870

Snow Braking

Nokian WR Snowproof

71%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

81%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

90%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

90%

Snow Traction

Nokian WR Snowproof

63%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

79%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

71%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

79%

Snow Handling

Nokian WR Snowproof

50%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

42%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

96%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

88%

Snow Circle Cornering

Nokian WR Snowproof

42%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

51%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

84%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

92%

Comfort & Noise

75%

Nokian

WR Snowproof

80%

Fulda

Kristall Control HP2

75%

BFGoodrich

G-FORCE WINTER 2

75%

Continental

WinterContact TS 870

Noise Exterior

Nokian WR Snowproof

78%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

69%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

78%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

78%

Ride Comfort

Nokian WR Snowproof

71%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

90%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

71%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

71%

Economy

85%

Nokian

WR Snowproof

85%

Fulda

Kristall Control HP2

64%

BFGoodrich

G-FORCE WINTER 2

89%

Continental

WinterContact TS 870

Rolling Resistance

Nokian WR Snowproof

91%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

73%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

56%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

82%

Mileage

Nokian WR Snowproof

79%

Fulda Kristall Control HP2

96%

BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2

71%

Continental WinterContact TS 870

96%

Tests used in comparison

Organization	Season	Year	Dimension
Autobild	Winter	2021	205/55 R16	View

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

View general comparison

Comparison: Nokian WR Snowproof vs. Fulda Kristall Control HP2 vs. BFGoodrich G-FORCE WINTER 2 vs. Continental WinterContact TS 870

WR Snowproof

Kristall Control HP2

G-FORCE WINTER 2

WinterContact TS 870

Test Profile

Performance comparison

Tests used in comparison

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison