Winter tyre test 245/70 R16 for 2025
Test results
Overall performance ranking
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
82%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a41/b6a41e97440c7de513c36b54af95e4a87c86489e" alt="FALKEN logo"
57%
Dry
Weight in overall score:
20%
1.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a41/b6a41e97440c7de513c36b54af95e4a87c86489e" alt="FALKEN logo"
92%
2.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
77%
Dry braking
50%
1.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
93%
2.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
68%
Dry handling
50%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
85%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Dry driving behavior
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
85%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Safety
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
88%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Wet
Weight in overall score:
40%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
87%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a41/b6a41e97440c7de513c36b54af95e4a87c86489e" alt="FALKEN logo"
55%
Wet braking
20%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
96%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
61%
Wet handling
20%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
91%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Aquaplaning - longitudal
20%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
78%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
57%
Aquaplaning - cross
20%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
80%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
47%
Wet circle cornering
20%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
91%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Snow
Weight in overall score:
30%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
66%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a41/b6a41e97440c7de513c36b54af95e4a87c86489e" alt="FALKEN logo"
24%
Snow traction
33%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
67%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
32%
Snow braking
33%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
71%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
25%
Snow handling
33%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
59%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Snow cornering
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
62%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Comfort
Weight in overall score:
5%
1.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b6a41/b6a41e97440c7de513c36b54af95e4a87c86489e" alt="FALKEN logo"
69%
2.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
61%
Exterior noise
100%
1.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
69%
2.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
61%
Interior noise
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
63%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Comfort
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
73%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Economy
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d4f72/d4f7285603db79812cacee36e158df590700dd13" alt="Bridgestone logo"
85%
Rolling resistance
100%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
85%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data
Mileage
0%
1.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
56%
2.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
40%
Fuel efficiency
0%
1.
Bridgestone Blizzak LM-005
85%
2.
FALKEN EUROWINTER HS02
Not enough data