Other Brands

Both the Kleber Krisalp HP3 and the Sava Eskimo HP2, are top budget winter tires, celebrated for their impressive performance on types of weather conditions. Though let’s see which one comes on top here.

Key Takeaway

Sava Eskimo HP2 excels in:

• Dry Traction: Thanks to a thicker middle section and a continuous middle strip for constant road contact, resulting in quicker stopping times.
• Wet Traction: Its innovative dual siping design ensures efficient water absorption and a robust grip on slightly dried surfaces.
• Fuel Efficiency: Due to longitudinally aligned tread ribs and a compound resistant to bending, this tire offers better fuel economy.
• Ice Traction: Aggressive biters on the central rib and shoulders, combined with angled cuts, dual siping, and in-groove notches ensure exceptional ice-biting performance.
• Noise Reduction: Compact shoulder lug design and densely arranged central lugs, combined with advanced pitch sequencing technology, mitigate road noise effectively.

Kleber Krisalp HP3 (review) excels in:

• Hydroplaning Resistance: Features larger grooves and sweeping arms for optimal water dispersion and superior hydroplaning resistance.
• Snow Traction: The larger tread voids enhance snow gripping and retention abilities, ensuring better performance in fluffy/powdery snow.
• Impact Comfort: An absorbent tread rubber and deeper tread offer a thicker cushion between the vehicle and the road, absorbing shocks and providing a smoother, more comfortable ride on uneven surfaces.

Areas for Improvement:

• The Kleber Krisalp HP3 could improve its dry traction and fuel efficiency due to its large tread gaps and heavier weight.
• The Sava Eskimo HP2 could enhance its snow traction due to its more enclosed structure limiting snow-to-snow contact.

Dry Traction

The Sava Eskimo HP2 does this really well when it comes to directional grip, thanks to its thicker middle section which supports most of the tire’s weight when driving straight.

This leads to stopping around five feet quicker than others on average in tests.

The reason it works so well is its continuous middle strip that keeps the tire in constant contact with the road.

On the other hand, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 struggles in comparison.

Having larger gaps in the tread, its middle section doesn’t contact the road with as much rubber.

Moreover, due to heavier weight, the tire also does not offer as good of a steering response, as seen on its counterpart.

Verdict: Sava Eskimo HP2 takes the lead, in terms of overall dry traction.

Enhanced Wet Traction

Wet traction hinges on two pivotal factors: the tread pattern and rubber compound. Both crucially contribute to gripping wet surfaces and averting hydroplaning.

The Sava Eskimo HP2 has an edge here with its innovative dual siping design, comprising rectilinear and interlocking slits that act as water magnets. These sipes work in tandem to efficiently absorb water, thereby enabling a robust grip on slightly dried surfaces.

Contrastingly, the Kleber Krisalp HP3, though featuring ample siping and adaptable tread rubber, falls short due to the absence of rectilinear slits, yielding somewhat inferior lateral traction.

Nevertheless, the Kleber redeems itself in hydroplaning resistance department, thanks to its slightly larger grooves and sweeping arms that optimally disperse water.

Its aggressive directional tread pattern and web of interconnected grooves actually offer a better water escaping efficacy, relatively.

Verdict: Sava Eskimo HP2 offers better wet grip, while the Kleber Krisalp HP3 provides superior resistance to hydroplaning.

Fuel Efficiency Evaluation

Fuel efficiency in tires is intricately tied to road grip and weight. So greater the grip, the more adhesive the tire would be with the road. Similarly, larger the wegith, the more the tread gets pushed down, and larger would be the rolling resistance.

That’s why here, the Sava Eskimo HP2, with its longitudinally aligned tread ribs and a compound resistant to bending, is taking the lead.

On the other side, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 could use some improvements here, as its hefty weight and large tread voids result in greater rolling resistance and friction.

Verdict: Sava Eskimo HP2 offers better fuel economy.

Snow Traction Review

When it comes to snow traction, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 takes the lead with its larger tread voids, which bolster its snow gripping and retention abilities.

The performance in snow is actually largely dependent on how well the tire offers snow to snow contact, and Kleber with its relatively larger voids grabs the snow, and holds on to it for good.

(Snow to snow contact is significant, because snow sticks better on other snowflakes, compared to rubber).

Conversely, the more enclosed structure of the Sava Eskimo HP2 is less effective in maintaining snow-to-snow contact.

Verdict: Kleber offers better fluffy/powdery snow traction.

Ice Traction Evaluation

In icy conditions, the Sava Eskimo HP2 unequivocally outperforms with faster stopping times and better acceleration capabilities on packed snow.

And its superior performance is attributed to its aggressive biters on both the central rib and the shoulders, which feature angled cuts, a dual siping pattern, and in-groove notches, culminating in exceptional ice-biting performance.

In contrast, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 falls behind, primarily due to its wider tread voids that provide fewer biters per unit surface area.

Verdict: Sava Eskimo HP2 offers better ice grip.

Comfort Level Appraisal

The comfort level delivered by a tire hinges on its ability to mitigate vibrations and generate minimal road noise, where both of these are influenced by the tire’s construction.

The Sava Eskimo HP2 excels in providing a quieter ride with its compact shoulder lug design and densely arranged central lugs.

These basically don’t allow air particles to freely flow and strike with the walls to create noise. Further, the tire also employs advanced pitch sequencing technology to mitigate residual noise.

On the other side, although the Kleber Krisalp HP3 doesn’t match up in noise reduction, it shines in impact comfort.

The tire, by design, absorbs shocks, and manages road irregularities and potholes exceptionally well. Its absorbent tread rubber and deeper tread offer a thicker cushion between the vehicle and the road, enhancing its shock-absorbing abilities and ensuring a smoother, more comfortable ride on uneven surfaces.

Verdict: Sava does better when it comes to noise, while the Kleber is superior in mitigating road bumps.

Conclusion

Both tires have their own strengths and weaknesses. The Sava Eskimo HP2 excels in dry and wet traction, ice traction, fuel efficiency, and noise reduction.

On the other hand, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 performs better in terms of snow traction and impact comfort.

The decision between the two tires depends on the driver’s specific needs and the prevailing driving conditions.

It is emphasized that regular maintenance and appropriate tire care can enhance the performance and longevity of both tire models.

In the books of winter tires, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 and the Barum Polaris 5, are each respected for their unique prowess in handling, tread life, and comfort, offer a range of options for various driving preferences. So let’s dig a little deep to find a better tire for you.

Sizes Specs

The Kleber Krisalp HP3 (review) comes in 14 to 20 inches, (99 total sizes), in following specs.

• Speed ratings: T and H.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 10/32″.
• Weight: 16 to 32 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

On the other side, the Barum Polaris 5 (review) comes in 74 total sizes, in 13 to 19 inches wheels, with following specs.

• Speed ratings: T, H and V.
• Load ratings: SL and XL.
• Tread depth: 9 to 10/32″.
• Weight: 15 to 26 lbs.
• Tread warranty: None.

Performance on Snow

The Kleber Krisalp HP3 seems to emerge as the marginally superior contender when considering performance in soft snow, due largely to the presence of numerous gaps and biters. These features act as effective snow traps, holding snow particles and promoting an improved snow-to-snow contact.

With each rotation of the tire, the trapped snow establishes the contact patch with the ground, resulting in enhanced traction.

But why its important?

Well, it’s the nature of snow to adhere more efficiently to itself than to rubber, facilitating this snow-to-snow connection.

The directional tread pattern of the Kleber Krisalp HP3 also creates a scooping effect, actively displacing snow and generating forward momentum.

Contrastingly, the Barum Polaris 5 doesn’t quite match up in these aspects.

With tread more on a symmetric side, it lacks the snow-trapping and scooping features found in the Kleber Krisalp HP3, leading to a slightly underwhelming snow performance.

A Look at Tread Life

Tread life is significantly affected by rolling resistance, which is determined by the tire’s weight and the rubber composition.

And here, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 is taking the back seat with its heavier structure, which imposes greater stress on the tread, as it rubs against the road.

Moreover, the tire’s softer compund isn’t helping that etither, allowing for the rubber to burn down more quckly in comparison.

Conversely, the Barum Polaris 5 enjoys the advantages of a lighter structure and more closely packed lugs, which results in reduced friction and slower wear when the tire meets the road.

Wet Traction

Wet traction is largely dictated by two crucial factors: the tread design and the rubber formulation. Both these components determine the tire’s grip on the road and resistance to hydroplaning—key aspects of wet performance.

Wet Grip

The Kleber Krisalp HP3’s triumphs in this arena, as the tire features more abundant biters and a more intricate siping design.

It’s tread gives out a more aggressive siping, having interlocking design, and those work alongside the notches to provide superior wet traction.

Actually, the whole game here is about having ample biting edges, that could grip in the relatively dried up surface, as the sipes suck up the water particles.

And yes, that is also helped by the tire’s grooves, though that has to do with hydorplaning.

Hydroplaning Resistance

Hydroplaning happens, when water forms a barrier between the tire tread and the road surface, causing the tire to get lifted up slightly, leading to a complete loss of traction.

This is a significant safety hazard, where the Kleber Krisalp HP3 seems to take the spotlight with its exceptional water (groove) channeling abilities.

It’s sweeping arms basically allow for better flaot speeds especially in curved aqua tests (meaning, out of both tires, it evacuates water out laterally, with more ease).

Though directionally, both tires are similar.

Dry Traction: Maintaining Grip on Dry Surfaces

Dry traction performance can be split into two categories: directional grip and handling. Let me start with the handling first.

Handling

The handling of a tire, which reflects its overall sideways traction, largely depends on its shoulder lugs.

But why is that?

Well, these shoulders/sidewalls get to meet up with the road better, as the tire turns, so “how well” they meet with the road is signficiant.

That’s why it makes sense why the Barum is taking the lead here, with a frimer rubber to road connection, allowing for faster handling times, and steering response.

Directional Grip

The Barum Polaris 5 pulls ahead in terms of directional grip, as well, and that is attributed to its wider, continuous-running central rubber area.

This basically allow for a better, and more uninterrupted contact between the rubber and the road results in shorter braking distances, (which is how this grip gets measured).

On the other hand, the Kleber Krisalp HP3, with its broader tread voids, naturally lacks here.

Evaluating Ride Comfort

The comfort provided by a tire is largely influenced by factors such as road noise and the capacity to absorb vibrations.

The Kleber Krisalp HP3 struggles with road noise, which originates from the collision of air particles against the walls of the tread voids, as its wider tread voids, allow air particles to hit around more freely, generating nosie.

Though the tire does okay in the secondar area of overall comfort, the shock absorption capabilities.

Thanks to its softer tread compound, this tire excels at cushioning shocks, ensuring a smoother ride overall. So pick your tire wisely here.

Fuel Economy

Tire fuel efficiency is fundamentally tied to tread design and tire weight, both of which affect rolling resistance.

And here, simply put, the Kleber Krisalp HP3, with its greater weight and larger tread voids, incurs increased lug flexing during cornering, braking, and acceleration, resulting in higher energy consumption.

In contrast, the Barum Polaris 5, designed with more streamlined, longitudinally aligned ribs, which don’t generate as much of the rolling resistance, relatively, leading to superior fuel efficiency.

Summing Up

In summary, both of these are premium winter tires, each excelling in their respective domains.

The Kleber Krisalp HP3 offers superior wet traction and soft snow performance, with its abundant sipes and tread voids.

However, the increased road noise due to wider grooves may compromise comfort levels.

Conversely, the Barum Polaris 5 outperforms in dry traction and fuel economy due to its continuous central rib and lighter weight, but lacks hydroplaning resistance.

Despite their respective strengths, the Kleber Krisalp HP3 suffers faster tread wear, while the Barum Polaris 5 ensures a smoother ride, illustrating that each tire is designed to meet specific driving conditions.

It’s a clash of the titans, as Barum Polaris 5, lauded for its exceptional snow handling, battles Matador MP93, commended for its excellent grip on ice. Let’s see which out of them, comes on top, starting with the snow performance of both tires.

Snow Performance

In the realm of snowy conditions, both tires exhibit impressive capabilities. However, it is the Matador MP93 that stands out as the more proficient option, particularly on fluffy snow. And a closer examination of its tread design sheds light on the reason behind its superiority.

The Matador MP93, basically, showcases a larger number of tread voids, predominantly in the form of in-groove notches. These intricacies enable the tire to adeptly trap snow particles, thereby improving snow-to-snow contact.

And as snow has a stronger affinity for itself than it does for rubber, this characteristic results in enhanced gripping efficiency.

Furthermore, the sweeping lugs of the Matador MP93 excel in clearing away heavy snow. As the tire rolls, it casts the snow backward, enabling forward momentum. This unique attribute contributes to slightly superior acceleration times.

On the other hand, the Barum Polaris 5 (review) displays somewhat diminished efficiency in braking and handling under snowy conditions. Its design is relatively enclosed, featuring a continuous central rib and narrower in-groove notches. Although it possesses a directional tread pattern, it lacks the comprehensive swooping arms of its counterpart, limiting its effectiveness in traversing through snow.

Verdict: In the battle for snow performance, the Matador MP93 emerges as the winner.

Ice Performance

The dynamics shift when confronting icy terrains, as the Barum Polaris 5 showcases its prowess by offering significantly shorter braking distances and faster acceleration times compared to the Matador MP93.

This superiority can be attributed to the numerous intricate biters spread across the tire’s tread. The central area of the Barum Polaris 5 features slanted incisions of varying width. When combined with snow vices, this design ensures superior longitudinal ice traction.

The Barum Polaris 5 further enhances its performance with multi-angled sipes that provide extra gripping on almost all types of icy surfaces.

On the other hand, the Matador MP93, with its wider tread voids, does not grip the ice as efficiently as its counterpart. Moreover, it lacks notches and multi-angled siping on both the central and shoulder lugs, leading to longer average braking distances and handling times. However, subjectively, its steering feedback is nearly on par with the Barum Polaris 5.

In terms of ice performance, the Barum Polaris 5 emerges as the winner.

Dry Traction

Dry grip efficiency largely depends on the tire’s contact with the ground, with directional grip and lateral traction playing pivotal roles.

In this aspect, the Barum Polaris 5 holds the upper hand. Its continuous central rib ensures superior and consistent surface contact as it moves in a straight line, particularly on highways. This, in turn, translates into shorter braking distances and quicker acceleration times in tests.

The continuous running rib of the Barum Polaris 5, combined with its surrounding closed-up lugs, significantly contributes to this aspect. Additionally, its lighter weight plays a considerable role in improving handling.

On the other hand, the heavier structure of the Matador MP93 offers limited performance. The added weight induces greater lug movement when the tire corners, reducing steering feedback and resulting in longer handling times compared to its counterpart.

In terms of dry traction, the Barum Polaris 5 emerges as the winner.

Wet Traction

Wet traction hinges primarily on two factors: tread design and rubber composition, which determine grip and hydroplaning resistance, respectively.

In terms of grip, despite both tires boasting ample siping and soft tread rubbers, the Barum Polaris 5 takes the lead. This advantage stems from the tire’s extensive collection of straight and interlocking sipes, which offer superior water absorption capabilities, leading to enhanced wet grip.

On the other hand, the Matador MP93 features less aggressive sipes which do not provide as much overall traction. Consequently, it exhibits longer wet braking distances and handling times on average.

However, when it comes to hydroplaning resistance, the Matador MP93 is taking the lead. Its wider grooves and sweeping arms allow for higher float speeds in both curved and straight aqua tests. The interconnected network of grooves efficiently disperses water in all directions, offering better resistance to hydroplaning overall.

In terms of wet traction, both tires emerge as winners, each excelling in different aspects.

Comfort Levels

Comfort in a tire primarily depends on factors such as road noise and vibration absorption. These aspects are heavily influenced by the tire’s construction, materials used, tread pattern, and overall sidewall design, which primarily dictate cornering smoothness.

When it comes to road noise and vibration absorption, the Barum Polaris 5 exhibits superior performance in terms of quietness. This advantage can be attributed to the tire’s less voided tread, as noise typically arises from air particles colliding with the tread walls.

However, the Matador MP93 compensates for its noisier operation by providing better vibration absorption, resulting in a smoother ride over bumps and ultimately enhancing overall comfort. Considering all these factors, both tires offer comparable comfort levels.

In terms of comfort levels, both tires emerge as winners.

Tread Life

The longevity of tire tread is significantly influenced by rolling resistance, particularly in the case of these two tire models. In this regard, the Barum Polaris 5 takes the lead.

Due to its lighter weight, the Barum Polaris 5 exerts less pressure on the tread blocks as they interact with the road. This reduces friction and slows down the rate of rubber degradation, ultimately prolonging the tire’s lifespan.

Conversely, the Matador MP93, with its heavier weight, concentrates more load on a smaller rubber surface due to its larger tread voids. As a result, each lug bears more weight, accelerating tread wear and reducing the tire’s overall lifespan.

It is worth noting, however, that the performance gap between the two tires is relatively small, which likely explains why neither model comes with any tread life warranties.

In terms of tread life, the Barum Polaris 5 emerges as the winner.

Fuel Economy

Fuel consumption in tires is closely linked to their road surface adhesion and overall structural weight. These are areas where the Matador MP93 could use some improvement.

The Matador MP93’s significant weight increases its rolling resistance, while its wider tread voids lead to increased friction as the tire rolls over asphalt surfaces.

Conversely, the Barum Polaris 5, being lighter, exerts less pressure on the surface, thereby reducing overall friction. Furthermore, its tread features longitudinally aligned ribs that streamline the tire’s movement when rolling straight, minimizing obstacles and conserving energy. This, in turn, improves fuel economy.

In terms of fuel economy, the Barum Polaris 5 emerges as the winner.

In Conclusion

When it comes to snow performance, the Matador MP93 shines with its unique tread design and higher number of tread voids, delivering superior snow gripping and clearing capabilities.

However, in icy conditions, the Barum Polaris 5 outperforms its counterpart, thanks to its intricate biters, slanted incisions, and multi-angled sipes that provide enhanced traction and handling.

On dry asphalt, the Barum Polaris 5 leads in terms of grip, although the Matador MP93 shows superior resistance to hydroplaning.

Considering overall performance, the Barum Polaris 5 appears to be the more desirable choice. It offers slightly better fuel efficiency and tread life, along with quieter operation, providing a balanced blend of performance, comfort, and durability.

Both Yokohama IceGuard IG52C and the Yokohama IG53 are formidable contenders in the frosty domain of winter tires, each showcasing unique grip and stability on slippery surfaces. As winter blankets the land, let’s find out who takes the top spot!

Quick Takeaway

Yokohama IceGuard IG52 excels in:

• Directional Gripping: The IceGuard IG52’s interlocking lugs provide a larger contact area, resulting in better directional grip.
• Lateral Gripping: Thanks to its biting edges on shoulder lugs and narrower lateral grooves, the IceGuard IG52 significantly outperforms its counterpart in handling dry surfaces.
• Tread Life: With its lighter construction, the IceGuard IG52 has better tread life as its lugs create less friction and heat due to reduced ground pressure.
• Noise Generation: The IceGuard IG52, with its tread pattern having fewer voids, generates less noise.
• Wet Traction: Thanks to an advanced rubber compound, the IceGuard IG52 offers superior water dispersal abilities, enhancing traction on damp surfaces.
• Fuel Economy: The IceGuard IG52, with its lighter weight and longitudinally aligned ribs, offers better fuel efficiency.

Yokohama IceGuard IG53 excels in:

• Hydroplaning Resistance: The IceGuard IG53, with its interconnected tread voids or grooves, offers exceptional water channeling capabilities.
• Vibration Absorption: The next-generation compound of the IceGuard IG53 excels at absorbing disturbances from uneven surfaces.
• Ice & Snow Performance: The IceGuard IG53 offers superior performance on icy terrains and in lighter, powdery snow due to its advanced tread compound, biters, and open tread design.

Areas for Improvement:

• The Yokohama IceGuard IG52 could improve in hydroplaning resistance, vibration absorption, and ice performance, given its more minimalist approach to handling snow and lack of an advanced compound for absorbing disturbances.
• The Yokohama IceGuard IG53 could enhance its directional and lateral grip, tread life, noise reduction, and fuel economy, given its large longitudinal groove in the middle of the tread, thicker lugs with fewer biting edges, greater weight, and less streamlined lugs.

Ice And Snow Performance

The Yokohama IceGuard IG53 offers a noteworthy edge over its competition when navigating icy terrains, showcasing an impressive braking distance that is, on average, 11 feet shorter.

Such superior performance is attributed to the tire’s advanced tread compound, further enhanced by the strategically placed biters scattered across the tread. This high-quality tire also boasts an asymmetric pattern, significantly boosting its ice-gripping capabilities.

Additionally, the tire integrates a state-of-the-art rubber compound that works in harmony with the biters to deliver an unparalleled performance.

Notably, the Yokohama IceGuard IG53 shines in lighter, powdery snow, thanks to its open tread design. This innovative layout incorporates expertly crafted voids which effectively trap soft snow particles within the tread, providing superior snow-to-snow contact. This feature is crucial, as snow adheres more effectively to itself than to rubber.

In contrast, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 employs a more minimalist approach to handling snow. Its compact tread design, characterized by aggressive, smaller biters, does not retain as much snow, resulting in slightly reduced performance in fluffier snow conditions.

Directional Gripping

The performance of a tire in terms of directional or longitudinal grip, a crucial factor for dry conditions, relies heavily on the design of the tread’s central area. This specific part of the tread bears the majority of the weight during straight-line driving.

When comparing the two tires in this aspect, it’s not surprising that the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 outperforms its counterpart by a significant margin.

To put it simply, this tire provides a larger contact area between the rubber and the road surface in the middle of the tread.

It achieves this through its interlocking lugs that effectively grip the road. In contrast, the IceGuard IG53 features a large longitudinal groove in that area, which results in longer braking distances during tests.

Lateral Gripping

The handling performance of a tire on dry surfaces depends largely on the design of its shoulder lugs and the overall flexibility of the tire.

And here, once again, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 stands out as it significantly outperforms its predecessor, as the tire incorporates numerous biting edges on its shoulder lugs and narrower lateral grooves, working together to enhance grip.

On the other hand, the Yokohama IceGuard IG53 has thicker lugs with fewer biting edges, limiting its grip capacity.

Additionally, the heavier weight of this tire, during cornering, can lead to delayed oversteer and understeer responses, reducing its overall responsiveness to steering inputs.

Tread Life

The longevity of a tire’s tread is greatly influenced by rolling resistance, which is determined by the weight and design of the tread.

Simply put, lighter tires tend to have better tread life, as such tires exert less pressure on their lugs, as they rub against the road surface, reducing friction and slowing down the rate of wear.

Consequently, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52, thanks to its lighter construction, excels in tread life. Its lugs create less friction and heat due to reduced ground pressure, leading to greater wear resistance.

In contrast, the Yokohama IceGuard IG53 falls short in this regard due to its greater weight, less streamlined lugs, and outdated rubber composition. This puts it behind its newer counterpart, the IceGuard IG52.

Noise Generation

The noise produced by a tire is primarily a result of air particles colliding against the tread walls, and its volume can greatly impact the overall driving experience. Therefore, effective noise management is a key consideration in tire design.

In this regard, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 takes the lead, thanks to its tread pattern with fewer voids. With fewer voids, there are fewer air cavities available for noise propagation, resulting in reduced noise as the tire rolls.

Fuel Economy

The fuel efficiency of a tire primarily depends on its interaction with the road surface and its overall weight. Both of these factors impact the tire’s rolling resistance, which significantly affects the vehicle’s energy usage.

In this regard, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 stands out due to its lighter weight and longitudinally aligned ribs, providing better aerodynamic efficiency compared to the larger-spaced, and asymmetric pattern of the Yokohama IceGuard IG53.

As a result, the IceGuard IG52 enables smoother and more energy-efficient travel, especially during straight-line movements such as highway driving, for the most part.

Wet Traction

A tire’s performance on wet surfaces depends on its tread design and rubber composition. In this aspect, the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 surpasses its competitors in various factors, including grip, handling.

The tire utilizes an advanced rubber compound, that offers superior water dispersal abilities, significantly enhancing traction on damp surfaces, where the multi-angled sipes, further that.

Though in case of resistance to hydroplaning, the IG53 takes the upper hand, with its interconnected tread voids or grooves provide exceptional water channeling capabilities in all directions. And so you get higher speeds in both straight-line and curved aquaplaning testing situations.

Vibration Absorption

Tires act as the first line of defense against road irregularities and function as secondary suspension systems for vehicles. And in this context, the Yokohama IceGuard IG53 excels with its next-generation compound.

When encountering uneven surfaces, the construction of the tire adeptly absorbs all sorts of minor disturbances, delivering a smoother ride.

Though in defense of IG52, its lighter weight offers better steering feedback, offering a more refined ride experience still.

So one can rate both these tires equally.

So What’s the Verdict?

In summary, both the Yokohama IceGuard IG52 and IG53 present distinct advantages.

The IG52 excels in dry grip, handling, tread life, noise reduction, and wet traction due to its superior design features.

Conversely, the IG53 stands out in icy conditions and snow handling, offering better vibration absorption, yet falls short in areas like dry grip, tread life, and fuel efficiency.

Both have their unique strengths making the choice between them dependent on specific user requirements and driving conditions.

Continental WinterContact SI and the SI Plus, both leading options in the winter tire segment, each showcase individual expertise in traction, tire life, and ride comfort. So its best you consider all of the below.

Quick Takeaway

Continental WinterContact SI Plus excels in:

• Wet Traction: The SI Plus’s multi-angled sipes and a combination of rectilinear, and interlocking patterns provide superior wet grip.
• Tread Life: The SI Plus’s lighter weight puts less pressure on the tread blocks, slowing degradation of the rubber and prolonging tread life.
• Ice Performance: The SI Plus’s aggressive siping and malleable tread allow for superior ice gripping, leading to shorter average braking distances.
• Comfort Levels: The SI Plus’s superior rubber compound and pitch sequencing technology result in less road noise, while its more pliable tread provides better vibration damping.
• Fuel Economy: The SI Plus’s lighter weight and more streamlined central rib contribute to lower rolling resistance and better fuel economy.

Continental WinterContact SI excels in:

• Hydroplaning Resistance: The SI’s wider groove channels allow for quicker water evacuation, offering superior resistance to hydroplaning.
• Snow Performance: The SI’s more open lug design and interlocking grooves allow for superior snow pickup and traction on fluffy snowy roads.

Areas for Improvement:

• The Continental WinterContact SI could improve in terms of wet grip, tread life, ice performance, comfort, and fuel economy, given its laterally-oriented siping, heavier weight, lack of aggressive siping, and higher rolling resistance.
• The Continental WinterContact SI Plus could perform better in terms of snow performance and hydroplaning resistance, given its enclosed tread pattern and narrower groove channels.

Wet Traction

When it comes to wet traction, there are two key factors to consider: grip and resistance to aquaplaning. And let me tell you, that the results for these factors are somewhat mixed between the two Continental tires here.

In terms of grip, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus takes the lead, as it features multi-angled sipes, and a combination of rectilinear, and interlocking patterns.

These sipes point in multiple directions, effectively channeling water away and allowing the tread rubber to maintain better contact with the road.

On the other hand, the Continental WinterContact SI is equipped with laterally-oriented siping and lacks the rectilinear pattern found in the SI Plus. As a result, it doesn’t offer as much grip. However, it performs slightly better in terms of aquaplaning resistance, which refers to the tire’s ability to prevent floating on water.

During testing, the Continental WinterContact SI demonstrated marginally higher speeds in both curved and straight aquaplaning tests. This is because it has wider groove channels that quickly evacuate water compared to its counterpart.

Verdict: Overall, the SI Plus excels in wet grip, while the SI performs better in resisting hydroplaning.

Snow Performance

Both tires demonstrate competitive performance in varying snowy conditions, showcasing their ability to handle wintry challenges. However, the Continental WinterContact SI carves out a slight advantage, especially when navigating fluffy snowy roads.

Despite having a directional tread pattern, the SI’s lugs have a more open design, which allows for enhanced contact between the tire and the snow.

The tire’s interlocking grooves and snow-trapping recesses effortlessly scoop up loosely packed snow, creating a snowy interface between the tire and the ground.

This snowy interface offers superior traction because snow adheres more effectively to other snowflakes than to rubber.

In contrast, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus has a more enclosed tread pattern, featuring a continuous running rib at its core and lacking the interlocking groove configuration.

Consequently, it doesn’t pick up as much snow as the SI, falling slightly short in performance.

Verdict: Overall, the SI Plus performs better on icy surfaces compared to its counterpart.

Tread Life

The lifespan of a tire’s tread is greatly influenced by its rolling resistance, and structure make-up.

And in both aspects, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus surpasses its rival, as the tire’s relatively lighter weight puts less pressure on its blocks, as they rub against the road, resulting in decreased friction and slower degradation of the rubber.

On the other hand, the Continental WinterContact SI is not only heavier but also distributes this extra weight over a smaller rubber surface due to its wider tread voids. As a result, each lug bears a greater amount of weight, leading to quicker tread wear and a shorter overall lifespan.

However, it’s important to note that the performance difference between the two tires is not significant enough to warrant warranties from both brands.

Verdict: Overall, the tread life is better on the Continental WinterContact SI Plus.

Ice Performance

When it comes to icy conditions, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus stands out, showcasing a more favorable average braking distance compared to the SI.

This is due to its more aggressive siping, and relatively pliable tread composition.

While the siping is the obvious one, with malleable tread, all biters get to have greater biting efficacy. So they allow for superior ice gripping.

Verdict: Overall, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus outperforms the Continental WinterContact SI in terms of ice performance.

Comfort Levels

The comfort provided by a tire depends on factors such as road noise and vibration absorption, which are influenced by the tire’s design, incorporated materials, tread pattern, and sidewall structure.

Regarding road noise, it primarily stems from air particles colliding with the tread walls. In this aspect, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus, offers slightly superior performance in reducing noise.

Even though both tires offers similar voided up designs, the Plus variant still renders smaller in-groove resonance, due to it’s superior rubber compound, and pitch sequencing technology.

Moreover, its more pliable tread, also excels in terms of vibration damping, providing better cushioning over road irregularities.

Verdict: The Plus variant takes the lead overall.

Fuel Economy

Fuel consumption is affected by the tire’s adherence to the road and its overall weight. In this regard, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus, with its lighter weight, performs better.

The reduced weight of the tire reduces the pressure exerted on the road, resulting in lower rolling resistance.

Furthermore, the tire’s more streamlined central rib compared to its counterpart allows for smoother rolling. Conversely, the Continental WinterContact SI, with its considerable weight, experiences higher rolling resistance, where lugs are pushed more, as they face greater lug-bending, generating heat and wasting energy that could have been used for rolling the tire efficiently.

Verdict: Overall, the Continental WinterContact SI Plus provides better fuel economy.

Summing Up

In summary, the Continental WinterContact SI and SI Plus each have their unique strengths.

The WinterContact SI Plus excels in wet grip, tread life, ice performance, comfort levels, and fuel economy, attributed to its design, lighter weight, and reduced friction.

The WinterContact SI, however, has an edge in aquaplaning resistance and performance on fluffy snowy roads, thanks to its wider groove channels and open lug design.

The choice between the two should be dictated by the specific driving conditions and needs of the user. And both are commendable options for their respective specialties.