Positive: Exceptionally high grip and great handling response on snow and ice. Negative: Less-than-perfect road holding ability that influences the riding comfort (falls short of the previous-generation tires in this respect). High price. The winner among the spiked tires.

Positive: Very good grip on ice and snow. Very good road holding ability. The best riding comfort. Negative: Relatively weak results on wet pavement. The winner among the studless tires of the Scandinavian type.

Positive: Well-balanced performance and absence of any prominent drawbacks. Great handling response in any weather conditions. Low rolling resistance. Relatively inexpensive.

Positive: Great handling response on snow and ice. The lowest rolling resistance on test. Negative: In some of the disciplines, the soft tread compound made a negative difference, for example, in the hydroplaning resistance test.

Positive: Great handling in the wet and in the dry. Great riding comfort. Negative: Relatively weak results on snow and ice as compared to the spiked tire of the same brand (which is, after all, quite expectable). The winner among the studless tires of the European type.

Positive: Great handling response on snow and ice. Relatively inexpensive. Negative: Low riding comfort

Positive: Acceptable performance on snow. Particularly great results on wet pavement. Great riding comfort. Negative: Weak performance on ice.

Positive: Excellent hydroplaning resistance. Negative: The longest braking distance on ice among all the tires.

Positive: Good results on snow and ice (the fact that Michelin did not score the first place only speaks about how tough the competition was this year). Negative: Long braking distance on wet pavement. Poor hydroplaning resistance. Weak results in the elk test.

Positive: Surprisingly good results for a cheap Chinese tire. Ice and snow performance on a par with the tires of the Scandinavian type. Negative: Weak results on asphalt.

Positive: A time-tested tire, soon to be replaced by a new model. Good performance on snow and ice. The result of the elk test better than was expected. Negative: Poor results on wet pavement.

Lack of balance between the longitudinal and the lateral grip, meaning, the car is OK when moving forward but can easily go into a skid while cornering. Hence a short braking distance, but a less-than-perfect handling response on ice.

Positive: This tire demonstrated a better performance than the premium Nokian Hakkapeliitta 9. Negative: The snow, and particularly the ice traction is worse than that of the leaders (and worse than was expected).

Positive: Good grip snow. Low rolling resistance. Acceptable results on wet pavement Negative: Weak results on ice (the experts noted that they tested the tire again and again, always with the same result, and what happened to Nokian is still a mystery).

Positive: Low rolling resistance. Lack of balanced performance. Negative: Weak traction on snow and ice, which is unacceptable for tires of Scandinavian type.

Positive: Acceptable performance on snow. Low rolling resistance. Negative: Weak traction on ice. Although Bridgestone is considered to be premium-grade tires, its performance falls obviously short of its stated class.

Positive:  Acceptable grip on snow (but where in the world is the region where you drive solely on snowy roads?) Negative: Lack of balanced performance. Very weak traction on ice. The worst tire in its class. Unreasonably high price.

Positive: Good grip on wet pavement (the tire’s one and only strong side, and, besides, this parameter is of secondary importance for spiked tires). Negative: Lack of balanced performance. On ice, these tires are pure junk. Not recommended.