Tests 74 · 8 tests Owners 79 · 12 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tyre Test (snow handling (tester's mark))
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 8 + 1 road tests and 12 + 2 owner reviews. How we score
VikingContact 8 is ahead, 76–66
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests 74 · 8 tests Owners 79 · 12 reviews
Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2025 Studded, Friction and European Winter Tyre Test (snow handling (tester's mark))
Tests 57 · 1 test Owners 76 · 2 reviews
Best test result: #3 of 8 in 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test (straight aquaplaning)
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 6 / 1 tests | 75 | 33 |
| Reviews found online | 75 | 75 |
VikingContact 8: 60% × 74.6 + 40% × 75.2 = 75
Snowleopard LX: 60% × 33.3 + 40% × 75 = 50
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 7 / 1 tests | 63 | 73 |
| Reviews found online | 85 | 79 |
VikingContact 8: 60% × 63 + 40% × 84.9 = 72
Snowleopard LX: 60% × 73.4 + 40% × 78.6 = 75
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 6 / 1 tests | 77 | 62 |
| Reviews found online | 80 | 77 |
VikingContact 8: 60% × 77.3 + 40% × 79.9 = 78
Snowleopard LX: 60% × 62.2 + 40% × 76.8 = 68
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 4 / – tests | 91 | ≈ 70 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 82 | 73 |
VikingContact 8: 40% × 90.9 + 60% × 81.7 = 85
Snowleopard LX: 40% × 69.5 (est.) + 60% × 72.5 = 71
No road tests of comfort for Snowleopard LX. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 5 / 1 tests | 79 | 68 |
| Reviews found online | 81 | ≈ 66 (est.) |
VikingContact 8: 60% × 78.5 + 40% × 81 = 80
Snowleopard LX: 60% × 67.8 + 40% × 66.3 (est.) = 67
No owner ratings of noise for Snowleopard LX. The owner half is the owners’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | ≈ 70 (est.) | ≈ 69 (est.) |
| Reviews found online | 77 | 73 |
VikingContact 8: 60% × 70.3 (est.) + 40% × 77.1 = 73
Snowleopard LX: 60% × 68.7 (est.) + 40% × 72.7 = 70
No road tests of treadwear for VikingContact 8. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
No road tests of treadwear for Snowleopard LX. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews found online | 76 | 75 |
| Source | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) · 4 / 1 tests | 78 | 70 |
| Category | Continental VikingContact 8 | Mazzini Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 76 | 66 |
| Dry | 75 | 50 |
| Wet | 72 | 75 |
| Snow | 78 | 68 |
| Comfort | 85 | 71 |
| Noise | 80 | 67 |
| Treadwear | 73 | 70 |
| Handling (owners) | 76 | 75 |
| Efficiency | 78 | 70 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
VikingContact 8
Snowleopard LX
Per discipline: the average % of the best tire over every test both tires were in, and how many of those tests each one won. “Different tests” rows compare results from separate tests.
| Discipline | Category | VikingContact 8 | Snowleopard LX | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Handling (tester's mark) | Dry | 100% #2/14 · 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tyre Test | 20% #8/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Straight Aquaplaning | Wet | 73% #10/18 · 2026 Teknikens Värld Studded, Nordic and Central European Winter Tyre Test | 98% #3/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Wet Handling | Wet | 99% #3/14 · 2025 Friction and Studded Winter Tyre Test | 98% #6/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Ice Handling | Snow | 100% #1/7 · 2025 NAF Motor Studless Winter Tire Test R17 | 93% #8/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Ice Traction | Snow | 92% #3/3 · 2026 Tire Rack New Winter Tyre Test | 79% #8/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Snow Handling | Snow | 98% #2/3 · 2026 Tire Rack New Winter Tyre Test | 94% #8/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Snow Traction | Snow | 96% #2/7 · 2025 NAF Motor Studless Winter Tire Test R17 | 97% #5/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Noise | Noise | 99% #3/8 · 2025 Friction Winter Tyre Test | 97% #7/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Rolling Resistance | Efficiency | 95% #6/7 · 2025 NAF Motor Studless Winter Tire Test R17 | 95% #6/8 · 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #1/6 2027 NAF Motor Studless Winter Tire Test R17 | #8/8 2022 ViBilagare Nordic SUV Winter Tyre Test | – | Different tests |
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
| Attribute | A · Continental VikingContact 8 | B · Mazzini Snowleopard LX |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Winter | Winter |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | SUV and 4x4 |
| Sizes available | 123 | 15 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 22″ | 15″ – 20″ |
| Tread depth | 10 - 11/32″ | — |
| Sidewall | Black Side Wall | — |
| Max pressure | 50 - 51 psi | — |
| Sizes in common | 10 | 10 |
Continental VikingContact 8
Mazzini Snowleopard LX
Winner: Continental VikingContact 8 — better dry, comfort and noise. Pick the Mazzini Snowleopard LX if wet matters most to you. Mazzini Snowleopard LX rests on little evidence so far (1 test, 2 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Continental VikingContact 8 scores 75 vs 50 on dry.
Continental VikingContact 8 scores 85 vs 71 on comfort.
Continental VikingContact 8 scores 80 vs 67 on noise.
Continental VikingContact 8 scores 78 vs 68 on snow.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Mazzini Snowleopard LX, 75 vs 72 on our wet score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 75 vs 50 on our dry score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 78 vs 68 on our snow score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 80 vs 67 on our noise score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 85 vs 71 on our comfort score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 73 vs 70 on our treadwear score.
Continental VikingContact 8, 78 vs 70 on our efficiency score.
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology