Head-to-head Updated

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P vs Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4 — Compared

Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews (comfort 40/60). Based on 30 + 2 road tests and 31 + 0 owner reviews. How we score

WinterContact TS 870 P leads, 83–79 Narrow edge

Add your size for an exact match
/R

Both Amazon links then search this exact size.

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
± 4

Tests 82 · 30 tests Owners 80 · 31 reviews

Best test result: #1 of 20 in 2023 Auto Bild Winter Tyre Test (dry handling)

Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4
Tire BHankook

Winter I*cept Evo 4

Winter tire

± 7

Tests 83 · 2 tests Owners – · none yet

Best test result: #1 of 10 in 2026 Auto Bild Allrad SUV Winter Tyre Test (comfort (tester's mark))

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 81

    Dry

    WinterContact TS 870 P +4
    77
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 24 / 1 tests8380
    Reviews found online79≈ 73 (est.)

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 60% × 83.4 + 40% × 78.6 = 81

    Winter I*cept Evo 4: 60% × 80.3 + 40% × 73.2 (est.) = 77

    No owner ratings of dry for Winter I*cept Evo 4. The owner half is estimated from its road-test score, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.42).

  2. 91

    Wet

    WinterContact TS 870 P +1
    90
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 30 / 2 tests9494
    Reviews found online86≈ 84 (est.)
    Wet Braking (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 1–097%91%

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 60% × 94.3 + 40% × 86 = 91

    Winter I*cept Evo 4: 60% × 94.3 + 40% × 83.6 (est.) = 90

    No owner ratings of wet for Winter I*cept Evo 4. The owner half is estimated from its road-test score, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.54).

  3. 78

    Snow

    WinterContact TS 870 P +4
    74
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 29 / 2 tests8076
    Reviews found online76≈ 72 (est.)
    Snow Braking (% of best) · 1 shared test · wins 0–199%99%

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 60% × 79.5 + 40% × 75.6 = 78

    Winter I*cept Evo 4: 60% × 75.6 + 40% × 72 (est.) = 74

    No owner ratings of snow for Winter I*cept Evo 4. The owner half is estimated from its road-test score, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).

  4. 86

    Comfort

    WinterContact TS 870 P +11
    75
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 7 / 1 tests9381
    Reviews found online81≈ 71 (est.)

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 40% × 93.4 + 60% × 81 = 86

    Winter I*cept Evo 4: 40% × 81.1 + 60% × 71.3 (est.) = 75

    No owner ratings of comfort for Winter I*cept Evo 4. The owner half is the owners’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.

  5. 73

    Noise

    Winter I*cept Evo 4 +2
    75
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 21 / 1 tests7880
    Reviews found online≈ 67 (est.)≈ 67 (est.)

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 60% × 77.7 + 40% × 66.5 (est.) = 73

    Winter I*cept Evo 4: 60% × 80.1 + 40% × 66.5 (est.) = 75

    No owner ratings of noise for WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4. The owner half is the owners’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests, so the tests say nothing about how owners would rate it.

  6. 75

    Treadwear

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 7 / – tests71–
    Reviews found online80–

    WinterContact TS 870 P: 60% × 70.7 + 40% × 80.3 = 75

  7. 83

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Reviews found online83–
  8. 87

    Efficiency

    WinterContact TS 870 P +23
    64
    Why this score
    SourceWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4
    Professional tests (TWG score) · 23 / 1 tests8764
Scores at a glance
Continental WinterContact TS 870 P vs Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryContinental WinterContact TS 870 PHankook Winter I*cept Evo 4
Relative Score 83 79
Dry 81 77
Wet 91 90
Snow 78 74
Comfort 86 75
Noise 73 75
Treadwear 75 –
Handling (owners) 83 –
Efficiency 87 64

Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.

Weight the categories that matter to you

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.

Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Not important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score
± 4

WinterContact TS 870 P

± 7

Winter I*cept Evo 4

Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.

The professional test results behind the scores

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.

In the overall rankings of 1 tests that ran both, Continental WinterContact TS 870 P finished ahead 1 times and Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4 0 times.

DisciplineCategoryWinterContact TS 870 PWinter I*cept Evo 4ΔHead-to-head
Wet Braking Wet 97% 91% +6.4 1–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2026 Winter Tyre Braking Test - 50 Sets · 245/45 R19
Snow Braking Snow 99% 99% −0.4 0–1 in 1 shared test Newest: 2026 Winter Tyre Braking Test - 50 Sets · 245/45 R19
Also published by the testers (not in the score)
Overall Ranking Overall #2/50 #4/50 – 1–0 in 1 shared test Newest: 2026 Winter Tyre Braking Test - 50 Sets · 245/45 R19

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A WinterContact TS 870 P

Pros

  • Exceptionally low noise levels and high ride comfort
  • Outstanding wet weather and slush performance, cutting through heavy rain effortlessly
  • Balanced dry and cold-weather handling with impressive cornering stability

Cons

  • Higher price point compared to some competitors
  • Steering response and initial stiffness are slightly softer and less sporty than dedicated summer tires or some rivals
  • Snow and ice traction can feel less exceptional or borderline inadequate for a small subset of users
All owner themes in the WinterContact TS 870 P review

Tire B Winter I*cept Evo 4

Not enough owner reviews yet to extract themes.

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Continental WinterContact TS 870 P B · Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4
CategoryWinterWinter tire
Vehicle typePassenger Car / Crossover—
Sizes available12186
Rim diameters16″ – 23″17″ – 22″
Sizes in common4444

Which one should you actually buy?

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P

Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4

Narrow edge: Continental WinterContact TS 870 P — better efficiency, comfort and dry. Where the Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4 is ahead, it is by less than 3 points.

Pick tire A You want lower fuel or energy use

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P scores 87 vs 64 on efficiency.

Pick tire A You want the most comfortable ride

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P scores 86 vs 75 on comfort.

Pick tire A You want the most grip on dry roads

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P scores 81 vs 77 on dry.

Pick tire A You drive through snowy winters

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P scores 78 vs 74 on snow.

Tire A · Continental WinterContact TS 870 P
Tire B · Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Which is better in the wet, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Neither, by our numbers: 91 vs 90 on the wet score, within 3 points.

Which grips better on dry roads, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P, 81 vs 77 on our dry score.

Which is better in snow, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P, 78 vs 74 on our snow score.

Which is quieter, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Neither, by our numbers: 73 vs 75 on the noise score, within 3 points.

Which is more comfortable, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P, 86 vs 75 on our comfort score.

Which rolls more easily, WinterContact TS 870 P or Winter I*cept Evo 4?

Continental WinterContact TS 870 P, 87 vs 64 on our efficiency score.

How do we compare tires?

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