Tests – · none yet Owners 65 · 17 reviews
Head-to-head
Updated
Firestone Winterforce 2 UV vs General Grabber Arctic — 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 0 + 0 road tests and 17 + 18 owner reviews. How we score
Grabber Arctic leads, 71–67 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.
Tests – · none yet Owners 72 · 18 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
65
Dry
Grabber Arctic +166Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online 64 65 Winterforce 2 UV: 60% × 66.2 (est.) + 40% × 63.6 = 65
Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66
No road tests of dry for Winterforce 2 UV. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
No road tests of dry for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
-
70
Wet
Grabber Arctic +474Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 70 (est.) ≈ 73 (est.) Reviews found online 70 75 Winterforce 2 UV: 60% × 70.4 (est.) + 40% × 70.1 = 70
Grabber Arctic: 60% × 72.9 (est.) + 40% × 74.8 = 74
No road tests of wet for Winterforce 2 UV. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
No road tests of wet for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
72
Snow
Grabber Arctic +577Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 71 (est.) ≈ 74 (est.) Reviews found online 73 82 Winterforce 2 UV: 60% × 71.2 (est.) + 40% × 72.8 = 72
Grabber Arctic: 60% × 74 (est.) + 40% × 81.6 = 77
No road tests of snow for Winterforce 2 UV. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
No road tests of snow for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
61
Comfort
Grabber Arctic +768Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 68 (est.) Reviews found online 57 67 Winterforce 2 UV: 40% × 66.3 (est.) + 60% × 57.1 = 61
Grabber Arctic: 40% × 68.3 (est.) + 60% × 67.1 = 68
No road tests of comfort for Winterforce 2 UV. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
No road tests of comfort for Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
61
Noise
Grabber Arctic +566Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 54 65 Winterforce 2 UV: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 54 = 61
Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 64.8 = 66
No road tests of noise for Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
62
Treadwear
Grabber Arctic +870Why this score
Source Winterforce 2 UV Grabber Arctic Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 64 (est.) ≈ 68 (est.) Reviews found online 59 72 Winterforce 2 UV: 60% × 63.7 (est.) + 40% × 58.6 = 62
Grabber Arctic: 60% × 68.4 (est.) + 40% × 71.6 = 70
No road tests of treadwear for Winterforce 2 UV. 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 Grabber Arctic. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
Scores at a glance
| Category | Firestone Winterforce 2 UV | General Grabber Arctic |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 67 | 71 |
| Dry | 65 | 66 |
| Wet | 70 | 74 |
| Snow | 72 | 77 |
| Comfort | 61 | 68 |
| Noise | 61 | 66 |
| Treadwear | 62 | 70 |
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
Recomputed
Headline score
67
/ 100
Winterforce 2 UV
71
/ 100
Grabber Arctic
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, Firestone Winterforce 2 UV finished ahead 0 times and General Grabber Arctic 1 times.
| Discipline | Category | Winterforce 2 UV | Grabber Arctic | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #8/8 | #4/8 | – | 0–1 in 1 shared test Newest: 2022 Consumer Reports Winter/Snow Truck/SUV Tires · 215/60R17 |
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Winterforce 2 UV
Pros
- Strong snow traction: one 4WD owner reported no slipping in 8 inches of snow, and an Explorer owner said it never needed 4x4 after 47 inches of snow in a week
- Good value for the money: reviewers repeatedly describe it as a great winter tire for the price, and one calls it the best balance of price and longevity
- Good wet-weather performance reported by some, including no hydroplaning on puddles and 'great all around' traction
Cons
- Increased road noise is mentioned by some reviewers, attributed to the aggressive winter tread, though others describe noise as very low
- Reduced wet-weather starting traction: one reviewer reports wheelspin when pulling away from a red light in the rain
- Fast wear if used in warm weather: one reviewer who ran them in summer notes this is not recommended and that they wear quickly
Tire B Grabber Arctic
Pros
- Exceptional traction and handling in snow and slush
- Great value and affordable price point compared to premium competitors
- Reliable cold-weather performance on wet and icy surfaces
Cons
- Moderate road noise when studded or on dry/slightly wet pavement
- Average performance on hard-packed ice unless studded
- Directional/rotational tread pattern may limit tire rotation options for some drivers
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Firestone Winterforce 2 UV | B · General Grabber Arctic |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Winter | Winter |
| Vehicle type | SUV and 4x4 | SUV and 4x4 |
| Sizes available | 30 | 8 |
| Rim diameters | 15″ – 18″ | 16″ – 20″ |
| Tread depth | 12/32″ | 12/32″ |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 44 psi | 51 psi |
| Sizes in common | 4 | 4 |
Which one should you actually buy?
67
/ 100
Firestone Winterforce 2 UV
71
/ 100
General Grabber Arctic
Narrow edge: General Grabber Arctic — better treadwear, comfort and snow. It leads or ties in every category we score. Firestone Winterforce 2 UV rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 17 reviews), so read this result as provisional. General Grabber Arctic rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 18 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Pick tire B
You want the longest tread life
General Grabber Arctic scores 70 vs 62 on treadwear.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
General Grabber Arctic scores 68 vs 61 on comfort.
Pick tire B
You drive through snowy winters
General Grabber Arctic scores 77 vs 72 on snow.
Pick tire B
You want a quieter cabin
General Grabber Arctic scores 66 vs 61 on noise.
Tire A · Firestone Winterforce 2 UV
Tire B · General Grabber Arctic
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
Which is better in the wet, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
General Grabber Arctic, 74 vs 70 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
Neither, by our numbers: 65 vs 66 on the dry score, within 3 points.
Which is better in snow, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
General Grabber Arctic, 77 vs 72 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 61 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
General Grabber Arctic, 68 vs 61 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Winterforce 2 UV or Grabber Arctic?
General Grabber Arctic, 70 vs 62 on our treadwear 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