Tests – · none yet Owners 72 · 18 reviews
General Grabber Arctic vs Firestone Winterforce 2 — 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 18 + 28 owner reviews. How we score
Grabber Arctic is ahead, 71–61
Add your size for an exact match
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 56 · 28 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
66
Dry
Grabber Arctic +1650Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 67 (est.) ≈ 57 (est.) Reviews found online 65 41 Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66
Winterforce 2: 60% × 56.8 (est.) + 40% × 40.8 = 50
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).
No road tests of dry for Winterforce 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).
-
74
Wet
Grabber Arctic +965Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 73 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 75 63 Grabber Arctic: 60% × 72.9 (est.) + 40% × 74.8 = 74
Winterforce 2: 60% × 66.3 (est.) + 40% × 62.7 = 65
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).
No road tests of wet for Winterforce 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).
-
77
Snow
Grabber Arctic +374Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 74 (est.) ≈ 72 (est.) Reviews found online 82 77 Grabber Arctic: 60% × 74 (est.) + 40% × 81.6 = 77
Winterforce 2: 60% × 72.5 (est.) + 40% × 76.6 = 74
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).
No road tests of snow for Winterforce 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).
-
68
Comfort
Grabber Arctic +1751Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 68 (est.) ≈ 64 (est.) Reviews found online 67 43 Grabber Arctic: 40% × 68.3 (est.) + 60% × 67.1 = 68
Winterforce 2: 40% × 63.5 (est.) + 60% × 43.1 = 51
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).
No road tests of comfort for Winterforce 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).
-
66
Noise
Grabber Arctic +858Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 65 46 Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 64.8 = 66
Winterforce 2: 60% × 66.4 (est.) + 40% × 46 = 58
No road tests of noise for Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
70
Treadwear
Grabber Arctic +1159Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 68 (est.) ≈ 62 (est.) Reviews found online 72 54 Grabber Arctic: 60% × 68.4 (est.) + 40% × 71.6 = 70
Winterforce 2: 60% × 62 (est.) + 40% × 54.1 = 59
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).
No road tests of treadwear for Winterforce 2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).
-
–
Handling (owners)
No comparison49Why this score
Source Grabber Arctic Winterforce 2 Reviews found online – 49
Scores at a glance
| Category | General Grabber Arctic | Firestone Winterforce 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 71 | 61 |
| Dry | 66 | 50 |
| Wet | 74 | 65 |
| Snow | 77 | 74 |
| Comfort | 68 | 51 |
| Noise | 66 | 58 |
| Treadwear | 70 | 59 |
| Handling (owners) | – | 49 |
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.
Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.
Grabber Arctic
Winterforce 2
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.
| Discipline | Category | Grabber Arctic | Winterforce 2 | Δ | Head-to-head |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Also published by the testers (not in the score) | |||||
| Overall Ranking | Overall | #4/8 2022 Consumer Reports Winter/Snow Truck/SUV Tires | #16/15 2022 Consumer Reports Winter Tires | – | Different tests |
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A 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
Tire B Winterforce 2
Pros
- Exceptional traction and capability in deep snow
- Highly competitive price point
- Reliable performance for daily winter commuting
Cons
- Increased road noise compared to all-season tires
- Noticeable 'mushy' or soft handling feedback on dry pavement
- Limited performance on ice without studs
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · General Grabber Arctic | B · Firestone Winterforce 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Winter | Winter Premium Touring tires |
| Vehicle type | SUV and 4x4 | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | 8 | 31 |
| Rim diameters | 16″ – 20″ | 14″ – 18″ |
| Tread depth | 12/32″ | 12/32″ |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 51 psi | 44 psi |
| Sizes in common | 0 | 0 |
Which one should you actually buy?
General Grabber Arctic
Firestone Winterforce 2
Winner: General Grabber Arctic — better comfort, dry and treadwear. It leads or ties in every category we score. General Grabber Arctic rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 18 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
General Grabber Arctic scores 68 vs 51 on comfort.
General Grabber Arctic scores 66 vs 50 on dry.
General Grabber Arctic scores 70 vs 59 on treadwear.
General Grabber Arctic scores 74 vs 65 on wet.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
Which is better in the wet, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 74 vs 65 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 50 on our dry score.
Which is better in snow, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 77 vs 74 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 58 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 68 vs 51 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Grabber Arctic or Winterforce 2?
General Grabber Arctic, 70 vs 59 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