tirewheelguide
Head-to-head Updated

General Grabber Arctic vs Hankook Winter i*cept RS — 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 + 6 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Grabber Arctic 70, Winter i*cept RS 71.

Check price on Amazon · Grabber Arctic Check price on Amazon · Winter i*cept RS
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.

Category by category

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

  1. 66

    Dry

    Winter i*cept RS +3
    69
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online6570

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.6 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66

    Winter i*cept RS: 60% × 68.7 (est.) + 40% × 69.7 = 69

    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 Winter i*cept RS. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

  2. 74

    Wet

    Grabber Arctic +1
    73
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 73 (est.)≈ 72 (est.)
    Reviews found online7573

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 73 (est.) + 40% × 74.8 = 74

    Winter i*cept RS: 60% × 72.2 (est.) + 40% × 73.4 = 73

    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 Winter i*cept RS. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 77

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 74 (est.)–
    Reviews found online82–

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 74 (est.) + 40% × 81.6 = 77

    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).

  4. 68

    Comfort

    Winter i*cept RS +2
    70
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online6770

    Grabber Arctic: 40% × 68.4 (est.) + 60% × 67.1 = 68

    Winter i*cept RS: 40% × 69 (est.) + 60% × 70 = 70

    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 Winter i*cept RS. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

  5. 66

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 66 (est.)–
    Reviews found online65–

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 66.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.6 = 66

    No road tests of noise for Grabber Arctic. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 70

    Treadwear

    Winter i*cept RS +2
    72
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 70 (est.)
    Reviews found online7275

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 68.3 (est.) + 40% × 71.5 = 70

    Winter i*cept RS: 60% × 69.7 (est.) + 40% × 75.3 = 72

    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 Winter i*cept RS. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

  7. –

    Handling (owners)

    No comparison
    71
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RS
    Reviews found online–71
Scores at a glance
CategoryGeneral Grabber ArcticHankook Winter i*cept RS
Relative Score 70 71
Dry 66 69
Wet 74 73
Snow 77 –
Comfort 68 70
Noise 66 –
Treadwear 70 72
Handling (owners) – 71

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

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

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

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

Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

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

Recomputed
Headline score
± 8

Grabber Arctic

± 8

Winter i*cept RS

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.

DisciplineCategoryGrabber ArcticWinter i*cept RSΔHead-to-head
Also published by the testers (not in the score)
Overall Ranking Overall #4/8 2022 Consumer Reports Winter/Snow Truck/SUV Tires #10/48 2014 50 Winter Tyre Braking Overview – 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
All owner themes in the Grabber Arctic review

Tire B Winter i*cept RS

Pros

  • Exceptional grip and performance in medium to heavy snow conditions
  • Low rolling resistance contributing to great fuel economy
  • Durable wear rate given the winter conditions

Cons

  • Very soft rubber compound reduces performance and handling on dry, hot roads
  • Less suited for extended high-speed motorway driving
All owner themes in the Winter i*cept RS review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · General Grabber Arctic B · Hankook Winter i*cept RS
CategoryWinterWinter
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4Passenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available817
Rim diameters16″ – 20″13″ – 16″
Tread depth12/32″—
SidewallBlackwall—
Max pressure51 psi—
Sizes in common00

Which one should you actually buy?

General Grabber Arctic

Hankook Winter i*cept RS

Too close to call: General Grabber Arctic and Hankook Winter i*cept RS are within 2 points overall. Hankook Winter i*cept RS is stronger on dry. General Grabber Arctic rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 18 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Hankook Winter i*cept RS rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 6 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Hankook Winter i*cept RS scores 69 vs 66 on dry.

Tire A · General Grabber Arctic
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Hankook Winter i*cept RS
Check price on Amazon

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

Grabber Arctic or Winter i*cept RS?

Which is better in the wet, Grabber Arctic or Winter i*cept RS?

Neither, by our numbers: 74 vs 73 on the wet score, within 3 points.

Which grips better on dry roads, Grabber Arctic or Winter i*cept RS?

Hankook Winter i*cept RS, 69 vs 66 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, Grabber Arctic or Winter i*cept RS?

Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 70 on the comfort score, within 3 points.

Which lasts longer, Grabber Arctic or Winter i*cept RS?

Neither, by our numbers: 70 vs 72 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.

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