tirewheelguide

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

General Grabber Arctic vs Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v — 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 + 11 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: Grabber Arctic 71, iceGUARD iG51v 70.

Check price on Amazon · Grabber Arctic Check price on Amazon · iceGUARD iG51v
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.

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v
Tire BYokohama

iceGUARD iG51v

Premium Touring Winter tire

± 8Provisional

Tests – · none yet Owners 68 · 11 reviews

Category by category

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

  1. 66

    Dry

    iceGUARD iG51v +4
    70
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online6571

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

    iceGUARD iG51v: 60% × 69.3 (est.) + 40% × 71.2 = 70

    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 iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.41).

  2. 74

    Wet

    iceGUARD iG51v +3
    77
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 73 (est.)≈ 76 (est.)
    Reviews found online7580

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 72.9 (est.) + 40% × 74.7 = 74

    iceGUARD iG51v: 60% × 75.6 (est.) + 40% × 79.6 = 77

    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 iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.55).

  3. 77

    Snow

    Grabber Arctic +3
    74
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 74 (est.)≈ 72 (est.)
    Reviews found online8276

    Grabber Arctic: 60% × 74.1 (est.) + 40% × 81.7 = 77

    iceGUARD iG51v: 60% × 72.2 (est.) + 40% × 75.8 = 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 iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.32).

  4. 68

    Comfort

    iceGUARD iG51v +1
    69
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 69 (est.)
    Reviews found online6769

    Grabber Arctic: 40% × 68.3 (est.) + 60% × 67 = 68

    iceGUARD iG51v: 40% × 68.7 (est.) + 60% × 68.8 = 69

    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 iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.20).

  5. 66

    Noise

    Grabber Arctic +3
    63
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 66 (est.)≈ 66 (est.)
    Reviews found online6557

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

    iceGUARD iG51v: 60% × 66.3 (est.) + 40% × 57.4 = 63

    No road tests of noise for Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is the tested tires’ average (66): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 70

    Treadwear

    Grabber Arctic +14
    56
    Why this score
    SourceGrabber ArcticiceGUARD iG51v
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 60 (est.)
    Reviews found online7249

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

    iceGUARD iG51v: 60% × 60.3 (est.) + 40% × 49 = 56

    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 iceGUARD iG51v. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.36).

Scores at a glance
CategoryGeneral Grabber ArcticYokohama iceGUARD iG51v
Relative Score 71 70
Dry 66 70
Wet 74 77
Snow 77 74
Comfort 68 69
Noise 66 63
Treadwear 70 56

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
± 7

Grabber Arctic

± 8

iceGUARD iG51v

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 iceGUARD iG51v

Not enough owner reviews yet to extract themes.

Specs side by side

Attribute A · General Grabber Arctic B · Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v
CategoryWinterPremium Touring Winter tire
Vehicle typeSUV and 4x4SUV and 4x4
Sizes available82
Rim diameters16″ – 20″18″
Tread depth12/32″13/32″
SidewallBlackwallBlackwall
Max pressure51 psi51 psi

Which one should you actually buy?

General Grabber Arctic

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v

Too close to call: General Grabber Arctic and Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v are within 2 points overall. General Grabber Arctic is stronger on treadwear, snow and noise. Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v is stronger on dry and wet. General Grabber Arctic rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 18 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 11 reviews), so read this result as provisional.

Pick tire A You want the longest tread life

General Grabber Arctic scores 70 vs 56 on treadwear.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v scores 70 vs 66 on dry.

Pick tire A You drive through snowy winters

General Grabber Arctic scores 77 vs 74 on snow.

Pick tire A You want a quieter cabin

General Grabber Arctic scores 66 vs 63 on noise.

Tire A · General Grabber Arctic
Check price on Amazon
Tire B · Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v
Check price on Amazon

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

Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

Which is better in the wet, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v, 77 vs 74 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

Yokohama iceGUARD iG51v, 70 vs 66 on our dry score.

Which is better in snow, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

General Grabber Arctic, 77 vs 74 on our snow score.

Which is quieter, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

General Grabber Arctic, 66 vs 63 on our noise score.

Which is more comfortable, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

Neither, by our numbers: 68 vs 69 on the comfort score, within 3 points.

Which lasts longer, Grabber Arctic or iceGUARD iG51v?

General Grabber Arctic, 70 vs 56 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