18 shops · 56 ·847+ products

Comparison: Kumho WinterCraft WP51 vs. Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2 (2026)

3 mutual test(s) with detailed data

Nexen wins on value and mileage; Kumho wins on ice and fitment availability.

On paper, the Kumho WinterCraft WP51 and the Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2 look like a straightforward contest between two South Korean winter tyres — but the practical reality sets them apart almost immediately. Kumho's WP51 is an established upper-middle-segment winter tyre available in 52 dimensions spanning R13 to R17, with a proper competitive test record and a successor already in the market in the form of the Kumho WinterCraft WP52. The Nexen WH2, despite its impressive owner satisfaction scores, is currently available in a single 13-inch dimension — which makes it a very narrow recommendation in practice. Where the two do meet, five shared test programmes from 2016–2018 give the Nexen a 3–2 head-to-head advantage, though the margins across most disciplines are small.

Kumho WinterCraft WP51
Good for
Drivers needing R13–R17 fitments Those prioritising ice and snow grip Budget buyers wanting a tested winter tyre Discounted stock from outgoing model
Not ideal for
Drivers prioritising fuel efficiency Those needing sizes above R17 Drivers focused on aquaplaning safety
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
Good for
Budget-conscious drivers in R13 fitments High-mileage drivers seeking lower running costs City drivers in light winter conditions Value-first buyers with good snow grip needs
Not ideal for
Anyone needing sizes above R13 Drivers on fast roads with standing water risk Those requiring strong ice performance data

Test Profile

Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Number of tests
11
7
Best position
#5
#6
Average position
17.1
14.0
Latest test
2021
2018
Available sizes
71
64

Performance comparison

Averaged from 3 tests

Wet Performance
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
64%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
68%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Wet Braking
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
49%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
82%
Wet Handling
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
65%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
72%
Wet Circle Cornering
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
50%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
79%
Aquaplaning Longitudinal
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
82%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
65%
Aquaplaning Cross
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
75%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
42%

Wet braking distances across the two shared braking tests are remarkably close: the Kumho WinterCraft WP51 averages 39.9 metres versus 39.8 metres for the Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2 — a statistical dead heat across two measured tests. In the Autobild 2018 195/65 R15 test, the Nexen stopped in 36.8m to the Kumho's 38.8m; in the 2016 205/55 R16 test, the Kumho gained that back at 41.0m versus 42.8m. So on wet braking specifically, neither tyre holds a meaningful edge. Where they do diverge significantly is on aquaplaning: the Kumho's resistance scores are meaningfully better than the Nexen's, which carries a notably low aquaplaning score — a real consideration for drivers who encounter standing water on faster roads. Wet handling scores also favour the Nexen in measured cornering tests, but the aquaplaning gap is the more safety-critical finding.

Dry Performance
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
74%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
75%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Dry Braking
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
68%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
78%
Dry Handling
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
72%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
77%
Dry Lane Change
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
90%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
70%
Dry Steering Reaction
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
65%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
75%

Dry performance is where the Nexen WH2 actually holds its own most convincingly. Its dry braking and handling scores average above the Kumho's in independent evaluations, and measured dry handling figures back that up. In the shared tests, the Nexen consistently placed ahead of the Kumho in the overall classifications that included dry assessment, finishing 6th in a 16-tyre ADAC test where the Kumho managed only 12th. The Kumho WinterCraft WP51 is not weak in dry conditions — its handling at the limit is rated reasonably for a budget-adjacent winter tyre — but it does not match the Nexen's dry confidence, and in the AutoMotorSport 2018 test it finished last in an 11-tyre field, a result that reflects meaningful dry-handling limitations under pressure.

Snow Performance
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
79%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
81%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Snow Braking
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
90%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
84%
Snow Traction
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
82%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
84%
Snow Handling
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
75%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
74%
Snow Circle Cornering
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
70%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
80%

Snow and ice performance is where the Kumho WinterCraft WP51 is most convincing. Its ice braking, ice lateral guidance, and snow handling scores are among its strongest results, and in the shared Autobild 2018 braking test it stopped in 28.0m on snow versus 29.4m for the Nexen — a meaningful gap. The Nexen matches it reasonably well on snow traction and snow braking in isolation, but the Kumho's broader ice credentials give it the advantage for drivers who regularly face icy surfaces. Both tyres earned recommended verdicts from ACE 2018, which is a reasonable baseline for moderate winter conditions. Owner feedback on the Nexen confirms solid snow performance — one driver on a Honda Accord reported being genuinely impressed in snow — but the Kumho's ice data is the more reassuring in markets with sustained cold spells.

Ice Performance
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
81%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
81%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Ice Braking Abs
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
83%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
83%
Ice Lateral Guidance
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
78%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
78%
Comfort & Noise
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
82%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
77%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Noise Exterior
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
79%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
74%
Noise Interior
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
71%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
71%
Ride Comfort
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
95%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
85%

Real-world owner feedback gives the Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2 a strong comfort reputation: it is rated 9.1 out of 10 across over 200 Heureka reviews, with quietness cited nine times as a specific positive. One owner noted the tyres were particularly silent in the first 5,000 km, though noise increased toward 10,000 km — a pattern consistent with tread wear reducing the noise-absorbing geometry. The Nexen also scores notably higher on predicted mileage than the Kumho, suggesting lower overall running costs for those who do find it in their size. The Kumho WinterCraft WP51 is competent on comfort but its rolling resistance figure is poor — one of its weakest measured scores — which translates to a real fuel consumption penalty over the tyre's life. Neither tyre is a refined touring product, but the Nexen's ownership experience is clearly the more positive of the two.

Economy
Confidence
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
66%
Kumho
WinterCraft WP51
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
73%
Nexen
Winguard Snow G WH2
Rolling Resistance
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
49%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
57%
Fuel Efficiency
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
72%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
74%
Mileage
Kumho WinterCraft WP51
78%
Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2
89%

Performance spider chart

Verdict

The most important thing to know before buying the Nexen Winguard Snow G WH2 is that it is currently listed in only a single 13-inch size — which immediately rules it out for the vast majority of drivers. If you happen to need that specific fitment and value matters, the Nexen's strong owner reviews, competitive wet braking, and impressive predicted mileage make it genuinely good value. For everyone else, the Kumho WinterCraft WP51 is the practical option: 52 dimensions, solid ice performance, and a competitive record in independent tests. It has been superseded by the Kumho WinterCraft WP52, so it may be available at a discount — which is worth factoring in. Neither tyre belongs in the top tier of the winter segment, but for budget-conscious buyers in the right size, both earn their keep.

Tests used in comparison

OrganizationSeasonYearDimension
ACEACE
Winter
2018185/65 R15View
ADACADAC
Winter
2018205/55 R16View
AutoMotorSportAutoMotorSport
Winter
2018205/55 R16View

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

View general comparison

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison

TheTireLab.com

GET

TheTireLab.com

Compare tyres, read test results and find the best prices — all in one app.