2020 Retread Summer Tyre Test

Here at Tyre Reviews, we receive many different questions about tyres, but one question that comes up more than most asks if modern retreaded tyres, sometimes called "retread" or "remoulds", any good?

While we've not been able to test ourselves, tests from many years ago indicate that retreaded tyres don't perform as well as even a budget tyre. Car tyres typically aren't designed to be retreaded (commercial bus and lorry tyres are), so the retreading process can leave you with not only poor performance, but a product that could be classified as unsafe.

Naturally in the past few years there have been improvements in the car retreading process, and one brand in particular, King Meiler, has established a name for itself as "the" retreading brand.

To find out whether a modern retread can match a premium, or even a budget tyre, the Polish magazine "Motor" have tested the King Meiler HPZ against the premium Continental PremiumContact 6, and a much cheaper Debica Presto HP.

The results speak for themselves.

Dry

It's been a while since we've seen such huge differences in the dry between a premium tyre and a brand like Debica, which indicates that this version of the Presto HP certainly isn't the grippiest tyre on test, so for the retreaded tyre to be so far behind in both dry braking and dry handling, indicates a serious lack of grip!

Wet

Wet was a similar story to dry, except with larger margins. While the Debica stopped the car a pretty sizable 6.3 meters after the premium Continental, the King Meiler took a HUGE extra 24.3 meters to stop the car, again from 100 km/h.  This means, where the car on the Debica stops, the car fitted with the King-Meiler tyres will still be doing more than 48 km/h!

The retread tyre also performed poorly in straight aquaplaning.

Environment

With the retreaded tyre both noiser, and less comfortable than the premium and budget tyres, its only positive quality was price. However, with the longevity of the tyre untested, is a 100 euro saving really worth all the negative qualities?

Results

1st: Continental Premium Contact 6

Continental Premium Contact 6
  • 195/65 R16
Test#Difference%
Dry Braking1st100%
Dry Handling1st100%
Subj. Dry Handling1st
Wet Braking1st100%
Wet Handling1st100%
Straight Aqua2nd-0.2 Km/H99.76%
Subj. Comfort1st
Noise2nd+1.1 dB98.29%
Price3rd+99.04 56.71%
Excellent handling and short braking distances in all conditions.
Relatively poor aquaplaning resistance, increased noise level.

Read Reviews

2nd: Debica Presto HP

Debica Presto HP
  • 195/65 R16
Test#Difference%
Dry Braking2nd+3.7 M90.56%
Dry Handling2nd+0.7 s98.69%
Subj. Dry Handling2nd-2 Points
Wet Braking2nd+6.3 M89.16%
Wet Handling2nd+5.3 s94.24%
Straight Aqua1st100%
Subj. Comfort2nd-1 Points
Noise1st100%
Price2nd+45.56 74.01%
Good aquaplaning resistance with low noise.
Average braking performance.

Read Reviews

3rd: King Meiler HPZ

King-Meiler HPZ
  • 195/65 R16
Test#Difference%
Dry Braking3rd+7 M83.53%
Dry Handling3rd+2.4 s95.64%
Subj. Dry Handling3rd-2.9 Points
Wet Braking3rd+24.3 M68.07%
Wet Handling3rd+13.8 s86.27%
Straight Aqua3rd-11.2 Km/H86.39%
Subj. Comfort3rd-1.5 Points
Noise3rd+1.4 dB97.84%
Price1st100%
Low price, acceptable braking performance and handling on dry surfaces
Poor handling and dangerously long braking distances on wet surfaces, weak aquaplaning resistance, high noise level.

Read Reviews

Similar Tyre Tests




Discussion:

comments powered by Disqus