2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test

It's the 50th anniversary of the ADAC tyre test, and to celebrate the German automotive body have tested fifty summer tyres in the popular 205/55 R16 tyre size, and have included wear testing for every tyre!

There's a lot to unpack in this test, so we'll dive straight in! Headline notes, there are two Michelin tyres in this test, the Michelin Primacy 4+ and the energy saving Michelin e.Primacy, the Continental on test is not the new PremiumContact 7, it's the previous model, the Continental PremiumContact 6, and Continental also have the new Continental UltraContact in the test which is meant to be a lower rolling resistance and higher mileage tyre for those who drive a lot of distance!

Test Publication:

205/55 R16 50 tyres 4 categories

Similar Tests

Images courtesy of ADAC

Test Publication:

https://www.adac.de/rund-ums-fahrzeug/ausstattung-technik-zubehoer/reifen/reifentest/

Images courtesy of ADAC

Test Size: 205/55 R16

Tyres Tested: 50 tyres

Test Categories:
4 categories (12 tests)

Similar Tests

Wear

Wear is a key quality of any tyre - what good is a tyre that has amazing grip if it only lasts a few thousand miles?! Road wear testing is incredibly expensive, and with 50 sets of tyres on test ADAC had to split the tyres between road and machine wearing with control tyres between the two to ensure data correlation. 

As usual, Michelin led the wear test, but not with the tyre you'd expect. The Michelin e.Primacy, which starts with lower than average tread depth and is designed for very low fuel use (more on that later) recorded a staggering estimated 71,500kms tread life! 

The second best tyre was the impressive Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 which once again highlights the longevity of modern Goodyear products, and the low wearing Michelin Primacy 4+ was just beaten to third by the budget Doublecoin DC99. This also happens to be the best result for the Doublecoin, keep an eye on it later in the test.

Of the known brand names, it was a disappointing result for Uniroyal, Nokian and Dunlop, all projected to have less than half the miles of the best.

The advantage of having the prices of the tyres and estimated mileage, you can get an idea of the value of the tyres, based in Euros Per 1000km to see how much you get for your money.

As the Doublecoin was one of the best wearing AND one of the cheapest, it offered exceptional value, but we still wouldn't recommend fitting it unless you're really into sliding around. Of the good tyres on test, it was again the Goodyear and Michelin offering great cost per mile, but the Kumho Ecsta HS52 was up there in the mix too.

Wet

Often wear comes at the expense of wet grip, but once again Goodyear and Michelin (with the Primacy 4+ at least) are proving to break that trend. ADAC only published their wet braking data, of which they use two surfaces, asphalt and concrete. This is where the Michelin, Goodyear and Continental stretch their legs, but it was also a good grip result for the Cooper, Hankook and ESA Tecar on both surfaces.

Straight aquaplaning was led by Uniroyal, with the Doublecoin and Michelin e.Primacy struggling. You can read the result of curved aquaplaning in the results table below.

Dry

Continental once again led the way in dry braking, narrowly beating out the Hankook and Michelin e.Primacy.

Environment

As the environmental impact of all industry is becoming ever more important, the big tyre tests are now measuring "abrasion" which is how much rubber, measured in weight, the tyre loses. While a high mileage tyre should lead in this category, it isn't always a straight correlation as the tyres have different amounts of material in them.

The best in test was the e.Primacy, and ignoring the budget Michelin also did very well with the Primacy 4+, but Continentals new high mileage tyre, the UltraContact, also performed extremely well.

Fuel consumption was measured in a real world test rather than a machine rolling resistance test, and, well, there was a disappointingly small range of results. The total spread was 5.5 litres per 100km to 5.9 litres per 100km.

Given the relatively small real world advantage a tyre like the e.Primacy has in this test over a tyre like the Bridgestone Turanza T005, but the large disadvantage it has in wet grip, it makes me wonder if ultra low rolling resistance tyres are really the correct choice for anyone.

Finally external noise was measured, but for the sake of avoiding another long chart, you can find the data below. The e.Primacy was impressively quiet, and the Petlas impressively loud!

Results

You can find the full results below, with some of the testers notes on key tyres. If you want to see the full test we strongly suggest you learn German and head over to the ADAC website here.

1^st

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Very balanced, good on dry and wet roads, good environmental record, very high mileage (top grade), efficient.

None mentioned.

Driving safety: The Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. It offers the driver decent feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and boasts an above-average braking distance on dry roads. On wet roads, the Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 shines in braking distance measurements and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. Only when it comes to aquaplaning behavior does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 scores with above-average mileage in the wear test and low abrasion. The efficiency is also impressive thanks to the low tire weight and low fuel consumption. When it comes to noise, the Goodyear performs satisfactorily.

Dry

95.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	13th	37.7 M	35.9 M	+1.8 M	95.23%

Wet

92.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	11th	37.4 M	34.4 M	+3 M	91.98%
Wet Braking - Concrete	5th	36 M	35.2 M	+0.8 M	97.78%
Straight Aqua	27th	80.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.4 Km/H	92.62%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

94.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	15th	70.6 dB	69.1 dB	+1.5 dB	97.88%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

69.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	2nd	65700 KM	71500 KM	-5800 KM	91.89%
Value	8th	1.67 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.64 Price/1000	61.68%
Price	44th	110	45	+65	40.91%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	5th	61.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+26.5 mg/km/t	56.77%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £94.99 Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Continental Premium Contact 6

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Very balanced, high driving safety (top mark), good on dry and wet roads (top marks), high mileage.

Weaknesses in efficiency.

Driving safety: The Continental PremiumContact 6 is impressive across the board and secured the top mark in the test for driving safety. It offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and claims the shortest braking distance in the test. This means that its performance on dry roads is clearly rated as good. But the Continental also shines with its performance on wet roads and also secured the top mark in the test here. It delivers the shortest braking distances in the test and is absolutely safe and easy to control over the wet handling course. Only when it comes to aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In terms of the environmental balance, the PremiumContact 6 just missed out on a good rating. In the wear test, it delivers a good predicted mileage and its abrasion is also low, in terms of efficiency it just misses a good rating due to the tyre weight. When it comes to noise, it also performs satisfactorily.

Dry

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	35.9 M			100%

Wet

93.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	34.4 M			100%
Wet Braking - Concrete	1st	35.2 M			100%
Straight Aqua	27th	80.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.4 Km/H	92.62%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	33rd	71.4 dB	69.1 dB	+2.3 dB	96.78%
Tyre Weight	36th	8.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.3 Kg	85.39%

Value

59.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	6th	49700 KM	71500 KM	-21800 KM	69.51%
Value	32nd	2.31 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.28 Price/1000	44.59%
Price	48th	115	45	+70	39.13%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	10th	69.5 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+34.7 mg/km/t	50.07%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Michelin Primacy 4+

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Very balanced, good on dry and wet roads, good environmental record, very high mileage (top grade.)

None mentioned.

Driving safety: The Michelin Primacy 4+ secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Michelin already offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road, but still shows itself to be safe in the limit area. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Michelin gets good ratings in terms of braking distance measurements, aquaplaning behavior and handling. This makes it very balanced on wet roads. It offers good grip and safe driving characteristics.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Primacy 4+ secures the second best rating in the test (best: Michelin e.Primacy). Its predicted mileage is classified as very good and its abrasion is also low.

Dry

97.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	36.9 M	35.9 M	+1 M	97.29%

Wet

93.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	36.7 M	34.4 M	+2.3 M	93.73%
Wet Braking - Concrete	11th	37.7 M	35.2 M	+2.5 M	93.37%
Straight Aqua	7th	83.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-3.2 Km/H	96.31%
Curved Aquaplaning	14th	3.6 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.4 m/sec2	90%

Comfort

93.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	12th	70.5 dB	69.1 dB	+1.4 dB	98.01%
Tyre Weight	26th	8.6 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1 Kg	88.37%

Value

67.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	4th	61300 KM	71500 KM	-10200 KM	85.73%
Value	16th	1.96 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.93 Price/1000	52.55%
Price	49th	120	45	+75	37.5%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	4th	53.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+18.9 mg/km/t	64.8%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Bridgestone Turanza T005

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry and wet roads, good environmental balance, high efficiency (top mark.)

None mentioned.

Driving safety: The Bridgestone Turanza T005 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Bridgestone Turanza T005 offers the driver decent feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and boasts a short braking distance on dry roads. On wet roads, the Bridgestone excels in braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. Only when aquaplaning transversely does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: The Bridgestone Turanza T005 achieves a good result in the environmental balance. It shines in terms of efficiency thanks to its low weight and fuel consumption, but its predicted mileage is rated as just good.

Dry

96.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	37.3 M	35.9 M	+1.4 M	96.25%

Wet

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	12th	37.7 M	34.4 M	+3.3 M	91.25%
Wet Braking - Concrete	19th	39.1 M	35.2 M	+3.9 M	90.03%
Straight Aqua	8th	82.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-3.9 Km/H	95.5%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

97.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	44th	72.3 dB	69.1 dB	+3.2 dB	95.57%
Tyre Weight	3rd	7.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.1 Kg	98.7%

Value

56%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	17th	40400 KM	71500 KM	-31100 KM	56.5%
Value	43rd	2.75 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.72 Price/1000	37.45%
Price	46th	111	45	+66	40.54%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	15th	73.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+38.5 mg/km/t	47.48%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £101.99 Results Table Test Charts

5^th

Nokian WetProof

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/68
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry and wet roads, efficient.

Weakness in the environmental balance, weaknesses in mileage and abrasion, slight weaknesses in sustainability.

Driving safety: The Nokian Wetproof impresses with its driving characteristics and thus secures a good rating for driving safety. It offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, is absolutely safe at the limit and also impresses with short braking distances on dry roads. Overall, its performance on dry roads is clearly rated as good. But the Nokian also offers good properties on wet roads. It has good ratings for braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and handling. Only in lateral aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Wetproof does not get more than a satisfactory rating. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as only satisfactory in relation to the test field. Thanks to the low tire weight and low fuel consumption, however, it achieves a good rating for efficiency.

Dry

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	14th	37.8 M	35.9 M	+1.9 M	94.97%

Wet

93.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	35.8 M	34.4 M	+1.4 M	96.09%
Wet Braking - Concrete	8th	37.3 M	35.2 M	+2.1 M	94.37%
Straight Aqua	2nd	84.6 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.58%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

94.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	15th	70.6 dB	69.1 dB	+1.5 dB	97.88%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

55.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	31st	35500 KM	71500 KM	-36000 KM	49.65%
Value	34th	2.45 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.42 Price/1000	42.04%
Price	30th	87	45	+42	51.72%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	41st	90.9 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+56.1 mg/km/t	38.28%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/67
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on wet and dry roads (top mark.)

Slight weaknesses in the environmental balance, weakness in efficiency, weaknesses in sustainability.

Driving safety: The Falken ZIEX ZE310 ECORUN sets the bar high on dry roads and also secures a good rating on wet roads, which leads to a good assessment of driving safety. The Falken secured the top mark in the test on dry roads. It offers the driver exemplary feedback on the steering wheel, is absolutely safe at the limit and also impresses with a short braking distance. The Falken ZIEX ZE310 ECORUN also gets a good rating on wet roads. It gets good ratings for braking distance measurements, lateral aquaplaning and wet handling. The test car can be driven safely and easily controlled over the course. Only in lateral aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the ZIEX ZE310 does not get more than a satisfactory result. It does get good ratings for its predicted mileage and abrasion, but since it's quite heavy in comparison, it doesn't get more than a satisfactory rating for efficiency. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Turkey does not go beyond an adequate assessment.

Dry

96%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	11th	37.4 M	35.9 M	+1.5 M	95.99%

Wet

92.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	36.8 M	34.4 M	+2.4 M	93.48%
Wet Braking - Concrete	4th	35.8 M	35.2 M	+0.6 M	98.32%
Straight Aqua	33rd	79.7 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7 Km/H	91.93%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

90.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	42nd	71.9 dB	69.1 dB	+2.8 dB	96.11%
Tyre Weight	40th	9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.4 Kg	84.44%

Value

58.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	15th	40800 KM	71500 KM	-30700 KM	57.06%
Value	25th	2.18 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.15 Price/1000	47.25%
Price	33rd	89	45	+44	50.56%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	22nd	75.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+40.9 mg/km/t	45.97%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

Continental UltraContact

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry roads, good environmental record, very high mileage.

Slight weakness on wet roads.

Driving safety: The Continental UltraContact is rated as just satisfactory when it comes to driving safety. The UltraContact offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road, but is still safe at the limit. Thanks to its short braking distance, it can still secure a good overall rating on dry roads. On wet roads, however, the UltraContact does not get more than a satisfactory rating. Although it scores in the braking distance measurements and also in handling with good grip and safe driving characteristics, it falters when it comes to aquaplaning. In the case of longitudinal aquaplaning, he does not get more than a satisfactory result, and in the case of transverse aquaplaning, even more than an adequate result.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the UltraContact secures one of the best results in the test. His predicted mileage is classified as very good, and he only just misses a very good rating for wear. The tire also scores with its low weight and low fuel consumption.

Dry

96.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	7th	37.1 M	35.9 M	+1.2 M	96.77%

Wet

85.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	16th	38.3 M	34.4 M	+3.9 M	89.82%
Wet Braking - Concrete	16th	38.7 M	35.2 M	+3.5 M	90.96%
Straight Aqua	46th	76.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-10.2 Km/H	88.24%
Curved Aquaplaning	46th	2.9 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1.1 m/sec2	72.5%

Comfort

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	23rd	71 dB	69.1 dB	+1.9 dB	97.32%
Tyre Weight	9th	8.2 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.6 Kg	92.68%

Value

66.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	5th	55900 KM	71500 KM	-15600 KM	78.18%
Value	20th	2.02 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.99 Price/1000	50.99%
Price	47th	113	45	+68	39.82%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	3rd	52.5 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+17.7 mg/km/t	66.29%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

8^th

Kumho Ecsta HS52

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry and wet roads.

Slight weaknesses in the environmental balance, weaknesses in efficiency, weaknesses in sustainability.

Driving safety: The Kumho Ecsta HS52 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The HS52 offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 scores in the braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. However, its transverse aquaplaning behavior is only rated as satisfactory. Overall, the Kumho secured a good rating for wet performance.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the Kumho does not get more than a satisfactory result. Although it scores in terms of predicted mileage and abrasion, but offers only satisfactory efficiency due to the higher tire weight. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in China is rated as sufficient.

Dry

97.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	36.7 M	35.9 M	+0.8 M	97.82%

Wet

90%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	17th	38.4 M	34.4 M	+4 M	89.58%
Wet Braking - Concrete	9th	37.6 M	35.2 M	+2.4 M	93.62%
Straight Aqua	13th	81.9 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.8 Km/H	94.46%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

90.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	23rd	71 dB	69.1 dB	+1.9 dB	97.32%
Tyre Weight	41st	9.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.5 Kg	83.52%

Value

61.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	12th	43500 KM	71500 KM	-28000 KM	60.84%
Value	13th	1.89 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000	54.5%
Price	24th	82	45	+37	54.88%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	29th	79.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+44.5 mg/km/t	43.88%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

9^th

Hankook Ventus Prime 4

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry and wet roads.

Slight weakness when aquaplaning, slight weaknesses in the environmental balance, weaknesses in efficiency.

Driving safety: The Hankook Ventus Prime4 secured a good overall rating for driving safety. The Ventus Prime 4 offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Hankook Ventus Prime 4 scores in braking distance measurements and in wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. However, its aquaplaning behavior is only rated as satisfactory. Overall, the Hankook secured a good rating for wet performance.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Ventus Prime4 gets a good rating for the predicted mileage and for its abrasion. In terms of efficiency, on the other hand, it loses out due to its relatively high weight. All in all, it does not go beyond a satisfactory result in terms of the environmental balance.

Dry

98.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	36.6 M	35.9 M	+0.7 M	98.09%

Wet

91.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	35.8 M	34.4 M	+1.4 M	96.09%
Wet Braking - Concrete	2nd	35.5 M	35.2 M	+0.3 M	99.15%
Straight Aqua	43rd	77.6 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-9.1 Km/H	89.5%
Curved Aquaplaning	39th	3.2 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.8 m/sec2	80%

Comfort

89.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	38th	71.7 dB	69.1 dB	+2.6 dB	96.37%
Tyre Weight	41st	9.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.5 Kg	83.52%

Value

60.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	13th	42200 KM	71500 KM	-29300 KM	59.02%
Value	22nd	2.11 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.08 Price/1000	48.82%
Price	33rd	89	45	+44	50.56%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	8th	67.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+32.8 mg/km/t	51.48%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

10^th

Nexen N Fera Primus

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Balanced, good on dry and wet roads.

Weakness in the environmental balance, weaknesses in mileage, slight weaknesses in sustainability.

Driving Safety: The Nexen N'Fera Primus secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Nexen offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and is still safe even at the limit. In addition, its braking distance is rated as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the N'Fera Primus gets good ratings for both braking distance measurements and aquaplaning behavior. In terms of handling, the Nexen just missed out on a good rating. All in all, it is still enough for a good assessment of the wet performance.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Nexen does not get more than a satisfactory result. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory.

Dry

94%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	19th	38.2 M	35.9 M	+2.3 M	93.98%

Wet

93.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	15th	38.2 M	34.4 M	+3.8 M	90.05%
Wet Braking - Concrete	12th	37.9 M	35.2 M	+2.7 M	92.88%
Straight Aqua	4th	84.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-2.2 Km/H	97.46%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

94.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	18th	70.7 dB	69.1 dB	+1.6 dB	97.74%
Tyre Weight	19th	8.4 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.8 Kg	90.48%

Value

55%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	38th	33300 KM	71500 KM	-38200 KM	46.57%
Value	39th	2.58 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.55 Price/1000	39.92%
Price	27th	86	45	+41	52.33%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	40th	88.1 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+53.3 mg/km/t	39.5%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

11^th

Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/69
• 3PMSF: no

Good on dry and wet roads.

Not quite balanced, weaknesses in the environmental balance, relatively low mileage (devaluation), significant weakness in sustainability.

Driving safety: The Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Kenda offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and is also safe at the limit. In addition, its braking distance is rated as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Kenetica Pro KR210 missed a good rating in the braking distance measurements, but was able to secure good marks in aquaplaning behavior and handling. All in all, it is enough for a still good assessment of the wet performance.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the Kenda does not get beyond a satisfactory result. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Taiwan is rated as sufficient.

Dry

90.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	32nd	39.5 M	35.9 M	+3.6 M	90.89%

Wet

90.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	22nd	40.2 M	34.4 M	+5.8 M	85.57%
Wet Braking - Concrete	25th	40.1 M	35.2 M	+4.9 M	87.78%
Straight Aqua	5th	84.1 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-2.6 Km/H	97%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

91.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	23rd	71 dB	69.1 dB	+1.9 dB	97.32%
Tyre Weight	36th	8.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.3 Kg	85.39%

Value

57.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	33rd	35100 KM	71500 KM	-36400 KM	49.09%
Value	28th	2.25 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.22 Price/1000	45.78%
Price	21st	79	45	+34	56.96%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	38th	87 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+52.2 mg/km/t	40%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

12^th

Kleber Dynaxer HP4

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/68
• 3PMSF: no

Good for the environmental balance, good for mileage, abrasion and efficiency.

Not quite balanced, weakness on wet roads.

Driving Safety: The driving safety of the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 does not go beyond a satisfactory rating. It offers the driver only average feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and could prove to be a bit more stable during dynamic evasive maneuvers. Its braking distance is still classified as good, but overall it just misses out on a good rating on dry roads. On wet roads, the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 does not get more than a satisfactory rating either. Although it scored well in the aquaplaning tests, it only performed satisfactorily in the braking distance measurements and handling. It lacks a bit of grip and precision for a better rating.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Dynaxer HP4 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. The tire also scores with its low fuel consumption, but it just misses out on a good rating in terms of weight.

Dry

96.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	9th	37.3 M	35.9 M	+1.4 M	96.25%

Wet

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	22nd	40.2 M	34.4 M	+5.8 M	85.57%
Wet Braking - Concrete	24th	39.5 M	35.2 M	+4.3 M	89.11%
Straight Aqua	19th	81.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.4 Km/H	93.77%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

92.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	8th	70.3 dB	69.1 dB	+1.2 dB	98.29%
Tyre Weight	34th	8.8 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.2 Kg	86.36%

Value

65.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	7th	48000 KM	71500 KM	-23500 KM	67.13%
Value	11th	1.83 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.8 Price/1000	56.28%
Price	31st	88	45	+43	51.14%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	6th	63.5 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+28.7 mg/km/t	54.8%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

13^th

Fulda EcoControl HP2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/70
• 3PMSF: no

Good for the environment, good for mileage, abrasion and efficiency.

Not quite balanced, weakness on wet roads.

Driving safety: The Fulda EcoControl HP2 can get a good rating on dry roads, but it does not get more than a satisfactory rating in the wet and thus overall driving safety. Overall, the Fulda still achieves a good rating on dry roads. Although it only offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel, it is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is also classified as clearly good compared to the test field. The EcoControl HP2 misses out on a good rating on wet roads. Although it can show good results in aquaplaning behavior, it does not get more than a satisfactory rating in wet braking and handling. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the EcoControl HP2 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its low fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency.

Dry

94.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	17th	38 M	35.9 M	+2.1 M	94.47%

Wet

89.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	26th	40.8 M	34.4 M	+6.4 M	84.31%
Wet Braking - Concrete	31st	41.1 M	35.2 M	+5.9 M	85.64%
Straight Aqua	23rd	80.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.9 Km/H	93.19%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	95%

Comfort

96.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	30th	71.2 dB	69.1 dB	+2.1 dB	97.05%
Tyre Weight	5th	7.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.3 Kg	96.2%

Value

63.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	8th	47500 KM	71500 KM	-24000 KM	66.43%
Value	13th	1.89 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000	54.5%
Price	35th	90	45	+45	50%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	11th	70.1 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+35.3 mg/km/t	49.64%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

14^th

Toyo Proxes Comfort

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/70
• 3PMSF: no

Still good on dry roads, good environmental balance.

Not quite balanced, slight weakness on wet roads (devaluation), significant weakness in sustainability

Driving safety: The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort just missed out on a good result when it came to driving safety. The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort offers the driver only average feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but still shows itself to be safe in the limit area. Thanks to its short braking distance, the Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort just about got a good rating for dry performance. The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort narrowly missed out on a good rating on wet roads. Its performance is rated as satisfactory for both braking distance and aquaplaning measurements. In wet handling he still gets good ratings, but overall that's not enough to get a good result in the wet.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Proxes Comfort secured a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its low fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Japan does not go beyond a sufficient result.

Dry

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	14th	37.8 M	35.9 M	+1.9 M	94.97%

Wet

88.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	25th	40.6 M	34.4 M	+6.2 M	84.73%
Wet Braking - Concrete	17th	38.8 M	35.2 M	+3.6 M	90.72%
Straight Aqua	40th	78.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-8.4 Km/H	90.31%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

94.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	10th	70.4 dB	69.1 dB	+1.3 dB	98.15%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

60.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	14th	41700 KM	71500 KM	-29800 KM	58.32%
Value	19th	2.01 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.98 Price/1000	51.24%
Price	26th	84	45	+39	53.57%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	25th	75.9 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+41.1 mg/km/t	45.85%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

15^th

Debica Presto HP 2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/B/70
• 3PMSF: no

Good environmental record, good for mileage, abrasion and efficiency.

Not quite balanced, weakness on wet roads.

Driving safety: The Debica Presto HP 2 does not get more than a satisfactory rating in either dry or wet conditions and therefore also overall in terms of driving safety. The Debica offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, so that it is difficult to set the steering angle required for the curve right away. But its handling at the limit is only classified as satisfactory. After all, he can get a good rating for the braking distance. On wet roads, the Debica Presto HP 2 does not get more than a satisfactory rating either. Although the tire received good ratings for its aquaplaning behavior, its properties in braking tests and handling were only rated as satisfactory. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Presto HP 2 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency.

Dry

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	28th	39.4 M	35.9 M	+3.5 M	91.12%

Wet

89.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	33rd	41.8 M	34.4 M	+7.4 M	82.3%
Wet Braking - Concrete	34th	41.7 M	35.2 M	+6.5 M	84.41%
Straight Aqua	12th	82.1 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.6 Km/H	94.69%
Curved Aquaplaning	2nd	3.9 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.1 m/sec2	97.5%

Comfort

95.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	28th	71.1 dB	69.1 dB	+2 dB	97.19%
Tyre Weight	8th	8.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.5 Kg	93.83%

Value

63.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	10th	45700 KM	71500 KM	-25800 KM	63.92%
Value	10th	1.77 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.74 Price/1000	58.19%
Price	23rd	81	45	+36	55.56%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	19th	74 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+39.2 mg/km/t	47.03%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

16^th

Dunlop Sport BluResponse

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/A/68
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	14th	37.8 M	35.9 M	+1.9 M	94.97%

Wet

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	31st	41.5 M	34.4 M	+7.1 M	82.89%
Wet Braking - Concrete	26th	40.2 M	35.2 M	+5 M	87.56%
Straight Aqua	9th	82.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.2 Km/H	95.16%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	95%

Comfort

97.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	39th	71.8 dB	69.1 dB	+2.7 dB	96.24%
Tyre Weight	3rd	7.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.1 Kg	98.7%

Value

53.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	28th	36900 KM	71500 KM	-34600 KM	51.61%
Value	47th	2.98 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.95 Price/1000	34.56%
Price	44th	110	45	+65	40.91%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	32nd	80.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+45.4 mg/km/t	43.39%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £83.99 Results Table Test Charts

17^th

Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Good on dry roads, still good for mileage and efficiency.

Not quite balanced, weaknesses on wet roads, weaknesses in the environmental balance, slight weakness in abrasion (devaluation.)

Driving safety: The Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 is rated as just satisfactory in terms of driving safety due to its wet properties. The Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, can be steered precisely and is safe even at the limit. In addition, it can score with its short braking distance and thus secures a good rating for dry performance. On wet roads, however, the Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 does not go beyond a satisfactory verdict. Although it scored well in the aquaplaning tests and secured good ratings, it was only satisfactory in the braking distance measurements and handling. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: The Cinturato P7 C2 also missed out on a good result in terms of the environmental balance. His predicted mileage is still rated as good, but he does not get more than a satisfactory result when it comes to abrasion. It doesn't help that its fuel consumption and weight are rated as good.

Dry

97%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	37 M	35.9 M	+1.1 M	97.03%

Wet

90.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	24th	40.3 M	34.4 M	+5.9 M	85.36%
Wet Braking - Concrete	19th	39.1 M	35.2 M	+3.9 M	90.03%
Straight Aqua	15th	81.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.9 Km/H	94.35%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

92.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	12th	70.5 dB	69.1 dB	+1.4 dB	98.01%
Tyre Weight	29th	8.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.1 Kg	87.36%

Value

54.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	21st	39500 KM	71500 KM	-32000 KM	55.24%
Value	42nd	2.71 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.68 Price/1000	38.01%
Price	43rd	107	45	+62	42.06%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	36th	82.1 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+47.3 mg/km/t	42.39%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

18^th

Sava Intensa HP2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

94%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	19th	38.2 M	35.9 M	+2.3 M	93.98%

Wet

89.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	27th	40.9 M	34.4 M	+6.5 M	84.11%
Wet Braking - Concrete	30th	40.9 M	35.2 M	+5.7 M	86.06%
Straight Aqua	19th	81.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.4 Km/H	93.77%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	95%

Comfort

95.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	34th	71.5 dB	69.1 dB	+2.4 dB	96.64%
Tyre Weight	6th	8 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.4 Kg	95%

Value

58.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	23rd	38600 KM	71500 KM	-32900 KM	53.99%
Value	27th	2.23 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.2 Price/1000	46.19%
Price	27th	86	45	+41	52.33%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	34th	81.4 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+46.6 mg/km/t	42.75%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

19^th

Semperit Speed Life 3

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	36th	39.7 M	35.9 M	+3.8 M	90.43%

Wet

95.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	10th	37.2 M	34.4 M	+2.8 M	92.47%
Wet Braking - Concrete	3rd	35.7 M	35.2 M	+0.5 M	98.6%
Straight Aqua	15th	81.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.9 Km/H	94.35%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	95%

Comfort

93.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	18th	70.7 dB	69.1 dB	+1.6 dB	97.74%
Tyre Weight	22nd	8.5 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.9 Kg	89.41%

Value

57.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	18th	40000 KM	71500 KM	-31500 KM	55.94%
Value	30th	2.28 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.25 Price/1000	45.18%
Price	38th	91	45	+46	49.45%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	29th	79.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+44.5 mg/km/t	43.88%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

20^th

Firestone RoadHawk

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

94.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	18th	38.1 M	35.9 M	+2.2 M	94.23%

Wet

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	32nd	41.7 M	34.4 M	+7.3 M	82.49%
Wet Braking - Concrete	28th	40.6 M	35.2 M	+5.4 M	86.7%
Straight Aqua	6th	83.6 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-3.1 Km/H	96.42%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	3.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.2 m/sec2	95%

Comfort

97.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	47th	72.4 dB	69.1 dB	+3.3 dB	95.44%
Tyre Weight	1st	7.6 Kg			100%

Value

58.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	25th	38200 KM	71500 KM	-33300 KM	53.43%
Value	31st	2.3 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.27 Price/1000	44.78%
Price	31st	88	45	+43	51.14%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	9th	68.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+33.9 mg/km/t	50.66%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £76.99 Results Table Test Charts

21^st

BFGoodrich Advantage

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

96.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	8th	37.2 M	35.9 M	+1.3 M	96.51%

Wet

89.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	21st	39.8 M	34.4 M	+5.4 M	86.43%
Wet Braking - Concrete	18th	39 M	35.2 M	+3.8 M	90.26%
Straight Aqua	19th	81.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.4 Km/H	93.77%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

91.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	44th	72.3 dB	69.1 dB	+3.2 dB	95.57%
Tyre Weight	29th	8.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.1 Kg	87.36%

Value

56.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	26th	37300 KM	71500 KM	-34200 KM	52.17%
Value	38th	2.57 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.54 Price/1000	40.08%
Price	40th	96	45	+51	46.88%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	12th	71.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+36.4 mg/km/t	48.88%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

22^nd

GT Radial FE2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/69
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	28th	39.4 M	35.9 M	+3.5 M	91.12%

Wet

87.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	28th	41.1 M	34.4 M	+6.7 M	83.7%
Wet Braking - Concrete	32nd	41.3 M	35.2 M	+6.1 M	85.23%
Straight Aqua	17th	81.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.2 Km/H	94%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	36th	71.6 dB	69.1 dB	+2.5 dB	96.51%
Tyre Weight	29th	8.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.1 Kg	87.36%

Value

60.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	33rd	35100 KM	71500 KM	-36400 KM	49.09%
Value	17th	1.99 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.96 Price/1000	51.76%
Price	10th	70	45	+25	64.29%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	37th	83.8 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+49 mg/km/t	41.53%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

23^rd

ESA Tecar Spirit Pro

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	32nd	39.5 M	35.9 M	+3.6 M	90.89%

Wet

94%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	36.3 M	34.4 M	+1.9 M	94.77%
Wet Braking - Concrete	6th	36.2 M	35.2 M	+1 M	97.24%
Straight Aqua	17th	81.5 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.2 Km/H	94%
Curved Aquaplaning	14th	3.6 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.4 m/sec2	90%

Comfort

93.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	23rd	71 dB	69.1 dB	+1.9 dB	97.32%
Tyre Weight	19th	8.4 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.8 Kg	90.48%

Value

69.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	10th	45700 KM	71500 KM	-25800 KM	63.92%
Value	3rd	1.47 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.44 Price/1000	70.07%
Price	6th	67	45	+22	67.16%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	21st	74.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+39.5 mg/km/t	46.84%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

24^th

Barum Bravuris 5HM

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

87.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	47th	41 M	35.9 M	+5.1 M	87.56%

Wet

86.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	29th	41.4 M	34.4 M	+7 M	83.09%
Wet Braking - Concrete	35th	41.9 M	35.2 M	+6.7 M	84.01%
Straight Aqua	26th	80.4 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.3 Km/H	92.73%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

93.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	47th	72.4 dB	69.1 dB	+3.3 dB	95.44%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

57.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	30th	36000 KM	71500 KM	-35500 KM	50.35%
Value	33rd	2.39 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.36 Price/1000	43.1%
Price	27th	86	45	+41	52.33%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	35th	81.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+46.9 mg/km/t	42.59%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

25^th

Viking Protech Newgen

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

89.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	43rd	40.3 M	35.9 M	+4.4 M	89.08%

Wet

86.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	40th	44.2 M	34.4 M	+9.8 M	77.83%
Wet Braking - Concrete	33rd	41.5 M	35.2 M	+6.3 M	84.82%
Straight Aqua	31st	80 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.7 Km/H	92.27%
Curved Aquaplaning	14th	3.6 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.4 m/sec2	90%

Comfort

94.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	15th	70.6 dB	69.1 dB	+1.5 dB	97.88%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

60.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	18th	40000 KM	71500 KM	-31500 KM	55.94%
Value	18th	2 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.97 Price/1000	51.5%
Price	22nd	80	45	+35	56.25%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	27th	78.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+43.4 mg/km/t	44.5%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

26^th

Norauto Prevensys 4

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

92.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	23rd	39 M	35.9 M	+3.1 M	92.05%

Wet

92.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	9th	36.9 M	34.4 M	+2.5 M	93.22%
Wet Braking - Concrete	12th	37.9 M	35.2 M	+2.7 M	92.88%
Straight Aqua	27th	80.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.4 Km/H	92.62%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

94%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	6th	70.1 dB	69.1 dB	+1 dB	98.57%
Tyre Weight	22nd	8.5 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.9 Kg	89.41%

Value

61.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	31st	35500 KM	71500 KM	-36000 KM	49.65%
Value	11th	1.83 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.8 Price/1000	56.28%
Price	5th	65	45	+20	69.23%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	44th	94.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+59.5 mg/km/t	36.9%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

27^th

Apollo Alnac 4g

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/C/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	26th	39.3 M	35.9 M	+3.4 M	91.35%

Wet

87.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	34th	42.2 M	34.4 M	+7.8 M	81.52%
Wet Braking - Concrete	28th	40.6 M	35.2 M	+5.4 M	86.7%
Straight Aqua	13th	81.9 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.8 Km/H	94.46%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

93.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	30th	71.2 dB	69.1 dB	+2.1 dB	97.05%
Tyre Weight	19th	8.4 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.8 Kg	90.48%

Value

52.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	44th	29700 KM	71500 KM	-41800 KM	41.54%
Value	48th	3.03 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+2 Price/1000	33.99%
Price	35th	90	45	+45	50%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	39th	87.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+52.5 mg/km/t	39.86%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

28^th

General Altimax One S

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

89.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	41st	40.2 M	35.9 M	+4.3 M	89.3%

Wet

84.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	39th	43.9 M	34.4 M	+9.5 M	78.36%
Wet Braking - Concrete	38th	43.3 M	35.2 M	+8.1 M	81.29%
Straight Aqua	41st	78.1 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-8.6 Km/H	90.08%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

94.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	10th	70.4 dB	69.1 dB	+1.3 dB	98.15%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

67.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	15th	40800 KM	71500 KM	-30700 KM	57.06%
Value	6th	1.57 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.54 Price/1000	65.61%
Price	3rd	64	45	+19	70.31%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	22nd	75.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+40.9 mg/km/t	45.97%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

29^th

Giti GitiSynergyH2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	28th	39.4 M	35.9 M	+3.5 M	91.12%

Wet

86.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	36th	43.5 M	34.4 M	+9.1 M	79.08%
Wet Braking - Concrete	38th	43.3 M	35.2 M	+8.1 M	81.29%
Straight Aqua	10th	82.4 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.3 Km/H	95.04%
Curved Aquaplaning	14th	3.6 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.4 m/sec2	90%

Comfort

90.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	39th	71.8 dB	69.1 dB	+2.7 dB	96.24%
Tyre Weight	36th	8.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.3 Kg	85.39%

Value

61.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	23rd	38600 KM	71500 KM	-32900 KM	53.99%
Value	15th	1.94 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.91 Price/1000	53.09%
Price	16th	75	45	+30	60%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	33rd	80.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+45.8 mg/km/t	43.18%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

30^th

Petlas Imperium PT515

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	26th	39.3 M	35.9 M	+3.4 M	91.35%

Wet

83.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	37th	43.6 M	34.4 M	+9.2 M	78.9%
Wet Braking - Concrete	37th	43.1 M	35.2 M	+7.9 M	81.67%
Straight Aqua	35th	79.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.4 Km/H	91.46%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

88.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	50th	73.6 dB	69.1 dB	+4.5 dB	93.89%
Tyre Weight	46th	9.2 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.6 Kg	82.61%

Value

66.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	8th	47500 KM	71500 KM	-24000 KM	66.43%
Value	4th	1.56 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000	66.03%
Price	14th	74	45	+29	60.81%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	14th	72.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+37.8 mg/km/t	47.93%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

31^st

Uniroyal RainSport 5

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Good on wet roads.

Less balanced, significant weaknesses on dry roads (devaluation), weakness in environmental performance and sustainability, low mileage, high fuel consumption.

Driving safety: The Uniroyal RainSport 5 is only rated as satisfactory for driving safety due to its dry properties. The RainSport 5 only offers the driver sufficient feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road and also receives an adequate rating for its handling at the limit - in the event of sudden evasive maneuvers, the test car tends to oversteer with the tires, but skilful steering maneuvers can prevent skidding. When it comes to the braking distance, the Uniroyal can secure a good mark with a short value. Overall, its drying properties are classified as satisfactory. On wet roads, the Uniroyal RainSport 5 receives very good ratings for its aquaplaning behavior, for its braking performance and its behavior in wet handling, thanks to good grip and safe and precise driveability, good reviews. Overall, the overall wet performance is rated as good.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Uniroyal RainSport 5 is also clearly rated as satisfactory. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory. The efficiency is still rated as good thanks to the relatively low fuel consumption and weight.

Dry

91.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	24th	39.1 M	35.9 M	+3.2 M	91.82%

Wet

97.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	36.8 M	34.4 M	+2.4 M	93.48%
Wet Braking - Concrete	7th	36.3 M	35.2 M	+1.1 M	96.97%
Straight Aqua	1st	86.7 Km/H			100%
Curved Aquaplaning	1st	4 m/sec2			100%

Comfort

93.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	22nd	70.9 dB	69.1 dB	+1.8 dB	97.46%
Tyre Weight	22nd	8.5 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.9 Kg	89.41%

Value

52.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	38th	33300 KM	71500 KM	-38200 KM	46.57%
Value	44th	2.76 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.73 Price/1000	37.32%
Price	39th	92	45	+47	48.91%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	43rd	93.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+58.4 mg/km/t	37.34%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

32^nd

Hifly HF201

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/C/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	37th	39.8 M	35.9 M	+3.9 M	90.2%

Wet

82.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	42nd	44.5 M	34.4 M	+10.1 M	77.3%
Wet Braking - Concrete	36th	42.9 M	35.2 M	+7.7 M	82.05%
Straight Aqua	37th	79.2 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.5 Km/H	91.35%
Curved Aquaplaning	40th	3.1 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.9 m/sec2	77.5%

Comfort

93.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	8th	70.3 dB	69.1 dB	+1.2 dB	98.29%
Tyre Weight	26th	8.6 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1 Kg	88.37%

Value

65.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	22nd	39100 KM	71500 KM	-32400 KM	54.69%
Value	7th	1.64 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.61 Price/1000	62.8%
Price	3rd	64	45	+19	70.31%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	17th	73.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+38.8 mg/km/t	47.28%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

33^rd

Cooper Zeon CS8

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/A/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

93%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	21st	38.6 M	35.9 M	+2.7 M	93.01%

Wet

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	35 M	34.4 M	+0.6 M	98.29%
Wet Braking - Concrete	9th	37.6 M	35.2 M	+2.4 M	93.62%
Straight Aqua	22nd	80.9 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.8 Km/H	93.31%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

88.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	7th	70.2 dB	69.1 dB	+1.1 dB	98.43%
Tyre Weight	49th	9.6 Kg	7.6 Kg	+2 Kg	79.17%

Value

53.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	42nd	31500 KM	71500 KM	-40000 KM	44.06%
Value	40th	2.63 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.6 Price/1000	39.16%
Price	25th	83	45	+38	54.22%
Fuel Consumption	43rd	5.9 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.4 l/100km	93.22%
Abrasion	47th	97.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+62.9 mg/km/t	35.62%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

34^th

Westlake Z 107

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	24th	39.1 M	35.9 M	+3.2 M	91.82%

Wet

91.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	29th	41.4 M	34.4 M	+7 M	83.09%
Wet Braking - Concrete	15th	38.4 M	35.2 M	+3.2 M	91.67%
Straight Aqua	2nd	84.6 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-2.1 Km/H	97.58%
Curved Aquaplaning	8th	3.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.3 m/sec2	92.5%

Comfort

92.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	34th	71.5 dB	69.1 dB	+2.4 dB	96.64%
Tyre Weight	26th	8.6 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1 Kg	88.37%

Value

54.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	46th	27100 KM	71500 KM	-44400 KM	37.9%
Value	41st	2.69 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.66 Price/1000	38.29%
Price	13th	73	45	+28	61.64%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	42nd	92.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+57.4 mg/km/t	37.74%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

35^th

Minerva Radial 209

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/B/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

88%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	45th	40.8 M	35.9 M	+4.9 M	87.99%

Wet

83%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	43rd	45.3 M	34.4 M	+10.9 M	75.94%
Wet Braking - Concrete	45th	44.8 M	35.2 M	+9.6 M	78.57%
Straight Aqua	30th	80.1 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.6 Km/H	92.39%
Curved Aquaplaning	30th	3.4 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.6 m/sec2	85%

Comfort

94.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	30th	71.2 dB	69.1 dB	+2.1 dB	97.05%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

60.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	35th	34600 KM	71500 KM	-36900 KM	48.39%
Value	24th	2.14 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.11 Price/1000	48.13%
Price	14th	74	45	+29	60.81%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	17th	73.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+38.8 mg/km/t	47.28%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

36^th

King Meiler Sport 1 KM

205/55 R16 91V

• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	35th	39.6 M	35.9 M	+3.7 M	90.66%

Wet

82.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	35th	43.1 M	34.4 M	+8.7 M	79.81%
Wet Braking - Concrete	40th	43.4 M	35.2 M	+8.2 M	81.11%
Straight Aqua	32nd	79.9 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6.8 Km/H	92.16%
Curved Aquaplaning	40th	3.1 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.9 m/sec2	77.5%

Comfort

91.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	28th	71.1 dB	69.1 dB	+2 dB	97.19%
Tyre Weight	34th	8.8 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.2 Kg	86.36%

Value

61.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	28th	36900 KM	71500 KM	-34600 KM	51.61%
Value	21st	2.03 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1 Price/1000	50.74%
Price	16th	75	45	+30	60%
Fuel Consumption	1st	5.5 l/100km			100%
Abrasion	28th	78.9 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+44.1 mg/km/t	44.11%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

37^th

Tomket Sport 3 Series 3

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/69
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

92.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	22nd	38.8 M	35.9 M	+2.9 M	92.53%

Wet

80.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	41st	44.3 M	34.4 M	+9.9 M	77.65%
Wet Braking - Concrete	44th	44.4 M	35.2 M	+9.2 M	79.28%
Straight Aqua	44th	77.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-9.4 Km/H	89.16%
Curved Aquaplaning	40th	3.1 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.9 m/sec2	77.5%

Comfort

98.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	36th	71.6 dB	69.1 dB	+2.5 dB	96.51%
Tyre Weight	1st	7.6 Kg			100%

Value

60.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	42nd	31500 KM	71500 KM	-40000 KM	44.06%
Value	23rd	2.13 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.1 Price/1000	48.36%
Price	6th	67	45	+22	67.16%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	22nd	75.7 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+40.9 mg/km/t	45.97%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

38^th

Michelin e.Primacy

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: A/B/69
• 3PMSF: no

Very good environmental balance, best sustainability, very high mileage (top grade), very little abrasion (top mark), light and very economical (top mark)

Unbalanced, weaknesses on dry and particularly wet roads (devaluation.)

Driving safety: The Michelin e.Primacy is rated as sufficient for driving safety due to its wet performance. The Michelin e.Primacy offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and does not get more than a satisfactory rating when driving at the limit. When it comes to the braking distance, however, the tire scores well and even gets a good rating for it. All in all, however, it does not get more than a satisfactory result in terms of dry performance. On wet roads, the e.Primacy shows clear weaknesses compared to the test field. Its braking, aquaplaning and handling performance is rated as only adequate. The tire can only moderately combine longitudinal and lateral forces, which means that the test car can only be controlled imprecisely and in the limit area with great difficulty. Overall, the wet performance is rated as sufficient.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the e.Primacy sets the standard in the test field. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating.

Dry

97.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	36.7 M	35.9 M	+0.8 M	97.82%

Wet

78.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	38th	43.7 M	34.4 M	+9.3 M	78.72%
Wet Braking - Concrete	41st	43.8 M	35.2 M	+8.6 M	80.37%
Straight Aqua	48th	72.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-13.9 Km/H	83.97%
Curved Aquaplaning	47th	2.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1.2 m/sec2	70%

Comfort

97%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	2nd	69.8 dB	69.1 dB	+0.7 dB	99%
Tyre Weight	6th	8 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.4 Kg	95%

Value

79.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	71500 KM			100%
Value	9th	1.73 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.7 Price/1000	59.54%
Price	50th	124	45	+79	36.29%
Fuel Consumption	1st	5.5 l/100km			100%
Abrasion	1st	34.8 mg/km/t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £107.99 Results Table Test Charts

39^th

Laufenn S Fit EQ+

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

95.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	12th	37.6 M	35.9 M	+1.7 M	95.48%

Wet

87.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	20th	39.5 M	34.4 M	+5.1 M	87.09%
Wet Braking - Concrete	21st	39.3 M	35.2 M	+4.1 M	89.57%
Straight Aqua	41st	78.1 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-8.6 Km/H	90.08%
Curved Aquaplaning	30th	3.4 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.6 m/sec2	85%

Comfort

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	23rd	71 dB	69.1 dB	+1.9 dB	97.32%
Tyre Weight	9th	8.2 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.6 Kg	92.68%

Value

52.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	48th	25300 KM	71500 KM	-46200 KM	35.38%
Value	46th	2.96 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.93 Price/1000	34.8%
Price	16th	75	45	+30	60%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	46th	96.8 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+62 mg/km/t	35.95%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

40^th

Delinte DH2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	32nd	39.5 M	35.9 M	+3.6 M	90.89%

Wet

84.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	14th	38.1 M	34.4 M	+3.7 M	90.29%
Wet Braking - Concrete	14th	38 M	35.2 M	+2.8 M	92.63%
Straight Aqua	45th	77.2 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-9.5 Km/H	89.04%
Curved Aquaplaning	49th	2.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1.3 m/sec2	67.5%

Comfort

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	1st	69.1 dB			100%
Tyre Weight	29th	8.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.1 Kg	87.36%

Value

55.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	45th	27500 KM	71500 KM	-44000 KM	38.46%
Value	36th	2.55 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000	40.39%
Price	10th	70	45	+25	64.29%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	45th	96.1 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+61.3 mg/km/t	36.21%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

41^st

Zeetex ZT1000

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: E/C/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	39th	39.9 M	35.9 M	+4 M	89.97%

Wet

86.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	18th	39 M	34.4 M	+4.6 M	88.21%
Wet Braking - Concrete	21st	39.3 M	35.2 M	+4.1 M	89.57%
Straight Aqua	35th	79.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.4 Km/H	91.46%
Curved Aquaplaning	40th	3.1 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.9 m/sec2	77.5%

Comfort

93.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	2nd	69.8 dB	69.1 dB	+0.7 dB	99%
Tyre Weight	29th	8.7 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.1 Kg	87.36%

Value

50%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	50th	23100 KM	71500 KM	-48400 KM	32.31%
Value	49th	3.29 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+2.26 Price/1000	31.31%
Price	19th	76	45	+31	59.21%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	49th	112.6 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+77.8 mg/km/t	30.91%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

42^nd

Avon ZV7

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/A/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

91.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	28th	39.4 M	35.9 M	+3.5 M	91.12%

Wet

90%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	13th	38 M	34.4 M	+3.6 M	90.53%
Wet Braking - Concrete	21st	39.3 M	35.2 M	+4.1 M	89.57%
Straight Aqua	10th	82.4 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-4.3 Km/H	95.04%
Curved Aquaplaning	30th	3.4 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.6 m/sec2	85%

Comfort

89%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	39th	71.8 dB	69.1 dB	+2.7 dB	96.24%
Tyre Weight	47th	9.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.7 Kg	81.72%

Value

46.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	49th	24000 KM	71500 KM	-47500 KM	33.57%
Value	50th	3.75 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+2.72 Price/1000	27.47%
Price	35th	90	45	+45	50%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	50th	126 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+91.2 mg/km/t	27.62%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £88.99 Results Table Test Charts

43^rd

Radar RPX800

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/A/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

88.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	44th	40.5 M	35.9 M	+4.6 M	88.64%

Wet

85.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	19th	39.1 M	34.4 M	+4.7 M	87.98%
Wet Braking - Concrete	27th	40.5 M	35.2 M	+5.3 M	86.91%
Straight Aqua	39th	79 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.7 Km/H	91.12%
Curved Aquaplaning	45th	3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1 m/sec2	75%

Comfort

92.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	4th	69.9 dB	69.1 dB	+0.8 dB	98.86%
Tyre Weight	36th	8.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.3 Kg	85.39%

Value

55.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	46th	27100 KM	71500 KM	-44400 KM	37.9%
Value	35th	2.47 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.44 Price/1000	41.7%
Price	6th	67	45	+22	67.16%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	48th	101 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+66.2 mg/km/t	34.46%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

44^th

Rotalla RH01 E Pace

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/B/69
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

89.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	40th	40.1 M	35.9 M	+4.2 M	89.53%

Wet

82.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	44th	45.9 M	34.4 M	+11.5 M	74.95%
Wet Braking - Concrete	43rd	44.2 M	35.2 M	+9 M	79.64%
Straight Aqua	23rd	80.8 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-5.9 Km/H	93.19%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

93.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	18th	70.7 dB	69.1 dB	+1.6 dB	97.74%
Tyre Weight	22nd	8.5 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.9 Kg	89.41%

Value

59.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	41st	32900 KM	71500 KM	-38600 KM	46.01%
Value	26th	2.19 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.16 Price/1000	47.03%
Price	12th	72	45	+27	62.5%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	15th	73.3 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+38.5 mg/km/t	47.48%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

45^th

Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

88%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	45th	40.8 M	35.9 M	+4.9 M	87.99%

Wet

74.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	48th	54 M	34.4 M	+19.6 M	63.7%
Wet Braking - Concrete	47th	49 M	35.2 M	+13.8 M	71.84%
Straight Aqua	47th	75 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-11.7 Km/H	86.51%
Curved Aquaplaning	40th	3.1 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.9 m/sec2	77.5%

Comfort

90.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	21st	70.8 dB	69.1 dB	+1.7 dB	97.6%
Tyre Weight	41st	9.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.5 Kg	83.52%

Value

67.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	38th	33300 KM	71500 KM	-38200 KM	46.57%
Value	4th	1.56 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000	66.03%
Price	2nd	52	45	+7	86.54%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	31st	80 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+45.2 mg/km/t	43.5%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

46^th

Lassa DriveWays

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: B/B/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

89.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	41st	40.2 M	35.9 M	+4.3 M	89.3%

Wet

82.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	45th	46.4 M	34.4 M	+12 M	74.14%
Wet Braking - Concrete	42nd	44.1 M	35.2 M	+8.9 M	79.82%
Straight Aqua	25th	80.7 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-6 Km/H	93.08%
Curved Aquaplaning	33rd	3.3 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.7 m/sec2	82.5%

Comfort

89.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	44th	72.3 dB	69.1 dB	+3.2 dB	95.57%
Tyre Weight	41st	9.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.5 Kg	83.52%

Value

54.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	36th	33700 KM	71500 KM	-37800 KM	47.13%
Value	45th	2.91 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.88 Price/1000	35.4%
Price	41st	98	45	+53	45.92%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	26th	76.1 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+41.3 mg/km/t	45.73%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

47^th

Evergreen DynaComfort EH226

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/C/68
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

86.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	48th	41.4 M	35.9 M	+5.5 M	86.71%

Wet

79.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	47th	50.9 M	34.4 M	+16.5 M	67.58%
Wet Braking - Concrete	48th	49.7 M	35.2 M	+14.5 M	70.82%
Straight Aqua	37th	79.2 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.5 Km/H	91.35%
Curved Aquaplaning	19th	3.5 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.5 m/sec2	87.5%

Comfort

90.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	12th	70.5 dB	69.1 dB	+1.4 dB	98.01%
Tyre Weight	41st	9.1 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.5 Kg	83.52%

Value

56.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	18th	40000 KM	71500 KM	-31500 KM	55.94%
Value	36th	2.55 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000	40.39%
Price	42nd	102	45	+57	44.12%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	13th	72.2 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+37.4 mg/km/t	48.2%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

48^th

Riken Road Performance

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/C/71
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	37th	39.8 M	35.9 M	+3.9 M	90.2%

Wet

82.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	46th	48.4 M	34.4 M	+14 M	71.07%
Wet Braking - Concrete	46th	45.7 M	35.2 M	+10.5 M	77.02%
Straight Aqua	34th	79.6 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-7.1 Km/H	91.81%
Curved Aquaplaning	14th	3.6 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-0.4 m/sec2	90%

Comfort

93.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	43rd	72.1 dB	69.1 dB	+3 dB	95.84%
Tyre Weight	11th	8.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+0.7 Kg	91.57%

Value

60.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	36th	33700 KM	71500 KM	-37800 KM	47.13%
Value	29th	2.26 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+1.23 Price/1000	45.58%
Price	19th	76	45	+31	59.21%
Fuel Consumption	10th	5.7 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.2 l/100km	96.49%
Abrasion	7th	67 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+32.2 mg/km/t	51.94%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

49^th

Double Coin DC99

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: C/C/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

84.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	49th	42.5 M	35.9 M	+6.6 M	84.47%

Wet

66.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	50th	59.3 M	34.4 M	+24.9 M	58.01%
Wet Braking - Concrete	50th	58.4 M	35.2 M	+23.2 M	60.27%
Straight Aqua	50th	70.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-16.4 Km/H	81.08%
Curved Aquaplaning	49th	2.7 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1.3 m/sec2	67.5%

Comfort

90.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	5th	70 dB	69.1 dB	+0.9 dB	98.71%
Tyre Weight	47th	9.3 Kg	7.6 Kg	+1.7 Kg	81.72%

Value

86.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	3rd	64800 KM	71500 KM	-6700 KM	90.63%
Value	1st	1.03 Price/1000			100%
Price	6th	67	45	+22	67.16%
Fuel Consumption	3rd	5.6 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.1 l/100km	98.21%
Abrasion	2nd	45.9 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+11.1 mg/km/t	75.82%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

50^th

Premiorri Solazo

205/55 R16 91V

• EU Label: D/B/70
• 3PMSF: no

Dry

83.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	50th	42.9 M	35.9 M	+7 M	83.68%

Wet

68.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	49th	58.1 M	34.4 M	+23.7 M	59.21%
Wet Braking - Concrete	49th	57.1 M	35.2 M	+21.9 M	61.65%
Straight Aqua	49th	71.3 Km/H	86.7 Km/H	-15.4 Km/H	82.24%
Curved Aquaplaning	47th	2.8 m/sec2	4 m/sec2	-1.2 m/sec2	70%

Comfort

86%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	49th	72.5 dB	69.1 dB	+3.4 dB	95.31%
Tyre Weight	50th	9.9 Kg	7.6 Kg	+2.3 Kg	76.77%

Value

75.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	26th	37300 KM	71500 KM	-34200 KM	52.17%
Value	2nd	1.21 Price/1000	1.03 Price/1000	+0.18 Price/1000	85.12%
Price	1st	45			100%
Fuel Consumption	28th	5.8 l/100km	5.5 l/100km	+0.3 l/100km	94.83%
Abrasion	19th	74 mg/km/t	34.8 mg/km/t	+39.2 mg/km/t	47.03%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts