Menu
Minerva minerva F109 View Gallery (1)

Minerva minerva F109

Minerva Tyres Touring Summer

The Minerva minerva F109 is a Touring Summer tyre designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

6.2
Tyre Reviews Score Based on User Reviews
Limited Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
70%
Wet Grip
43%
Road Feedback
52%
Handling
50%
Wear
50%
Comfort
60%
Buy again
33%
6 Reviews
51% Average
44,700 miles driven
1 Tests (avg: 43rd)
Minerva minerva F109

Minerva minerva F109

Summer Budget
BETA
6.2 / 10
Based on User Reviews · Limited Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tyre Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tyre scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 1
Publications: 1
Period: 2016
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 6
Avg Rating: 51.2%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.13
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tyre tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2016 Market Overview - Braking Test Auto Bild 2016 205/55 R16 43/50 0 metrics
All Tests
View Test Results
1
Tests
43rd
Average
43rd
Best
43rd
Worst
Latest Tyre Test Results
2016 Market Overview - Braking Test
205/55 R16 • 2016
43rd/50
View Test Results

Questions and Answers for the Minerva minerva F109

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Minerva minerva F109. Why not submit a question to our tyre experts using the form below!
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Top 3 Minerva minerva F109 Reviews

Given 44% while driving a Opel Signum 2.2 DTi (205/60 R16) on a combination of roads for 20,000 easy going miles
Minerva tyres like a plastic. Very slippery on the road. Will never buy again.
Helpful 795
February 3, 2022
Given 46% while driving a Citroën c3 Picasso 1.6 diesel (195/55 R16 H) on mostly country roads for 2,500 easy going miles
Perfectly ok grip in dry and wet, with good resistance to aquaplaning. Quite comfortable. I would recommend this tyre if it weren't for two serious drawbacks:

1. Sidewalls are too soft, cars feels insecure in cornering. My car is small MPV.
2. Rubber gets too old too fast. Treadwear is not a problem, I have 5 mm left but I had to replace the tyres because of rubber getting too old. Cracks and uneven tread, making vibrations and an unstable drive.The tyres are 6 years old.
Helpful 910
August 10, 2019
Given 28% while driving a Lancia Ypsilon 0.9 Twinair 85 (185/55 R15 H) on mostly country roads for 1,200 easy going miles
Girlfriend had these on the rear of a Lancia Ypsilon 312. Already on the car when she got the car. They were horrible.
In a wet turn the car suddenly oversteered.
Also they were noisy, and seemingly extremely snappy..

The tyres were 2 years old, but already had many cracks in the rubber.

Replaced them asap after the spin with Vredestein Sportrac5 which were already at the front.
Helpful 488
January 4, 2018

How would you rate the Minerva minerva F109?

Click a star to start your review

182 reviews submitted this month Earn your Contributor badge No account needed

Latest Minerva minerva F109 Reviews

Given 63% while driving a Mazda 2 SP (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 1,000 spirited miles
My demio is light in the front these are an improvement on the original set but being a front wheel drive it has better traction on acceleration but still ploughs when decelerating and turning into corners. not recommended for Winter conditions.
Helpful 520
April 11, 2017
Given 83% while driving a Volvo V40 Estate (195/55 R15) on a combination of roads for 5,000 average miles
I have driven on these tyres for 5000 km and have never experienced any problems. They are great for the price.
Helpful 575
May 7, 2016
Given 40% while driving a Mitsubishi Lancer 1.8 4 Door (2008) (195/50 R16) on mostly town for 15,000 average miles
Lasts maximum for three years, after turns into plastic.
Helpful 574
March 9, 2016
Rate the Minerva minerva F109