Menu

Nexen CP641

The Nexen CP641 is a Touring All Season tyre designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

4.9
Tyre Reviews Score Based on User Reviews
Limited Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
75%
Wet Grip
59%
Road Feedback
62%
Handling
67%
Wear
76%
Comfort
70%
Buy again
61%
33 Reviews
67% Average
290,749 miles driven
Nexen CP641

Nexen CP641

All Season Mid-Range
BETA
4.9 / 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: 0
Publications: 0
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 33
Avg Rating: 67.2%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 1.97
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
All Tests

Sorry, we don't currently have any magazine tyre tests for the Nexen CP641

Questions and Answers for the Nexen CP641

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Nexen CP641. 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 Nexen CP641 Reviews

Given 61% while driving a Mitsubishi Spacestar (185/65 R14 H) on a combination of roads for 35,000 easy going miles
Had these tyres on a Mitsubishi space star 1.8 for the past 35000 miles and they have lasted incredibly well, still going strong at over 3mm. However the value and durability does not make up for the deafening road noise. I initially thought it was a bearing but no, it was the tyres! Would only buy if desperately strapped for cash again as dry grip was good but never trusted them in the wet after a slip n slide moment.
December 22, 2014
Given 94% while driving a Peugeot 407 sw (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 24,000 average miles
Brilliant. Half the price of pirellis. No loss of fuel economy at 47mpg. No excessive noise. Responsive, good grip in snow. Very very happy with these on my 407 hdi sw. 24000 miles and front nearlly at legal limit indicator. Buy them
December 22, 2013
Given 70% while driving a Peugeot 406 (225/45 R17) on mostly town for 10 average miles
I have only driven about 200m with one of these tyres fitted and cannot really notice any difference from the previous Avon tyre.

I bought one in 195/65R15 very cheaply and having them fitted separately.

Later I bought another two except that I later noticed they were slightly different as an N Blue ECO

The reviews for the NBlue are far better!

But another aspect which has not been promoted here much is that the CP641 are sided! They can only be used after fitting on ONE side of the car.

The NBlue are sided and can be used on either side.

I paid the same price for both types! £31 including separate fitting!

July 1, 2014

How would you rate the Nexen CP641?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Nexen CP641 Reviews

Given 73% while driving a Toyota Avensis (205/55 R16 V) on a combination of roads for 26,000 average miles
For a budget tyre, these are excellent value for money. Just about to change front tyres, which have done 26,000 miles. That is marginally better than I got from Michelin and Bridgestone, in the past. They may be a little noisy, but not irritating. The last week or so, I have noticed some wheel spin when accelerating away from stop, but they've done 26k, so probably fair enough. the back should be good for another 20k, but I have noticed some minor cracking in the tread grooves. I've been assured this is nothing to worry about, but I'll keep my eye on it. Overall, I would buy again, but I'm going to try the Dunlop SP BluResponse this time.
March 7, 2014
Given 53% while driving a Ford Fiesta (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 5,000 spirited miles
Tyres were already fitted to the car when I brought it. In the dry they are not too bad, fairly high level of grip, at the limit they still give a fair amount of traction but this is quickly lost and then prone to skidding. The worst thing about these tyres is the Wet Grip, or I should say lack of. I have never felt confident driving with these tyres in the wet, I always feel even at slow speeds the car is twitching. Hit a puddle and it's like being on ice. Braking distance in the wet is shockingly bad and traction is lost very VERY quickly. Trying to pull away on a steep hill from traffic lights in heavy rain and they just span. Apparently they are very noisy but I have nothing to compare them to.
In the ice I found them not to be too bad, a fair amount of traction and when the back started to slide it was very easy to recover in minimal time with little steering input.

Fuel effeicancy, I was getting around 45mpg which isn't bad for a 1.25 Fiesta.

Looking at the price I think they were about £40. Seeing as you can fit the entire contact surface area of your car on the road on a piece of A3 paper I was always told it's worth making sure its up to the challenge.
If you are mainly driving around city and slow to moderate speeds then I'm sure these tyres are fine for you. If you are driving more on twisting B & A roads or motorways then I would steer clear( no pun intended )

Decided that as we are forecast for a wet and cold winter I would change them as I really didn't like how they performed in the wet. Changing to Dunlop Sport BluResponse for only £55 a tyre with great reviews.

Hope someone finds what I have said useful.
November 1, 2013
Check out how the BEST all seasons tyres perform against premium summer and winter tyres!
Given 17% while driving a Ford Fiesta (245/45 R17) on mostly town for 10,000 easy going miles
Worst bloody tyres ever. Awful in rain and not much better dry.
Then with less than 10km on them the side walls started to split. Thought it was me but tyres on both side had the same problem and was a perfect circle.
Looked online and Nexen has a lot of quality issues.
August 14, 2013
Given 20% while driving a Toyota sienna (225/45 R17) on mostly motorways for 0 average miles
Noisy, very noisy, would never buy Nexen again. Only have 30K on tires and they are history!
August 11, 2013
Given 64% while driving a Toyota Celica GT4 (215/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 4,000 average miles
Fitted to a Toyota Celica Gt-Four 215/55/16

Good points:
- Fairly progressive breakaway when traction is lost
- Feedback/steerig feel is good, and ride quality is ok.
- Seem to be wearing at a fair rate.

Negatives:
- Grip falls off quickly in damp/cold conditions
- NOISE! these are by far the noisiest tyres I have ever used. I thought I had a wheel bearing failure when I fitted them it was that bad. Unless the road is perfectly smooth fresh tarmac the tyre roar is deafening.

Wouldn't purchase again unless for a town car which never went above 30mph so the noise wouldn't matter.
July 6, 2013
Given 77% while driving a Nissan Qashqai (215/65 R16 H) on mostly country roads for 13,000 spirited miles
12 months use (approx 13000 miles).
Performance in the wet was fair but subject to aquaplaning in roadside puddles- pretty un-nerving!
Ride was good with little in the way of obtrusive noise.
Preferred these to the Kumho replacements.
June 11, 2013
Given 94% while driving a Nissan Qashqai (215/65 R16 H) on mostly country roads for 12,000 average miles
Not much to say really. They pretty much do what any other more expensive premium tyres. Maybe just a tiny bit noisy, but for the price I managed to get them, it is the last thing on my mind. Wear is surprisingly good, considering it being softer compound rubber.
March 13, 2013
Given 93% while driving a Rover 200 TURBO COUPE (195/55 R15 V) on mostly country roads for 4,000 average miles
ON AN OLD ROVER 200 ---2 LITRE TURBO.
IN MY PERSONAL OPINION THEY DO EVERTHING RATHER WELL.
BEING SOFTER COMPOUND--CAN PUNCTURE BUT THAT IS PROBABNLY OUR LOCATION
GOOD ALL ROUND AT A REASONABLE PRICE
February 3, 2013
Given 96% while driving a Saab Automobile 9 5 2.3 SE Estate (215/55 R15 V) on a combination of roads for 20,000 average miles
Very quiet, Excellent grip. would recommend.
December 13, 2012
Given 43% while driving a Suzuki Swift 1.5 (225/45 R17) on mostly country roads for 10,000 easy going miles
I somehow stuck with these tyres for 10,000 miles. They were new on the car when I bought it. The wear rate is very good, I'd guess left on the back of my car they would have done 50,000 miles plus.

The major drawback is no wet grip. I have fairly reasonable expectations of tyres on wet roads, I know there is a lot less grip available but these Nexen tyres are really poor. In a straight line they are just about acceptable but as soon as you ask them to turn and brake or accelerate at the same time there is no grip at all. Huge wheel spin in 2nd on part throttle (I'd don't have a powerful car or drive it hard). On the brakes the ABS will trigger as if you are on ice.

I've just replaced these tyres for some new mid-range ones of a different brand and the difference is huge.
October 31, 2012
Given 41% while driving a BMW 320 TDI (205/50 R17 V) on a combination of roads for 5,000 spirited miles
What a dissapointment.... the only good think about this tyres is comfort, very low noise, and easy drive on wheel-ruts. The rest.... ehhh, u can forget about agrresive driving couse there is no confidence on steering wheel becouse tyre is MOVING A LOT on corners. On wet? disaster. Little heavier breaking - ABS all the time. Before iv got snow used snow tyres goodyear ultra grip gw3, and on dry they was TWICE more grippy thay nexen, even when temp was 20-30 C degrees.... NOT RECOMENDED IF U LIKE AGRESSIVE DRIVER, but when u drive like my grandfa u can buy this one, couse is cheap and no noisy. Sorry 4 my eng.
October 27, 2012
Given 77% while driving a Volkswagen Polo 19.TDI Sport (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 2,000 easy going miles
Bought these tyres to repalce Firesone which were down to the limit. Fitted on front better feel than the out going tyres even before they were down to the limit. Swopped them to the back as recomended . Yet again fine. Good tyre good price
Would definatly buy agian
October 19, 2012
Rate the Nexen CP641