Menu
Nexen N Blue HD+ View Gallery (2)
145-235/45-80 R13-17 278 sizes 2014

Nexen N Blue HD+

The Nexen N Blue HD Plus is a mid-range, high-performance summer tyre that stands out for strong day-to-day value, a quiet ride and reassuring grip for normal road use. Real-world drivers commonly report confident braking, stable handling and impressive mileage for the money, often feeling close to more expensive brands in everyday conditions. In professional testing, however, it tends to be more mixed: capable in braking-focused comparisons, but less convincing when the full wet and dry handling picture is assessed.

7.7
Tyre Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
High Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
82%
Wet Grip
78%
Road Feedback
77%
Handling
76%
Wear
77%
Comfort
82%
Buy again
80%
80 Reviews
79% Average
832,017 miles driven
14 Tests (avg: 12th)
Nexen N Blue HD Plus

Nexen N Blue HD Plus

Summer Mid-Range
BETA
7.7 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · High 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
Dry
73.1
1.8x / 9 tests
Wet
63
2x / 12 tests
Comfort
61.3
0.32x / 3 tests
Value
56.2
0.42x / 6 tests

Cross-category scores are derived metrics that combine data from multiple test disciplines to evaluate real-world performance characteristics.

Braking
75.9
10 tests
Handling
56.7
8 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 14
Publications: 6
Period: 2015 - 2021
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 80
Avg Rating: 78.9%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.3
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
2021 Auto Bild 16 Inch Summer Tyre Test Auto Bild 2021 205/55 R16 20/20 10 metrics
2021 53 Summer Tyre Braking Test Auto Bild 2021 205/55 R16 15/53 2 metrics
2019 AMS Summer SUV Tyre Test Auto Motor Und Sport 2019 215/55 R17 10/11 10 metrics
2018 Gute Fahrt Summer Tyre Test Gute Fahrt 2018 205/55 R16 8/12 4 metrics
2018 AutoBild Summer Tyre Overview Auto Bild 2018 195/65 R15 31/47 0 metrics
2018 ADAC Summer Tyre Test - 205/55 R16 ADAC 2018 205/55 R16 13/16 0 metrics
2017 Mid Range Tyre Test Motor 2017 205/55 R16 7/10 4 metrics
2016 AutoBild Summer Tyre Test Auto Bild 2016 205/55 R16 13/15 0 metrics
2016 Market Overview - Braking Test Auto Bild 2016 205/55 R16 12/50 0 metrics
2016 ADAC Tyre Test - 185/65 R15 ADAC 2016 185/65 R15 13/16 0 metrics
2016 ACE Mid Range Summer Tyre Test ACE 2016 195/65 R15 1/10 0 metrics
2015 Auto Bild Top 18 Summer Tyre Test Auto Bild 2015 185/60 R15 4/18 0 metrics
2015 Market Overview - Braking Test Auto Bild 2015 185/60 R15 6/52 0 metrics
2015 ACE Summer Touring Tyre Test ACE 2015 205/55 R16 10/12 0 metrics
14
Tests
12th
Average
1st
Best
31st
Worst
Latest Tyre Test Results
15th/53
20th/20
STable safe handling and short braking in the dry, low price.
Slow steering and understeer in the wet, average wear.
Acceptable.
10th/11
Acceptable handling.
Relatively wea dry and wet grip.
Size Fuel Wet Noise
13 inch
155/80R13 79 T D C 68
155/80R13 79 T D C 68
14 inch
175/65R14 82 T C C 70
175/65R14 82 H D C 70
185/60R14 82 H D C 70
185/70R14 88 T C C 70
175/65R14 86 T XL B B 70
165/70R14 81 T D B 70
185/60R14 82 T D C 69
165/70R14 85 T XL C C 70
175/65R14 82 T C A 70
175/65R14 82 H D B 69
175/65R14 86 T XL C B 69
165/70R14 81 T C B 69
185/60R14 82 H D B 68
165/70R14 85 T XL C B 66
185/70R14 88 T B C 70
185/60R14 82 T D B 68
175/65R14 86 T A B 71
175/65R14 82 T C C 70
185/60R14 82 T D C 69
165/70R14 81 T D B 70
15 inch
195/55R15 85 V C B 69
185/65R15 88 H C B 70
195/65R15 91 H D B 68
185/65R15 92 T XL D B 67
195/65R15 95 T XL D B 68
195/65R15 91 V D B 68
185/65R15 88 H C C 70
195/55R15 85 H D B 69
185/65R15 88 T D B 68
195/65R15 91 T D C 71
195/65R15 95 H XL C B 70
185/65R15 88 T D B 70
185/65R15 88 H D A 70
195/65R15 91 H D B 70
195/55R15 85 V C B 69
195/65R15 91 V D B 68
195/55R15 85 H C B 66
195/65R15 95 T XL C A 68
195/65R15 91 T D B 68
195/65R15 95 H XL D B 68
185/65R15 92 T XL C B 68
185/65R15 88 H A C 70
195/65R15 95 H XL C B 70
185/65R15 88 H C B 70
195/65R15 91 H C B 71
195/65R15 91 H D B 68
195/55R15 85 V C B 69
185/65R15 88 T D B 68
16 inch
205/60R16 92 H C B 70
205/60R16 92 V C B 70
215/60R16 95 H B B 68
215/60R16 99 V XL C B 69
215/60R16 95 V C B 70
205/60R16 92 V C B 71
215/60R16 95 V C B 70
205/55R16 91 V B B 70
215/60R16 99 H XL C B 69
215/60R16 95 V C C 71
205/55R16 91 V A C 71
205/55R16 91 V D B 70
205/60R16 92 H C B 69
205/60R16 92 V B C 69
215/60R16 99 V XL B B 68
215/60R16 95 H B B 67
215/60R16 99 H XL B C 69
215/60R16 95 V B B 67
205/55R16 91 H A C 71
215/60R16 99 H XL C B 72
205/60R16 92 V C B 71
205/55R16 91 V C B 69
205/55R16 91 V C B 69
215/60R16 95 H C B 69
205/55R16 91 V B C 71
215/60R16 99 H XL C B 69
205/60R16 92 V C B 70
17 inch
225/60R17 99 H C B 70
205/50R17 93 V XL C B 70
215/55R17 94 V C B 69
225/60R17 99 H C B 70
215/45R17 91 W XL C B 71
225/60R17 99 V C C 71
205/50R17 93 V XL B B 69
225/60R17 99 H B B 68
215/55R17 94 V C A 69
225/60R17 99 V B C 69
225/60R17 99 H C B 70
225/60R17 99 H C B 70
205/50R17 93 V XL C B 70
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Nexen N Blue HD Plus >>

Questions and Answers for the Nexen N Blue HD Plus

Ask a question
December 26, 2016

I have just purchased the Nexen N Blue HD 255/55/R17 for my VW Tiguan to replace the worn out Purelli. I was told to keep both the front and back infalted at 32. However when I exceed a certain speed, say 60mph, they tend to become rather noisy, giving that 'unsafe' feeling. Moreover they give the impression that they are a bit 'flat'. I inflated them up to 36, both front and back, and the noise, though still audible, decreased a lot. Any idea whether it is ok to have them inflated at 36, and whether they can give a better performance if inflated a bit more, say 38 front and 40 back?

While it's always advisable to start with the manufacturer's recommended pressures, there is scope to move tyre pressures safely a few PSI in either direction depending on personal preference. That said, moving the tyres, especially the rear up to 40 psi will reduce overall grip at the rear and likely give you uneven, centre wear, which could result in noise as the tyres wear down, so any extreme adjustments you make need to be carefully considered and monitored.
May 15, 2017

I am thinking of buying these Nexen tyres for my 1 yr old Suzuki Vitara (new model) would you recommend buying XL or 'reinforced' types as opposed to the normal tyres. There is no indication in the car's handbook as to which to buy. I live in the north of England where it rains about half of the year. Also, is there a tyre more suitable without spending a lot more as it is just used as a family runabout? Thought about Uniroyal as they seem to score higher for wet roads but wear out quite a lot faster and their dry performance is somewhat questionable. PS the car is the petrol model which has firmer suspension than the diesel (supported by Suzuki)

As long as you meet the minimum load rating recommended by the manufacturer whether you order XL or not is down to preference, and whether to plan to carry heavy loads. In theory, the XL version of the Nexen N Blue HD+ will have a slightly better steering response while the non-XL version will have slightly better comfort.
November 30, 2018

Hi I’ve just had these in 16” fitted to my combo van are these upto the job. As I asked the dealer for r16c’s as what was currently on the van.

As long as they meet the size and load rating specified by the vehicle they are legal to fit, usually C (cargo) tyres have a higher load rating and stronger sidewalls so you might not have the right tyres fitted, it's worth double checking.
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.

Review Summary

Based on 69 user reviews

Overall, the Nexen N Blue HD Plus earns a strong reputation as a value-focused summer tyre with commendable grip in both dry and wet conditions, low noise, and comfortable ride quality. Many drivers report stable handling, confident braking, and impressive longevity (often 40-60k km+), noting performance comparable to pricier brands for everyday driving. A minority highlight softer sidewalls that can reduce steering precision and feel, and some report inconsistent wet grip or aquaplaning resistance, especially at the limit or as the tyre wears. For most users, however, the tyre delivers excellent price-to-performance and dependable, safe behavior.

Strengths
  • Good dry grip
  • Good wet grip for the price
  • Quiet/low noise
  • Comfortable ride
  • Strong value for money
  • Stable braking and handling
  • Long tread life for many users
Areas for Improvement
  • Soft sidewalls and vague steering feedback
  • Inconsistent wet grip/aquaplaning resistance for some drivers

Top 3 Nexen N Blue HD Plus Reviews

Given 74% while driving a Kia Motors Picanto (195/45 R16) on a combination of roads for 30,000 spirited miles
For a factory-mounted (kia picanto 1.0 tgdi) it has really good grip and and response, they are lasting almost 50k km and still going, 1.5mm of rubber left.
June 4, 2025
Given 77% while driving a Chevrolet Spark (165/65 R14) on a combination of roads for 8,000 average miles
Fitted these tires after my stock hankooks got burned in a storage fire accident. Doing second season on them and find them pretty well-balanced in all summer conditions for non-performance car like mine. They were good in a heatwave 2024, also fitted them way too early when it was still few weeks of sub-zero night temperatures this spring, got in a heavy rain on a highway few times, everything went well. Long trips are comfortable and no punctures so far. I wish they were a bit stiffer to have better steering feedback and less sidewall roll.
June 11, 2025
Given 76% while driving a SEAT ibiza 1.4 (185/60 R14) on a combination of roads for 15,000 average miles
I have a 2003 Seat Ibiza, I chose these tyres in 2015 after using some Kumhos (which were quite decent). The handling is quite good, I occasionally drive in a more spirited way and only twice in 10 years have I heard them squealing in a corner and it was at a relatively low speed, 40-50 km/h, while still providing sufficient grip. So I'd say they give a good amount of confidence on dry roads and the grip limit is not low. They're far from the best in the wet, but its limits are more evident when there is a lot of standing water on the road, in which case I recommend to reduce your speed significantly. Comfort is decent but I can't say much because my car is not exactly comfortable and is a bit noisy as is so the tyres don't really have much influence, but I'd say it's average.
Since I live in an area where it doesn't rain that much, I chose them again in 2022 after one of the tyres got punctured. I would've had to change them anyway because of their age and low tread depth, I had covered 66k km with them so pretty satisfied with the wear. As of now, I've covered 19k km with them and all is fine. Definitely recommend them because of their high price/performance ratio, 4 tyres were 210€ here in Italy.
June 6, 2025

How would you rate the Nexen N Blue HD Plus?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Nexen N Blue HD Plus Reviews

Given 71% while driving a Fiat Panda (155/80 R13) on mostly town for 10,000 average miles
I had already left a review on these Nexen tires but reading around I would like to integrate and reexamine some considerations: I have seen that some car manufacturers fit Nexen tires as standard and this means that at least they have done some testing and will respond adequately to stress, then always reading around I have seen that some "pairings" seem tested and functional, and even if these Nexens do not have the sipes and grooves that allow the dispersion of water directly in case of rain and puddles, by mounting a pair of Kleber Viaxer on the front axle, which instead have the structure of the sipes and grooves of the tread designed in such a way as to allow the water to flow directly, therefore even with a small and therefore relatively light car, the water planning effect can be mitigated in a way that I would say is good. By adopting this scheme, with the Kleber Viaxer in front and these Nexen HD Blues in the back, I can say that if you stay above 5°C the "system" works very well. I've done more than 10,000 km, and the last trip on the motorway, even in heavy rain, went very well with a 1242 cc Panda 169. I think the choice is quite wise, as I've tried other tyres, even premium ones, and I can safely say that they are only slightly inferior in quality and performance to some better-known and best-selling brands. However, we must often recognize the superiority of Pirelli, Michelin (Kleber belongs to Michelin), GoodYear, and Uniroyal. Continental, Dunlop is real. I found these little Korean tyres to be truly deficient, and I think they can easily last more than 30,000 km safely.
December 9, 2025
Given 91% while driving a Peugeot 308 1.6 HDi (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 5,000 average miles
I had driven 2000 km , august . And can say very reliable tire. When you install new one , will fill noice , but that disappear after few days driving
November 21, 2025
Given 71% while driving a Fiat Panda (155/80 R13) on a combination of roads for 8,000 easy going miles
First of all, on the front drive axle I mounted a different brand that is just a little inferior to the more renowned ones but still very efficient. On the rear axle I have these 155-80-r13 Nexen tires that I consider really good for the car, which has modest performance, but the tire undoubtedly changes your ride and grip, and if you use reliable products, the difference is really noticeable! Absolutely positive opinion even if the tread has not adopted the system of grooves and cuts that allow the direct flow of water in case of rain as other brands do, in any case I think they work very well. I have traveled about 11,000 km and the wear is promising because they are less than 1/3 worn, so I expect them to easily reach over 30,000 km.
November 15, 2025
Given 74% while driving a Volkswagen Polo 6R 1.2 TSI MT (195/50 R16) on mostly motorways for 16,000 average miles
This review might not be a complete one because the car wasn't driven much and didn't have many chances to get the most out of them.
Grip/Response/Feedback: A couple of times i got the chance to push them a little the feedback on dry was good. You feel what they're rolling over and when they're close to their limit.
Steering response was crisp. No delays, no vagueness. Grip on the dry was good but so is for most tires of that price.
The grip on wet is what matters and it was very good. Much better than the Goodyear Excellence they replaced. ZERO aquaplaning, ZERO loss of grip even at heavy rainfall on the slippery roads of Greece. Very safe feeling.
Two or three times i had to do emergency braking and they performed good. Saved me from a couple of crashes but eventually the driver i share it with did crash the car at the rear of another car, but i don't know the circumstances because i wasn't there. He might have been tailgating him while being distracted. Old men shouldn't drive.

Wear: Like i said, didn't drive that much but after around 16000 miles (26000 kilometers) they still have PLENTY of tread left and despite their age (7 years old) they still feel safe. Still have short braking distance, good response and feeback. The tread doesn't feel hard. The sidewalls are still in good shape. The only cracks i noticed is on the very edges of the tread, at the very top of the sidewall, which i think is normal. No bits and pieces missing.

Comfort: This is where they kinda let me down, although maybe it was a mistake to fit them on a 7J rim. They were borderline stretched. But anyway, on spec pressure (car specs) the ride was rough. They felt more rough than the 45 profile Goodyears. But the response and feedback was better than the 45s. I used to run them on slightly lower pressures to get a better ride.

Would i buy them again? Maybe, but if i do i will go for the 205 or 215, although i'd much rather get rid of the 16x7J rims. Too wide for the car in general.
I have now replaced them with Kleber HP5s and let me tell you that the 205 Kleber is as wide as the 215 Goodyear was. Even the tire fitter was surprised at how wide they are for 205. Very beefy tires and more comfortable than the Nexens, even at spec pressures. We'll see how they will perform because i just fitted them so now they feel great, like all tires feel when brand new and fresh. But they're a PERFECT match for the 16x7J rims.
October 23, 2025
Given 66% while driving a Renault megane 4 hb (225/45 R17) on mostly town for 20,000 easy going miles
The tire on dry road is average, so I give it a rating of 8. On a wet road, I rate it 6, because when there is water, the car does not have good traction and starts to become unstable.
May 8, 2025
Given 84% while driving a Opel Meriva B 1.4 LPG (205/55 R16) on a combination of roads for 30,000 spirited miles
Run on this tire for 50K+ KMs in total with 2 different cars, 2 different sizes. When I was using it on my Ford Fiesta, tires didn't lose it's characteristics after 2 years and 30K+ KMs. So I did buy another set for my new car, Opel Meriva. I will buy again when I need new tires.

Best choice for the price. Comfort is very good and noise is low. Wet grip is very good, dry grip is much better than its price range.
When its wet, I force the car on turns to test the limits, I can't even let it lose grip. I used to buy only premium tires like Continental or Michelin but after using those Nexens I don't think I will pay 2x more for premium tires ever again.
May 7, 2025
Given 91% while driving a Nissan Qashqai (215/60 R17) on a combination of roads for 57 average miles
I have been driving my car with these tires for more than 90 000 km. My first set of four tyres lasted about 40 000 km without any problem. The second set is also now nearing the end of its life after more than 50,000 km and will soon be replaced by a third of the same model. I find the tyres comfortable, if a little noisy. On dry or wet roads the car stays stable and follows the set trajectory steadily.

After so many kilometres on these tyres, I have only had one occasion when I had to reduce speed due to a slight slip when climbing a mountain because the temperatures had dropped sharply and after a short snowfall the road was slippery and icy in places.

Taking into account the low price of this tyre model and their stable and increasing quality over the years I can only warmly recommend it to all colleagues on the road.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
March 6, 2025
Given 77% while driving a Hyundai Tucson (225/60 R17) on mostly motorways for 80,000 miles
I have done 80,000 km with this tire without any particular problem. Good comfort, quiet, safe and handles very well both on dry and wet surfaces. Well worth a bridge or a Kléber.
November 3, 2024
Given 66% while driving a SEAT Ibiza FR V 1.5 TSI EVO2 (215/45 R17) on mostly motorways for 18,650 average miles
When they were new they had a very decent behavior. Now that they are a little more than their useful life, on wet terrain, they tend to slide relatively easily, which means I don't have confidence in them.
July 10, 2024
Given 70% while driving a Nissan Pulsar (205/55 R17) on a combination of roads for 5,000 easy going miles
On my Nissan, it came with Continentals when new so it always had very good grip. After one of the services, the dealer had to replace the tyres and they only had the Nexen, so we had no choice. These tyres are comfortable as the sidewalls appear to be soft. Dry grip is ok. But I go easy in the wet as they are not good with aquaplaning performance. However, knowing that they are made in Korea made me feel fine having them. Korean tyre manufacturers are generally competent.
April 18, 2024
Given 90% while driving a Opel Astra G 1.6 (195/60 R15) on mostly motorways for 31,000 average miles
I bought these in 2018 for my Opel Astra G 1.6 16V 101HP and after 50000 kilometers I think they can last at least 8-10k kilometers more as they look nice and with no cracks at all. They've been taken through all kinds of weather and asphalt conditions, I've even driven on gravel and dirt and they've never gave me a problem, they are also quite comfortable as they are one of the quietest tyres in the market. I strongly recommend them for non-performance cars like mine.
November 27, 2023
Given 74% while driving a Kia Motors Rio (185/65 R15) on mostly town for 50,000 spirited miles
Came stock on my 2018 Kia Rio EX, so I've been on them for 5 years and 80,000km or 50,000mi. No complains so far, wet grip is as expected, never had a moment even though I like to drive fast, almost always above the speed limits (I'm in Mexico). Tyres are just starting to chip, but I think it's expected after 5 years and the quality of the streets over here. Noise is comfortable in the city, gets a little high on highway speeds as expected. Economy is average, but i think that's because of the 1.6L motor. Overall I would buy again if the price was right and would not change them if they came with a new car. I'm getting new Michelins Primacy 4 because they're on sale at my local Costco ($350 usd for the set of 4 with installation and balance).
July 24, 2023
Rate the Nexen N Blue HD Plus