Test Publication:
Auto Motor Und Sport
215/55 R17
11 tyres
5 categories
Test Size:
215/55 R17
Tyres Tested:
11 tyres
Auto Motor Und Sport is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, Tyre Reviews. This is independent editorial coverage of their published test.
Warning, lots of data ahead! For the 2019 winter, Auto Motor und Sport have tested eleven of the best winter tyres in the 215/55 R17 crossover SUV size.
The biggest plus of this test is the sheer amount of data they've produced, as they've rated the tyres both objectively and subjectively in a lot of categories.
It's also good news for Goodyear, as the new Goodyear UltraGrip Performance + wins on its first outing, proving to have an excellent balance of wet and snow performance, along with short dry braking distances.
Stepping up on the promise of 2018, the Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 once again proves itself as a strong contender, and maybe the tyre of choice for the snowier climates.
The Vredestein Wintrac Pro rounds out the top three places. This tyre might be the best choice for the drier, warmer climates, as it excelled in the dry and wet handling tests, but was a little weaker than the best on test during snow testing.
The other result worth mentioning was the new Nokian SnowProof. It's not very often we see Nokian performing badly in a winter test, let alone finishing last. In this test, the Nokian performed extremely well in the dry, with the best dry braking result and had a good result in the snow, but really struggled in the wet. As this is the first test of the SnowProof we've seen, we'll await more test data to see whether the new Nokian really is this bad in the wet, or it was something related to this test.
The overall results were incredibly close, with all the tyres down to eighth place being recommended, but if you want the best for your SUV in 215/55 R17, pick from the top five.
Dry
Interestingly, the top two spots during dry braking were taken by the bottom two tyres overall, with the Nokian and Giti proving to be the best at stopping the VW T-Roc.
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
Dry handling was extremely close between the eleven tyres, with a difference of just 2 km/h between the best and worst tyres.
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
The sporty Vredestein was the only tyre to receive ten points during subjective dry handling scoring.
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
Wet
The Bridgestone Blizzak LM005 had a significant advantage during wet braking.
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
The top three tyres overall dominated wet handling, both in average speed and subjectively.
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
The Falken had an advantage during the aquaplaning testing, with the rest of the tyres closely matched.
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Nokian WR Snowproof
Snow
Bridgestone once again stopped the VW T-Roc in the shortest distance, this time during snow braking.
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
As in the wet testing, the new Goodyear proved to be excellent during snow handling.
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
Environment
All the tyres were relatively close in both external noise and subjective internal noise, but the Falken proved to have the best balance of the two.
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Michelin Alpin 6
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Giti GitiWinterW1
The Continental WinterContact TS850P had the lowest rolling resistance, but was one of the most expensive to buy.
- Giti GitiWinterW1
- Falken Eurowinter HS01 SUV
- Toyo Snowprox S954 SUV
- Hankook Winter i cept evo2 SUV
- Vredestein Wintrac Pro
- Nokian WR Snowproof
- Bridgestone Blizzak LM005
- Pirelli Winter Sottozero 3
- Goodyear UltraGrip Performance Plu
- Continental WinterContact TS 850 P
- Michelin Alpin 6
Results
Great in the wet and on snow, show braking in the dry, worked well with the vehicles ESP systems
Average dry grip when cornering
Test winner
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
3rd |
44.5 M |
44.1 M |
+0.4 M |
99.1% |
| Dry Handling |
11th |
114.1 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-2 Km/H |
98.28% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
6th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
3rd |
32.5 M |
31.2 M |
+1.3 M |
96% |
| Wet Handling |
1st |
73.3 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
2nd |
76.5 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-6.6 Km/H |
92.06% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
2nd |
26 M |
25.6 M |
+0.4 M |
98.46% |
| Snow Handling |
1st |
49.4 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
6th |
70.2 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.9 dB |
98.72% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
9th |
145 |
73 |
+72 |
50.34% |
| Rolling Resistance |
4th |
8 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+0.6 kg / t |
92.5% |
Very good handling in the snow and the wet, stable behavior during emergency maneuvers
Relatively long braking and poor lateral stability in the dry
Excellent
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
4th |
44.6 M |
44.1 M |
+0.5 M |
98.88% |
| Dry Handling |
7th |
114.9 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-1.2 Km/H |
98.97% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
1st |
31.2 M |
|
|
100% |
| Wet Handling |
3rd |
72.9 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-0.4 Km/H |
99.45% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
6th |
75.5 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-7.6 Km/H |
90.85% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
1st |
25.6 M |
|
|
100% |
| Snow Handling |
7th |
48 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1.4 Km/H |
97.17% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
6th |
70.2 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.9 dB |
98.72% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
7th |
128 |
73 |
+55 |
57.03% |
| Rolling Resistance |
2nd |
7.6 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+0.2 kg / t |
97.37% |
Precise steering response and high traction in the dry and wet
Relatively long snow braking, high rolling resistance
Excellent
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
4th |
44.6 M |
44.1 M |
+0.5 M |
98.88% |
| Dry Handling |
4th |
115.4 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-0.7 Km/H |
99.4% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
4th |
32.6 M |
31.2 M |
+1.4 M |
95.71% |
| Wet Handling |
2nd |
73.2 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-0.1 Km/H |
99.86% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
5th |
75.8 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-7.3 Km/H |
91.22% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
8th |
27.3 M |
25.6 M |
+1.7 M |
93.77% |
| Snow Handling |
4th |
48.4 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1 Km/H |
97.98% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
8th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
8th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Noise |
4th |
70 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.7 dB |
99% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
5th |
118 |
73 |
+45 |
61.86% |
| Rolling Resistance |
8th |
8.7 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1.3 kg / t |
85.06% |
Although tires were launched five years ago, they still perform well due to their balanced performance, stable behavior and good lateral stability in the snow, good wet handling
Relatively long braking distance on snow and dry surfaces
Excellent
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
8th |
45.7 M |
44.1 M |
+1.6 M |
96.5% |
| Dry Handling |
3rd |
115.6 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-0.5 Km/H |
99.57% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
2nd |
32.3 M |
31.2 M |
+1.1 M |
96.59% |
| Wet Handling |
5th |
72.5 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-0.8 Km/H |
98.91% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
5th |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Straight Aqua |
4th |
76 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-7.1 Km/H |
91.46% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
6th |
27.2 M |
25.6 M |
+1.6 M |
94.12% |
| Snow Handling |
6th |
48.3 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1.1 Km/H |
97.77% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
9th |
70.7 dB |
69.3 dB |
+1.4 dB |
98.02% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
10th |
147 |
73 |
+74 |
49.66% |
| Rolling Resistance |
1st |
7.4 kg / t |
|
|
100% |
Good handling in the snow and on dry roads, good lateral grip in the wet
Relatively long braking distances in the snow and wet
Good
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
4th |
44.6 M |
44.1 M |
+0.5 M |
98.88% |
| Dry Handling |
7th |
114.9 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-1.2 Km/H |
98.97% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
5th |
33.5 M |
31.2 M |
+2.3 M |
93.13% |
| Wet Handling |
4th |
72.6 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-0.7 Km/H |
99.05% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
7th |
75.4 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-7.7 Km/H |
90.73% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
6th |
27.2 M |
25.6 M |
+1.6 M |
94.12% |
| Snow Handling |
10th |
47.7 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1.7 Km/H |
96.56% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
8th |
70.5 dB |
69.3 dB |
+1.2 dB |
98.3% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
11th |
160 |
73 |
+87 |
45.63% |
| Rolling Resistance |
4th |
8 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+0.6 kg / t |
92.5% |
Good traction and handling in the snow, good dry handling, very quiet
Long dry braking, unbalanced in the wet, high rolling resistance
Good
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
11th |
46.8 M |
44.1 M |
+2.7 M |
94.23% |
| Dry Handling |
2nd |
115.9 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-0.2 Km/H |
99.83% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
6th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
5th |
33.5 M |
31.2 M |
+2.3 M |
93.13% |
| Wet Handling |
7th |
70.7 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-2.6 Km/H |
96.45% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
8th |
6 Points |
10 Points |
-4 Points |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
9th |
72.3 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-10.8 Km/H |
87% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
4th |
26.5 M |
25.6 M |
+0.9 M |
96.6% |
| Snow Handling |
2nd |
49.2 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-0.2 Km/H |
99.6% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
1st |
69.3 dB |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
4th |
115 |
73 |
+42 |
63.48% |
| Rolling Resistance |
10th |
9 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1.6 kg / t |
82.22% |
Good snow performance, very good aquaplaning resistance
Relatively weak wet grip, average dry performance
Good
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
10th |
45.9 M |
44.1 M |
+1.8 M |
96.08% |
| Dry Handling |
9th |
114.4 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-1.7 Km/H |
98.54% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
10th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
8th |
34 M |
31.2 M |
+2.8 M |
91.76% |
| Wet Handling |
10th |
69.8 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-3.5 Km/H |
95.23% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
8th |
6 Points |
10 Points |
-4 Points |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
1st |
83.1 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
3rd |
26.1 M |
25.6 M |
+0.5 M |
98.08% |
| Snow Handling |
3rd |
48.7 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-0.7 Km/H |
98.58% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
1st |
10 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Noise |
3rd |
69.8 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.5 dB |
99.28% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
2nd |
106 |
73 |
+33 |
68.87% |
| Rolling Resistance |
11th |
9.3 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1.9 kg / t |
79.57% |
Strong in the dry
Long braking distances in the dry, wet and snow. Poor snow handling, poor wet handling
Good
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
8th |
45.7 M |
44.1 M |
+1.6 M |
96.5% |
| Dry Handling |
1st |
116.1 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
10th |
34.8 M |
31.2 M |
+3.6 M |
89.66% |
| Wet Handling |
8th |
70.5 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-2.8 Km/H |
96.18% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
8th |
6 Points |
10 Points |
-4 Points |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
8th |
74.1 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-9 Km/H |
89.17% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
11th |
28.1 M |
25.6 M |
+2.5 M |
91.1% |
| Snow Handling |
8th |
47.9 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1.5 Km/H |
96.96% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
10th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
8th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Noise |
10th |
71 dB |
69.3 dB |
+1.7 dB |
97.61% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
3rd |
111 |
73 |
+38 |
65.77% |
| Rolling Resistance |
3rd |
7.9 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+0.5 kg / t |
93.67% |
Balanced dry performance
Long braking distances in the snow and wet, weak aquaplaning resistance
Average
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
7th |
44.8 M |
44.1 M |
+0.7 M |
98.44% |
| Dry Handling |
10th |
114.2 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-1.9 Km/H |
98.36% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
6th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
9th |
34.4 M |
31.2 M |
+3.2 M |
90.7% |
| Wet Handling |
9th |
70.3 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-3 Km/H |
95.91% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
6th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Straight Aqua |
10th |
71.7 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-11.4 Km/H |
86.28% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
10th |
27.9 M |
25.6 M |
+2.3 M |
91.76% |
| Snow Handling |
8th |
47.9 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1.5 Km/H |
96.96% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
8th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Noise |
11th |
71.1 dB |
69.3 dB |
+1.8 dB |
97.47% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
8th |
134 |
73 |
+61 |
54.48% |
| Rolling Resistance |
7th |
8.6 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1.2 kg / t |
86.05% |
Very low price, short braking distances in the dry
Long braking distances and poor grip in the snow, poor wet handling, understeer in the dry
Average
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
2nd |
44.3 M |
44.1 M |
+0.2 M |
99.55% |
| Dry Handling |
5th |
115.2 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-0.9 Km/H |
99.22% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
10th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
5th |
33.5 M |
31.2 M |
+2.3 M |
93.13% |
| Wet Handling |
6th |
70.8 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-2.5 Km/H |
96.59% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
6th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Straight Aqua |
2nd |
76.5 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-6.6 Km/H |
92.06% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
9th |
27.7 M |
25.6 M |
+2.1 M |
92.42% |
| Snow Handling |
11th |
46 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-3.4 Km/H |
93.12% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
10th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
11th |
7 Points |
10 Points |
-3 Points |
70% |
| Noise |
5th |
70.1 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.8 dB |
98.86% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
1st |
73 |
|
|
100% |
| Rolling Resistance |
9th |
8.8 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1.4 kg / t |
84.09% |
Good handling in the snow, short braking distances in the snow and dry, acceptable safety on dry roads
Long braking distances and poor lateral stability in the wet
Average
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
1st |
44.1 M |
|
|
100% |
| Dry Handling |
5th |
115.2 Km/H |
116.1 Km/H |
-0.9 Km/H |
99.22% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
6th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
11th |
36.1 M |
31.2 M |
+4.9 M |
86.43% |
| Wet Handling |
11th |
68.9 Km/H |
73.3 Km/H |
-4.4 Km/H |
94% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
8th |
6 Points |
10 Points |
-4 Points |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
11th |
70.3 Km/H |
83.1 Km/H |
-12.8 Km/H |
84.6% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Snow Braking |
5th |
26.6 M |
25.6 M |
+1 M |
96.24% |
| Snow Handling |
4th |
48.4 Km/H |
49.4 Km/H |
-1 Km/H |
97.98% |
| Subj. Snow Handling |
2nd |
9 Points |
10 Points |
-1 Points |
90% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
8th |
8 Points |
10 Points |
-2 Points |
80% |
| Noise |
2nd |
69.7 dB |
69.3 dB |
+0.4 dB |
99.43% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Price |
6th |
125 |
73 |
+52 |
58.4% |
| Rolling Resistance |
6th |
8.4 kg / t |
7.4 kg / t |
+1 kg / t |
88.1% |
Discussion