Menu

2022 ViBilagare Eco vs Normal Tyre Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
8 min read Updated

Adjust Result Weighting

The overall scores below are calculated using our weighting system. Since the original publication may use a different scoring methodology that wasn't shared, these results may differ from their published rankings. You can adjust the weightings below to explore how different priorities affect the results.
Dry 37%
Wet 53%
Value 11%
Dry 37% · Wet 53% · Value 11%
Fine-tune sub-categories
Dry
Wet
Value

Test Results Data

BEST Good Average Below Average
# Tyre Total Score Dry Wet Value
Braking M Handling s % Braking M Handling s Circle s Straight Aqua Km/H Curved Aquaplaning m/sec2 % Price Rolling Resistance kg / t Fuel Consumption l/100km %
1 Continental Premium Contact 6 97.5% 34.2 ★ 107.1 ★ 100% 29.8 2 68.1 2 20.5 ★ 81.2 67 98% 969 8.46 5.26 78%
2 Nokian Hakka Blue 3 97.2% 35.1 3 108.3 98.2% 28.6 ★ 67.9 ★ 20.6 2 81.8 2 67.3 99.1% 1069 8.23 5.49 76%
3 Bridgestone Turanza T005 96.9% 35.1 3 107.6 2 98.5% 32 68.2 3 20.7 3 81.8 2 69.8 ★ 96.5% 879 7.12 5.24 84.5%
4 Toyo Proxes Comfort 96.3% 35 2 107.7 3 98.6% 31.7 68.7 20.7 3 80.7 68.7 3 96.2% 779 2 8.22 5.41 80.9%
5 Michelin Primacy 4 96.2% 35.3 107.8 98.1% 31.3 3 69.1 21 84.9 ★ 68.9 2 96.5% 1039 7.87 5.29 79%
6 Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 95.6% 36 107.8 97.2% 33 68.9 20.9 80.4 67.9 94.8% 869 3 7.15 5.14 3 85.3%
7 Nokian Hakka Green 3 94.2% 37.5 109.4 94.6% 33.7 69.1 21.2 79.4 67.3 93.6% 1019 6.29 2 5.17 87.3%
8 Continental EcoContact 6 93.8% 36.3 108.3 96.6% 34.2 71.7 21.6 77.7 65.4 91.4% 989 6.48 3 5.07 ★ 87.4%
9 Michelin e.Primacy 93.1% 35.6 108.4 97.4% 36.3 72.4 22 75.2 64 88.9% 1119 5.64 ★ 5.13 2 90.6%
10 Petlas Imperium PT515 91.1% 37.9 108.7 94.4% 38.2 72.6 22.1 78.4 66.6 88.6% 621 ★ 8.39 5.48 83.9%
Scroll for more
1
Continental Premium Contact 6
97.5%
Dry 100% Wet 98% Value 78%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 34.2 M ★
Dry Handling 107.1 s ★
Wet
Wet Braking 29.8 M 2
Wet Handling 68.1 s 2
Wet Circle 20.5 s ★
Straight Aqua 81.2 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 67 m/sec2
Value
Price 969
Rolling Resistance 8.46 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.26 l/100km
More information
2
Nokian Hakka Blue 3
97.2%
Dry 98% Wet 99% Value 76%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.1 M 3
Dry Handling 108.3 s
Wet
Wet Braking 28.6 M ★
Wet Handling 67.9 s ★
Wet Circle 20.6 s 2
Straight Aqua 81.8 Km/H 2
Curved Aquaplaning 67.3 m/sec2
Value
Price 1069
Rolling Resistance 8.23 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.49 l/100km
More information
3
Bridgestone Turanza T005
96.9%
Dry 99% Wet 97% Value 85%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.1 M 3
Dry Handling 107.6 s 2
Wet
Wet Braking 32 M
Wet Handling 68.2 s 3
Wet Circle 20.7 s 3
Straight Aqua 81.8 Km/H 2
Curved Aquaplaning 69.8 m/sec2 ★
Value
Price 879
Rolling Resistance 7.12 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.24 l/100km
More information
4
Toyo Proxes Comfort
96.3%
Dry 99% Wet 96% Value 81%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35 M 2
Dry Handling 107.7 s 3
Wet
Wet Braking 31.7 M
Wet Handling 68.7 s
Wet Circle 20.7 s 3
Straight Aqua 80.7 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 68.7 m/sec2 3
Value
Price 779 2
Rolling Resistance 8.22 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.41 l/100km
More information
5
Michelin Primacy 4
96.2%
Dry 98% Wet 97% Value 79%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.3 M
Dry Handling 107.8 s
Wet
Wet Braking 31.3 M 3
Wet Handling 69.1 s
Wet Circle 21 s
Straight Aqua 84.9 Km/H ★
Curved Aquaplaning 68.9 m/sec2 2
Value
Price 1039
Rolling Resistance 7.87 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.29 l/100km
More information
6
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
95.6%
Dry 97% Wet 95% Value 85%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36 M
Dry Handling 107.8 s
Wet
Wet Braking 33 M
Wet Handling 68.9 s
Wet Circle 20.9 s
Straight Aqua 80.4 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 67.9 m/sec2
Value
Price 869 3
Rolling Resistance 7.15 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.14 l/100km 3
More information
7
Nokian Hakka Green 3
94.2%
Dry 95% Wet 94% Value 87%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 37.5 M
Dry Handling 109.4 s
Wet
Wet Braking 33.7 M
Wet Handling 69.1 s
Wet Circle 21.2 s
Straight Aqua 79.4 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 67.3 m/sec2
Value
Price 1019
Rolling Resistance 6.29 kg / t 2
Fuel Consumption 5.17 l/100km
More information
8
Continental EcoContact 6
93.8%
Dry 97% Wet 91% Value 87%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 36.3 M
Dry Handling 108.3 s
Wet
Wet Braking 34.2 M
Wet Handling 71.7 s
Wet Circle 21.6 s
Straight Aqua 77.7 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 65.4 m/sec2
Value
Price 989
Rolling Resistance 6.48 kg / t 3
Fuel Consumption 5.07 l/100km ★
More information
9
Michelin e.Primacy
93.1%
Dry 97% Wet 89% Value 91%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 35.6 M
Dry Handling 108.4 s
Wet
Wet Braking 36.3 M
Wet Handling 72.4 s
Wet Circle 22 s
Straight Aqua 75.2 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 64 m/sec2
Value
Price 1119
Rolling Resistance 5.64 kg / t ★
Fuel Consumption 5.13 l/100km 2
More information
10
Petlas Imperium PT515
91.1%
Dry 94% Wet 89% Value 84%
View detailed scores
Dry
Dry Braking 37.9 M
Dry Handling 108.7 s
Wet
Wet Braking 38.2 M
Wet Handling 72.6 s
Wet Circle 22.1 s
Straight Aqua 78.4 Km/H
Curved Aquaplaning 66.6 m/sec2
Value
Price 621 ★
Rolling Resistance 8.39 kg / t
Fuel Consumption 5.48 l/100km
More information
Not every driver has the same priorities. Adjust the category weightings above to re-rank the tyres based on what matters most to your driving style.
Scores are colour-coded from red (weakest) through yellow to green (strongest) to help you quickly spot each tyre's strengths and weaknesses.
The original test ranking is shown in the # column. Arrows indicate how each tyre moves when your custom weighting is applied.

Similar Tyre Tests

Show All summer tyre tests
2026 autozurnal Eco Summer Tyre Test
April 2026 215/55 R18 Hankook iON Evo 10 tyres
2026 Motor Summer Tyre Test
April 2026 225/45 R17 Continental PremiumContact 7 9 tyres
2026 AutoBild Track Day Tyre Test
April 2026 275/35 R19 Pirelli P Zero Trofeo RS 7 tyres
2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test
March 2026 195/55 R16 Dunlop Blue Response TG 8 tyres
2026 Sport Auto Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/45 R17 Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo 7 tyres
2026 Vi Bilagare Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/55 R16 Continental PremiumContact 7 10 tyres

Discussion

8 comments
  1. PaulF archived

    I wonder if you wear down those non-eco tyres down to eco-tyre thread depts what would consumption will look like....

    #8590
    1. TyreReviews PaulF archived

      A magazine did it and it ended up pretty close...

      #8600
  2. Grunt007 archived

    Why on earth is the fuel consumption test set up so clumsily?!
    Driving in a continuous circle, which introduces centrifugal forces and changes the characteristics of each tyre...
    Using a petrol engine, which wastes more than 75% of energy in the cooling system, is of course going to minimise the effects. They really could not find a single electric car in all of Sweden...?

    With EVs, rolling resistance makes up more than half of the typical consumption.
    I run an Jaguar I-Pace EV. I have switched from the OEM B label Good Years summer tyres to A label Pirelli's. (The Pirellli's are all season tyres,, which I run in winter.)
    I have a clearly measured improvement in efficiency of more than 1.5kWh per 100km, or nearly 10%. 10% more range, 10% less charging time etc, that really makes a difference.
    It is very encouraging to see that all manufacturers increasingly understand the importance and field gradual improvements with each new tyre released. In my opinion this 'test' does little to advance understanding or awareness as it leads to dismissing the entire notion as marketing. While the pressure shoulf IMO be to gain the tangible, real benefits without the trade-off disadvantages that speaks from this test.

    #8174
    1. TyreReviews Grunt007 archived

      Because fuel consumption tests are hard. Driving in a straight line introduces wind issues. We have the bench tests of the tyres so we have actual rolling resistance data of the tyres fortunately.

      And yes you're right the RR effect of a tyre on an EV is around 3x an IC. EVs still aren't usually part of test fleets yet because of the recharge time and the amount of energy used in a full test.

      #8177
  3. Paolo Cavarzere archived

    Funny to see that some brand new tyres have just 2 mm thread more than the value (4mm) some few years ago manufacturers was suggesting as limit for safe wet conditions...

    I will never trade 5.6 meters on wet bracking or 10 km/h margin on aquaplaning for 0.2 l/100km... (happy to spend extea 0.36 €/100km for safety).

    #8012
  4. Pedro Neves archived

    Finally a test like this one to break many urban and marketing myths! It's funny to see, however, how that 1% of fuel consumption increase for each 5% of rolling resistance increase rule of thumb almost goes out of the window. For instance: the Michelin e-Primacy has 13% lower RR than the Conti EC6 but has a FC 1,2% higher; the Conti PC6 has a RR 31% higher than the Conti EC6 but only wastes 3,8% more fuel, and the same Conti PC6 has a RR 7,5% higher than the Michelin P4 but has a FC 0,6% lower. Of course, comparing the results on a naked eye, in general terms, the lower the RR the lower the fuel consumption, so, I wonder if tyre weight is that important in terms of fuel consumption as rolling resistance or have they measured the RR and FC in this test in a very scientific manner or not? But then, the Bridgestone T005 has a RR 0,4% lower than the Goodyear EGP2, weighs 8,4% less but burns 2 % more fuel...
    Maybe tyre aerodynamics counts just as much...

    #7973
    1. TyreReviews Pedro Neves archived

      Fuel consumption was measured in a driven circle, I'm not sure how accurate that is, but rolling resistance is measured on a drum and VERY accurate as it's also the EU standard for the label!

      You're right though, it's very interesting.

      #7978
  5. 930 Engineering archived

    Sadly all reviews of this size are missing the Michelin Pilot Sport 4. Actually the PS4 is available in 205/55 R16 for some time (as was the PS3 before) as one of the very few UHP tyres in this 'milder' size. 'Sadly' because I supect it would be a clear winner. At the very least it likely would be on par with Conti's PremiumContact 6.

    #7969