Tire tests 175 65 r14. Summer tires R14: reviews, tests, price, which is better to buy? Resistant to longitudinal aquaplaning

On the eve of the spring-summer season, the question of the choice of high-quality rubber arises. The seriousness of this issue cannot be underestimated. Tires are one of the most important components of safe and comfortable driving.

In the article:

• the best summer tires R14;
• reviews;
• tests;
• video;
• prices;
• where can one buy.

Rating of the best summer tires 2018

It's time to figure out which summer tires are 14 better. Let's discuss the following brands in more detail:

• Toyo.
• Michelin.
• Nokian.
• Continental.
• Kumho.
• Bridgestone.
• Matador.
• Hankook.
• Amtel.

Toyo

Toyo's NanoEnergy 3 tire range is the perfect solution for compact and mid-sized vehicles.

Characteristics

The average price is 2300 rubles per piece.

• lack of noise;
• fuel efficiency.

• long braking distances on wet surfaces;
• sensitivity to road irregularities.

The cabin has become much quieter. Fuel consumption has decreased, a trifle - but nice. Grip is excellent, the speed of 120 km / h is simply not felt. When braking, the car stops rooted to the spot. By the way, the brakes are the same on dry asphalt and on wet ones. He does not drive on wet asphalt. Of the minuses, the sidewalls are probably too soft.

Tests of summer tires 185 / 60R14 allow you to compare tire brands of different brands, to identify the advantages and disadvantages of rubber. After reviewing the tire ratings based on independent testing, you can choose the best option for your car.

R14 summer tire tests make it possible to compare the following characteristics of tires of different brands:

1. Aquaplaning. This term means a decrease in the adhesion of tires to the roadway, leading to a partial or complete loss of control over the machine.
2. Braking. The distance that the car travels from the moment the braking system is reset to a complete stop is calculated.
3. Controllability is the speed at which tires respond to steering commands.
4. Vehicle stability. The ability of tires to resist rolling over or skidding of the vehicle is calculated.
5. Wear. This concept means the rate of abrasion of tires when it comes into contact with the road surface while the car is moving.
6. Profitability. Fuel consumption is calculated, if the pressure inside the tires is distributed correctly, then the volume of fuel consumed by the car decreases.
7. Noisiness. Affects driving comfort, depends on the noise emitted by the tires while the car is moving.
8. Rigidity. Summer tires should not be too soft.
9. Resistant to high temperatures.

The best quality P14 tires for the summer showed good results in most of the tests carried out and took a leading position.

First place

In the manufacture of this rubber, innovative technologies were used. This made it possible to reduce the weight of the product and the noise while driving. Tires provide excellent vehicle handling. Benefits:

• high level of comfort, noise inside the car decreased by 1 dB;
• environmental friendliness, the product is subject to complete disposal;
• a special siping system reduces the risk of aquaplaning;
• quick response to steering commands;
• reduced fuel consumption;
• reduced rolling resistance.

Disadvantages: running smoothness is not the highest among the presented brands.

Second place

The best rubber for the summer, made by a Finnish company. Designed for passenger cars, products are recommended for use in regions where the air temperature is not more than 35 0 C. Tires provide a high level of vehicle control. Advantages:

• stability when driving on a wet road surface;
• vehicle maneuverability;
• tires practically do not heat up;
• increased resource;
• environmental friendliness;
• provide quiet, comfortable driving;
• low fuel consumption.

Disadvantages: no significant disadvantages.

Third place

Tires made from a rubber compound based on silicate and synthetic rubber. Thanks to this composition, excellent braking of the car on a wet road is ensured, and fuel consumption is significantly reduced. Benefits:

• resistance to damage and deformation;
• reduced fuel consumption;
• driving comfort;
• tires absorb noise;
• provide vehicle handling in difficult weather conditions;
• resistant to uneven wear;
• lack of aquaplaning effect.

Disadvantages: the average rate of exchange rate stability among competitors.

Fourth place

These tires belong to the premium class, are developed using a thermoplastic rubber compound, and provide braking of the car on a wet road surface. Automobile tires are suitable for driving in the city and on suburban roads. Advantages:

• decrease in rolling resistance;
• fast braking;
• reduced fuel consumption;
• high level of comfort;
• little noise.

Disadvantages: handling and course stability on a dry surface is not the highest among the tested brands.

Fifth place

The tires are designed using special technologies to reduce vibration and reduce fuel consumption, suitable for driving on suburban roads. Advantages:

• effective braking on wet or dry asphalt;
• driving comfort;
• environmental friendliness;
• economical when driving at high and medium speeds.

Disadvantages: Average tire response to steering commands when driving on dry asphalt.

Sixth place

These tires are designed for a wide range of vehicles. They have a directional tread pattern. Suitable for driving around the city and country roads. Advantages:

• good directional stability of the car;
• vehicle maneuverability when cornering;
• lack of aquaplaning;
• reduction of fuel consumption;
• insignificant noise;
• good grip of the tire with the road surface.

Disadvantages: when driving on a wet road surface, the average indicator of handling and running smoothness.

Seventh place

• lack of aquaplaning effect;
• improved handling on wet road surfaces;
• the tires are practically silent;
• reduction of fuel consumption.

Disadvantages: tires show their best sides while driving on a flat road surface, directional stability is low. The rubber is pretty tough.

Eighth place

These tires are designed for passenger cars. Excellent for high-speed driving. Advantages:

• dynamic acceleration;
• resistance to external mechanical influences;
• a clear course when driving on a dry road;
• lack of noise while driving.

Disadvantages:

• long-term braking on a dry surface;
• difficult handling on a wet road surface;
• increased fuel consumption.

Ninth place

The tires have a block tread structure that allows the wheels to react quickly to steering commands. Tires have proven themselves well for driving on dirt roads, as well as country roads. Benefits:

• high cross-country ability;
• average braking performance on various road surfaces;
• are a budget option;
• noise reduction.

Disadvantages:

• increased fuel consumption;
• the occurrence of the aquaplaning effect when driving at high speeds on wet road surfaces.

Tenth place

The tires are designed for SUV cars. They have an asymmetrical tread pattern. Suitable for country roads and urban conditions, designed for car movement on a good quality road surface. Advantages:

• average course stability;
• reduced fuel consumption

Disadvantages:

• weak braking on a wet surface;
• too tough.

Eleventh place

These tires are designed with a special tread layer for dynamic driving. The products are perfect for long trips. Benefits:

• average wheel reactions to steering commands;
• noiseless driving;
• reduced fuel consumption;
• comfort;
• long service life;
• resistance to mechanical stress.

Disadvantages: Difficulty driving when performing emergency maneuvers.

Twelfth place

The composition of these tires is environmentally friendly, consists of self-renewable substances that do not harm nature and people. When driving on suburban roads, they allow you to minimize fuel consumption as much as possible. Benefits:

• reduction of fuel consumption by 10%;
• driving comfort;
• improved grip when driving on wet road surfaces;
• practically silent.

Disadvantages:

• low exchange rate stability;
• possible loss of control during extreme maneuvering;
• low rebuild speed.

Thirteenth place

The tires have a unique tread structure that provides dynamic acceleration and high speed performance when the vehicle is moving.

Advantages:

• low fuel consumption;
• reduction of noise while driving;
• driving comfort.

Disadvantages:

• weak inhibition;
• insufficient vehicle control on dry and wet road surfaces;
• slow response to steering commands.

Fourteenth place

The tires are excellent for driving on country roads with hard road surfaces. Automobile rubber practically does not create resistance while the car is moving and thus, helps to reduce the consumption of the fuel mixture.

Benefits:

• normal course stability;
• driving comfort;
• long operational period;
• resistance to aquaplaning.
• fuel economy.

Disadvantages:

• slow braking;
• insufficient vehicle control on dry and wet road surfaces when performing emergency maneuvers.

Fifteenth place

The composition of the rubber compound from which these tires are made includes a compound. It allows the tires to stay cool while the machine is in motion. The unique tread ensures the grip of the wheels on the road surface.

• the lowest braking and shifting speed among competitors;
• slow rubber response to steering commands;
• weak exchange rate stability;
• too tough.

Conclusion

The choice of tires P14 in our time is quite large. Manufacturers offer a wide range of products with various quality characteristics. Therefore, it is quite difficult to choose tires on your own; you need to spend time comparing the parameters of rubber of various brands. To simplify the choice of motorists, independent experts conduct tire tests, leave reviews, ratings of products offered on the car market.

Which tires showed the best performance can be judged by the results of the R14 summer tire test. It should be borne in mind that tires that have taken leading positions may not be suitable for the operating conditions of your car, plus they are not a budget option. Therefore, it is worth familiarizing yourself with the advantages and disadvantages of all brands in order to choose the best option.

Introducing the top best summer tires of 2019 for small and medium-sized passenger cars. It includes budget, mid and premium tires, which are available in sizes from R13 to R16. When compiling the rating, the cost of tires, the relevance of the model and its results in tests were taken into account.

All models are sorted and presented by price from expensive to cheaper.

Segment: premium.

Multiple participant and test winner from European and domestic magazines. It is a balanced, soft, comfortable and quiet tire that performs equally well on dry and wet asphalt. Ideal for both leisurely city driving and country trips.

Country of origin: France, Portugal, Czech Republic, Germany, Romania.

2.

Segment: premium.

The company positions the model as a “tough weather tire” that is highly resistant to aquaplaning, fuel efficiency and increased durability. It will show its best qualities on wet asphalt, although its behavior on dry surfaces is also predictable and safe. When buying a tire from an authorized dealer, it is covered by an extended warranty, which is an added benefit.

Country of origin: Russia, Finland.

3.

Segment: premium.

A quiet, comfortable and economical tire that delivers equally effective braking and handling on both wet and dry asphalt. Thanks to the most balanced characteristics, in 2016 the tire took first place in the test from the Swedish edition Teknikens Varld.

Country of origin: Slovenia, Poland, Germany, France.

4.

Segment: premium.

The company markets the model as a "travel tire" that strikes a great balance between safety, handling and comfort. During the development of the model, special emphasis was placed on an increased level of comfort: on the tire tread there are many specially shaped grooves that reduce the level of vibration and noise in the cabin. Perfect for long distance travel at high speed and quiet city driving.

Country of origin: Japan, Hungary, Poland.

5.

Segment: premium.

Balanced summer tire from the Italian manufacturer Pirelli, which is equally effective in braking and providing a high level of handling on wet and dry asphalt. The tire took first place in the test from the Russian magazine "Za Rulem", which was held in 2017.

Country of origin: Italy, Russia, Turkey.

6.

Segment: medium.

A very balanced tire from a South Korean manufacturer that performs well on dry and wet asphalt and also provides excellent fuel efficiency. And although the tire is in the mid-range, in most tests it is not much inferior in performance to the premium models. An excellent option for the city and long trips for reasonable money.

Country of origin: Korea, Hungary, China.

7.

Segment: medium.

The budget variant of the premium Nokian Hakka Green 2. The tire demonstrates a balanced average performance on dry and wet pavement, without significantly lagging behind the premium models. A good option for those who want to drive safely around the city in any weather without overpaying for an extended warranty.

Country of origin: Russia.

8.

Segment: medium.

Quiet, comfortable and balanced UHP tire with a sporty character from the Dutch company Vredestein. In tests, the tire demonstrates good fuel economy and average results on dry and wet asphalt. Suitable for the city and long trips.

Country of origin: Holland.

9.

Segment: medium.

Summer "rain tire" with an asymmetric tread pattern that provides a safe ride on wet asphalt, low noise levels and excellent ride comfort. On dry pavement, the tire behaves a little worse, so it is more suitable for rainy regions.

Country of origin: France, Germany, Romania, Portugal. The Uniroyal company belongs to the German concern Continental.

10.

Segment: medium.

The converse alternative for Uniroyal is a comfortable, economical and durable tire from the South Korean manufacturer that reveals its best qualities on dry asphalt, but falls behind on wet. A good inexpensive option for the southern regions.

Country of origin: Korea.

11.

Segment: medium.

Initially, the model was created as a comfort class and was called Kumho Solus HS51. However, in operation, it showed good sporting qualities, so in 2015 it was transferred to the Ecsta line (sports tire series), maintaining a balance between dynamic qualities and comfort.

In tests, the tire demonstrates excellent aquaplaning resistance and a balanced average performance on dry and wet asphalt.

Country of origin: Korea.

12.

Segment: medium.

Summer fuel-efficient tire from the Fulda company, which is part of the German concern Goodyear. In tests, the tire shows a balanced average performance on both wet and dry asphalt, high fuel efficiency and good comfort levels. At a low cost, it is perfect for daily city trips.

Country of origin: France, Germany, Poland, Slovenia, Turkey, Thailand

13.

Segment: medium / budget.

Summer fuel-efficient tire with symmetrical non-directional tread pattern. In tests for braking and handling, the tire does not show outstanding results even against the background of budget tires, but its main advantages are a high level of comfort and low fuel consumption. At a low cost - a good choice for daily use within the city.

Country of origin: Malaysia, Japan

14.

Segment: medium / budget.

Another tire whose strengths are driving comfort: it is soft, quiet, perfectly absorbs any road bumps and consumes little fuel. In tests on dry and wet asphalt, the tire demonstrates below average braking and handling.

Country of origin: Romania, Germany, Czech Republic, France.

15.

Segment: medium / budget.

A fuel-efficient tire from a Korean manufacturer with average performance on dry and wet asphalt without clear advantages and disadvantages. Like the previous two models, the tire offers low fuel consumption and a quiet and comfortable ride. A good option for little money.

Country of origin: China.

16.

Segment: budget.

Another fuel-efficient budget tire with an asymmetric tread pattern that delivers high levels of comfort and average performance in safety disciplines.

Country of origin: Slovakia, Slovenia, Russia.

17.

Segment: budget.

A summer budget tire with an average level of comfort, noise and good braking and handling properties. The tire is notable for the fact that the Taurus company belongs to the French Michelin and all its products meet high quality standards, keeping the cost at the level of Chinese or domestic rubber.

Also, this model is produced under the brands Tigar, Kormoran, Strial, Orium, Riken.

Country of origin: Serbia.

18.

Specialists of the French magazine L "Argus compared budget tires, 5 summer tires from third-tier brands took part in the test. Among budget tires, a tire of premium class was also tested.

All major tire manufacturers offer their customers second-tier brands - BFGoodrich from Michelin, Uniroyal from Continental, Fulda from Goodyear, etc. Fitting these tires can help you save a lot, but if you want to increase your savings even further, you need to turn to third-tier brands like Kormoran, Barum or Sava. So, in their test of budget summer tires, the French experts took five tires, the price of which on the French market varies from 38 to 45 euros per piece. For greater clarity, L'Argus magazine decided to buy a premium tire for comparison - Dunlop, worth 52 euros. Dunlop SP StreetResponse tires allowed experts not only to compare the performance of third-tier brands, but also to monitor changing conditions during tests.

The tests were carried out at the Goodyear Dunlop Proving Ground in Mireval, France, as well as in the company's laboratory in Luxembourg. The handling tests used two Ford Fiesta 1.0 Ecoboost compact hatchbacks, the rest of the tests used the Fiesta 1.6. The tires were inflated according to the manufacturer's recommendations (2.1 bar front and 1.8 bar rear). All tires tested were purchased from regular stores.

Braking on wet asphalt

• Braking was carried out from 50 and 80 to 1 km / h, after which the braking distance was calculated to a complete stop. Dunlop reference tires were used to determine changes in conditions (wind, air humidity, temperature). Within each test, test pilots made five runs.

Braking on wet asphalt from a speed of 50 km / h, meters

• When braking from 50 km / h, the premium Dunlop was the best, but three of the budget tires performed very well. At the same time, the last Dayton tires needed 2.5 meters more to stop than the Dunlop. With an increase in the speed of the beginning of braking to 80 km / h, the Kormoran and Sava tires come out ahead, the former stopping more than 2 meters earlier than the more expensive Dunlop. As for the Dayton, they receive a red card in this discipline, since their stopping distance is almost 8 meters longer than that of the Kormoran, which is the length of two Renault Clio.

Braking on wet asphalt from a speed of 80 km / h, meters

Dry braking

• Test pilots stopped the car at speeds of 90 and 130 to 1 km / h, after which they also determined the braking distance to 0 km / h. On dry road surfaces, the Dayton tires that failed in previous tests performed best.

Dry braking drive at a speed of 90 km / h, meters

• If at a speed of 90 km / h Dayton tires stopped the car before all other tires, then when the start of braking increased to 130 km / h, they gave way to Sava tires. The last places in both disciplines were taken by Kingstar and Barum, with the last tires from 130 km / h stopping the car 5 m further than the leader of this test Sava.

Braking on dry asphalt at a speed of 130 km / h, meters

Resistant to longitudinal aquaplaning

• As part of this discipline, the car was driven on a track, half of which was covered with a 7mm layer of water. The test drivers gradually increased the speed by 5 km / h, the test was carried out until the tires began to lose grip on the wet road. The higher the speed that the tires could withstand, the more resistant they are to aquaplaning.

Successful completion of this test is possible only with a well-designed tread pattern. So the first places in this discipline are occupied by Dunlop and Sava, which have wide longitudinal grooves. The Kormoran are also doing well, and Barum and especially Kingstar and Dayton begin to float at relatively low speeds.

Traction loss rate, km / h

Handling on dry and wet asphalt

• The wet handling test was carried out on an irrigated track with a constantly maintained water depth. Parameters such as tractive effort, lateral stability, maneuverability, grip at corner entry, braking efficiency and information content were evaluated. The dry track tests were carried out in the same way.

• On the wet track, the tires split into two groups - leaders and laggards. The Dunlop and Kormoran tires behaved very similarly, both showed good handling and predictable behavior at the grip limit, and the Sava tires showed similar characteristics. But the tires Kingstar, Dayton and Barum could not boast of decent results on the wet road surface. Kingstar tires noticeably lack traction, Dayton skid easily in corners, and then find traction again with great difficulty. and the Barum are very nervous and their steering responses are generally quite difficult to predict. On the dry track, the differences between the tires were less pronounced, but even there the Barum lagged behind its competitors.

Wet handling

• This test was carried out in accordance with industry standards using two microphones on either side of the track and a sonometer measuring the noise level in decibels with the vehicle's engine off. Test pilots made eight runs on each tire. The 3 dB difference between the quietest Kormoran and the three last tied tires is very significant, as it doubles the volume to human hearing, and this will also be noticeable in the cabin.

Rolling resistance

• Before this test, each tire inflated to 2.1 bar was rotated on the bench at 120 km / h without load for three hours. After that, pressure was applied to it, equivalent to 80% of the maximum load that the tire must withstand. After several measurements, it was determined how much energy is needed to move a car weighing 1 ton.
• Tires account for up to 20% of fuel consumption, and recently tire manufacturers have been especially concerned with such characteristics of tires as rolling resistance and are trying to reduce it while not allowing deterioration in other performance characteristics. At the same time, experts remind that in order for tires to really reduce fuel consumption, it is necessary to regularly monitor the pressure level.
• There were no so-called "green" tires among the test participants. The most economical are the expensive Dunlop tires, but installing Sava or Kormoran tires can significantly increase fuel costs.

Long-standing competitors such as Nokian and Continental won gold and silver in our competition. It is worth noting that these two companies update their product line almost every year. Prices for competing tires are at about the same level of 3,700 rubles. At the same time, Hakkapelliita 7 demonstrates slightly better results, therefore, it is ahead of ContilceContact in terms of quality / price ratio.

Michelin's North 2 X-Ice series is firmly in third place, although they are far from being "first fresh". They cost about 3,300 rubles.

The model NordFrost 5 from Gislaved in terms of cost is in fourth place (3200 rubles), and in terms of the amount of points (892) - in sixth. The people are still willing to buy this rubber, apparently relying on the good reputation of its predecessor. However, in practice, the price of these tires should be lower.

Next comes the Ice Cruiser 7000 from Bridgestone for 2,900 rubles. The new tire model has average qualities and properties for the harsh Russian winters. That is why she takes only 8th position with her modest result of 829 points.

Revealed trend

Apparently, our motorists are ready to pay more for a well-promoted and well-known brand. However, some buyers appreciate the increased herniation resistance of the tires, which allows you to confidently drive over road irregularities and jump over holes without serious consequences.

Yokohama tires are traditionally slightly cheaper than Bridgestone, but at the same time practically not inferior to them in terms of performance. The cost of Japanese tires is 2800 rubles. We again consider this bar too high. Customers feel good about the Land of the Rising Sun tire product, even though it is labeled "Made in the Philippines".

The Winter Carving Edge from Pirelli costs 2,700 rubles, but at the same time it is among the five best tires in our test. By the way, the problem of the previous generation rubber model with the loss of studs has been completely resolved. Average cost / quality ratio - 3.0. Not a bad result.

Cheaper (for 2,400 rubles) you can buy Korean I'ZEN KW22 and Nordman of the 4th generation of domestic production. According to the test results, Russian-made tires look much more attractive, therefore they deservedly occupy the 4th place in our rating. It should be noted that this is a very interesting product.

Sno-Max from Cordiant can be considered an even more advantageous option in terms of price. Their price tag reflects 2,200 rubles. The final position in the test deserves respect - 852 points and a legitimate 7th place. At the same time, tires of domestic design outperformed imported tires of eastern production.

The cheapest tire models in our test are Kama's Irbis (505). They cost less than 2,000 rubles. At the same time, according to the test results, they did not even reach the 800-point threshold, gaining only 776 points. They cannot be called the last century, since the rubber model appeared 6 years ago. However, in terms of grip and properties, the tires clearly do not reach the modern level.

Note

You might be wondering why we haven't tried Kama's latest Euro 518 and 519 models? The fact is that such winter studded tires R14 in the most running size 175/65 are not produced. The Russian plant limited itself to producing only the old model in this class.

Separate conversation about each tire model

And now you can talk about each participant in our test in more detail. We will identify their characteristic features, main advantages and main disadvantages. We will also present their characteristics and the average cost in the market.

11th place

Characteristics

• These tires appeared with Gislaved in 2006.
• On an icy road, the tires have the weakest grip both longitudinally and transversely. On a snowy track, the transverse is also very weak, and the longitudinal is simply none.
• A car shod in such rubber will experience serious overclocking difficulties. The wheels strive to slip into slipping, not willingly picking up speed at all.
• On a snowy track, it is best to drive carefully and slowly. The car prowls very hard on irregularities and all the time seeks to go to the side of the road where the snow is deeper. The steering wheel is uninformative and empty, as if playing an arcade race.
• When cornering, the car behaves as it pleases. There is a feeling that the steering wheel is simply disconnected from the vehicle. A car can easily "crawl" out or break into a skid. At the end of the maneuver, you can completely turn around. The situation is aggravated by large delays and simply huge steering angles. The problem can be solved by severely limiting the speed when cornering.
• Driving through snowdrifts with Kama Irbis is very problematic. You can safely drive a snowy distance only without stopping. An attempt to get under way ends with burying the tires in the snowdrifts.
• Tires float on an asphalt road and require constant steering.
• On a wet road, the brakes are poor, and on a dry road - average.
• The tires are completely uncomfortable. They make a lot of noise, transmit shocks and vibrations even in places where the road surface seems smooth.
• Increases fuel consumption at speeds over 90 km / h. When driving no more than 60 km / h, fuel consumption increases slightly.
• The protrusion of the studs (1.5 mm) and its growth after the tests (1.7 mm) are within acceptable limits. After testing, none of the thorns were lost.

Pros:

1. relatively acceptable braking properties on dry asphalt and snow

Minuses:

1. slow down badly on ice
2. performed poorly on ice and snow in acceleration and lateral grip tests
3. unconvincing braking performance
4. difficult to manage
5. poorly keep the trajectory on a snowy track
6. make a lot of noise and increase fuel consumption

Total amount - 776 points

Verdict

Can only be used on roads well cleared of snow. It is not recommended to operate on snowy and icy roads.

10th place

Characteristics

• They first appeared in 2008. In 2009, they began to be sold in our country.
• They have weak adhesion parameters on an icy track in the longitudinal direction. Transverse grip qualities are average. Acceleration is satisfactory on a snow-covered road, and braking and lateral traction are poor.
• You should not start abruptly on such tires. Slight slipping is allowed during acceleration.
• They walk well on a snow-covered straight line.
• In the snow in the corners, the car, shod in Kumho, behaves rather strangely, as if it cannot decide between drifting out or skidding and going in. Sliding transitions are sharp and unexpected for the driver. In this case, the slides are of a long-term nature. On an icy road, the behavior is more stable: only a skid, but at the same time it is very sharp and difficult to control.
• In deep snow, when starting from a place, tires can easily bury themselves. It is best to get under tension with these Korean tires, and move with a little slippage. However, the tires are poorly suited for off-road driving. Reverse in which case does not help out. The tires move in the opposite direction very unevenly.
• On a straight asphalt road, they stick well to the trajectory, however, delays in reactions and the need to steer are a little annoying.
• Have average braking parameters on wet asphalt, while on dry - the worst among all the subjects.
• Slightly increase fuel consumption at any speed.
• The protrusion of the spikes (1.4 mm), as well as the change in this parameter after the tests (1.5 mm), does not go beyond the established norms.

Pros:

1. acceptable smoothness
2. stable on a snowy track
3. have virtually no effect on consumption

Minuses:

1. mediocre braking performance on snow and ice, and the worst on dry pavement
2. difficult to manage on a winter road
3. make a lot of noise
4. very often they "burrow", are characterized by poor maneuverability

Total amount - 826 points

Verdict

Not a bad budget option for car "shoes" for cleaned, slightly icy and slightly snowy trails.

9th place

Characteristics

• On an icy road, the tires have poor grip in the longitudinal direction, and in the transverse direction, things are better. The results are average here. On snow, the balance changes slightly: lateral qualities and acceleration dynamics are a little pleasing, and braking is upsetting.
• It is also possible to get under way in a car with slipping. True, then it is recommended to stop it, since in order to gain speed faster, it is better to move vnatyag.
• On a road with snow, the car prowls heavily and constantly tries to get out of the trajectory towards deep snowdrifts.
• Pleases the behavior of the car with Yokohama in the corners. The steering wheel is tight and intuitive, and the initial reactions are immediate. However, the speed of maneuvers on any type of surface is limited by skidding.
• Not suitable for deep snow. They move forward with great difficulty, and in reverse they can hardly get out of the snowdrifts.
• You should also take your time on an asphalt road that is clear of snow. The machine is constantly in need of adjustment. Large cornering angles at the steering wheel also interfere with fast driving.
• They stop well on dry roads, but they took the last place in the wet braking test. Such is the contradictory result.
• The comfort level of the tires is poor. The tires are shaking strongly on any potholes, bumps and other irregularities in the road. At the same time, Japanese tires made in Philippines make noise on ice and snow.
• Slight increase in fuel consumption.
• Tire spikes, it seems to us, are slightly recessed (1.2 mm). This can explain the poor grip on ice. The rate of increase in the protrusion of the studs does not go beyond reasonable limits (1.3 mm). No lost.

Pros:

1. good fuel consumption
2. brakes very well on dry asphalt

Minuses:

1. slow down on snowy and icy roads
2. the worst performance of acceleration and deceleration on a wet track
3. poor directional stability on a track with snow and on clean asphalt
4. not suitable for deep snowdrifts, instantly "buried"

Total amount - 828 points

Verdict

Allowed with a stretch to all types of surfaces, except for a wet road with snow in freezing temperatures. Large drifts should also be avoided.

8th place

Characteristics

• As with Yokohama, we included the most recent model in our test. The updated Bridgestone tires appeared in 2010, but they were brought to our country only in 2011.
• On ice they are characterized by very uncertain acceleration, but at the same time good braking properties and lateral grip. On snow, there is frankly weak grip in the longitudinal direction.
• When accelerating, they lose pace at the slightest slip. In it, Bridgestone tires, by the way, fail very unexpectedly.
• There are no complaints about running on a snowy track. It is measured and even. We also have no comments on the directional stability of the tires.
• It is useless to rush these tires around corners. On the ice, everything is limited to a skid, which comes suddenly and requires immediate correction. In the snow, the car constantly straightens the trajectory. At the same time, it slides outside the turn for a very long time.
• There is no confidence in the tires in the snowdrifts. It's better to get under way without skidding. At the same time, the tires make it possible to confidently get out of the "snowy scrape" in reverse.
• On an asphalt road without snow, the tires "float" a little. It is difficult to correct them and "catch" the correct trajectory. This is hampered by the low information content of the steering wheel and tangible delays.
• On wet and dry road surfaces they slow down well.
• Very noisy tires. What sounds only they do not emit when moving. On tarmac and ice with Bridgestone tires, you will experience an unpleasant howl and hum. Any of the road irregularities responds with vertical accelerations.
• They negatively affect the consumption, increasing it.
• There are no complaints about the projection of the studs (1.4 mm) and the rate of its change (1.5 mm). During the tests, none of the spikes were lost.

Pros:

1. directional stability on a snow track
2. brakes well on dry / wet asphalt

Minuses:

1. the steering wheel is difficult to obey, the tires are difficult to control
2. increase fuel consumption
3. make a lot of noise
4. poor braking performance on snow, acceleration on ice / snow, lateral grip on snow

Total amount - 829 points

Verdict

You can drive leisurely on clean, partially snowy and icy roads.

7th place

Characteristics

• The debut of the tire took place in the 2009th.
• On an icy track, they have mediocre braking performance. They accelerate and cling to the road in the lateral direction a little better. On snow, the situation is completely different: weak acceleration with satisfactory lateral grip and good braking.
• Decent acceleration on Cordiant tires is obtained only vnatyag.
• On a straight section on a snow-covered road, they scour from one side to the other. The steering process is complicated by the low information content of the feedback.
• In high-speed corners, acceleration will not work, since the maneuver is limited to drift. Slipping outward is very noticeable, and you have to wait a long time to regain adhesion.
• Russian tires run well on snowdrifts. They can be driven without interference.
• It is possible to drive fast on an asphalt road, but it is quite difficult. Constant swimming in the lane limit requires the driver to be attentive and careful driving, a clear course correction. At the same time, an inexperienced driver can be taken by surprise by the steering wheel turning angles (quite significant), as well as its lack of information content.
• Braking on wet and dry surfaces is very good. The results of these tests are comparable to those of Nokian.
• Comfort is not their strong point. They make a lot of noise and thump on the flaws of the roadway. There is also one unpleasant habit, which consists in scoring the change of coatings.
• It is very difficult to save money with these tires. Fuel consumption at a speed of sixty km / h is average, and at more than 90 km / h - increased.
• There are no lost thorns. Their protrusion (1.8 mm) and growth rate (1.9 mm) are normal.

Pros:

1. Brakes well on snow, wet / dry asphalt
2. They are distinguished by excellent cross-country ability in snowdrifts

Minuses:

1. Increased consumption
2. Mediocre trajectory
3. Low braking performance and lateral grip on ice
4. Poorly gaining speed in the snow

Total amount - 852 points

Verdict

Good for snowy roads. With them, you can not be afraid to "bury" in any snowdrift.

6th place

Characteristics

• This is another of the "oldies" of our test. The rubber model first appeared in 2006. Since the same year, it has been sold in our country. True, this winter the rubber compound has been improved.
• Longitudinal coupling parameters, both on ice and on snow, do not go beyond average, but transverse ones on a snow road are very good, and on ice they are even better.
• It is better to accelerate on such tires on the verge of slipping. It will be an order of magnitude more effective.
• On a snowy road, they drive smoothly and calmly, but still the steering wheel is not informative enough.
• There are minor remarks on the handling indicators. At the initial stage of turning, the tires behave approximately, but on the arc itself, problems begin, associated with drift, then with a skid. It is this uncertainty that will greatly strain and annoy the driver.
• On a track with deep snow, they require minimal slippage, they go confidently in tension. It will be easy to get out back if necessary with such tires.
• On the asphalt, the tires keep an even course. There are no special remarks. In braking tests, Gislaved products were the best on dry and wet surfaces.
• They differ in average comfort, although they "howl" a little on dense snow and an asphalt road.
• Slightly increases fuel consumption.
• The stud protrusion is at a good level (1.5 mm). After the tests, their average value increased slightly, within the normal range (1.6 mm). However, during the tests, we lost 5 spikes. This is very alarming.

Pros:

1. best braking performance on dry / wet asphalt
2. best lateral grip on ice, good on snow
3. comfortable enough
4. adhere well to the chosen trajectory on any road

Minuses:

1. average acceleration on any type of coverage
2. increase consumption
3. loss of five thorns
4. there are a number of comments on handling

Final mark - 892 points

Verdict

The element of this model of tires from Gislaved - well-cleared roads, on icy and snowy, unfortunately, not as comfortable, reliable and efficient as we would like.

5th place

Characteristics

• The tires were created in 2008. Since then, they have been modified and modernized many times. The last time was at the beginning of 2012.
• Braking performance on snow is the best, but on ice it is not credible. Lateral adhesion on both surfaces is fairly average. Accelerate well, and on any road. However, tires are especially effective when driving in tension.
• On a straight section in the snow, the tires surprise a little with a clear and precise course. In addition, the tires boast good asphalt reactions and small steering angles when adjusting the direction of travel.
• Cornering with Pirelli shoes is a pleasure. Immediate reactions and a tight and informative steering wheel allow you to "understand" and even feel the vehicle. Also worth noting is close to neutral understeer.
• It is better to overcome dangerous areas with deep snow without stopping. When starting from a standstill, the tires fall into the snow, although they are not prone to self-burying. When reversing, the car is selected confidently.
• On the pavement, the clear course resembles that of summer tires. Small heading correction angles and tight rudder.
• On a wet surface, a car with these tires slows down moderately, and on a dry surface - frankly bad.
• Tires each time sound the change of surface and roughness of the asphalt. At the same time, they diligently transmit shocks from irregularities to the vehicle body.
• Modest fuel consumption.
• The protrusion of the spines is normal (1.5 mm), and the changes are insignificant (1.7 mm). We lost only one thorn, but this is not critical.

Pros:

1. economical consumption
2. best in snow braking
3. accelerates well on snow / ice
4. have good lateral grip on ice
5. perfectly keep the trajectory and good handling

Minuses:

1. braking on a dry track is frankly weak
2. minor claims for cross-country ability and comfort

Total amount - 912 points

Verdict

Best suited for highway driving on all winter roads. Better to avoid serious snowdrifts.

4th place

Characteristics

• The tires were created in 2009. Since the same year, this model of tires has been sold in Russia. The rubber was improved this winter.
• Similar in grip to Michelin's third-place product. They showed themselves well on ice and snow (transverse and longitudinal properties), and on the rearrangement they even outstrip our winners.
• On the straight line they "float" a little, so do not forget about the constant adjustment of the direction. They do not allow the driver to relax, they constantly keep him in suspense.
• In tight turns, the car is easier to control the gas pedal than the steering wheel. Screwing is responsible for the tire speed reduction, and the turning radius is increased for its growth.
• They feel good on deep and difficult snow. In reverse, you can get out of almost any snowdrift. However, there is one peculiarity. Tires prefer a soft and smooth drive off without slipping. But on the go, you can completely "drown" the gas pedal. It only helps. The more gas, the faster the car goes on the Nordman 4.
• On a cleared asphalt road, the same features as on a snowy one. Deviations from the target direction must be constantly corrected.
• They brake well on wet asphalt, and average on clean and dry asphalt.
• The ride is good, but the tires are more noisy than the more expensive tires in the 1st to 3rd positions.
• They are distinguished by a modest expense.
• The spikes protrude within the normal range (1.4 mm). The value changes slightly (1.5 mm). During the tests, only 3 studs from the front tires were lost.

Pros:

1. modest fuel consumption
2. handle well on a winter road
3. excellent cross-country ability
4. good braking performance on ice, wet pavement and snow
5. excellent lateral grip on snowy roads

Minuses:

1. notes on the parameter of exchange rate stability
2. increased noise level

Total amount - 913 points

Verdict

An excellent choice for all types of winter roads. Also with them you can go on the winter off-road.

3rd place

Characteristics

• They first appeared in 2009. In the same year they made their debut in Russia.
• Well balanced traction performance.
• Acceleration on a winter road is confident. Slipping during acceleration does not reduce the acceleration efficiency. On a snow-covered track, they ride calmly, evenly and steadily, regardless of the thickness and unevenness of the snow cover. Responsive to directional adjustments.
• The behavior when entering and taking turns on ice and snow is well predictable. There is understeer in the form of soft drift. However, it is easily "removed" due to competent steering, since the "steering wheel" has immediate reactions.
• They feel great in deep snow. In motion, they prefer slipping. At the same time, Michelin helps the driver well. Even if his car "crawls on its belly", the tires in most cases will allow you to get out.
• On tarmac, the tires are also to be praised. At a decent speed, they keep a straight trajectory well. They respond to steering wheel manipulation without the slightest delay.
• Good braking on dry / wet roads.
• They have a good level of comfort. Quiet enough. There are no complaints or comments about the smoothness of the course.
• Fuel consumption is modest.
• Tire stud protrusion is normal (1.5 mm). During our test, this parameter increased by only 0.1 mm, which indicates a good quality of studding. By the way, they never lost a single thorn.

Pros:

1. low consumption
2. brakes and accelerates well on snow and ice

No cons were identified.

Total amount - 921 points

Verdict

Perfectly balanced and good winter tires. In which case, "help out" in deep snowdrifts.

2nd place

Characteristics

• Tires were born in 2010. They immediately came to our country. In 2012, the design of the studs was updated and the composition of the mixture was improved.
• The tires showed the best grip in all tests on snow and ice. The only exception was the passage of the ice circle.
• On the snow-covered road, they are not very smooth. It is felt that the tires are pulling the car into deeper snow, noticeably slipping on lateral slopes. In this case, the steering wheel could be more informative.
• They are well managed, but there are a number of features. The speed of passing sharp turns is limited by drift at the front axle, and in faster and shallow bends they are prone to a sharp skid. It is better to parry it at a low angle, not allowing it to develop, so as not to get into trouble.
• Tires are not afraid of snow drifts, but require the driver to adapt to their behavior. They don't like heavy skidding. They like the vnatyag movement more. They cannot always rescue the car in reverse from a large snowdrift.
• There are no comments on directional stability on cleaned asphalt. Performs well in dry / wet braking tests, behind only Gislaved products.
• Increased noise is uncharacteristic for them. The tires are comfortable enough, but they noticeably shake the car on bumps.
• Modest expense.
• The protrusion of the studs did not change at all during the tests (1.8 mm). Studding is of high quality.

Pros:

1. better braking and acceleration on snow / icy roads and lateral grip on snowy trails
2. good lateral grip on dry cleaned / wet asphalt

Minuses:

1. remark on the smoothness of the ride and the patency of tires
2. far from the best directional stability

Total amount - 927 points

Verdict

A good all-round tire for all winter surfaces.

1st place

Characteristics

• The debut of the tires took place in 2008. A year later, they were already on sale in Russia. At the beginning of 2012, the tires were seriously modernized in such areas as the geometry of the studs and the composition of the rubber compound.
• The grip of the tire is perfectly balanced. On snow and ice, longitudinal properties are virtually best in class. Transverse on an icy road - very good, better only in Gislaved, and on snow - above average.
• On a snowy track, the tires run smoothly and without the slightest remark. Tires respond well to steering commands from the driver. True, its informativeness can still be improved.
• When cornering, the front wheels adhere well to the path chosen by the driver. The rear wheels grip a little less well, resulting in slight oversteer. This unpleasant phenomenon can be easily eliminated with the gas pedal.
• They are not afraid of deep snow at all. Easy and simple to maneuver on it. If the car has rested its front bumper against an insurmountable snowdrift, then it will not be difficult to get out of it in reverse.
• They behave well on asphalt. At high speeds, the tires roll smoothly, they brake well on dry land, and on a wet track - well.
Contacts, telephones, directions.
Information is not a public offer 17777