The Polish magazine Motor has tested 17-inch tires suitable for such cars as Dacia Duster, Renault Arkana, Nissan Qashqai, etc.
List of models tested:
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Continental PremiumContact 6
- Debica Presto HP2
- Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
- Kleber Dynaxer SUV
- Kormoran UHP (Ultra High Performance)
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Nokian Wetproof SUV
- Yokohama BluEarth-XT AE61
The experts of the Polish automotive magazine Motor conducted a test of tires in size 215/60 R17, fitting many compact crossovers and minivans, and, considering the weight of the cars of this category, the test involved tires with a load index of 96 (up to 710 kg per tire). The tests were performed in the fall of 2021 in warm still weather at a test facility in Germany, where the tires were installed on a Dacia Duster; the car was driven by pilots having a considerable experience of participating in car tests and car races.
The Motor experts noted that the tires they selected for the tests are differently positioned in online catalogs, and, for example, the Bridgestone Turanza T005, Continental PremiumContact 6, and Michelin Primacy 4 are sold as passenger tires (because their manufacturers opted out of designing dedicated SUV versions), while the Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV, Kleber Dynaxer SUV, and Nokian Wetproof SUV are positioned as crossover tires, i.e. the end consumer may have to look for these tires in both categories. In addition, the drivers of minivans, such as Fiat Scudo or Renault Trafic, will have to check if their vehicle requires tires with an extra load index, marked «C».
Test results
In the wet braking test, the best results were returned by Continental, Michelin, and Nokian, while Debica demonstrated an average performance, and the traction produced by the Kormoran model was rated as «unacceptably weak».
Wet braking
- Continental
- Michelin
- Nokian
- Bridgestone
- Goodyear
- Yokohama
- Kleber
- Debica
- Kormoran
Info! Braking distance from 100-0 km/h, m.
The straight hydroplaning resistance test was won by Nokian and Debica. The Yokohama tires fell somewhat behind the main group, but they also do not compromise driving safety. When hitting a puddle in a corner, the best tire to combat the hydroplaning effect was the Debica model; the other tires, including Yokohama, also showed acceptable results.
Straight hydroplaning resistance
- Nokian
- Michelin
- Debica
- Continental
- Goodyear
- Bridgestone
- Kleber
- Kormoran
- Yokohama
Info! Float speed, km/h.
Lateral hydroplaning resistance
- Debica
- Michelin
- Goodyear
- Kormoran
- Nokian
- Kleber
- Bridgestone
- Continental
- Yokohama
Info! Lateral acceleration, m/s2.
On the wet circuit, the best lateral grip was demonstrated by the Goodyear model, and it was only the Kormoran tire that fell significantly behind all the rivals
Lateral stability on wet pavement
- Goodyear
- Nokian
- Yokohama
- Michelin
- Bridgestone
- Continental
- Debica
- Kleber
- Kormoran
Info! Lateral acceleration, g.
The scores for wet handling performance were given after three laps, and this time around first place was won by Continental, closely followed by Bridgestone. At the same time, the Kormoran tire performance was pronounced to be unsatisfactory.
Wet handling
- Continental
- Bridgestone
- Goodyear
- Michelin
- Nokian
- Yokohama
- Kleber
- Debica
- Kormoran
Info! Lap time, sec.
On dry pavement, the best braking performance was demonstrated by Continental and Bridgestone. The other tires also showed decent results, and even Debica, which came last, ensured an acceptable safety level.
Dry braking
- Continental
- Bridgestone
- Michelin
- Goodyear
- Kleber
- Nokian
- Yokohama
- Kormoran
- Debica
Info! Braking distance from 100-0 km/h, m.
The dry handling test included both lap time, and the pilot’s subjective evaluation, and in the first part the victory was won by Goodyear, followed by Continental and Bridgestone. At the same time, the first lines in the subjective ranking were scored by Bridgestone and Continental, possessing «the sportiest character». Goodyear and Michelin also received high scores, the other tires performing on an average level.
Dry handling
- Continental
- Goodyear
- Bridgestone
- Nokian
- Michelin
- Kleber
- Debica
- Yokohama
- Kormoran
Info! Lap time, sec.
Dry handling (subjectively)
- Bridgestone
- Continental
- Goodyear
- Michelin
- Yokohama
- Kleber
- Nokian
- Debica
- Kormoran
Info! Subjective, points.
The noise was measured from the outside at a speed of 50 km/h, the car passing a microphone with its engine turned off. The quietest tires were Goodyear and Yokohama, but on the whole there were no complaints about any of the contestants.
Noise
- Goodyear
- Yokohama
- Kleber
- Michelin
- Nokian
- Bridgestone
- Continental
- Debica
- Kormoran
Info! External noise, db.
And finally, the environment test involved measuring rolling resistance, and the results showed that the best fuel saver was the Michelin tire.
Environment
- Michelin
- Kormoran
- Bridgestone
- Debica
- Kleber
- Goodyear
- Yokohama
- Continental
- Nokian
Info! Rolling resistance, kg/t.
Verdict
The well-deserved victory in the Motor test was won by the Continental PremiumContact 6, which ensures a high level of safety in any conditions and behaves in a dependable and predictable way in emergency situations. The Continental model was the quickest to stop the car on both wet and dry surfaces, and it fell behind the other tires only in the hydroplaning and rolling resistance tests, falling in the middle of the tournament bracket.
The second line was scored by the Michelin Primacy 4, which only won in the «Environment» discipline, but demonstrated very good results in all the other tests, i.e. delivered a well-balanced performance. According to the experts, the Michelin tire delivered a very good handling performance and a crisp steering response.
The Bridgestone Turanza T005 lost to the Michelin model by mere 0.3 points, the most prominent issues showing on a wet circuit, where this tire had an average hydroplaning resistance. At the same time, the Bridgestone model ensured a very good handling performance, and, in addition, had a very low rolling resistance.
The Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV, which almost made it to the winners’ pedestal, performed well on the wet surface, but on the dry track fell behind the leaders (although it did get the highest subjective scores for handling performance). In addition, the Goodyear tire was relatively noisy.
The fifth line of the tournament bracket was scored by the Nokian Wetproof SUV, which scored a lot of points on wet surfaces and had a very high straight hydroplaning resistance. Its dry performance was less impressive, but there were no gripes about the safety level, and, besides, this Nokian model comes at an attractive price.
A line still lower was occupied by the Kleber Dynaxer SUV, which was outperformed by the Nokian on the wet circuit. At the same time, the Kleber model was described as a well-balanced tire, and it showed decent results in most of the disciplines.
The Yokohama BluEarth-XT AE61 scored only the seventh place, and the Motor experts noted that they expected more from this Japanese brand, especially in view of the fact that this tire was priced almost on a level with the premium models, and was ultimately outperformed by the inexpensive Kleber. The only discipline, in which Yokohama secured a leadership, was the noise test; in the other discipline, this tire demonstrated an average performance. At the same time, the experts emphasized that the tire did ensure the required safety level.
The Debica Presto HP2 came eighth, and the Motor experts stated that it delivered quite a decent performance for an economy class tire. Debica did not allow itself any obvious weaknesses neither on dry nor on wet pavement, and it had a very high hydroplaning resistance. On the whole, the tire of this Polish brand performed on a level with Nokian and Kleber, at the same time coming at a much more affordable price, the experts noted.
The last line of the tournament bracket was scored by the Kormoran UHP (a brand owned by Michelin), whose handling and braking performance was pronounced to be unacceptably poor. The only strong sides of the Kormoran model were the inexpensive price and reduced rolling resistance, but this is definitely not enough to make up for a low safety level.
1st place: Continental / PremiumContact 6
Quick Take
Continental PremiumContact 6
- Good handling, short braking distance, and a high level of safety on wet and dry pavement
- Predictable behavior in emergency situations
- Relatively low lateral hydroplaning resistance
- Increased noise emission
- Increased rolling resistance
- Recommended
2nd place: Michelin / Primacy 4
Quick Take
Michelin Primacy 4
- Well-balanced performance
- Short braking distance on wet and dry pavement
- Excellent hydroplaning resistance
- Very low rolling resistance
- Recommended
3rd place: Bridgestone / Turanza T005
Quick Take
Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Good handling response in the wet
- Short braking distance and very good handling response on dry pavement
- Low rolling resistance
- Average hydroplaning resistance
- Recommended
4th place: Goodyear / EfficientGrip 2 SUV
Quick Take
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
- Good lateral hydroplaning resistance
- Excellent lateral stability and good handling response on wet pavement
- Good handling response in the dry
- Low noise emission
5th place: Nokian / Wetproof SUV
Quick Take
Nokian Wetproof SUV
- Short braking distance and good lateral stability on wet pavement
- Very high resistance to straight hydroplaning
- Attractive price
- Fell behind the leaders on dry pavement (but still ensured the required safety level)
- High rolling resistance
6th place: Kleber / Dynaxer SUV
Quick Take
Kleber Dynaxer SUV
- Good results on dry pavement
- Low noise emission
- Relatively long braking distance and less-than-perfect handling response on wet pavement
- Average resistance to straight hydroplaning
- Reduced lateral stability on wet pavement
7th place: Yokohama / BluEarth-XT AE61
Quick Take
Yokohama BluEarth-XT AE61
- Good lateral stability on wet pavement
- Low noise emission
- Great riding comfort
- Low hydroplaning resistance
- Relatively long braking distance on dry pavement
- Increased rolling resistance
- Unreasonably high price
8th place: Debica / Presto HP2
Quick Take
Debica Presto HP2
- Very high hydroplaning resistance
- Attractive price
- Relatively long braking distance, low lateral stability, and less-than-perfect handling response on wet pavement
- Long braking distance and less-than-perfect handling response on dry pavement
- Increased noise
9th place: Kormoran / UHP
Quick Take
Kormoran UHP
- Low price
- Low rolling resistance
- Unacceptably long braking distance, low lateral stability, and poor wet handling performance
- Reduced straight hydroplaning resistance
- Long braking distance and poor handling response on dry and wet pavement
- High noise emission
