• Home
  • traffic
  • Summer tire test 2019: 11 tires (215/55 R 17) for SUVs

Summer tire test 2019: 11 tires (215/55 R 17) for SUVs

Dino Eisele
Summer tire test 2019 (215/55 R 17)
Subscriptions & booklets

D he compact class is dying, long live the compact class! In other words: While the segment of the traditional Golf class is melting, the small SUVs around Opel Mokka, Skoda Karoq, Seat Ateca, Hyundai Kona and Audi Q2 are enjoying increasing popularity. An effect that can also be observed in the higher regions: even in the mid-range business models, sedans and station wagons are increasingly being beset by towering SUVs.

It is a reality that bulky and heavier vehicles do not necessarily help to conserve resources and reduce CO2. Just like the fact that, with a lot of effort and technical effort, tires with optimized rolling resistance are hardly noticeable in view of the increased air resistance of such vehicles. If, for example, wide tires are ordered on heavy accessory rims instead of the efficient basic tires, the liveliness of the car and fuel consumption continue to suffer. So: Schuster, stick to your last - which in the case of the compact SUV class are usually the reasonable size 215/55 R 17.

But which tire is the best? The selection is large, but the latest tire developments are not always available in this dimension. This is because the developers primarily focus on sportier or more profitable tire sizes or models.

Nokian Wetproof

Very safe wet behavior with a high grip level
Very reliable even when dry
Easily controllable
Sluggish steering response and large steering angles
Disappointing in terms of rolling resistance
A bit raucous

Price per tire: 128 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.8 points)

Bridgestone Turanza T005

Outstanding lateral guidance
High reliability Wetness
Spontaneous steering properties
Lowest rolling resistance
Slight deficits in wet braking

Price per tire: 144 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.6Points)

Michelin Primacy 4

Fairly balanced tire with very short braking distances on dry asphalt
Easily controllable
Slight grip deficits when wet
Weak drainage

Price per tire: 160 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.6 points)

Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance

Safe, stable handling on wet and dry asphalt
Reliable when changing lanes
Easily controllable
Little spontaneous steering on dry slopes

Price per tire: 151 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.3 points)

Pirelli Cinturato P7

With the exception of the braking performance on dry roads, more sporty, dynamic and k Comfortable tire
Top in braking in wet conditions
Weak in dry braking and aquaplaning

Price per tire: 139 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.3 points)

Hankook Ventus Prime³

Safe braking on wet and dry asphalt
Stable when changing lanes
Comparatively poor wet performance
Sluggish articulation behavior

Price per tire: 124 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8 , 3 points)

Continental PremiumContact 5

Very safe wet behavior with short braking distances
Best aquaplaning precaution
Weak braking on dry asphalt
Strong understeer with thin Reserves

Price per tire: 153 euros
Conclusion: Recommended (8.1 points)

Falken ZIEX ZE310EC

Good braking, wet and dry
Wet, dynamically drivable tire with good reserves
Even dry quite spontaneously steering
Somewhat indifferent self-steering behavior wet
Strong understeering dry
Very high rolling resistance

Price per tire: 116 euros
Conclusion: Still recommendable (7.7 points)

Giti Premium H1

Very good lateral guidance and handling properties dry
Good ride comfort
Weak braking performance
Steering loads
Oversteer tendency in wet conditions

Price per tire: 88 euros
Conclusion: Still recommended (7 , 1 point)

Nexen N'blue HD Plus

Mostly well controllable driving behavior
Only satisfactory grip on wet and dry roads

Price per tire: 101 euros
Conclusion: Conditionally recommended (6.9 points)

Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV

Acceptable performance on dry asphalt
Good comfort
Weaknesses in aquaplaning
Wet grip in need of improvement

Price per tire: 111 euros
Conclusion: Conditionally recommended (6.5 points)

* Please note the sizes prescribed for your vehicle
=recommended, =still recommended, =conditionally recommended

Find the detailed evaluation table You can find them in the picture gallery.

This is how testing was done

In order to guarantee the best possible accuracy and reliability of results, all tests in this test are carried out multiple times as far as possible. A progressive evaluation scheme is used which takes into account the objective evaluation by measuring devices as well as the subjective rating by the experienced test driver. When handling on wet or dry tracks, balanced, safe driving behavior that meets the expectations of the presumed target group leads to an optimal grade. The aquaplaning tests, carried out separately in the longitudinal and transverse directions, provide information about the reaction of the tires - for example when driving through deep ruts. The level of the critical floating speed when driving straight ahead or the achievable lateral acceleration when driving through water according to VDA criteria should each show the safety reserves of the tires. If possible, your rolling resistance is determined in two different test laboratories on roller dynamometers.

Dino Eisele
If possible, the rolling resistance is divided into two different test laboratories determined on roller dynamometers.

The results are included in the evaluation in the form of an average value. The basis of the assessment is the European legislation on tire labeling, which is also relevant for the tire label. For years, the tested products have been compared with tires from subsequent test purchases in spot-check follow-up tests to ensure the long-term validity of the results. In focus: the top three of the test as well as products with atypically good performance or unusual signs of wear. Deviations or abnormalities lead to the exclusion of the test, combined with corresponding reporting.

Little new in the segment

Both Michelin and Continental operate this size with tires from the premium segment, which is a little more comfortable. As last year's winner, Michelin provides the reference with the current Primacy 4. Against this: the brand new Bridgestone Turanza T005, the somewhat old Conti PremiumContact 5, which will be available on the market at least this year - the successor model PremiumContact 6, which is available in parallel, was still standing at the time of the test not available -, the no less proven Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance, the brand new Nokian Wetproof and the Pirelli Cinturato P7. Among the presumably cheaper brands are Falken with the new ZIEX 310, the originally Indonesian tire giant Giti with the new Premium H1, Nexen with the N'blue HD Plus and Toyo with the Proxes CF2 SUV.

Are the top brands top?

They are all competing to beat Michelin, who was outstanding last year. The bar is high on a dry road: after ten full ABS brakes from 100 km /h, the Frenchman takes the lead with an average of 36.1 meters of braking distance. Nokian, Hankook and Bridgestone only need another 20 centimeters. The braking distance plus at Goodyear and Falken increases to around one meter, while Nexen and Pirelli add two meters. Toyo and Conti need about three meters longer, as do the GitiPremiumH1, which only stops after a long 39.3 meters.

Dino Eisele
The selection is large, but the latest tire developments are not always available in this dimension.

Top performance in all dry disciplines as well When it comes to comfort and road noise, the Michelin initially take the clear lead. Hankook's Ventus Prime3 can do it just as well in terms of points, but looks a bit more unbalanced due to the clearly sluggish steering response. Nokian, Pirelli and Falken are also particularly strong on dry asphalt, with their agile, always safe and forgiving driving behavior.

According to our measurements, Michelin save with certain inconsistencies with the manufacturers' own label specifications , Bridge-stone and Goodyear the most fuel. Pirelli, Giti, Toyo, Hankook and Nexen are in the midfield, while Conti, together with the wet-strength Nokian, holds the penultimate place in terms of fuel consumption.

For the last one in the rolling resistance test, Falken, almost 20 are in order to keep the pace constant when driving slowly Percent more energy required than with the particularly easy-running Michelin. In the city, this can roughly correspond to an additional consumption of up to half a liter per hundred kilometers.

Problems in wet conditions

Top dry results, top marks for rolling resistance and road noise - the Michelin only lacks an adequate wet result to win the test. But water is not his element, and braking distances of 36.6 meters are not a top result. The best wet brakes in the test, Nokian and Pirelli, are around 1.2 meters earlier. Conti, Goodyear and Hankook also brake better than Michelin in the wet. Falken, Bridgestone and Nexen stop a little worse than the French. Giti and Toyo need a long 39 meter braking distance - the chances of top places in this test are gone.

The reason: In addition to our requirements for safe braking on dry asphalt, our requirements for the technically more difficult controllable wet braking in the total weighted again higher.

The chic spoked wheels are available in specialist shops in 15-inch format from 87 euros per piece, 17-inch wheels cost ( in silver) from 114 euros.

Why we attach so much importance to safe braking is quickly explained: Before the driver's steering reactions are There are brakes and tires, which can contribute significantly and quickly to defusing dangerous traffic situations - not only because efficient and lightning-fast speed reduction is paramount here, but also because important safety systems such as ABS and ESP are based solely on the Braking wheels guarantee safe driving dynamics. After all, it is the tire that can transfer these deceleration forces to the road.

Of course, the final wetness assessment is not just about braking, but also about the aquaplaning tests. The speed at which the tire floats dangerously on heavily rainy roads is checked here. The lateral guidance test, on the other hand, shows how quickly an artificially watered curve can still be safely negotiated. The handling tests deserve a similar meaning. On a winding circuit driven at the limit and for a limited period of time, the car is exposed to many dangers typical of rainy weather. The driver and the stopwatch evaluate how confidently the tire copes with it.

Wet handling is decisive

With excellent aquaplaning properties and the best longitudinal grip, Conti goes far ahead, Nokian buckles a little when braking better Cross-aquaplaning occurs, but follows closely. Goodyear is weak in the lateral guidance and comes in third place in the wet ranking, followed by Pirelli, Goodyear and Bridge-stone, who only find places next to the podium in their test vita with small cosmetic flaws.

And the rest? With the exception of the somewhat water-shy products from Giti, Toyo and Nexen, the other manufacturers have obviously taken their homework seriously. Is that already clear? Michelin or Conti are ahead, right? They are not! For the top rating “highly recommended”, the Michelin lacks wet performance, and Conti can no longer really hold its own with the basically outdated product.


Leave a reply

Name *