All-season tires in the test: a "good" one for the first time
The ADAC tested 16 all-season tires in the 205/55 R16 size. Many of them are poor, but one of them was awarded a grade of 2.
(Image: ADAC)
All-season tires promise to square the circle: they should be able to handle all the demands placed on a tire by the seasons, for example. The industry has come up with the euphemistic term "all-weather tires" for this purpose. Specialists for summer and winter have not yet been able to outdo them, but you don't need one for every driving profile. This is probably one of the reasons why all-season tires are becoming increasingly popular.
However, the fact that the ADAC has awarded a "good" rating to this type of tire for the first time in a recent test should not obscure the fact that prospective customers should take a close look when making their choice and not save money. According to the test, the majority of tires are not recommendable.
Prices and expected mileage
16 tires in the 205/55 R16 size were tested. Both brand and low-cost manufacturers were represented. The ADAC recorded a price range of between 78 and 131 euros per tire, but this is only a rough tendency. Local and online offers can differ significantly from this in individual cases. In any case, the price should only be one of several criteria. The "Vector 4Seasons Gen-3" from Goodyear narrowly wins the test because it outperforms the competition in terms of environmental performance. Its predicted mileage, which the ADAC estimates at almost 61,000 km, is outstanding. Hankook (51,500 km), Kumho (50,600) and Toyo (50,200) come closest in this discipline.
The Pirelli, which is in second place overall, is said to be worn out after 33,000 km. This costs it the victory, although it performs slightly better than the Goodyear in terms of driving safety. However, Pirelli has already presented the successor to the "Cinturato All Season SF2" tested here. It is possible that the "SF3" performs better in terms of the predicted mileage.
Popular all-season tires (205/55 R16) in price comparison
Empfohlener redaktioneller Inhalt
Mit Ihrer Zustimmmung wird hier ein externer Preisvergleich (heise Preisvergleich) geladen.
Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass mir externe Inhalte angezeigt werden. Damit können personenbezogene Daten an Drittplattformen (heise Preisvergleich) übermittelt werden. Mehr dazu in unserer Datenschutzerklärung.
Big differences in braking
The differences in braking are also drastic. When braking hard from 100 km/h, the Michelin "CrossClimate 2" stops after 39.5 m, while the Uniroyal "AllSeasonExpert 2" stops after 46.6 m - a difference of just over seven meters. The braking distances on wet roads as well as on snow and ice also show considerable differences. The range on wet asphalt is between 33.3 and 38.6 m when decelerating from 80 km/h. On snow, the distance is ten to twelve meters. On snow it is ten to twelve meters at an initial speed of 30 km/h, on ice 18 to 22 m from 20 to 0 km/h. This may not seem like much at first glance, but in practice it can make the difference between "just-got-well" and an accident.
Rolling resistance and fuel consumption
At first glance, the tires tested differ only slightly in terms of rolling resistance, which has an influence on driving energy consumption. For this test, the ADAC determines the actual fuel supply at a constant 100 km/h via a CAN bus tap. In the case of the VW Golf used as the test car, the values determined for 100 km/h were between 5.2 and 5.5 liters/100 km. In practice, the average speed is likely to be lower and thus the difference in consumption.
However, smaller differences do add up over time. A tire that saves 0.2 liters/100 km compared to another model due to lower rolling resistance will have used 60 liters less fuel after 30,000 km. At current petrol prices of around 1.8 euros/liter (E10), that's almost 110 euros.
All-season tires in the test (3 Bilder)
(Bild: ADAC)
(mfz)