View Single Post
      01-14-2013, 01:49 AM   #1
parapaul's Avatar
United Kingdom

Drives: E91 330d M Sport
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Stoke on Trent

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Lightbulb New EU Tyre ratings

Just idly scanning the interweb for tyres, planning ahead for spring when I need a new pair on the rear and I noticed something very interesting. I know it's not the be-all and end-all but these are as close to neutral comparisons as is ever likely to happen with something like tyres.

They're rated on fuel efficiency (A-G), wet grip (A-G) and noise.

Fuel efficiency is not actually that helpful - an A rated fuel efficient tyre uses 7.5% less fuel than a G rated one. That's 80 litres (just over a tankful) over the life of the tyre, which isn't actually specified. Say 100 over 10k miles? 15k? 20k? Who knows?

Wet grip is good though, an A rated tyre will stop in a 30% shorter distance than a G rated tyre. At 50mph, that's 18m difference, which is a lot.

For reference:

OEM Bridgestone Potenza RFT: Fuel F, Wet C, noise 73dB.

So, some of the popular choices on this forum:

Falken 452 140: Fuel E, Wet C, noise 72dB
Falken 453 143: Fuel F, Wet B, noise 71dB. Appears it's a more performance-orientated tyre than its predecessor.
Kumho KU31 133: Fuel G, Wet C, noise 74dB.
Kumho KU39 137: Fuel E, Wet A, noise 74dB. Interesting, because I found these quieter than the 452s they replaced.
Vred Sessenta 143: Fuel F, Wet C, noise 67dB.
Goodyear F1 Assy 174: Fuel E, Wet A, noise 70dB.
Conti SC5/5P 182: Fuel E, Wet A, noise 73dB.
Michelin PS3 193: Fuel E, Wet A, noise 71dB.

Now, I know there's a lot more to it than that, but it certainly lends weight to the argument that premium brands aren't worth the extra...
Just how many Yorkshire sheep can you fit inside one exhaust?