The best summer tires 175 65 14 rating. Summer tires R14: reviews, tests, price, which ones are better to buy? Braking on wet asphalt

Choice: Test of summer tires size 175/65R14 (2011) This time we take a look at the results of tire tests from the Australian magazine Choice.

All drivers need to change their tires every few years. You can, of course, again take the model that was included in the factory equipment of the car, but what to do if something doesn’t suit you. To help drivers choose tires, specialized publications around the world conduct annual bus tests, and this time we bring you the results of tests carried out by Choice magazine, which has been helping Australian consumers find best products on the market.

This year, Australians tested 18 tires of size 175/65R14, which can be installed on popular models small cars, such as Ford Fiesta honda jazz Hyundai Getz, Mazda2 and Toyota Yaris. Testing was carried out at Morgan Park Raceway in Warwick (Queensland, Australia).

As Choice notes, this test revealed the worst tire in the history of testing. What kind of tire this is, you will find out from the results below.

Tested tires:

• BFGoodrich Sport T/A
• Ecopia EP100
• Continental ContiComfortContact CC5
• SP Sport 300E
• Firestone TZ700
• Goodride Radial SP06
• Goodyear Assurance Armorgrip
• GT Radial Champiro BXT
• Optimo K415
• Ironman iMove
• Kumho Solus KH17
• Maxxis MA-P1
• Energy XM1 Plus
• Classe Premiere CP661
• Pirelli P6
• Sime Astar 100
• Toyo Teo Plus Eco
• Yokohama A.drive

The tests were carried out by Peter Horvath and Michael Hohl, who assessed how the tires hold the selected trajectory at speeds of 85 and 80 km/h on a dry surface, as well as 80 and 75 km/h on a wet surface, for which they drove through a right turn with a radius of about 55 meters. During each test, the pilot did not know what tires were on the car.

During the braking performance tests, drivers stopped from 50 and 80 km/h on both dry and wet surfaces to see how the tires performed under emergency braking.

In addition, the level of rolling noise was also assessed - at speeds of 50 and 80 km/h on uneven surfaces. In both tests, the difference between the noise of all tires did not exceed 3 dB, so a person can hardly notice it. However, all tires tested were new, so differences may become more obvious as they wear.

Choice emphasizes that the behavior of the tires was assessed in emergency situations, which rarely occur in ordinary life, so during everyday driving the differences between the best tires may not be as noticeable.

At the same time, it is the tire's ability to cope with emergency maneuvers and sudden braking that is of paramount importance to guarantee maximum safety. Tires rated Buy (top six spots) are more effective at helping you maintain control of your vehicle, which may help you avoid an accident.

During braking on a dry surface from a speed of 50 km/h, the results the best tires(BFGoodrich and Goodyear) were only one meter better than the worst (GT Radial, Ironman and Toyo). At a braking start speed of 80 km/h, the length braking distance BFGoodrich was already four meters less than Ironman. This may already mean that where some tires can help avoid a collision, others will not, but the differences become even more startling in wet testing - mainly due to Ironman, as these tires were the worst ever Choice tests, and experts strongly recommend against purchasing them. From 50 km/h the Ironman stopped the car 6 meters further than Goodyear and Pirelli, who were the best, and when braking from 80 km/h their braking distance was already 15 meters longer than Goodyear. At the same time, even the tires that took second place from the bottom - Goodride - were much better.

Ironman showed the same dismal results in the cornering test. These tires were the worst in tests on dry surfaces, and on wet asphalt and it was difficult to provide at least some traction with the road. BFGoodrich, Continental and Goodyear tires had the strongest lateral grip on dry surfaces, while Goodyear took the lead on wet surfaces.

Test results

Cornering on dry surfaces (80 and 85 km/h)

Cornering on wet surfaces (80 and 85 km/h)

Braking on dry surfaces (from 50 and 80 km/h)

Braking on wet surfaces (from 50 and 80 km/h)

Noise level at 50 km/h (dB)

Noise level at 80 km/h (dB)

Places in the test and additional information(weight of ratings when compiling the overall rating: cornering on a dry surface - 30%; cornering on a wet surface - 30%; braking distance on a dry surface - 20%; braking distance on a wet surface - 20%. Maximum number of points - 100) .

On the eve of the spring-summer season, the question of choice arises quality rubber. 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 to buy.

Rating of the best summer tires 2018

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

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

Toyo

Ruler Shin Toyo NanoEnergy 3 is an excellent solution for compact and medium-sized cars.

Characteristics

Average price – 2300 rubles per piece.

• no noise;
• fuel efficiency.

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

The cabin has become much quieter. Fuel consumption has decreased, a small thing - but nice. The road grip is excellent, the speed of 120 km/h is simply not felt. When braking, the car stops dead in its tracks. By the way, the brakes are the same on dry asphalt as on wet ones. Can't drive a car on wet asphalt. The downside is probably the sides are too soft.

Tests of 185/60R14 summer tires allow you to compare tires from different brands and 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.

Tests of R14 summer tires make it possible to compare the following characteristics of tires from different brands:

1. Hydroplaning. This term means a decrease in the adhesion of tires to the road surface, leading to a partial or complete loss of controllability of the car.
2. Braking. The distance that the car travels from the moment the braking system is reset to a complete stop is calculated.
3. Handling is the speed at which tires respond to steering commands.
4. Vehicle stability. The ability of tires to resist rollover or skidding is calculated. vehicle.
5. Wear. This concept refers to the rate of abrasion of tires upon contact with the road surface while the vehicle is moving.
6. Economical. Fuel consumption is calculated; if the pressure inside the tires is distributed correctly, then the volume of fuel consumed by the car decreases.
7. Noisy. It affects driving comfort and depends on the noise emitted by the tires while the car is moving.
8. Rigidity. Summer tires should not be too soft.
9. High temperature resistance.

The highest quality P14 tires for the summer showed good results in most tests and took leading positions.

First place

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

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

Disadvantages: the smoothness of the ride is not the highest among the presented brands.

Second place

Best option rubber for the summer, manufactured by a Finnish company. Designed for passenger cars, the products are recommended for use in regions where the air temperature is no more than 35 0 C. Tires provide a high level of vehicle controllability. Advantages:

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

Disadvantages: no significant disadvantages.

Third place

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

• resistance to damage and deformation;
• reduction of fuel consumption;
• driving comfort;
• tires absorb noise;
• provide vehicle controllability in difficult weather conditions;
• resistant to uneven wear;
• no aquaplaning effect.

Disadvantages: 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 vehicle braking on wet road surfaces. The tires are suitable for driving within the city and on country roads. Advantages:

• reduction in rolling resistance;
• fast braking;
• reduction in fuel consumption;
• high level of comfort;
• slight noise.

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

Fifth place

The tires are developed using special technologies that reduce vibration and reduce fuel consumption, and are 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;
• maneuverability of the vehicle when turning;
• no aquaplaning;
• reduction of fuel consumption;
• slight noise;
• good tire adhesion to the road surface.

Disadvantages: when driving on wet road surfaces, the handling and ride quality are average.

Seventh place

• no aquaplaning effect;
• improved handling on wet road surfaces;
• tires are almost silent;
• reduction of fuel consumption.

Disadvantages: own best sides When driving on a flat road surface, tires show poor directional stability. The rubber is quite hard.

Eighth place

These tires are designed for passenger cars. They have proven themselves to be excellent during high-speed driving. Advantages:

• dynamic acceleration;
• resistance to external mechanical influences;
• clear course when driving on dry roads;
• no noise while driving.

Disadvantages:

• long braking on dry surfaces;
• difficult handling on wet roads;
• increase in fuel consumption.

Ninth place

The tires have a block tread structure, which allows the wheels to respond quickly to steering commands. The tires have proven themselves well for driving on dirt roads, as well as on country roads. Advantages:

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

Flaws:

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

Tenth place

Tires are designed for cars SUV class. They have an asymmetric tread pattern. Suitable for country roads and urban conditions, designed for vehicle movement on the road surface good quality. Advantages:

• average directional stability;
• reduction in fuel consumption

Flaws:

• weak braking on wet surfaces;
• too hard.

Eleventh place

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

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

Disadvantages: difficult to control the car when performing emergency maneuvers.

Twelfth place

The composition of these tires is environmentally friendly, consisting of self-renewing substances that do not harm nature and people. When driving on suburban roads, they allow you to minimize fuel consumption. Advantages:

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

Flaws:

• low directional stability;
• loss of control is possible during extreme maneuvering;
• low speed of reconstruction.

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.

Flaws:

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

Fourteenth place

The tires have proven themselves to be excellent for driving on country roads with hard pavement. Tires create virtually no resistance while the car is moving and thus help reduce fuel consumption.

Advantages:

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

Flaws:

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

Fifteenth place

The rubber mixture from which these tires are made includes a compound. It allows the tires not to heat up while the car is moving. The unique tread ensures traction between the wheels and the road surface.

• the lowest braking and shift speed among competitors;
• slow reaction of rubber to steering commands;
• poor directional stability;
• too hard.

Conclusion

The choice of P14 tires these days is quite large. Manufacturers offer a wide range of products with different quality characteristics. Therefore, it is quite difficult to choose tires on your own; you need to spend time comparing the parameters of tires from different brands. To simplify the choice of car enthusiasts, independent experts test tires and leave reviews and ratings of products offered on the car market.

What tires did they show? best characteristics can be judged by the test results of R14 summer tires. It is worth considering that the 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.

Specialists from the French magazine L'Argus compared budget class tires; 5 people took part in the test summer tires from third-tier brands. Among budget tires The premium class tire was also tested.

All large tire manufacturers offer their customers tires from second-tier brands - BFGoodrich from Michelin, Uniroyal from Continental, Fulda from Goodyear, etc. Installing these tires will help you save a lot, but if you want to increase your savings even further, you'll need to turn to third-tier brands such as Kormoran, Barum or Sava. So, in their test of budget summer tires, 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 premium tires for comparison - Dunlop, costing 52 euros. Dunlop SP StreetResponse tires allowed experts to not only compare the performance characteristics of tires from third-tier brands, but also monitor changing conditions during tests.

Tests were carried out at the Goodyear Dunlop test site in Mireval (France), as well as in the company's laboratory in Luxembourg. Handling tests used two Ford Fiesta 1.0 Ecoboost compact hatchbacks, while the remaining tests used a Fiesta 1.6. The tires were inflated according to the manufacturer's recommendations (2.1 bar front and 1.8 rear). All tested tires were purchased in regular stores.

Braking on wet asphalt

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

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

• When braking at a speed of 50 km/h, premium Dunlops were the best, but three of the budget tires showed very good results. At the same time, the Dayton tires, which came in last, required 2.5 meters more to stop than the Dunlops. When the braking start speed increases to 80 km/h, the Kormoran tires and Sava, with the former stopping more than 2 meters earlier than the more expensive Dunlops. As for Dayton, they receive a red card in this discipline, since their braking distance is almost 8 meters longer than that of the Kormoran, which is the length of two Renault Clios.

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

Braking on dry asphalt

• Test drivers stopped the car from 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 previous tests performed best.

Braking on dry asphalt drive at a speed of 90 km/h, meters

• If from 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 lost primacy to Sava tires. The last places in both disciplines were taken by Kingstar and Barum, with the latter tires stopping the car 5 m further from 130 km/h than the leader of this test, Sava.

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

Resistance to longitudinal aquaplaning

• As part of this discipline, the car moved along a track, half of which was covered with a 7 mm 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 wet roads. The higher the speed that the tires can withstand, the more resistant they are to hydroplaning.

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

Speed ​​of loss of traction with the road surface, 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 traction, lateral stability, maneuverability, grip at the entrance to a turn, braking efficiency and information content were assessed. Tests on a dry track were carried out in the same way.

• On a wet track, the tires were divided into two groups - leaders and laggards. The Dunlop and Kormoran tires behaved very similarly, both showed good handling and predictable behavior at the limit of grip, the Sava tires showed similar characteristics. But the Kingstar, Dayton and Barum tires could not boast decent results on wet road surfaces. The Kingstar tires noticeably lack grip; the Dayton skids easily in corners, after which it struggles to find traction again. and Barum behave very nervously, and their reactions to steering It's generally quite difficult to predict. On a dry track, the differences between the tires were less pronounced, but even there Barum was noticeably behind its competitors.

Handling on wet surfaces

• This test was carried out according to industry standards using two microphones on either side of the track and a sonometer that measures the noise level in decibels when the vehicle engine is off. The test drivers completed eight runs on each tire. The difference of 3 dB between the quietest Kormoran and the three tires tied for last place is very significant, since for human hearing it means double the volume, 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 stand at 120 km/h without load for three hours. After this, a pressure equivalent to 80% of the maximum load that the tire should withstand was applied to it. 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. Recently, tire manufacturers have been especially concerned about such characteristics of tires as rolling resistance and are trying to reduce it without allowing deterioration of other performance characteristics. At the same time, experts remind that in order for tires to truly reduce fuel consumption, it is necessary to regularly monitor the pressure level.
• There were no so-called “green” tires among the test participants. They turned out to be the most economical expensive tires Dunlop, and here is the installation Sava tires or Kormoran may significantly increase fuel costs.