Tyre reviews Bridgestone Turanza ER300. Page 5 3211

On dry roads they were reasonable, though not excellent ..., but on a wet road it's straight down dangerous. In snow they're also not great, but that's not the tire's fault since it's not claimed to be a studded tire. What surprised me the most was the crazy amount of tire wear over a relatively short period of time, particularly in relation to the limited traction. I wouldn't buy this tire again and would stick with Toyo Proxes or Yokohama S-drive.

Overall very poor performing tires in wet conditions. I for the first time in 20 years of daily driving, experienced three 360 degree spin outs according to 30 miles per hour with these tires on my car gathers around roundabouts. Overall, for such a good name, very disappointing tires in wet or even damp conditions.... better to avoid.

Excellent handling and cornering in both wet and dry conditions. The braking distance is just as good as any other top tires. On mileage the tread wear is surprisingly minimal so far. Some others here on this site have complained about noise, but I have found them to be very quiet on most surfaces. On coarse asphalt there is noise, however.

I do not recommend

It came with a new car, of course, I wouldn't have bought it myself. I've driven 10,000 km, the result: two out of five wheels (four plus a full-size spare) are dead. A small pothole, speed around 40 km/h, the wheel hits the pothole - the cord is torn in two places, cannot be repaired. Perhaps the manufacturer never thought it would be operated in Russia. The rubber is

From the factory to the salon - further urn

Tires were installed from the factory... at first, everything seemed fine, but when I started pressing the gas pedal to the floor (after 3,000 miles) on a turn at a speed of 160, the car became unstable. I removed them at 6,000 miles and installed Michelin - the speed of passing high-speed turns increased by 30 kilometers without any tail swings like it was before. A friend's Mazda

not for our "roads"
Was on a new car. Holds the road perfectly, especially dry asphalt. Brakes well on both dry and wet surfaces. But driving on our "roads" is a real torture: it shakes out all your insides. And with acoustic comfort, it's not smooth either: it's quite noisy.
Pros: good on dry asphalt
Cons: very stiff

Mainly not bad
I've driven over 60,000 km on these tires, they hold the road very confidently in both dry and wet weather. On the used tires, they never skidded during sharp braking or sharp acceleration. The tread has worn out, but the tires have not lost their grip properties. The problem is different: they are hard and very noisy.
Pros: Excellent grip properties.
Cons: Hard, noisy.

only name

Bought a full set, they said it's the same Bridgestone. I drove 10,000 km, when I came to my relatives, they asked me: did you buy used?. On dry road, it's good, in the rain it also didn't fail, on turns nothing, it brakes probably normally, but on a VAZ it's hard to understand, don't even think about mud, two potholes, two hernias. On smooth asphalt

First impressions

I recently picked up the car from the dealership, I haven't checked the tires in emergency modes yet, so for now I'm talking about the drawbacks: 1) On poor asphalt, it's really noisy. 2) It's stiff. I haven't noticed anything else yet, I'll just go through the run-in period and then check how it handles turns and braking. I was worried because they bash this tire on the forums!

Pros: We'll check

Excellent tire

I bought a VW Passat B6 with this rubber. 55 thousand miles of mileage and no problems. Braking on dry and wet asphalt is super! The road is held perfectly! It makes average noise. You feel a bit uncertain when entering a puddle at high speed. I used to drive on Nokian, Goodyear, Continental. Comparison in favor of Bridgestone. I wanted to buy the same ones in advance for the next year, but it