Tyre reviews Michelin Energy Saver. Страница 3 1900

The side wall of a rubber tire is already two years old. Cracks have appeared, then at the fifth year two pieces of the rubber package. Rubber wear is excessive on a wet road. This is not the quality of Michelin.

Before these tyres I was using Amtel and Conti, Michelin far exceeds them. The only drawback - due to asymmetry when intensive braking the car slightly drifts to the right. But it's not critical, because it's not felt in normal modes. In all other parameters the tyres are very good, although they are made in Russia. The tyres were used in difficult conditions: the car worked, i.e. carried loads, but no one "groin", unlike Amtel.

Very good tire, very low wear after 15000km and increases gas mileage all the way 5miles, not a lot I know, but all of this helps. Much quieter than using other tires and infinitely better than Pirelli tires that came with the car.

This tire was a DRAMATIC improvement over the Summitomo HTRZ II that was on the car. Noise level was cut in half (at least) and wet traction was a huge step forward, as well. They are very even and quiet and provide more adequate traction in dry conditions. Overall, I'm very pleased with the Hankook tires. I also plan on putting Hankook WinteriPike tires on all of our vehicles for winter and will love them. I think I'm largely

I've just done almost 25km and the tyre burst for no reason at all in the traffic jam. The tyres were original when I bought the car, a set of Focus 3, size 205/50 R16. They've been driven for about 10-15% of the tread life and I've been driving without any issues, but unfortunately that's not the case now. By the way, these tyres are made in Russia and I've always thought it's best not to

To be honest, the tires are really annoying, making a loud noise that's drowning out the music from my car stereo. At first, I thought it might be a manufacturing defect or that they were installed incorrectly, but everything seems to be fine with the installation. The only thing that's somewhat pleasant is the traction on wet roads, but that's just about the only plus. Don't buy them, you'll only be disappointed. I'm currently in the process of returning all four tires to the

Tires for comfort enthusiasts, and very good (high-quality) dry asphalt (obviously not ours)! I took 4 tires 195/65/15 - 91 (can't remember the letter or T or V). Soft, quiet until 120, after that it starts to hum but compared to "Kumho" you can say it's almost inaudible. Haven't driven on wet roads but I'm afraid, I'm afraid because today I swerved the back wheels on

I chose between Nokian Hakkapeliitta Green, Yokohama CDRIVE, and Miska. Of course, I wanted the Nokian, but upon visiting the centre, I was dismayed to find the sticker on them now reads MADE IN RUSSIA, and as you understand, if "Russian Vanya" has touched an import good, it's no longer import. I couldn't find any Japanese tyres in the store, so I decided to buy Miska Ener

Thought I got a set from the market leader, made on a mega factory in Russia, to replace my old mid-range tires...

The first take – it's poorly balanced. The tire technicians were even surprised. Loads on 14x185x60 from 35 to 50 grams on each side!!! That's a lot for a new high-class tire on new quality lightweight rims (not Chinese). Even Rosava usually settles for 20-30 grams. Normal production tires usually top

I bought the tires before a trip to Crimea. After getting back from Crimea (4000 km) I went to the tire shop to check the tire balance. Everything is super! I drove into such potholes that I thought the axles would fly out, not to mention the "bumps". But no, everything is super. So far, I have already driven 15,000 km and haven't experienced any tire issues, neither on dry nor on wet asphalt. So, the tires