Tyre reviews Nokian Hakka i3. Page 2 421

I bought it three years ago, now the mileage is already over 20,000. It is a Lada 21065 from 1997. The car holds the road perfectly, both on wet and dry asphalt. Aquaplaning is absent. Wear resistance is good, after three seasons, the digital wear indicator has worn off by one digit from 8 to 7. Previously, I had the Rosava, heaven and earth, the difference is enormous and in terms of traction properties

When I bought my Hyundai Elantra J4, it came with Hankook tires, which I immediately replaced with Nokian I3s, as they were quite affordable and I have a good impression of this brand. The tire is quite comfortable, holds the road well, and handling on a wet road is no different from a dry one, and it doesn't notice rain or puddles. Disadvantages: - Sharp noise when driving on asphalt with pebbles mixed in - but the

At first, the tire seemed good, but after two years of operation, it became completely worn out. Very weak sidewall resistance to external influences. 2 wheels with a sidewall cut and one with an eighth - a terrible result. Quite wear-resistant tire.

Excellent tire. It handles the road perfectly, the steering has become more sharp. It's not afraid of ruts, it easily copes with them. When braking from 60 km/h on wet asphalt, it barely slips into a skid, rarely, and only in the last 30 centimeters of the braking distance. Very pleased!

Tired of shuttle buses. Rolled out my VAZ 21051 for a test drive, 105th model from 1985 with BL85 from 1993 in the front and IN251 from 1985 in the back. The steering is ideal, all consumables are new, and the play is removed. However, it was producing a loud noise and couldn't hold the road at all. I installed i3 tires on new disks, no more than 15g on each disk

I've been using 2105 for 2 seasons now (20,000 miles on these tires). For this car, all the tire characteristics are simply redundant, they handle the road excellent, brake perfectly, there are issues with directional stability, but I think that's a problem with the car :)

For another car (Logan) I'll take GREEN. I'll write back as I use them.

Great tire!! And why are there bad reviews about it? I bought it in mid-summer, drove about 15,000 km, and the wear is only 1 mm on the front, on the rear, the *8* mark is still visible (I drive aggressively). I'm completely satisfied with the tire, it handles the road perfectly, and in the rain, it's like driving on dry pavement. In my Tazz, I don't even hear any noise from them) In

For undemanding drivers, although overall it's not bad at all. Good tire for its money.

Plastic. Comparatively high wear resistance. Far from being high-speed. Floats on hot asphalt (probably not suitable for southern regions).

I bought my wife a set of Hakka i3 tires for her Toyota IST, but it's impossible to balance all four wheels with more than 50g of weight on each one. The casting is naturally uneven. I've been working with cars for about 15 years and I have five cars, so I don't need to be told about square disks and other things. For the first time, I fell for the advertising of this company, and for the first time, I've had such

complete garbage

to all apologists of this "tire" - "Focus" cars were initially equipped with this product... but came to their senses in time and switched to Michelin (also, by the way, Russian). the hum from it is such that it seems like resonance has started in the car and it will fall apart now. tire fitters just cry when they put it on - up to 0.5 kg on one side is added and nothing helps.