Segment
1. Nokian cLine VAN Upper-middle2. Kumho PorTran KC53 Upper-middle3. Falken Linam VAN01 Upper-middle4. Apollo Altrust Lowcost
Comparison: Apollo Altrust vs. Nokian cLine VAN vs. Kumho PorTran KC53 vs. Falken Linam VAN01
| # | Apollo Altrust
| Nokian cLine VAN
| Kumho PorTran KC53
| Falken Linam VAN01
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |  |  |  | ||
| Dimensions | R15 - R16 | R14 - R17 | R12 - R17 | R13 - R17 | |
| Price | |||||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Apollo Altrust Satisfactory2. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory3. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
Worst rating in test
1. Apollo Altrust Satisfactory2. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory3. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
1. Falken Linam VAN01 72 dB
Dry
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Mutual Tests Available
These tyres were tested together in 1 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.
1
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,8 | 2,1 | 2,7 | 0,5 | 1,7 | ||
| Apollo Altrust Rating: Satisfactory | 2,8 | 2,1 | 2,9 | 2,5 | 2,4 | ||
| Nokian cLine VAN Rating: Satisfactory | 3,3 | 3,0 | 2,9 | 2,5 | 2,1 | ||
| Kumho PorTran KC53 Rating: Sufficient | 3,8 | 3,2 | 2,7 | 2,0 | 2,0 | ||
| Falken Linam VAN01 Rating: Poor | 4,6 | 2,8 | 3,2 | 0,5 | 2,0 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
