Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Continental UltraContact NXT

Upper-middle

BFGoodrich

ACTIVAN WINTER

R14 – R16

VS

Upper-middle

Falken

e.Ziex

UltraContact NXT

9.5

R16 – R20

Also compare with

SportContact 7

PremiumContact 7

Pilot Sport 4 SUV

Test Profile

ACTIVAN WINTER

e.Ziex

UltraContact NXT

Number of tests

1

3

2

Best position

#13

#2

#1

Average position

13.0

3.7

1.0

Latest test

2019

2025

Available sizes

15

34

23

Wet

Falken e.Ziex

75%

Continental UltraContact NXT

56%

Aquaplaning - cross

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

67%

Falken e.Ziex

61%

Continental UltraContact NXT

68%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

56%

Falken e.Ziex

68%

Continental UltraContact NXT

65%

Wet braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

40%

Falken e.Ziex

87%

Continental UltraContact NXT

51%

Wet handling

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

23%

Falken e.Ziex

69%

Continental UltraContact NXT

45%

Dry

Falken e.Ziex

85%

Continental UltraContact NXT

75%

Dry braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

82%

Falken e.Ziex

88%

Continental UltraContact NXT

63%

Comfort

Falken e.Ziex

78%

Continental UltraContact NXT

44%

Exterior noise

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

71%

Falken e.Ziex

78%

Continental UltraContact NXT

42%

Costs

Falken e.Ziex

80%

Continental UltraContact NXT

88%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Continental UltraContact NXT

ACTIVAN WINTER

e.Ziex

UltraContact NXT

Test Profile

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Costs

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison