Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Michelin e.Primacy vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Hankook ION Evo

Upper-middle

BFGoodrich

ACTIVAN WINTER

R14 – R16

VS

Premium

Michelin

Also compare with

SportContact 7

PremiumContact 7

UltraContact NXT

Test Profile

ACTIVAN WINTER

e.Primacy

e.Ziex

ION Evo

Number of tests

1

4

3

1

Best position

#13

#3

#2

#1

Average position

13.0

12.0

3.7

1.0

Latest test

2019

2025

Available sizes

15

111

34

64

Wet

Michelin e.Primacy

61%

Falken e.Ziex

75%

Hankook ION Evo

89%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

56%

Michelin e.Primacy

65%

Falken e.Ziex

68%

Hankook ION Evo

77%

Wet braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

40%

Michelin e.Primacy

62%

Falken e.Ziex

87%

Hankook ION Evo

97%

Wet circle cornering

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

61%

Michelin e.Primacy

52%

Falken e.Ziex

77%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Wet handling

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

23%

Michelin e.Primacy

52%

Falken e.Ziex

69%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Aquaplaning - cross

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

67%

Michelin e.Primacy

65%

Falken e.Ziex

61%

Hankook ION Evo

87%

Dry

Michelin e.Primacy

74%

Falken e.Ziex

85%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

Dry braking

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

82%

Michelin e.Primacy

63%

Falken e.Ziex

88%

Hankook ION Evo

91%

Comfort

Michelin e.Primacy

62%

Falken e.Ziex

78%

Hankook ION Evo

72%

Exterior noise

BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER

71%

Michelin e.Primacy

70%

Falken e.Ziex

78%

Hankook ION Evo

66%

Costs

Michelin e.Primacy

81%

Falken e.Ziex

80%

Hankook ION Evo

71%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Comparison: BFGoodrich ACTIVAN WINTER vs. Michelin e.Primacy vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Hankook ION Evo

ACTIVAN WINTER

e.Primacy

e.Ziex

ION Evo

Test Profile

Wet

Dry

Comfort

Costs

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison