Segment
1. Continental VanContact 200 Premium2. Nokian cLine VAN Upper-middle3. Kumho PorTran KC53 Upper-middle4. Falken Linam VAN01 Upper-middle5. Apollo Altrust Lowcost
Comparison: Continental VanContact 200 vs. Apollo Altrust vs. Nokian cLine VAN vs. Kumho PorTran KC53 vs. Falken Linam VAN01
Table of contents:
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. Continental VanContact 200 Satisfactory3. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory4. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
Worst rating in test
1. Apollo Altrust Satisfactory2. Continental VanContact 200 Satisfactory3. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory4. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
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 | ||
| Continental VanContact 200 Rating: Satisfactory | 2,8 | 3,4 | 3,1 | 1,5 | 1,8 | ||
| 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 | |||||||
