Comparison: Continental VanContact Winter vs. Falken EuroWinter VAN01 vs. Kumho PorTran CW51 vs. Bridgestone Blizzak W810

Premium

Continental

VanContact Winter

R14 – R17

VS

Upper-middle

Falken

1 mutual test(s) with detailed data

Also compare with

Turanza T005

Test Profile

VanContact Winter

EuroWinter VAN01

PorTran CW51

Blizzak W810

Number of tests

2

1

Best position

#1

#6

#8

#7

Average position

1.0

6.0

8.0

7.0

Latest test

2019

Available sizes

46

32

21

56

Performance comparison

Wet Performance

83%

Continental

VanContact Winter

67%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

65%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

56%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Wet Braking

Continental VanContact Winter

87%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

71%

Kumho PorTran CW51

49%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

40%

Wet Handling

Continental VanContact Winter

90%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

57%

Kumho PorTran CW51

46%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

34%

Wet Circle Cornering

Continental VanContact Winter

83%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

72%

Kumho PorTran CW51

72%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

61%

Aquaplaning Longitudinal

Continental VanContact Winter

78%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

67%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Aquaplaning Cross

Continental VanContact Winter

78%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

67%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Dry Performance

82%

Continental

VanContact Winter

89%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

78%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

78%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Dry Braking

Continental VanContact Winter

82%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

89%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Snow Performance

77%

Continental

VanContact Winter

49%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

70%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

79%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Snow Braking

Continental VanContact Winter

67%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

56%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Snow Traction

Continental VanContact Winter

83%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

50%

Kumho PorTran CW51

72%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

83%

Snow Handling

Continental VanContact Winter

80%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

40%

Kumho PorTran CW51

60%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

76%

Ice Performance

74%

Continental

VanContact Winter

86%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

78%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

74%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Ice Braking Abs

Continental VanContact Winter

74%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

86%

Kumho PorTran CW51

81%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

74%

Ice Lateral Guidance

Continental VanContact Winter

74%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

86%

Kumho PorTran CW51

74%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

74%

Comfort & Noise

69%

Continental

VanContact Winter

81%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

71%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

56%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Noise Exterior

Continental VanContact Winter

67%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

91%

Kumho PorTran CW51

71%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

44%

Noise Interior

Continental VanContact Winter

71%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

71%

Kumho PorTran CW51

71%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Economy

74%

Continental

VanContact Winter

89%

Falken

EuroWinter VAN01

76%

Kumho

PorTran CW51

76%

Bridgestone

Blizzak W810

Fuel Efficiency

Continental VanContact Winter

80%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

89%

Kumho PorTran CW51

84%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

84%

Mileage

Continental VanContact Winter

67%

Falken EuroWinter VAN01

89%

Kumho PorTran CW51

67%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Tests used in comparison

Organization	Season	Year	Dimension
ADAC	Winter	2019	205/65 R16	View

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

View general comparison

Comparison: Continental VanContact Winter vs. Falken EuroWinter VAN01 vs. Kumho PorTran CW51 vs. Bridgestone Blizzak W810

VanContact Winter

EuroWinter VAN01

PorTran CW51

Blizzak W810

Test Profile

Performance comparison

Tests used in comparison

Dimensions and prices

Add to comparison