Segment
1. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN Premium2. Bridgestone Blizzak W810 Premium3. Kumho PorTran CW51 Upper-middle
Comparison: Kumho PorTran CW51 vs. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN vs. Bridgestone Blizzak W810
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. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN Recommended2. Bridgestone Blizzak W810 Conditionally recommended3. Kumho PorTran CW51 Conditionally recommended
Worst rating in test
1. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN Still recommended2. Bridgestone Blizzak W810 Conditionally recommended3. Kumho PorTran CW51 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - longitudal
Wet braking
Wet circle cornering
Wet handling
Aquaplaning - cross
Wet braking according to EU label
Snow
(Overall rating)Snow traction
Snow braking
Snow handling
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
Interior noise
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Ice
(Overall rating)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 | Snow | Ice | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,4 | 2,3 | 2,2 | 2,3 | 2,5 | 2,0 | 1,6 |
| Kumho PorTran CW51 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 3,6 | 4,1 | 3,0 | 2,6 | 3,0 | 3,0 | 2,0 |
| Michelin AGILIS ALPIN Rating: Recommended | 2,9 | 3,4 | 2,5 | 2,4 | 3,2 | 2,0 | 2,0 |
| Bridgestone Blizzak W810 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 4,0 | 4,1 | 2,6 | 2,8 | 3,7 | 3,0 | 2,0 |
| Show test details | |||||||
