Comparison: Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van vs. Kumho PorTran CW51 vs. Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01 vs. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN vs. Bridgestone Blizzak W810

Budget

Matador

MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

R14 – R16

VS

Upper-middle

Kumho

Also compare with

Turanza T005

Test Profile

MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

PorTran CW51

BluEarth winter WY01

AGILIS ALPIN

Blizzak W810

Number of tests

1

2

1

Best position

#9

#8

#11

#3

#7

Average position

9.0

8.0

11.0

3.0

7.0

Latest test

2019

Available sizes

18

21

19

23

56

Wet

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

67%

Kumho PorTran CW51

61%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

47%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

58%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

51%

Aquaplaning - longitudal

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

67%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

56%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

59%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Wet braking

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

62%

Kumho PorTran CW51

49%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

40%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

75%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

40%

Wet circle cornering

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

72%

Kumho PorTran CW51

72%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

61%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

61%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

61%

Wet handling

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

66%

Kumho PorTran CW51

46%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

32%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

69%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

34%

Aquaplaning - cross

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

78%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

67%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

67%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Snow

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

78%

Kumho PorTran CW51

70%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

69%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

75%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Snow traction

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

72%

Kumho PorTran CW51

72%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

72%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

92%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

83%

Snow braking

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

78%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

78%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

89%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Snow handling

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

80%

Kumho PorTran CW51

60%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

58%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

74%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

76%

Dry

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

63%

Kumho PorTran CW51

67%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

77%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

58%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Dry braking

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

71%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

82%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

61%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

78%

Comfort

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

56%

Kumho PorTran CW51

71%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

82%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

90%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

58%

Exterior noise

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

42%

Kumho PorTran CW51

71%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

87%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

81%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

44%

Interior noise

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

67%

Kumho PorTran CW51

71%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

78%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

77%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

67%

Ice

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

74%

Kumho PorTran CW51

78%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

81%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

83%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

74%

Costs

Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

68%

Kumho PorTran CW51

73%

Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01

80%

Michelin AGILIS ALPIN

43%

Bridgestone Blizzak W810

73%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Mutual Tests Available

These tyres were tested together in 1 test(s). Click to view detailed head-to-head results.

Mutual tests

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

Comparison: Matador MPS530 Sibir Snow Van vs. Kumho PorTran CW51 vs. Yokohama BluEarth winter WY01 vs. Michelin AGILIS ALPIN vs. Bridgestone Blizzak W810

MPS530 Sibir Snow Van

PorTran CW51

BluEarth winter WY01

AGILIS ALPIN

Blizzak W810

Test Profile

Wet

Snow

Dry

Comfort

Ice

Costs

Dimensions and prices

Mutual tests

Add to comparison