18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Michelin Energy Saver + vs. Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV vs. Falken e.Ziex vs. Hankook ION Evo

Test Profile

Michelin
Energy Saver +
Goodyear
Efficientgrip 2 SUV
Falken
e.Ziex
Hankook
ION Evo
Number of tests
4
5
3
1
Best position
#5
#1
#2
#1
Average position
10.3
2.2
3.7
1.0
Latest test
2018
2025
2025
2025
Available sizes
63
34
64

Wet

Wet
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
83%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Hankook ION Evo
89%
Aquaplaning - cross
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
82%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Hankook ION Evo
87%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
78%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Hankook ION Evo
77%
Wet circle cornering
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
79%
Falken e.Ziex
77%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Wet handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
86%
Falken e.Ziex
69%
Hankook ION Evo
92%

Costs

Costs
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
84%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Hankook ION Evo
71%
Rolling resistance
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
77%
Falken e.Ziex
95%
Hankook ION Evo
69%

Comfort

Comfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
92%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Hankook ION Evo
72%
Exterior noise
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
90%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Hankook ION Evo
66%

Dry

Dry
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
83%
Falken e.Ziex
85%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Dry handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV
84%
Falken e.Ziex
81%
Hankook ION Evo
92%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison