18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

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

Test Profile

Michelin
Energy Saver +
GoodYear
Efficientgrip Performance 2
Falken
e.Ziex
Hankook
ION Evo
Number of tests
4
3
3
1
Best position
#5
#2
#2
#1
Average position
10.3
3.3
3.7
1.0
Latest test
2018
2026
2025
2025
Available sizes
40
34
64

Wet

Wet
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
77%
Falken e.Ziex
75%
Hankook ION Evo
89%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
66%
Falken e.Ziex
68%
Hankook ION Evo
77%
Wet circle cornering
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
61%
Falken e.Ziex
77%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Wet handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
74%
Falken e.Ziex
69%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Aquaplaning - cross
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
69%
Falken e.Ziex
61%
Hankook ION Evo
87%

Costs

Costs
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
83%
Falken e.Ziex
80%
Hankook ION Evo
71%
Mileage
Michelin Energy Saver +
94%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
99%
Falken e.Ziex
60%
Hankook ION Evo
82%
Rolling resistance
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
72%
Falken e.Ziex
95%
Hankook ION Evo
69%

Dry

Dry
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
75%
Falken e.Ziex
85%
Hankook ION Evo
92%
Dry handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
77%
Falken e.Ziex
81%
Hankook ION Evo
92%

Comfort

Comfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
70%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Hankook ION Evo
72%
Exterior noise
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2
67%
Falken e.Ziex
78%
Hankook ION Evo
66%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison