18 Shops · 56,847+ Products

Comparison: Michelin Energy Saver + vs. Nokian WR Snowproof P vs. GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+

Test Profile

Michelin
Energy Saver +
Nokian
WR Snowproof P
GoodYear
UltraGrip Performance+
Number of tests
4
7
23
Best position
#5
#4
#1
Average position
10.3
9.7
3.3
Latest test
2018
2025
2025
Available sizes
55
176

Wet

Wet
Michelin Energy Saver +
87%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
64%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
83%
Aquaplaning - cross
Michelin Energy Saver +
62%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
35%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
87%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
60%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
83%
Wet circle cornering
Michelin Energy Saver +
95%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
75%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
82%
Wet handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
90%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
74%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
89%

Costs

Costs
Michelin Energy Saver +
80%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
85%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
80%
Price/value
Michelin Energy Saver +
55%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
62%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
69%
Rolling resistance
Michelin Energy Saver +
79%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
92%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
80%
Mileage
Michelin Energy Saver +
94%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
81%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
78%

Dry

Dry
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
90%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
78%
Dry handling
Michelin Energy Saver +
96%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
88%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
81%

Comfort

Comfort
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
92%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
84%
Exterior noise
Michelin Energy Saver +
84%
Nokian WR Snowproof P
92%
GoodYear UltraGrip Performance+
81%

Dimensions and prices

Compare prices across all available dimensions for these tyres.

Add to comparison

Popular brands
New comparison