Segment
1. Nokian cLine VAN Upper-middle2. Kumho PorTran KC53 Upper-middle3. Falken Linam VAN01 Upper-middle
Comparison: Nokian cLine VAN vs. Kumho PorTran KC53 vs. Falken Linam VAN01
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. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory2. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian cLine VAN Satisfactory2. Kumho PorTran KC53 Sufficient
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
1. Falken Linam VAN01 72 dB
Dry
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
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 | Noise | Wear | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,8 | 2,1 | 2,7 | 0,5 | 1,7 | ||
| Nokian cLine VAN Rating: Satisfactory | 3,3 | 3,0 | 2,9 | 2,5 | 2,1 | ||
| Kumho PorTran KC53 Rating: Sufficient | 3,8 | 3,2 | 2,7 | 2,0 | 2,0 | ||
| Falken Linam VAN01 Rating: Poor | 4,6 | 2,8 | 3,2 | 0,5 | 2,0 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
