Segment
1. Bridgestone Potenza S001 Premium2. Nokian zLine Upper-middle3. Kumho Ecsta PS91 Upper-middle
Comparison: Nokian zLine vs. Bridgestone Potenza S001 vs. Kumho Ecsta PS91
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
3. Nokian zLine 20.
Average position in tests
2. Nokian zLine 7.38
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Nokian zLine Recommended2. Bridgestone Potenza S001 Satisfactory3. Kumho Ecsta PS91 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian zLine Recommended2. Bridgestone Potenza S001 Conditionally recommended3. Kumho Ecsta PS91 Conditionally recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet circle cornering
3. Nokian zLine 60%
Wet handling
1. Nokian zLine 85%
Aquaplaning - cross
2. Nokian zLine 75%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
1. Nokian zLine 83%
Wet braking
1. Nokian zLine 90%
Wet braking according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
1. Nokian zLine 85%
Dry handling
2. Nokian zLine 93%
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
1. Nokian zLine 75%
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
1. Nokian zLine 90%
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 | Points total | Wet | Dry | Enviromental impact | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 9,3 | 6 | 7,6 | 7 | |||
| Nokian zLine Rating: Recommended | 8,2 | 8,4 | 8 | 8,4 | |||
| Bridgestone Potenza S001 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 7,5 | 7,6 | 7,6 | 7 | |||
| Kumho Ecsta PS91 Rating: Conditionally recommended | 7,5 | 6 | 8,8 | 7,3 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
