Vergleich: GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV gegen Michelin e.Primacy gegen Falken e.Ziex gegen GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2 gegen Hankook ION Evo gegen GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

Premium

GoodYear

Efficientgrip SUV

R16 – R22

VS

Premium

Michelin

Auch vergleichen mit

PILOT ALPIN 5

SportContact 7

WinterContact TS 870

Testprofil

Efficientgrip SUV

e.Primacy

e.Ziex

Efficientgrip Performance 2

ION Evo

UltraGrip Performance 3

Anzahl der Tests

—

4

3

1

24

Optimale Position

—

#3

#2

#1

Durchschnittliche Position

—

12.0

3.7

3.3

1.0

2.7

Neuester Test

—

2025

2026

2025

Verfügbare Größen

123

111

34

40

64

302

Nass

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

81%

Michelin e.Primacy

61%

Falken e.Ziex

75%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

Hankook ION Evo

89%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

83%

Aquaplaning - längs

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

87%

Michelin e.Primacy

65%

Falken e.Ziex

68%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

66%

Hankook ION Evo

77%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

74%

Nassbremsen

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

89%

Michelin e.Primacy

62%

Falken e.Ziex

87%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

78%

Hankook ION Evo

97%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

80%

Kreisbahn nass

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

86%

Michelin e.Primacy

52%

Falken e.Ziex

77%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

61%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

86%

Handling - nass

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

89%

Michelin e.Primacy

52%

Falken e.Ziex

69%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

74%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

91%

Aquaplaning - quer

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

71%

Michelin e.Primacy

65%

Falken e.Ziex

61%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

69%

Hankook ION Evo

87%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

74%

Trocken

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

92%

Michelin e.Primacy

74%

Falken e.Ziex

85%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

75%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

79%

Trockenbremsen

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

92%

Michelin e.Primacy

63%

Falken e.Ziex

88%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

Hankook ION Evo

91%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

72%

Handling - trocken

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

93%

Michelin e.Primacy

80%

Falken e.Ziex

81%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

77%

Hankook ION Evo

92%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

82%

Kosten

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

81%

Michelin e.Primacy

81%

Falken e.Ziex

80%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

83%

Hankook ION Evo

71%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

70%

Kilometerstand

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

70%

Michelin e.Primacy

100%

Falken e.Ziex

60%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

99%

Hankook ION Evo

82%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

56%

Rollwiderstand

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

88%

Michelin e.Primacy

67%

Falken e.Ziex

95%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

72%

Hankook ION Evo

69%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

75%

Komfort

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

79%

Michelin e.Primacy

62%

Falken e.Ziex

78%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

70%

Hankook ION Evo

72%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

85%

Außengeräusch

GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV

70%

Michelin e.Primacy

70%

Falken e.Ziex

78%

GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2

67%

Hankook ION Evo

66%

GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

80%

Abmessungen und Preise

Preise in allen verfügbaren reifendimensionen dieser reifen vergleichen.

Vergleich: GoodYear Efficientgrip SUV gegen Michelin e.Primacy gegen Falken e.Ziex gegen GoodYear Efficientgrip Performance 2 gegen Hankook ION Evo gegen GoodYear UltraGrip Performance 3

Efficientgrip SUV

e.Primacy

e.Ziex

Efficientgrip Performance 2

ION Evo

UltraGrip Performance 3

Testprofil

Nass

Trocken

Kosten

Komfort

Abmessungen und Preise

Zum Vergleich hinzufügen