Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun vs Nexen N Fera Primus
Expect the Falken to deliver shorter dry stops, stronger aquaplaning safety, and significantly better tread life and value. The Nexen counters with flashes of wet-surface pace (wet handling/circle) and marginally lower purchase prices and fuel use in some sizes. The nuances matter depending on whether you prioritise all-round safety and longevity or up-front price and wet agility.
Test Results
Independent comparison tire tests are the best source of data to get tire information from, and the good news is there have been six tests which compare both tires directly!
| Tire | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun | six |
While it might look like the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is better than the Nexen N Fera Primus purely based on the higher number of test wins, tires are very complicated objects which means where one tire is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tires compare across multiple tire test categories.
Key Strengths
- Consistently shorter dry braking (wins 6/6 shared dry brake tests)
- Superior aquaplaning resistance (straight and curved) across most tests
- Significantly longer tread life and lower abrasion (e.g., +13-33% mileage)
- Stronger overall value per 1,000 km despite mid-pack purchase price
- Competitive wet dynamics (wins wet handling/circle in multiple tests)
- Lower purchase price in most comparisons
- Occasionally lower fuel consumption and tire weight
- Good wet braking in select sizes and conditions
Dry Braking
Looking at data from six tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during six dry braking tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun stopped the vehicle in 1.92% less distance than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Dry Braking: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during two dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was 1.47% faster around a lap than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from six tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during four wet braking tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun stopped the vehicle in 1.36% less distance than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Wet Braking: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during two wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun stopped the vehicle in 3.99% less distance than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during two wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus was 0.6% faster around a wet lap than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun had 2.2% higher lateral wet grip than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Wet Circle: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during three straight aqua tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun floated at a 0.49% higher speed than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Straight Aqua: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during three curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun slipped out at a 2.73% higher speed than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during two noise tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus measured 0.14% quieter than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Noise: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Tire Weight
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during one tire weight tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus weighed 6.67% less than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Tire Weight: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Tire Weight winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during four wear tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is predicted to cover 18.33% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Wear: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during one value tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun has a 8.36% better value based on dollars per 1000 warranted miles than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Value: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Price
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during four price tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus cost 9.3% less than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Price: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Price winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus had a 0.34% lower rolling resistance than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Nexen N Fera Primus was better during two fuel consumption tests. On average the Nexen N Fera Primus used 2.52% less fuel than the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Nexen N Fera Primus
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun was better during two abrasion tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun emitted 8.6% less particle wear matter than the Nexen N Fera Primus.
Best In Abrasion: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun Driver Reviews
Across 104 reviews, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun is most often described as a strong value summer tire with confident wet and dry grip (including good aquaplaning resistance) and notably low road noise. Many drivers also praise its predictable, safe handling and generally good wear for the money, with a high rate of repeat purchases. The main recurring downside is higher rolling resistance leading to increased fuel consumption, and some users note a softer sidewall/less sharp steering response that makes it feel less sporty or a bit vague when pushed.
Based on 113 reviews with an average rating of 80%
Nexen N Fera Primus Driver Reviews
Most drivers rate the Nexen N Fera Primus highly for strong dry and wet grip, quiet ride, and comfort, with several noting excellent wear for the price. High-scoring reviews emphasize confident handling and braking, including in wet conditions, and generally low noise. A minority report longer braking vs Falken, higher noise on some cars, and slightly worse fuel economy; one low-score outlier cites sensitivity to pressure and variable wet performance. Overall, the N Fera Primus is praised as a comfortable, grippy, and good-value tire.
Based on 10 reviews with an average rating of 83%
Very silent. Most silent tires I had the last 20 years.
Nice handling.
Cheaper than most other brands.
(30euro cheaper than dunlop and 50 euro cheaper than michelin)
Euro label - C A A 67db for 195 65 15
Conclusion
The Nexen N'Fera Primus delivers commendable wet-surface agility in several tests (wet handling/circle) and edges fuel consumption and weight in certain sizes, plus a slightly lower purchase price. However, it trails in wear, value, and dry-brake consistency, which are meaningful for safety and running costs. For most drivers, the Falken is the safer, longer-lasting, better-value choice; the Nexen suits budget-minded buyers who prioritize lively wet dynamics over longevity.
Key Differences
- Overall results: Falken ranks higher in all six shared tests (e.g., 7/21 vs 17/21 AutoBild 2024; 6/50 vs 10/50 ADAC 2023).
- Dry braking: Falken leads every time (e.g., 36.5 m vs 37.2 m repeatedly; ~2% edge).
- Aquaplaning safety: Falken generally superior in straight/curved tests (e.g., +3-8% in 2024; +4-6% in 2022).
- Wet behaviour split: Nexen shows higher wet handling/circle speeds in some tests, while Falken often stops shorter in wet braking.
- Wear and value: Falken's projected mileage is markedly higher (+13-33%), yielding better cost per 1,000 km in every test.
- Efficiency and price: Nexen tends to be cheaper up front and sometimes posts slightly lower fuel use/rolling resistance and weight.
Overall Winner: Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
Based on the tire test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tire has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tire buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:
Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Nexen N Fera Primus Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Footnote
This page has been developed using tire industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tires in the same test.
Why is this important? Tire testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tire test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tire tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tire Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tire comparison, Tire Reviews doesn't.