Test Charts / Tire Reviews

Are Budget Tires Finally Good Enough? 8 Cheap Tires VS 1 Premium Tire

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tire, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 205/55 R16
Tires tested: 9
Disciplines: 12

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental PremiumContact 7	116 ft	Best	0 mph
2Tomket Sport Series 1	124 ft	+8 ft	21 mph
3Nankang Econex NA1	126 ft	+10 ft	23 mph
4Davanti DX390	128 ft	+12 ft	25 mph
5Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	129 ft	+13 ft	26 mph
6Winrun R330	129 ft	+13 ft	26 mph
7King Meiler Sport 1 KM	130 ft	+14 ft	26 mph
8Double Coin DC99	130 ft	+14 ft	27 mph
9Triangle SporteX TH201	131 ft	+15 ft	28 mph

The difference between best and worst was 13.4% (15 ft ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Triangle SporteX TH201 would still be travelling at 28 mph when the Continental PremiumContact 7 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	51.73 s	Best
2Nankang Econex NA1	52.23 s	+0.50 s
3Tomket Sport Series 1	52.78 s	+1.05 s
4King Meiler Sport 1 KM	52.84 s	+1.11 s
5Winrun R330	52.85 s	+1.12 s
6Triangle SporteX TH201	52.97 s	+1.24 s
7Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	53.21 s	+1.48 s
8Davanti DX390	53.32 s	+1.59 s
9Double Coin DC99	53.39 s	+1.66 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.2% (1.66 s).

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	100 Points	Best
2Winrun R330	90 Points	-10.00 Points
3King Meiler Sport 1 KM	85 Points	-15.00 Points
3Tomket Sport Series 1	85 Points	-15.00 Points
5Triangle SporteX TH201	80 Points	-20.00 Points
6Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	75 Points	-25.00 Points
6Nankang Econex NA1	75 Points	-25.00 Points
8Davanti DX390	70 Points	-30.00 Points
9Double Coin DC99	30 Points	-70.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 70% (70 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental PremiumContact 7	104 ft	Best	0 mph
2Tomket Sport Series 1	127 ft	+23 ft	34 mph
3Nankang Econex NA1	130 ft	+26 ft	36 mph
4Davanti DX390	134 ft	+30 ft	38 mph
5Winrun R330	134 ft	+30 ft	38 mph
6Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	143 ft	+39 ft	42 mph
7Triangle SporteX TH201	143 ft	+39 ft	42 mph
8King Meiler Sport 1 KM	144 ft	+40 ft	42 mph
9Double Coin DC99	151 ft	+47 ft	45 mph

The difference between best and worst was 45.8% (47 ft ≈ 3.2 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Double Coin DC99 would still be travelling at 45 mph when the Continental PremiumContact 7 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	84.85 s	Best
2Tomket Sport Series 1	89.21 s	+4.36 s
3Nankang Econex NA1	89.36 s	+4.51 s
4Davanti DX390	92.19 s	+7.34 s
5Winrun R330	92.25 s	+7.40 s
6Triangle SporteX TH201	93.11 s	+8.26 s
7Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	93.93 s	+9.08 s
8King Meiler Sport 1 KM	95.24 s	+10.39 s
9Double Coin DC99	96.27 s	+11.42 s

The difference between best and worst was 13.5% (11.42 s).

Subj. Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	100 Points	Best
2Tomket Sport Series 1	90 Points	-10.00 Points
3Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	75 Points	-25.00 Points
4Winrun R330	70 Points	-30.00 Points
4Nankang Econex NA1	70 Points	-30.00 Points
4Triangle SporteX TH201	70 Points	-30.00 Points
7King Meiler Sport 1 KM	65 Points	-35.00 Points
7Davanti DX390	65 Points	-35.00 Points
9Double Coin DC99	50 Points	-50.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 50% (50 Points).

Wet Circle
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	11.5 s	Best
2Nankang Econex NA1	11.9 s	+0.40 s
3Tomket Sport Series 1	12 s	+0.50 s
4Winrun R330	12.4 s	+0.90 s
4Davanti DX390	12.4 s	+0.90 s
6Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	12.7 s	+1.20 s
6King Meiler Sport 1 KM	12.7 s	+1.20 s
6Triangle SporteX TH201	12.7 s	+1.20 s
9Double Coin DC99	12.8 s	+1.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 11.3% (1.3 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	46.5 mph	Best
2Nankang Econex NA1	46.1 mph	-0.4 mph
3Davanti DX390	44.1 mph	-2.4 mph
4Winrun R330	44.0 mph	-2.5 mph
5Tomket Sport Series 1	43.8 mph	-2.7 mph
6King Meiler Sport 1 KM	43.3 mph	-3.2 mph
7Triangle SporteX TH201	43.2 mph	-3.3 mph
8Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	41.8 mph	-4.7 mph
9Double Coin DC99	40.1 mph	-6.4 mph

The difference between best and worst was 13.8% (6.4 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental PremiumContact 7	10.8 ft/s²	Best
2Nankang Econex NA1	10.5 ft/s²	-0.3 ft/s²
3Davanti DX390	10.2 ft/s²	-0.6 ft/s²
4Winrun R330	9.8 ft/s²	-1.0 ft/s²
5King Meiler Sport 1 KM	9.2 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²
5Tomket Sport Series 1	9.2 ft/s²	-1.6 ft/s²
7Triangle SporteX TH201	8.9 ft/s²	-1.9 ft/s²
8Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	8.5 ft/s²	-2.3 ft/s²
9Double Coin DC99	7.5 ft/s²	-3.3 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 30.3% (3.3 ft/s²).

Comfort

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Winrun R330	100 Points	Best
2Continental PremiumContact 7	92 Points	-8.00 Points
3Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	91 Points	-9.00 Points
3King Meiler Sport 1 KM	91 Points	-9.00 Points
3Davanti DX390	91 Points	-9.00 Points
3Tomket Sport Series 1	91 Points	-9.00 Points
3Triangle SporteX TH201	91 Points	-9.00 Points
8Nankang Econex NA1	90 Points	-10.00 Points
8Double Coin DC99	90 Points	-10.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 10% (10 Points).

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Double Coin DC99	70.2 dB	Best
2Davanti DX390	70.3 dB	+0.10 dB
3Nankang Econex NA1	71.9 dB	+1.70 dB
4Continental PremiumContact 7	72 dB	+1.80 dB
5Winrun R330	72.2 dB	+2.00 dB
6Tomket Sport Series 1	72.6 dB	+2.40 dB
7King Meiler Sport 1 KM	72.9 dB	+2.70 dB
8Triangle SporteX TH201	73.2 dB	+3.00 dB
9Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	74.4 dB	+4.20 dB

The difference between best and worst was 6% (4.2 dB).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Tomket Sport Series 1	8.28 kg/t	Best	$0
2Winrun R330	8.37 kg/t	+0.09 kg/t	$3
3Continental PremiumContact 7	8.38 kg/t	+0.10 kg/t	$4
4Davanti DX390	8.56 kg/t	+0.28 kg/t	$10
5Double Coin DC99	8.63 kg/t	+0.35 kg/t	$12
6Triangle SporteX TH201	8.71 kg/t	+0.43 kg/t	$15
7Nankang Econex NA1	9.18 kg/t	+0.90 kg/t	$32
8King Meiler Sport 1 KM	9.42 kg/t	+1.14 kg/t	$40
9Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1	9.82 kg/t	+1.54 kg/t	$55

The difference between best and worst was 18.6% (1.54 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Maxtrek MAXIMUS M1 uses about 15 gal ($55) more fuel than the Tomket Sport Series 1.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.

Gas/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

12,000 mi

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

$3.60/gal

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tire age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Show full testing methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 62.1 → 3.1 mph
Wet Braking: 49.7 → 3.1 mph

Score Weighting

Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.

Test	Within category	Share of overall score
Dry · 35%
Dry Braking	45%	15.75%
Dry Handling	45%	15.75%
Subj. Dry Handling	10%	3.5%
Wet · 50%
Wet Braking	40%	20%
Wet Handling	35%	17.5%
Subj. Wet Handling	10%	5%
Wet Circle	5%	2.5%
Straight Aqua	5%	2.5%
Curved Aquaplaning	5%	2.5%
Comfort · 5%
Subj. Comfort	50%	2.5%
Noise	50%	2.5%
Value · 10%
Rolling Resistance	100%	10%

Our standard methods

The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.

Dry Braking

For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.

Dry Handling

For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.

Subj. Dry Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.

Wet Braking

For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.

Wet Handling

For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.

Subj. Wet Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.

Wet Circle

For wet lateral grip testing, I use a circular track of fixed radius, typically between 30 and 50 meters, broadly aligned with ISO 4138 principles. The surface is wetted in a controlled and repeatable manner. I progressively increase speed until the maximum sustainable cornering speed is reached. I normally record multiple laps in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions to reduce the influence of camber, banking, or directional track bias. I then calculate average lateral acceleration and compare the result with the reference tire.

Straight Aqua

To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tire set and average the valid results.

Curved Aquaplaning

For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 meters in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.

Subj. Comfort

To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tire's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tire.

Noise

I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tire is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.

Read our complete testing methodology →

Tire shortlist →Read the test →

More tire tests