Menu
Federal Super Steel 657 View Gallery (1)
165-235/60-80 R14-16 24 sizes 2017

Federal Super Steel 657

The Federal Super Steel 657 is a Touring Winter tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

5.7
Tire Reviews Score Based on User Reviews
Limited Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
70%
Wet Grip
51%
Road Feedback
48%
Handling
51%
Wear
75%
Comfort
55%
Buy again
33%
8 Reviews
55% Average
110,200 miles driven
1 Tests (avg: 10th)
Federal Super Steel 657

Federal Super Steel 657

Winter Economy
BETA
5.7 / 10
Based on User Reviews · Limited Confidence · Updated 23 Feb 2026

The Tire Reviews Score is the most comprehensive tire scoring system available. It aggregates professional test data from multiple independent publications, user reviews, and consistency analysis using Bayesian statistical methods, weighted normalisation, and recency-adjusted scoring to produce a single, reliable performance rating.

Learn more about our methodology
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 1
Publications: 1
Period: 2011
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 8
Avg Rating: 54.6%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 1.72
History Points: 10
Methodology & Configuration
Scoring Process
  1. Collect Test Data: Gather results from professional tire tests across multiple publications. Minimum 1 test(s) required.
  2. Normalize Positions: Convert test positions to percentile scores using exponential weighting (factor: 1.2).
  3. Apply Recency Weighting: More recent tests are weighted higher with a decay rate of 0.95.
  4. Incorporate User Reviews: Factor in user review data (minimum 5 reviews). Weight: 15%.
  5. Bayesian Smoothing: Apply Bayesian prior (score: 7, weight: 1.5) to prevent extreme scores with limited data.
  6. Calculate Final Score: Combine all components using normalization factor of 1.1. Max score with limited data: 9.5.
Component Weights
Test Data
80%
User Reviews
15%
Consistency
5%
All Configuration Parameters
ParameterValueDescription
safety_weight 0.7 Weight multiplier for safety-related metrics
performance_weight 0.55 Weight multiplier for performance metrics
comfort_weight 0.4 Weight multiplier for comfort metrics
value_weight 0.45 Weight multiplier for value-for-money metrics
user_reviews_weight 0.15 How much user reviews contribute to the final score
test_data_weight 0.8 How much professional test data contributes to the final score
consistency_weight 0.05 How much score consistency contributes to the final score
recency_decay_rate 0.95 Rate at which older test results lose influence (higher = slower decay)
min_test_count 1 Minimum number of professional tests required
min_review_count 5 Minimum number of user reviews required
score_version 1.9 Current version of the scoring algorithm
score_normalization_factor 1.1 Factor used to normalize raw scores to the 0-10 scale
confidence_factor_weight 0.2 How much data confidence affects the final score
position_penalty_weight 0.2 Penalty applied for poor test positions
gap_penalty_threshold 12 Score gap (%) that triggers additional penalties
min_metrics_count 2 Minimum number of test metrics needed per test
limited_data_threshold 2 Number of tests below which data is considered limited
single_test_penalty 0.75 Score multiplier when only one test is available
critical_metric_penalty 0.7 Penalty for poor performance on critical safety metrics
critical_metric_threshold 70 Score below which a critical metric penalty applies
position_exponential_factor 1.2 Exponent used to amplify position-based scoring
position_exponential_threshold 0.9 Position percentile below which exponential scoring applies
gap_multiplier_critical 3 Multiplier for critical gap penalties
max_category_weight 2 Maximum weight any single category can have
max_score_limited_data 9.5 Score cap when data is limited
bayesian_prior_weight 1.5 Weight of the Bayesian prior in smoothing
bayesian_prior_score 7 Prior score used for Bayesian smoothing
evidence_test_multiplier 1.9 Multiplier for test evidence in confidence calculation
evidence_metric_divisor 3 Divisor for metric count in evidence calculation
evidence_review_divisor 10 Divisor for review count in evidence calculation
combined_penalty_floor 0.2
Data Sources
TestPublicationDateSizePositionMetrics
2011 Auto Bild All Season Tire Test Auto Bild 2011 185/60 R15 10/10 0 metrics
1
Tests
10th
Average
10th
Best
10th
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
10th/10
Good dry braking.
In spite of M+S marking the tire fails on snow an dice. Long stopping distances on wet roads, unbalanced handling.
Size Fuel Wet Noise
14 inch
185/70R14 88 T D D 67
15 inch
185/65R15 88 H D D 67
195/65R15 91 H D D 70
195/65R15 91 T D D 70
16 inch
205/60R16 92 H D D 70
215/60R16 95 H D D 70
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Federal Super Steel 657 >>

Questions and Answers for the Federal Super Steel 657

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Federal Super Steel 657. Why not submit a question to our tire experts using the form below!
Ask a question

We will never publish or share your email address

captcha

To verify you are human please type the word you see in the box below.

Top 3 Federal Super Steel 657 Reviews

Given 34% while driving a Citroën berlingo (225/45 R17) on mostly country roads for 8,000 average miles
Ok in the dry, but shockingly bad in the wet, to the point that I think I will be changing the tires for another make even before they have reached the end of their useful life on the car, they are that bad.
Relatively hardwearing however, comfort/road noise/economy are all fairly average.
My opinion, not great tires, probably best to look elsewhere...
August 23, 2013
Given 54% while driving a GMC Saturn Ion (225/45 R17) on mostly town for 100 average miles
The tires do not like the grooves that are cut into the road, Makes it feel like your driving in ruts. On smooth roads tires are fine.I would not buy again.
July 30, 2012
Given 30% while driving a Honda Accord (195/65 R15 S) on mostly town for 2,000 easy going miles
This is the worst tires ever. I got two of them from a used tires dealer...They still have over 80% tread on them. Drove it for two months and notice the vibration started... thought it was unbalance so took it to have it balance and discovered that one of the tires was twisted like a prezel so got it replace with another used tires. Two weeks later I felt a bumb while I was on the freeway. Got of the freeway and check on the tires and the other one that was left had two hug bumbs on the middle of the tires. Took it off and discovered that the tread were separated, completely peel off like a banana. I could of been hurt. The worse tires ever...I can understand if one is bad but both of them are...dame at 80% treads and this happen. I know it's used but it's has over 80% tread life left on them. I bought used tire before but none is worse than the FERAL SS 657 AND I AM SURE THAT ALL OTHER FERDERAL TIRES ARE PRABABLY THE SAME. 
October 28, 2014

How would you rate the Federal Super Steel 657?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Federal Super Steel 657 Reviews

Given 47% while driving a Ford Focus (195/60 R15) on mostly motorways for 0 average miles
Do not buy,much better tires for the same price.
April 17, 2012
Given 56% while driving a Ford Fairlane NL (205/65 R15 H) on mostly motorways for 100 average miles
Horrible in the wet!! Never again
November 24, 2011
Given 86% while driving a Renault Scenic (195/65 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 40,000 average miles
Perfectly good tire in wet and dry conditions. A bit suspect in the snow and these are certainly not winter tires by any stretch of the imagination.

The stand out quality of this tire is the wear. Changed the fronts after 36000+ and the backs will still be legal for another 5000-10000. All in all they are super value for money on the average family car.
March 21, 2011
Given 73% while driving a Mazda Bongo Friendee (215/65 R15 H) on a combination of roads for 20,000 spirited miles
I am a little surprised by these tires. I bought them because they were well priced. They have an M+S marking on the side wall. They don't look much like a winter tire but they have performed better than expected. I have them on a Mazda Bongo 4 X 4.
I was about to buy a mid range winter but will now not have to. The last two weeks I have travelled through the sort of conditions that have give them a good test. Soft snow above my axle's they still pulled through. No use on ice but you would need studs for that. They don't have an snowflake symbol so the compound must be all season rather than full winter spec. I will now sell my snow chains because I will never bring the Mazda through anything as challenging again.
They seem to be long lasting as well.
December 24, 2010
Given 57% while driving a Chevrolet Lacetti (195/55 R15 V) on mostly motorways for 40,000 average miles
Bought these as I'd had federal on my Mondeo 2.2 TDCI which were fine. These to be fair have lasted a massively long time, just over 35k on the fronts. I do mainly motorway driving and there's not my power in a Lacetti so no rip roaring starts.

However they are really, really bad in the snow and wet, they give very little grip in the wet and have skidded often on braking and when pulling away, and as I said 1.6 Lacetti wont pull the skin of a rice pudding!

In the snow I almost demolished a garden wall, slight hill, foot on brake at about 10mph, the tires let go and I slid 20m - 30m down the incline, in a straight line, down a curved road and then over the pavement, it's only because the off side wheel caught the curb that I went round the corner and on to the flat and stopped. It's lucky that no one was on the path or I'd have taken them out at about 20mph.

Won't be getting them again.

N.B. Mondeo same hill, same speed (probably faster), same conditions, Kumo 205/50/17 tires no problem at all.
July 21, 2010
Rate the Federal Super Steel 657