Menu
Laufenn S fit EQ View Gallery (1)
185-265/35-65 R15-19 23 sizes 2021

Laufenn S fit EQ

The Laufenn S fit EQ is a Ultra High Performance Summer tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

5.2
Tire Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
Medium Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
78%
Wet Grip
63%
Road Feedback
62%
Handling
57%
Wear
73%
Comfort
73%
Buy again
58%
14 Reviews
66% Average
86,322 miles driven
4 Tests (avg: 20th)
Laufenn S fit EQ

Laufenn S fit EQ

Summer Economy
BETA
5.2 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · Medium 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
Dry
74.6
1.8x / 4 tests
Wet
63.9
2x / 5 tests
Value
59.1
0.42x / 2 tests
Comfort
40
0.32x / 1 test

Cross-category scores are derived metrics that combine data from multiple test disciplines to evaluate real-world performance characteristics.

Handling
74.6
2 tests
Braking
67.3
6 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 4
Publications: 4
Period: 2018 - 2020
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 14
Avg Rating: 66.2%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.23
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
2020 ADAC SUV Summer Tire Test ADAC 2020 235/55 R17 12/12 1 metrics
2019 Summer 53 Tire Braking Shootout Auto Bild 2019 225/45 R17 44/45 2 metrics
2018 New and Worn Summer Tire Test Auto Navigator 2018 205/55 R16 14/17 5 metrics
2018 Gute Fahrt Summer Tire Test Gute Fahrt 2018 205/55 R16 9/12 4 metrics
4
Tests
20th
Average
9th
Best
44th
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
12th/12
Good in the dry
Very weak in the wet
Not Recommended
44th/45
14th/17
Size Fuel Wet Noise
16 inch
205/55R16 91 V C C 71
205/55R16 91 H C C 71
17 inch
225/50R17 94 W D B 71
225/45R17 91 W D B 71
18 inch
245/45R18 96 W D B 71
20 inch
255/45R20 105 W XL D A 73
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Laufenn S fit EQ >>

Questions and Answers for the Laufenn S fit EQ

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Laufenn S fit EQ. 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.

Review Summary

Based on 13 user reviews

Drivers report mixed experiences with the Laufenn S fit EQ: many praise its quiet ride, strong value, and balanced dry/wet grip for normal driving, while others criticize wet grip at the limit, steering feedback, and durability/puncture susceptibility. High-scoring reviews highlight good handling, low noise, and decent wear for budget money; several low/mid reviews cite vague feel, poor wet traction when pushed, and faster front wear/noise growth. Overall sentiment is middling with positives weighted by several high scores but notable negatives from multiple low scores.

Strengths
  • Low road noise (when new/for many)
  • Good dry grip for normal driving
  • Acceptable wet grip for everyday use
  • Good value/price-performance
  • Decent wear for some users
Areas for Improvement
  • Weak wet grip when pushed/low-speed understeer
  • Vague steering/poor feedback
  • Sidewall softness/puncture susceptibility
  • Noise increases as they wear
  • Front wear faster than expected for some

Top 3 Laufenn S fit EQ Reviews

Suzuki 2007 Vtt Suzuki swift (225/85 R17) on mostly town for 0 miles
3 tires in 3 months due to bubble in side wall not happy at all no one willing to take responsibility just getting blamed on pot holes don't buy stay well awsy
October 1, 2025
Given 37% while driving a Volkswagen CC (235/40 R18) on a combination of roads for 115 spirited miles
Worst tires I have ever had on a car. These came new fitted to the car (7.5 mm all round). As the miles piled on the MPG got worse. Started out managing 55 MPG on the motorway, now I can barely manage 40 mpg. Dry grip is there but there's little feedback. Wet grip, I have absolutely no confidence in the them, tires easily spin up and easily under steer. When accelerating you have to be gentle on the throttle will 30 MPH before accelerating, if you force them expect traction to work overtime until the tires grip. Even with suspension in sports mode it makes little difference. Braking distances in either conditions is long. Durability is not that great, every week or 2 I have had to reset the pressure monitoring system. They lose quite a lot of pressure hence I have had to add pressure quite a lot. In the 2 years owned I have had about 4 punctures. One tire is on it's 2nd puncture and can't be repaired. Front tires were already (first service after purchase) at the 3 mm after 8k miles the rears were still good at 6mm and even now the rears are at 5.8mm. The only redeeming quality is the comfort.
August 27, 2021
Given 91% while driving a Alfa Romeo GT 1.9 JTD (225/40 R18) on a combination of roads for 6,000 average miles
Excellent budget tires, they grip really good in corners if pushed hard, very quiet on the road however be careful of potholes because they are soft and can be punctured very easily
November 2, 2021

How would you rate the Laufenn S fit EQ?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Laufenn S fit EQ Reviews

Given 87% while driving a Toyota Avensis (225/45 R17) on mostly motorways for 35,000 average miles
About to change the front pair after 35000 kms on them, I have absolutely nothing against them. I've made 60% of the driving on highway, 30% on roads, and 10% left on the city. I've tried them on snowed, rained, and dry roads and they are excelent. Good handling, no noise, and excelent wear. I allways check tire pressure according to the vehicle recomendation. But if I have to say something bad about them it's probably that I basically feel no feedback, like when I enter on a curve too fast, sometimes I feel like it's going to drift away, but definetly never happens. I would recomend those wheels for sure
September 27, 2021
Given 51% while driving a Renault Clio 172 (195/45 R16) on a combination of roads for 500 miles
Bought these as a recommended replacement to some excellent Vetus Primes on my Renault Sport Clio 172. I wish I hadn't! Grip is sort of there, but the tire walls are so flimsy that any aggressive corner results in: weave wobble boing boing "oh my god I'm gonna crash!!!!" I genuinely thought something important on the suspension had broken, they're that bad. They've been on around a month, and to be honest, I'm just about ready to take a financial hit and replace them with something (anything!) else with some actual handling characteristics. In short: if you drive like Miss Daisy then they're not bad, but if you have a car with more than 60hp and you enjoy going round bends without worrying then I'd avoid these.
March 16, 2021
Given 58% while driving a Audi A4 Avant 2.0T Quattro (255/35 R19) on mostly town for 10,000 average miles
Fitment - 2014 A4 B8.5 S-Line wagon, 2.0T Normal city driving, all year around Dry weather performance - no issues, grip fine, low noise, good wear Wet weather performance - poor. Front tires lose traction under moderate corner acceleration resulting in low speed understeer. No problem with straight line and sweeping bends grip but would not recommend pushing these tires in the wet. Recommendation - summer-only tires - ok. Winter or all-round use - avoid.
December 1, 2020
Given 91% while driving a Land Rover Range Rover Sport (275/40 R20) on mostly town for 7 easy going miles
I bought s used car with a mixture of Blacklion and Hifly tires. I taught I needed a wheel bearing until my mechanic said it was the road noise. He offered the Laufenn and the car was transformed into a quite cruiser. I don’t do big mileage or drive hard so I don’t need a premium performance tire. Just something quiet, stops me in the rain and doesn’t feel detached from the steering wheel, Laufenn does all that at a good price and my fuel consumption is a little lighter. No issues with 12,000 kms todate.
September 29, 2020
Given 70% while driving a Volvo S40 1.6d (205/55 R16 H) on mostly motorways for 20,000 average miles
I own the tires on VOLVO S40 1.6 116 horse power The tires have their advantages: Excellent grip on dry, Very well grip on wet with almost no sliding on heavy water. Low noise levels and very good feedback on the steering wheel. Disadvantages: The tires wear is average (that is expected considering the good grip levels) They perform not well at speeds higher than 170 kmh. The rubber is soft and higher internal temperatures makes the tire lose the ground. Not recommended for heavy vehicles or high speeds.
August 8, 2020
Given 37% while driving a Mercedes Benz A45 (235/35 R19 W) on a combination of roads for 9,000 spirited miles
Had a brand new set of 4 of this tire come with the car when I bought it. Not a tire I’ve enjoyed at all. Really loud road noise which progressively gets worse and worse as they wear. Grip was very sketchy at times with the car skipping out on me a few times in the dry and worse so in the wet. After 9,000 miles of moderate to hard driving (with launches) the front has around 3 to 3.5mm left and the rear is around 5 to 5.5mm left.

I’m replacing them early due to the noise and the lack of suitability for this car, they may perform a lot better on something with less performance.
January 29, 2020
Given 61% while driving a Honda Accord (205/60 R16 V) on mostly country roads for 1,200 spirited miles
I purchased 4 of these tires to replace the Michelin Primacy LC's which were due for replacement. As my car is getting a lot older I decided that it may not be worth paying the extra for Michelin which I have been using on this car for 8 years. I have only done approx. 2000kms on them and it was very noticeable that the turn in response was poor and that the tires could be heard scrubbing on the same bends that the Michelins just gripped and felt like you were driving on rails. The Laufenns are a quiet tire when new but even after 2000km they have become a little noisier and have a feeling of vagueness in the straightahead position and the smoothness of the Michelins is absent.
Laufenns are good value for money as the Michelins are nearly twice the price and they would suit an average driver.
October 24, 2018
Given 91% while driving a Suzuki 2010 sx4 AWD cross over (215/45 R17 W) on mostly country roads for 3,000 spirited miles
Decided to give these a try based on price point instead of going with the bridgestones I normally and wow was I impressed. Looks like laufenn/hankook really stepped up the game with this tire in terms of value for money. Really balanced wet and dry performance and I've yet to actually find the limits to these tires.
November 20, 2017
Given 77% while driving a Volkswagen Golf R32 MK4 (225/40 R18 W) on a combination of roads for 1,500 spirited miles
Had these tires fitted when we got our Golf R32. Tread pattern is very similar to the Hankook H452 that I run on another car in the exact same size.
Compound is also very similar at a fraction of the cost. They look almost as if they came out of the same factory (with the same font and size stamping).
In terms of driving feel, I can't fault these tires. Excellent dry and wet performance with good low road noise. Car also had brand new rotors, pads and fluids so this helped benchmark the test.
They feel very similar to the Hankook S1Noble2, no surprise since they both made in Indonesia by Hankook and very likely to be from the same factory.
November 19, 2017
Volkswagen (235/45 R17 W) on mostly motorways for 0 average miles
I had two fronts recently fitted to replace the hankook tires that I was very pleased with but couldn't get stock anywhere. Laufenn is a "cheaper" brand made and marketed by hankook, which I thought I'd try as they sat in my price range. I didn't know what to expect, and given past experience of the cheaper tire ranges (Nankang particularly) I was expecting great dry traction but very poor wet handling (Nankang feeling down right dangerous in that respect). However, I'm very very pleased that they are equally good in the wet as they are in the dry. Can't comment on how well they last in terms of mileage as they have only just been fitted, but if I can get 12,000 out of them like the hankooks they replace then happy days. Didn't know the laufenn brand before but do now! Would recommend!
November 13, 2017
Rate the Laufenn S fit EQ