Menu
Nexen N Fera Primus View Gallery (1)
185-255/40-65 R15-19 97 sizes 2020

Nexen N Fera Primus

The Nexen N Fera Primus is a Premium Touring Summer tire designed to be fitted to Passenger Cars.

7.7
Tire Reviews Score Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews
High Confidence View Breakdown
Dry Grip
87%
Wet Grip
90%
Road Feedback
84%
Handling
77%
Wear
84%
Comfort
80%
Buy again
77%
10 Reviews
83% Average
51,847 miles driven
6 Tests (avg: 12th)
Nexen N Fera Primus

Nexen N Fera Primus

Summer Mid-Range
BETA
7.7 / 10
Based on Professional Tests & User Reviews · High 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
Wet
80.7
2x / 20 tests
Dry
72.9
1.8x / 8 tests
Comfort
68.3
0.32x / 5 tests
Value
62.4
0.42x / 18 tests

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

Braking
80.8
14 tests
Handling
75.4
4 tests
Score Components
Professional Tests
Weight: 80%
Tests: 6
Publications: 2
Period: 2022 - 2024
User Reviews
Weight: 15%
Reviews: 10
Avg Rating: 82.5%
Min Required: 5
Consistency
Weight: 5%
Score Std Dev: 0.32
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
2024 AutoBild Summer Tire Test Auto Bild 2024 205/55 R16 17/21 12 metrics
2024 ADAC Summer Tire Test ADAC 2024 215/55 R17 11/16 11 metrics
2024 Summer Tire Market Overview Auto Bild 2024 205/55 R16 11/55 2 metrics
2023 ADAC Summer Tire Test ADAC 2023 205/55 R16 10/50 12 metrics
2022 Auto Bild Summer Tire Test Auto Bild 2022 215/55 R17 15/22 12 metrics
2022 Summer Tire Market Overview Auto Bild 2022 215/55 R17 10/44 2 metrics
6
Tests
12th
Average
10th
Best
17th
Worst
Latest Tire Test Results
11th/55
2024 ADAC Summer Tire Test
215/55 R17 • 2024
11th/16
The Nexen N'Fera Primus receives a satisfactory rating in driving safety, failing to achieve a good rating in both dry and wet conditions. On dry roads, it provides barely satisfactory steering feedback and does not surpass a satisfactory rating in handling at the limit. A lack of precise steering feedback makes it challenging to accurately adjust the steering angle for curves, leading to a tendency for the vehicle to oversteer during sudden evasion maneuvers. However, the tire achieves a clearly good rating in braking distance. On wet surfaces, the N'Fera Primus secures good ratings in braking distance measurements and lateral aquaplaning but only achieves satisfactory results in longitudinal aquaplaning and handling, preventing a good overall rating in wet performance. Environmentally, the Nexen narrowly misses a good rating, with its projected mileage, noise, and sustainability rated as just satisfactory, while its wear and efficiency are rated as good.
17th/21
Good braking performance, dynamic wet handling.
Delayed steering response, limited tread life/economic efficiency.
Satisfactory.
Size Fuel Wet Noise
15 inch
195/65R15 95 H XL A B 72
185/65R15 88 H D A 70
195/65R15 91 V D B 71
195/65R15 95 H XL A B 69
195/65R15 95 H XL A B 69
16 inch
205/60R16 96 H XL A B 72
205/55R16 91 V D A 71
205/60R16 96 H XL A B 70
205/60R16 92 V A A 71
205/60R16 96 W XL C A 72
17 inch
225/60R17 99 H C B 71
205/50R17 93 V XL C B 72
225/60R17 99 V C B 71
225/45R17 91 W B A 71
225/50R17 94 V D A 71
225/50R17 98 V XL D A 71
215/55R17 94 V C B 70
215/55R17 94 W A A 71
215/55R17 94 W A A 71
215/55R17 94 T A A 70
18 inch
245/45R18 96 W B B 71
View All Sizes and EU Label Scores for the Nexen N Fera Primus >>

Questions and Answers for the Nexen N Fera Primus

Ask a question
Sorry, we don't currently have any questions and answers for the Nexen N Fera Primus. 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 10 user 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.

Strengths
  • Dry grip
  • Wet grip
  • Comfort
  • Low noise
  • Handling confidence
  • Tread wear/longevity
  • Value/price
Areas for Improvement
  • Noise (some users)
  • Longer braking vs competitors (falken)
  • Slightly worse fuel economy

Top 3 Nexen N Fera Primus Reviews

Given 81% while driving a Hyundai Tucson (235/55 R18) on mostly motorways for 0 average miles
Nfera primus dry and wet grip is very good and comfort and wear rate is also good but my only concerned is that after 3years of using it, if forms a tiny crack in the upper side ot the tire and its not jst one tire, all four of them.
July 7, 2025
Given 87% while driving a Citroën C5 Tourer (225/55 R17) on a combination of roads for 300 easy going miles
Very comfortable and quiet. The quality I value the most.
March 31, 2025
Given 83% while driving a Volkswagen Polo BlueGT 6R (215/40 R17) on mostly country roads for 15,000 spirited miles
The best tire I've had so far. The grip on any surface is fantastic. Czech Republic production, very much a plus for this company. One thing I can only complain about is the very low tread, and from what I've noticed they wear down quite quickly. The price is also fantastic for such a quality tire.
November 12, 2024

How would you rate the Nexen N Fera Primus?

Click a star to start your review

Latest Nexen N Fera Primus Reviews

Given 86% while driving a Alfa Romeo Giulietta (225/40 R18) on mostly town for 20,000 average miles
I have been driving them for the last 20k km maybe even more. I went on a track day during wet conditions also and in entry and mid part of the corner was faster than RWD cars, only on exit was the front squealing for grip but never ran out of line, I tried to upset the car more but it felt stable and confident even when under steering into a sharp corner it held a good margin. So in extreme driving conditions it is good even if not a pure sport tire. On motorway it performs well with good comfort and noise level. tread wear for me is excellent, it has a marker for wear and it is only ate the first level out of four levels. Wet performance is good also with no issues to report. Never did it spin the tires on fast acceleration on a torquey 175hp diesel fwd Alfa. For this car it was great match, would buy again.
September 30, 2025
Given 76% while driving a Opel Signum 2.2 DTi (215/50 R17) on a combination of roads for 0 average miles
They seems to have a bit longer breaking distance than Falkens and they feel softer. They stay soft even if the preasure is bigger than required. Comfortable.
May 1, 2023
Check out how the BEST all seasons tires perform against premium summer and winter tires!
Given 76% while driving a Renault Clio II 1.2 16v (225/45 R17) on mostly town for 1,000 average miles
after 2 months of installation in the clio ii 12 16v i have to say that i am AMAZED about their wet performance, specially while braking. a little bit more noisy than the falkens i used to have but bearable.
November 29, 2021
Given 99% while driving a Kia Motors ceed (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 10,447 easy going miles
Second review to complement my first review of those tires. The summer season has passed and I have replaced summer tires with winter tires. Everything said in my first review stands - the tires are very good. Magnificent grip, confidence inspiring and no surprises. Quiet, comfortable etc. I have more information about fuel consumption - they are worse compared to Michelin. Although my driving profile has changed a bit, I've done more city driving and less long distance, average fuel consumption has increased since Nexen tires were installed. Wear is great - after the summer season I measured 6.5 and 6.2mm tread left on rear and front tires. Initial tread depth was 7mm. With this rate of wear, these could easily go 50 000+ kilometres. Please note, my stated mileage in this review is not miles but kilometres. I ran the tires on 2.4bar cold pressure since car's recommended 2.2bar felt a bit soft and wobbly. 2.4 and above and they are great.
October 25, 2021
Given 66% while driving a Renault Clio II 1.2 16v (195/45 R16) on mostly town for 100 easy going miles
i fitted these tires a week ago. my braking became worst than the falkens i had fitted (ziex 914 , 185/60R14) . I will get back to report wear and wet performance. keep in mind that they are noisy no matter the km/h 50 or 150....
September 27, 2021
Mazda (195/45 R16) on mostly town for 4,000 spirited miles
I upgraded to 16 inches wheels and I was shopping for tires for my mazda 2 which is a very light car, so the XL rating it's a bit overkill for it and this affects comfort adding more sensitivity to every small imperfection of the road already compromised from the lower sidewall height. The tire itself it's very advisable for the car because the significant dry grip and cornering precision, being ligher than the stock one and having a better fuel economy rating i kept the unsprung masses almost identical (but measuring from a completely worn tire!). The feedback from the road at the limit is excellent in dry, lower and noticiable on wet, but never unsafe. Talking about wet grip and hydroplaning resistance i've owned better tires, I run the tire pressure 2 psi higher than what mazda advises tbh (for my suspensions going under 34 front and 32 rear causes a reduction in comfort), and the context of use it's not always ideal (11 degrees °C or lower) and maybe for this even with an underpowered car like mine I can slip at startup sometimes. When the wheather is hot they heat up very quickly and the pressure rises a lot, lowering comfort , increasing noise and reducing the contact patch resulting in dangerous longer braking distance. But all of this recovers if you study the right pressure for you needs which is nor the one on the door sticker, neither the one from the manufacturer.
April 13, 2021
Given 95% while driving a Kia Motors ceed (225/45 R17) on a combination of roads for 1,000 easy going miles
Bought those tires to replace a set of Michelin Primacy 3s that came new with the car. These are also XL tires. Price was very decent. 51€ per tire. After installing the tires car felt immediately smoother and softer. Also quiet. Michelins were quite hard, crashy and made unbearable noise. Now going over bumps does not make me flinch any more. Also, gone is the tramlining effect old tires had. Any imperfections in the road were directly translated to my steering wheel being yanked left and right. No more. Grip is magnificent, braking feels confident and smooth. Even saw some snow with them. No problem at all. Since this is an initial review and I have not gathered a lot of miles with them, I can't say much about wear. Initial tread depth was 7mm. I measured. Fuel economy feels unchanged.
April 13, 2021
Rate the Nexen N Fera Primus