Been ok not fantastic in the wet but fine in the dry. About half worn and they are 6 years old but both have become a advisory on the mot. Sidewalls perished and cracked. Replacing with khumo
Best Tires for the Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce
Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce drivers have left 17 tire reviews on Tire Reviews, covering 216,800 miles of real world driving. Every tire they rated is ranked below, so you can see what actually works on this car.
- 17owner reviews
- 216,800 milescovered on them
- 13different tires rated
- 75%average tire score
The best rated tires that fit the Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce
The rankings above can only speak for tires a Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce driver has already reviewed. These are the highest rated tires we hold that are actually manufactured in the sizes these drivers run - 205/55 R16, 225/40 R18 and 225/45 R17 - whether or not anyone here has fitted them yet. They are ranked on the TR Score, which is built from independent test results and every owner review of that tire.
Summer tires
No Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce driver has reviewed a tire in the Summer category yet. Of the ones made in this car's sizes, the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 is our highest rated, at 9.7 out of 10.
| # | Tire | TR Score | Made in | Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce reviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
9.7 | 225/40 R18, 225/45 R17 | Be the first → |
| 2 |
|
9.7 | 225/40 R18 | Be the first → |
| 3 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 4 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 5 |
|
9.4 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 6 |
|
9.4 | 225/40 R18, 225/45 R17 | Be the first → |
Want test data as well as owner opinion? Best Summer Tires →
All Season tires
No Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce driver has reviewed a tire in the All Season category yet. Of the ones made in this car's sizes, the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 is our highest rated, at 9.6 out of 10.
| # | Tire | TR Score | Made in | Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce reviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
9.6 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 2 |
|
9.6 | 225/40 R18 | Be the first → |
| 3 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 4 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 5 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 6 |
|
9.4 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
Want test data as well as owner opinion? Best All Season Tires → Test winner: Goodyear Vector All Season 4
Winter tires
No Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce driver has reviewed a tire in the Winter category yet. Of the ones made in this car's sizes, the Hankook Winter I*cept Evo 4 is our highest rated, at 9.6 out of 10.
| # | Tire | TR Score | Made in | Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce reviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
9.6 | 225/40 R18 | Be the first → |
| 2 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 3 |
|
9.5 | 205/55 R16, 225/45 R17 | Be the first → |
| 4 |
|
9.5 | 225/40 R18 | Be the first → |
| 5 |
|
9.4 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 6 |
|
9.4 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
Want test data as well as owner opinion? Best Winter Tires → Test winner: Goodyear UltraGrip Performance 3
All Weather tires
No Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce driver has reviewed a tire in the All Weather category yet. Of the ones made in this car's sizes, the Vredestein Quatrac is our highest rated, at 9.5 out of 10.
| # | Tire | TR Score | Made in | Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce reviews |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
9.5 | All your sizes | Be the first → |
| 2 |
|
8.3 | 225/45 R17 | Be the first → |
| 3 |
|
8.1 | 225/40 R18, 225/45 R17 | Be the first → |
Want test data as well as owner opinion? Best All Weather Tires →
Fitment comes from each tire's manufactured size list, and the sizes are the ones drivers reported when they reviewed. Check the size, load index and speed rating on your own doorplate before buying - a size a previous owner ran is not always the size your car left the factory on.
Every tire reviewed on the Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce
The complete record, including discontinued tires and tires with too few reviews to rank, ordered by the amount of evidence. A further 9 tires have a single review each; they count toward the totals but are not listed.
| Tire | Season | Owner rating | Reviews | Distance reviewed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dunlop SP Sport Fast Response Replaced by Dunlop Sport BluResponse | Summer | 97% | 2 | 27,000 miles |
| Pirelli CINTURATO P7 Replaced by Pirelli Cinturato C3 | Summer | 90% | 2 | 22,000 miles |
| Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125 Replaced by Hankook Ventus Prime 4 | Summer | 84% | 2 | 42,000 miles |
| Bridgestone Adrenalin RE002 Replaced by Bridgestone Potenza Adrenalin RE005 | Summer | 69% | 2 | 22,000 miles |
Tire sizes Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce drivers run
The sizes fitted in the reviews on this page. Each one links to the top rated tires in that size, across every car.
What Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce drivers say
The most recent owner reviews from this car, in their own words.
These Bridgestones have lasted 20k so far but only 5k on the front. Comparitively, I have found better wearing tires as I seem to wear tires quickly in the winter months. That must be a sign that I can get close to their limits. They are quiet, comfortable and stable and have performed largely well. I didn't go for the T005s as the T001 Evos are quieter. They ride nicely so could be a good choice for those who value comfort highly.
Outright cornering grip is ok and feedback is ok when it is remembered they are touring tires. I find they lack bite into corners but strangely this subjectively improves with speed.
What I have found now they are just below 4mm tread depth on the front is that they trigger the ABS when even lightly check braking on smooth asphalt when there is a film of water. I hadn't noticed any great aquaplaning issues going straight or cornering but they are notably poor while braking. My point here is that over their lifetime, these tires which are A rated for wet braking simply do not perform how their rating suggests. This has been something I've long noted in regards to how new European tire labelling can be very misleading. To put this in some context, I've noted another family car which has 195/65R15 Yokohama C-Drive 2 tires which are C rated are definitely superior in this respect (they also have 3.5mm of tread depth).
Right now, I have noted the Bridgestone's weak point and drive accordingly but it does mean I won't take the chance of running them right down simply because under certain conditions they will render the brakes ineffective.
It is a shame because I like Bridgestones for my motorbike but I concede Bridgestone were noted for having wet performance issues which were addressed with the T005s.
A way around this could be to move the tires to the rear again but this could have safety implications (worn tires are subjectively better in the dry, new tires subjectively better in the wet- which is why I fit new pairs to the rear).
In short they are good but have a glaring shortcoming which is not typical of the rounded performance of tires from a Premium manufacturer. They still may be a good buy providing people are aware and act accordingly AND the purchase price is towards the low end of the mid-range scale. All said and done, I think they are still considerably better than most low cost tires which typically have major performance issues when worn.
The AV7s do have negative points as well though. The tire slip angles seem high which manifest as a generally unreactive and imprecise, albeit less so, tire. Similarly, dry roadholding is not great (but not terrible either) and it is not hard to have the ZV7s squeal with even somewhat enthusiastic use.
Issues aside; these are a performance per £ bargain. They are a forgiving enough tire and therefore safe which provide decent enough feedback. They do what is intended. That is; the ZV7 is an impressive touring tire which has no sporting pretentions. It is absolutely safe, wears well and is quiet and smooth and performs subjectively better in the wet. All this for a tenner more than a cheap and nasty alternative mean the ZV7 is a good tire which I suspect people will like more than professional test scores suggest.
I like the green credentials- light weight, less materials in construction yet a strong carcass means low unsprung weight so good ride quality yet they still grip. Braking, aquaplaning resistance and cornering are all commendable aspects for these hard wearing Cinturatos which come with 9mm of tread when new. Indeed, due to the unusually deep tread, I wish I'd fitted them to the less stressed rear wheels when new as that would pay huge dividends in tire life.
I'm trying marginally quieter tires this time which are still very lightweight but not so light that the carcass deforms and shoulder wear results (Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance). Look for tire weights on Amazon under product details as a guide. However, I have found I greatly like these Pirellis and I would heartily recommend them as a vice free touring tire. They are a refreshing change to the rather short lived, harsh and noisy tires Continental have offered for far too long now. The Pirellis also work very well for the enthusiastic driver and stand up to punishment well. The only negative aspect is slightly blunted steering response but otherwise they really are very good indeed and I say if you are considering them just give them a try. There is nothing to lose.
The first thing anyone will notice is noise and comfort. Surprisingly, the 3s are actually a set backwards. The 2s are noticeably quieter and round off road imperfections more effectively. In this department, both are superior to the heavy Conti Premium Contact 2s. The Kook 2s are almost as good as the lightweight Pirelli P7 Cinturatos with regard to comfort which on my other 156.
Next is response and feedback. The Ventus Prime 3s are a small improvement over the 2s in this respect. The 2s are obviously aimed more for comfort. The 3s are similar to the Pirellis but not as good as the Contis which need less lock to get round bends. The 2s are adequate but not inspiring.
Handling. I thought I'd have more to say given the crazy angles I've put the 156s round bends but they appear to be safe and manageable. Perhaps that is in itself great praise. Contrast that with the Contis which become messy, inaccurate and totally lack adjustability and either of the Kooks really do shape up to look controllable in extremis. They are perhaps not as good as the Pirellis though. The only criticism I have for the 3s is that cold weather does drop off a little (as it does with all summer tires). In this area, for once, the Contis make sense. However, the good handling means it is easily manageable and the reduction is in no way concerning.
Wear. I'd say the 3s have it. I can't be sure but now the 3s have less than 3mm and over 20k miles (a first for me) I think the 3s are a particularly durable tire. My impressions of the 2s wear I though wear was on the high side but I didn't mind. I did mind having to rub loads of tire black into the tiny sidewall ribs of the 2s though... Another thing about these tires, notably the 3s is how well they preserve the grip and handling characteristics when they are worn. Budget tires cannot do this and become terrible (a set of Vredestein Sportrac 3s became decidedly psychotic- yet were winning tire tests). They may not be up to Michelin Pilot levels in this respect but they do perform convincingly even when worn so can go right to the 1.6mm.
In short, either variant is recommended. The 2s are quieter and more comfortably and the 3s feel a little more sporting even though there is not much difference in outright grip.
They have a nice crisp steering response and good feedback. Cornering grip was very good but less so in the wet. I found them to generally behave very well with no upsets. Breakaway and recovery was always easily managed and for that they can be recommended.
They have shortcomings though. When new, the tread depth was only just above 6mm (sporting tire). Aquaplaning resistance was very poor though. Indeed, I used them in snow once. It gave new meaning to 'absolutely no grip'. They are very heavy so transmit every bump into the cabin and even tiny road imperfections could clearly be detected. Wear was not good and I'd sum them up as not good for a daily driver. For a toy they're not bad but I believe there are better options available which don't have anything like the RE002's drawbacks.
Not a bad tire but it should have been marketed more accurately and having mainstream autocenters fitting them as a mainstream performance tire certainly had it's drawbacks and I imagine some damage was done to the Bridgestone brand name for that reason.
I cannot comment on low temperature performance as yet but they are not as true tracking as the Continental tires and even cruising, the Pirellis need a little more steering lock in bends. The plus side of that is that when the limit is approached, there is still plenty of scope for line and attitude adjustment. In any case, even if and when performance does tail off when these Pirellis are worn, it should still hopefully be quite acceptable.
I really like these tires as they ride so smoothly and quietly yet they still manage to perform very well indeed. I find them quieter than the nose rating of 71dB suggests but that will vary car to car. Aquaplaning resistance has been exceptional but they are still new so again, I cannot comment what they are like when worn. How much performance tails off varies greatly over a tire's life and I hope these Pirellis are well enough developed to avoid the shocking tail off which is common to so many budget tires.
For a touring tire, grip is about as good as can be reasonably expected which is less than that of a sports focused tire for obvious reasons. However, last winter I found the cold weather performance to suffer more than the Continental Premium Contact 2 tires at the other end. The Hankooks are not terrible in this respect but not as good as some. However, they remained stable, predictable and controllable so there was never cause for alarm.
Although they tend to have fairly large slip angles (not as true tracking as some tires), grip and tire life seems notably good. In short, not quite up to Pirelli P7 Cinturatos but they are cheaper and only slightly not as good.
Definitely good value for money and a good performing tire which is only slightly let down by its aquaplaning resistance. Good in all other respects.
For a touring tire, the Contis are impressively reactive and require less steering lock than many others. However, the negative side is that at the limit they lose grip suddenly and there is little scope for adjustment to the line. Used as such, they make the handling untidy at best and certainly less stable than others. I think these tires demonstrate German engineering ethos in that they are generally well rounded up to about 8 tenths but after that the shortcomings become apparent.
Tire life seems good. They were on the car for 20000 miles in both rear and front positions. Resistance to aquaplaning is quite good as is damp and cold weather cornering. As such, these older mid-performing tires may still make sense if they are discounted sufficiently.
Drive a Alfa Romeo 156 2.0 TS Veloce?
Review your tires and help the next owner choose. It takes about five minutes, and every review on this page came from a driver who took them.
Where this data comes from
Every rating on this page was submitted by a driver through the review form on this site, naming the car, the tire, the size and the distance covered. Reviews are checked by hand before publication, and the page rebuilds automatically as new ones arrive.
About the TR Score
The Tire Reviews Score rates each tire out of 10 using independent test results and the full body of owner reviews, so you can check a car-specific ranking against the wider evidence.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tire Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tires independently since 2007.

