Segment
1. Bridgestone Turanza T001 Premium2. Nokian Line Upper-middle
Comparison: Bridgestone Turanza T001 vs. Nokian Line
Table of contents:
In this comparison, we are comparing a tyre from a manufacturer from Japan (Bridgestone) against a tyre from a manufacturer from Finland (Nokian). Generally, Nokian summer tyres are slightly better rated (81%) than Bridgestone (69%). In this particular case, the Bridgestone Turanza T001 has a better rating of 86% compared to 76% of the Nokian Line. The first tyre test of Bridgestone Turanza T001 was done in 2015, compared to 2016 when was the Nokian Line first tested. Important for this comparison is also the ADAC 2017 195/65 R15 test, where both the Turanza T001 and the Line were tested. See more mutual tests below. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 74% of Bridgestone Turanza T001 has B wet grip rating, whereas 100% of Nokian Line has A rating.
| # | Bridgestone Turanza T001 | Nokian Line | Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R15 - R19 | R14 - R17 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
2. Nokian Line 17.
Average position in tests
2. Nokian Line 12.17
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
2. Nokian Line Good
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian Line Good2. Bridgestone Turanza T001 Satisfactory
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - cross
1. Nokian Line 72%
Wet handling
2. Nokian Line 80%
Aquaplaning - longitudal
1. Nokian Line 84%
Wet braking
2. Nokian Line 84%
Wet circle cornering
1. Nokian Line 87%
Wet braking according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Exterior noise
1. Nokian Line 72%
Outside noise accoring to EU label
1. Nokian Line ? dB
Dry
(Overall rating)Costs
(Overall rating)Mileage
1. Nokian Line 63%
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Wet | Dry | Wear | Comfort | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 1,9 | 1,5 | 0,5 | 1,5 | 1,6 | ||
| Bridgestone Turanza T001 Rating: Good | 2,1 | 1,7 | 1,9 | 2,5 | 1,9 | ||
| Nokian Line Rating: Good | 2,6 | 2,2 | 2,0 | 3,5 | 2,3 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Running costs | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2+ | 1- | 1 | ||||
| Bridgestone Turanza T001 Rating: - | 2+ | 2- | 3+ | ||||
| Nokian Line Rating: - | 2- | 2- | 3 | ||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Wet | Dry | Wear | Comfort | Fuel consumption | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 2,0 | 1,6 | 1,0 | 1,7 | 1,6 | ||
| Bridgestone Turanza T001 Rating: Satisfactory | 3,0 | 1,6 | 2,0 | 1,7 | 1,7 | ||
| Nokian Line Rating: Good | 2,3 | 1,7 | 2,5 | 3,6 | 1,8 | ||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,6 | 27 | |||||
| Bridgestone Turanza T001 | 36,6 | 28,7 | |||||
| Nokian Line | 37,9 | 29,1 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||