Segment
1. Nokian WR A4 Upper-middle2. Nokian WR SUV 3 Upper-middle
Comparison: Nokian WR A4 vs. Nokian WR SUV 3
Table of contents:
Both of the tyres in this comparison are made by Nokian, which is a brand from Finland. But when it comes to comparing Nokian WR A4 and Nokian WR SUV 3, the rating is the same - 0%. The first tyre test of Nokian WR A4 was done in 2017, compared to 2015 when was the Nokian WR SUV 3 first tested. When it comes to comparison, eu labels can be also interesting - 94% of Nokian WR A4 has B wet grip rating, whereas 80% of Nokian WR SUV 3 has C rating.
| # | Nokian WR A4
| Nokian WR SUV 3
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 | | ||
| Dimensions | R16 - R21 | R15 - R21 | |
| 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 WR A4 17.
Average position in tests
1. Nokian WR SUV 3 4.252. Nokian WR A4 9.83
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Nokian WR SUV 3 Highly recommended2. Nokian WR A4 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Nokian WR A4 Still recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Aquaplaning - longitudal
2. Nokian WR A4 64%
Wet braking
2. Nokian WR A4 63%
Wet circle cornering
2. Nokian WR A4 71%
Wet handling
2. Nokian WR A4 65%
Aquaplaning - cross
2. Nokian WR A4 58%
Wet braking according to EU label
Snow
(Overall rating)Snow traction
1. Nokian WR A4 79%
Snow braking
2. Nokian WR A4 78%
Snow cornering
2. Nokian WR A4 72%
Snow handling
2. Nokian WR A4 73%
Costs
(Overall rating)Rolling resistance
1. Nokian WR A4 89%
Fuel consumption according to EU label
Comfort
(Overall rating)Comfort
2. Nokian WR A4 72%
Exterior noise
1. Nokian WR A4 83%
Outside noise accoring to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Dry braking
2. Nokian WR A4 81%
Dry handling
1. Nokian WR SUV 3 100%2. Nokian WR A4 78%
