Michelin Energy Saver+, Sommer, 82 (475kg), H (210 km / h), 35,6 cm (14"), 18,5 cm
Vor- und Nachteile
von unseren Spezialisten
Der Michelin Energy Saver+ 185/60R14 82H richtet sich vor allem an Fahrer, die Kraftstoffverbrauch und niedrige CO2‑Emissionen wichtig finden. Durch den sehr geringen Rollwiderstand kann dieser Reifen den Verbrauch spürbar senken, ohne die Sicherheit völlig zu vernachlässigen. Unabhängige Beschreibungen heben den Reifen wegen seines zuverlässigen Grips und seiner Bremsleistung auf trockener wie nasser Fahrbahn hervor, auch wenn der Schwerpunkt klar auf Effizienz und Komfort liegt. Dadurch wirkt das Fahrverhalten weniger sportlich als bei echten Performance-Sommerreifen, und es gibt Alternativen mit noch mehr Nasshaftung. Zudem liegt der Preis häufig über Budgetmarken. Wer vor allem wirtschaftlich, komfortabel und sicher im Alltag fahren möchte, bekommt hier jedoch eine ausgewogene Wahl mit deutlichen Vorteilen an der Zapfsäule.
Bewertungen von Michelin Energy Saver+, Sommer, 82 (475kg), H (210 km / h), 35,6 cm (14"), 18,5 cm
Basierend auf 51 Bewertungen
NU categoric ...clar nu as cumpara aceasta anvelopa dupa 3000 km de mers pe sosea anvelopa spate a capatat o galma ...deviatie nici nu pot descrie....repet fara sa fac offroad...nu pot sa mi explic deoarece in primi 1000 km a mers bine...dezamagit....va las un telefon 0723362588
NU categoric ...clar nu as cumpara aceasta anvelopa dupa 3000 km de mers pe sosea anvelopa spate a capatat o galma ...deviatie nici nu pot descrie....repet fara sa fac offroad...nu pot sa mi explic deoarece in primi 1000 km a mers bine...dezamagit....va las un telefon 0723362588
cristian cana
22. Oktober 2025
MOT rejected after 7 years of use. Reason: drought cracks up to the canvas in several places. Tires still had 3.6 to 3.8 mm profile. 2 front tires, front wheel drive, 90% highway kms, all cracks on the outer rim. Bizarre.
MOT rejected after 7 years of use. Reason: drought cracks up to the canvas in several places. Tires still had 3.6 to 3.8 mm profile. 2 front tires, front wheel drive, 90% highway kms, all cracks on the outer rim. Bizarre.
Anonymous
16. April 2021
MOT rejected after 7 years of use. Reason: drought cracks up to the canvas in several places. Tires still had 3.6 to 3.8 mm profile. 2 front tires, front wheel drive, 90% highway kms, all cracks on the outer rim. Bizarre.
MOT rejected after 7 years of use. Reason: drought cracks up to the canvas in several places. Tires still had 3.6 to 3.8 mm profile. 2 front tires, front wheel drive, 90% highway kms, all cracks on the outer rim. Bizarre.
Anonymous
16. April 2021
I didn't notice anything about "Energy Saving". The tire drives quite well, as you would expect from a premium manufacturer, and makes normal noises. After 20,000 km there were still 2x 6 mm / 2x 5 mm of the profile. But only a 7 mm profile was new.
I didn't notice anything about "Energy Saving". The tire drives quite well, as you would expect from a premium manufacturer, and makes normal noises. After 20,000 km there were still 2x 6 mm / 2x 5 mm of the profile. But only a 7 mm profile was new.
Rainer Lange
12. Januar 2021
I didn't notice anything about "Energy Saving". The tire drives quite well, as you would expect from a premium manufacturer, and makes normal noises. After 20,000 km there were still 2x 6 mm / 2x 5 mm of the profile. But only a 7 mm profile was new.
I didn't notice anything about "Energy Saving". The tire drives quite well, as you would expect from a premium manufacturer, and makes normal noises. After 20,000 km there were still 2x 6 mm / 2x 5 mm of the profile. But only a 7 mm profile was new.
Rainer Lange
12. Januar 2021
