With low RR tires becoming mandatory in Europe as of November 2012 (earlier in new cars), a recent issue of the Polish edition of Auto Bild (Auto Świat 34/783, 16.08.2010) published a test of five low rolling resistance tires:
Bridgestone Turanza ER300 Ecopia,
Goodyear EfficientGrip,
Michelin Energy Saver,
Nokian V, and
Pirelli Cinturato P7. The tested tires were all 205/55R16, and were tested on a Mercedes C200 CGI, loaded with precise instrumentation, on a flat test track with no wind. All showed a reduction in fuel consumption compared to the standard tire (the article doesn't reveal what the
standard tire is in this case). Fuel consumption was measured at three different speeds: 80, 100, and 130 km/h (50, 62.5, 81 mph).
| FE | l/100km | mpg(US) |
| Michelin | 6.72 | 35.00 |
| Goodyear | 6.74 | 34.90 |
| Pirelli | 6.87 | 34.24 |
| Nokian | 6.91 | 34.04 |
| Bridgestone | 7.08 | 33.22 |
| standard | 7.34 | 32.05 |
Fuel consuption was not the only thing tested, the main focus was safety.
First, the maximum aquaplaning speed.
| speed | km/h | mph |
| Nokian | 85.8 | 53.6 |
| Bridgestone | 85.2 | 53.2 |
| standard | 85.1 | 53.2 |
| Pirelli | 83.3 | 52.1 |
| Goodyear | 81.8 | 51.1 |
| Michelin | 78.5 | 49.1 |
Aquaplaning on a curve:
| lateral acceleration | m/s2 | ft/s2 |
| Bridgestone | 3.53 | 11.65 |
| Pirelli | 3.35 | 11.06 |
| standard | 3.30 | 10.89 |
| Goodyear | 3.28 | 10.82 |
| Nokian | 3.26 | 10.76 |
| Michelin | 3.01 | 9.93 |
Driving on dry pavement:
| speed | km/h | mph |
| Bridgestone | 100.6 | 62.9 |
| Michelin | 100.6 | 62.9 |
| standard | 99.9 | 62.4 |
| Pirelli | 99.8 | 62.3 |
| Nokian | 99.4 | 62.1 |
| Goodyear | 99.2 | 62.0 |
Driving on wet pavement:
| speed | km/h | mph |
| standard | 82.3 | 51.4 |
| Pirelli | 81.6 | 51.0 |
| Bridgestone | 79.5 | 49.7 |
| Nokian | 79.4 | 49.6 |
| Goodyear | 77.7 | 48.6 |
| Michelin | 75.9 | 47.4 |
(Note: In this test the car was very hard to control with ESP on when fitted with Michelin and Goodyear tires.)
Braking on dry pavement (from 100km/h, 62.5mph):
| distance | m | ft |
| Bridgestone | 36.5 | 120.5 |
| Goodyear | 37.0 | 122.1 |
| standard | 37.0 | 122.1 |
| Michelin | 37.3 | 123.1 |
| Pirelli | 37.3 | 123.1 |
| Nokian | 37.9 | 125.1 |
Braking on wet pavement (from 100km/h, 62.5mph):
| distance | m | ft |
| Pirelli | 57.6 | 190.1 |
| standard | 57.8 | 190.7 |
| Nokian | 59.7 | 197.0 |
| Bridgestone | 59.8 | 197.3 |
| Goodyear | 62.1 | 204.9 |
| Michelin | 64.7 | 213.5 |
Driving in a circle (time for one lap, article did not give radius):
| time | s |
| standard | 22.59 |
| Bridgestone | 22.73 |
| Pirelli | 22.86 |
| Nokian | 22.96 |
| Goodyear | 23.15 |
| Michelin | 23.18 |
Rolling resistance (measured on a special machine):
| Goodyear | 7.83 |
| Michelin | 7.87 |
| Nokian | 9.01 |
| Pirelli | 9.67 |
| Bridgestone | 10.13 |
| standard | 11.90 |
External noise (average of tests @ 70/80/90 km/h; 44/50/56 mph):
| noise | dB |
| Bridgestone | 71.5 |
| Pirelli | 71.7 |
| Nokian | 71.9 |
| standard | 72.0 |
| Goodyear | 72.7 |
| Michelin | 72.7 |
Summary: The best low RR tire appears to be the
Pirelli Cinturato P7, with
Bridgestone Turanza ER300 Ecopia second and
Nokian V third.
Goodyear EfficientGrip and
Michelin Energy Saver may have the lowest rolling resistance, but their performance is at the lower boundry of safety.
Note: The article did not give details about the testing procedures, i.e. how many tries were averaged, etc. I pretty much translated the whole article, plus converted all units.