What is the best LRR tire available?
 

This question has been raised many times before, but threads get old and new tires enter the market.

I need new summer-tires for my propane powered Volvo, and I get the impression from older forum posts that many recommend the all season Michelin Energy saver. Is this tire still ahead of the pack of LRR-tires?

Noise, thread wear or bad traction is not an issue for me. I just want the lowest rolling resistance.

The Continental Ecocontact 5 is the tyre to beat .
Wear is good too, according to the ADAC.de testers.

ADAC Test - Sommerreifen 2012 - 165/70 R14

See Kraftstoffverbrauch (fuel usage) and Verschleiss (wear) - lower numbers are better.


The Energy Saver is already 4 years old.

I'm looking for some LRR tires to run on the truck eventually... but those Contis only come in one 15" size (and only one 14")! The rest are 16".

Running 185's when it's wearing 205's now might look a bit weird. Are there any LRR tires with more size options?

Continental Eco Contact 5 XL Tyres

I guess Energy Savers only come in 14" though... :(

TireRack.com
They sell all the brands I've seen discussed here, and more.
Even if you prefer to buy elsewhere, their site provides an excellent search tool.

Once you get to the page listing the tires available in your size,
the left side panel has filtering options.
All the way at the bottom of that panel are the selection options for LRR tires.
I even found LRR winter tires by Michelin. Excellent.

Word of Caution:

LRR (low Rolling Resistance) means the tires have low rolling resistance COMPARED TO OTHER SIMILAR TIRES - that is, tires with similar wear and traction characteristics. It does NOT mean low in the absolute sense.

There is a technology triangle in tires involving treadwear, traction and rolling resistance. In order to get good values in one area, one or more of the other areas has to be sacrificed.

So carefull selection of tires with the right compromise will pay dividends.

True to a degree. However by first wanting to improve rolling resistance and then by applying new approaches and technologies the triangle restrictions can be exceeded. I'm sure few would argue that overall tire performance of a 1960's tire would be the same as a modern one due to the triangle.

Case in point - my Michelin X-ice II's. They have the best ice traction I've ever had without studs, and rolling resistance roughly equal to my Kumho LRR summer tires. True deep snow traction not yet tested but I expect they will be very good because the tires earned the mountain/snowflake logo. I used them at Watkins Glen for the 2012 Green Grand Prix, experienced excellent dry and wet traction.

Can a true nordic winter friction tire get lower rolling resistance than a summer LRR tire? Maybe I should drive my Nokian Hakkapelita R´s all year long then :)

Probably not, in all honesty. I suspect my Kumho summer tires are not as smooth rolling as a good Michelin or Continental LRR tire.

The Kumhos were tagged as "LRR" by TireRack but I don't know of an international standard for an LRR tire, not even a US standard. I think they roll more smoothly than most but not up there with the best. So the Michelin winter tires could match them as Michelin truly does know how to make an excellent LRR tire.

If you search tires on the Michelin site it will show you a Fuel Efficiency rating for every tire they make.

The ADAC testing puts all tyres through the same tests.

The lowest RR there, actually means the lowest RR amongst the tyres being tested.

The EcoContact 5 is rated with a "B" for fuel efficiency in the new EU labeling system - AFAIK no A label (best) tyres are yet commercially available (though a few manufacturers have boasted with them).

Between A (best) and G (worst), there's apparently about 10% difference in fuel efficiency.