Mercedes Benz C180 Tyres

Drive a Mercedes Benz C180? Why not add your own tyre review and help other owners pick the right tyre!

The following tyres have been reviewed on the Mercedes Benz C180
Nokian Line (61) 93% 91% 90% 90% 83% 87% 85% 88% 791,933
Falken Azenis FK510 (49) 91% 90% 86% 86% 79% 79% 87% 86% 407,485
Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125 (44) 90% 86% 84% 76% 85% 80% 85% 84% 243,662
Michelin Primacy 4 (33) 86% 84% 79% 80% 88% 86% 72% 82% 126,530
Falken ZIEX ZE914 EcoRun (67) 87% 84% 82% 83% 79% 79% 80% 82% 666,365
Continental WinterContact TS 860 (21) 94% 95% 89% 90% 86% 89% 88% 80% 141,657
Michelin Primacy 3 (138) 86% 81% 78% 77% 68% 81% 67% 77% 1,976,073
Lassa Snoways Era (11) 77% 75% 76% 75% 76% 79% 73% 76% 174,966
Firestone Firehawk SZ90 (23) 77% 69% 75% 71% 71% 60% 59% 69% 261,525
Bridgestone Turanza T001 (72) 82% 73% 70% 65% 64% 73% 52% 68% 740,327

Mercedes Benz C180 Tyre Review Highlights

Writing about the Nokian Line given 97% (205-55-16-)
Driving on mostly town for 6500 easy going miles
I am from Singapore and it is summer everyday with plenty of rain. I replaced my stock tyres, Michelin Energysaver, for the Nokian Line on my Mercedes C180 in Feb 15 and since clocked abt 10000km.

The Nokian Line has got very good dry and wet grips. For the Energysaver, each time i stepped hard on my brakes on wet roads, the car's ABS would kick in and skit forward. I had many heart in mouth moments. With the Nokian Line, no such problems, fantastic grip on wet roads. The wear is also good, hardly any wear after 10000km of mainly town driving.

However, as compared to the Energysaver, the Nokian Line is noisier. I supposed that is because it has better traction and i can live with it. Also, the Nokian is cheaper then the Michelins or Contis with the same performance range, i will definitely buy these tyres again if can find it in Singapore. Its quite sad there is no dealership here in my country.
tyre reviewed on 2015-08-15 05:45:55
Writing about the Falken Azenis FK510 given 97% (225-45-17-W)
Driving on a combination of roads for 5000 spirited miles
Excellent in all aspects, except when you cross tram tracks. Don't know about wear, have done only 7000 km with them.
tyre reviewed on 2018-04-28 08:34:26
Writing about the Michelin Primacy 3 given 88% (225-50-17-V)
Driving on a combination of roads for 100 average miles
replaced them after the OEM horrible run flats were half worn.
good grip for comfort tires in both wet and dry conditions, drove into a storm on the first day, resisted hydroplaning well considering these are not performance tires.

ride comfort is excellent, maybe i was coming from run-flats.
tyre reviewed on 2018-04-19 12:22:33
Writing about the Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125 given 87% (205-55-16-T)
Driving on a combination of roads for 16000 average miles
First time buying and using Hankook tires, I was initially very doubtful but I listened to the tire-dealers advice who strongly recommended these tires above anything els including so-called premium brands.
I have nothing bad to say about these tires, it's very good tires in both wet and dry, always good grip and braking both wet and dry, very good and safe handling, good and controllable feel, very good direction stability, good comfort and low noise-level.
These Hankook tires can match any premium brand and in my opinion they are better, very satisfied with these tires.
The only downside is the wear rate which is average at the best, they did not last very long, unfortunately a very typical problem with modern tires these days.
Although this is the only car I have driven with these Hankook tires, I think I can strongly recommend them except if wear is the most important issue.
Their performance lasted until the very last mm of tread, actually until somebody decided to shred all four tires on a public parking lot........fortunately.....(suspiciously?)..... there was a tire dealer next to this parking lot and he sold me some Michelin Primacy 4 tires which I have made another review about.
tyre reviewed on 2018-11-24 05:59:09
Writing about the Continental WinterContact TS 860 given 86% (205-55-16-T)
Driving on a combination of roads for 2000 average miles
Bought these tires last year as winter-tires and I now using them again for the winter.
Surprisingly good performance on dry roads even at temperature up to +20 C, very stable and good handling, comfortable and low noise-level.
The grip on dry roads in corners and turns are very good for a winter tire, not exactly as firm as a good summer tire but it is not at all far away.
Very good in wet and heavy rain, very safe in the wet regardless of temperature.
Regarding snow and ice conditions, my car is a 2013 Mercedes C class with a rear wheel drive, it is not a very good car for snowy and icy roads, I can only give my review based on this type of car, I have never driven with these tires on any other car.
The snow and ice performance on my car is most likely significantly reduced compared to basically any front-wheel drive car.
On this car the Continentals are, with reservation, acceptable on snow and ice conditions, but not more.
They are obviously much better than worthless summer-tires in the winter but it is obviously important to be aware of their limits.
On soft and relatively deep and dry snow , they are capable of climbing a 4 km long steep uphill curvy road without too much problems.
On wet and heavy snow and also in heavy slush these tires have huge problems on this car, on that same uphill road I have a very difficult time even to get halfway to my home and while my car gets to a complete standstill when my anti-spin effectively stops any spin, but also consequently any forward movement, my neighbors with their front-wheel drive cars in any shape and sizes are just sailing by me without any problems.
On pure icy roads it is better to leave the car in the garage, certainly if you are going up or downhill, basically no grip at all.
I must always be very careful in any corner and turns when there is snow and/or ice, the car slides very easily.
I can recommend these tires for winters with only occasional snow and ice conditions, but always be aware of their limits, and be aware of your cars limits.
For real lasting winter conditions I strongly recommend so-called "Nordic" winter tires if you can get them, they are usually far better for snow and ice although with reduced dry performance, maybe even reduced wet performance.
Continental, Goodyear, Pirelli, Nokian etc have "Nordic" winter-tires as options, much better for long lasting winters especially if your car, like mine, is not very suitable for winter conditions.
tyre reviewed on 2018-11-24 06:10:32
Writing about the Firestone Firehawk SZ90 given 86% (225-45-17-)
Driving on a combination of roads for 12000 average miles
I gave grades to these tyres after first impressions and now, after 20000 km, I'm back with new verdicts. Grip on dry and wet almost perfect, braking the same. Lateral side very strong, car doesn't bend on corners. Wear is somewhere at half. Negative aspects: noise, consumption and comfort.
tyre reviewed on 2015-09-24 13:04:10
Writing about the Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125 given 84% (205-55-16-V)
Driving on a combination of roads for 7000 average miles
Mercedes C 180, 2013 Model, 205/55/16.
Michelin and Hankook review.

I have always been very careful and aware/educated when I bought new tires, I used to be a huge Michelin fan and held my nose when low-cost tires like Hankook etc was mentioned, it was unthinkable for me to use anything ells other than premium brands like Michelin.

After my original good Dunlop SP Sport FastResponse MO tires were worn out on my MB C180 I bought 4 new Michelin Primacy 3, actually against the recommendation from my tire-dealer who warned me about the Michelin's, for once I did not listen to good advice.

I have never been so surprised and disappointed about tires before, with the exception of some lethal LingLong tires on a rental car.

As I recently wrote about Michelin Pilot Sport 3 PS3 on my other car, a MB SLK 350, the Michelin Primacy 3 has basically the same slightly "weird" unsafe feeling under all circumstances.

In the dry the Primacy 3 have this somewhat strange "heavy" and "clumsy" feeling, a slightly unstable "wandering" feeling in straight driving and curvy country roads, it's like constantly driving on slippery pebble roads, it is not much or a big problem but enough to be very irritating especially on long journeys.

With the Dunlops my C180 was 100% stable at all speeds both on straight and curvy roads, a "light" and "agile" safe feeling with the Dunlops, never with the Primacy 3.

I have previously noted with other Michelin tires on other cars that they could have a slightly "heavier" feeling than other brands but more solid planted on the road, I always liked it before and it was never a problem like with the Primacy 3.

With Primacy 3 I also noted that braking in both wet and dry is slightly worse than the Dunlops, not a huge difference but absolutely noticeable.

In dry corners/turns the grip is often pretty good with the Primacy 3 but it is not consequent, I have never before experienced tires with so surprising unequal irregular qualities on the limits and in sharp turns as the Primacy 3 and it's basically that same slightly shaky/wobbly feeling as PS3 on the limits.

There is also a somewhat "weird" noise from the tires at all speeds, a "course" and "rough" noise, almost as if there were small pieces of metal in the tires. (spikes)

The comfort with the Primacy 3 in general is mediocre at the best, a huge negative surprise from what I expected, I never had perfect comfort with Michelin's before but I never had any complaints either.

It's acceptable performance in the wet, I never had problems in heavy rain in straight driving but again inconsequent surprising and "weird" behavior in sharp turns and corner, it is simply not possible to trust these tires.

I really don't have anything good to say about Michelin Primacy 3, I do not like them at all and I do not trust them, I am extremely surprised and disappointed about that.

I owned a 2000 Model VW Bora (Jetta) since new for many years, I have had Dunlop SP 8000, Uniroyal MS Plus 55, Michelin HP, Michelin Pilot Exalto on this car, all of them were good tires with no problems, very stable with good grip and acceptable/good comfort.

The current owner of this VW Bora bought Michelin Primacy 3, I have driven that car with the Primacy 3 and it's basically the same experience as I have with my MB C180, a good car reduced by bad tires, in addition to the similar problems with my C180 the VW Bora easily loses grip on the rear and wobbles side to side with the rear when pushed near the limits in turns, I have never previously experienced this with the VW Bora and any other tire-brands, this car is normally very stable in any situation, believe me, I have pushed that car to every limit.

I have driven a VW Golf TSI 2016 Model and a BMW 320i 2016 Model with Michelin Primacy 3 tires with basically the same negatives regarding "heavy/clumsy" feeling, stability problems and mediocre comfort/noise, although I did not push these cars to the limits in curves/turns so I can not comment on that.

After ca 2000 km and a long journey in my C180 I had enough, no more Primacy 3, I got rid of them.

After recommendation from a tire-dealer, who was aware of the "problems" with the obviously very overrated Michelin Primacy 3, I decided to change and buy the Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125 which I would never had considered before.

As my tire dealer predicted, I was very positively surprised with the Hankook tires on my C180, much cheaper, much better than the Primacy 3, back to the "light" and "agile" feeling as with the Dunlops, very stable and planted in dry and wet, good braking, good comfort/noise, the wear is about average, nothing bad to say about the Hankook, good tires, very similar to my good Dunlop tires even at very high speeds.

I never had anything bad at all to say about Michelin tires on my own previous cars and other cars I previously have driven with Michelin tires, it was for a long time my absolute favorite tire-brand, it was good to drive on and they lasted long.

Nowadays my own experience with both new and older cars with the newest Michelin tires is always disappointing regardless of car and tire-size and based on comments from both tire dealers and consumers with different cars I can only agree that Michelin's now are widely overrated, and very overpriced, and even some budget tire-brands are superior in basically every way.

One explanation to the Michelin fail might be manufacturing process in different countries, I do not know, but the tires I tried lately were all manufactured in France except for one tire that was manufactured in Spain.

I always had correct alignment and tire-pressure, no mechanical problems with the cars, I can only conclude that Michelin for me is now a fallen "hero".
tyre reviewed on 2018-02-20 15:54:05
Writing about the Firestone Firehawk SZ90 given 80% (225-45-17-W)
Driving on a combination of roads for 17500 average miles
Bought the tyres in May 2013, have done 28000 km with them. Two tyres down to wear sign, two still have about 3 mm. So I will change them in the spring with a new set of something else. They had very good grip on dry and wet, on curves the car was very stable, feedback also good, you felt the car when it started to slide. Negative aspects: noise, low comfort and high fuel consumption.
tyre reviewed on 2016-11-13 14:02:43
Writing about the Falken ZIEX ZE914 EcoRun given 77% (225-45-17-)
Driving on mostly town for 7500 easy going miles
Bought these tyres to replace my Nokian Line (see my review in the Nokian Line page) on my Mercedes C180. I had to change from the Nokian because there is no more dealership in my country, Singapore. Else, I would have just carry on with the Nokian.

I bought these tyres after seeing the good reviews on here as well as the reasonable price offered by local dealers. In Singapore, it is summer all year with plenty of rain. After putting about 12000km on these tyres on mainly town driving, I find that it has excellent dry grip and has low rolling resistence (good for people who likes to take pedal off and glide their cars). However, the wet grip is not exactly convincing. On wet smooth surface, such as metal drain covers or smooth cement floors used in carparks, these tyres got ZERO grip. Once you step on the brakes on such surface, the car's ABS kicks in and the car skids forward. You can only pray that it stops.

On normal wet surface, most time the grip is pretty good. But there was an instance when i jammed my brake (and i usually keep my distance), my car was initially braking ok but suddenly, it seem to lose grip and started skidding forward. The final moments before the car stopped i thought i was going to collide with the car in front. So for me these tyres are simply too unconvincing. It doesnt give me the feeling that i will be entirely safe on wet surface and i will not buy these tyres again.
tyre reviewed on 2017-08-17 04:17:48
Writing about the Michelin Primacy 3 given 70% (225-45-17-)
Driving on a combination of roads for 0 average miles
No comments left
tyre reviewed on 2018-07-06 08:21:35
Drive this car? Why not add your own tyre review and help other owners pick the right tyre