Michelin Energy Saver+
Fordele og ulemper
af vores specialister
Michelin Energy Saver+ 175/65 R14 82T er et populært sommerdæk til mindre og mellemstore biler, især valgt af bilister der vil køre økonomisk og komfortabelt. Takket være lav rullemodstand og en særlig silica-gummiblanding rapporterer mange brugere lavere brændstofforbrug og dermed lavere driftsomkostninger over dækkets levetid. Samtidig er dækket kendt for lang levetid og kan ved normal brug køre mange titusinde kilometer, hvilket delvist opvejer den højere købspris. På våd vej scorer det generelt godt med pålidelig bremselængde og forudsigelige køreegenskaber, hvilket giver en tryg fornemmelse i regn. Energy Saver+ beskrives desuden ofte som stille og komfortabelt, egnet til daglig pendling og længere ture. Ulempen er, at fokus ligger stærkt på effektivitet og holdbarhed og mindre på ekstremt sportsligt greb eller skarp styring. For dem der af og til kører meget sportsligt, findes der bedre alternativer, men for købere der især vægter økonomi, levetid og komfort, er dette et meget stærkt valg.
Anmeldelser af Michelin Energy Saver+
Baseret på 51 anmeldelser
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
