Comparison: Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV vs. Nokian Powerproof 2 (2026)

Wet is where this comparison gets genuinely interesting, because both tyres are good but they earn it differently. Again there is no clean multi-test average to quote (one mutual test only), so the EU labels and test commentary carry the load. On paper the Goodyear claims an A wet-grip rating across 98 percent of its lineup, and the Nokian posts a clean A wet-grip label across the board. In the shared Motor 2026 test the Nokian took the win partly on the strength of the shortest wet braking in the field at 29.7 metres, while the Goodyear answered with the single best wet cornering result, a perfect 25.0 of 25 points for first place in that discipline.

That tension runs through the scores. The Goodyear edges the composite wet rating (84.5 versus 80.2) and posts a higher wet-braking score (86.3 versus 83.5) plus stronger aquaplaning resistance (81.8 versus 76.3). Its wet handling detail score is an excellent 88.3, and across Autobild's 2022, 2023 and 2025 outings it was repeatedly cited for short wet braking, good aquaplaning reserves and harmonious wet behaviour. The Nokian, meanwhile, owns wet cornering: its wet-circle-cornering detail score of 87.5 beats the Goodyear's 82.4, and Die Reifentester 2026 logged class-leading lateral aquaplaning with a 10 percent advantage plus strong wet braking around 34.0 metres.

The honest read is that the Goodyear is the more rounded, safer-feeling tyre in heavy standing water and straight-line wet braking, while the Nokian is the more confident, grippier tyre carrying speed through wet bends. One caveat on the Nokian: ACE 2026 noted it was the earliest to lose longitudinal aquaplaning contact (around 80.1 km/h), so its straight-line flood reserves are good but not its strongest suit.

Head-to-head test overlap here is thin: these two have met in only one common test, Motor 2026 on 235/55 R18, so there is no robust multi-test average braking figure to lean on. We have to read the broader picture from performance scores and individual test feedback rather than a clean stopping-distance table, and that single shared test is itself revealing. In it the Goodyear actually recorded the weaker dry braking, around 36.3 metres for sixth place in its group, while the Nokian was the overall test winner. Translate that roughly into the real world and you are talking close to a full car length of difference in a hard stop from 100 km/h, with the sporty Nokian pulling up shorter.

The performance scores back this up. Nokian's dry handling sits at 82.5 with dry braking at 80, and testers repeatedly praised its dynamic, precise dry behaviour: Autobild 2026 called it a braking specialist on both wet and dry with dynamic dry handling, and the Powerproof 2's whole design brief is steering precision and high-speed stability. The Goodyear scores a higher composite dry rating (84.1 versus 75.6) and strong dry handling (86), which reflects its balance and security rather than sharpness. The catch, and Goodyear's own data admits it, is that its steering is less responsive and its dry braking can trail in the toughest company.

So why the split? The Nokian's UHP compound and stiffer, sportier construction give it more ultimate grip and a crisper turn-in, ideal when you push. The Goodyear's softer, comfort-tuned carcass delivers wonderfully linear, predictable, fatigue-free dry handling that feels secure all day but never eggs you on. For ordinary driving the Goodyear feels more than composed; for genuine pace and the shortest dry stops, the Nokian is the stronger tool.

This is the section where the two tyres separate most decisively, and it is no contest. The Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 SUV is a comfort and refinement champion: a 92.3 comfort score and an outstanding 96.9 noise score, with an exterior-noise detail figure of 90.7. Owners feel it immediately. One driver on a Peugeot 3008 called it incredibly comfortable with extremely successful road absorption, another praised it as very quiet over 5000 motorway miles. The Nokian, true to its UHP brief, trails badly here: a 66.5 comfort score and a 64.8 noise score, with testers (Die Reifentester 2026) explicitly flagging noticeably louder cabin noise and after-vibration on poor surfaces. Nokian itself admits to slight highway road noise. If refinement matters, the Goodyear wins by a country mile.

On running costs the picture is more nuanced but still favours the Goodyear for most buyers. Mileage and longevity are a Goodyear strong suit: a 96 mileage score versus the Nokian's 69, and Autobild 2025 singled it out as the best tyre with outstanding mileage in the cost chapter. Rolling resistance is the one area the Nokian fights back: it scores 80.8 against the Goodyear's 78, and ACE 2026 rated the Nokian as having the best rolling resistance in test, with a B fuel label across its range. The Goodyear's fuel label is mixed (mostly B and C with some A grades), so on pure economy the Nokian is marginally more efficient per kilometre.

Value, though, comes down to the whole life of the tyre. The Goodyear costs more up front (Motor 2026 flagged its high price, around 603 zloty), and Autobild has repeatedly noted its premium price level. The Nokian also carries premium pricing. But the Goodyear's vastly superior expected mileage means it amortises that cost over far more kilometres, and its top-tier cost ranking in independent testing suggests it returns more value over its service life despite the higher sticker. The Nokian's slim rolling-resistance edge does not offset wearing out noticeably sooner. For a high-mileage family SUV, the Goodyear is the cheaper tyre to own.