Segment
1. Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 Upper-middle2. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Lowcost
Comparison: Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 vs. Sava Intensa UHP 2
Table of contents:
| # | Yokohama Advan Fleva V701
| Sava Intensa UHP 2
| Add to comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
 |  | ||
| Dimensions | R15 - R20 | R17 - R20 | |
| Price | |||
| Remove | Remove from comparison | Remove from comparison |
In the realm of summer tyres, two stand out for comparison: the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 and the Sava Intensa UHP 2. This comparison will help determine the better choice between the two, depending on your driving requirements and conditions.
The Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 is a fine summer tyre, scoring a test rating of 46% on our site. Its design and construction offer fair performance during the warm summer months, even though it didn't make it to the top spots in the Autobild test, ranking 15 out of 52 tyres. Unfortunately, our test data didn't highlight any specific strengths, and it's also important to mention that the Advan Fleva V701 hasn't been replaced by a new model yet.
On the other hand, the Sava Intensa UHP 2, from the renowned Sava brand, impresses with a notably higher test score of 73%. This tyre is an improvement over its predecessor (Sava Intensa UHP), and outperformed the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 in the same Autobild test by achieving the 11th spot. Notable strengths of the Sava Intensa UHP 2 include superior performance in cross aquaplaning conditions and a highly favourable price/value ratio. Like its competitor, it's not been replaced by a new model.
Verdict: When comparing the Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 and the Sava Intensa UHP 2, the latter comes out on top. The Sava tyre scored much better overall, and it shines particularly in cross aquaplaning and value for money - essential features for a safe and cost-effective summer drive. While the Yokohama tyre is a fair choice, its lower score in our tests and its position in the Autobild test suggest that for most drivers, the Sava Intensa UHP 2 would be the superior tyre.
Number of sizes available
Number of tests
Best position in test
Worst position in test
Average position in tests
1. Sava Intensa UHP 2 11.31
Year of the last test
Best rating in test
1. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Satisfactory2. Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 Satisfactory
Worst rating in test
1. Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 Conditionally recommended2. Sava Intensa UHP 2 Still recommended
Wet
(Overall rating)Wet braking according to EU label
Costs
(Overall rating)Fuel consumption according to EU label
Dry
(Overall rating)Comfort
(Overall rating)Outside noise accoring to EU label
Add to comparison
Dimensions and prices
Mutual tests
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||
| Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2- | 2+ | 2 | |||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Good | dobré | 2- | 2+ | 1- | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,2 | 28,7 | |||||
| Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 | 35,2 | 32,9 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 35,7 | 32,8 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Rating | Wet | Dry | Running costs | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | příkladné | 1- | 1- | 1 | |||
| Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 Rating: Conditionally recommended | podmíněně doporučeno | 3+ | 2+ | 2 | |||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 Rating: Satisfactory | uspokojivé | 2- | 2 | 2 | |||
| Show test details | |||||||
| Name | Stopping distance on dry | Stopping distance on wet | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Best values in test | 34,1 | 34,6 | |||||
| Yokohama Advan Fleva V701 | 34,9 | 40,2 | |||||
| Sava Intensa UHP 2 | 35,3 | 38,3 | |||||
| Show test details | |||||||
