Mercedes GL500 automobile. Size 275/50 R20. 2.3 cold pressure. I skated Hakku Black 2 last season, so we'll compare her. He had previously used Nokian products but opted to switch back to another one. The tires are identical in terms of their primary features. On any surface, excellent handling and braking. The slight sensitivity to the music is another resemblance. There are, nevertheless, some distinctions. The biggest benefit of Mishka is how smoothly it travels over any road imperfections. In the pits, Hakka jumps even higher. But perhaps the benefits of Michelin stop here. The unpleasant truth then sets in. Price! The Mishka set was 28 more expensive. When purchasing Michelin tires, fewer additional deals are available. I recently received free tire fitting. The 1-year extended warranty and 4-year gasoline card are exclusively available to private individuals. They provide seasonal storage, tire fitting, and an endless guarantee to Hakka (a card with denyushka is only for persons (up to 4t. R.). In other words, Hakka was a better buy from the start. Despite the fact that the car is official and the corporation pays, I don't really care about this. The new tires have only 6.5 mm of tread depth (4.9 to the limiters). The front tires wore down by 0.5 mm and the rear tires by 0.7 mm during the course of two weeks and 2,5000 kilometers.) I'm hoping there will be enough tires, at least for the summer (when I go roughly 30 thousand kilometers). The very soft rubber wears out rapidly and very aggressively absorbs small stones, glass, and nails, which is a drawback while driving through pits. A particularly broad central track. However, unlike Nokian, there are no tread splits or rubber breaking away. My initial thoughts are conflicted. If the tread lasts the specified 30t. Km, I will probably be happy with the purchase, but if not, it will be a very bad investment. Generally, if the tires wear out faster than expected at the end of the season or early, I will add the final judgment to the evaluation.