70
/ 100
Objective (60%)
–/100
No test data yet
User signal (40%)
65/100
40 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
Head-to-head
Updated September 2026
Bridgestone Alenza 001 vs Kumho Crugen HP91 — Compared (September 2026)
Our Relative Score blends 60% objective test data with 40% owner-review signal — so any two tires can be compared even if they were never tested on the same day.
VS
79
/ 100
Objective (60%)
71/100
1 professional test
User signal (40%)
78/100
21 owner reviews
Prices change daily — check the retailer for your size.
VerdictWinner: Kumho Crugen HP91 — better comfort, wet and handling. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Read full
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made via links on this page.
Category breakdown
6 categories, side by side
Each bar is the Relative Score for that category. Expand a tile to see the test results and owner ratings behind it.
Dry
Score (0–100)
Crugen HP91 leads by 6
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 82 |
| Tire Rack owners | 89 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 79 | 89 |
Wet
Score (0–100)
Crugen HP91 leads by 15
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 88 |
| Tire Rack owners | 81 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 72 | 86 |
Comfort
Score (0–100)
Crugen HP91 leads by 20
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 82 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 58 | 79 |
Noise
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Professional tests (TWG score) | – | 36 |
Treadwear
Score (0–100)
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Tire Rack owners | 65 | – |
| Tyre Reviews owners | 67 | 67 |
Handling
Score (0–100)
Crugen HP91 leads by 7
Why this score
| Source | Alenza 001 | Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Tyre Reviews owners | 71 | 78 |
| DriverReviews owners | 80 | 82 |
Scores at a glance
| Category | Bridgestone Alenza 001 | Kumho Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 70 | 79 |
| Dry | 79 | 85 |
| Wet | 72 | 87 |
| Comfort | 59 | 79 |
| Noise | – | 36 |
| Treadwear | 67 | 67 |
| Handling | 71 | 78 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Personalize
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip and treadwear start at “Important” — the two things buyers rank highest. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Important
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Neutral
NoneLessNeutralMoreMost
Recomputed
Headline score
70
/ 100
Tire A
79
/ 100
Tire B
Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.
From owners
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews across retailers and review sites — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
The Bridgestone Alenza 001 receives a polarized reception, often serving as a divisive original equipment (OE) choice for premium SUVs and crossovers. While some users praise its dry-road handling and longevity on specific platforms, a significant portion of owners report issues with excessive road noise, harsh ride quality—particularly in run-flat configurations—and premature tread wear.
Pros
- Strong dry-weather handling and cornering stability
- High durability and tread life reported by a subset of users
- Stable and secure performance on motorway driving
- Effective traction control and grip for specific vehicle pairings
Cons
- Excessive road noise, often described as 'unbearable' or 'horrendous'
- Harsh ride quality, especially over uneven surfaces
- Rapid or uneven tread wear on certain SUV models
- Mediocre wet-weather performance and tendency to slip under acceleration
Observations
- Run-flat (RFT) variants are frequently cited for significantly harsher ride quality and increased noise compared to non-run-flat versions.
- EV owners (e.g., Audi e-tron) report higher satisfaction with refinement and wear, likely due to vehicle-specific suspension tuning and torque management.
- Users of mid-size SUVs like the Mazda CX-60 and Toyota RAV4 frequently report dissatisfaction with noise levels and ride comfort.
The Kumho Crugen HP91 is widely regarded as a high-value performance tire that offers impressive wet and dry grip, often rivaling more expensive premium brands. While many users praise its comfort and handling, there is a notable polarization regarding tread longevity, with some owners reporting excellent mileage and others experiencing premature wear.
Pros
- Excellent wet and dry traction
- High value-to-price ratio compared to premium competitors
- Low road noise and high ride comfort
- Responsive handling and steering feedback
Cons
- Inconsistent tread life reported across different vehicles
- Occasional reports of sidewall or structural integrity issues
- Some users report a softer compound that wears faster than expected
Observations
- Owners of larger SUVs like the Kia Sorento and Ford Kuga generally report high satisfaction with both longevity and performance.
- Users driving on rougher road surfaces, such as those in South Africa or Ukraine, reported faster degradation or structural issues.
- Some Hyundai Santa Fe owners noted dissatisfaction with wet-weather performance and rapid tread wear compared to other vehicle owners.
Community buzz
What real owners are saying
From Reddit, forums and review threads. Not part of our score
Tire A
Mixed
Bridgestone Alenza 001
Community opinions on the Bridgestone Alenza 001 are divided, with praise for their handling, rim protection, and longevity in warm weather, but frequent complaints regarding noise, a buzzy or harsh ride over rough asphalt, and poor winter performance.
r/LexusNX
·13 upvotes ·2025-07-19
“Soon will have to replace tires on my NX350h Hi all, Soon I will have to replace the 2022 NX tires. The car came with "Bridgestone Alenza 001" so far so good, the ride quality has been nice, the noise is OK, and the rim protection (tire being wider than rim) worked well (narrow entrances with curbs in parkings in the city we live). We've made 75.000Km with the OEM tires and we will still make the summer with them before replacing them. In the area were we live is very rare to see snow. The car has no place for spare tire so runflats will have to be. I know runflats don't get "lots of love", but safety is a must and we will mount runflats again. The guy at the dealer offered us the GOODYEAR EFFICIENT GRIP 2 SUV. But as far as I've seen, those are not runflat. If we would like to improve, what would you recommend and why? Thanks!”
r/tires
·1 upvote ·2025-04-15
“Bridgestone Alenza 001 on a Lexus LC 500. Mistake? These things seem sooo buzzy compared to the Bridgestone Potenza S001L that came with it. I was told they’re the same tire basically. Not! Now is see they’re designed for SUVs. They’re not cheap tires either. Sounds like knobby jeep tires compared to before. 245/40/21 Is it because they’re new? Will the buzzing stop? Will they quiet down? Actually makes the steering wheel buzz a little. I’ve bought new before. Lol. Don’t remember this much difference.”
r/tires
·1 upvote ·2025-03-26
“towing with Bridgestone Alenza 001 I am looking for a set of new tires in 255/55/18 for my diesel X5, and I will be using the car to tow an open trailer with a car (5000 lbs). The price of these Alenza 001 is attractive, but wondering if it would be a mistake to buy these for towing. The car is rarely driven in rain and rarely driven at all, so they will probably age out before I wear them out through mileage.”
r/BMWiX
·1 upvote ·2026-04-24
“Not that you asked, but I had the alenza 001 and replaced with continental dws tires because the 15k mile tread life on the alenza's against the cost of the tire was too crazy. Alenza's were quieter and a bit smoother. I do hear great things about the hanook's, wishing I had gotten those!”
Top themes
#ride comfort and noise#tread life and longevity#dry and wet handling#poor winter capability#OEM runflat options
Based on 11 community posts
Tire B
Kumho Crugen HP91
We haven't collected enough community discussion about this tire yet.
Specifications
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Bridgestone Alenza 001 | B · Kumho Crugen HP91 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Summer Premium Touring tires | Summer Ultra High Performance tires |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | SUV and 4x4 |
| Sizes available | 14 | 2 |
| Rim diameters | 17″ – 22″ | 18″ – 20″ |
| Tread depth | 10/32″ | 10/32″ |
| UTQG | 400 A A | 420 A A |
| Sidewall | Blackwall | Blackwall |
| Max pressure | 51 psi | 51 psi |
Final verdict
Which one should you actually buy?
70
/ 100
Bridgestone
79
/ 100
Kumho
Winner: Kumho Crugen HP91 — better comfort, wet and handling. It leads or ties in every category we score.
Pick tire B
You want the most comfortable ride
Kumho Crugen HP91 scores 79 vs 59 on comfort.
Pick tire B
Your priority is wet-weather safety
Kumho Crugen HP91 scores 87 vs 72 on wet.
Pick tire B
You enjoy sharp, responsive handling
Kumho Crugen HP91 scores 78 vs 71 on handling.
Pick tire B
You want the most grip on dry roads
Kumho Crugen HP91 scores 85 vs 79 on dry.
Tire A · Bridgestone Alenza 001
Tire B · Kumho Crugen HP91
More comparisons
Also compared with
Bridgestone Alenza 001 also compared with
Kumho Crugen HP91 also compared with
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements) normalized against the best tire in each test and weighted toward recent tests. 40% comes from thousands of owner reviews collected from retailers and review sites. When a tire has only one of the two, we use what exists and say so.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score.