Tests – · none yet Owners 49 · 10 reviews
Toyo Proxes RA1 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.
Michelin Energy Saver A/S vs Toyo Proxes RA1 — Compared
Relative Score (0–100): the weighted average of the categories below, each 60% road tests and 40% owner reviews. Based on 0 + 0 road tests and 10 + 11 owner reviews. How we score
Proxes RA1 is ahead, 66–56
Add your size for an exact match
Both Amazon links then search this exact size.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Tests – · none yet Owners 65 · 11 reviews
Category by category
Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.
-
56
Dry
Proxes RA1 +1975Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 60 (est.) ≈ 72 (est.) Reviews found online 49 79 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 60.2 (est.) + 40% × 49 = 56
Proxes RA1: 60% × 72.1 (est.) + 40% × 78.5 = 75
No road tests of dry for Energy Saver A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
No road tests of dry for Proxes RA1. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).
-
54
Wet
Proxes RA1 +1064Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 58 (est.) ≈ 65 (est.) Reviews found online 49 61 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 57.9 (est.) + 40% × 48.5 = 54
Proxes RA1: 60% × 65 (est.) + 40% × 61.3 = 64
No road tests of wet for Energy Saver A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
No road tests of wet for Proxes RA1. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).
-
54
Snow
Energy Saver A/S +549Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 61 (est.) ≈ 58 (est.) Reviews found online 43 34 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 61.1 (est.) + 40% × 43.3 = 54
Proxes RA1: 60% × 58.2 (est.) + 40% × 34.4 = 49
No road tests of snow for Energy Saver A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.33).
No road tests of snow for Proxes RA1. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.33).
-
60
Comfort
Proxes RA1 +767Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 66 (est.) ≈ 69 (est.) Reviews found online 50 66 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 65.9 (est.) + 40% × 50.3 = 60
Proxes RA1: 60% × 68.5 (est.) + 40% × 65.7 = 67
No road tests of comfort for Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
61
Noise
Proxes RA1 +768Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 67 (est.) ≈ 67 (est.) Reviews found online 53 70 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 52.7 = 61
Proxes RA1: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 70.1 = 68
No road tests of noise for Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.
-
57
Treadwear
Proxes RA1 +1067Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Professional tests (TWG score) ≈ 61 (est.) ≈ 66 (est.) Reviews found online 51 68 Energy Saver A/S: 60% × 61.2 (est.) + 40% × 51.1 = 57
Proxes RA1: 60% × 66.2 (est.) + 40% × 67.6 = 67
No road tests of treadwear for Energy Saver A/S. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
No road tests of treadwear for Proxes RA1. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).
-
50
Handling (owners)
Proxes RA1 +2373Why this score
Source Energy Saver A/S Proxes RA1 Reviews found online 50 73
Scores at a glance
| Category | Michelin Energy Saver A/S | Toyo Proxes RA1 |
|---|---|---|
| Relative Score | 56 | 66 |
| Dry | 56 | 75 |
| Wet | 54 | 64 |
| Snow | 54 | 49 |
| Comfort | 60 | 67 |
| Noise | 61 | 68 |
| Treadwear | 57 | 67 |
| Handling (owners) | 50 | 73 |
Higher is better. The Relative Score follows your weights below; category scores do not change.
Weight the categories that matter to you
Wet grip starts at “Important”. Treadwear starts at “Neutral” here: road tests measured it for at most one of the two tires, so it rests on owner reviews. Move the sliders and the scores update instantly.
Energy Saver A/S
Proxes RA1
Pros, cons & observations
Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.
Tire A Energy Saver A/S
Pros
- High fuel economy and rolling efficiency
- Potential for high mileage in specific driving conditions
- Reliable dry weather traction for some users
Cons
- Significant hydroplaning tendencies in wet conditions
- Inconsistent tread life, with reports of premature wear
- Excessive road noise and audible squealing during cornering
Tire B Proxes RA1
Pros
- Exceptional dry grip that remains consistent even as the tread wears down.
- Superior tire life compared to many other dedicated track-focused compounds.
- Predictable breakaway characteristics that provide driver confidence at the limit.
Cons
- Performance can become 'greasy' if the tire is overdriven or overheated during long sessions.
- Requires proper heat cycling and break-in procedures to achieve optimal performance.
- Sensitive to alignment settings, which can lead to accelerated or uneven wear if not managed.
Specs side by side
| Attribute | A · Michelin Energy Saver A/S | B · Toyo Proxes RA1 |
|---|---|---|
| Category | All Season | Summer Trackday and Competition tires |
| Vehicle type | Passenger Car / Crossover | Passenger Car / Crossover |
| Sizes available | — | 7 |
| Rim diameters | — | 15″ – 18″ |
| Tread depth | — | 8/32″ |
| UTQG | — | 100 AA A |
| Sidewall | — | Black Side Wall |
| Max pressure | — | 44 psi |
Which one should you actually buy?
Michelin Energy Saver A/S
Toyo Proxes RA1
Winner: Toyo Proxes RA1 — better handling, dry and wet. Pick the Michelin Energy Saver A/S if snow matters most to you. Michelin Energy Saver A/S rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 10 reviews), so read this result as provisional. Toyo Proxes RA1 rests on little evidence so far (0 tests, 11 reviews), so read this result as provisional.
Toyo Proxes RA1 scores 73 vs 50 on handling.
Toyo Proxes RA1 scores 75 vs 56 on dry.
Toyo Proxes RA1 scores 64 vs 54 on wet.
Toyo Proxes RA1 scores 67 vs 57 on treadwear.
TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.
Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Which is better in the wet, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Toyo Proxes RA1, 64 vs 54 on our wet score.
Which grips better on dry roads, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Toyo Proxes RA1, 75 vs 56 on our dry score.
Which is better in snow, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Michelin Energy Saver A/S, 54 vs 49 on our snow score.
Which is quieter, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Toyo Proxes RA1, 68 vs 61 on our noise score.
Which is more comfortable, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Toyo Proxes RA1, 67 vs 60 on our comfort score.
Which lasts longer, Energy Saver A/S or Proxes RA1?
Toyo Proxes RA1, 67 vs 57 on our treadwear score.
How do we compare tires?
Every category score blends two independent signals. 60% comes from professional tire tests (braking distances, lap times, noise measurements), each result compared with every other tire in the same test and newer tests counting more. 40% comes from owner reviews found online, adjusted for how generously each site rates. Both use one scale: the average tested tire gets 70, the best 100. When a tire has only one of the two, the missing half is estimated from the other and the score stays closer to average; with no road test and fewer than five owner reviews it gets no score yet.
Handling is the exception: road tests measure it inside the dry and wet scores, so its own row comes from owner ratings only and starts as less important.
Community buzz from Reddit and forums is shown for context only — it never changes the score. Full methodology