Yokohama Parada Spec-2 looks discontinued: no new owner reviews or road tests in five years and no current EU tyre label.

Head-to-head Updated

Nexen CP671 vs Yokohama Parada Spec-2 — 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 62 + 118 owner reviews. How we score

Too close to call: CP671 67, Parada Spec-2 66.

Add your size for an exact match
/R

Both Amazon links then search this exact size.

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

Nexen CP671
Tire ANexen

CP671

Summer Touring tires

Tests – · none yet Owners 64 · 62 reviews

Category by category

Relative Score per category, 0–100. Open “Why this score” for the tests and owner ratings behind it.

  1. 67

    Dry

    Parada Spec-2 +6
    73
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)≈ 71 (est.)
    Reviews found online6675

    CP671: 60% × 67.2 (est.) + 40% × 66.4 = 67

    Parada Spec-2: 60% × 70.7 (est.) + 40% × 75.2 = 73

    No road tests of dry for CP671. 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 Parada Spec-2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.40).

  2. 68

    Wet

    CP671 +7
    61
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 63 (est.)
    Reviews found online6758

    CP671: 60% × 68.1 (est.) + 40% × 66.8 = 68

    Parada Spec-2: 60% × 63 (est.) + 40% × 57.6 = 61

    No road tests of wet for CP671. 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 Parada Spec-2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.56).

  3. 60

    Snow

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 65 (est.)–
    Reviews found online54–

    CP671: 60% × 64.6 (est.) + 40% × 53.8 = 60

    No road tests of snow for CP671. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.33).

  4. 67

    Comfort

    CP671 +2
    65
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 68 (est.)≈ 68 (est.)
    Reviews found online6562

    CP671: 60% × 68.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.5 = 67

    Parada Spec-2: 60% × 67.8 (est.) + 40% × 61.5 = 65

    No road tests of comfort for CP671 or Parada Spec-2. The test half is the tested tires’ average (69): owners’ comfort ratings barely follow the road tests.

  5. 66

    Noise

    No comparison
    –
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 67 (est.)–
    Reviews found online65–

    CP671: 60% × 67.3 (est.) + 40% × 64.5 = 66

    No road tests of noise for CP671. The test half is the tested tires’ average (67): owners’ noise ratings barely follow the road tests.

  6. 64

    Treadwear

    CP671 +2
    62
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Professional tests (TWG score)≈ 65 (est.)≈ 63 (est.)
    Reviews found online6359

    CP671: 60% × 64.7 (est.) + 40% × 62.5 = 64

    Parada Spec-2: 60% × 63.5 (est.) + 40% × 58.7 = 62

    No road tests of treadwear for CP671. 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 Parada Spec-2. The test half is estimated from the owner ratings, as far as owners and testers agree (correlation 0.31).

  7. 67

    Handling (owners)

    Parada Spec-2 +2
    69
    Why this score
    SourceCP671Parada Spec-2
    Reviews found online6769
Scores at a glance
Nexen CP671 vs Yokohama Parada Spec-2: scores by category (0–100)
CategoryNexen CP671Yokohama Parada Spec-2
Relative Score 67 66
Dry 67 73
Wet 68 61
Snow 60 –
Comfort 67 65
Noise 66 –
Treadwear 64 62
Handling (owners) 67 69

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.

Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost

Only one of the two tires has a score here, so this weight changes nothing in the head-to-head.

Neutral
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Less important
NotLessNeutralImportantMost
Recomputed
Headline score

CP671

Parada Spec-2

Only categories both tires have data for count toward the headline score.

Pros, cons & observations

Themes extracted from owner reviews found online — not the opinion of TireWheelGuide.

Tire A CP671

Pros

  • Exceptional value and budget-friendly pricing
  • Low road noise and smooth highway ride quality
  • Impressive tread life and durability with regular rotations

Cons

  • Subpar or limited performance in heavy snow and winter weather
  • Occasional reports of increased road noise or minor roaring, especially at lower speeds
  • Directional tread design can complicate tire rotation procedures
All owner themes in the CP671 review

Tire B Parada Spec-2

Pros

  • Outstanding dry grip and cornering stability
  • Excellent value for money and aggressive tread design
  • Precise steering feedback and predictable breakaway limits in the dry

Cons

  • Poor wet-weather traction and high risk of aquaplaning
  • Fast tread wear due to the soft rubber compound
  • Noticeable road noise at cruising speeds
All owner themes in the Parada Spec-2 review

Specs side by side

Attribute A · Nexen CP671 B · Yokohama Parada Spec-2
CategorySummer Touring tiresSummer
Vehicle typePassenger Car / CrossoverPassenger Car / Crossover
Sizes available12—
Rim diameters15″ – 19″—
Tread depth10/32″—
UTQG400 A A—
SidewallBlackwall—
Max pressure36 psi—

Which one should you actually buy?

Nexen CP671

Yokohama Parada Spec-2

Too close to call: Nexen CP671 and Yokohama Parada Spec-2 are within 2 points overall. Nexen CP671 is stronger on wet. Yokohama Parada Spec-2 is stronger on dry.

Pick tire A Your priority is wet-weather safety

Nexen CP671 scores 68 vs 61 on wet.

Pick tire B You want the most grip on dry roads

Yokohama Parada Spec-2 scores 73 vs 67 on dry.

Tire A · Nexen CP671
Tire B · Yokohama Parada Spec-2

TireWheelGuide may earn a commission from purchases made through these links.

CP671 or Parada Spec-2?

Which is better in the wet, CP671 or Parada Spec-2?

Nexen CP671, 68 vs 61 on our wet score.

Which grips better on dry roads, CP671 or Parada Spec-2?

Yokohama Parada Spec-2, 73 vs 67 on our dry score.

Which is more comfortable, CP671 or Parada Spec-2?

Neither, by our numbers: 67 vs 65 on the comfort score, within 3 points.

Which lasts longer, CP671 or Parada Spec-2?

Neither, by our numbers: 64 vs 62 on the treadwear score, within 3 points.

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