2019 Auto Zeitung Summer Tyre Test

For the 2019 summer season Auto Zeitung have tested nine 235/45 R18 summer tyres, and included the summer-bias all season Michelin CrossClimate.

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson

February 25, 2019 6 min read Updated January 8, 2025

For the 2019 summer season Auto Zeitung have tested nine 235/45 R18 summer tyres, and included the summer-bias all season Michelin CrossClimate.

The stand out performances go to the new Continental Premium Contact 6 and Michelin Primacy 4, both showing extremely well balanced test results, and also the new Maxxis Premitra HP5. The quality of Maxxis tyres has quietly improving quickly over the past 12 months, and it's great to see the Premitra HP5 prove it's excellent price / performance ratio.

It's also worth noting, which the Michelin CrossClimate only finished seventh place overall, this is the only tyre on test which has any sort of ability in the snow. The trade for snow performance is often dry grip, but the CrossClimate held its own in a full summer tyre test, which makes it unique amongst all season tyres.

Dry

The dry testing was led by the top three tyres overall, with the Continental, Michelin Primacy 4 and Maxxis trading places in the dry braking and dry handling testing. The Nankang AS1 was last in both tests.

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Premium Contact 6	36 m	Best
2Maxxis Premitra HP5	36.4 m	+0.40 m
3Michelin Primacy 4	36.6 m	+0.60 m
4Bridgestone Turanza T005	36.8 m	+0.80 m
5Apollo Aspire XP	37.4 m	+1.40 m
6Pirelli CINTURATO P7	37.5 m	+1.50 m
7Yokohama BluEarth AE50	37.8 m	+1.80 m
8Nankang AS1	39.2 m	+3.20 m
8Kumho Ecsta HS51	39.2 m	+3.20 m
8Michelin CrossClimate+	39.2 m	+3.20 m

The difference between best and worst was 8.9% (3.2 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Premium Contact 6	59.3 s	Best
2Michelin Primacy 4	59.7 s	+0.40 s
3Pirelli CINTURATO P7	60.2 s	+0.90 s
3Maxxis Premitra HP5	60.2 s	+0.90 s
5Apollo Aspire XP	60.3 s	+1.00 s
6Yokohama BluEarth AE50	60.4 s	+1.10 s
6Michelin CrossClimate+	60.4 s	+1.10 s
8Kumho Ecsta HS51	60.7 s	+1.40 s
8Bridgestone Turanza T005	60.7 s	+1.40 s
10Nankang AS1	60.9 s	+1.60 s

All the tyres in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.

Wet

The Michelin CrossClimate had a surprise advantage during wet braking, but couldn't match the performance during the wet handling lap. The Continental Premium Contact 6 was the best of the summer tyres, with the Maxxis, Yokohama and Bridgestone all having excellent results. The Nankang AS1 was again last.

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate+	54.6 m	Best
2Continental Premium Contact 6	57.7 m	+3.10 m
3Pirelli CINTURATO P7	58.8 m	+4.20 m
4Yokohama BluEarth AE50	59 m	+4.40 m
5Maxxis Premitra HP5	59.2 m	+4.60 m
6Michelin Primacy 4	60.6 m	+6.00 m
7Apollo Aspire XP	65.8 m	+11.20 m
8Bridgestone Turanza T005	66.6 m	+12.00 m
9Kumho Ecsta HS51	73.1 m	+18.50 m
10Nankang AS1	77.3 m	+22.70 m

The difference between best and worst was 41.6% (22.7 m ≈ 5 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Premium Contact 6	90 s	Best
2Maxxis Premitra HP5	91.2 s	+1.20 s
3Bridgestone Turanza T005	92.8 s	+2.80 s
4Yokohama BluEarth AE50	93.4 s	+3.40 s
5Apollo Aspire XP	94 s	+4.00 s
6Michelin Primacy 4	94.2 s	+4.20 s
7Michelin CrossClimate+	96 s	+6.00 s
8Pirelli CINTURATO P7	96.6 s	+6.60 s
9Kumho Ecsta HS51	98 s	+8.00 s
10Nankang AS1	99.9 s	+9.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 11% (9.9 s).

The Kumho was the best tyre for straight aquaplaning resistance.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Kumho Ecsta HS51	75.1 km/h	Best
2Bridgestone Turanza T005	74.3 km/h	-0.80 km/h
3Pirelli CINTURATO P7	74.2 km/h	-0.90 km/h
4Apollo Aspire XP	74.1 km/h	-1.00 km/h
5Continental Premium Contact 6	74 km/h	-1.10 km/h
6Maxxis Premitra HP5	73.2 km/h	-1.90 km/h
7Michelin Primacy 4	72.3 km/h	-2.80 km/h
8Yokohama BluEarth AE50	70.8 km/h	-4.30 km/h
9Michelin CrossClimate+	70.4 km/h	-4.70 km/h
10Nankang AS1	68.2 km/h	-6.90 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 9.2% (6.9 Km/H).

Environment

The Michelin Primacy 4 had an extremely low rolling resistance, while the Continental's only weakness was highlighted.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin Primacy 4	7.2 kg/t	Best	£0
2Bridgestone Turanza T005	7.46 kg/t	+0.26 kg/t	£16
3Yokohama BluEarth AE50	7.68 kg/t	+0.48 kg/t	£29
4Michelin CrossClimate+	7.78 kg/t	+0.58 kg/t	£36
5Apollo Aspire XP	8.16 kg/t	+0.96 kg/t	£59
6Pirelli CINTURATO P7	8.19 kg/t	+0.99 kg/t	£61
7Maxxis Premitra HP5	8.31 kg/t	+1.11 kg/t	£68
8Continental Premium Contact 6	8.34 kg/t	+1.14 kg/t	£70
9Kumho Ecsta HS51	8.49 kg/t	+1.29 kg/t	£79
10Nankang AS1	8.92 kg/t	+1.72 kg/t	£105

The difference between best and worst was 23.9% (1.72 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Nankang AS1 uses about 73 L (£105) more fuel than the Michelin Primacy 4.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

Petrol/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

19,000 km

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

£1.45/L

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

The Maxxis was the quietest tyre on test, with a 1dB margin over the next best.

Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Maxxis Premitra HP5	68 dB	Best
2Nankang AS1	69 dB	+1.00 dB
3Pirelli CINTURATO P7	70 dB	+2.00 dB
3Yokohama BluEarth AE50	70 dB	+2.00 dB
3Kumho Ecsta HS51	70 dB	+2.00 dB
3Apollo Aspire XP	70 dB	+2.00 dB
7Continental Premium Contact 6	71 dB	+3.00 dB
7Bridgestone Turanza T005	71 dB	+3.00 dB
7Michelin Primacy 4	71 dB	+3.00 dB
10Michelin CrossClimate+	72 dB	+4.00 dB

The difference between best and worst was 5.9% (4 dB).

The cheapest set of tyres on test, the Nankang AS1, were almost a third of the price of the most expensive.

Results

As always, you can see the full results on the Auto Zeitung website.

Dry100%

Wet97.5%

Comfort95.8%

Rolling Resistance86.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	36 m	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 10	59.3 s	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	57.7 m	+3.10 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 10	90 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 10	74 km/h	-1.10 km/h
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 10	71 dB	+3.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	8^th / 10	8.34 kg/t	+1.14 kg/t

Price: 555.00

Dry98.8%

Wet93.4%

Comfort95.8%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	36.6 m	+0.60 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 10	59.7 s	+0.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	60.6 m	+6.00 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	94.2 s	+4.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 10	72.3 km/h	-2.80 km/h
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 10	71 dB	+3.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 10	7.2 kg/t	Best in this discipline

Price: 590.00

Dry98.7%

Wet95.8%

Comfort100%

Rolling Resistance86.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	36.4 m	+0.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	60.2 s	+0.90 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	59.2 m	+4.60 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 10	91.2 s	+1.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 10	73.2 km/h	-1.90 km/h
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 10	68 dB	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 10	8.31 kg/t	+1.11 kg/t

Price: 345.00

Dry97.3%

Wet94.1%

Comfort97.1%

Rolling Resistance87.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	37.5 m	+1.50 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	60.2 s	+0.90 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	58.8 m	+4.20 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	96.6 s	+6.60 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 10	74.2 km/h	-0.90 km/h
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 10	70 dB	+2.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 10	8.19 kg/t	+0.99 kg/t

Price: 465.00

Dry97.8%

Wet91.2%

Comfort95.8%

Rolling Resistance96.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	36.8 m	+0.80 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	60.7 s	+1.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	66.6 m	+12.00 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 10	92.8 s	+2.80 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 10	74.3 km/h	-0.80 km/h
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 10	71 dB	+3.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 10	7.46 kg/t	+0.26 kg/t

Price: 540.00

Dry96.7%

Wet94.4%

Comfort97.1%

Rolling Resistance93.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	37.8 m	+1.80 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	60.4 s	+1.10 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	59 m	+4.40 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 10	93.4 s	+3.40 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 10	70.8 km/h	-4.30 km/h
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 10	70 dB	+2.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 10	7.68 kg/t	+0.48 kg/t

Price: 470.00

Dry95%

Wet96.3%

Comfort94.4%

Rolling Resistance92.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	39.2 m	+3.20 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 10	60.4 s	+1.10 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	54.6 m	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 10	96 s	+6.00 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 10	70.4 km/h	-4.70 km/h
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 10	72 dB	+4.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 10	7.78 kg/t	+0.58 kg/t

Price: 645.00

Dry97.3%

Wet91%

Comfort97.1%

Rolling Resistance88.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	37.4 m	+1.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	5^th / 10	60.3 s	+1.00 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	65.8 m	+11.20 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 10	94 s	+4.00 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 10	74.1 km/h	-1.00 km/h
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 10	70 dB	+2.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	5^th / 10	8.16 kg/t	+0.96 kg/t

Price: 400.00

Dry94.8%

Wet86.3%

Comfort97.1%

Rolling Resistance84.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	39.2 m	+3.20 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	8^th / 10	60.7 s	+1.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 10	73.1 m	+18.50 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	9^th / 10	98 s	+8.00 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 10	75.1 km/h	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	3^rd / 10	70 dB	+2.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	9^th / 10	8.49 kg/t	+1.29 kg/t

Price: 325.00

Dry94.6%

Wet82.2%

Comfort98.6%

Rolling Resistance80.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	39.2 m	+3.20 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	10^th / 10	60.9 s	+1.60 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	10^th / 10	77.3 m	+22.70 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	10^th / 10	99.9 s	+9.90 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 10	68.2 km/h	-6.90 km/h
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 10	69 dB	+1.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	10^th / 10	8.92 kg/t	+1.72 kg/t

Price: 265.00

Discussion

25 comments

Lux Apr 8, 2019 archived

I would like a very quiet tyres and safety as well.
My doubt is michelin primacy 4 or nokian wetproof. Size 225/45/17 for a Bmw 1 series.
I understood that Nokian are better on wet and dry as well, and noise is approximately the same. But when they are much aged, will they maintain the same characteristics? thanks for helping!

#4638
1. TyreReviews Lux Apr 8, 2019 archived
  
  As a rule Michelin generally wear better than other brands, but the Nokian is a new tyre from a premium brand so there's no reason this should perform worse than any other brand.
  
  #4640
  1. Lux TyreReviews Apr 8, 2019 archived
    
    Thanks for your reply... In terms of noisy goodyear asymmetric 5 are better?
    
    #4642
    1. TyreReviews Lux Apr 8, 2019 archived
      
      Have a look at our video and the various test data on this site :)
      
      #4651
      1. Lux TyreReviews Apr 9, 2019 archived
        
        Already did 😁. But I am confused. ...constructors declare a noise value but in test it is different. For instance goodyear f1 a3 68db and in your test f1 a5(70db) are quieter. Could you please advise me the quieter tyres(premium brands) at high speeds(motorway).
        I will appreciate very mutch! Thanks🙂
        
        #4653
        
        TyreReviews Lux Apr 9, 2019 archived
        
        You have all the data I have :) My noise test was internal noise, some tests are external.
        
        #4654
Justin Saunders Feb 27, 2019 archived

I would have liked to see Landsail tyres in the list. Appreciate there are many makes now
though.

#4424
1. TyreReviews Justin Saunders Feb 27, 2019 archived
  
  Sadly we don't see Landsail in many tests anymore.
  
  #4429
Lulu Bulu Feb 25, 2019 archived

I think that load and speed index should be known. They make a difference even in the same size and model. Correct me if I'm wrong.

#4403
1. TyreReviews Lulu Bulu Feb 26, 2019 archived
  
  They don't always made a difference, but you're right, it can. I'll work on getting it added to the database where available!
  
  #4407
J Feb 25, 2019 archived

I have those Maxxis Premitra HP5, at first I liked them, but not anymore..
At a certain point, where there's approx 5-5,5mm of thread left, they change a lot, like it's a whole different rubber compound. Suddenly they're terrible sub 5deg Celsius. Also their wet capabilities have become poor. When it's wet and sub 5C they're lethal. They've become extremely noisy over time.
Wear is high in the beginning, but now it's really slow.

#4396
1. J J Feb 25, 2019 archived
  
  Also, how can the Premitra HP5 be 'new' (as mentioned in the text) if I have them already since February 2017.. DOT = 4616..
  Or did they have an update?
  
  #4398
  1. Jtp J Feb 25, 2019 archived
    
    Specially made an account for this:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
    This is how they look after ~40,000km, approx 4mm left
    
    #4401
    1. TyreReviews Jtp Feb 25, 2019 archived
      
      New with tyres is relative, though you're right, I thought they were launched in early 2018 but I was wrong.
      Obviously I can't comment on grip, but that's very good wear for 40,000 kms!
      
      #4402
2. TyreReviews J Feb 25, 2019 archived
  
  Interesting information, hopefully it's a one off or weather related but I'll keep an eye out for other reviews like this. ADAC did wear test a Maxxis tyre and found nothing usual, though it was a different pattern.
  
  #4399
3. giannis karadimos J Mar 5, 2019 archived
  
  For 5 years and 45000km I had the Pirelli Pzero Nero(205/45/16) and I was very satisfied with this tire. Now I'm thinking of putting the premitra hp5,but i am not sure if this should be a good choice. It can compare this tire with my old pirelli? Is Maxxis premitra a worth buying in your opinion?
  
  #4451
Jirka Chomat Feb 25, 2019 archived

Hi, I can't find it on the Autozeitung website as mentioned, can you give me a hint?

#4395
1. TyreReviews Jirka Chomat Feb 25, 2019 archived
  
  It might not be published yet, sorry! I'll update the article with a link when it is.
  
  #4397
Andy Holmes Feb 25, 2019 archived

Nice clear layout for this one!
The surprise was the Kumho which usually tests pretty well and has strong reviews to back this up. Like the other Andy just said though, like the CC, this is more a 'general' tyre stretched out to a more 'sporty' size against some more 'sportier' tyres.
That said, the second surprise is the Maxxis, also a 'general' tyre, testing a bit better than normal. They arent poor tyres, but its a strong result nevertheless. The big downside of these astronomic wear, but that is the downfall of a lot of decent tyres today!

#4394
1. TyreReviews Andy Holmes Feb 25, 2019 archived
  
  I've just added even more data points to the overall results, should make things even clearer (though the formatting does need updating!)
  
  #4400
Engineer_Andy Feb 25, 2019 archived

A couple of points, one that TR needs to include on the review details, the other, more a commentary over Auto Zeitung's methodology:
1. The size/rating of the tyres tested is not mentioned in the details or title of the review (the size for the ADAC review is). Given the CC+ is more suited to 'standard' (non-performance/low profile) tyre sized to get the best performance (from reading previous reviews [and why I chose them for my car]), what size of tyre tested could easily sway the result as regards how the CC+ fairs.
2. The test (at least as the results are shown here) don't show any marks for wear/value for money, which other tests often do. As many group tests have already shown, the CC+ is excellent on that score and more than offset the higher purchase price, especially when the winter performance is factored in. Similarly no marks were given for 'comfort', another rating that the CC+ often does very well on.
It's a shame (you're not at fault Jon, but the magazines testing them) that there isn't a more unified testing regime as what criteria are used - I have no problems with performance tyres (obviously not the CC+ or other all-season tyres) being weighted more to the handling/braking side of things, but I think all reviews and group tests should include comparative scores across a wide range of aspects of the tyre, as some can look overly good or poor because a rating is included, excluded or weighted too heavily.

#4392
1. TyreReviews Engineer_Andy Feb 25, 2019 archived
  
  Hi Andy!
  The size was in the database, I just forgot to mention it in the article. First of the year, I'm rusty :) It's added now!
  As I'm sure you know, wear is very difficult to test, as to do it properly you actually have to go out and drive. For 10 sets of tyres, which need at least 10,000 miles on, that's a lot of driving. I'm always thankful when ADAC and Auto Bild do include wear testing.
  I'm in the process of adding the score weighting details to the database too so hopefully that will become more clear in the future. It's currently difficult to decide whether to use the raw data where available, or to use the scoring numbers magazines also feel the need to apply.
  
  #4393
  1. Engineer_Andy TyreReviews Feb 25, 2019 archived
    
    No problem Jon. I had an inkling that the tyre size in the group test was a lower profile one, as from the reviews generally the CC+ seems to do less well in wider, lower profile sizes than those over 50. I'm keen on a group test with it against other all-season and summer tyres for the two most popular sizes: 205/55 R16 and 195/65 R15.
    
    #4404
    1. TyreReviews Engineer_Andy Feb 26, 2019 archived
      
      I'm sure it's featured in those in the past? The data must be on the website (I'm on mobile so can't search right now)
      
      #4416
2. 4cvg Engineer_Andy Mar 1, 2019 archived
  
  In my judgement, it's a good thing that various magazines use different test protocols & weight different parameters of performance differently & differently for different classes of tyre.
  An astute user of tests should be ignoring overall scores anyway & mining the data for information on parameters of interest. A variety of test protocol "takes" on those prioritised areas adds breadth.
  What should ideally be as apparent as possible is information about the test protocol which led to a given score & TR tries to supply this to some extent in the introductory "blurb" & in table annotations.
  
  #4432

Menu

Tyre shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Dry

Wet

Environment

Results

Cross-check this test