2023 Tyre Reviews UHP All Season Tyre Test

In this test I'll be comparing 7 of the most popular ultra high performance all season tyres to find out which tyre is best for you.

If you've read any of my previous all season tests, you'll be happy to know that six of the tyres in this test I've never tested before, and they include the brand new Pirelli P Zero AS 3 Plus and the brand new Falken Azenis FK460AS. The tyre I have tested before is one of the benchmarks of the segment, the Continental ExtremeContact DWS06+, so if you want to, you'll have a cross reference points to compare the tyres in this test to the tyres in the previous tests.

As always I'll be digging into the dry, wet, comfort and noise performance of the tyres, then in a later test I'll be looking at the snow performance, to give you a really complete overview of the tyres performances.

Testing Methodology

Test Driver

Jonathan Benson

Tyre Size

275/40 R20

Test Location

Professional Proving Ground

Test Year

2023

Tyres Tested

7

Show full testing methodology Hide methodology

Every tyre is tested using calibrated instrumented measurement and structured subjective assessment. Reference tyres are retested throughout each session to correct for changing conditions, ensuring fair, repeatable comparisons. Multiple reference sets are used where needed so that control tyre wear does not affect accuracy.

We use professional-grade testing equipment including GPS data loggers, accelerometers, and calibrated microphones. All tyres are broken in and conditioned before testing begins. For full details on our equipment, preparation process, and calibration procedures, see our complete testing methodology.

Categories Tested

Dry Braking

For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.

Dry Handling

For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.

Subj. Dry Handling

Objective data is only part of the picture, so I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Wet Braking

For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tyre performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.

Wet Handling

For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.

Subj. Wet Handling

Objective data is only part of the picture, so I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Subj. Comfort

To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tyre's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tyre.

Subj. Noise

For subjective noise assessment, I drive at constant speeds across multiple surface types with the windows closed, ventilation off, and audio system off. I assess overall noise level, tonal quality, cavity boom, pattern noise, broadband roar, and sensitivity to both speed and road texture. Each tyre is rated on a 1–10 scale and supported by written observations on noise character and annoyance.

Wear

I do not conduct tread wear testing myself; where wear is included in a programme, it is carried out by a contracted specialist test provider using either an on-road convoy method or an accelerated machine-based method. In convoy wear testing, multiple vehicles run a defined public-road route over an extended distance, with tread depth measured at intervals and tyres rotated methodically to reduce positional and vehicle-specific effects. In accelerated machine wear testing, the tyre is run on a specialised roadwheel or rough-surfaced drum system designed to simulate real-world wear under controlled load, speed, alignment, and force inputs. I then use the contracted provider's measured wear rate relative to the reference tyre to estimate projected tread life.

Read our complete testing methodology

Score Weighting Hide Score Weighting

How each category is weighted in the overall score:

Dry 40%

Dry Braking 50%

Dry Handling 45%

Subj. Dry Handling 5%

Wet 45%

Wet Braking 50%

Wet Handling 45%

Subj. Wet Handling 5%

Comfort 10%

Subj. Comfort 50%

Subj. Noise 50%

Value 5%

Value 100%

Wet

Starting with the wet performance of the tyres, this is arguably the most important aspect of the tyres they're meant for year round use in areas get mild to moderate winters. In short, they'll see a lot of wet running, and wet is where the good tyres separate themselves from the bad.

In last place was the Atlas Force UHP, which I believe is made by Linglong, a chinese company. This tyre is the cheapest tyre here, and might be sold as an all season tyre, but it looks like a very summer bias tread pattern, so we will have to see how it does in the snow testing, but in the wet, it was both the slowest and my least favourite subjectively. It wasn't a total disaster, even on this 717bhp hellcat with all the driver aids turned off, however it did have noticably less grip laterally, even without seeing the lap times, and once it started sliding it took longer to recover.

Next up was the group of BFGoodrich, General and Vredestein, all in the 49 second bracket and while their lap times were close, they did feel fairly different to each other.

The BFGoodrich felt good when turning, but it didn't seem to stop or accelerate very easily, and was one of the tyres more upset by the deeper pockets of water on track, and the General was a similar story, feeling slightly more sporty, but these are tiny differences, and again seemed to get upset by the deeper water.

The Vredestein on the other hand was a different feeling tyre, it felt softer, more sluggish to turn, and offered less feedback than the previous two tyres, but had zero issues with standing water. It was incredibly easy to be consistent driving it, two of the three laps I drove were identical and the last was two one hundredths of a second slower. Quite a result, but of the 7 tyres, in the wet, it felt the least like a UHP tyre and more like a touring tyre.

Next up nearly a second ahead, which is a lot of time on this short lap was the new Falken. This tyre felt good to steer, but it could have given me a little more detail at the limit through the steering wheel. Lots of grip, good quick steering but lacking the final few percent of detail at the limit. Good tyre though and had good traction out of the corners. For an all season tyre in the wet with a 717bhp RWD vehicle.

The second fastest lap time was posted by new Pirelli, feeling pretty similar to the new Falken. Perhaps not quite as direct to steer, but excellent grip and very good traction and brakes. As good as everything was with the Pirelli, I did find myself prone to making small mistakes when driving it, but I couldn't really tell you why, I think possibly a little detail missing on the front axle, and a slightly longer than ideal time for it to recover. But I'm really moaning over tiny details, you'll be happy with this tyre.

And finally, the Continental, it's not a new tyre, but it's still the best around wet handling. There were small amounts of hydroplaning, but the grip was immense, it turned really nicely, and was just an enjoyable all round experience.

As for the wet braking test, I was happy to find out there was a pretty decent correlation between wet braking and wet handling, which is always nice as it's not always the way. In percentage terms, the falken edged even closer to the Pirelli and Continental, with the rest of the pack slipping slightly further back, so we're seeing a bit of a separation between the top 3 and the rest.

Dry

The soft handling of the Vredestein in the wet was magnified in the dry, the tyre just didn't appreciate going quickly and had lots of noisy understeer. It was also the worst in dry braking. 

The General posted exactly the same time, and while it felt a little tighter than the Vredestein, it also felt a little imprecise on this Challenger.

Then came the BFGoodrich and the Atlas. Both felt more sporty, with the BFG just having a little more understeer, but as we know understeer is safe. The Atlas was a surprise, punching well above its weight in dry handling, but given it looks like a summer pattern, perhaps this all makes sense.

The final trio of tyres were once again the Falken, Continental and Pirelli, in that order. Like in the wet, the Falken just needed a little more detail at the limit through the steering, the Continental felt great, and the Pirelli remained as fun as it's predecessor in the dry, and posted the best time overall.

The Continental proved to be the best at stopping the car, with the Falken a close second and the new Pirelli third. 

Environment

Price / Warranty

The Continental was the most expensive tyre on test, with the Atlas being the cheapest.

The tyres broadly offered a similar tread life warranty.

Using the purchase price and warranty, we can work out a cost per 1,000 miles driven.

Results

For the overall results I've been debating whether to include the treadwear warranty against the price to factor in a price per mile value figure, as while a tread wear warranty isn't a true wear test, in theory the tyres should get there.

For these results I have, but there's a link below to the results page so you can play with it yourself and see what results you get.

2023 Tyre Reviews UHP All Season Tyre TestWatch the full video of this test on YouTube Watch on YouTube

1^st

Continental ExtremeContact DWS 06 PLUS

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 560 A A
• Weight: 13.2 kgs
• Tread: 7.15 mm

Excellent in both wet and dry conditions with good handling and a solid warranty.

Slightly higher price point.

Dry

99.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	34.5 M			100%
Dry Handling	2nd	42.27 s	42.14 s	+0.13 s	99.69%
Subj. Dry Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Wet

99.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	46.9 M	46.7 M	+0.2 M	99.57%
Wet Handling	1st	47.38 s			100%
Subj. Wet Handling	1st	100 Points			100%

Comfort

95%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Subj. Noise	7th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%

Value

72.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	50000 KM			100%
Value	6th	5.74 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+1.97 Price/1000	65.68%
Price	7th	286.99	150.99	+136	52.61%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Pirelli P Zero AS+ 3

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 560 AA A
• Weight: 14.21 kgs
• Tread: 7.82 mm

Excellent dry handling, good braking, and good comfort. Strong performance in both wet and dry conditions.

Price per mile is higher than some competitors.

Dry

99.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	35.2 M	34.5 M	+0.7 M	98.01%
Dry Handling	1st	42.14 s			100%
Subj. Dry Handling	1st	100 Points			100%

Wet

99%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	46.7 M			100%
Wet Handling	2nd	47.83 s	47.38 s	+0.45 s	99.06%
Subj. Wet Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Comfort

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%
Subj. Noise	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Value

74.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	50000 KM			100%
Value	5th	5.55 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+1.78 Price/1000	67.93%
Price	6th	277.6	150.99	+126.61	54.39%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Falken Azenis FK460 AS

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 500 A A
• Weight: 15.12 kgs
• Tread: 7.54 mm

Balanced performance across categories and less expensive on a per-mile basis. Good in wet conditions.

Subjective dry handling is slightly lower than its competitors.

Dry

97.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	34.7 M	34.5 M	+0.2 M	99.42%
Dry Handling	3rd	42.52 s	42.14 s	+0.38 s	99.11%
Subj. Dry Handling	5th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%

Wet

98.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	47.3 M	46.7 M	+0.6 M	98.73%
Wet Handling	3rd	48.24 s	47.38 s	+0.86 s	98.22%
Subj. Wet Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Comfort

96.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Subj. Noise	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Value

78.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	50000 KM			100%
Value	3rd	5.04 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+1.27 Price/1000	74.8%
Price	3rd	252	150.99	+101.01	59.92%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Atlas Force UHP

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 520 AA A
• Weight: 14.52 kgs
• Tread: 8.02 mm

Best value tire with good dry handling and excellent comfort.

Extended wet braking and limited wet handling, warranty duration are less than other options in the test.

Dry

98.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	35.3 M	34.5 M	+0.8 M	97.73%
Dry Handling	5th	42.76 s	42.14 s	+0.62 s	98.55%
Subj. Dry Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Wet

92.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	51.2 M	46.7 M	+4.5 M	91.21%
Wet Handling	7th	50.24 s	47.38 s	+2.86 s	94.31%
Subj. Wet Handling	7th	92 Points	100 Points	-8 Points	92%

Comfort

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%
Subj. Noise	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Value

93.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	7th	40000 KM	50000 KM	-10000 KM	80%
Value	1st	3.77 Price/1000			100%
Price	1st	150.99			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

5^th

Vredestein Hypertrac All Season

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 500 AA A
• Weight: 14.02 kgs
• Tread: 7.89 mm

Highest rated comfort and noise. Decent performance across various metrics.

Dry braking and dry handling lag behind competitors.

Dry

93.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	7th	38.2 M	34.5 M	+3.7 M	90.31%
Dry Handling	6th	43.17 s	42.14 s	+1.03 s	97.61%
Subj. Dry Handling	6th	92 Points	100 Points	-8 Points	92%

Wet

95.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	49.4 M	46.7 M	+2.7 M	94.53%
Wet Handling	4th	49.14 s	47.38 s	+1.76 s	96.42%
Subj. Wet Handling	6th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%

Comfort

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	1st	100 Points			100%
Subj. Noise	1st	100 Points			100%

Value

78.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	50000 KM			100%
Value	4th	5.06 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+1.29 Price/1000	74.51%
Price	4th	253.13	150.99	+102.14	59.65%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

6^th

General G Max AS 05

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 500 A A
• Weight: 14.01 kgs
• Tread: 7.8 mm

Affordable with solid warranty, and comfortable ride.

Dry and wet braking could be improved.

Dry

94.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	36.9 M	34.5 M	+2.4 M	93.5%
Dry Handling	6th	43.17 s	42.14 s	+1.03 s	97.61%
Subj. Dry Handling	6th	92 Points	100 Points	-8 Points	92%

Wet

95.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	50.6 M	46.7 M	+3.9 M	92.29%
Wet Handling	6th	49.66 s	47.38 s	+2.28 s	95.41%
Subj. Wet Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Comfort

98%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%
Subj. Noise	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Value

78.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	1st	50000 KM			100%
Value	2nd	5 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+1.23 Price/1000	75.4%
Price	2nd	249.99	150.99	+99	60.4%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

7^th

BFGoodrich g Force COMP 2 AS+

275/40 R20 106Y

• UTQG: 400 A A
• Weight: 15.66 kgs
• Tread: 7.16 mm

Good dry handling and overall comfort, along with a decent warranty.

Falls behind in both dry and wet braking metrics. Higher price per mile.

Dry

97.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	36.1 M	34.5 M	+1.6 M	95.57%
Dry Handling	4th	42.75 s	42.14 s	+0.61 s	98.57%
Subj. Dry Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Wet

94.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	7th	52.3 M	46.7 M	+5.6 M	89.29%
Wet Handling	5th	49.41 s	47.38 s	+2.03 s	95.89%
Subj. Wet Handling	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Comfort

96.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Subj. Comfort	5th	95 Points	100 Points	-5 Points	95%
Subj. Noise	2nd	98 Points	100 Points	-2 Points	98%

Value

69.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wear	6th	45000 KM	50000 KM	-5000 KM	90%
Value	7th	6 Price/1000	3.77 Price/1000	+2.23 Price/1000	62.83%
Price	5th	269.99	150.99	+119	55.92%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts