For enthusiastic drivers subjective handling, as in how this tyre reacts to steering, how balanced the tyre is, and how much ability you have to adjust things mid-corner, is often more important than outright grip. In this test I take eight of the very best ultra ultra high performance summer tyres and put them through my usual array of dry, wet, noise, comfort, and rolling resistance testing but with a heavy focus on subjective handling to find out which tyre will make you feel the happiest when driving!
One of the most interesting aspects of this test to be the inclusion of the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2, which Michelin say is an 80% track tyre and 20% road tyre, whereas the rest of the tyres are more road-biased. Seeing how the Michelin track product performed in a group of street tyres was fascinating and some of the data will certainly surprise you.
4 categories (10 tests)
Dry
Starting with the King Boss, in isolation it didn't feel terrible - steering reaction was acceptable and grip seemed adequate - but it was six seconds a lap down on the fastest, which tells the full story. Moving up, the Falken was a clear step forward; turn-in to lock was perhaps a touch slower than ideal but it was beautifully weighted and built up progressively, and it put in a consistent lap time. The Hankook was similar, though it wasn't quite as direct as the Falken on initial turn-in, with a very slight two-stage feel where the front and rear would build up at slightly different speeds - a small quirk but noticeable in a group this competitive.
The Continental Sport Contact 7 showed a duality I've observed before: around centre there is just a slight elasticity to the steering that isn't my favourite, but once you're genuinely committed to a corner it comes alive, turns hard and feels very stable. It's clearly leaning into its road-focused character.
The Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport was a step up in steering directness and outright grip over the Continental, Hankook, and Falken, and it was one of the few tyres that got meaningfully quicker on its second lap once the compound was fully up to temperature. The one mild criticism is that before it's fully warm, it felt slightly numb on the limit - just a fraction short of the feedback of the very best here.
The Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo once again did what I can only describe as Bridgestone things. Its steering ramp-up is non-linear - you turn and then suddenly you are turning faster and faster without additional steering input - which isn't objectively ideal but delivers a genuinely thrilling, exciting feel even at sub-limit pace. On the lap it was fast, aggressive, and rewarding.
Then came the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2. Sub-limit it felt sensational, with the sharpest front-end steering reaction of the group by a small but definite margin, and wonderful granularity through the front axle. However, on lap one turn one the front bit hard and then a split second later the rear came round - I had to correct it, losing around two seconds in the opening corners. Even giving it an extra warm-up lap, and despite having clear advantages in very high-speed, high-load corners, it was bleeding small amounts of time in braking zones, low-speed corners and traction zones everywhere else.
The Pirelli P Zero R was shockingly fast. Its steering has a linear ramp-up - not quite the manic edge of the Bridgestone - but it is still very sporty and possibly the best overall front-end feel of the group. Under braking on the first lap I had to roll off and re-apply the brakes because I was stopping more quickly than I had anticipated. It was a second faster than the Bridgestone in the dry and, despite genuine effort to close the gap with the Michelin, the P Zero R was faster in almost every part of the lap. Whatever Pirelli have been doing recently, it is working.
Dry braking was very closely aligned with dry handling, which always makes me happy. That also means the Pirelli P Zero R was once again the best, Cup 2 second best, Bridgestone third and Continental fourth.
Wet
The King Boss was simply outclassed; with no useful wet grip. The Falken didn't feel especially sporty in the wet - it wasn't as direct or sharp as the rest and broke into understeer fairly early, though in absolute terms it still posted a respectable time in a very competitive field. The Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 shared the same lap time as the Falken in this test, though they arrived there very differently. The Cup 2 felt excellent on surface where it had proper contact - grippy, direct and with the nicest steering of the group - but in the deeper standing water it would lift, making the rear axle a little unpredictable. The ambient air temperature was over 18 degrees and the water temperature was warm so in the real world on the road in the wet things would be even trickier.
The Hankook and Continental were remarkably similar to each other. Neither had quite the front-axle bite of the very fastest in the group, but both were genuinely lovely to drive - completely manageable across the full two-minute lap from damp surface to standing water with no aquaplaning concerns and a well-planted rear end.
The Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo was once again remarkable in the wet. The front-end bite was excellent, steering off-centre was quick and well-weighted, the rear remained stable throughout, and aquaplaning was rarely an issue. It was noticeably faster than the Continental and I came away once again deeply impressed by this tyre.
However, the Pirelli P Zero R was faster still - another two seconds over the Bridgestone. It appeared to have unlimited front grip, allowing later turn-in, continued adjustment mid-corner, and earlier and harder power application than anything else in the group. The rear was completely planted throughout; there was no hint of the rear wanting to fight you. Both the Bridgestone and Pirelli received my highest steering enjoyment scores of the group - with hindsight the Bridgestone may have had a marginal edge in reactivity and granularity, but the Pirelli's outright grip level was simply on another level. For a tyre positioned as more dry-focused, its wet performance was extraordinary.
Continental managed to just beat Pirelli in wet braking, with the Bridgestone close behind. The Pilot Sport Cup 2 did impressively well considering its low starting tread depth but it couldn't match the more road-focused tyres.
Straight aquaplaning was closer than expected, given the differing natures of the products. Hankook was the best, with Continental once again at the sharp end, with the Pirelli and Michelin very close overall. It's likely curved aquaplaning would have separated these tyres further.
Comfort
As always I did run subjective noise and comfort on a reasonably long road route. Unfortunately it started raining so I couldn't do subjective noise across all of the sets. However, to the three of us in the car while doing the comfort testing, it was pretty clear that the Goodyear, Continental and even the Bridgestone were very good in comfort. The Falcon, Hankook, and Pirelli were just a little bit firmer, with the Cup 2 noticeably firmer.
Again, perhaps you don't really care as you are probably willing to sacrifice some comfort for the best handling possible. I know I am.
During the road drive I did also assess the steering response on the road, which was also very close. Goodyear was my favourite by a tiny margin on the road but Bridgestone, Michelin, and Pirelli were all excellent. I haven't scored this category but I thought it would be worth mentioning.
The external noise test had the Michelin best again, which again might be counterintuitive but that's because noise is also a factor of tread depth. The Falken was the next best. All of them were split by just 3.3%
Value
To me, the rolling resistance of this category of tyres is less important than regular summer tyres, But as these are intended for everyday use, other than maybe the cup 2, the rolling resistance is still a factor so I've tested it.
The Continental and the King Boss were joint-tied for the best rolling resistance, with surprisingly the Cup 2 in third place. It's not what you would imagine when looking at that kind of category of tyre, it is a track-focused product afterall so why would they care about rolling resistance, well rolling resistance is quite aligned with tread depth and void, and the Cup 2 has the lowest starting tread depth and the least pattern here so it kind of makes sense.
The rest of the tyres were in a little group of their own, which is not going to make much difference in real-world other than maybe the Goodyear Eagle F1 Super Sport, which is showing its age at 10.4 kg/t.
Results
- EU Label: D/A/72
- Rim Protection: Medium
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 9.6 kgs
- Tread: 6.5 mm
If you told me at the start of the test that one tyre would beat the Cup 2 in the dry and the same tyre would beat the Continental in the wet, I wouldn't have believed you, but here we are.
It certainly wasn't the most comfortable and it doesn't have the lowest rolling resistance but I really don't care. This tyre is awesome and I would like to fit it to everything I own; which brings me to the biggest issue with it, the size range. I think there's currently only 3 non-OE sizes, so if you are one of the blessed ones, do it, and if you're not, I've been told there are more coming very soon.
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 1st | 31.7 M | 100% |
| Dry Handling | 1st | 76.48 s | 100% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 1st | 8.75 Points | 100% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 2nd | 24.89 M | 98.59% |
| Wet Handling | 1st | 99.38 s | 100% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 1st | 8 Points | 100% |
| Straight Aqua | 6th | 76.1 Km/H | 97.31% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 5th | 6.75 Points | 93.1% |
| Noise | 4th | 73.2 dB | 97.4% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 6th | 9.8 kg / t | 89.8% |
- EU Label: D/A/72
- Rim Protection: Massive
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.2 kgs
- Tread: 7 mm
It seems like they have done that. I didn't get to do as many laps on the Sport Evo as I wanted to but my gut is telling me the track wear is significantly better than the Potenza Sport, Which was admittedly a very low bar.
As always I want to see more than just my test data to form a firm conclusion but in this test it was a very fun tyre and had good grip, So it's showing a lot of promise as being a great enthusiast product.
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 3rd | 33.2 M | 95.48% |
| Dry Handling | 3rd | 77.38 s | 98.84% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 3rd | 8.5 Points | 97.14% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 3rd | 24.96 M | 98.32% |
| Wet Handling | 2nd | 102.58 s | 96.88% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 1st | 8 Points | 100% |
| Straight Aqua | 5th | 76.9 Km/H | 98.34% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 2nd | 7 Points | 96.55% |
| Noise | 8th | 73.7 dB | 96.74% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 4th | 9.5 kg / t | 92.63% |
- EU Label: D/A/72
- Rim Protection: Large
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.2 kgs
- Tread: 6.9 mm
In this group its steering response and handling were just a little bit below where I would want to be for a tyre that I would use on track a lot, but you can't argue with the fact that this is an excellent tyre And one I continue to highly recommend.
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 4th | 33.39 M | 94.94% |
| Dry Handling | 4th | 78.42 s | 97.53% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 5th | 8 Points | 91.43% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 1st | 24.54 M | 100% |
| Wet Handling | 4th | 104.4 s | 95.19% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 4th | 7.75 Points | 96.88% |
| Straight Aqua | 2nd | 78 Km/H | 99.74% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 2nd | 7 Points | 96.55% |
| Noise | 6th | 73.6 dB | 96.88% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 1st | 8.8 kg / t | 100% |
- EU Label: C/A/70
- Rim Protection: Massive
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.2 kgs
- Tread: 7.3 mm
I think now it's just starting to show its age. It couldn't quite match the best in the dry and its rolling resistance is very high but it is still a very good tyre. I assume it's going to be priced very well for its longevity, My gut tells me this will be the best-wearing tyre here, although I don't have any data to prove that, so ignore me.
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 7th | 34.18 M | 92.74% |
| Dry Handling | 5th | 78.66 s | 97.23% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 4th | 8.25 Points | 94.29% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 6th | 26.95 M | 91.06% |
| Wet Handling | 3rd | 102.7 s | 96.77% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 1st | 8 Points | 100% |
| Straight Aqua | 3rd | 77.6 Km/H | 99.23% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 1st | 7.25 Points | 100% |
| Noise | 3rd | 72.4 dB | 98.48% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 8th | 10.4 kg / t | 84.62% |
- EU Label: D/C/70
- Rim Protection: Small
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.2 kgs
- Tread: 5.7 mm
I think people give the cup 2 too much credit as a fully focused track tyre, probably because Michelin officially say it's an 80:20 track-to-road tyre.
A lot of the time it doesn't even feel that focused, especially compared to the North American 200 treadwear category. I really enjoyed this tyre; however, I wouldn't rush to recommend it for a UK-based person for year-round use, I have a video demonstrating its cold, wet weather performance and it really does harden up. That's something to keep in mind. Though maybe similar tyres around it will suffer similar consequences, your reviews will tell me that once you've used them.
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 2nd | 32.97 M | 96.15% |
| Dry Handling | 2nd | 76.8 s | 99.58% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 1st | 8.75 Points | 100% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 7th | 28.04 M | 87.52% |
| Wet Handling | 6th | 107.09 s | 92.8% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 6th | 7.5 Points | 93.75% |
| Straight Aqua | 6th | 76.1 Km/H | 97.31% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 8th | 6.25 Points | 86.21% |
| Noise | 1st | 71.3 dB | 100% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 3rd | 9.2 kg / t | 95.65% |
- EU Label: D/A/72
- Rim Protection: Small
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.2 kgs
- Tread: 6.9 mm
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 5th | 33.93 M | 93.43% |
| Dry Handling | 6th | 79.15 s | 96.63% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 7th | 7.75 Points | 88.57% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 4th | 25.71 M | 95.45% |
| Wet Handling | 5th | 105.19 s | 94.48% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 4th | 7.75 Points | 96.88% |
| Straight Aqua | 1st | 78.2 Km/H | 100% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 5th | 6.75 Points | 93.1% |
| Noise | 5th | 73.3 dB | 97.27% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 7th | 9.9 kg / t | 88.89% |
- EU Label: D/A/70
- Rim Protection: Medium
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.8 kgs
- Tread: 7.1 mm
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 6th | 34.05 M | 93.1% |
| Dry Handling | 7th | 79.17 s | 96.6% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 5th | 8 Points | 91.43% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 5th | 26.29 M | 93.34% |
| Wet Handling | 7th | 107.59 s | 92.37% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 7th | 7.25 Points | 90.63% |
| Straight Aqua | 4th | 77 Km/H | 98.47% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 5th | 6.75 Points | 93.1% |
| Noise | 2nd | 71.6 dB | 99.58% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 5th | 9.6 kg / t | 91.67% |
- EU Label: D/C/72
- Rim Protection: Small
- 3PMSF: no
- Weight: 10.5 kgs
- Tread: 6.35 mm
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Braking | 8th | 38.92 M | 81.45% |
| Dry Handling | 8th | 82.21 s | 93.03% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 8th | 7 Points | 80% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wet Braking | 8th | 31.48 M | 77.95% |
| Wet Handling | 8th | 117.14 s | 84.84% |
| Subj. Wet Handling | 8th | 6 Points | 75% |
| Straight Aqua | 8th | 75 Km/H | 95.91% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subj. Comfort | 2nd | 7 Points | 96.55% |
| Noise | 6th | 73.6 dB | 96.88% |
| Test | # | Result | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rolling Resistance | 1st | 8.8 kg / t | 100% |