BFGoodrich Advantage All Season vs Continental AllSeasonContact 2
Expect clear contrasts: BFGoodrich posts repeatedly shorter dry braking distances and strong aquaplaning margins, plus competitive snow performance and low abrasion. Continental counters with class-leading wet grip, higher mileage, lower rolling resistance, and stronger overall scores-including all six overall test wins-signaling a more rounded, premium execution.

Test Results
Independent comparison tyre tests are the best source of data to get tyre information from, and the good news is there have been six tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Continental AllSeasonContact 2 | six |
While it might look like the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is better than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season purely based on the higher number of test wins, tyres are very complicated objects which means where one tyre is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tyres compare across multiple tyre test categories.
Key Strengths
- Consistently shorter dry braking across all shared tests
- Strong straight and curved aquaplaning resistance
- Low abrasion and favorable fuel use in several tests
- Competitive snow braking and traction with stable winter manners
- Class-leading wet braking and wet handling performance
- High mileage and strong value over life despite higher purchase price
- Balanced all-round performance with good winter capability
- Low rolling resistance and refined noise characteristics
Dry Braking
Looking at data from six tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during six dry braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season stopped the vehicle in 2.96% less distance than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Dry Braking: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during two dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was 1.25% faster around a lap than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from six tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during six wet braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 8.05% less distance than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Wet Braking: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 8.79% less distance than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 4.87% faster around a wet lap than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two wet circle tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 3.95% faster around a wet circle than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Wet Circle: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during three straight aqua tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season floated at a 4.48% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during three curved aquaplaning tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season slipped out at a 5.67% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during two snow braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season stopped the vehicle in 1.37% less distance than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Braking: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during two snow traction tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season had 0.89% better snow traction than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Traction: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 0.8% faster around a lap than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during one snow slalom tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was 1.64% faster through a slalom than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Snow Slalom: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during one ice braking tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season stopped the vehicle 1.92% shorter than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Ice Braking: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two noise tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 measured 0.37% quieter than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Noise: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Tyre Weight
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during one tyre weight tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season weighed 5.11% less than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Tyre Weight: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Tyre Weight winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two wear tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is predicted to cover 15.92% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Wear: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two value tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 proved to have a 10.91% better value based on price/1000km than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Value: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two rolling resistance tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 had a 1.3% lower rolling resistance than the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from three tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during two fuel consumption tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season used 1.12% less fuel than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Fuel Consumption: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season was better during one abrasion tests. On average the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season emitted 10.45% less particle wear matter than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Abrasion: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Tyre Reviews also collects real world driver reviews for the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season and Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
In total the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season has been reviewed 0 times and drivers have given the tyre 0% overall.
The Continental AllSeasonContact 2 has been reviewed 45 times and drivers have given the tyre 83% overall.
This means in real world driving, people prefer the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
View all BFGoodrich Advantage All Season driver reviews >>
Conclusion
The BFGoodrich Advantage All Season makes a strong case on value and specific metrics: consistently shorter dry braking, top-tier straight and curved aquaplaning resistance, competitive snow braking/traction, and notably low abrasion with solid fuel use. If your priority is dry-road stopping, aquaplaning security, and long tread life per euro, BFGoodrich delivers excellent practicality-just accept its moderate wet-grip limitations. The takeaway: choose Continental for all-weather balance and wet-road confidence; pick BFGoodrich if you want dry bite, aquaplaning headroom, and lower ownership cost.
Key Differences
- Overall results: Continental wins all 6 shared tests; BFGoodrich has none
- Dry braking: BFGoodrich shorter by ~2.7-3.7% in multiple tests
- Wet braking: Continental shorter by ~4-12% and consistently superior
- Aquaplaning: BFGoodrich holds higher straight/curved aquaplaning margins
- Mileage: Continental projects notably longer life (e.g., +15-46% in ADAC/Auto Bild)
- Operating costs: Continental lower rolling resistance; BFGoodrich lower abrasion and often better purchase price/value index
Overall Winner: BFGoodrich Advantage All Season
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the BFGoodrich Advantage All Season has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tyre has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tyre buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tyre comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tyres:
Footnote
This page has been developed using tyre industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tyres in the same test.
Why is this important? Tyre testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tyre test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tyre tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tyre Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tyre comparison, Tyre Reviews doesn't.