Continental AllSeasonContact 2 vs Viking Fourtech Plus
The data points to a clear pattern: Continental repeatedly delivers shorter stopping distances on dry and wet roads, stronger winter capability, and better longevity, while Viking counters with superior straight-line and curved aquaplaning resistance and sharper dry-handling feel in one test. If you drive often in heavy rain with standing water or prioritize upfront price and fuel use, the Viking has hooks-otherwise the Continental looks like the safer, longer-lasting bet.
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 four tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Continental AllSeasonContact 2 | four |
While it might look like the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is better than the Viking Fourtech Plus 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
- Class-leading dry and wet braking (3-10% shorter across tests)
- Stronger winter capability (snow traction/handling and ice braking edges)
- Lower noise and better wear/mileage (+7-19%)
- Balanced wet handling and grip with low rolling resistance
- Excellent aquaplaning resistance (straight and curved leads)
- Competitive dry handling feel in one test
- Good environmental/efficiency scores (very low fuel in one test)
- Stronger value proposition (lower purchase cost metrics)
Dry Braking
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during four dry braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 6.67% less distance than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Dry Braking: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Viking Fourtech Plus was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Viking Fourtech Plus was 0.84% faster around a lap than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Viking Fourtech Plus
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from four tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during four wet braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 5.76% less distance than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
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 3.27% less distance than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
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 one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 4.25% faster around a wet lap than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 5.79% faster around a wet circle than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Wet Circle: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Viking Fourtech Plus was better during two straight aqua tests. On average the Viking Fourtech Plus floated at a 3.76% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: Viking Fourtech Plus
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Viking Fourtech Plus was better during two curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Viking Fourtech Plus slipped out at a 11.78% higher speed than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Viking Fourtech Plus
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Snow Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one snow braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle in 0.59% less distance than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Snow Braking: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Snow Braking winner was calculated >>
Snow Traction
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two snow traction tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 had 1.13% better snow traction than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Snow Traction: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Snow Traction winner was calculated >>
Snow Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one snow handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 6.86% faster around a lap than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Snow Handling [Km/H]: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Snow Handling winner was calculated >>
Snow Slalom
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one snow slalom tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was 11.54% faster through a slalom than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Snow Slalom: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Snow Slalom winner was calculated >>
Ice Braking
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one ice braking tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 stopped the vehicle 0.64% shorter than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Ice Braking: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Ice Braking winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two noise tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 measured 0.76% quieter than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Noise: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during two wear tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 is predicted to cover 11.62% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Wear: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Viking Fourtech Plus was better during two value tests. On average the Viking Fourtech Plus proved to have a 22.24% better value based on price/1000km than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Value: Viking Fourtech Plus
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 had a 3.46% lower rolling resistance than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Viking Fourtech Plus was better during one fuel consumption tests. On average the Viking Fourtech Plus used 2.09% less fuel than the Continental AllSeasonContact 2.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Viking Fourtech Plus
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 emitted 2.9% less particle wear matter than the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Best In Abrasion: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Tyre Reviews also collects real world driver reviews for the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 and Viking Fourtech Plus.
In total the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 has been reviewed 45 times and drivers have given the tyre 83% overall.
The Viking Fourtech Plus has been reviewed 1 times and drivers have given the tyre 85% overall.
This means in real world driving, people prefer the Viking Fourtech Plus.
Conclusion
The Viking FourTech Plus brings real strengths: best-in-pair aquaplaning reserves (straight +3-4 km/h; curved +12-14%) that inspire confidence in deep water, a nimble dry-handling result in one test, lower abrasion/fuel in a 2024 panel, and better headline value. For commuters frequently facing heavy rain and standing water, or budget-led buyers in milder climates with infrequent snow, it's a sensible pick. For most drivers seeking the safest, most consistent year-round grip and longer service life, the Continental is the clear choice.
Key Differences
- Braking safety: Continental consistently stops shorter on dry and wet (e.g., 41.5 m vs 43.8 m dry; 44.9 m vs 49.7 m wet).
- Wet handling/grip: Continental quicker on wet lap and circle; Viking trends to under/oversteer at the limit.
- Aquaplaning: Viking leads in straight and curved aquaplaning (+3-14%), aiding stability in standing water.
- Winter performance: Continental better in snow traction/handling and marginally on ice braking.
- Longevity and noise: Continental shows higher projected mileage (+7-19%) and slightly lower noise.
- Efficiency/value: Viking posts lower fuel in one test and better price/value indices; Continental has lower rolling resistance once.
Overall Winner: Continental AllSeasonContact 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Continental AllSeasonContact 2 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.