Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 vs Michelin Primacy 5
Across the two shared 2026 group tests (autozurnal in 215/55 R18 and ADAC in 225/50 R17), the Goodyear is the more consistently high finisher (3rd/10 and 3rd/16), while the Michelin lands a step back overall (4th/10 and 7th/16). The data shows a clear pattern: Goodyear tends to win on all-round dynamics and lab/real-world efficiency, while Michelin's biggest measurable edge is straight-line aquaplaning resistance-plus a narrow fuel-consumption win in ADAC.
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 two tests which compare both tyres directly!
| Tyre | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 | two |
While it might look like the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 is better than the Michelin Primacy 5 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
- More consistent overall test performance (3rd/10 autozurnal; 3rd/16 ADAC) with broad competence across dry and wet disciplines
- Stronger day-to-day dynamics in the shared data (e.g., autozurnal subjective dry handling 7.438 vs 6.688; wet circle 11.59 s vs 12.1 s)
- Efficiency standout in autozurnal: much lower rolling resistance (0.536 vs 0.677 kg/t) and lower energy use (12.86 vs 13.78 kWh/100 km)
- Slightly longer predicted wear life in ADAC (57,800 km vs 56,000 km) while keeping wet braking advantage (31.3 m vs 32.7 m)
- Best repeatable advantage is straight-line aquaplaning (wins both tests: 77.8 vs 72.9 km/h; 76.5 vs 75.7 km/h)
- Strong aquaplaning competence overall, including a big win in autozurnal curved aquaplaning (3.21 vs 2.77 m/s²)
- Competitive braking performance even when overall handling is criticized (e.g., autozurnal wet braking 47.8 vs 48.7 m)
- Environmental/consumption upside in ADAC via marginally lower fuel use (5.4 vs 5.5 l/100 km) and lower abrasion (54 vs 62 mg/km/t)
Dry Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one dry braking tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 stopped the vehicle in 1.61% less distance than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Dry Braking: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one subj. dry handling tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 scored 10.08% more points than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one wet braking tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 stopped the vehicle in 0.62% less distance than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Wet Braking: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 stopped the vehicle in 1.8% less distance than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one wet handling [s] tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was 1.03% faster around a wet lap than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was 4.21% faster around a wet circle than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Wet Circle: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Michelin Primacy 5 was better during two straight aqua tests. On average the Michelin Primacy 5 floated at a 3.69% higher speed than the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2.
Best In Straight Aqua: Michelin Primacy 5
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from two tyre tests, the Michelin Primacy 5 was better during one curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Michelin Primacy 5 slipped out at a 5.21% higher speed than the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Michelin Primacy 5
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 and Michelin Primacy 5 performed equally well in subj. comfort tests.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Both tyres performed equally well
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one noise tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 measured 0.69% quieter than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Noise: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one wear tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 is predicted to cover 3.11% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Wear: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one rolling resistance tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 had a 20.59% lower rolling resistance than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Energy Consumption
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 was better during one energy consumption tests. On average the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 used 6.68% less energy than the Michelin Primacy 5.
Best In Energy Consumption: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
See how the Energy Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tyre tests, the Michelin Primacy 5 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Michelin Primacy 5 emitted 12.9% less particle wear matter than the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2.
Best In Abrasion: Michelin Primacy 5
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 Driver Reviews
Drivers generally describe the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 as a highly capable premium touring tyre, praised most for exceptional tread life, strong all-round grip (especially wet-road security for many), and a noticeably quieter, more comfortable ride than many OEM or budget alternatives. Fuel economy/rolling resistance is also frequently reported as very good, helping offset the higher purchase price through longevity. A recurring minority complaint is a soft sidewall feel that can make steering response seem vague or less sporty, and some users report weaker wet braking/traction (often in cooler or very wet conditions) compared with sportier rivals.
Based on 115 reviews with an average rating of 86%
Michelin Primacy 5 Driver Reviews
Across 31 reviews, the Michelin Primacy 5 is most often described as a very quiet, premium-feeling touring tyre with standout ride comfort and strong wet-weather confidence, including impressive aquaplaning resistance. Many drivers also report low rolling resistance/fuel-economy benefits and early signs of good wear. The most consistent downside is a softer, more isolated steering feel with less sharp response for sporty driving; a small minority also report vibrations or unexpectedly weak grip on their specific vehicles/conditions (sometimes early in the tyre's life).
Based on 32 reviews with an average rating of 86%
Conclusion
The Primacy 5's strongest, most repeatable advantage is hydroplaning at higher water depths/speeds: it wins straight aquaplaning in both tests (77.8 vs 72.9 km/h in autozurnal; 76.5 vs 75.7 km/h in ADAC) and also leads curved aquaplaning in autozurnal (3.21 vs 2.77 m/s²). However, the same reports flag handling/steering shortcomings (ADAC notes imprecise steering and thermal sensitivity), which helps explain why its overall placements trail despite decent braking. Practical takeaway: pick Michelin when your priority is motorway wet-weather security in standing water; pick Goodyear when you want the better all-rounder with stronger efficiency and more convincing overall test results.
Key Differences
- Overall ranking consistency: Goodyear finishes 3rd in both shared tests, while Michelin drops to 7th in ADAC-suggesting Goodyear's balance translates better across test formats and sizes.
- Aquaplaning profile: Michelin is clearly stronger in straight aquaplaning (wins 2/2, including a sizeable +6.72% in autozurnal), while other wet metrics more often favor Goodyear (wet circle and wet handling in autozurnal; curved aquaplaning win for Goodyear in ADAC).
- Wet braking is split by test: Michelin edges autozurnal (47.8 m vs 48.7 m), but Goodyear is better in ADAC (31.3 m vs 32.7 m, plus concrete braking 38.1 m vs 38.8 m).
- Dry-road feel/handling: Goodyear leads subjective dry handling in autozurnal by a meaningful margin (7.438 vs 6.688), while ADAC explicitly flags Primacy 5 steering imprecision/thermal sensitivity.
- Efficiency depends on metric: autozurnal strongly favors Goodyear (rolling resistance and EV-style energy consumption), but ADAC's fuel-consumption figure slightly favors Michelin (5.4 vs 5.5 l/100 km).
- Wear/environment trade: ADAC predicts slightly longer mileage for Goodyear (57,800 vs 56,000 km), but Michelin shows lower abrasion (54 vs 62 mg/km/t), implying less particulate wear despite similar projected life.
Overall Winner: Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
Based on the tyre test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 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.
Discussion
- No comments yet — be the first.