Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- TR Score
- 9.4/10
- Owners say
- 85% · 179
- TR Score
- 9.0/10
- Owners say
- 83% · 7
In the 6 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S finished ahead 4 times and the Ultrac Pro twice. The Pilot Sport 4 S stopped 3.4% shorter in the dry; the Ultrac Pro held 6.7% more grip in curved aquaplaning.
Data updated
Which should you buy?
Choose the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S if you prioritise maximum dry grip, sharper steering feel, and strong braking performance for spirited driving/occasional track use. Choose the Vredestein Ultrac Pro if you want a quieter, more comfortable fast-road tyre with stronger aquaplaning confidence and a generally better price-to-performance balance-especially for high-mileage daily driving in variable summer rain.
Where the Pilot Sport 4 S is stronger
- Consistently stronger dry performance: wins dry braking and dry handling in 5/6 shared results, with multiple 3-7% braking advantages (e.g., 33.0 m vs 35.2 m in Autobild 2025)
- More precise, sporty steering/feedback profile in professional notes; often described as exceptionally balanced and controllable at the limit
- Competitive wet capability overall: splits wet braking and wet handling 3-3 across the dataset and can be class-leading in some tests (e.g., EVO 2024 wet braking 31.4 m vs 32.3 m)
Where the Ultrac Pro is stronger
- Better aquaplaning safety reserves: wins straight aquaplaning in 4 comparisons and curved aquaplaning in 3 where measured (including a large +16% curved advantage in one test)
- Refinement advantage: repeatedly quieter (wins noise 4 times; as low as 70.5-70.9 dB vs Michelin typically higher) with better comfort scores where reported
- Strong wet performance consistency in several tests, including wins in wet braking and wet handling in key datasets (e.g., Autobild 2026 wet handling 73.3 vs 71.2 km/h and wet circle 13.3 vs 14.3 s)
The bullet points are analysis of the shared tests and of owner reviews; the measured wins in each discipline are in the tables below. Where the two disagree, the figures are right.
Pilot Sport 4 S vs Ultrac Pro at a glance
| Category | Pilot Sport 4 S | Gap | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Shared tests won6 shared tests | 4 | 2 | |
| Dry16 measurements | 13 | The Pilot Sport 4 S stopped 3.4% shorter in the dry (6 tests) | 3 |
| Wet26 measurements | 11 | The Ultrac Pro held 6.7% more grip in curved aquaplaning (3 tests) | 15 |
| Comfort7 measurements | 1 | The Ultrac Pro was 1.3 dB quieter (4 tests) | 6 |
| Value5 measurements | 4 | The Pilot Sport 4 S had 3.1% lower rolling resistance (5 tests) | 1 |
| Tyre Reviews Scoreevery test and review we hold | 9.4/10 | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 0.4 | 9.0/10 |
| Owner rating179 and 7 reviews | 85% | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 2 points | 83% |
| Would buy againshare of owners | 80% | The Pilot Sport 4 S by 9 points | 71% |
| Pricein the 3 tests that listed prices | +30.7% | The Pilot Sport 4 S was dearer in 3 of 3 | Cheaper |
| Sizes madeEU label registrations | 105 | 59 sizes made in both | 98 |
Wins count every measurement the shared tests recorded for both tyres; a tick marks the tyre ahead on that line. Subjective driver scores count as wins but are never averaged, because each test uses its own scale.
Head to head in 6 tests, 2024 to 2026
Each row is one published test in which both tyres ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | Pilot Sport 4 S | Field | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Autobild Sports Cars Summer Tyre Test | P5 of 8 | P3 of 8 | |
| 2025 Tire Rack UUHP Summer Tyre Test | P5 of 10 | P4 of 10 | |
| 2025 Autobild Sports Cars UUHP Tyre Test | P2 of 7 | P6 of 7 | |
| 2025 Sports Cars Tyre Test | P4 of 8 | P5 of 8 | |
| 2024 EVO Summer Tyre Test | P2 of 7 | P5 of 7 | |
| 2024 Sports Car Tyre Test | P2 of 7 | P3 of 7 |
Performance profile
14 measurements from the 6 shared tests, each tyre shown as its share of the better figure in every test.
Where each is furthest ahead
Pilot Sport 4 S
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 36 m stop against 34.2 m is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 95%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow. 4 measurements recorded in only one shared test are left off; every measurement is in the table further down.
Where each scores higher
Pilot Sport 4 S
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
Pilot Sport 4 S
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tyres' figures.
Owners rate the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 179 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Averages of the figures both tyres posted in the same tests. The gap is the average of each test's own gap, so figures from different cars and years are never mixed. Open a discipline for its measurements, and a measurement for every test's figure.
| Measurement | Pilot Sport 4 S | Gap | Ultrac Pro | Wins | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 34.82 | 3.4% | 36.02 | 5-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 64.92 | 1.2% | 65.26 | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 107.8 | 1.6% | 106.1 | 4-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 8.5% | scored | 2-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1 | 4.2% | 0.96 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 7.1% | scored | 0-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 44.55 | 1.2% | 45.1 | 3-3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 50.18 | 1.5% | 50.82 | 2-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 75.98 | 0.5% | 76.3 | 1-3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | = | scored | 1-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 0.85 | 2.4% | 0.83 | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 12.14 | 1.3% | 11.93 | 2-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 86.12 | 2% | 87.95 | 1-4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 23.59 | 6.7% | 23.87 | 0-3 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 11.9% | scored | 0-2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| scored | 2.1% | scored | 1-0 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 73.1 | 1.3 dB | 71.85 | 0-4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 8.26 | 3.1% | 8.54 | 4-1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tyres shared. "Scored" rows are subjective driver ratings: each test uses its own scale, so only the wins are counted.
Scores beyond the shared tests
On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Pilot Sport 4 S scores 9.4 and the Ultrac Pro 9 out of 10.
| Pilot Sport 4 S | Category | Ultrac Pro | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 97 | Dry | 86 | ||
| 89 | Wet | 82 | ||
| 44 | Comfort | 80 | ||
| 32 | Value | 27 | ||
Category scores are percentiles among tyres of the same season and class: 90 means this tyre out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
What owners say
| Pilot Sport 4 S | Category | Ultrac Pro | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9.2 | Dry Grip | 9.1 | ||
| 8.7 | Wet Grip | 8.9 | ||
| 8.4 | Road Feedback | 8.3 | ||
| 8.6 | Handling | 9 | ||
| 8 | Wear | 6 | ||
| 8.4 | Comfort | 8.1 | ||
Owners rate the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 179 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. Reviews are vetted by hand before publication; ownership is not verified.
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- 85%from 179 reviews
- 80%would buy again
- 2,104,714 milesdriven by reviewers
Owners broadly agree the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S delivers standout dry and wet grip, with over half mentioning strong dry traction and nearly half praising its wet confidence. Comfort is also a common plus for a max-performance tyre, though noise is more mixed, with a noticeable minority finding it loud. Longevity gets a more divided reception: many report solid tread life, but around one in eight complain about faster wear or uneven wear, and a smaller group say performance drops off as it wears. A further recurring criticism is a soft sidewall feel, with around one in ten owners reporting less support or precision than expected.
- Excellent dry grip and traction
- Very strong wet grip and confidence in the rain
- Comfortable ride for a performance tyre
- Stable, confidence-inspiring dry handling
- Noticeable road noise at certain speeds or on coarse surfaces
- Soft sidewalls can feel less supportive or precise
- Tread life can be shorter than expected for some drivers
Summarised by AI from 154 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 179 Pilot Sport 4 S reviewsThe wet and dry grip has been exceptional with low road noise and moderate harshness. Handling precision and responsiveness have been good, not exceptional. The tires have held inflation pressure very well with minimal leakage. This is my second set and unless Michelin comes out with a better max performance summer tire, I'll buy them again.
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- 83%from 7 reviews
- 71%would buy again
- 34,100 milesdriven by reviewers
Drivers largely praise the Vredestein Ultrac Pro for strong dry and wet grip, confident handling, and notably good ride comfort, with several noting premium feel and value. High-scoring reviews highlight short braking distances, stability, and decent wear for aggressive or heavy vehicles. A minority report concerns include poor performance in very cold (sub-5°C) conditions and one case of premature wear/delamination. Overall, the Ultrac Pro delivers balanced performance with comfort-focused tuning and attractive design.
- dry grip
- wet grip
- handling/steering feel
- ride comfort
- reduced grip in very cold temperatures
Summarised by AI from 6 vetted reviews; the reviews themselves are on the tyre page.
All 7 Ultrac Pro reviewsI've had them for two summers and about 10k kms on a Ford Focus ST250. When I was buying them I was looking for good tires at a fair price and these were the newest model available at the time.
Dry: In the dry they have good traction, predictable handlings and good comfort for a UHP tire. Breakaway is communicated well and they don't surprise you out of nowhere. Lift of oversteer is easily achieved and controlled. They do wheelspin a bit in first gear if you are a bit more enthusiastic with the throttle but that's expected on a more powerful fwd car.
Wet: They have good and predictable grip in the wet, good aquaplaning resistance and stop quite well.
Others: Rim guard is somewhere in the middle, not as big as Bridgestone but better than Hankook. Sidewall design is good, comfort and noise are good for a uhp tire. Wear has also been good for me, I expect to change them due to age and not wear but then again I don't do that many miles a year.
It's a tire I like and would recommend. Price to performance is good. Would consider buying. I got their Wintrac Pro Plus to try this winter so I've been satisfied with Vredesteins as a whole.
Sizes, EU label and lineage
From the EU label registrations for each tyre: 105 sizes of the Pilot Sport 4 S and 98 of the Ultrac Pro, 59 of them made in both.
| Category | Pilot Sport 4 S | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Season | Summer | Summer |
| Sizes made | 105 sizes, 17 to 22 inch | 98 sizes, 18 to 24 inch |
| Made in both | 59 sizes 205/40 R18215/35 R18215/40 R18225/40 R18225/45 R18235/40 R18245/35 R18245/40 R18245/45 R18255/40 R18225/35 R19225/40 R19and 47 more | |
| EU label wet grip | A84%B11%C2%D2% | A97%B3% |
| EU label rolling resistance | C55%D45% | C73%D18%B6%A3% |
| EU label noise | 70-75 dB B100% | 69-73 dB B97%A3% |
| On the market since | 2016 | 2024 |
| Replaced | Michelin Pilot Super Sport (2010) | Vredestein Ultrac Vorti+ (2020) |
| Replaced by | Michelin Pilot Sport S 5 | - |
| Awards | Winner: Best Tyres for High Performance Cars (DriverReviews, 2026/27) Winner: Best Tyres for High Performance Cars (DriverReviews, 2024/25) | - |
| Price in the shared tests | The Pilot Sport 4 S was the dearer tyre in 3 of the 3 tests that listed prices, by 30.7% on average. Each test priced the tyres in its own market at the time; only the gap is comparable. | |
Label grades are shown as the share of registered sizes carrying each grade, so "B (88%), C (12%)" means most sizes are B. Grades vary by size; check the label for yours.
Reading the results
Written from the test results and owner reviews above. It is analysis, not a measurement: where it and the tables disagree, the tables are right.
This is a classic “established benchmark vs. new-value challenger” matchup in the max-performance summer category. The Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S has long been a reference point for steering precision and all-round grip, while the newer Vredestein Ultrac Pro has been positioning itself as a refined, road-friendly UUHP option that can still deliver credible track-style performance.
Across six shared professional tests in multiple sizes (235-295 section widths, 19-20 inch fitments), the pattern is consistent: Michelin tends to own the core sporty metrics (dry braking and dry handling), while Vredestein repeatedly trades back with stronger aquaplaning safety reserves, lower noise and better comfort, and often a sharper price-to-performance story. The interesting part is that in several tests the lap-time gaps are small-but the “how” (balance, breakaway, and wet confidence) can feel very different depending on your priorities.
Conclusion
On outright sporty performance, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S still looks like the safer pick if your priority is crisp steering, strong dry pace, and short stopping distances. It wins dry braking and dry handling in 5 of the 6 shared datasets, with notable examples like 33.0 m vs 35.2 m dry braking and 104.3 vs 100.8 km/h dry handling (Autobild Sports Cars 2025, 295/30 R20). Even when it doesn't top every wet metric, it tends to remain highly capable and is repeatedly described as precise and well-balanced-though some reports note it can feel edgy at the limit and, in one test, below-average wet braking/handling for that particular field.
The Vredestein Ultrac Pro makes its strongest case as the more liveable, confidence-in-standing-water alternative that doesn't give up too much performance for normal fast-road use. It wins straight aquaplaning in 4 of the shared comparisons and also takes curved aquaplaning where measured (e.g., +16.2% in curved aquaplaning in the 245/35 R19 test). Add its recurring advantages in noise and comfort (often ~1-2 dB quieter; plus higher comfort scores), and it becomes the smarter daily-driver performance tyre-especially when pricing is meaningfully lower (e.g., ~€740-€760 per set vs ~€1020 cited in Autobild 2026).
Practical takeaway: if you'll actually use the tyre's dry grip (spirited mountain runs, high-performance cars driven hard, occasional track days), the Michelin's braking/handling edge is the difference you feel most. If you drive fast in real weather, value refinement, and want extra aquaplaning margin with strong comfort and lower cabin noise, the Vredestein is the more well-rounded road choice and typically the better buy.
Pilot Sport 4 S vs Ultrac Pro: your questions
Is the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S or the Vredestein Ultrac Pro the better tyre?
In the 6 independent tests that ran both tyres, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S finished ahead 4 times and the Ultrac Pro twice. On the Tyre Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Pilot Sport 4 S scores 9.4 and the Ultrac Pro 9 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Pilot Sport 4 S or the Ultrac Pro?
The Ultrac Pro led 15 of the 26 wet measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it held 6.7% more grip in curved aquaplaning across 3 tests.
Which is better in the dry?
The Pilot Sport 4 S led 13 of the 16 dry measurements the shared tests recorded. On average it stopped 3.4% shorter in the dry across 6 tests.
Which lasts longer and costs less to run?
The Pilot Sport 4 S had 3.1% lower rolling resistance (5 tests). Owners rate wear 8/10 for the Pilot Sport 4 S and 6/10 for the Ultrac Pro.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
The Ultrac Pro was 1.3 dB quieter (4 tests). Owners rate comfort 8.4/10 for the Pilot Sport 4 S and 8.1/10 for the Ultrac Pro.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Pilot Sport 4 S 85% from 179 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. 80% of Pilot Sport 4 S owners would buy it again, against 71% for the Ultrac Pro.
Which is more expensive?
In the 3 tests that listed prices, the Pilot Sport 4 S was the dearer tyre in 3 of them, by 30.7% on average. Prices are the test's own at the time, in its own market.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Pilot Sport 4 S is made in 105 sizes (17 to 22 inch) and the Ultrac Pro in 98 (18 to 24 inch). 59 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Pilot Sport 4 S is graded A for wet grip and C for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Ultrac Pro A and C.
Which is the newer tyre?
The Ultrac Pro is the newer design: it reached the market in 2024, the Pilot Sport 4 S in 2016. The Pilot Sport 4 S replaced the Michelin Pilot Super Sport. The Ultrac Pro replaced the Vredestein Ultrac Vorti+.
More comparisons with these tyres
vs
Continental SportContact 7 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
9-2 in 12 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Pirelli P Zero PZ4
8-1 in 9 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Potenza Sport vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
2-8 in 10 shared tests
vs 
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Pirelli P Zero PZ5
2-2 in 4 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
3-0 in 4 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
2-11 in 13 shared tests
vs
Kumho Ecsta Sport S PS72 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
1-1 in 3 shared tests
vs
Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
1-1 in 2 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tyre wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tyres ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tyre Reviews Score rates each tyre out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tyres can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tyre Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tyres independently since 2007.
Discussion