Following on from yesterdays 50 tyre shootout, Auto Bild have tested the top 15 tyres more thoroughly, putting them through the usual mix of wet, dry, wear and NVH tests in 225/50 R17 on a BMW 320i Touring.
The Premiums
This test had a slightly strange mix of tyres on show from the premium manufacturers. Michelin, Pirelli, Goodyear and Dunlop provided their premium touring tyres, whereas Continental and Dunlop provided their ultra high performance summer tyres.
With the test weighted towards wet performance and price per mile, Michelin got the balance spot on with the Michelin Primacy 3 thanks to its excellent all round performance combined with exceptionally low wear. Pirelli scored a strong second with their updated P7 Cinturato, the Eco Impact, and Continental rounded out the top three with the Sport Contact 5 having another strong all round performance.
Surprisingly, Goodyear were beaten to fourth position by Fulda, who are owned by Goodyear and considered a sub brand, thanks to the SportControls excellent value for money, while the sister tyre from Dunlop had to settle for 13th place thanks to very high wear - it scored strongly in all other tests.
Bridgestone finished the test second to last, again thanks to high wear, which is unusual for a Bridgestone tyre.
The Rest
As mentioned Fulda had a very strong showing to finish fourth - while it only scored joint highest in the comfort test, an all round strong performance coupled with a low price earned its excellent finish. Sava, another Goodyear Dunlop brand finished in sixth, showing there are some very promising mid range brands out there if you're not overly interested in dynamic qualities, which this test largely ignored.
A couple of new brands took seventh and ninth place, sandwiching the established Kumho in eighth. Nexen and Hankook finished the tenth and twelfth, leaving this round of the Korean battle won by Kumho.
The Results
Michelin Primacy 3
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 8 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 7 |
| Rolling Resistance | 7 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 10 |
Total: 46
Pirelli Cinturato P 7 Ecoimpact
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 7 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 6 |
| Noise | 6 |
| Wear | 9 |
Total: 41
Continental Sport Contact 5
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 9 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 5 |
| Rolling Resistance | 7 |
| Noise | 5 |
| Wear | 7 |
Total: 40
Fulda SportControl
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 7 |
| Wet | 6 |
| Comfort | 7 |
| Rolling Resistance | 4 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 9 |
Total: 40
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 8 |
| Wet | 6 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 10 |
| Noise | 5 |
| Wear | 7 |
Total: 42
Sava intensa uhp
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 6 |
| Wet | 6 |
| Comfort | 5 |
| Rolling Resistance | 3 |
| Noise | 6 |
| Wear | 8 |
Total: 34
Atlas Sport Green
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 6 |
| Wet | 5 |
| Comfort | 3 |
| Rolling Resistance | 7 |
| Noise | 9 |
| Wear | 6 |
Total: 36
Kumho Ecsta KU39
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 6 |
| Wet | 5 |
| Comfort | 4 |
| Rolling Resistance | 6 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 4 |
Total: 32
Point S Summerstar Sport 2
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 6 |
| Wet | 5 |
| Comfort | 5 |
| Rolling Resistance | 5 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 5 |
Total: 33
Nexen N Fera SU1
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 5 |
| Wet | 5 |
| Comfort | 5 |
| Rolling Resistance | 7 |
| Noise | 9 |
| Wear | 4 |
Total: 35
General Altimax UHP
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 3 |
| Wet | 5 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 6 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 4 |
Total: 31
Hankook Ventus Prime2
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 8 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 6 |
| Noise | 8 |
| Wear | 2 |
Total: 37
Dunlop SportMaxx RT
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 9 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 7 |
| Noise | 6 |
| Wear | 2 |
Total: 37
Bridgestone Turanza T001
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 7 |
| Wet | 7 |
| Comfort | 6 |
| Rolling Resistance | 6 |
| Noise | 7 |
| Wear | 2 |
Total: 35
Apollo Aspire 4G
225/50 R17
All discipline results (6)
| Test | Result |
|---|---|
| Dry | 7 |
| Wet | 6 |
| Comfort | 7 |
| Rolling Resistance | 2 |
| Noise | 5 |
| Wear | 7 |
Total: 34
Can you expalin each category you give scores?
i wonder why in any of this test there is not Bridgestone Potenza RE002
Bridgestone will have chosen to submit the T001 instead of the RE002!
In 2013 European Summer Sports Tyre Test Dunlop SportMaxx RT was also at the top in wear and now only 2 of 10? Does that mean that they last 4 times less than Michelin?
I'm afraid we don't know if there is a direct correlation between the score and the number of miles the tyre will last, only that the lower the number the less miles they'll last.
And where is the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 2..??
Very very good tires
Goodyear and Dunlop would have chosen what tyres to submit, and would have only been allowed 1 tyre per brand, so split it across the EfficientGrip Performance and Sport Maxx RT
Where is the Dunlop Blue Response
Michelin Primacy 3
14th: 2012 Autobild 50 Tyre Braking Test (225/45 R17)
1st: 2014 Auto Bild Top 15 Summer Tyre Test (225/50 R17)
Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
How is that possible????
Tyres get updated through their life with improved compounds and technologies. It's extremely unlikely the tyre tested in 2014 is the same tyre they tested in 2012.
The new label scores has pushed through a lot of new updated to existing patterns in the past 2 years.
Thanks for reply.
Again, I can not believe that the tyre can hold up great in the rain and have a little wear. Rain tires are generally softer, and wear out relatively faster compared with stiffer tyres.
Anyhow, somebody will buy this tyres... and we will have some feedback.... soon....
Plenty of feedback here :)
http://www.tyrereviews.co.u...
Michelin are well known for having an excellent wear / wet performance. Their tyres often cost a little more than other premium brands, but the price/performance per mile works out well due to the increased mileage.
...wear / wet perfomace...
...price/performance per mile... Arguments are in place.
I'll see what will ADAC say...
Thanks.
If the tires have been updated at some point most of those user reviews are probably still based on the older version of the tire.
Not that it matters to me anyway, I already ordered the SportMaxx RTs before I saw this article - although considering how fast they are said to wear, I might be shopping for new tires again soon. Shame there aren't many performance-oriented tires available in my size (225/55 R16).
That sounds like a great excuse for some new, larger alloys ;)
It does, doesn't it? On the other hand I've avoided moving to larger wheels as the roads around here are not particularly smooth. I guess everything is a compromise in one way or another when it comes to finding the right wheels and tires :)
"Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
How is that possible????"
There are several ways that it is possible. The most obvious is that the two tests evaluate different things and in different ways.
Firstly, they seem to give strong emphasis on cost per mile. Most tests, when they consider costs, consider purchase price only and don't give it very much emphasis. You can decide for yourself whether costs are important to you, but, if you decdide that costs are important, it seems to me that this test has the approach correct (and, by implication, the ones that take the simple purchase price approach, don't).
The other very obvious thing is that one test is a braking test. In a braking test, you measure braking, and nothing else. this obviously does not give a balanced or complete view of a tyre's performance, but the reason that Auto Bild did that test was to act as a 'prefilter' on the proper testing, presumably on the grounds that anything that was really bad in braking wasn't worth subhecting to the full gamut of tests, because, in the light of its braking test results, it wasn't going to trouble the podium places.
Given the amount of work involved in doing tyre testing properly, you have to understand their approach, but that's not the same as saying that you should take the results of a braking test as being the final word on the subject.
(And, the braking test doesn't even seem to take cost into account, never mind whether it takes the 'correct' cost per mile approach, or not.)
Also, the Primacy 3s are scoring top for wear, yet in the customer reviews on this site they get absolutely slated for very low endurance - as low as 6k miles for some reviewers. I don't trust this test at all.
Remember the tests are testing them comparatively to other tyres, whereas the reviews are an isolated experience.
As a rule, Michelin and Bridgestone often last longer than competitors, so the claims in this test are believable to us.