Test Charts / Auto Bild Allrad

2018 All Road 265/60 R18 4x4 Tyre Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tyre, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 265/60 R18
Tyres tested: 8
Disciplines: 11

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tyres can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tyres does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	37.7 m	Best
2Hankook Ventus ST	39.8 m	+2.10 m
3Pirelli Scorpion Verde	40 m	+2.30 m
3Kumho Crugen HP91	40 m	+2.30 m
5Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	40.1 m	+2.40 m
6Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	40.3 m	+2.60 m
7Apollo Apterra HT2	43.1 m	+5.40 m
8Goodride SU 318 HT	43.5 m	+5.80 m

The difference between best and worst was 15.4% (5.8 m ≈ 1.3 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	116.3 km/h	Best
2Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	115.6 km/h	-0.70 km/h
3Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	114.2 km/h	-2.10 km/h
4Pirelli Scorpion Verde	113.9 km/h	-2.40 km/h
5Hankook Ventus ST	113.7 km/h	-2.60 km/h
6Kumho Crugen HP91	113.1 km/h	-3.20 km/h
7Goodride SU 318 HT	112.9 km/h	-3.40 km/h
8Apollo Apterra HT2	112.6 km/h	-3.70 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 3.2% (3.7 Km/H).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Scorpion Verde	52.2 m	Best
2Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	52.6 m	+0.40 m
3Hankook Ventus ST	52.9 m	+0.70 m
4Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	54.9 m	+2.70 m
5Kumho Crugen HP91	55.1 m	+2.90 m
6Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	58.4 m	+6.20 m
7Apollo Apterra HT2	63.3 m	+11.10 m
8Goodride SU 318 HT	72.3 m	+20.10 m

The difference between best and worst was 38.5% (20.1 m ≈ 4.5 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	80.3 km/h	Best
2Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	79.9 km/h	-0.40 km/h
3Hankook Ventus ST	78.6 km/h	-1.70 km/h
4Kumho Crugen HP91	77 km/h	-3.30 km/h
5Pirelli Scorpion Verde	75.6 km/h	-4.70 km/h
6Apollo Apterra HT2	75.4 km/h	-4.90 km/h
7Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	75.3 km/h	-5.00 km/h
8Goodride SU 318 HT	69.1 km/h	-11.20 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 13.9% (11.2 Km/H).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Apollo Apterra HT2	95 km/h	Best
2Hankook Ventus ST	93 km/h	-2.00 km/h
3Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	91.9 km/h	-3.10 km/h
3Kumho Crugen HP91	91.9 km/h	-3.10 km/h
5Pirelli Scorpion Verde	91.1 km/h	-3.90 km/h
6Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	90.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
6Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	90.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
8Goodride SU 318 HT	88.8 km/h	-6.20 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 6.5% (6.2 Km/H).

Off road

Gravel Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Scorpion Verde	65.5 km/h	Best
1Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	65.5 km/h	Best
3Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	64.9 km/h	-0.60 km/h
4Hankook Ventus ST	64.6 km/h	-0.90 km/h
5Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	64.5 km/h	-1.00 km/h
6Apollo Apterra HT2	64 km/h	-1.50 km/h
7Kumho Crugen HP91	63.7 km/h	-1.80 km/h
7Goodride SU 318 HT	63.7 km/h	-1.80 km/h

All the tyres in the Gravel Handling test finished less than 3% apart.

Gravel Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Hankook Ventus ST	4170 N	Best
2Pirelli Scorpion Verde	4080 N	-90.00 N
3Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	4010 N	-160.00 N
4Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	3990 N	-180.00 N
4Goodride SU 318 HT	3990 N	-180.00 N
6Kumho Crugen HP91	3920 N	-250.00 N
7Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	3870 N	-300.00 N
8Apollo Apterra HT2	3730 N	-440.00 N

The difference between best and worst was 10.6% (440 N).

Grass Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Hankook Ventus ST	3640 N	Best
2Goodride SU 318 HT	3430 N	-210.00 N
3Apollo Apterra HT2	3350 N	-290.00 N
4Kumho Crugen HP91	3310 N	-330.00 N
5Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	3250 N	-390.00 N
6Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	3240 N	-400.00 N
6Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	3240 N	-400.00 N
8Pirelli Scorpion Verde	3150 N	-490.00 N

The difference between best and worst was 13.5% (490 N).

Mud Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Kumho Crugen HP91	1930 N	Best
2Hankook Ventus ST	1780 N	-150.00 N
3Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	1740 N	-190.00 N
3Apollo Apterra HT2	1740 N	-190.00 N
5Goodride SU 318 HT	1720 N	-210.00 N
6Pirelli Scorpion Verde	1690 N	-240.00 N
7Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	1580 N	-350.00 N
8Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	1570 N	-360.00 N

The difference between best and worst was 18.7% (360 N).

Comfort

Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Goodride SU 318 HT	66.4 dB	Best
2Pirelli Scorpion Verde	66.7 dB	+0.30 dB
3Kumho Crugen HP91	67.4 dB	+1.00 dB
4Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	67.9 dB	+1.50 dB
5Hankook Ventus ST	68.2 dB	+1.80 dB
6Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	68.6 dB	+2.20 dB
7Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	68.9 dB	+2.50 dB
8Apollo Apterra HT2	70.7 dB	+4.30 dB

The difference between best and worst was 6.5% (4.3 dB).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV	7.48 kg/t	Best	£0
2Continental ContiSportContact 5 SUV	7.6 kg/t	+0.12 kg/t	£7
3Pirelli Scorpion Verde	7.65 kg/t	+0.17 kg/t	£10
4Goodride SU 318 HT	7.97 kg/t	+0.49 kg/t	£29
5Kumho Crugen HP91	8.4 kg/t	+0.92 kg/t	£54
5Apollo Apterra HT2	8.4 kg/t	+0.92 kg/t	£54
7Goodyear EfficientGrip SUV	8.59 kg/t	+1.11 kg/t	£65
8Hankook Ventus ST	9.2 kg/t	+1.72 kg/t	£101

The difference between best and worst was 23% (1.72 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Hankook Ventus ST uses about 70 L (£101) more fuel than the Toyo Proxes T1 Sport SUV.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tyre selection above.

Petrol/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

19,000 km

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

£1.45/L

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Tyre shortlist →Read the test →

More tyre tests