Test Charts / Gute Fahrt

2020 Gute Fahrt SUV Summer 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: 215/50 R18
Tyres tested: 8
Disciplines: 9

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 Sport Contact 5	35.03 m	Best
2Nokian WetProof	35.17 m	+0.14 m
3Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	35.56 m	+0.53 m
4Falken FK510 SUV	35.66 m	+0.63 m
5Pirelli CINTURATO P7	37.67 m	+2.64 m
6Yokohama BluEarth RV02	37.78 m	+2.75 m
7Vredestein Ultrac Satin	37.94 m	+2.91 m
8Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	38.12 m	+3.09 m

The difference between best and worst was 8.8% (3.09 m ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths).

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Sport Contact 5	3 Points	Best
1Falken FK510 SUV	3 Points	Best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	3 Points	Best
4Pirelli CINTURATO P7	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Vredestein Ultrac Satin	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Nokian WetProof	2 Points	-1.00 Points
7Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	1 Points	-2.00 Points
7Yokohama BluEarth RV02	1 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 66.7% (2 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	38.72 m	Best
2Falken FK510 SUV	38.84 m	+0.12 m
3Continental Sport Contact 5	38.98 m	+0.26 m
4Nokian WetProof	39.27 m	+0.55 m
5Vredestein Ultrac Satin	39.64 m	+0.92 m
6Pirelli CINTURATO P7	39.99 m	+1.27 m
7Yokohama BluEarth RV02	40.6 m	+1.88 m
8Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	41.55 m	+2.83 m

The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (2.83 m ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths).

Subj. Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Sport Contact 5	3 Points	Best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	3 Points	Best
3Pirelli CINTURATO P7	2 Points	-1.00 Points
3Falken FK510 SUV	2 Points	-1.00 Points
3Nokian WetProof	2 Points	-1.00 Points
6Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	1 Points	-2.00 Points
6Vredestein Ultrac Satin	1 Points	-2.00 Points
6Yokohama BluEarth RV02	1 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 66.7% (2 Points).

Wet Circle
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Falken FK510 SUV	8.09 m/s	Best
2Vredestein Ultrac Satin	7.94 m/s	-0.15 m/s
3Continental Sport Contact 5	7.88 m/s	-0.21 m/s
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	7.77 m/s	-0.32 m/s
5Nokian WetProof	7.73 m/s	-0.36 m/s
6Yokohama BluEarth RV02	7.55 m/s	-0.54 m/s
7Pirelli CINTURATO P7	7.47 m/s	-0.62 m/s
8Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	7.29 m/s	-0.80 m/s

The difference between best and worst was 9.9% (0.8 m/s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli CINTURATO P7	78.4 km/h	Best
2Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	77.7 km/h	-0.70 km/h
3Continental Sport Contact 5	77.2 km/h	-1.20 km/h
4Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	77.1 km/h	-1.30 km/h
4Vredestein Ultrac Satin	77.1 km/h	-1.30 km/h
6Falken FK510 SUV	77 km/h	-1.40 km/h
7Nokian WetProof	76.1 km/h	-2.30 km/h
8Yokohama BluEarth RV02	73.9 km/h	-4.50 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 5.7% (4.5 Km/H).

Comfort

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli CINTURATO P7	3 Points	Best
1Vredestein Ultrac Satin	3 Points	Best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	3 Points	Best
4Continental Sport Contact 5	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Falken FK510 SUV	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Yokohama BluEarth RV02	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Nokian WetProof	2 Points	-1.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 33.3% (1 Points).

Subj. Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Vredestein Ultrac Satin	3 Points	Best
1Falken FK510 SUV	3 Points	Best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	3 Points	Best
4Pirelli CINTURATO P7	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Continental Sport Contact 5	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Yokohama BluEarth RV02	2 Points	-1.00 Points
4Nokian WetProof	2 Points	-1.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 33.3% (1 Points).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Nokian WetProof	0.97 kg/t	Best	£0
2Pirelli CINTURATO P7	1 kg/t	+0.03 kg/t	£14
3Continental Sport Contact 5	1.01 kg/t	+0.04 kg/t	£18
4Vredestein Ultrac Satin	1.03 kg/t	+0.06 kg/t	£27
5Yokohama BluEarth RV02	1.05 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t	£36
6Falken FK510 SUV	1.15 kg/t	+0.18 kg/t	£82
7Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5	1.16 kg/t	+0.19 kg/t	£86
8Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV	1.2 kg/t	+0.23 kg/t	£105

The difference between best and worst was 23.7% (0.23 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV uses about 72 L (£105) more fuel than the Nokian WetProof.

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