Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 100 → 0 km/h
Wet Braking: 80 → 0 km/h

For 2021, the testing experts at ViBilagare have tested eight of the latest 225/45 R17 tyres, with a surprising result!

The Maxxis Premitra HP5 aced the tyre test to finish in first spot overall, ahead of the new Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 in second place and Continental PremiumContact 6 in third. This is a really impressive result for the Maxxis brand, especially when you consider price was NOT taken into account for the final results!

The only caveat worth remembering is wear was not tested in this test. In previous tests where wear results were included, the second placed Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 had a significant advantage over other tyres on test, and the Maxxis didn't score too well..

You can find our summary of the data below, but for the full details be sure to head over to the ViBilagare website.

Dry

Dry braking was a close group overall, and was lead by the Continental PremiumContact 6 which stop the car 0.4 meters ahead of the new Landsail Sentury Qirin 990!

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental Premium Contact 6	33.7 m	Best	0 km/h
2Landsail Qirin 990	34.1 m	+0.40 m	14 km/h
3Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	34.2 m	+0.50 m	16 km/h
4Michelin Primacy 4	34.7 m	+1.00 m	22 km/h
5Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	34.8 m	+1.10 m	23 km/h
6Maxxis Premitra HP5	34.9 m	+1.20 m	24 km/h
7Nokian Hakka Blue 2	35.3 m	+1.60 m	28 km/h
8Hifly HF805	36 m	+2.30 m	33 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 6.8% (2.3 m ≈ 0.5 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Hifly HF805 would still be travelling at 33 km/h when the Continental Premium Contact 6 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

The test winning Maxxis Premitra HP5 was the fastest tyre across a dry handling lap, edging out Goodyear and Continental in second place.

Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Maxxis Premitra HP5	99.9 s	Best
2Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	100.3 s	+0.40 s
2Continental Premium Contact 6	100.3 s	+0.40 s
4Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	100.5 s	+0.60 s
5Michelin Primacy 4	100.7 s	+0.80 s
6Nokian Hakka Blue 2	100.8 s	+0.90 s
7Landsail Qirin 990	101.4 s	+1.50 s
8Hifly HF805	102.3 s	+2.40 s

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

Wet

Continental also won the wet braking testing, but this time by nearly a full meter over the second placed Nokian Hakka Blue 2, which is a similar tyre to the Central European Nokian WetProof.

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental Premium Contact 6	31.6 m	Best	0 km/h
2Nokian Hakka Blue 2	32.5 m	+0.90 m	22 km/h
3Michelin Primacy 4	33.8 m	+2.20 m	33 km/h
4Maxxis Premitra HP5	34.3 m	+2.70 m	36 km/h
5Landsail Qirin 990	34.5 m	+2.90 m	38 km/h
6Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	34.6 m	+3.00 m	38 km/h
7Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	35 m	+3.40 m	41 km/h
8Hifly HF805	37.1 m	+5.50 m	50 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 17.4% (5.5 m ≈ 1.2 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Hifly HF805 would still be travelling at 50 km/h when the Continental Premium Contact 6 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Continental was also the fastest tyre around the wet handling lap, with the budget Hifly again performing poorly.

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Premium Contact 6	69.9 s	Best
2Nokian Hakka Blue 2	70.1 s	+0.20 s
3Maxxis Premitra HP5	70.2 s	+0.30 s
4Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	70.4 s	+0.50 s
5Michelin Primacy 4	70.9 s	+1.00 s
6Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	71.3 s	+1.40 s
7Landsail Qirin 990	71.9 s	+2.00 s
8Hifly HF805	73.2 s	+3.30 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.7% (3.3 s).

Nokian and Maxxis led the way in the aquaplaning testing by a large margin!

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakka Blue 2	86 km/h	Best
2Maxxis Premitra HP5	85.6 km/h	-0.40 km/h
3Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	83.4 km/h	-2.60 km/h
4Continental Premium Contact 6	83 km/h	-3.00 km/h
5Michelin Primacy 4	82.6 km/h	-3.40 km/h
6Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	81.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
7Hifly HF805	80.5 km/h	-5.50 km/h
8Landsail Qirin 990	79.4 km/h	-6.60 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 7.7% (6.6 Km/H).

Environment

ViBilagare are one of the few publications to rate comfort and noise subjectively, which is a really interesting metric.

In the subjective comfort testing, the Nokian and Pirelli had a small advantage over the group of tyres, rounding out bumps and road imperfections better than the rivals.

Subj. Comfort
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Hakka Blue 2	4 Points	Best
1Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	4 Points	Best
3Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	3 Points	-1.00 Points
3Michelin Primacy 4	3 Points	-1.00 Points
3Landsail Qirin 990	3 Points	-1.00 Points
6Hifly HF805	2 Points	-2.00 Points
6Maxxis Premitra HP5	2 Points	-2.00 Points
6Continental Premium Contact 6	2 Points	-2.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 50% (2 Points).

Subjective noise testing showed the Goodyear had an advantage over the group, especially on rough surfaces.

Subj. Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	5 Points	Best
2Nokian Hakka Blue 2	4 Points	-1.00 Points
2Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	4 Points	-1.00 Points
2Landsail Qirin 990	4 Points	-1.00 Points
5Maxxis Premitra HP5	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Continental Premium Contact 6	3 Points	-2.00 Points
5Michelin Primacy 4	3 Points	-2.00 Points
8Hifly HF805	2 Points	-3.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 60% (3 Points).

The price (in Euros) chart highlights the huge difference between the cheapest and most expensive tyres on test.

And finally, it will be no surprise to regular tyre tests viewers to see the Michelin Primacy 4 and Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 leading the way in the rolling resistance testing.

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin Primacy 4	5.37 l/100km	Best	£0
2Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	5.44 l/100km	+0.07 l/100km	£19
3Continental Premium Contact 6	5.49 l/100km	+0.12 l/100km	£33
4Maxxis Premitra HP5	5.51 l/100km	+0.14 l/100km	£39
5Landsail Qirin 990	5.55 l/100km	+0.18 l/100km	£50
6Hifly HF805	5.6 l/100km	+0.23 l/100km	£63
7Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	5.63 l/100km	+0.26 l/100km	£72
8Nokian Hakka Blue 2	5.71 l/100km	+0.34 l/100km	£94

The difference between best and worst was 6.3% (0.34 l/100km). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Nokian Hakka Blue 2 uses about 65 L (£94) more fuel than the Michelin Primacy 4.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

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.

Results

Dry98.3%

Wet97.4%

Comfort55%

Fuel Consumption97.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	34.9 m	+1.20 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	99.9 s	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	34.3 m	+2.70 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 8	70.2 s	+0.30 s
Wet CircleLower is better	3^rd / 8	14.67 s	+0.06 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 8	85.6 km/h	-0.40 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 8	2 Points	-2.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	4^th / 8	5.51 l/100km	+0.14 l/100km

EU Label: C/A/70
Origin: China
UTQG: 340
Weight: 8.9 kgs
Tread: 7.3 mm
Price: 75.53

Dry98.2%

Wet96.6%

Comfort87.5%

Fuel Consumption98.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	34.8 m	+1.10 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	100.3 s	+0.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 8	34.6 m	+3.00 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	70.4 s	+0.50 s
Wet CircleLower is better	1^st / 8	14.61 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 8	81.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	3 Points	-1.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	1^st / 8	5 Points	Best in this discipline
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	2^nd / 8	5.44 l/100km	+0.07 l/100km

EU Label: B/A/70
Origin: Poland
UTQG: 360
Weight: 9 kgs
Tread: 8.1 mm
Price: 123.07

Dry99.8%

Wet99.3%

Comfort55%

Fuel Consumption97.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	33.7 m	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	100.3 s	+0.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 8	31.6 m	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 8	69.9 s	Best in this discipline
Wet CircleLower is better	4^th / 8	14.72 s	+0.11 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 8	83 km/h	-3.00 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 8	2 Points	-2.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 8	5.49 l/100km	+0.12 l/100km

EU Label: C/A/72
Origin: France
UTQG: 280
Weight: 9.5 kgs
Tread: 7.5 mm
Price: 146.94

Dry97.3%

Wet99.1%

Comfort90%

Fuel Consumption94.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	35.3 m	+1.60 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	100.8 s	+0.90 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	32.5 m	+0.90 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 8	70.1 s	+0.20 s
Wet CircleLower is better	2^nd / 8	14.64 s	+0.03 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 8	86 km/h	Best in this discipline
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 8	4 Points	Best in this discipline
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	2^nd / 8	4 Points	-1.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	8^th / 8	5.71 l/100km	+0.34 l/100km

EU Label: C/A/72
Origin: Russia
UTQG: 300
Weight: 10.4 kgs
Tread: 7.8 mm
Price: 140.55

Dry98.2%

Wet96.5%

Comfort67.5%

Fuel Consumption100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 8	34.7 m	+1.00 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	100.7 s	+0.80 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	33.8 m	+2.20 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 8	70.9 s	+1.00 s
Wet CircleLower is better	6^th / 8	14.95 s	+0.34 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 8	82.6 km/h	-3.40 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	3 Points	-1.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	5^th / 8	3 Points	-2.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 8	5.37 l/100km	Best in this discipline

EU Label: B/A/68
Origin: Italy
UTQG: 340
Weight: 9.1 kgs
Tread: 6.3 mm
Price: 142.81

Dry99%

Wet95.8%

Comfort90%

Fuel Consumption95.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 8	34.2 m	+0.50 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 8	100.5 s	+0.60 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 8	35 m	+3.40 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	6^th / 8	71.3 s	+1.40 s
Wet CircleLower is better	5^th / 8	14.85 s	+0.24 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 8	83.4 km/h	-2.60 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	1^st / 8	4 Points	Best in this discipline
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	2^nd / 8	4 Points	-1.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	7^th / 8	5.63 l/100km	+0.26 l/100km

EU Label: C/A/69
Origin: Russia
UTQG: 320
Weight: 9.4 kgs
Tread: 6.9 mm
Price: 122.78

Dry98.7%

Wet95.1%

Comfort77.5%

Fuel Consumption96.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 8	34.1 m	+0.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	101.4 s	+1.50 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 8	34.5 m	+2.90 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 8	71.9 s	+2.00 s
Wet CircleLower is better	6^th / 8	14.95 s	+0.34 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 8	79.4 km/h	-6.60 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	3^rd / 8	3 Points	-1.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	2^nd / 8	4 Points	-1.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	5^th / 8	5.55 l/100km	+0.18 l/100km

EU Label: B/A/66
Origin: China
UTQG: 520
Weight: 9.5 kgs
Tread: 7.1 mm
Price: 65.42

Dry95.6%

Wet92.3%

Comfort45%

Fuel Consumption95.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tyres in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	36 m	+2.30 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	102.3 s	+2.40 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 8	37.1 m	+5.50 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	8^th / 8	73.2 s	+3.30 s
Wet CircleLower is better	8^th / 8	15.28 s	+0.67 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 8	80.5 km/h	-5.50 km/h
Subj. ComfortHigher is better	6^th / 8	2 Points	-2.00 Points
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	8^th / 8	2 Points	-3.00 Points
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	6^th / 8	5.6 l/100km	+0.23 l/100km

EU Label: E/E/72
Origin: China
UTQG: 280
Weight: 10.1 kgs
Tread: 7.4 mm
Price: 65.32

Discussion

8 comments

Niclas Feb 9, 2022 archived

It is not suprizing at all, vi bilägare is an appalling newspaper and they not their readers can drive.. true story.

#7805
Mark Nov 8, 2021 archived

Isn't this yet another test where the overall ranking doesn't bear much resemblance to the individual results. Maxxis have clearly done a very fine job but unless you are really stressed about curved aqua then the Conti is surely the better tyre - best wet and dry braking (3.9m in total better than Maxxis actoss the two), best wet handling and 2nd best dry handling, identical comfort and noise to Maxxis and only very marginally worse fuel consumption and wet circle. Yes Maxxis looks a very fine tyre for the price but it's not the best unless you do some pretty heavy weightings for price and curved aqua.

#7521
Tom Apr 1, 2021 archived

Quite interesting indeed. Again we see that in different sizes the order on the list might change a bit for the same models, but still the good tyres perform similarly well, so even in a different size one shouldn't expect drastically worse performance. As for Maxxis... Wow! I noticed they're doing quite well in recent tests, you also said they're good value for the money etc. But here, without the price aspect taken into the final grade. That's unexpected :) Did the Swedish team buy the normal, retail tyres or were they provided with the tyres by some manufacturer-linked party? ;)

#6681
1. TyreReviews Tom Apr 1, 2021 archived
  
  I'm confident the performance of the Maxxis is real, but as mentioned, wear wasn't tested which is the usual trade maxxis seem to make.
  
  #6682
  1. Florin Bogdan TyreReviews Apr 14, 2021 archived
    
    What's more important : a tyre that lasts "forever" or one that keeps you safe on the road? Adding the price into account if the money are an issue a tyre like Maxxis will do the job and won't break the bank. I am focussed on safety and if it lasts three summer seasons it's fine. For the next three I get to have new tyres to keep me safe.
    
    #6729
    1. TyreReviews Florin Bogdan Apr 14, 2021 archived
      
      In an ideal world you would have both :)
      
      #6730
      1. Florin Bogdan TyreReviews Apr 14, 2021 archived
        
        If this world world would be ideal we would have nothing to put our minds to work for the best solutions, all would be easy, all our conversation and information exchange would not exist and maybe this world of our days is ideal in this regards.
        
        #6731
2. Rama Tom May 14, 2021 archived
  
  As has been noted, wear wasn’t tested. The difference between the top is small, I rather have a tyre that combines good grip with good wear. Also note that they were tested under ideal conditions.
  Aftonbladet/Test World did a recent test under different temperatures. They noted that some - especially inexpensive chinese tyres, including Maxxis - looses their grip even in milder/cold spring temperatures even if they have good grip in hotter summer temperatures.
  
  #6862

Menu

Tyre shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry

Wet

Environment

Results

Cross-check this test