Test source ADAC

2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test

Overall test winnerGoodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2

It's the 50th anniversary of the ADAC tyre test, and to celebrate the German automotive body have tested fifty summer tyres in the popular 205/55 R16 tyre size, and have included wear testing for every tyre!There's a lot to unpack in this…

Data analyzed and reviewed byJonathan Benson

February 26, 2023 21 min read Updated January 8, 2025

Tyre shortlist Read the test

205/55 R16 / 2023 View full image

Tyres tested: 50
Tested size: 205/55 R16
Disciplines: 11

At a glance

Tyre shortlist

50 Tyres tested

Published finishing positions, with the strengths and considerations from this test. Owner reviews cover other sizes and driving conditions.

Tyre shortlist

Compare selected tyres

2023 ADAC Summer Tyre Test · 205/55 R16

Tyre	Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	Continental Premium Contact 6	Michelin Primacy 4+	Bridgestone Turanza T005	Nokian WetProof	Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	Continental UltraContact	Kumho Ecsta HS52	Hankook Ventus Prime 4	Nexen N Fera Primus	Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	Kleber Dynaxer HP4	Fulda EcoControl HP2	Toyo Proxes Comfort	Debica Presto HP 2	Dunlop Sport BluResponse	Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	Sava Intensa HP2	Semperit Speed Life 3	Firestone RoadHawk	BFGoodrich Advantage	GT Radial FE2	ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	Barum Bravuris 5HM	Viking Protech Newgen	Norauto Prevensys 4	Apollo Alnac 4g	General Altimax One S	Giti GitiSynergyH2	Petlas Imperium PT515	Uniroyal RainSport 5	Hifly HF201	Cooper Zeon CS8	Westlake Z 107	Minerva Radial 209	King Meiler Sport 1 KM	Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	Michelin e.Primacy	Laufenn S Fit EQ+	Delinte DH2	Zeetex ZT1000	Avon ZV7	Radar RPX800	Rotalla RH01 E Pace	Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	Lassa DriveWays	Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	Riken Road Performance	Double Coin DC99	Premiorri Solazo
Position	1^st	2^nd	3^rd	4^th	5^th	6^th	7^th	8^th	9^th	10^th	11^th	12^th	13^th	14^th	15^th	16^th	17^th	18^th	19^th	20^th	21^st	22^nd	23^rd	24^th	25^th	26^th	27^th	28^th	29^th	30^th	31^st	32^nd	33^rd	34^th	35^th	36^th	37^th	38^th	39^th	40^th	41^st	42^nd	43^rd	44^th	45^th	46^th	47^th	48^th	49^th	50^th
Category scores (% of best)
Dry	95.2%	100%	97.3%	96.3%	95%	96%	96.8%	97.8%	98.1%	94%	90.9%	96.3%	94.5%	95%	91.1%	95%	97%	94%	90.4%	94.2%	96.5%	91.1%	90.9%	87.6%	89.1%	92.1%	91.4%	89.3%	91.1%	91.4%	91.8%	90.2%	93%	91.8%	88%	90.7%	92.5%	97.8%	95.5%	90.9%	90%	91.1%	88.6%	89.5%	88%	89.3%	86.7%	90.2%	84.5%	83.7%
Wet	93.4%	96.3%	93.4%	90.9%	94.4%	94%	87.4%	90.7%	93.8%	92.5%	89.1%	89.1%	87.7%	88.1%	87.2%	88.2%	89.4%	87.9%	95.3%	87.9%	89%	86.4%	94.8%	85.5%	84.3%	92.9%	86.2%	82.5%	83.9%	82.3%	96.7%	81.1%	93.5%	89.7%	80.7%	81.8%	79.9%	78.8%	88.1%	87.5%	87.6%	90%	86.1%	80.5%	72%	80.2%	75.3%	79.1%	63.7%	65.1%
Comfort	96.8%	94.8%	96.4%	96.1%	96.8%	94.1%	96.5%	95%	94.2%	96.5%	95.3%	96.3%	96.9%	97%	96.6%	96.7%	96.2%	96.4%	96.3%	96.2%	94.2%	95%	96.2%	94.8%	96.8%	97%	95.9%	97%	94.4%	92%	96.1%	96.6%	95.2%	95.2%	96.1%	95.3%	97.1%	98.3%	96.5%	97.9%	97%	93.8%	96.6%	96.3%	95.2%	93.5%	95.5%	95.1%	95.8%	92.2%
Value	79.5%	67.5%	77%	62.7%	58.8%	63.2%	75.3%	65.3%	65.7%	58.2%	60.2%	70.8%	68.6%	64.8%	67.7%	59.3%	60.9%	62.3%	62.4%	62.6%	61.8%	61.8%	71.6%	61.1%	63.9%	61.5%	55.5%	68%	63.9%	70.2%	56.2%	66%	55.5%	54.5%	62.1%	63.9%	61.1%	91.5%	52.6%	55.7%	50.4%	48.8%	54.5%	61.2%	64.5%	59.2%	62.3%	62.1%	91.7%	70.4%
Keep researching	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results	Read owner reviews Test Results

Explore the complete results →

The full test

The evidence behind the verdict

There's a lot to unpack in this test, so we'll dive straight in! Headline notes, there are two Michelin tyres in this test, the Michelin Primacy 4+ and the energy saving Michelin e.Primacy, the Continental on test is not the new PremiumContact 7, it's the previous model, the Continental PremiumContact 6, and Continental also have the new Continental UltraContact in the test which is meant to be a lower rolling resistance and higher mileage tyre for those who drive a lot of distance!

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
Wet Braking - Concrete: 80 → 0 km/h

Wear

Wear is a key quality of any tyre - what good is a tyre that has amazing grip if it only lasts a few thousand miles?! Road wear testing is incredibly expensive, and with 50 sets of tyres on test ADAC had to split the tyres between road and machine wearing with control tyres between the two to ensure data correlation.

As usual, Michelin led the wear test, but not with the tyre you'd expect. The Michelin e.Primacy, which starts with lower than average tread depth and is designed for very low fuel use (more on that later) recorded a staggering estimated 71,500kms tread life!

The second best tyre was the impressive Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2 which once again highlights the longevity of modern Goodyear products, and the low wearing Michelin Primacy 4+ was just beaten to third by the budget Doublecoin DC99. This also happens to be the best result for the Doublecoin, keep an eye on it later in the test.

Of the known brand names, it was a disappointing result for Uniroyal, Nokian and Dunlop, all projected to have less than half the miles of the best.

Wear
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin e.Primacy	71,500 KM	Best
2Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	65,700 KM	-5,800 KM
3Double Coin DC99	64,800 KM	-6,700 KM
4Michelin Primacy 4+	61,300 KM	-10,200 KM
5Continental UltraContact	55,900 KM	-15,600 KM
6Continental Premium Contact 6	49,700 KM	-21,800 KM
7Kleber Dynaxer HP4	48,000 KM	-23,500 KM
8Fulda EcoControl HP2	47,500 KM	-24,000 KM
8Petlas Imperium PT515	47,500 KM	-24,000 KM
10ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	45,700 KM	-25,800 KM
10Debica Presto HP 2	45,700 KM	-25,800 KM
12Kumho Ecsta HS52	43,500 KM	-28,000 KM
13Hankook Ventus Prime 4	42,200 KM	-29,300 KM
14Toyo Proxes Comfort	41,700 KM	-29,800 KM
15Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	40,800 KM	-30,700 KM
15General Altimax One S	40,800 KM	-30,700 KM
17Bridgestone Turanza T005	40,400 KM	-31,100 KM
18Semperit Speed Life 3	40,000 KM	-31,500 KM
18Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	40,000 KM	-31,500 KM
18Viking Protech Newgen	40,000 KM	-31,500 KM
21Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	39,500 KM	-32,000 KM
22Hifly HF201	39,100 KM	-32,400 KM
23Giti GitiSynergyH2	38,600 KM	-32,900 KM
23Sava Intensa HP2	38,600 KM	-32,900 KM
25Firestone RoadHawk	38,200 KM	-33,300 KM
26Premiorri Solazo	37,300 KM	-34,200 KM
26BFGoodrich Advantage	37,300 KM	-34,200 KM
28King Meiler Sport 1 KM	36,900 KM	-34,600 KM
28Dunlop Sport BluResponse	36,900 KM	-34,600 KM
30Barum Bravuris 5HM	36,000 KM	-35,500 KM
31Norauto Prevensys 4	35,500 KM	-36,000 KM
31Nokian WetProof	35,500 KM	-36,000 KM
33Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	35,100 KM	-36,400 KM
33GT Radial FE2	35,100 KM	-36,400 KM
35Minerva Radial 209	34,600 KM	-36,900 KM
36Riken Road Performance	33,700 KM	-37,800 KM
36Lassa DriveWays	33,700 KM	-37,800 KM
38Uniroyal RainSport 5	33,300 KM	-38,200 KM
38Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	33,300 KM	-38,200 KM
38Nexen N Fera Primus	33,300 KM	-38,200 KM
41Rotalla RH01 E Pace	32,900 KM	-38,600 KM
42Cooper Zeon CS8	31,500 KM	-40,000 KM
42Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	31,500 KM	-40,000 KM
44Apollo Alnac 4g	29,700 KM	-41,800 KM
45Delinte DH2	27,500 KM	-44,000 KM
46Westlake Z 107	27,100 KM	-44,400 KM
46Radar RPX800	27,100 KM	-44,400 KM
48Laufenn S Fit EQ+	25,300 KM	-46,200 KM
49Avon ZV7	24,000 KM	-47,500 KM
50Zeetex ZT1000	23,100 KM	-48,400 KM

The difference between best and worst was 67.7% (48,400 KM).

The advantage of having the prices of the tyres and estimated mileage, you can get an idea of the value of the tyres, based in Euros Per 1000km to see how much you get for your money.

As the Doublecoin was one of the best wearing AND one of the cheapest, it offered exceptional value, but we still wouldn't recommend fitting it unless you're really into sliding around. Of the good tyres on test, it was again the Goodyear and Michelin offering great cost per mile, but the Kumho Ecsta HS52 was up there in the mix too.

Value
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Double Coin DC99	1.03 Price/1000	Best
2Premiorri Solazo	1.21 Price/1000	+0.18 Price/1000
3ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	1.47 Price/1000	+0.44 Price/1000
4Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	1.56 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000
4Petlas Imperium PT515	1.56 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000
6General Altimax One S	1.57 Price/1000	+0.54 Price/1000
7Hifly HF201	1.64 Price/1000	+0.61 Price/1000
8Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	1.67 Price/1000	+0.64 Price/1000
9Michelin e.Primacy	1.73 Price/1000	+0.70 Price/1000
10Debica Presto HP 2	1.77 Price/1000	+0.74 Price/1000
11Norauto Prevensys 4	1.83 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000
11Kleber Dynaxer HP4	1.83 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000
13Kumho Ecsta HS52	1.89 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000
13Fulda EcoControl HP2	1.89 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000
15Giti GitiSynergyH2	1.94 Price/1000	+0.91 Price/1000
16Michelin Primacy 4+	1.96 Price/1000	+0.93 Price/1000
17GT Radial FE2	1.99 Price/1000	+0.96 Price/1000
18Viking Protech Newgen	2 Price/1000	+0.97 Price/1000
19Toyo Proxes Comfort	2.01 Price/1000	+0.98 Price/1000
20Continental UltraContact	2.02 Price/1000	+0.99 Price/1000
21King Meiler Sport 1 KM	2.03 Price/1000	+1.00 Price/1000
22Hankook Ventus Prime 4	2.11 Price/1000	+1.08 Price/1000
23Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	2.13 Price/1000	+1.10 Price/1000
24Minerva Radial 209	2.14 Price/1000	+1.11 Price/1000
25Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	2.18 Price/1000	+1.15 Price/1000
26Rotalla RH01 E Pace	2.19 Price/1000	+1.16 Price/1000
27Sava Intensa HP2	2.23 Price/1000	+1.20 Price/1000
28Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	2.25 Price/1000	+1.22 Price/1000
29Riken Road Performance	2.26 Price/1000	+1.23 Price/1000
30Semperit Speed Life 3	2.28 Price/1000	+1.25 Price/1000
31Firestone RoadHawk	2.3 Price/1000	+1.27 Price/1000
32Continental Premium Contact 6	2.31 Price/1000	+1.28 Price/1000
33Barum Bravuris 5HM	2.39 Price/1000	+1.36 Price/1000
34Nokian WetProof	2.45 Price/1000	+1.42 Price/1000
35Radar RPX800	2.47 Price/1000	+1.44 Price/1000
36Delinte DH2	2.55 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000
36Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	2.55 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000
38BFGoodrich Advantage	2.57 Price/1000	+1.54 Price/1000
39Nexen N Fera Primus	2.58 Price/1000	+1.55 Price/1000
40Cooper Zeon CS8	2.63 Price/1000	+1.60 Price/1000
41Westlake Z 107	2.69 Price/1000	+1.66 Price/1000
42Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	2.71 Price/1000	+1.68 Price/1000
43Bridgestone Turanza T005	2.75 Price/1000	+1.72 Price/1000
44Uniroyal RainSport 5	2.76 Price/1000	+1.73 Price/1000
45Lassa DriveWays	2.91 Price/1000	+1.88 Price/1000
46Laufenn S Fit EQ+	2.96 Price/1000	+1.93 Price/1000
47Dunlop Sport BluResponse	2.98 Price/1000	+1.95 Price/1000
48Apollo Alnac 4g	3.03 Price/1000	+2.00 Price/1000
49Zeetex ZT1000	3.29 Price/1000	+2.26 Price/1000
50Avon ZV7	3.75 Price/1000	+2.72 Price/1000

The difference between best and worst was 264.1% (2.72 Price/1000).

Wet

Often wear comes at the expense of wet grip, but once again Goodyear and Michelin (with the Primacy 4+ at least) are proving to break that trend. ADAC only published their wet braking data, of which they use two surfaces, asphalt and concrete. This is where the Michelin, Goodyear and Continental stretch their legs, but it was also a good grip result for the Cooper, Hankook and ESA Tecar on both surfaces.

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental Premium Contact 6	34.4 m	Best	0 km/h
2Cooper Zeon CS8	35 m	+0.60 m	17 km/h
3Nokian WetProof	35.8 m	+1.40 m	26 km/h
3Hankook Ventus Prime 4	35.8 m	+1.40 m	26 km/h
5ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	36.3 m	+1.90 m	30 km/h
6Michelin Primacy 4+	36.7 m	+2.30 m	33 km/h
7Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	36.8 m	+2.40 m	33 km/h
7Uniroyal RainSport 5	36.8 m	+2.40 m	33 km/h
9Norauto Prevensys 4	36.9 m	+2.50 m	34 km/h
10Semperit Speed Life 3	37.2 m	+2.80 m	36 km/h
11Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	37.4 m	+3.00 m	37 km/h
12Bridgestone Turanza T005	37.7 m	+3.30 m	38 km/h
13Avon ZV7	38 m	+3.60 m	40 km/h
14Delinte DH2	38.1 m	+3.70 m	41 km/h
15Nexen N Fera Primus	38.2 m	+3.80 m	41 km/h
16Continental UltraContact	38.3 m	+3.90 m	41 km/h
17Kumho Ecsta HS52	38.4 m	+4.00 m	42 km/h
18Zeetex ZT1000	39 m	+4.60 m	45 km/h
19Radar RPX800	39.1 m	+4.70 m	45 km/h
20Laufenn S Fit EQ+	39.5 m	+5.10 m	47 km/h
21BFGoodrich Advantage	39.8 m	+5.40 m	48 km/h
22Kleber Dynaxer HP4	40.2 m	+5.80 m	49 km/h
22Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	40.2 m	+5.80 m	49 km/h
24Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	40.3 m	+5.90 m	50 km/h
25Toyo Proxes Comfort	40.6 m	+6.20 m	51 km/h
26Fulda EcoControl HP2	40.8 m	+6.40 m	51 km/h
27Sava Intensa HP2	40.9 m	+6.50 m	52 km/h
28GT Radial FE2	41.1 m	+6.70 m	52 km/h
29Barum Bravuris 5HM	41.4 m	+7.00 m	53 km/h
29Westlake Z 107	41.4 m	+7.00 m	53 km/h
31Dunlop Sport BluResponse	41.5 m	+7.10 m	54 km/h
32Firestone RoadHawk	41.7 m	+7.30 m	54 km/h
33Debica Presto HP 2	41.8 m	+7.40 m	55 km/h
34Apollo Alnac 4g	42.2 m	+7.80 m	56 km/h
35King Meiler Sport 1 KM	43.1 m	+8.70 m	58 km/h
36Giti GitiSynergyH2	43.5 m	+9.10 m	59 km/h
37Petlas Imperium PT515	43.6 m	+9.20 m	60 km/h
38Michelin e.Primacy	43.7 m	+9.30 m	60 km/h
39General Altimax One S	43.9 m	+9.50 m	60 km/h
40Viking Protech Newgen	44.2 m	+9.80 m	61 km/h
41Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	44.3 m	+9.90 m	61 km/h
42Hifly HF201	44.5 m	+10.10 m	62 km/h
43Minerva Radial 209	45.3 m	+10.90 m	64 km/h
44Rotalla RH01 E Pace	45.9 m	+11.50 m	65 km/h
45Lassa DriveWays	46.4 m	+12.00 m	66 km/h
46Riken Road Performance	48.4 m	+14.00 m	70 km/h
47Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	50.9 m	+16.50 m	74 km/h
48Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	54 m	+19.60 m	78 km/h
49Premiorri Solazo	58.1 m	+23.70 m	83 km/h
50Double Coin DC99	59.3 m	+24.90 m	84 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 72.4% (24.9 m ≈ 5.5 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Double Coin DC99 would still be travelling at 84 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.

Wet Braking - Concrete
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental Premium Contact 6	35.2 m	Best	0 km/h
2Hankook Ventus Prime 4	35.5 m	+0.30 m	12 km/h
3Semperit Speed Life 3	35.7 m	+0.50 m	15 km/h
4Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	35.8 m	+0.60 m	17 km/h
5Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	36 m	+0.80 m	19 km/h
6ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	36.2 m	+1.00 m	22 km/h
7Uniroyal RainSport 5	36.3 m	+1.10 m	23 km/h
8Nokian WetProof	37.3 m	+2.10 m	31 km/h
9Cooper Zeon CS8	37.6 m	+2.40 m	33 km/h
9Kumho Ecsta HS52	37.6 m	+2.40 m	33 km/h
11Michelin Primacy 4+	37.7 m	+2.50 m	33 km/h
12Nexen N Fera Primus	37.9 m	+2.70 m	35 km/h
12Norauto Prevensys 4	37.9 m	+2.70 m	35 km/h
14Delinte DH2	38 m	+2.80 m	35 km/h
15Westlake Z 107	38.4 m	+3.20 m	38 km/h
16Continental UltraContact	38.7 m	+3.50 m	39 km/h
17Toyo Proxes Comfort	38.8 m	+3.60 m	40 km/h
18BFGoodrich Advantage	39 m	+3.80 m	41 km/h
19Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	39.1 m	+3.90 m	41 km/h
19Bridgestone Turanza T005	39.1 m	+3.90 m	41 km/h
21Laufenn S Fit EQ+	39.3 m	+4.10 m	42 km/h
21Zeetex ZT1000	39.3 m	+4.10 m	42 km/h
21Avon ZV7	39.3 m	+4.10 m	42 km/h
24Kleber Dynaxer HP4	39.5 m	+4.30 m	43 km/h
25Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	40.1 m	+4.90 m	45 km/h
26Dunlop Sport BluResponse	40.2 m	+5.00 m	46 km/h
27Radar RPX800	40.5 m	+5.30 m	47 km/h
28Apollo Alnac 4g	40.6 m	+5.40 m	47 km/h
28Firestone RoadHawk	40.6 m	+5.40 m	47 km/h
30Sava Intensa HP2	40.9 m	+5.70 m	49 km/h
31Fulda EcoControl HP2	41.1 m	+5.90 m	49 km/h
32GT Radial FE2	41.3 m	+6.10 m	50 km/h
33Viking Protech Newgen	41.5 m	+6.30 m	51 km/h
34Debica Presto HP 2	41.7 m	+6.50 m	51 km/h
35Barum Bravuris 5HM	41.9 m	+6.70 m	52 km/h
36Hifly HF201	42.9 m	+7.70 m	55 km/h
37Petlas Imperium PT515	43.1 m	+7.90 m	56 km/h
38General Altimax One S	43.3 m	+8.10 m	56 km/h
38Giti GitiSynergyH2	43.3 m	+8.10 m	56 km/h
40King Meiler Sport 1 KM	43.4 m	+8.20 m	57 km/h
41Michelin e.Primacy	43.8 m	+8.60 m	58 km/h
42Lassa DriveWays	44.1 m	+8.90 m	58 km/h
43Rotalla RH01 E Pace	44.2 m	+9.00 m	59 km/h
44Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	44.4 m	+9.20 m	59 km/h
45Minerva Radial 209	44.8 m	+9.60 m	60 km/h
46Riken Road Performance	45.7 m	+10.50 m	62 km/h
47Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	49 m	+13.80 m	69 km/h
48Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	49.7 m	+14.50 m	70 km/h
49Premiorri Solazo	57.1 m	+21.90 m	81 km/h
50Double Coin DC99	58.4 m	+23.20 m	82 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 65.9% (23.2 m ≈ 5.2 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Double Coin DC99 would still be travelling at 82 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.

Straight aquaplaning was led by Uniroyal, with the Doublecoin and Michelin e.Primacy struggling. You can read the result of curved aquaplaning in the results table below.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Uniroyal RainSport 5	86.7 km/h	Best
2Westlake Z 107	84.6 km/h	-2.10 km/h
2Nokian WetProof	84.6 km/h	-2.10 km/h
4Nexen N Fera Primus	84.5 km/h	-2.20 km/h
5Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	84.1 km/h	-2.60 km/h
6Firestone RoadHawk	83.6 km/h	-3.10 km/h
7Michelin Primacy 4+	83.5 km/h	-3.20 km/h
8Bridgestone Turanza T005	82.8 km/h	-3.90 km/h
9Dunlop Sport BluResponse	82.5 km/h	-4.20 km/h
10Giti GitiSynergyH2	82.4 km/h	-4.30 km/h
10Avon ZV7	82.4 km/h	-4.30 km/h
12Debica Presto HP 2	82.1 km/h	-4.60 km/h
13Apollo Alnac 4g	81.9 km/h	-4.80 km/h
13Kumho Ecsta HS52	81.9 km/h	-4.80 km/h
15Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	81.8 km/h	-4.90 km/h
15Semperit Speed Life 3	81.8 km/h	-4.90 km/h
17ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	81.5 km/h	-5.20 km/h
17GT Radial FE2	81.5 km/h	-5.20 km/h
19Sava Intensa HP2	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
19Kleber Dynaxer HP4	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
19BFGoodrich Advantage	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
22Cooper Zeon CS8	80.9 km/h	-5.80 km/h
23Rotalla RH01 E Pace	80.8 km/h	-5.90 km/h
23Fulda EcoControl HP2	80.8 km/h	-5.90 km/h
25Lassa DriveWays	80.7 km/h	-6.00 km/h
26Barum Bravuris 5HM	80.4 km/h	-6.30 km/h
27Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
27Norauto Prevensys 4	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
27Continental Premium Contact 6	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
30Minerva Radial 209	80.1 km/h	-6.60 km/h
31Viking Protech Newgen	80 km/h	-6.70 km/h
32King Meiler Sport 1 KM	79.9 km/h	-6.80 km/h
33Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	79.7 km/h	-7.00 km/h
34Riken Road Performance	79.6 km/h	-7.10 km/h
35Zeetex ZT1000	79.3 km/h	-7.40 km/h
35Petlas Imperium PT515	79.3 km/h	-7.40 km/h
37Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	79.2 km/h	-7.50 km/h
37Hifly HF201	79.2 km/h	-7.50 km/h
39Radar RPX800	79 km/h	-7.70 km/h
40Toyo Proxes Comfort	78.3 km/h	-8.40 km/h
41Laufenn S Fit EQ+	78.1 km/h	-8.60 km/h
41General Altimax One S	78.1 km/h	-8.60 km/h
43Hankook Ventus Prime 4	77.6 km/h	-9.10 km/h
44Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	77.3 km/h	-9.40 km/h
45Delinte DH2	77.2 km/h	-9.50 km/h
46Continental UltraContact	76.5 km/h	-10.20 km/h
47Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	75 km/h	-11.70 km/h
48Michelin e.Primacy	72.8 km/h	-13.90 km/h
49Premiorri Solazo	71.3 km/h	-15.40 km/h
50Double Coin DC99	70.3 km/h	-16.40 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 18.9% (16.4 Km/H).

Dry

Continental once again led the way in dry braking, narrowly beating out the Hankook and Michelin e.Primacy.

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Continental Premium Contact 6	35.9 m	Best	0 km/h
2Hankook Ventus Prime 4	36.6 m	+0.70 m	18 km/h
3Michelin e.Primacy	36.7 m	+0.80 m	19 km/h
3Kumho Ecsta HS52	36.7 m	+0.80 m	19 km/h
5Michelin Primacy 4+	36.9 m	+1.00 m	21 km/h
6Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	37 m	+1.10 m	22 km/h
7Continental UltraContact	37.1 m	+1.20 m	23 km/h
8BFGoodrich Advantage	37.2 m	+1.30 m	24 km/h
9Bridgestone Turanza T005	37.3 m	+1.40 m	25 km/h
9Kleber Dynaxer HP4	37.3 m	+1.40 m	25 km/h
11Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	37.4 m	+1.50 m	26 km/h
12Laufenn S Fit EQ+	37.6 m	+1.70 m	28 km/h
13Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	37.7 m	+1.80 m	28 km/h
14Nokian WetProof	37.8 m	+1.90 m	29 km/h
14Dunlop Sport BluResponse	37.8 m	+1.90 m	29 km/h
14Toyo Proxes Comfort	37.8 m	+1.90 m	29 km/h
17Fulda EcoControl HP2	38 m	+2.10 m	31 km/h
18Firestone RoadHawk	38.1 m	+2.20 m	31 km/h
19Nexen N Fera Primus	38.2 m	+2.30 m	32 km/h
19Sava Intensa HP2	38.2 m	+2.30 m	32 km/h
21Cooper Zeon CS8	38.6 m	+2.70 m	34 km/h
22Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	38.8 m	+2.90 m	36 km/h
23Norauto Prevensys 4	39 m	+3.10 m	37 km/h
24Uniroyal RainSport 5	39.1 m	+3.20 m	37 km/h
24Westlake Z 107	39.1 m	+3.20 m	37 km/h
26Petlas Imperium PT515	39.3 m	+3.40 m	38 km/h
26Apollo Alnac 4g	39.3 m	+3.40 m	38 km/h
28Avon ZV7	39.4 m	+3.50 m	39 km/h
28Debica Presto HP 2	39.4 m	+3.50 m	39 km/h
28Giti GitiSynergyH2	39.4 m	+3.50 m	39 km/h
28GT Radial FE2	39.4 m	+3.50 m	39 km/h
32Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	39.5 m	+3.60 m	39 km/h
32ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	39.5 m	+3.60 m	39 km/h
32Delinte DH2	39.5 m	+3.60 m	39 km/h
35King Meiler Sport 1 KM	39.6 m	+3.70 m	40 km/h
36Semperit Speed Life 3	39.7 m	+3.80 m	40 km/h
37Hifly HF201	39.8 m	+3.90 m	41 km/h
37Riken Road Performance	39.8 m	+3.90 m	41 km/h
39Zeetex ZT1000	39.9 m	+4.00 m	41 km/h
40Rotalla RH01 E Pace	40.1 m	+4.20 m	42 km/h
41General Altimax One S	40.2 m	+4.30 m	43 km/h
41Lassa DriveWays	40.2 m	+4.30 m	43 km/h
43Viking Protech Newgen	40.3 m	+4.40 m	43 km/h
44Radar RPX800	40.5 m	+4.60 m	44 km/h
45Minerva Radial 209	40.8 m	+4.90 m	45 km/h
45Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	40.8 m	+4.90 m	45 km/h
47Barum Bravuris 5HM	41 m	+5.10 m	46 km/h
48Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	41.4 m	+5.50 m	47 km/h
49Double Coin DC99	42.5 m	+6.60 m	51 km/h
50Premiorri Solazo	42.9 m	+7.00 m	53 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 19.5% (7 m ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Premiorri Solazo would still be travelling at 53 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.

Environment

As the environmental impact of all industry is becoming ever more important, the big tyre tests are now measuring "abrasion" which is how much rubber, measured in weight, the tyre loses. While a high mileage tyre should lead in this category, it isn't always a straight correlation as the tyres have different amounts of material in them.

The best in test was the e.Primacy, and ignoring the budget Michelin also did very well with the Primacy 4+, but Continentals new high mileage tyre, the UltraContact, also performed extremely well.

Abrasion
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin e.Primacy	34.8 mg/km/t	Best
2Double Coin DC99	45.9 mg/km/t	+11.10 mg/km/t
3Continental UltraContact	52.5 mg/km/t	+17.70 mg/km/t
4Michelin Primacy 4+	53.7 mg/km/t	+18.90 mg/km/t
5Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	61.3 mg/km/t	+26.50 mg/km/t
6Kleber Dynaxer HP4	63.5 mg/km/t	+28.70 mg/km/t
7Riken Road Performance	67 mg/km/t	+32.20 mg/km/t
8Hankook Ventus Prime 4	67.6 mg/km/t	+32.80 mg/km/t
9Firestone RoadHawk	68.7 mg/km/t	+33.90 mg/km/t
10Continental Premium Contact 6	69.5 mg/km/t	+34.70 mg/km/t
11Fulda EcoControl HP2	70.1 mg/km/t	+35.30 mg/km/t
12BFGoodrich Advantage	71.2 mg/km/t	+36.40 mg/km/t
13Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	72.2 mg/km/t	+37.40 mg/km/t
14Petlas Imperium PT515	72.6 mg/km/t	+37.80 mg/km/t
15Rotalla RH01 E Pace	73.3 mg/km/t	+38.50 mg/km/t
15Bridgestone Turanza T005	73.3 mg/km/t	+38.50 mg/km/t
17Hifly HF201	73.6 mg/km/t	+38.80 mg/km/t
17Minerva Radial 209	73.6 mg/km/t	+38.80 mg/km/t
19Premiorri Solazo	74 mg/km/t	+39.20 mg/km/t
19Debica Presto HP 2	74 mg/km/t	+39.20 mg/km/t
21ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	74.3 mg/km/t	+39.50 mg/km/t
22Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t
22Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t
22General Altimax One S	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t
25Toyo Proxes Comfort	75.9 mg/km/t	+41.10 mg/km/t
26Lassa DriveWays	76.1 mg/km/t	+41.30 mg/km/t
27Viking Protech Newgen	78.2 mg/km/t	+43.40 mg/km/t
28King Meiler Sport 1 KM	78.9 mg/km/t	+44.10 mg/km/t
29Semperit Speed Life 3	79.3 mg/km/t	+44.50 mg/km/t
29Kumho Ecsta HS52	79.3 mg/km/t	+44.50 mg/km/t
31Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	80 mg/km/t	+45.20 mg/km/t
32Dunlop Sport BluResponse	80.2 mg/km/t	+45.40 mg/km/t
33Giti GitiSynergyH2	80.6 mg/km/t	+45.80 mg/km/t
34Sava Intensa HP2	81.4 mg/km/t	+46.60 mg/km/t
35Barum Bravuris 5HM	81.7 mg/km/t	+46.90 mg/km/t
36Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	82.1 mg/km/t	+47.30 mg/km/t
37GT Radial FE2	83.8 mg/km/t	+49.00 mg/km/t
38Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	87 mg/km/t	+52.20 mg/km/t
39Apollo Alnac 4g	87.3 mg/km/t	+52.50 mg/km/t
40Nexen N Fera Primus	88.1 mg/km/t	+53.30 mg/km/t
41Nokian WetProof	90.9 mg/km/t	+56.10 mg/km/t
42Westlake Z 107	92.2 mg/km/t	+57.40 mg/km/t
43Uniroyal RainSport 5	93.2 mg/km/t	+58.40 mg/km/t
44Norauto Prevensys 4	94.3 mg/km/t	+59.50 mg/km/t
45Delinte DH2	96.1 mg/km/t	+61.30 mg/km/t
46Laufenn S Fit EQ+	96.8 mg/km/t	+62.00 mg/km/t
47Cooper Zeon CS8	97.7 mg/km/t	+62.90 mg/km/t
48Radar RPX800	101 mg/km/t	+66.20 mg/km/t
49Zeetex ZT1000	112.6 mg/km/t	+77.80 mg/km/t
50Avon ZV7	126 mg/km/t	+91.20 mg/km/t

The difference between best and worst was 262.1% (91.2 mg/km/t).

Fuel consumption was measured in a real world test rather than a machine rolling resistance test, and, well, there was a disappointingly small range of results. The total spread was 5.5 litres per 100km to 5.9 litres per 100km.

Given the relatively small real world advantage a tyre like the e.Primacy has in this test over a tyre like the Bridgestone Turanza T005, but the large disadvantage it has in wet grip, it makes me wonder if ultra low rolling resistance tyres are really the correct choice for anyone.

Fuel Consumption
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin e.Primacy	5.5 l/100km	Best	£0
1King Meiler Sport 1 KM	5.5 l/100km	Best	£0
3Tomket Sport 3 Series 3	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3Barum Bravuris 5HM	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3Bridgestone Turanza T005	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3Lassa DriveWays	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3ESA Tecar Spirit Pro	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3Delinte DH2	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
3Double Coin DC99	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km	£28
10Giti GitiSynergyH2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Nexen N Fera Primus	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Sava Intensa HP2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10GT Radial FE2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10BFGoodrich Advantage	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Continental UltraContact	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10General Altimax One S	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Berlin Tires Summer UHP 1 G2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Riken Road Performance	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Zeetex ZT1000	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Minerva Radial 209	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Rotalla RH01 E Pace	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Dunlop Sport BluResponse	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Apollo Alnac 4g	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
10Kleber Dynaxer HP4	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km	£55
28Toyo Proxes Comfort	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Norauto Prevensys 4	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Radar RPX800	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Westlake Z 107	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Hankook Ventus Prime 4	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Michelin Primacy 4+	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Premiorri Solazo	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Fulda EcoControl HP2	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Semperit Speed Life 3	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Avon ZV7	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Evergreen DynaComfort EH226	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Continental Premium Contact 6	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Laufenn S Fit EQ+	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Viking Protech Newgen	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
28Nokian WetProof	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km	£83
43Cooper Zeon CS8	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Debica Presto HP 2	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Hifly HF201	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Kumho Ecsta HS52	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Firestone RoadHawk	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Uniroyal RainSport 5	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Petlas Imperium PT515	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110
43Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km	£110

The difference between best and worst was 7.3% (0.4 l/100km). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Cooper Zeon CS8 uses about 76 L (£110) more fuel than the Michelin e.Primacy.

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.

Finally external noise was measured, but for the sake of avoiding another long chart, you can find the data below. The e.Primacy was impressively quiet, and the Petlas impressively loud!

Results

You can find the full results below, with some of the testers notes on key tyres. If you want to see the full test we strongly suggest you learn German and head over to the ADAC website here.

Driving safety: The Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. It offers the driver decent feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and boasts an above-average braking distance on dry roads. On wet roads, the Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 shines in braking distance measurements and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. Only when it comes to aquaplaning behavior does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Goodyear Efficient Grip Performance 2 scores with above-average mileage in the wear test and low abrasion. The efficiency is also impressive thanks to the low tire weight and low fuel consumption. When it comes to noise, the Goodyear performs satisfactorily.

Dry95.2%

Wet93.4%

Comfort96.8%

Value79.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	13^th / 50	37.7 m	+1.80 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	11^th / 50	37.4 m	+3.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	5^th / 50	36 m	+0.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	27^th / 50	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	15^th / 50	70.6 dB	+1.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	2^nd / 50	65700 KM	-5,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	8^th / 50	1.67 Price/1000	+0.64 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	5^th / 50	61.3 mg/km/t	+26.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/A/69
Price: 110.00

Driving safety: The Continental PremiumContact 6 is impressive across the board and secured the top mark in the test for driving safety. It offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and claims the shortest braking distance in the test. This means that its performance on dry roads is clearly rated as good. But the Continental also shines with its performance on wet roads and also secured the top mark in the test here. It delivers the shortest braking distances in the test and is absolutely safe and easy to control over the wet handling course. Only when it comes to aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In terms of the environmental balance, the PremiumContact 6 just missed out on a good rating. In the wear test, it delivers a good predicted mileage and its abrasion is also low, in terms of efficiency it just misses a good rating due to the tyre weight. When it comes to noise, it also performs satisfactorily.

Dry100%

Wet96.3%

Comfort94.8%

Value67.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	35.9 m	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 50	34.4 m	Best in this discipline
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	1^st / 50	35.2 m	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	27^th / 50	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	33^rd / 50	71.4 dB	+2.30 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	36^th / 50	8.9 Kg	+1.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	6^th / 50	49700 KM	-21,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	32^nd / 50	2.31 Price/1000	+1.28 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	10^th / 50	69.5 mg/km/t	+34.70 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 115.00

Driving safety: The Michelin Primacy 4+ secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Michelin already offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road, but still shows itself to be safe in the limit area. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Michelin gets good ratings in terms of braking distance measurements, aquaplaning behavior and handling. This makes it very balanced on wet roads. It offers good grip and safe driving characteristics.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Primacy 4+ secures the second best rating in the test (best: Michelin e.Primacy). Its predicted mileage is classified as very good and its abrasion is also low.

Dry97.3%

Wet93.4%

Comfort96.4%

Value77%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	36.9 m	+1.00 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 50	36.7 m	+2.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	11^th / 50	37.7 m	+2.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 50	83.5 km/h	-3.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	14^th / 50	3.6 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	12^th / 50	70.5 dB	+1.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	26^th / 50	8.6 Kg	+1.00 Kg
WearHigher is better	4^th / 50	61300 KM	-10,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	16^th / 50	1.96 Price/1000	+0.93 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	4^th / 50	53.7 mg/km/t	+18.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/69
Price: 120.00

Driving safety: The Bridgestone Turanza T005 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Bridgestone Turanza T005 offers the driver decent feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, shows itself to be safe at the limit and boasts a short braking distance on dry roads. On wet roads, the Bridgestone excels in braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. Only when aquaplaning transversely does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: The Bridgestone Turanza T005 achieves a good result in the environmental balance. It shines in terms of efficiency thanks to its low weight and fuel consumption, but its predicted mileage is rated as just good.

Dry96.3%

Wet90.9%

Comfort96.1%

Value62.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	9^th / 50	37.3 m	+1.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	12^th / 50	37.7 m	+3.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	19^th / 50	39.1 m	+3.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 50	82.8 km/h	-3.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	44^th / 50	72.3 dB	+3.20 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	3^rd / 50	7.7 Kg	+0.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	17^th / 50	40400 KM	-31,100.00 KM
ValueLower is better	43^rd / 50	2.75 Price/1000	+1.72 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	15^th / 50	73.3 mg/km/t	+38.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/A/71
Price: 111.00

Driving safety: The Nokian Wetproof impresses with its driving characteristics and thus secures a good rating for driving safety. It offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, is absolutely safe at the limit and also impresses with short braking distances on dry roads. Overall, its performance on dry roads is clearly rated as good. But the Nokian also offers good properties on wet roads. It has good ratings for braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and handling. Only in lateral aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Wetproof does not get more than a satisfactory rating. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as only satisfactory in relation to the test field. Thanks to the low tire weight and low fuel consumption, however, it achieves a good rating for efficiency.

Dry95%

Wet94.4%

Comfort96.8%

Value58.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	14^th / 50	37.8 m	+1.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 50	35.8 m	+1.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	8^th / 50	37.3 m	+2.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 50	84.6 km/h	-2.10 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	15^th / 50	70.6 dB	+1.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	31^st / 50	35500 KM	-36,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	34^th / 50	2.45 Price/1000	+1.42 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	41^st / 50	90.9 mg/km/t	+56.10 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/68
Price: 87.00

Driving safety: The Falken ZIEX ZE310 ECORUN sets the bar high on dry roads and also secures a good rating on wet roads, which leads to a good assessment of driving safety. The Falken secured the top mark in the test on dry roads. It offers the driver exemplary feedback on the steering wheel, is absolutely safe at the limit and also impresses with a short braking distance. The Falken ZIEX ZE310 ECORUN also gets a good rating on wet roads. It gets good ratings for braking distance measurements, lateral aquaplaning and wet handling. The test car can be driven safely and easily controlled over the course. Only in lateral aquaplaning does it not get beyond a satisfactory rating.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the ZIEX ZE310 does not get more than a satisfactory result. It does get good ratings for its predicted mileage and abrasion, but since it's quite heavy in comparison, it doesn't get more than a satisfactory rating for efficiency. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Turkey does not go beyond an adequate assessment.

Dry96%

Wet94%

Comfort94.1%

Value63.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	11^th / 50	37.4 m	+1.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 50	36.8 m	+2.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	4^th / 50	35.8 m	+0.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	33^rd / 50	79.7 km/h	-7.00 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	42^nd / 50	71.9 dB	+2.80 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	40^th / 50	9 Kg	+1.40 Kg
WearHigher is better	15^th / 50	40800 KM	-30,700.00 KM
ValueLower is better	25^th / 50	2.18 Price/1000	+1.15 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	22^nd / 50	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/67
Price: 89.00

Driving safety: The Continental UltraContact is rated as just satisfactory when it comes to driving safety. The UltraContact offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road, but is still safe at the limit. Thanks to its short braking distance, it can still secure a good overall rating on dry roads. On wet roads, however, the UltraContact does not get more than a satisfactory rating. Although it scores in the braking distance measurements and also in handling with good grip and safe driving characteristics, it falters when it comes to aquaplaning. In the case of longitudinal aquaplaning, he does not get more than a satisfactory result, and in the case of transverse aquaplaning, even more than an adequate result.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the UltraContact secures one of the best results in the test. His predicted mileage is classified as very good, and he only just misses a very good rating for wear. The tire also scores with its low weight and low fuel consumption.

Dry96.8%

Wet87.4%

Comfort96.5%

Value75.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	37.1 m	+1.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	16^th / 50	38.3 m	+3.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	16^th / 50	38.7 m	+3.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	46^th / 50	76.5 km/h	-10.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	46^th / 50	2.9 m/sec2	-1.10 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	23^rd / 50	71 dB	+1.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	9^th / 50	8.2 Kg	+0.60 Kg
WearHigher is better	5^th / 50	55900 KM	-15,600.00 KM
ValueLower is better	20^th / 50	2.02 Price/1000	+0.99 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	3^rd / 50	52.5 mg/km/t	+17.70 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/A/69
Price: 113.00

Driving safety: The Kumho Ecsta HS52 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The HS52 offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Kumho Ecsta HS52 scores in the braking distance measurements, longitudinal aquaplaning and wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. However, its transverse aquaplaning behavior is only rated as satisfactory. Overall, the Kumho secured a good rating for wet performance.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the Kumho does not get more than a satisfactory result. Although it scores in terms of predicted mileage and abrasion, but offers only satisfactory efficiency due to the higher tire weight. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in China is rated as sufficient.

Dry97.8%

Wet90.7%

Comfort95%

Value65.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	36.7 m	+0.80 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	17^th / 50	38.4 m	+4.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	9^th / 50	37.6 m	+2.40 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	13^th / 50	81.9 km/h	-4.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	23^rd / 50	71 dB	+1.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	41^st / 50	9.1 Kg	+1.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	12^th / 50	43500 KM	-28,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	13^th / 50	1.89 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	29^th / 50	79.3 mg/km/t	+44.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 82.00

Driving safety: The Hankook Ventus Prime4 secured a good overall rating for driving safety. The Ventus Prime 4 offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is classified as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Hankook Ventus Prime 4 scores in braking distance measurements and in wet handling with good grip and safe drivability. However, its aquaplaning behavior is only rated as satisfactory. Overall, the Hankook secured a good rating for wet performance.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Ventus Prime4 gets a good rating for the predicted mileage and for its abrasion. In terms of efficiency, on the other hand, it loses out due to its relatively high weight. All in all, it does not go beyond a satisfactory result in terms of the environmental balance.

Dry98.1%

Wet93.8%

Comfort94.2%

Value65.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	36.6 m	+0.70 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 50	35.8 m	+1.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	2^nd / 50	35.5 m	+0.30 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	43^rd / 50	77.6 km/h	-9.10 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	39^th / 50	3.2 m/sec2	-0.80 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	38^th / 50	71.7 dB	+2.60 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	41^st / 50	9.1 Kg	+1.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	13^th / 50	42200 KM	-29,300.00 KM
ValueLower is better	22^nd / 50	2.11 Price/1000	+1.08 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	8^th / 50	67.6 mg/km/t	+32.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/69
Price: 89.00

Driving Safety: The Nexen N'Fera Primus secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Nexen offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and is still safe even at the limit. In addition, its braking distance is rated as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the N'Fera Primus gets good ratings for both braking distance measurements and aquaplaning behavior. In terms of handling, the Nexen just missed out on a good rating. All in all, it is still enough for a good assessment of the wet performance.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Nexen does not get more than a satisfactory result. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory.

Dry94%

Wet92.5%

Comfort96.5%

Value58.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	19^th / 50	38.2 m	+2.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	15^th / 50	38.2 m	+3.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	12^th / 50	37.9 m	+2.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 50	84.5 km/h	-2.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	18^th / 50	70.7 dB	+1.60 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	19^th / 50	8.4 Kg	+0.80 Kg
WearHigher is better	38^th / 50	33300 KM	-38,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	39^th / 50	2.58 Price/1000	+1.55 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	40^th / 50	88.1 mg/km/t	+53.30 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/A/71
Price: 86.00

Driving safety: The Kenda Kenetica Pro KR210 secures an overall good rating for driving safety. The Kenda offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and is also safe at the limit. In addition, its braking distance is rated as good compared to the test field. On wet roads, the Kenetica Pro KR210 missed a good rating in the braking distance measurements, but was able to secure good marks in aquaplaning behavior and handling. All in all, it is enough for a still good assessment of the wet performance.

Environmental balance: When it comes to the environmental balance, the Kenda does not get beyond a satisfactory result. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Taiwan is rated as sufficient.

Dry90.9%

Wet89.1%

Comfort95.3%

Value60.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	32^nd / 50	39.5 m	+3.60 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	22^nd / 50	40.2 m	+5.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	25^th / 50	40.1 m	+4.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 50	84.1 km/h	-2.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	23^rd / 50	71 dB	+1.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	36^th / 50	8.9 Kg	+1.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	33^rd / 50	35100 KM	-36,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	28^th / 50	2.25 Price/1000	+1.22 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	38^th / 50	87 mg/km/t	+52.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/69
Price: 79.00

Driving Safety: The driving safety of the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 does not go beyond a satisfactory rating. It offers the driver only average feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and could prove to be a bit more stable during dynamic evasive maneuvers. Its braking distance is still classified as good, but overall it just misses out on a good rating on dry roads. On wet roads, the Kleber Dynaxer HP4 does not get more than a satisfactory rating either. Although it scored well in the aquaplaning tests, it only performed satisfactorily in the braking distance measurements and handling. It lacks a bit of grip and precision for a better rating.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Dynaxer HP4 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. The tire also scores with its low fuel consumption, but it just misses out on a good rating in terms of weight.

Dry96.3%

Wet89.1%

Comfort96.3%

Value70.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	9^th / 50	37.3 m	+1.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	22^nd / 50	40.2 m	+5.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	24^th / 50	39.5 m	+4.30 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	19^th / 50	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 50	70.3 dB	+1.20 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	34^th / 50	8.8 Kg	+1.20 Kg
WearHigher is better	7^th / 50	48000 KM	-23,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	11^th / 50	1.83 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	6^th / 50	63.5 mg/km/t	+28.70 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/68
Price: 88.00

Driving safety: The Fulda EcoControl HP2 can get a good rating on dry roads, but it does not get more than a satisfactory rating in the wet and thus overall driving safety. Overall, the Fulda still achieves a good rating on dry roads. Although it only offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel, it is still safe at the limit. Its braking distance is also classified as clearly good compared to the test field. The EcoControl HP2 misses out on a good rating on wet roads. Although it can show good results in aquaplaning behavior, it does not get more than a satisfactory rating in wet braking and handling. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the EcoControl HP2 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its low fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency.

Dry94.5%

Wet87.7%

Comfort96.9%

Value68.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	17^th / 50	38 m	+2.10 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	26^th / 50	40.8 m	+6.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	31^st / 50	41.1 m	+5.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	23^rd / 50	80.8 km/h	-5.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 50	3.8 m/sec2	-0.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	30^th / 50	71.2 dB	+2.10 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	5^th / 50	7.9 Kg	+0.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	8^th / 50	47500 KM	-24,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	13^th / 50	1.89 Price/1000	+0.86 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	11^th / 50	70.1 mg/km/t	+35.30 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/70
Price: 90.00

Driving safety: The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort just missed out on a good result when it came to driving safety. The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort offers the driver only average feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, but still shows itself to be safe in the limit area. Thanks to its short braking distance, the Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort just about got a good rating for dry performance. The Toyo Tires Proxes Comfort narrowly missed out on a good rating on wet roads. Its performance is rated as satisfactory for both braking distance and aquaplaning measurements. In wet handling he still gets good ratings, but overall that's not enough to get a good result in the wet.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Proxes Comfort secured a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its low fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency. In terms of sustainability, the tire produced in Japan does not go beyond a sufficient result.

Dry95%

Wet88.1%

Comfort97%

Value64.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	14^th / 50	37.8 m	+1.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	25^th / 50	40.6 m	+6.20 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	17^th / 50	38.8 m	+3.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	40^th / 50	78.3 km/h	-8.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 50	70.4 dB	+1.30 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	14^th / 50	41700 KM	-29,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	19^th / 50	2.01 Price/1000	+0.98 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	25^th / 50	75.9 mg/km/t	+41.10 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/70
Price: 84.00

Driving safety: The Debica Presto HP 2 does not get more than a satisfactory rating in either dry or wet conditions and therefore also overall in terms of driving safety. The Debica offers the driver only satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, so that it is difficult to set the steering angle required for the curve right away. But its handling at the limit is only classified as satisfactory. After all, he can get a good rating for the braking distance. On wet roads, the Debica Presto HP 2 does not get more than a satisfactory rating either. Although the tire received good ratings for its aquaplaning behavior, its properties in braking tests and handling were only rated as satisfactory. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: In the environmental balance, the Presto HP 2 secures a good result in the test. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are rated as good. In addition, it can also get a good result with its fuel consumption and low weight in terms of efficiency.

Dry91.1%

Wet87.2%

Comfort96.6%

Value67.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	28^th / 50	39.4 m	+3.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	33^rd / 50	41.8 m	+7.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	34^th / 50	41.7 m	+6.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	12^th / 50	82.1 km/h	-4.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	2^nd / 50	3.9 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	28^th / 50	71.1 dB	+2.00 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	8^th / 50	8.1 Kg	+0.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	10^th / 50	45700 KM	-25,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	10^th / 50	1.77 Price/1000	+0.74 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	19^th / 50	74 mg/km/t	+39.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/B/70
Price: 81.00

Dry95%

Wet88.2%

Comfort96.7%

Value59.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	14^th / 50	37.8 m	+1.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	31^st / 50	41.5 m	+7.10 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	26^th / 50	40.2 m	+5.00 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 50	82.5 km/h	-4.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 50	3.8 m/sec2	-0.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	39^th / 50	71.8 dB	+2.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	3^rd / 50	7.7 Kg	+0.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	28^th / 50	36900 KM	-34,600.00 KM
ValueLower is better	47^th / 50	2.98 Price/1000	+1.95 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	32^nd / 50	80.2 mg/km/t	+45.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/A/68
Price: 110.00

Driving safety: The Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 is rated as just satisfactory in terms of driving safety due to its wet properties. The Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 offers the driver good feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads, can be steered precisely and is safe even at the limit. In addition, it can score with its short braking distance and thus secures a good rating for dry performance. On wet roads, however, the Pirelli Cinturato P7 C2 does not go beyond a satisfactory verdict. Although it scored well in the aquaplaning tests and secured good ratings, it was only satisfactory in the braking distance measurements and handling. It offers a medium level of grip and can only satisfactorily combine longitudinal and lateral forces.

Environmental balance: The Cinturato P7 C2 also missed out on a good result in terms of the environmental balance. His predicted mileage is still rated as good, but he does not get more than a satisfactory result when it comes to abrasion. It doesn't help that its fuel consumption and weight are rated as good.

Dry97%

Wet89.4%

Comfort96.2%

Value60.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	37 m	+1.10 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	24^th / 50	40.3 m	+5.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	19^th / 50	39.1 m	+3.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	15^th / 50	81.8 km/h	-4.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	12^th / 50	70.5 dB	+1.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	29^th / 50	8.7 Kg	+1.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	21^st / 50	39500 KM	-32,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	42^nd / 50	2.71 Price/1000	+1.68 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	36^th / 50	82.1 mg/km/t	+47.30 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/69
Price: 107.00

Dry94%

Wet87.9%

Comfort96.4%

Value62.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	19^th / 50	38.2 m	+2.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	27^th / 50	40.9 m	+6.50 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	30^th / 50	40.9 m	+5.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	19^th / 50	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 50	3.8 m/sec2	-0.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	34^th / 50	71.5 dB	+2.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	6^th / 50	8 Kg	+0.40 Kg
WearHigher is better	23^rd / 50	38600 KM	-32,900.00 KM
ValueLower is better	27^th / 50	2.23 Price/1000	+1.20 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	34^th / 50	81.4 mg/km/t	+46.60 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/70
Price: 86.00

Dry90.4%

Wet95.3%

Comfort96.3%

Value62.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	36^th / 50	39.7 m	+3.80 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	10^th / 50	37.2 m	+2.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	3^rd / 50	35.7 m	+0.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	15^th / 50	81.8 km/h	-4.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 50	3.8 m/sec2	-0.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	18^th / 50	70.7 dB	+1.60 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	22^nd / 50	8.5 Kg	+0.90 Kg
WearHigher is better	18^th / 50	40000 KM	-31,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	30^th / 50	2.28 Price/1000	+1.25 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	29^th / 50	79.3 mg/km/t	+44.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 91.00

Dry94.2%

Wet87.9%

Comfort96.2%

Value62.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	18^th / 50	38.1 m	+2.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	32^nd / 50	41.7 m	+7.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	28^th / 50	40.6 m	+5.40 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 50	83.6 km/h	-3.10 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 50	3.8 m/sec2	-0.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	47^th / 50	72.4 dB	+3.30 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	1^st / 50	7.6 Kg	Best in this discipline
WearHigher is better	25^th / 50	38200 KM	-33,300.00 KM
ValueLower is better	31^st / 50	2.3 Price/1000	+1.27 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	9^th / 50	68.7 mg/km/t	+33.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/70
Price: 88.00

Dry96.5%

Wet89%

Comfort94.2%

Value61.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	37.2 m	+1.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	21^st / 50	39.8 m	+5.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	18^th / 50	39 m	+3.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	19^th / 50	81.3 km/h	-5.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	44^th / 50	72.3 dB	+3.20 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	29^th / 50	8.7 Kg	+1.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	26^th / 50	37300 KM	-34,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	38^th / 50	2.57 Price/1000	+1.54 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	12^th / 50	71.2 mg/km/t	+36.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/70
Price: 96.00

Dry91.1%

Wet86.4%

Comfort95%

Value61.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	28^th / 50	39.4 m	+3.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	28^th / 50	41.1 m	+6.70 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	32^nd / 50	41.3 m	+6.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	17^th / 50	81.5 km/h	-5.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	36^th / 50	71.6 dB	+2.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	29^th / 50	8.7 Kg	+1.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	33^rd / 50	35100 KM	-36,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	17^th / 50	1.99 Price/1000	+0.96 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	37^th / 50	83.8 mg/km/t	+49.00 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/69
Price: 70.00

Dry90.9%

Wet94.8%

Comfort96.2%

Value71.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	32^nd / 50	39.5 m	+3.60 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 50	36.3 m	+1.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	6^th / 50	36.2 m	+1.00 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	17^th / 50	81.5 km/h	-5.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	14^th / 50	3.6 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	23^rd / 50	71 dB	+1.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	19^th / 50	8.4 Kg	+0.80 Kg
WearHigher is better	10^th / 50	45700 KM	-25,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	3^rd / 50	1.47 Price/1000	+0.44 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	21^st / 50	74.3 mg/km/t	+39.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 67.00

Dry87.6%

Wet85.5%

Comfort94.8%

Value61.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	47^th / 50	41 m	+5.10 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	29^th / 50	41.4 m	+7.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	35^th / 50	41.9 m	+6.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	26^th / 50	80.4 km/h	-6.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	47^th / 50	72.4 dB	+3.30 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	30^th / 50	36000 KM	-35,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	33^rd / 50	2.39 Price/1000	+1.36 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	35^th / 50	81.7 mg/km/t	+46.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 86.00

Dry89.1%

Wet84.3%

Comfort96.8%

Value63.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	43^rd / 50	40.3 m	+4.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	40^th / 50	44.2 m	+9.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	33^rd / 50	41.5 m	+6.30 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	31^st / 50	80 km/h	-6.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	14^th / 50	3.6 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	15^th / 50	70.6 dB	+1.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	18^th / 50	40000 KM	-31,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	18^th / 50	2 Price/1000	+0.97 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	27^th / 50	78.2 mg/km/t	+43.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 80.00

Dry92.1%

Wet92.9%

Comfort97%

Value61.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	23^rd / 50	39 m	+3.10 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 50	36.9 m	+2.50 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	12^th / 50	37.9 m	+2.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	27^th / 50	80.3 km/h	-6.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	6^th / 50	70.1 dB	+1.00 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	22^nd / 50	8.5 Kg	+0.90 Kg
WearHigher is better	31^st / 50	35500 KM	-36,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	11^th / 50	1.83 Price/1000	+0.80 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	44^th / 50	94.3 mg/km/t	+59.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 65.00

Dry91.4%

Wet86.2%

Comfort95.9%

Value55.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	26^th / 50	39.3 m	+3.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	34^th / 50	42.2 m	+7.80 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	28^th / 50	40.6 m	+5.40 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	13^th / 50	81.9 km/h	-4.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	30^th / 50	71.2 dB	+2.10 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	19^th / 50	8.4 Kg	+0.80 Kg
WearHigher is better	44^th / 50	29700 KM	-41,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	48^th / 50	3.03 Price/1000	+2.00 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	39^th / 50	87.3 mg/km/t	+52.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/C/70
Price: 90.00

Dry89.3%

Wet82.5%

Comfort97%

Value68%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	41^st / 50	40.2 m	+4.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	39^th / 50	43.9 m	+9.50 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	38^th / 50	43.3 m	+8.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	41^st / 50	78.1 km/h	-8.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 50	70.4 dB	+1.30 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	15^th / 50	40800 KM	-30,700.00 KM
ValueLower is better	6^th / 50	1.57 Price/1000	+0.54 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	22^nd / 50	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 64.00

Dry91.1%

Wet83.9%

Comfort94.4%

Value63.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	28^th / 50	39.4 m	+3.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	36^th / 50	43.5 m	+9.10 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	38^th / 50	43.3 m	+8.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 50	82.4 km/h	-4.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	14^th / 50	3.6 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	39^th / 50	71.8 dB	+2.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	36^th / 50	8.9 Kg	+1.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	23^rd / 50	38600 KM	-32,900.00 KM
ValueLower is better	15^th / 50	1.94 Price/1000	+0.91 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	33^rd / 50	80.6 mg/km/t	+45.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 75.00

Dry91.4%

Wet82.3%

Comfort92%

Value70.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	26^th / 50	39.3 m	+3.40 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	37^th / 50	43.6 m	+9.20 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	37^th / 50	43.1 m	+7.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	35^th / 50	79.3 km/h	-7.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	50^th / 50	73.6 dB	+4.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	46^th / 50	9.2 Kg	+1.60 Kg
WearHigher is better	8^th / 50	47500 KM	-24,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	4^th / 50	1.56 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	14^th / 50	72.6 mg/km/t	+37.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 74.00

Driving safety: The Uniroyal RainSport 5 is only rated as satisfactory for driving safety due to its dry properties. The RainSport 5 only offers the driver sufficient feedback on the steering wheel on a dry road and also receives an adequate rating for its handling at the limit - in the event of sudden evasive maneuvers, the test car tends to oversteer with the tires, but skilful steering maneuvers can prevent skidding. When it comes to the braking distance, the Uniroyal can secure a good mark with a short value. Overall, its drying properties are classified as satisfactory. On wet roads, the Uniroyal RainSport 5 receives very good ratings for its aquaplaning behavior, for its braking performance and its behavior in wet handling, thanks to good grip and safe and precise driveability, good reviews. Overall, the overall wet performance is rated as good.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the Uniroyal RainSport 5 is also clearly rated as satisfactory. Both its predicted mileage and its abrasion are classified as satisfactory. The efficiency is still rated as good thanks to the relatively low fuel consumption and weight.

Dry91.8%

Wet96.7%

Comfort96.1%

Value56.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	24^th / 50	39.1 m	+3.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 50	36.8 m	+2.40 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	7^th / 50	36.3 m	+1.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 50	86.7 km/h	Best in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 50	4 m/sec2	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	22^nd / 50	70.9 dB	+1.80 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	22^nd / 50	8.5 Kg	+0.90 Kg
WearHigher is better	38^th / 50	33300 KM	-38,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	44^th / 50	2.76 Price/1000	+1.73 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	43^rd / 50	93.2 mg/km/t	+58.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 92.00

Dry90.2%

Wet81.1%

Comfort96.6%

Value66%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	37^th / 50	39.8 m	+3.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	42^nd / 50	44.5 m	+10.10 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	36^th / 50	42.9 m	+7.70 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	37^th / 50	79.2 km/h	-7.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	40^th / 50	3.1 m/sec2	-0.90 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 50	70.3 dB	+1.20 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	26^th / 50	8.6 Kg	+1.00 Kg
WearHigher is better	22^nd / 50	39100 KM	-32,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	7^th / 50	1.64 Price/1000	+0.61 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	17^th / 50	73.6 mg/km/t	+38.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/C/71
Price: 64.00

Dry93%

Wet93.5%

Comfort95.2%

Value55.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	21^st / 50	38.6 m	+2.70 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 50	35 m	+0.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	9^th / 50	37.6 m	+2.40 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	22^nd / 50	80.9 km/h	-5.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 50	70.2 dB	+1.10 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	49^th / 50	9.6 Kg	+2.00 Kg
WearHigher is better	42^nd / 50	31500 KM	-40,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	40^th / 50	2.63 Price/1000	+1.60 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	43^rd / 50	5.9 l/100km	+0.40 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	47^th / 50	97.7 mg/km/t	+62.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/A/70
Price: 83.00

Dry91.8%

Wet89.7%

Comfort95.2%

Value54.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	24^th / 50	39.1 m	+3.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	29^th / 50	41.4 m	+7.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	15^th / 50	38.4 m	+3.20 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 50	84.6 km/h	-2.10 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 50	3.7 m/sec2	-0.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	34^th / 50	71.5 dB	+2.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	26^th / 50	8.6 Kg	+1.00 Kg
WearHigher is better	46^th / 50	27100 KM	-44,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	41^st / 50	2.69 Price/1000	+1.66 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	42^nd / 50	92.2 mg/km/t	+57.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/B/71
Price: 73.00

Dry88%

Wet80.7%

Comfort96.1%

Value62.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	45^th / 50	40.8 m	+4.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	43^rd / 50	45.3 m	+10.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	45^th / 50	44.8 m	+9.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	30^th / 50	80.1 km/h	-6.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	30^th / 50	3.4 m/sec2	-0.60 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	30^th / 50	71.2 dB	+2.10 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	35^th / 50	34600 KM	-36,900.00 KM
ValueLower is better	24^th / 50	2.14 Price/1000	+1.11 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	17^th / 50	73.6 mg/km/t	+38.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/B/70
Price: 74.00

Dry90.7%

Wet81.8%

Comfort95.3%

Value63.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	35^th / 50	39.6 m	+3.70 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	35^th / 50	43.1 m	+8.70 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	40^th / 50	43.4 m	+8.20 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	32^nd / 50	79.9 km/h	-6.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	40^th / 50	3.1 m/sec2	-0.90 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	28^th / 50	71.1 dB	+2.00 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	34^th / 50	8.8 Kg	+1.20 Kg
WearHigher is better	28^th / 50	36900 KM	-34,600.00 KM
ValueLower is better	21^st / 50	2.03 Price/1000	+1.00 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 50	5.5 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	28^th / 50	78.9 mg/km/t	+44.10 mg/km/t

Price: 75.00

Dry92.5%

Wet79.9%

Comfort97.1%

Value61.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	22^nd / 50	38.8 m	+2.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	41^st / 50	44.3 m	+9.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	44^th / 50	44.4 m	+9.20 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	44^th / 50	77.3 km/h	-9.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	40^th / 50	3.1 m/sec2	-0.90 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	36^th / 50	71.6 dB	+2.50 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	1^st / 50	7.6 Kg	Best in this discipline
WearHigher is better	42^nd / 50	31500 KM	-40,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	23^rd / 50	2.13 Price/1000	+1.10 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	22^nd / 50	75.7 mg/km/t	+40.90 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/69
Price: 67.00

Driving safety: The Michelin e.Primacy is rated as sufficient for driving safety due to its wet performance. The Michelin e.Primacy offers the driver satisfactory feedback on the steering wheel on dry roads and does not get more than a satisfactory rating when driving at the limit. When it comes to the braking distance, however, the tire scores well and even gets a good rating for it. All in all, however, it does not get more than a satisfactory result in terms of dry performance. On wet roads, the e.Primacy shows clear weaknesses compared to the test field. Its braking, aquaplaning and handling performance is rated as only adequate. The tire can only moderately combine longitudinal and lateral forces, which means that the test car can only be controlled imprecisely and in the limit area with great difficulty. Overall, the wet performance is rated as sufficient.

Environmental balance: In terms of environmental balance, the e.Primacy sets the standard in the test field. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating. It offers a very high predicted mileage, gets a very good rating for the lowest wear and also scores points in terms of efficiency with very low fuel consumption and low tire weight. The Michelin e.Primacy also sets the bar high when it comes to sustainability and is the only tire that just barely misses a good rating.

Dry97.8%

Wet78.8%

Comfort98.3%

Value91.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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 / 50	36.7 m	+0.80 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	38^th / 50	43.7 m	+9.30 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	41^st / 50	43.8 m	+8.60 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	48^th / 50	72.8 km/h	-13.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	47^th / 50	2.8 m/sec2	-1.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 50	69.8 dB	+0.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	6^th / 50	8 Kg	+0.40 Kg
WearHigher is better	1^st / 50	71500 KM	Best in this discipline
ValueLower is better	9^th / 50	1.73 Price/1000	+0.70 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	1^st / 50	5.5 l/100km	Best in this discipline
AbrasionLower is better	1^st / 50	34.8 mg/km/t	Best in this discipline

EU Label: A/B/69
Price: 124.00

Dry95.5%

Wet88.1%

Comfort96.5%

Value52.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	12^th / 50	37.6 m	+1.70 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	20^th / 50	39.5 m	+5.10 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	21^st / 50	39.3 m	+4.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	41^st / 50	78.1 km/h	-8.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	30^th / 50	3.4 m/sec2	-0.60 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	23^rd / 50	71 dB	+1.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	9^th / 50	8.2 Kg	+0.60 Kg
WearHigher is better	48^th / 50	25300 KM	-46,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	46^th / 50	2.96 Price/1000	+1.93 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	46^th / 50	96.8 mg/km/t	+62.00 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/71
Price: 75.00

Dry90.9%

Wet87.5%

Comfort97.9%

Value55.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	32^nd / 50	39.5 m	+3.60 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	14^th / 50	38.1 m	+3.70 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	14^th / 50	38 m	+2.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	45^th / 50	77.2 km/h	-9.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	49^th / 50	2.7 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 50	69.1 dB	Best in this discipline
Tyre WeightLower is better	29^th / 50	8.7 Kg	+1.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	45^th / 50	27500 KM	-44,000.00 KM
ValueLower is better	36^th / 50	2.55 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	45^th / 50	96.1 mg/km/t	+61.30 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/B/71
Price: 70.00

Dry90%

Wet87.6%

Comfort97%

Value50.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	39^th / 50	39.9 m	+4.00 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	18^th / 50	39 m	+4.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	21^st / 50	39.3 m	+4.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	35^th / 50	79.3 km/h	-7.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	40^th / 50	3.1 m/sec2	-0.90 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 50	69.8 dB	+0.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	29^th / 50	8.7 Kg	+1.10 Kg
WearHigher is better	50^th / 50	23100 KM	-48,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	49^th / 50	3.29 Price/1000	+2.26 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	49^th / 50	112.6 mg/km/t	+77.80 mg/km/t

EU Label: E/C/71
Price: 76.00

Dry91.1%

Wet90%

Comfort93.8%

Value48.8%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	28^th / 50	39.4 m	+3.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	13^th / 50	38 m	+3.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	21^st / 50	39.3 m	+4.10 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 50	82.4 km/h	-4.30 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	30^th / 50	3.4 m/sec2	-0.60 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	39^th / 50	71.8 dB	+2.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	47^th / 50	9.3 Kg	+1.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	49^th / 50	24000 KM	-47,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	50^th / 50	3.75 Price/1000	+2.72 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	50^th / 50	126 mg/km/t	+91.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/A/70
Price: 90.00

Dry88.6%

Wet86.1%

Comfort96.6%

Value54.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	44^th / 50	40.5 m	+4.60 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	19^th / 50	39.1 m	+4.70 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	27^th / 50	40.5 m	+5.30 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	39^th / 50	79 km/h	-7.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	45^th / 50	3 m/sec2	-1.00 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	4^th / 50	69.9 dB	+0.80 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	36^th / 50	8.9 Kg	+1.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	46^th / 50	27100 KM	-44,400.00 KM
ValueLower is better	35^th / 50	2.47 Price/1000	+1.44 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	48^th / 50	101 mg/km/t	+66.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/A/71
Price: 67.00

Dry89.5%

Wet80.5%

Comfort96.3%

Value61.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	40^th / 50	40.1 m	+4.20 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	44^th / 50	45.9 m	+11.50 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	43^rd / 50	44.2 m	+9.00 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	23^rd / 50	80.8 km/h	-5.90 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	18^th / 50	70.7 dB	+1.60 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	22^nd / 50	8.5 Kg	+0.90 Kg
WearHigher is better	41^st / 50	32900 KM	-38,600.00 KM
ValueLower is better	26^th / 50	2.19 Price/1000	+1.16 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	15^th / 50	73.3 mg/km/t	+38.50 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/B/69
Price: 72.00

Dry88%

Wet72%

Comfort95.2%

Value64.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	45^th / 50	40.8 m	+4.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	48^th / 50	54 m	+19.60 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	47^th / 50	49 m	+13.80 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	47^th / 50	75 km/h	-11.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	40^th / 50	3.1 m/sec2	-0.90 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	21^st / 50	70.8 dB	+1.70 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	41^st / 50	9.1 Kg	+1.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	38^th / 50	33300 KM	-38,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	4^th / 50	1.56 Price/1000	+0.53 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	31^st / 50	80 mg/km/t	+45.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/B/71
Price: 52.00

Dry89.3%

Wet80.2%

Comfort93.5%

Value59.2%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	41^st / 50	40.2 m	+4.30 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	45^th / 50	46.4 m	+12.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	42^nd / 50	44.1 m	+8.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	25^th / 50	80.7 km/h	-6.00 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	33^rd / 50	3.3 m/sec2	-0.70 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	44^th / 50	72.3 dB	+3.20 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	41^st / 50	9.1 Kg	+1.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	36^th / 50	33700 KM	-37,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	45^th / 50	2.91 Price/1000	+1.88 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	26^th / 50	76.1 mg/km/t	+41.30 mg/km/t

EU Label: B/B/71
Price: 98.00

Dry86.7%

Wet75.3%

Comfort95.5%

Value62.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	48^th / 50	41.4 m	+5.50 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	47^th / 50	50.9 m	+16.50 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	48^th / 50	49.7 m	+14.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	37^th / 50	79.2 km/h	-7.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	19^th / 50	3.5 m/sec2	-0.50 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	12^th / 50	70.5 dB	+1.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	41^st / 50	9.1 Kg	+1.50 Kg
WearHigher is better	18^th / 50	40000 KM	-31,500.00 KM
ValueLower is better	36^th / 50	2.55 Price/1000	+1.52 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	13^th / 50	72.2 mg/km/t	+37.40 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/C/68
Price: 102.00

Dry90.2%

Wet79.1%

Comfort95.1%

Value62.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	37^th / 50	39.8 m	+3.90 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	46^th / 50	48.4 m	+14.00 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	46^th / 50	45.7 m	+10.50 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	34^th / 50	79.6 km/h	-7.10 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	14^th / 50	3.6 m/sec2	-0.40 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	43^rd / 50	72.1 dB	+3.00 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	11^th / 50	8.3 Kg	+0.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	36^th / 50	33700 KM	-37,800.00 KM
ValueLower is better	29^th / 50	2.26 Price/1000	+1.23 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	10^th / 50	5.7 l/100km	+0.20 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	7^th / 50	67 mg/km/t	+32.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/C/71
Price: 76.00

Dry84.5%

Wet63.7%

Comfort95.8%

Value91.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	49^th / 50	42.5 m	+6.60 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	50^th / 50	59.3 m	+24.90 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	50^th / 50	58.4 m	+23.20 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	50^th / 50	70.3 km/h	-16.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	49^th / 50	2.7 m/sec2	-1.30 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 50	70 dB	+0.90 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	47^th / 50	9.3 Kg	+1.70 Kg
WearHigher is better	3^rd / 50	64800 KM	-6,700.00 KM
ValueLower is better	1^st / 50	1.03 Price/1000	Best in this discipline
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	3^rd / 50	5.6 l/100km	+0.10 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	2^nd / 50	45.9 mg/km/t	+11.10 mg/km/t

EU Label: C/C/70
Price: 67.00

Dry83.7%

Wet65.1%

Comfort92.2%

Value70.4%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (11)

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	50^th / 50	42.9 m	+7.00 m
Wet BrakingLower is better	49^th / 50	58.1 m	+23.70 m
Wet Braking - ConcreteLower is better	49^th / 50	57.1 m	+21.90 m
Straight AquaHigher is better	49^th / 50	71.3 km/h	-15.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	47^th / 50	2.8 m/sec2	-1.20 m/sec2
NoiseLower is better	49^th / 50	72.5 dB	+3.40 dB
Tyre WeightLower is better	50^th / 50	9.9 Kg	+2.30 Kg
WearHigher is better	26^th / 50	37300 KM	-34,200.00 KM
ValueLower is better	2^nd / 50	1.21 Price/1000	+0.18 Price/1000
Fuel ConsumptionLower is better	28^th / 50	5.8 l/100km	+0.30 l/100km
AbrasionLower is better	19^th / 50	74 mg/km/t	+39.20 mg/km/t

EU Label: D/B/70
Price: 45.00

More tyre tests

Cross-check this test

All tyre tests

Where these tyres were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

Auto Bild2021

2021 53 Summer Tyre Braking Test

205/55 R1653 tyres tested

29 of these 50 tyres tested again

Winner there

Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125

This test’s winner finished 13^th there

Auto Bild2024

2024 Summer Tyre Market Overview

205/55 R1655 tyres tested

27 of these 50 tyres tested again

Winner there

Continental PremiumContact 7

This test’s winner finished 13^th there

Auto Bild2022

2022 Summer Tyre Market Overview

215/55 R1744 tyres tested

21 of these 50 tyres tested again

Winner there

Bridgestone Turanza T005

This test’s winner finished 16^th there

More tyre tests2026 AutoView Sport Tyre Test 2026 Tire Rack Streetable Track Tyre Test 2026 Auto Express Summer Tyre Test Michelin Range Test - CrossClimate 3, 3 Sport, Primacy 5, Pilot Sport 5 and Cup 2 All tests: Summer Tyres

Best tyresBest UUHP Tyres Best Performance Summer Tyres Best Summer Tyres

Discussion

14 comments

Athens Concrete Contractor Mar 3, 2026 archived

We like this simple chart explanation. As a Athens concrete contractor , our work also needs good testing and data. The picture helps kids and adults understand. We think learning about tires is helpful and fun.

#10550
AUSDAVIDZ Aug 4, 2024 archived

Yokohama GLING GLING!!

#9610
Bob Pritchett Feb 7, 2024 archived

Question cannot find answer: When / why do tire mfg companies no longer show both min psi with the max psi.
While I understand one tire may max at 51psi but asked to inflate to your own car guide (like 32-34psi), there must be a minimum psi that the mfg would say its my falt for driving (say at 20psi) where the integeraty of the tire would be challenged.

#9346
1. TyreReviews Bob Pritchett Feb 7, 2024 archived
  
  That's a good question I don't know the answer to.
  At a guess, the biggest issue with low PSI is the tyre debeading from the rim, so perhaps manufacturers don't want the liability of saying for example 20psi and the tyre comes off the rim at 22psi due to poor wheel or big impact.
  
  #9347
David Odaisky Jan 17, 2024 archived

really liked your video testing the impact of adding weight to pickup truck rear axle. I think that it would be a very interesting and popular video if you performed a similar test on a FWD vehicle to evaluate how adding mass over the rear axle affects braking distances on snow or ice. There just does not seem to be a solid answer to this question, and therefore actual testing would be very valuable info. I think it would be most useful if the test was performed with snow tires installed, and even better if the effect of studded tires could also be included as an additional variable (could potentially change the results of the added mass). Thanks

#9318
1. TyreReviews David Odaisky Jan 19, 2024 archived
  
  That's certainly an interesting test idea, but I'm not sure I've ever heard anyone suggest adding weight to the boot of a FWD vehicle so I'm not sure how relevant it would be.
  
  #9320
  1. David Odaisky TyreReviews Jan 22, 2024 archived
    
    Thanks for the reply. I think that if you google this question you can actually find tons and tons of online conversations and debate regarding this question, along with tons of opinions for or against. Lots of people do add weight to the trunk of FWD vehicles hoping to increase rear wheel braking grip and reduce the risk of having the rear swing out. Maybe its a Canadian/Nordic thing?. The problem is that it is not completely obvious if this is net beneficial, or if the extra inertia completely offsets the benefit of the extra traction.
    
    #9325
cim113 Jul 18, 2023 archived

Thanks for such epic test.
If EC6 join these test will be better

#9012
Petr Mar 5, 2023 archived

Sadly, once again, they sort of set wear above safety making the test nice for fleet managers but bad news for customers.
What is the true average annual mileage of a privately owned car in central Europe? Around 10.000 km / year, there are some drivers that do more and there are many more that do even less. I'm talking about private, not company cars. Let's get back to the average. Say, 4k km are done on winter set, so 6.000 km / year on summer tyres. There is absolutely no chance those like the Goodyears would be worn out unless being absolute threat to everything on the road after ten or even more years. Actually they will be unsafe in half the time (own experience with previous Goodyear Efficientgrip Performance model - great when new, completely lost traction after five years causing extremely extended braking distances and wheel spinning on slippery surfaces even for cautious and gentle drivers. Borrowed a pair of new, confirmed the old tyres to be the problem, so they had to go. Who would voluntarily reaplce tyres with still half of tread depth as I did?
Currently I am using Nokian Wetproof (which are praised for braking distances and excellent wet and dry grip which I can confirm) but these (and Vredestein Ultrac) are usually devaluated for low expected mileage around 30.000 km. Honestly, I'd happily replace worn tyres every five or six years if they are as safe as when new instead of being rear-ended by hypermilers with 'eternal' Michelin or Goodyear on traffic lights.
Sadly, such pressure on extreme wear durability inevitably leads to tyres being worse and less safe for private customers.

#8707
1. TyreReviews Petr Mar 5, 2023 archived
  
  Interesting comment, thanks for sharing. I think in the UK the average mileage is around 10,000 miles, so 16,000km and there's no switch to a winter tyre for 98% of people. That means 80,000km is achievable in the 5 year recommended life of a tyre.
  How these tyres perform after 5 years at 2mm is another question that's sadly very hard to answer.
  
  #8709
2. Olli-Pekka Tervo Petr Apr 13, 2023 archived
  
  Nokian tyres are usually pretty safe bet overall, and especially for those whose mileage is low. If one really wants to maintain maximum safety, they need to have over 3mm tread left and tyre shouldn't be more than 4 years old*. Maybe even less if they are exposed to sunlight 365 days a year. So, if your mileage is low, and tyre does not wear too much on that 3-4 years period, you are good to go, but if your mileage is high (some people actually drive 30k, even 50k in one summer), you probably want to get one of those more durable tyres.
  *) I always have this at minimum on our family car...but my "commuter" can have anything, because I don't have to drive it on highway.
  
  #8852
Pedro Neves Feb 26, 2023 archived

That's a lot of data to digest! At ADAC's link we've got at the page's bottom the test pdf's where there's even more data relating to dry and wet performance, the way ADAC usually presents it. Unfortunately, they went through a lot of effort and money to test all these tyres when they could have tested a smaller amount of them but of many different premium and budgets models (and even different weight/speed indexes for each model). For instance: the Contis EC5, EC6, PC5, Michelin Pilot Sport 4, Primacy 4, Goodyear EGP, Hankook Prime 3, Pirelli Cinturato P1 Verde, Bridgestone Ecopia EP150 and Turanza ECO, Maxxis Premitra HP5 and Mecotra 3, Falken Sincera SN832, Yokohama BluEarth GT and BluEarth-ES, Vredestein Ultra, etc. So much money wasted in so many crappy tyres!... Maybe I'm being ungrateful, but on my opinion, this is not a great way to celebrate 50 years of tyre testing!

#8683
4cvg Feb 26, 2023 archived

Two things: first, the performance of the P7C2 is oddly out of alignment with TR's own assessment; second, might we have the descriptive commentary for the other tyres?

#8681
1. TyreReviews 4cvg Feb 26, 2023 archived
  
  I meant to write something about that in the article, I guess I forgot. We got the new compound P7C2, ADAC didn't as they tested before us.
  You can find the descriptive commentary on the ADAC site linked just above the results, I sadly don't have the time to copy and paste it across, it's surprisingly time consuming :) I'll try and get it added in the coming weeks.
  
  #8682

Menu

Tyre shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Test setup & methodology

Recorded test conditions

Wear

Wet

Dry

Environment

Results

Cross-check this test