2025 AMS Sustainability Tyre Test

Auto Motor Und Sport always pushes traditional tyre testing in new directions, and this years summer tyre test has a new twist - sustainability. The test focused on the 215/55 R17 size, suitable for midsize sedans, station wagons, and compact SUVs, with particular attention paid to tyres achieving at least a "B" rating for rolling resistance on the EU tyre label.

Test Publication:

215/55 R17 6 tyres 4 categories

Similar Tests

Images courtesy of Auto Motor Und Sport

Test Publication:

https://www.auto-motor-und-sport.de/verkehr/reifen/

Images courtesy of Auto Motor Und Sport

Test Size: 215/55 R17

Tyres Tested: 6 tyres

Test Categories:
4 categories (9 tests)

Similar Tests

The Sustainability Challenge

The test went beyond traditional performance metrics to evaluate sustainability through in three categories: manufacturing processes, logistics, and fuel efficiency. The testers awarded extra points for innovative sustainable production methods and use of recycled or renewable materials. They also factored in the carbon footprint of transportation by measuring the distance between production facilities and the German market. Most significantly, they heavily weighted the real-world impact of rolling resistance on fuel consumption.

To practice what they preached, the testers even used synthetic e-fuels and HVO diesel during the evaluation process to minimize the test's own carbon footprint.

Sustainability Champions

The sustainability scoring revealed clear differences in manufacturers' approaches to eco-friendly tyre production:

Michelin emerged as the sustainability leader with the e.Primacy, which is produced carbon-neutrally in Germany. The tyre achieved a perfect score in manufacturing innovation (10 points), logistics (0 km, as it's produced locally), and most impressively, demonstrated zero additional fuel consumption compared to the test benchmark.

Continental took a different path to sustainability with its UltraContact NXT. While it scored slightly lower overall than Michelin, it led the field in manufacturing innovations, earning a perfect 10 points for its comprehensive use of sustainable materials. The tyre incorporates natural rubber, bio-based silica derived from rice husk ash, recycled PET bottles, and reclaimed steel. This material-focused approach represents a significant advancement in reducing the tyre's environmental footprint from production. Its slightly higher 1.0% fuel consumption increase and 2400 km logistics distance were the only factors preventing it from matching Michelin's overall sustainability score.

Falken's e.Ziex also performed admirably in the sustainability metrics, particularly with its 29% content of sustainable and recycled materials. Although manufactured in Turkey, creating a longer logistics chain for the test in Germany, it maintained excellent fuel efficiency with just a 1.3% increase in consumption compared to the benchmark.

Goodyear and Bridgestone both approached sustainability primarily through longevity and efficiency rather than revolutionary material changes. Both brands scored well for relatively short transportation distances but couldn't match the leaders in overall environmental impact.

The Insa Turbo EcoEvolution, despite being a retreaded tyre that theoretically should excel in sustainability through material reuse, surprisingly performed poorly. While it earned top marks for manufacturing due to the inherent sustainability of retreading, its dramatically higher rolling resistance resulted in an 11.4% increase in fuel consumption—negating much of its environmental advantage.

Dry

Dry braking remains a critical safety test, with the Falken e.Ziex delivering the best stopping performance at 35.2 meters from 100 km/h. Interestingly, this shows that sustainability doesn't necessarily compromise dry braking, as the Falken combines good environmental credentials with class-leading dry braking. The retreaded Insa Turbo struggled significantly here, requiring an additional 6.4 meters (18%) more distance to stop.

In the dry handling test, which measures average lap speeds around a challenging course, the Falken e.Ziex again took top honors with 107.4 km/h, closely followed by the Continental. This test demonstrates that eco-friendly compounds can still deliver the responsiveness and grip needed for confident handling, though the high-efficiency Michelin ranked fifth, suggesting some compromises in ultimate handling performance.

Wet

Continental's UltraContact NXT demonstrated its wet weather prowess by delivering the shortest wet braking distance at 31.5 meters from 80 km/h. Wet performance is often where eco-focused tyres sacrifice grip to achieve lower rolling resistance, yet Continental managed to balance both priorities effectively. The alarming 42.6-meter stopping distance of the Insa Turbo represents a dangerous compromise in wet safety.

Bridgestone and Goodyear tied for first place in wet handling with identical 78.9 km/h lap speeds. The Michelin e.Primacy, despite leading in sustainability metrics, fell behind here, suggesting its focus on rolling resistance may have required some concessions in wet performance.

The Bridgestone was best in both aquaplaning tests.

Comfort

Michelin's e.Primacy delivered the quietest performance at 70.5 dB

Value

The Michelin e.Primacy demonstrated its efficiency focus with a class-leading rolling resistance measurement of just 5.7 kg/t. This test directly impacts fuel consumption and vehicle range, especially for electric vehicles, making it perhaps the most relevant sustainability metric. The stark contrast with the Insa Turbo (10.4 kg/t) explains why the retreaded tyre's theoretical environmental advantage was undermined by its poor real-world efficiency.

Results

The Continental UltraContact NXT emerged as the most well-rounded product, blending sustainability with excellent safety features. For value-conscious buyers, the Falken e.Ziex offers comparable performance with minimal environmental compromise at a lower price point. 

1^st

Continental UltraContact NXT

215/55 R17 98W

• EU Label: A/A/69
• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 180.00

The Continental emerged as a joint test winner, featuring an exceptionally balanced overall performance. It achieves sustainability through innovative production methods, using natural rubber, bio-based silica from rice husk ash, recycled PET bottles, and reclaimed steel. It delivers the shortest wet braking distances and offers safe, balanced handling in wet conditions. On dry surfaces, it provides secure, predictably understeering behavior with high cornering stability. The tyre features low rolling resistance, though it shows slight weaknesses in dry braking. Continental achieves its sustainability profile through material innovation rather than just optimizing rolling resistance, making it the top choice when safety, dynamics, and sustainability are all important.

Dry

98.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	2nd	36.3 M	35.2 M	+1.1 M	96.97%
Dry Handling	2nd	107.1 Km/H	107.4 Km/H	-0.3 Km/H	99.72%

Wet

97.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	1st	31.5 M			100%
Wet Handling	4th	78.4 Km/H	78.9 Km/H	-0.5 Km/H	99.37%
Wet Circle	2nd	8.49 m/s	8.63 m/s	-0.14 m/s	98.38%
Straight Aqua	3rd	73.8 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-4.4 Km/H	94.37%
Curved Aquaplaning	3rd	2.78 m/sec2	2.94 m/sec2	-0.16 m/sec2	94.56%

Comfort

99.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	2nd	71 dB	70.5 dB	+0.5 dB	99.3%

Value

93.4%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	2nd	6.1 kg / t	5.7 kg / t	+0.4 kg / t	93.44%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

2^nd

Falken e.Ziex

215/55 R17 98V

• EU Label: A/A/71
• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 125.00

The Falken e.Ziex is the co-winner and value champion of the test, delivering outstanding safety performance with minimal compromises in sustainability. It uses up to 29% sustainable and recycled materials and is manufactured in Turkey to reduce shipping distances. The tyre excels in both wet and dry braking tests, achieving the best dry braking performance of all tested tyres. It features dynamic yet safe cornering behavior on wet surfaces and has low rolling resistance combined with good wet grip. Its only notable weakness is slightly reduced aquaplaning protection. For drivers seeking maximum safety with reasonable sustainability, the Falken represents an excellent value option.

Dry

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	1st	35.2 M			100%
Dry Handling	1st	107.4 Km/H			100%

Wet

95.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	2nd	31.6 M	31.5 M	+0.1 M	99.68%
Wet Handling	3rd	78.6 Km/H	78.9 Km/H	-0.3 Km/H	99.62%
Wet Circle	3rd	8.46 m/s	8.63 m/s	-0.17 m/s	98.03%
Straight Aqua	5th	73.7 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-4.5 Km/H	94.25%
Curved Aquaplaning	5th	2.59 m/sec2	2.94 m/sec2	-0.35 m/sec2	88.1%

Comfort

98.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	4th	71.9 dB	70.5 dB	+1.4 dB	98.05%

Value

91.9%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	3rd	6.2 kg / t	5.7 kg / t	+0.5 kg / t	91.94%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

3^rd

Bridgestone Turanza 6

215/55 R17 98W

• EU Label: B/A/70
• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 154.00

The Bridgestone Turanza 6 derives its sustainability primarily from increased longevity and improved fuel efficiency. It features innovative profile, rubber compound, and construction technologies to enhance both performance and sustainability. The tyre excels in wet conditions, providing exceptional grip in corners and the best aquaplaning protection of all tested tyres. Despite slightly longer braking distances, it offers outstanding traction and safety reserves in wet curves. On dry roads, it provides secure, understeer-neutral handling. Weaknesses include slightly reduced self-damping properties, comfort, and more noticeable rolling noise, particularly in corners. The Bridgestone scored "very good" overall.

Dry

97.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	3rd	36.7 M	35.2 M	+1.5 M	95.91%
Dry Handling	3rd	106.8 Km/H	107.4 Km/H	-0.6 Km/H	99.44%

Wet

98.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	4th	32.7 M	31.5 M	+1.2 M	96.33%
Wet Handling	1st	78.9 Km/H			100%
Wet Circle	4th	8.45 m/s	8.63 m/s	-0.18 m/s	97.91%
Straight Aqua	1st	78.2 Km/H			100%
Curved Aquaplaning	1st	2.94 m/sec2			100%

Comfort

97.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	5th	72.6 dB	70.5 dB	+2.1 dB	97.11%

Value

83.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	4th	6.8 kg / t	5.7 kg / t	+1.1 kg / t	83.82%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

4^th

Michelin e.Primacy

215/55 R17 98W

• EU Label: A/B/70
• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 178.00

The Michelin e.Primacy stands out for having the highest efficiency and comfort ratings while maintaining good overall performance. It's produced CO2-neutrally in Germany and features extremely low rolling resistance, long life, and minimal wear. The tyre provides well-balanced dynamics and precision on dry surfaces with direct steering response and high safety during evasive maneuvers. It's exceptionally comfortable and quiet with the highest fuel efficiency of all tested tyres. Its main compromises are longer braking distances on both wet and dry surfaces, and reduced dynamics and corner grip in wet handling. For electric vehicles, it excels by maximizing range and minimizing rolling noise.

Dry

96%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	5th	37.8 M	35.2 M	+2.6 M	93.12%
Dry Handling	5th	106.1 Km/H	107.4 Km/H	-1.3 Km/H	98.79%

Wet

94.5%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	5th	35 M	31.5 M	+3.5 M	90%
Wet Handling	5th	76.3 Km/H	78.9 Km/H	-2.6 Km/H	96.7%
Wet Circle	5th	8.39 m/s	8.63 m/s	-0.24 m/s	97.22%
Straight Aqua	3rd	73.8 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-4.4 Km/H	94.37%
Curved Aquaplaning	4th	2.77 m/sec2	2.94 m/sec2	-0.17 m/sec2	94.22%

Comfort

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	1st	70.5 dB			100%

Value

100%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	1st	5.7 kg / t			100%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

5^th

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2

215/55 R17 98W

• EU Label: B/A/70
• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 147.00

The Goodyear defines its sustainability through its Mileage-Plus technology, which provides 50% more longevity than its predecessor—particularly beneficial for heavier electric vehicles. The tyre has been optimized in structure, compound technology, and sidewall aerodynamics for improved efficiency. It performs exceptionally well in wet conditions, providing excellent braking performance and very high precision and safety on wet tracks. On dry roads, it offers secure, reliable handling but shows weaknesses in dry braking distances and has somewhat increased rolling resistance. Overall, the Goodyear earned a "very good" rating with particular strengths in wet performance.

Dry

97.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	4th	37 M	35.2 M	+1.8 M	95.14%
Dry Handling	4th	106.5 Km/H	107.4 Km/H	-0.9 Km/H	99.16%

Wet

98.1%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	3rd	32 M	31.5 M	+0.5 M	98.44%
Wet Handling	1st	78.9 Km/H			100%
Wet Circle	1st	8.63 m/s			100%
Straight Aqua	2nd	74.7 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-3.5 Km/H	95.52%
Curved Aquaplaning	2nd	2.84 m/sec2	2.94 m/sec2	-0.1 m/sec2	96.6%

Comfort

98.2%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	3rd	71.8 dB	70.5 dB	+1.3 dB	98.19%

Value

82.6%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	5th	6.9 kg / t	5.7 kg / t	+1.2 kg / t	82.61%

Read Reviews Test Results Buy from £155.99 Results Table Test Charts

6^th

Insa Turbo EcoEvolution

215/55 R17 94V

• 3PMSF: no
• Price: 77.00

The Insa Turbo EcoEvolution is a retreaded tyre that performed poorly across nearly all test categories. While the concept of reusing tyre carcasses is fundamentally sustainable, the execution failed to meet basic safety standards. The tyre exhibited extremely poor grip on both wet and dry roads with dangerously long braking distances. It showed unsafe, heavily understeering, and unpredictable handling dynamics. The tyre had poor construction quality with uneven surfaces causing vibrations and loud interior noise. Despite its low price, its extremely high rolling resistance caused over 10% increased fuel consumption. It failed the high-speed test and received a "deficient" overall rating with the recommendation not to use it on passenger cars.

Dry

91%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Dry Braking	6th	41.6 M	35.2 M	+6.4 M	84.62%
Dry Handling	6th	104.6 Km/H	107.4 Km/H	-2.8 Km/H	97.39%

Wet

81.3%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Wet Braking	6th	42.6 M	31.5 M	+11.1 M	73.94%
Wet Handling	6th	69.6 Km/H	78.9 Km/H	-9.3 Km/H	88.21%
Wet Circle	6th	6.99 m/s	8.63 m/s	-1.64 m/s	81%
Straight Aqua	6th	67.5 Km/H	78.2 Km/H	-10.7 Km/H	86.32%
Curved Aquaplaning	6th	2.26 m/sec2	2.94 m/sec2	-0.68 m/sec2	76.87%

Comfort

95.7%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Noise	6th	73.7 dB	70.5 dB	+3.2 dB	95.66%

Value

54.8%

Test	#	Result	Best	Diff	%
Rolling Resistance	6th	10.4 kg / t	5.7 kg / t	+4.7 kg / t	54.81%

Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts