We're not sure why, but Auto Zeitung did not calculate value, ie the price per 1000km driven. This paints a really interesting picture as the test winning Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 is ALSO the best value tyre. A set of 4 costs 665 euros and the calculated tread life is 50,000km giving a cost per 1000 km of 13.3 Euros. When you compare it to one of the budget tyres, which only cost 300 euros for a set, and performed terribly in all the tests, the fact they only last 20,000km means they actually cost you more money!
Other than the Goodyear having a near perfect results, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was great in wet handling, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport was the sporty option, and the Michelin Pilot Sport 5 was a solid all rounder, even though it was a little down in the wet.
Below is the full dataset.
Dry
In dry braking, the Bridgestone Potenza Sport delivered the shortest stopping distance at 33m, while the Mastersteel Super Sport 2 needed 36.9m - a 10.6% difference that could be crucial in emergency situations.
Dry Braking
Spread: 3.90 M (11.8%)|Avg: 34.31 M
Dry braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h) (Lower is better)
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
33.00 M
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
33.30 M
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
33.50 M
Continental PremiumContact 7
33.60 M
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
33.60 M
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
33.90 M
Falken Azenis FK520
34.20 M
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
35.00 M
Triangle EffeXSport
36.10 M
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
36.90 M
The dry handling test showed the Toyo Proxes Sport 2 was quickest around the track at 68.7 seconds, with the Mastersteel trailing at 71.5 seconds - a 3.9% gap that demonstrates the handling limitations of budget options.
Dry Handling
Spread: 2.80 s (4.1%)|Avg: 69.64 s
Dry handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
68.70 s
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
68.80 s
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
69.10 s
Continental PremiumContact 7
69.30 s
Falken Azenis FK520
69.40 s
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
69.50 s
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
69.60 s
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
69.60 s
Triangle EffeXSport
70.90 s
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
71.50 s
Wet
In wet braking, the differences were dramatic. The Continental PremiumContact 7 stopped in just 41.8m, while the Mastersteel required a concerning 52.7m - a massive 20.7% difference that highlights significant safety implications in rainy conditions.
Wet Braking
Spread: 10.90 M (26.1%)|Avg: 46.40 M
Wet braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h) (Lower is better)
Continental PremiumContact 7
41.80 M
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
42.50 M
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
43.30 M
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
44.40 M
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
45.20 M
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
46.60 M
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
47.30 M
Falken Azenis FK520
48.20 M
Triangle EffeXSport
52.00 M
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
52.70 M
The wet handling test saw the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 lead with 69.7 seconds, while the Mastersteel needed 77 seconds - a 9.5% gap.
Wet Handling
Spread: 7.30 s (10.5%)|Avg: 72.21 s
Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
69.70 s
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
69.90 s
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
70.20 s
Continental PremiumContact 7
70.20 s
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
70.80 s
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
72.60 s
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
72.80 s
Falken Azenis FK520
74.00 s
Triangle EffeXSport
74.90 s
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
77.00 s
The Wet Circle test measured cornering ability on wet surfaces, with the Bridgestone Potenza Sport achieving the fastest time at 11.11 seconds while the Mastersteel Super Sport 2 required 12.58 seconds - an 11.7% difference showing how premium tyres maintain grip in wet corners, which is larger than wet handling.
Wet Circle
Spread: 1.47 s (13.2%)|Avg: 11.52 s
Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds (Lower is better)
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
11.11 s
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
11.13 s
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
11.18 s
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
11.20 s
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
11.37 s
Falken Azenis FK520
11.51 s
Continental PremiumContact 7
11.52 s
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
11.71 s
Triangle EffeXSport
11.93 s
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
12.58 s
The Straight Aquaplaning test assessed resistance to aquaplaning, with the Vredestein Ultrac Pro remaining stable up to 76.6 km/h while the Mastersteel lost grip at just 70.8 km/h.
Straight Aqua
Spread: 5.80 Km/H (7.6%)|Avg: 74.41 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
76.60 Km/H
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
75.90 Km/H
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
75.70 Km/H
Falken Azenis FK520
75.30 Km/H
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
75.20 Km/H
Triangle EffeXSport
74.70 Km/H
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
73.70 Km/H
Continental PremiumContact 7
73.20 Km/H
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
73.00 Km/H
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
70.80 Km/H
Comfort
In the Subjective Comfort assessment, the Continental PremiumContact 7 led the way.
Subj. Comfort
Spread: 4.00 Points (40%)|Avg: 7.20 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
Continental PremiumContact 7
10.00 Points
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
8.00 Points
Falken Azenis FK520
8.00 Points
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
7.00 Points
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
7.00 Points
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
7.00 Points
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
7.00 Points
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
6.00 Points
Triangle EffeXSport
6.00 Points
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
6.00 Points
The budget Mastersteel had the lowest external passby noise of the test.
Noise
Spread: 4.00 dB (6%)|Avg: 69.10 dB
External noise in dB (Lower is better)
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
67.00 dB
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
68.00 dB
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
68.00 dB
Triangle EffeXSport
69.00 dB
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
69.00 dB
Falken Azenis FK520
69.00 dB
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
70.00 dB
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
70.00 dB
Continental PremiumContact 7
70.00 dB
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
71.00 dB
Value
Wear testing revealed the most surprising results, with the Goodyear projected to last 50,000km while budget options like Triangle and Mastersteel managed just 20,000km - a 150% difference that completely transforms the value equation despite lower purchase prices.
Wear
Spread: 30000.00 KM (60%)|Avg: 34750.00 KM
Predicted tread life in KM (Higher is better)
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
50000.00 KM
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
45000.00 KM
Continental PremiumContact 7
42500.00 KM
Falken Azenis FK520
40000.00 KM
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
35000.00 KM
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
32500.00 KM
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
32500.00 KM
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
30000.00 KM
Triangle EffeXSport
20000.00 KM
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
20000.00 KM
Rolling Resistance measurements showed the Mastersteel Super Sport 2 was most efficient at 7.35 kg/t while the Bridgestone Potenza Sport required 10.15 kg/t - a 27.6% difference that directly impacts fuel consumption and emissions.
Rolling Resistance
Spread: 2.80 kg / t (38.1%)|Avg: 8.70 kg / t
Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)
Mastersteel Super Sport 2
7.35 kg / t
Continental PremiumContact 7
8.25 kg / t
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
8.35 kg / t
Pirelli P Zero PZ4
8.60 kg / t
Falken Azenis FK520
8.70 kg / t
Toyo Proxes Sport 2
8.80 kg / t
Michelin Pilot Sport 5
8.85 kg / t
Vredestein Ultrac Pro
8.85 kg / t
Triangle EffeXSport
9.05 kg / t
Bridgestone Potenza Sport
10.15 kg / t
The Abrasion test measured tread wear per 1,000km, with the Michelin Pilot Sport 5 losing just 0.085mm while the Triangle EffeXSport lost 0.185mm - a 117.6% difference confirming Michelin's reputation for durability despite higher purchase price.
On dry roads, the Goodyear builds tremendous grip with precise steering response and remains completely manageable even at the limit. It stops quickly and handles transitions smoothly while offering decent comfort. In wet conditions, it truly excels with the quickest handling time, strong braking, and a sporty yet neutral balance that inspires confidence. The Goodyear's remarkable environmental credentials with minimal wear, long life expectancy, and good efficiency make it a complete package. It masters both performance and sustainability better than any competitor, justifying its premium price by offering the best value in the long run.
In dry conditions, the Continental delivers performance nearly matching dedicated sports tyres while providing the best ride comfort in the test. It offers high safety reserves and excellent road feel despite its touring tyre designation. On wet roads, it truly shines with the shortest braking distance and predictable, secure handling even in extreme situations. Its consistent grip inspires confidence in all conditions. The Continental achieves an impressive balance between outstanding wet safety, good handling dynamics, and excellent comfort, proving that a touring tyre can compete with UHP models while excelling in everyday usability.
The Bridgestone delivers the shortest dry braking distance and highest slalom speed, demonstrating its sporty character. This comes with firmer ride quality and higher rolling resistance that affects efficiency. In wet conditions, it provides exceptional grip with mild transitions during weight shifts and outstanding front-end precision. The Bridgestone's Japanese engineering emphasizes maximum performance and feedback at the expense of comfort and efficiency, making it the driver's choice. Despite being slightly less balanced than the top two finishers, it delivers the best price-performance ratio for enthusiasts seeking maximum driving engagement.
On dry pavement, the Michelin feels secure and stable but not as dynamic as the top performers. It delivers good grip in fast corners but understeers earlier than the sportiest contenders. Wet performance is characterized by balanced, predictable behavior and strong resistance to aquaplaning, though braking distances are merely good rather than exceptional. The Michelin follows brand tradition with minimal wear and excellent longevity, but its higher noise levels and average efficiency hold it back slightly. It prioritizes consistent performance throughout a long service life over maximum initial grip, appealing to high-mileage drivers seeking reliability and durability.
The Pirelli demonstrates excellent dry handling with sharp steering response and good braking performance. It feels balanced and neutral but with slightly less comfort than ideal. In wet conditions, it delivers good overall grip despite falling somewhat behind the class leaders in braking. The tyre provides fine feedback and neutral balance even in challenging wet conditions. While Pirelli has improved the P Zero's efficiency, its higher wear rate and shorter lifespan make it less economical over time. This fourth-generation model shows its age against newer designs but still delivers engaging handling for enthusiasts willing to accept its shorter life and higher long-term costs.
On dry surfaces, the Vredestein delivers average performance across all metrics without any standout strengths or notable weaknesses. Its wet weather behavior is mixed – while offering class-leading aquaplaning resistance, it struggles with braking performance on wet roads. The Vredestein handles predictably but without the precision or feedback of premium competitors. It runs quietly and provides good comfort, making it pleasant for everyday use. The Dutch tyre represents solid middle-ground value with reasonable wear characteristics and efficiency, best suited for drivers seeking balanced all-weather capability at a more affordable price point than premium brands.
The Toyo excels in dry conditions with the fastest handling time and impressive agility. It brakes well and provides good feedback to the driver, matching premium tyres for dynamic handling. However, wet performance reveals its limitations – while braking is acceptable, it reacts nervously to load changes, reducing confidence in challenging conditions. This Japanese offering presents a specialized character: exceptional dry-weather dynamics at a competitive price point, but with compromises in wet safety and longevity. It's well-suited for enthusiasts in drier climates who prioritize handling response over all-weather versatility.
The Falken struggles with precision on dry roads, requiring larger steering inputs and feeling less stable than competitors during dynamic maneuvers. In wet conditions, deficiencies become more apparent with longer braking distances and understeer, though it does offer excellent lateral aquaplaning resistance. The tyre's saving grace is its good durability and relatively low wear rate. The aging design shows its limitations against newer competitors, particularly in handling precision and wet grip. While offering reasonable value through longevity, its performance compromises are too significant to recommend for drivers who frequently encounter wet conditions.
On dry roads, the Triangle exhibits low grip levels with vague steering feel and significantly longer braking distances. Wet performance is concerning, with poor braking, uncertain handling, and nervous response to load changes. Despite offering acceptable aquaplaning resistance, overall wet safety is compromised. The Chinese budget tyre suffers from rapid wear and short life expectancy, negating much of its price advantage over time. The Triangle demonstrates why focusing solely on purchase price can be misleading – its safety compromises and poor longevity make it difficult to recommend even at its lower price point.
The Mastersteel shows substantial limitations on dry roads with the longest braking distances and least precise handling in the test. Wet performance is critically deficient across all metrics, scoring poorly in every wet test and presenting potential safety concerns. Its only genuine advantages are low rolling resistance for better fuel economy and quiet operation. This budget option illustrates the significant trade-offs at the lowest price point – while initially inexpensive, its extremely short lifespan, poor grip, and compromised safety characteristics make it the least economical choice over time and difficult to recommend for any regular use case.
