It's the second test for the new Pirelli P Zero PZ5, and the second win! This years Auto Express summer tyre test has tested nine popular summer tyres in 225/40 R18, with some rather interesting results.

As always we suggest you visit the Auto Express website on the link below for the full details, but here is our summary.

Perhaps the most interesting result of this test was the Continental SportContact 7, which usually performs well in the wet, struggling in the wet conditions of the test facility. I asked Continental to comment and they are as confused as I am, I'll update this article if I hear something else in the future.

As Auto Express do not provide raw data, instead percentages to the best in test, the data below is based on estimated 'bests'. The percentage difference between the tyres is accurate, but the numbers are based on guessing the best in category. As scoring is done on percentages this doesn't affect the score weighting calculator on the results tab but I thought it was important to share.

Dry

Dry Braking

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Yokohama Advan Sport V107	34 m	Best
2Bridgestone Potenza Sport	34.9 m	+0.90 m
2Continental SportContact 7	34.9 m	+0.90 m
4Pirelli P Zero PZ5	35.2 m	+1.20 m
5Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	35.6 m	+1.60 m
6Hankook Ventus Evo	36.4 m	+2.40 m
7Michelin Pilot Sport 5	36.8 m	+2.80 m
7Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	36.8 m	+2.80 m
9Ceat SportDrive	38.3 m	+4.30 m

The difference between best and worst was 12.6% (4.3 m ≈ 1 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling

Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Potenza Sport	82 s	Best
1Pirelli P Zero PZ5	82 s	Best
3Continental SportContact 7	82.5 s	+0.50 s
4Yokohama Advan Sport V107	82.8 s	+0.80 s
4Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	82.8 s	+0.80 s
6Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	82.9 s	+0.90 s
7Michelin Pilot Sport 5	83.1 s	+1.10 s
7Hankook Ventus Evo	83.1 s	+1.10 s
9Ceat SportDrive	83.8 s	+1.80 s

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

Wet

Wet Braking

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Bridgestone Potenza Sport	30 m	Best
2Pirelli P Zero PZ5	30.8 m	+0.80 m
3Michelin Pilot Sport 5	31.6 m	+1.60 m
4Hankook Ventus Evo	32.4 m	+2.40 m
5Yokohama Advan Sport V107	33.2 m	+3.20 m
6Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	34.1 m	+4.10 m
7Continental SportContact 7	35 m	+5.00 m
8Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	35.9 m	+5.90 m
9Ceat SportDrive	36.8 m	+6.80 m

The difference between best and worst was 22.7% (6.8 m ≈ 1.5 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero PZ5	90 s	Best
2Hankook Ventus Evo	90.2 s	+0.20 s
3Bridgestone Potenza Sport	90.6 s	+0.60 s
4Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	90.9 s	+0.90 s
5Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	91.1 s	+1.10 s
5Michelin Pilot Sport 5	91.1 s	+1.10 s
7Yokohama Advan Sport V107	91.8 s	+1.80 s
7Continental SportContact 7	91.8 s	+1.80 s
9Ceat SportDrive	97.7 s	+7.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.6% (7.7 s).

Wet Circle

Wet Circle
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli P Zero PZ5	28 s	Best
2Bridgestone Potenza Sport	28.1 s	+0.10 s
3Michelin Pilot Sport 5	28.2 s	+0.20 s
4Yokohama Advan Sport V107	28.3 s	+0.30 s
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	28.3 s	+0.30 s
6Continental SportContact 7	28.4 s	+0.40 s
7Hankook Ventus Evo	28.5 s	+0.50 s
8Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	28.6 s	+0.60 s
9Ceat SportDrive	28.7 s	+0.70 s

All the tyres in the Wet Circle test finished less than 3% apart.

Straight Aqua

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport 5	88 km/h	Best
2Hankook Ventus Evo	86.5 km/h	-1.50 km/h
3Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	85.4 km/h	-2.60 km/h
4Bridgestone Potenza Sport	85.2 km/h	-2.80 km/h
5Continental SportContact 7	84.8 km/h	-3.20 km/h
6Pirelli P Zero PZ5	84.5 km/h	-3.50 km/h
7Yokohama Advan Sport V107	83.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
8Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	83.6 km/h	-4.40 km/h
9Ceat SportDrive	81.3 km/h	-6.70 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 7.6% (6.7 Km/H).

Curved Aquaplaning

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport 5	0.85 m/sec2	Best
1Hankook Ventus Evo	0.85 m/sec2	Best
3Yokohama Advan Sport V107	0.83 m/sec2	-0.02 m/sec2
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	0.79 m/sec2	-0.06 m/sec2
5Pirelli P Zero PZ5	0.78 m/sec2	-0.07 m/sec2
6Ceat SportDrive	0.77 m/sec2	-0.08 m/sec2
7Bridgestone Potenza Sport	0.75 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
8Continental SportContact 7	0.7 m/sec2	-0.15 m/sec2
8Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	0.7 m/sec2	-0.15 m/sec2

The difference between best and worst was 17.6% (0.15 m/sec2).

Comfort

Subj. Noise

Subj. Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	10 Points	Best
2Hankook Ventus Evo	9.6 Points	-0.40 Points
3Pirelli P Zero PZ5	9.3 Points	-0.70 Points
4Ceat SportDrive	9 Points	-1.00 Points
5Yokohama Advan Sport V107	8.8 Points	-1.20 Points
5Bridgestone Potenza Sport	8.8 Points	-1.20 Points
7Continental SportContact 7	8.7 Points	-1.30 Points
7Michelin Pilot Sport 5	8.7 Points	-1.30 Points
9Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	8.4 Points	-1.60 Points

The difference between best and worst was 16% (1.6 Points).

Value

Rolling Resistance

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Ceat SportDrive	7 kg/t	Best	£0
2Kumho Ecsta Sport PS72	7.36 kg/t	+0.36 kg/t	£23
3Michelin Pilot Sport 5	7.45 kg/t	+0.45 kg/t	£28
4Continental SportContact 7	7.63 kg/t	+0.63 kg/t	£40
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6	7.63 kg/t	+0.63 kg/t	£40
6Hankook Ventus Evo	7.9 kg/t	+0.90 kg/t	£57
7Pirelli P Zero PZ5	7.99 kg/t	+0.99 kg/t	£62
8Bridgestone Potenza Sport	8.25 kg/t	+1.25 kg/t	£79
9Yokohama Advan Sport V107	8.97 kg/t	+1.97 kg/t	£124

The difference between best and worst was 28.1% (1.97 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Yokohama Advan Sport V107 uses about 86 L (£124) more fuel than the Ceat SportDrive.

Adjust the assumptions

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

Petrol/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

19,000 km

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

£1.45/L

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tyre age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Results

The new Pirelli P Zero PZ5 impressed with three test wins—more than any other tyre—including first place in both wet and dry handling. In the wet, it was agile, stable, and well-balanced, taking second in braking just 0.7m behind the leader, though its pace was greater than its feel suggested. Aquaplaning results were good but not class-leading. In the dry, it showed strong grip, throttle adjustability, and composure, matching the fastest lap time with Bridgestone and placing fourth in braking. Quiet and comfortable over rough asphalt, its only notable drawback was relatively high rolling resistance.

Dry98.3%

Wet98%

Comfort93%

Rolling Resistance87.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 9	35.2 m	+1.20 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 9	82 s	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 9	30.8 m	+0.80 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	1^st / 9	90 s	Best in this discipline
Wet CircleLower is better	1^st / 9	28 s	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 9	84.5 km/h	-3.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	5^th / 9	0.78 m/sec2	-0.07 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	3^rd / 9	9.3 Points	-0.70 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 9	7.99 kg/t	+0.99 kg/t

The Bridgestone, last year’s winner in this size, takes second place this time but delivers a dramatic turnaround in wet braking, topping the field at 27.5m—nearly a metre ahead of its nearest rival. It added third in wet handling and solid aquaplaning results, though felt less confident in standing water. In the dry, it matched Pirelli for the fastest lap, showing strong grip, precise transitions, and excellent traction, with joint-second braking just under a metre off the best. Quiet and consistent, its main drawback is high rolling resistance, but its balanced performance secures a strong overall result.

Dry98.7%

Wet98.1%

Comfort88%

Rolling Resistance84.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 9	34.9 m	+0.90 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	1^st / 9	82 s	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 9	30 m	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 9	90.6 s	+0.60 s
Wet CircleLower is better	2^nd / 9	28.1 s	+0.10 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	4^th / 9	85.2 km/h	-2.80 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	7^th / 9	0.75 m/sec2	-0.10 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	5^th / 9	8.8 Points	-1.20 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	8^th / 9	8.25 kg/t	+1.25 kg/t

The new Hankook impressed with consistently strong wet-weather performance, earning third overall despite no outright wins. It was within a metre of the leader in wet braking and excelled on the wet handling circuit, combining grip, braking, traction, and composure for a lap just 0.2 seconds off the best. It also claimed second in both aquaplaning tests. Dry results were less competitive, with sixth in braking and seventh in handling, lacking the grip and precision of the leaders. Refinement was a highlight, with low cabin noise and good bump absorption, though rolling resistance was only average.

Dry96%

Wet97.4%

Comfort96%

Rolling Resistance88.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 9	36.4 m	+2.40 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	7^th / 9	83.1 s	+1.10 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 9	32.4 m	+2.40 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	2^nd / 9	90.2 s	+0.20 s
Wet CircleLower is better	7^th / 9	28.5 s	+0.50 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 9	86.5 km/h	-1.50 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 9	0.85 m/sec2	Best in this discipline
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	2^nd / 9	9.6 Points	-0.40 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 9	7.9 kg/t	+0.90 kg/t

The Michelin Pilot Sport 5 repeats its fourth-place finish from last year, again showing standout aquaplaning ability with wins in both tests. It took third in wet cornering and wet braking—within a metre of the leader—but was only joint-fifth in wet handling despite feeling composed, grippy, and stable. Dry results were more modest, with seventh in both braking and handling, around 2.6m and several tenths off the best respectively, though it delivered a smooth, high-quality driving feel. While rather noisy in the cabin, it offered excellent fuel economy and a performance that felt stronger than the raw times suggested.

Dry95.5%

Wet98.2%

Comfort87%

Rolling Resistance94%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 9	36.8 m	+2.80 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	7^th / 9	83.1 s	+1.10 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 9	31.6 m	+1.60 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 9	91.1 s	+1.10 s
Wet CircleLower is better	3^rd / 9	28.2 s	+0.20 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 9	88 km/h	Best in this discipline
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	1^st / 9	0.85 m/sec2	Best in this discipline
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	7^th / 9	8.7 Points	-1.30 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 9	7.45 kg/t	+0.45 kg/t

The new Kumho made an impressive debut with strong wet and dry handling performances and excellent refinement, despite weaknesses in other areas. It struggled in wet braking, aquaplaning, and wet cornering, ranking eighth in each, yet delivered the fourth-fastest wet lap thanks to great traction, stability, and precise balance. In the dry, it again paired poor braking with strong handling, finishing joint-fourth, though it needed assertive steering and was noisy under pressure. It excelled in comfort, recording the lowest noise levels and absorbing bumps well, and offered strong economy with the second-lowest rolling resistance.

Dry95.7%

Wet92.4%

Comfort100%

Rolling Resistance95.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	7^th / 9	36.8 m	+2.80 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 9	82.8 s	+0.80 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 9	35.9 m	+5.90 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	4^th / 9	90.9 s	+0.90 s
Wet CircleLower is better	8^th / 9	28.6 s	+0.60 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 9	83.6 km/h	-4.40 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 9	0.7 m/sec2	-0.15 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	1^st / 9	10 Points	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 9	7.36 kg/t	+0.36 kg/t

The Goodyear, a previous triple test winner and close runner-up, delivered a solid but less dominant performance this time, with no outright wins. In the wet, it placed sixth in braking, fourth in cornering, and fifth in handling, showing good balance and composure when driven smoothly, and ranked third in straight-line aquaplaning. Dry results were similarly mid-pack, with average braking and sixth in handling, just 0.6 seconds off the best, offering precision and strong traction but lacking the sharpness of the top performers. High cabin noise and some harshness over ridges were drawbacks, though rolling resistance was competitive, making it a capable all-rounder in a tougher field.

Dry97.2%

Wet95.2%

Comfort84%

Rolling Resistance91.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 9	35.6 m	+1.60 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	6^th / 9	82.9 s	+0.90 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 9	34.1 m	+4.10 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	5^th / 9	91.1 s	+1.10 s
Wet CircleLower is better	4^th / 9	28.3 s	+0.30 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 9	85.4 km/h	-2.60 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	4^th / 9	0.79 m/sec2	-0.06 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	9^th / 9	8.4 Points	-1.60 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 9	7.63 kg/t	+0.63 kg/t

The new Yokohama Advan Sport V107 delivers a competitive showing among major European rivals, excelling more in dry conditions than wet. It topped dry braking with a class-leading 32.2m stop from 60mph and ranked joint-fourth in dry handling, feeling grippy and tidy if slightly demanding to drive at the limit. Wet performance was more mixed, with fifth in straight-line braking, equal-seventh in handling due to limited traction and stability, and mid-pack aquaplaning results. It offered low cabin noise but was louder over sharp bumps, and its high rolling resistance made it the least fuel-efficient tyre tested. Overall, its performance was still within 2% of the best in the group.

Dry99.5%

Wet95.9%

Comfort88%

Rolling Resistance78%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 9	34 m	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingLower is better	4^th / 9	82.8 s	+0.80 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	5^th / 9	33.2 m	+3.20 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 9	91.8 s	+1.80 s
Wet CircleLower is better	4^th / 9	28.3 s	+0.30 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 9	83.8 km/h	-4.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	3^rd / 9	0.83 m/sec2	-0.02 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	5^th / 9	8.8 Points	-1.20 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	9^th / 9	8.97 kg/t	+1.97 kg/t

The Continental SportContact 7, last year’s third-place finisher in the 17-inch test, ranks eighth here despite being only 2% off the top performer. Its wet performance was the main weakness, placing seventh in straight-line braking—2.5m longer than the leader—eighth in wet handling, and mid-pack in aquaplaning. While traction was good, it felt unsettled over standing water and light at the rear in fast sweeps. In the dry, it excelled with joint-second braking and third in handling, showing superb grip, precision, and composure, though slightly off the fastest time. Noise levels were moderate, comfort was good, and rolling resistance was mid-range.

Dry98.4%

Wet93.1%

Comfort87%

Rolling Resistance91.7%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 9	34.9 m	+0.90 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	3^rd / 9	82.5 s	+0.50 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 9	35 m	+5.00 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	7^th / 9	91.8 s	+1.80 s
Wet CircleLower is better	6^th / 9	28.4 s	+0.40 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 9	84.8 km/h	-3.20 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	8^th / 9	0.7 m/sec2	-0.15 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	7^th / 9	8.7 Points	-1.30 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 9	7.63 kg/t	+0.63 kg/t

The Ceat SportDrive, a newcomer to testing, delivered a mixed performance, showing particular weakness in the wet. It was last in nearly all objective tests, including straight-line wet braking, where it took over 6m longer to stop than the leader, and struggled for grip and traction on the wet handling circuit. The Golf GTI felt light and tentative on them, requiring gentle inputs to maintain balance. Dry performance was also lacking, with braking more than 4m behind the best and handling two seconds off the pace, though it could be guided onto the right line. It was refined, offered the lowest rolling resistance despite an unfavourable EU label, but was surprisingly one of the most expensive tyres tested.

Dry93.3%

Wet90.6%

Comfort90%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (9)

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

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	9^th / 9	38.3 m	+4.30 m
Dry HandlingLower is better	9^th / 9	83.8 s	+1.80 s
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 9	36.8 m	+6.80 m
Wet HandlingLower is better	9^th / 9	97.7 s	+7.70 s
Wet CircleLower is better	9^th / 9	28.7 s	+0.70 s
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 9	81.3 km/h	-6.70 km/h
Curved AquaplaningHigher is better	6^th / 9	0.77 m/sec2	-0.08 m/sec2
Subj. NoiseHigher is better	4^th / 9	9 Points	-1.00 Points
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 9	7 kg/t	Best in this discipline

Discussion

2 comments

Tom Jan 30, 2026 archived

strange results: Conti SC7 on place 8 out of 9. Kumho was tested bad in wet here, but in other test ("Die Reifentester") it was the best....also Asym6 with bad results here, but usually number 1-3 in other tests

#10499
1. TyreReviews Tom Feb 2, 2026 archived
  
  Agreed, bit of an odd one but that sometimes happens in testing (though rarely to this degree!)
  
  #10501

Menu

Tyre shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Dry

Wet

Comfort

Value

Results

Cross-check this test