Charts 2025 EV Tyre Test - Tyre Reviews And Ratings

Below are all the data points for the 2025 EV Tyre Test, displaying how each tyre performed across all test categories. The spider chart below provides a complete overview of performance, where one hundred percent represents the best performance in each category. The larger the area covered by each tyre's plot, the better its overall performance.

How to read these charts: For each test category, data is presented relative to the best performing tire. The direction indicates whether lower or higher values are better - pay close attention to this when interpreting results.

Performance Overview

This radar chart shows relative performance across all test categories, with 100% representing the best performance in each category. Reference tires may have gaps where data is not available.

Hankook iON Evo

Continental PremiumContact 7

Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

Falken e.Ziex

Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

Goodride Solmax 1

Dry Performance Overview

Dry Braking (M)

Dry braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 33.6 M. The difference between best and worst was 11.1%.

Hankook iON Evo

33.6 M
Continental PremiumContact 7

34.5 M
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

35.1 M
Falken e.Ziex

35.7 M
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

35.9 M
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

36.6 M
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

36.6 M
Goodride Solmax 1

37.8 M

Dry Handling (Km/H)

Dry Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 92.8 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 5%.

Hankook iON Evo

92.8 Km/H
Continental PremiumContact 7

91.9 Km/H
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

91.1 Km/H
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

90.8 Km/H
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

90.5 Km/H
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

90.4 Km/H
Falken e.Ziex

90.2 Km/H
Goodride Solmax 1

88.2 Km/H

Wet Performance Overview

Wet Braking (M)

Wet braking in meters (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Continental PremiumContact 7 with a result of 39.4 M. The difference between best and worst was 19.1%.

Continental PremiumContact 7

39.4 M
Hankook iON Evo

39.6 M
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

41.8 M
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

42.2 M
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

43.2 M
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

44.9 M
Falken e.Ziex

45.6 M
Goodride Solmax 1

48.7 M

Wet Handling (Km/H)

Wet Handling Average Speed (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 74.4 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 8.1%.

Hankook iON Evo

74.4 Km/H
Continental PremiumContact 7

74.1 Km/H
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

72.9 Km/H
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

72 Km/H
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

71.5 Km/H
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

70.6 Km/H
Falken e.Ziex

69.3 Km/H
Goodride Solmax 1

68.4 Km/H

Wet Circle (s)

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Hankook iON Evo with a result of 12.45 s. The difference between best and worst was 4.5%.

Hankook iON Evo

12.45 s
Continental PremiumContact 7

12.59 s
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

12.67 s
Falken e.Ziex

12.68 s
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

12.7 s
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

12.79 s
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

12.86 s
Goodride Solmax 1

13.03 s

Straight Aqua (Km/H)

Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN with a result of 80.1 Km/H. The difference between best and worst was 20.5%.

Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

80.1 Km/H
Hankook iON Evo

74.8 Km/H
Falken e.Ziex

72.6 Km/H
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

71.5 Km/H
Continental PremiumContact 7

69.3 Km/H
Goodride Solmax 1

67.5 Km/H
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

65.8 Km/H
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

63.7 Km/H

Curved Aquaplaning (m/sec2)

Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN with a result of 3.02 m/sec2. The difference between best and worst was 14.6%.

Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

3.02 m/sec2
Hankook iON Evo

2.97 m/sec2
Goodride Solmax 1

2.85 m/sec2
Falken e.Ziex

2.84 m/sec2
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

2.84 m/sec2
Continental PremiumContact 7

2.74 m/sec2
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

2.6 m/sec2
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

2.58 m/sec2

Comfort Performance Overview

Subj. Comfort ( Points)

Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV with a result of 8 Points. The difference between best and worst was 37.5%.

Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

8 Points
Continental PremiumContact 7

7 Points
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

7 Points
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

7 Points
Hankook iON Evo

7 Points
Falken e.Ziex

7 Points
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

6 Points
Goodride Solmax 1

5 Points

Noise (dB)

External noise in dB (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61 with a result of 68.7 dB. The difference between best and worst was 4.7%.

Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

68.7 dB
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

69.9 dB
Hankook iON Evo

70.2 dB
Goodride Solmax 1

70.3 dB
Falken e.Ziex

70.9 dB
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

71.2 dB
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

72 dB
Continental PremiumContact 7

72.1 dB

Value Performance Overview

Wear (KM)

Predicted tread life in KM (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV with a result of 49050 KM. The difference between best and worst was 41.9%.

Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

49050 KM
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

44920 KM
Hankook iON Evo

43120 KM
Continental PremiumContact 7

40890 KM
Falken e.Ziex

36790 KM
Goodride Solmax 1

31030 KM
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

30280 KM
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

28510 KM

Value (Price/1000)

Euros/1000km based on cost/wear (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Goodride Solmax 1 with a result of 11 Price/1000. The difference between best and worst was 32.9%.

Goodride Solmax 1

11 Price/1000
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

12 Price/1000
Falken e.Ziex

14.9 Price/1000
Hankook iON Evo

15.1 Price/1000
Continental PremiumContact 7

15.2 Price/1000
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

15.6 Price/1000
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

15.7 Price/1000
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

16.4 Price/1000

Rolling Resistance (kg / t)

Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Falken e.Ziex with a result of 5.86 kg / t. The difference between best and worst was 23.5%.

Falken e.Ziex

5.86 kg / t
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

6.51 kg / t
Hankook iON Evo

6.81 kg / t
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

7.15 kg / t
Goodride Solmax 1

7.22 kg / t
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

7.33 kg / t
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

7.58 kg / t
Continental PremiumContact 7

7.66 kg / t

Range (km)

Calculated Range (Higher is better)

Key Insight: The best performer was Falken e.Ziex with a result of 410 km. The difference between best and worst was 16%.

Falken e.Ziex

410 km
Hankook iON Evo

381.3 km
Michelin Primacy 4 Plus

377.2 km
Goodride Solmax 1

373.2 km
Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61

373.1 km
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV

373.1 km
Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN

352.6 km
Continental PremiumContact 7

344.4 km

Overall Findings

Based on the weighted scoring from all tests, here are the overall results:

Position	Tyre	Score
	Hankook iON Evo	0%
2	Continental PremiumContact 7	0%
3	Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV	0%
4	Michelin Primacy 4 Plus	0%
5	Falken e.Ziex	0%
6	Firestone Roadhawk 2 ENLITEN	0%
7	Yokohama BluEarth XT AE61	0%
8	Goodride Solmax 1	0%

Menu

2025 EV Tyre Test