Test Charts / Motor

2025 Motor All Season Tyre Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tyre, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 215/55 R17
Tyres tested: 7
Disciplines: 10
Test vehicle: VW Troc

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tyres can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tyres does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	38.9 m	Best	0 km/h
2Nokian Seasonproof 2	41.4 m	+2.50 m	32 km/h
3Sunny NC501	41.5 m	+2.60 m	33 km/h
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	41.6 m	+2.70 m	33 km/h
5Debica Navigator 3	43.4 m	+4.50 m	42 km/h
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	43.8 m	+4.90 m	43 km/h
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	43.8 m	+4.90 m	43 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 12.6% (4.9 m ≈ 1.1 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro+ would still be travelling at 43 km/h when the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	112.1 s	Best
2Debica Navigator 3	113 s	+0.90 s
3Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	113.1 s	+1.00 s
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	113.2 s	+1.10 s
5Sunny NC501	113.4 s	+1.30 s
6Nokian Seasonproof 2	113.6 s	+1.50 s
7Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	113.7 s	+1.60 s

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

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Nokian Seasonproof 2	29 m	Best	0 km/h
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	30.2 m	+1.20 m	26 km/h
3Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	30.9 m	+1.90 m	32 km/h
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	31.8 m	+2.80 m	39 km/h
5Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	32.4 m	+3.40 m	42 km/h
6Debica Navigator 3	34.7 m	+5.70 m	53 km/h
7Sunny NC501	35.4 m	+6.40 m	55 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 22.1% (6.4 m ≈ 1.4 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Sunny NC501 would still be travelling at 55 km/h when the Nokian Seasonproof 2 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Seasonproof 2	74.2 s	Best
2Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	74.6 s	+0.40 s
3Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	74.9 s	+0.70 s
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	75.3 s	+1.10 s
5Debica Navigator 3	75.7 s	+1.50 s
6Michelin CrossClimate 2	76.1 s	+1.90 s
7Sunny NC501	78.6 s	+4.40 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.9% (4.4 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Seasonproof 2	92.2 km/h	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	85.7 km/h	-6.50 km/h
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	84 km/h	-8.20 km/h
4Debica Navigator 3	82.6 km/h	-9.60 km/h
5Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	80.1 km/h	-12.10 km/h
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	79 km/h	-13.20 km/h
7Sunny NC501	74.1 km/h	-18.10 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 19.6% (18.1 Km/H).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	15.7 m	Best	0 km/h
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	16.2 m	+0.50 m	23 km/h
2Nokian Seasonproof 2	16.2 m	+0.50 m	23 km/h
4Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	16.5 m	+0.80 m	29 km/h
4Sunny NC501	16.5 m	+0.80 m	29 km/h
6Debica Navigator 3	16.6 m	+0.90 m	30 km/h
7Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	17.1 m	+1.40 m	37 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 8.9% (1.4 m ≈ 0.3 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Vredestein Quatrac Pro+ would still be travelling at 37 km/h when the Michelin CrossClimate 2 had stopped.

Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.

Snow Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	5.2 s	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	5.5 s	+0.30 s
3Sunny NC501	5.6 s	+0.40 s
4Debica Navigator 3	5.7 s	+0.50 s
5Nokian Seasonproof 2	5.8 s	+0.60 s
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	5.9 s	+0.70 s
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	6 s	+0.80 s

The difference between best and worst was 15.4% (0.8 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Seasonproof 2	86.8 s	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	88.9 s	+2.10 s
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	89.2 s	+2.40 s
4Debica Navigator 3	91.2 s	+4.40 s
4Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	91.2 s	+4.40 s
6Sunny NC501	91.5 s	+4.70 s
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	92.5 s	+5.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 6.6% (5.7 s).

Comfort

Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Nokian Seasonproof 2	69.4 dB	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	70.4 dB	+1.00 dB
3Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	70.5 dB	+1.10 dB
4Sunny NC501	70.8 dB	+1.40 dB
5Continental AllSeasonContact 2	70.9 dB	+1.50 dB
6Debica Navigator 3	71.4 dB	+2.00 dB
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	72.6 dB	+3.20 dB

The difference between best and worst was 4.6% (3.2 dB).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Debica Navigator 3	6.48 kg/t	Best	£0
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	6.71 kg/t	+0.23 kg/t	£16
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	6.85 kg/t	+0.37 kg/t	£25
4Sunny NC501	7.9 kg/t	+1.42 kg/t	£97
5Nokian Seasonproof 2	8.03 kg/t	+1.55 kg/t	£105
6Vredestein Quatrac Pro+	8.04 kg/t	+1.56 kg/t	£106
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	8.33 kg/t	+1.85 kg/t	£126

The difference between best and worst was 28.5% (1.85 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21 uses about 87 L (£126) more fuel than the Debica Navigator 3.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tyre selection above.

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.