Menu

2026 autozurnal Eco Summer Tyre Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
8 min read
Contents
  1. Introduction
  2. Dry
  3. Wet
  4. Comfort
  5. Value
  6. Results
  7. Hankook iON Evo
  8. Continental UltraContact NXT
  9. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
  10. Michelin Primacy 5
  11. Pirelli Powergy
  12. Barum Bravuris 6
  13. Sava Intensa SUV 2
  14. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
  15. Imperial EcoSport SUV
  16. Tomket Tomket Suv

Auto Žurnál tested 10 summer tyres in size 215/55 R18 99V on a Volkswagen ID.3. The test covered wet performance (braking, handling, aquaplaning, circle tracking), dry performance (braking, handling), and economy and comfort (rolling resistance, energy consumption, noise, subjective comfort).

Test Publication:
Autozurnal
215/55 R18 10 tyres 4 categories
Similar Tests
Images courtesy of Autozurnal
Test Publication:
Autozurnal
Images courtesy of Autozurnal
Test Size: 215/55 R18
Tyres Tested: 10 tyres
Test Categories:
4 categories (11 tests)
Similar Tests

The Hankook iON evo took the top spot with strong results across wet and dry disciplines, including the shortest dry braking distance (34.8 m) and the fastest wet handling lap. Continental's UltraContact NXT followed in second, posting the best wet braking distance (47.2 m) and leading on efficiency. At the other end, the Tomket SUV finished last with a wet braking distance of 62.3 m - over 15 metres longer than the Continental - and the slowest times in both handling tests. The Imperial EcoSport SUV also received a failing grade. Among the budget options, the Barum Bravuris 6 stood out with rolling resistance and energy consumption figures that matched the premium tyres.

```html

Dry

The Hankook stopped in just 34.8 m, over 7 metres shorter than the last-placed Tomket at 42.0 m. That gap is significant - at the point where the Hankook has come to a complete stop, the Tomket is still travelling at 41.3 km/h.

Dry Braking

Spread: 7.20 M (20.7%)|Avg: 38.33 M
Dry braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    34.80 M
  2. Continental UltraContact NXT
    37.00 M
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    37.10 M
  4. Pirelli Powergy
    37.20 M
  5. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    38.20 M
  6. Michelin Primacy 5
    38.30 M
  7. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    38.70 M
  8. Barum Bravuris 6
    39.30 M
  9. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    40.70 M
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    42.00 M

Subjective dry handling scores followed a similar order, with the Hankook again on top (7.75) and the Tomket at the bottom (5.44). The Goodyear placed second here, ahead of the Pirelli and Sava, both of which outperformed the Continental in this discipline.

Subj. Dry Handling

Spread: 2.31 Points (29.8%)|Avg: 6.62 Points
Subjective Dry Handling Score (Higher is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    7.75 Points
  2. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    7.44 Points
  3. Pirelli Powergy
    7.19 Points
  4. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    7.06 Points
  5. Continental UltraContact NXT
    7.00 Points
  6. Michelin Primacy 5
    6.69 Points
  7. Barum Bravuris 6
    6.13 Points
  8. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    5.81 Points
  9. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    5.69 Points
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    5.44 Points

Wet

The Continental posted the shortest wet braking distance at 47.2 m, closely followed by the Michelin at 47.8 m. The Tomket needed 62.3 m to stop - over 15 metres more - meaning it would still be doing 49.3 km/h at the point where the Continental had already come to rest.

Wet Braking

Spread: 15.10 M (32%)|Avg: 52.48 M
Wet braking in meters (100 - 0 km/h) (Lower is better)
  1. Continental UltraContact NXT
    47.20 M
  2. Michelin Primacy 5
    47.80 M
  3. Hankook iON Evo
    48.60 M
  4. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    48.70 M
  5. Pirelli Powergy
    49.40 M
  6. Barum Bravuris 6
    52.60 M
  7. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    52.70 M
  8. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    57.40 M
  9. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    58.10 M
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    62.30 M

The Hankook was the fastest around the wet handling circuit at 83.6 s, with the Pirelli and Goodyear close behind. The Tomket was again last at 95.4 s, nearly 12 seconds off the pace - a large margin on an 1823 m track.

Wet Handling

Spread: 11.80 s (14.1%)|Avg: 88.79 s
Wet handling time in seconds (Lower is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    83.60 s
  2. Pirelli Powergy
    86.30 s
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    86.40 s
  4. Continental UltraContact NXT
    87.00 s
  5. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    87.10 s
  6. Michelin Primacy 5
    87.30 s
  7. Barum Bravuris 6
    89.70 s
  8. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    91.90 s
  9. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    93.20 s
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    95.40 s

Wet circle tracking times were tightly grouped at the top, with the Hankook (11.49 s), Goodyear (11.59 s), and Pirelli (11.70 s) separated by just two tenths. The Kormoran was slowest at 12.55 s.

Wet Circle

Spread: 1.06 s (9.2%)|Avg: 11.96 s
Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds (Lower is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    11.49 s
  2. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    11.59 s
  3. Pirelli Powergy
    11.70 s
  4. Continental UltraContact NXT
    11.71 s
  5. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    11.77 s
  6. Michelin Primacy 5
    12.10 s
  7. Barum Bravuris 6
    12.10 s
  8. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    12.19 s
  9. Tomket Tomket Suv
    12.44 s
  10. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    12.55 s

The Hankook held on to grip longest in straight-line aquaplaning, reaching 81.5 km/h before losing traction - well clear of the Tomket at 71.1 km/h. The Goodyear, despite its strong showing in other wet tests, dropped to eighth here at 72.9 m.

Straight Aqua

Spread: 10.40 Km/H (12.8%)|Avg: 75.02 Km/H
Float Speed in Km/H (Higher is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    81.50 Km/H
  2. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    79.00 Km/H
  3. Michelin Primacy 5
    77.80 Km/H
  4. Pirelli Powergy
    74.80 Km/H
  5. Continental UltraContact NXT
    74.50 Km/H
  6. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    73.50 Km/H
  7. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    72.90 Km/H
  8. Barum Bravuris 6
    72.90 Km/H
  9. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    72.20 Km/H
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    71.10 Km/H

Curved aquaplaning reshuffled the order: the Sava took first place at 3.45 m/s, ahead of the Hankook. The Goodyear finished last at 2.77 m/s, suggesting its tread pattern prioritises other wet disciplines over lateral water evacuation.

Curved Aquaplaning

Spread: 0.83 m/sec2 (24.1%)|Avg: 2.99 m/sec2
Remaining lateral acceleration (Higher is better)
  1. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    3.45 m/sec2
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    3.26 m/sec2
  3. Michelin Primacy 5
    3.21 m/sec2
  4. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    3.08 m/sec2
  5. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    3.03 m/sec2
  6. Continental UltraContact NXT
    2.90 m/sec2
  7. Barum Bravuris 6
    2.82 m/sec2
  8. Pirelli Powergy
    2.79 m/sec2
  9. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    2.77 m/sec2
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    2.62 m/sec2

Comfort

The Hankook scored highest for subjective comfort at 7.0 points, likely helped by its built-in sound absorber foam layer. Five tyres - Pirelli, Barum, Continental, Goodyear, and Michelin - all tied at 6.5, while the Kormoran came last at 5.5.

Subj. Comfort

Spread: 1.50 Points (21.4%)|Avg: 6.30 Points
Subjective Comfort Score (Higher is better)
  1. Hankook iON Evo
    7.00 Points
  2. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    6.50 Points
  3. Pirelli Powergy
    6.50 Points
  4. Continental UltraContact NXT
    6.50 Points
  5. Michelin Primacy 5
    6.50 Points
  6. Barum Bravuris 6
    6.50 Points
  7. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    6.00 Points
  8. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    6.00 Points
  9. Tomket Tomket Suv
    6.00 Points
  10. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    5.50 Points

Exterior noise levels were closely bunched. The Pirelli was the quietest at both 50 km/h (65.4 dB) and 80 km/h (71.4 dB), while the Tomket was the loudest at 66.5 and 72.9 dB respectively - a small but measurable difference.

Noise

Spread: 1.50 dB (2.1%)|Avg: 72.38 dB
External noise in dB (Lower is better)
  1. Pirelli Powergy
    71.40 dB
  2. Hankook iON Evo
    71.90 dB
  3. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    72.20 dB
  4. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    72.30 dB
  5. Continental UltraContact NXT
    72.40 dB
  6. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    72.60 dB
  7. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    72.70 dB
  8. Michelin Primacy 5
    72.70 dB
  9. Barum Bravuris 6
    72.70 dB
  10. Tomket Tomket Suv
    72.90 dB

Value

The Goodyear had the lowest rolling resistance coefficient at 0.536, followed by the Continental at 0.587 and Barum at 0.600. The Imperial was the least efficient at 0.841 - roughly 57% higher than the Goodyear.

Rolling Resistance

Spread: 0.30 kg / t (55.6%)|Avg: 0.69 kg / t
Rolling resistance in kg t (Lower is better)
  1. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    0.54 kg / t
  2. Continental UltraContact NXT
    0.59 kg / t
  3. Barum Bravuris 6
    0.60 kg / t
  4. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    0.66 kg / t
  5. Pirelli Powergy
    0.67 kg / t
  6. Michelin Primacy 5
    0.68 kg / t
  7. Hankook iON Evo
    0.70 kg / t
  8. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    0.78 kg / t
  9. Tomket Tomket Suv
    0.79 kg / t
  10. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    0.84 kg / t
19,000 km
£1.45/L
--
Annual Difference
--
Lifetime Savings
--
Extra Fuel/Energy
--
Extra CO2

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.

Real-world energy consumption on the ID.3 at a constant 80 km/h mirrored the lab results closely, with the Goodyear leading at 12.86 kWh/100 km and the Imperial last at 14.40 kWh/100 km. The Barum matched the Continental almost exactly (12.96 vs 12.95), confirming its strong efficiency showing despite being a budget tyre.

Energy Consumption

Spread: 1.54 kWh/100km (12%)|Avg: 13.57 kWh/100km
Energy consumption in kW hours per 100 km (Lower is better)
  1. Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
    12.86 kWh/100km
  2. Continental UltraContact NXT
    12.95 kWh/100km
  3. Barum Bravuris 6
    12.96 kWh/100km
  4. Kormoran Ultra High Performance
    13.27 kWh/100km
  5. Pirelli Powergy
    13.34 kWh/100km
  6. Tomket Tomket Suv
    13.76 kWh/100km
  7. Michelin Primacy 5
    13.78 kWh/100km
  8. Hankook iON Evo
    14.12 kWh/100km
  9. Sava Intensa SUV 2
    14.21 kWh/100km
  10. Imperial EcoSport SUV
    14.40 kWh/100km
19,000 km
£1.45/L
--
Annual Difference
--
Lifetime Savings
--
Extra Fuel/Energy
--
Extra CO2

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 Hankook iON evo topped the overall standings with strong results across almost every discipline, followed by the Continental UltraContact NXT and Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2. The Tomket SUV and Imperial EcoSport SUV finished at the bottom with significant safety deficits, particularly in braking.

1st

Hankook iON Evo

215/55 R18 99V
Hankook iON Evo
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 1st 34.8 M 100%
Subj. Dry Handling 1st 7.75 Points 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 3rd 48.6 M 47.2 M +1.4 M 97.12%
Wet Handling 1st 83.6 s 100%
Wet Circle 1st 11.49 s 100%
Straight Aqua 1st 81.5 Km/H 100%
Curved Aquaplaning 2nd 3.26 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.19 m/sec2 94.49%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 1st 7 Points 100%
Noise 2nd 71.9 dB 71.4 dB +0.5 dB 99.3%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 7th 0.7 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.16 kg / t 76.57%
Energy Consumption 8th 14.12 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +1.26 kWh/100km 91.08%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
2nd

Continental UltraContact NXT

215/55 R18 99V
Continental UltraContact NXT
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 2nd 37 M 34.8 M +2.2 M 94.05%
Subj. Dry Handling 5th 7 Points 7.75 Points -0.75 Points 90.32%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 1st 47.2 M 100%
Wet Handling 4th 87 s 83.6 s +3.4 s 96.09%
Wet Circle 4th 11.71 s 11.49 s +0.22 s 98.12%
Straight Aqua 5th 74.5 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -7 Km/H 91.41%
Curved Aquaplaning 6th 2.9 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.55 m/sec2 84.06%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 2nd 6.5 Points 7 Points -0.5 Points 92.86%
Noise 5th 72.4 dB 71.4 dB +1 dB 98.62%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 2nd 0.587 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.05 kg / t 91.31%
Energy Consumption 2nd 12.95 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.09 kWh/100km 99.31%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
3rd

Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2

215/55 R18 99V
Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance 2
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 3rd 37.1 M 34.8 M +2.3 M 93.8%
Subj. Dry Handling 2nd 7.438 Points 7.75 Points -0.31 Points 95.97%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 4th 48.7 M 47.2 M +1.5 M 96.92%
Wet Handling 3rd 86.4 s 83.6 s +2.8 s 96.76%
Wet Circle 2nd 11.59 s 11.49 s +0.1 s 99.14%
Straight Aqua 7th 72.9 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -8.6 Km/H 89.45%
Curved Aquaplaning 9th 2.77 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.68 m/sec2 80.29%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 2nd 6.5 Points 7 Points -0.5 Points 92.86%
Noise 3rd 72.2 dB 71.4 dB +0.8 dB 98.89%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 1st 0.536 kg / t 100%
Energy Consumption 1st 12.86 kWh/100km 100%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
4th

Michelin Primacy 5

215/55 R18 99V
Michelin Primacy 5
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 6th 38.3 M 34.8 M +3.5 M 90.86%
Subj. Dry Handling 6th 6.688 Points 7.75 Points -1.06 Points 86.3%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 2nd 47.8 M 47.2 M +0.6 M 98.74%
Wet Handling 6th 87.3 s 83.6 s +3.7 s 95.76%
Wet Circle 6th 12.1 s 11.49 s +0.61 s 94.96%
Straight Aqua 3rd 77.8 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -3.7 Km/H 95.46%
Curved Aquaplaning 3rd 3.21 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.24 m/sec2 93.04%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 2nd 6.5 Points 7 Points -0.5 Points 92.86%
Noise 7th 72.7 dB 71.4 dB +1.3 dB 98.21%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 6th 0.677 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.14 kg / t 79.17%
Energy Consumption 7th 13.78 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.92 kWh/100km 93.32%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
5th

Pirelli Powergy

215/55 R18 99V
Pirelli Powergy
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 4th 37.2 M 34.8 M +2.4 M 93.55%
Subj. Dry Handling 3rd 7.188 Points 7.75 Points -0.56 Points 92.75%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 5th 49.4 M 47.2 M +2.2 M 95.55%
Wet Handling 2nd 86.3 s 83.6 s +2.7 s 96.87%
Wet Circle 3rd 11.7 s 11.49 s +0.21 s 98.21%
Straight Aqua 4th 74.8 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -6.7 Km/H 91.78%
Curved Aquaplaning 8th 2.79 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.66 m/sec2 80.87%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 2nd 6.5 Points 7 Points -0.5 Points 92.86%
Noise 1st 71.4 dB 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 5th 0.667 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.13 kg / t 80.36%
Energy Consumption 5th 13.34 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.48 kWh/100km 96.4%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
6th

Barum Bravuris 6

215/55 R18 99V
Barum Bravuris 6
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 8th 39.3 M 34.8 M +4.5 M 88.55%
Subj. Dry Handling 7th 6.125 Points 7.75 Points -1.63 Points 79.03%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 6th 52.6 M 47.2 M +5.4 M 89.73%
Wet Handling 7th 89.7 s 83.6 s +6.1 s 93.2%
Wet Circle 6th 12.1 s 11.49 s +0.61 s 94.96%
Straight Aqua 7th 72.9 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -8.6 Km/H 89.45%
Curved Aquaplaning 7th 2.82 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.63 m/sec2 81.74%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 2nd 6.5 Points 7 Points -0.5 Points 92.86%
Noise 7th 72.7 dB 71.4 dB +1.3 dB 98.21%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 3rd 0.6 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.06 kg / t 89.33%
Energy Consumption 3rd 12.96 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.1 kWh/100km 99.23%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
7th

Sava Intensa SUV 2

215/55 R18 99V
Sava Intensa SUV 2
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 5th 38.2 M 34.8 M +3.4 M 91.1%
Subj. Dry Handling 4th 7.063 Points 7.75 Points -0.69 Points 91.14%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 7th 52.7 M 47.2 M +5.5 M 89.56%
Wet Handling 5th 87.1 s 83.6 s +3.5 s 95.98%
Wet Circle 5th 11.77 s 11.49 s +0.28 s 97.62%
Straight Aqua 2nd 79 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -2.5 Km/H 96.93%
Curved Aquaplaning 1st 3.45 m/sec2 100%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 7th 6 Points 7 Points -1 Points 85.71%
Noise 6th 72.6 dB 71.4 dB +1.2 dB 98.35%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 8th 0.784 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.25 kg / t 68.37%
Energy Consumption 9th 14.21 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +1.35 kWh/100km 90.5%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
8th

Kormoran Ultra High Performance

215/55 R18 99V
Kormoran Ultra High Performance
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 7th 38.7 M 34.8 M +3.9 M 89.92%
Subj. Dry Handling 9th 5.688 Points 7.75 Points -2.06 Points 73.39%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 8th 57.4 M 47.2 M +10.2 M 82.23%
Wet Handling 9th 93.2 s 83.6 s +9.6 s 89.7%
Wet Circle 10th 12.55 s 11.49 s +1.06 s 91.55%
Straight Aqua 9th 72.2 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -9.3 Km/H 88.59%
Curved Aquaplaning 5th 3.03 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.42 m/sec2 87.83%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 10th 5.5 Points 7 Points -1.5 Points 78.57%
Noise 4th 72.3 dB 71.4 dB +0.9 dB 98.76%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 4th 0.664 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.13 kg / t 80.72%
Energy Consumption 4th 13.27 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.41 kWh/100km 96.91%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
9th

Imperial EcoSport SUV

215/55 R18 99V
Imperial EcoSport SUV
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 9th 40.7 M 34.8 M +5.9 M 85.5%
Subj. Dry Handling 8th 5.813 Points 7.75 Points -1.94 Points 75.01%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 9th 58.1 M 47.2 M +10.9 M 81.24%
Wet Handling 8th 91.9 s 83.6 s +8.3 s 90.97%
Wet Circle 8th 12.19 s 11.49 s +0.7 s 94.26%
Straight Aqua 6th 73.5 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -8 Km/H 90.18%
Curved Aquaplaning 4th 3.08 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.37 m/sec2 89.28%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 7th 6 Points 7 Points -1 Points 85.71%
Noise 7th 72.7 dB 71.4 dB +1.3 dB 98.21%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 10th 0.841 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.31 kg / t 63.73%
Energy Consumption 10th 14.4 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +1.54 kWh/100km 89.31%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts
10th

Tomket Tomket Suv

215/55 R18 95V
Tomket Tomket Suv
Test # Result Best Diff %
Dry Braking 10th 42 M 34.8 M +7.2 M 82.86%
Subj. Dry Handling 10th 5.438 Points 7.75 Points -2.31 Points 70.17%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Wet Braking 10th 62.3 M 47.2 M +15.1 M 75.76%
Wet Handling 10th 95.4 s 83.6 s +11.8 s 87.63%
Wet Circle 9th 12.44 s 11.49 s +0.95 s 92.36%
Straight Aqua 10th 71.1 Km/H 81.5 Km/H -10.4 Km/H 87.24%
Curved Aquaplaning 10th 2.62 m/sec2 3.45 m/sec2 -0.83 m/sec2 75.94%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Subj. Comfort 7th 6 Points 7 Points -1 Points 85.71%
Noise 10th 72.9 dB 71.4 dB +1.5 dB 97.94%
Test # Result Best Diff %
Rolling Resistance 9th 0.786 kg / t 0.536 kg / t +0.25 kg / t 68.19%
Energy Consumption 6th 13.76 kWh/100km 12.86 kWh/100km +0.9 kWh/100km 93.46%
Read Reviews Test Results Results Table Test Charts

Similar Tyre Tests

Show All summer tyre tests
2025 AutoView Sports Tyre Test
May 2026 275/35R19 Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S 5 tyres
2026 Motor Summer Tyre Test
April 2026 225/45 R17 Continental PremiumContact 7 9 tyres
2026 AutoBild Track Day Tyre Test
April 2026 275/35 R19 Pirelli P Zero Trofeo RS 7 tyres
2026 Summer ECO Tyre Test
March 2026 195/55 R16 Dunlop Blue Response TG 8 tyres
2026 Sport Auto Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/45 R17 Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo 7 tyres
2026 Vi Bilagare Summer Tyre Test
March 2026 205/55 R16 Continental PremiumContact 7 10 tyres

Discussion

6 comments
  1. Antore
    You write that the PremiumContact 7 is a “safety/handling champ.” Continental is a good tire and has won many tests. However, load capacity is a significant factor when making tire comparisons, and I have not seen a single test where the PremiumContact 7 has come out on top when talking about tires suitable for the weight of EVs and sizes 18 inches or above.

    The Ion EVO is unfortunately tested quite rarely, but AutoBild tested it about a year ago in size 215/55 R18 (99 Y), and the PremiumContact 7 was included as well. The Ion EVO was the clear winner compared to the Continental — both in wet and dry conditions, handling, braking, and even aquaplaning tests. I recommend taking a look at the test results.

    I’ve now been driving on these Hankooks for a few weeks (Polestar 2), and besides being a high-performance tire, it is also incredibly comfortable and quiet. I can recommend it without reservation.
    #10637
    1. TyreReviews Antore
      I'm a little confused as the PC7 isn't in this test? Generally the PC7 does well in safety critical criteria such as wet braking.

      The iON EVO does seem to be quite a special tyre though.
      #10638
      1. Antore TyreReviews
        As I wrote, the PC7 and the iON EVO were both included in the same AutoBild test about a year ago. I haven’t found any other tire test where these two tires were tested together. The only way to truly compare tires is when they are tested at the same time and using the same testing methods.

        Here is the link to the results, where both the PC7 and the iON EVO are included: https://www.tyrereviews.com/Tyre-Tests/2025-EV-Tyre-Test.htm
        #10639
      2. Antore TyreReviews
        My original message was meant to be a reply to “Fermin’s” message below, where the PC7 was mentioned. My bad, and I apologize for posting my message in the wrong place :)
        #10640
        1. TyreReviews Antore
          Ah that makes more sense :)

          I have actually tested the iON but not against the PC7. It is a very good tyre. Sadly there was an issue with part of the test so the full results couldn't be published yet.
          #10641
  2. Fermi archived

    Very interesting test results. I am currently thinking what my next pair of summers will be for my Ioniq 6 (225 / 55 R18). It is currently running on Hankook Ventus S1 Evo 3 EV, which have a C in wet braking and I really dislike their lack of wet grip.

    When I pair this with other recent summer tyre tests (yours and ADAC first of all), it seems that both the Goodyear Efficient Grip 2 and Continental Ultragrip NXT are very similar in Safety/Handling to the Michelin Primacy 5, but quite a lot better in rolling resistance.
    Going from the ADAC test, Goodyear is also very comparable in wear to the Michelin. I would assume the Ultragrip to be very competitive here, but so far I have seen no data on this.

    Going to the safety/handling champs, like the Continental Premium Contact 7 and Pirelli Cinturato C3, they probably slot in rolling resistance like the Imperial in this test.

    For me this means I either pay a premium and go the Premium Contact 7 / Pirelli route: This would result in ~160€ more over lifetime in energy, and 20% less mileage until they need to be changed. This is roughly 50% more expensive in total over tyre lifetime. Also, roughly 50 km less range per battery charge (Going just by a 2 kWh/100km increase).

    If I go by the more economical prio, I would skip the Primacy 5 and go straight for Efficient Grip 2 or Ultragrip NXT. Means a lot cheaper to run and 50 km more on a single charge.

    Would love to hear your thoughts on this.

    #10610