Test Charts / Tyre Reviews

All Season vs All Terrain Tyres Tested: Do You Actually Need an All Terrain?

Name: All Season vs All Terrain Tyres Tested: Do You Actually Need an All Terrain?
Creator: Tyre Reviews
Published: 2026-10-14

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: 265/70 R17
Tyres tested: 2
Disciplines: 17
Test vehicle: Ford Ranger Raptor

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
Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	40.28 m	Best	0 km/h
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	40.99 m	+0.71 m	17 km/h
RefReference All Terrain Avg	44.86 m	+4.58 m	42 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 11.4% (4.58 m ≈ 1 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT would still be travelling at 17 km/h when the Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3 had stopped.

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

Subj. Dry Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	11 Points	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	9.75 Points	-1.25 Points
RefReference All Terrain Avg	9.32 Points	-1.68 Points

The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (1.68 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	33.53 m	Best	0 km/h
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	35.77 m	+2.24 m	33 km/h
RefReference All Terrain Avg	40.69 m	+7.16 m	55 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 21.4% (7.16 m ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT would still be travelling at 33 km/h when the Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3 had stopped.

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

Wet Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	117.67 s	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	119.98 s	+2.31 s
RefReference All Terrain Avg	128.15 s	+10.48 s

The difference between best and worst was 8.9% (10.48 s).

Subj. Wet Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	8.9 Points	Best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	8.4 Points	-0.50 Points
RefReference All Terrain Avg	7.9 Points	-1.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 11.2% (1 Points).

Straight Aqua
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	102.2 km/h	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	101.6 km/h	-0.60 km/h
RefReference All Terrain Avg	100.8 km/h	-1.40 km/h

All the tyres in the Straight Aqua test finished less than 3% apart.

Snow

Snow Braking
Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	13.42 m	Best	0 km/h
RefReference All Terrain Avg	14.03 m	+0.61 m	27 km/h
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	14.77 m	+1.35 m	39 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 10.1% (1.35 m). From 130 km/h, the Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3 would still be travelling at 39 km/h when the Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT had stopped.

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

Snow Traction
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	5.26 s	Best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	5.37 s	+0.11 s
RefReference All Terrain Avg	5.99 s	+0.73 s

The difference between best and worst was 13.9% (0.73 s).

Snow Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	81.64 s	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	81.91 s	+0.27 s
RefReference All Terrain Avg	83.37 s	+1.73 s

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

Subj. Snow Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	8.7 Points	Best
RefReference All Terrain Avg	8.29 Points	-0.41 Points
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	8.2 Points	-0.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 5.7% (0.5 Points).

Off road

Dirt Handling
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	80.13 s	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	80.9 s	+0.77 s

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

Sand Drag
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	6.25 s	Best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	6.31 s	+0.06 s

All the tyres in the Sand Drag test finished less than 3% apart.

Comfort

Subj. Comfort
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	11 Points	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	9.5 Points	-1.50 Points
RefReference All Terrain Avg	8.89 Points	-2.11 Points

The difference between best and worst was 19.2% (2.11 Points).

Subj. Noise
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	10 Points	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	9 Points	-1.00 Points
RefReference All Terrain Avg	8.36 Points	-1.64 Points

The difference between best and worst was 16.4% (1.64 Points).

Noise
Tyre	Result	Gap to best
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	52.79 dB	Best
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	54.95 dB	+2.16 dB
RefReference All Terrain Avg	55.56 dB	+2.77 dB

The difference between best and worst was 5.2% (2.77 dB).

Value

Value
Tyre	Result	Gap to best	cost per 1,000 miles
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	3.41 Price/1000	Best	$14.77
RefReference All Terrain Avg	5.23 Price/1000	+1.82 Price/1000	$26.01
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	5.39 Price/1000	+1.98 Price/1000	$26.30

The difference between best and worst was 58.1% (1.98 Price/1000). Over 25,000 miles the cheapest tyre to own (Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3) works out $288 cheaper than the most expensive (Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT).

How this is calculated

Tyre life here is the manufacturer's treadwear warranty, NOT measured wear - treat it as the maker's promise, not a test result.

Tyre life is the manufacturer's treadwear warranty, not measured wear. Assumes a typical car using 8 l/100km (rolling resistance causing 20% of fuel use), fuel at $0.95 per litre and $80 fitting per set of four. US prices are from the time of the 2026 test; financing costs are excluded.

Rolling Resistance
Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 3	8.2 kg/t	Best	£0
Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT	9.3 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t	£59
RefReference All Terrain Avg	9.4 kg/t	+1.20 kg/t	£65

The difference between best and worst was 14.6% (1.2 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Pirelli Scorpion XTM AT uses about 41 L (£59) more fuel than the Pirelli Scorpion AS Plus 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.

Test setup & methodology

The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.

Show full testing methodology

Recorded test conditions

Dry Braking: 100 → 10 km/h · 14–17 °C
Wet Braking: 80 → 10 km/h · 12–15 °C
Wet Handling: 10–12 °C
Snow Braking: 30 → 10 km/h · -6–-4 °C
Snow Traction: 5 → 35 km/h · -6–-4 °C
Snow Handling: -3–-2 °C

Score Weighting

Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.

Test	Within category	Share of overall score
Dry · 30%
Dry Braking	75%	22.5%
Subj. Dry Handling	25%	7.5%
Wet · 35%
Wet Braking	50%	17.5%
Wet Handling	30%	10.5%
Subj. Wet Handling	10%	3.5%
Straight Aqua	10%	3.5%
Off road · 12.5%
Dirt Handling	50%	6.25%
Sand Drag	50%	6.25%
Snow · 10%
Snow Braking	35%	3.5%
Snow Traction	35%	3.5%
Snow Handling	20%	2%
Subj. Snow Handling	10%	1%
Comfort · 10%
Subj. Comfort	50%	5%
Subj. Noise	25%	2.5%
Noise	25%	2.5%
Value · 2.5%
Value	100%	2.5%

Our standard methods

The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.

Dry Braking

For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.

Subj. Dry Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Wet Braking

For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tyre performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tyre set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tyre category justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.

Wet Handling

For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tyre's natural balance, transient response, and limit behaviour without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, depending on the circuit, tyre type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tyres so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.

Subj. Wet Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Straight Aqua

To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tyre set and average the valid results.

Snow Braking

For snow braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 50 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a groomed, compacted snow surface, measuring 45-5 km/h. I generally use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever brakes on the same piece of snow twice. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set, although the sequence can extend further if the data justify it. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. To correct for changing snow surface conditions, I run reference tyres repeatedly — typically every two candidate test sets.

Snow Traction

For snow traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a groomed snow surface with traction control active and measure speed and time using GPS telemetry. I typically use a 5–35 km/h measurement window to reduce the influence of launch transients and powertrain irregularities. I use a wide VDA (vehicle dynamic area) and progressively move across the surface between runs so that no tyre ever accelerates on the same piece of snow twice. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I complete multiple runs per tyre set and average the valid results. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing snow surface conditions.

Snow Handling

For snow handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated snow handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tyre set, excluding laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly than asphalt, control runs are carried out more frequently — typically every two candidate test sets.

Subj. Snow Handling

I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated snow handling circuit. The circuit is groomed and prepared after every run while tyres are being changed, so each set runs on a consistently prepared surface. I score steering precision, turn-in behaviour, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence on snow using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tyre before evaluating each candidate.

Dirt Handling

For dirt handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated dirt handling course with ESC typically disabled. I complete multiple timed laps per tyre set, excluding laps affected by driver error or environmental inconsistency. Because natural surfaces are inherently variable, I place particular emphasis on repeat runs, careful reference tracking, and averaged results. The control tyre is retested at regular intervals.

Subj. Comfort

To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tyre's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tyre.

Subj. Noise

For subjective noise assessment, I drive at constant speeds across multiple surface types with the windows closed, ventilation off, and audio system off. I assess overall noise level, tonal quality, cavity boom, pattern noise, broadband roar, and sensitivity to both speed and road texture. Each tyre is rated on a 1–10 scale and supported by written observations on noise character and annoyance.

Noise

For cabin noise assessment, I drive at controlled speeds, typically 50, 80, 100, and 120 km/h, on NVH test surfaces with defined texture characteristics. Calibrated microphones are positioned at ear height within the cabin. Measurements are taken using A-weighting, with one-third octave analysis where required to identify tonal features such as cavity resonance. Windows remain closed, ventilation is off, and ambient conditions are controlled so the data reflects the tyre rather than external interference.

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tyre is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.

Read our complete testing methodology →

Tyre shortlist →Read the test →

More tyre tests