Test Charts / Tyre Reviews

The Best All Season Tyres for 2024

Name: The Best All Season Tyres for 2024
Creator: Tyre Reviews
Published: 2024-03-12

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: 205/55 R16
Tyres tested: 7
Disciplines: 20

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
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	37.7 m	Best	0 km/h
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	38.9 m	+1.20 m	23 km/h
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	39.2 m	+1.50 m	25 km/h
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	41.4 m	+3.70 m	39 km/h
5Dunlop Sport All Season	43 m	+5.30 m	46 km/h
6Fronway Fronwing AS	43.6 m	+5.90 m	48 km/h
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	44.3 m	+6.60 m	50 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 17.5% (6.6 m ≈ 1.5 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21 would still be travelling at 50 km/h when the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 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
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	55.4 s	Best
2Dunlop Sport All Season	55.8 s	+0.40 s
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	55.8 s	+0.40 s
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	56 s	+0.60 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	56.4 s	+1.00 s
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	56.6 s	+1.20 s
7Fronway Fronwing AS	58.1 s	+2.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.9% (2.7 s).

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	100 Points	Best
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	95 Points	-5.00 Points
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	95 Points	-5.00 Points
4Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	92 Points	-8.00 Points
4Dunlop Sport All Season	92 Points	-8.00 Points
4Michelin CrossClimate 2	92 Points	-8.00 Points
7Fronway Fronwing AS	85 Points	-15.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 15% (15 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	33.2 m	Best	0 km/h
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	34.1 m	+0.90 m	21 km/h
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	35.5 m	+2.30 m	33 km/h
4Dunlop Sport All Season	36.8 m	+3.60 m	41 km/h
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	37.3 m	+4.10 m	43 km/h
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	38 m	+4.80 m	46 km/h
7Fronway Fronwing AS	48.7 m	+15.50 m	73 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 46.7% (15.5 m ≈ 3.4 Car Lengths). From 130 km/h, the Fronway Fronwing AS would still be travelling at 73 km/h when the Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6 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
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	86.1 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	86.2 s	+0.10 s
3Dunlop Sport All Season	87 s	+0.90 s
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	87.2 s	+1.10 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	87.9 s	+1.80 s
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	88.7 s	+2.60 s
7Fronway Fronwing AS	99.7 s	+13.60 s

The difference between best and worst was 15.8% (13.6 s).

Subj. Wet Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	100 Points	Best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	100 Points	Best
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	95 Points	-5.00 Points
3Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	95 Points	-5.00 Points
5Dunlop Sport All Season	90 Points	-10.00 Points
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	88 Points	-12.00 Points
7Fronway Fronwing AS	10 Points	-90.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 90% (90 Points).

Wet Circle
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Dunlop Sport All Season	11.86 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	12 s	+0.14 s
3Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	12.01 s	+0.15 s
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	12.03 s	+0.17 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	12.18 s	+0.32 s
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	12.23 s	+0.37 s
7Fronway Fronwing AS	13.1 s	+1.24 s

The difference between best and worst was 10.5% (1.24 s).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	84.2 km/h	Best
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	81.3 km/h	-2.90 km/h
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	80.1 km/h	-4.10 km/h
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	78.5 km/h	-5.70 km/h
5Dunlop Sport All Season	76.4 km/h	-7.80 km/h
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	75.5 km/h	-8.70 km/h
7Fronway Fronwing AS	70.2 km/h	-14.00 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 16.6% (14 Km/H).

Curved Aquaplaning
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	3.43 m/sec2	Best
2Michelin CrossClimate 2	3.22 m/sec2	-0.21 m/sec2
3Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	3.12 m/sec2	-0.31 m/sec2
4Dunlop Sport All Season	2.99 m/sec2	-0.44 m/sec2
5Continental AllSeasonContact 2	2.92 m/sec2	-0.51 m/sec2
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	2.7 m/sec2	-0.73 m/sec2
7Fronway Fronwing AS	2.14 m/sec2	-1.29 m/sec2

The difference between best and worst was 37.6% (1.29 m/sec2).

Snow

Snow Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	17.6 m	Best	0 km/h
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	17.6 m	Best	0 km/h
3Fronway Fronwing AS	17.9 m	+0.30 m	17 km/h
4Dunlop Sport All Season	18 m	+0.40 m	19 km/h
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	18 m	+0.40 m	19 km/h
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	18.2 m	+0.60 m	24 km/h
7Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	18.8 m	+1.20 m	33 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 6.8% (1.2 m). From 130 km/h, the Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 would still be travelling at 33 km/h when the Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21 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
1Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	8.04 s	Best
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	8.04 s	Best
3Dunlop Sport All Season	8.46 s	+0.42 s
3Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	8.46 s	+0.42 s
5Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8.57 s	+0.53 s
6Michelin CrossClimate 2	8.69 s	+0.65 s
7Fronway Fronwing AS	9.11 s	+1.07 s

The difference between best and worst was 13.3% (1.07 s).

Snow Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	90.68 s	Best
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	91.99 s	+1.31 s
3Fronway Fronwing AS	92.16 s	+1.48 s
4Continental AllSeasonContact 2	92.18 s	+1.50 s
5Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	93.51 s	+2.83 s
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	95.01 s	+4.33 s
7Dunlop Sport All Season	95.45 s	+4.77 s

The difference between best and worst was 5.3% (4.77 s).

Subj. Snow Handling
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	100 Points	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	98 Points	-2.00 Points
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	98 Points	-2.00 Points
4Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	92 Points	-8.00 Points
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	92 Points	-8.00 Points
6Fronway Fronwing AS	90 Points	-10.00 Points
7Dunlop Sport All Season	88 Points	-12.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 12% (12 Points).

Snow Circle
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	0.39 ms/2	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	0.38 ms/2	-0.01 ms/2
2Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	0.38 ms/2	-0.01 ms/2
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	0.37 ms/2	-0.02 ms/2
5Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	0.36 ms/2	-0.03 ms/2
6Fronway Fronwing AS	0.35 ms/2	-0.04 ms/2
6Dunlop Sport All Season	0.35 ms/2	-0.04 ms/2

The difference between best and worst was 10.3% (0.04 ms/2).

Ice

Ice Braking
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Residual speed
1Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	6.48 m	Best	0 km/h
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	6.67 m	+0.19 m	22 km/h
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	6.79 m	+0.31 m	28 km/h
3Fronway Fronwing AS	6.79 m	+0.31 m	28 km/h
5Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	6.89 m	+0.41 m	32 km/h
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	7.11 m	+0.63 m	39 km/h
7Dunlop Sport All Season	7.47 m	+0.99 m	47 km/h

The difference between best and worst was 15.3% (0.99 m). From 130 km/h, the Dunlop Sport All Season would still be travelling at 47 km/h when the Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21 had stopped.

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

Ice Traction
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	4.68 s	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	4.78 s	+0.10 s
3Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	4.88 s	+0.20 s
4Fronway Fronwing AS	4.94 s	+0.26 s
5Michelin CrossClimate 2	4.97 s	+0.29 s
6Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	5.44 s	+0.76 s
7Dunlop Sport All Season	5.56 s	+0.88 s

The difference between best and worst was 18.8% (0.88 s).

Comfort

Noise
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	70.9 dB	Best
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	71 dB	+0.10 dB
3Fronway Fronwing AS	71.1 dB	+0.20 dB
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	71.6 dB	+0.70 dB
5Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	71.7 dB	+0.80 dB
6Dunlop Sport All Season	72 dB	+1.10 dB
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	73.5 dB	+2.60 dB

The difference between best and worst was 3.7% (2.6 dB).

Value

Wear
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best
1Continental AllSeasonContact 2	48,900 KM	Best
2Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	44,499 KM	-4,401 KM
3Michelin CrossClimate 2	39,609 KM	-9,291 KM
4Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	38,631 KM	-10,269 KM
5Dunlop Sport All Season	36,186 KM	-12,714 KM
6Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	33,741 KM	-15,159 KM
7Fronway Fronwing AS	1 KM	-48,899 KM

The difference between best and worst was 100% (48,899 KM).

Value
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	cost per 1,000 km
1Fronway Fronwing AS	1 Price/1000	Best	—
2Continental AllSeasonContact 2	1.88 Price/1000	+0.88 Price/1000	£9.66
3Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	1.97 Price/1000	+0.97 Price/1000	£16.73
4Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	2.04 Price/1000	+1.04 Price/1000	£15.25
5Dunlop Sport All Season	2.12 Price/1000	+1.12 Price/1000	£10.42
6Michelin CrossClimate 2	2.54 Price/1000	+1.54 Price/1000	£11.67
7Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	2.75 Price/1000	+1.75 Price/1000	£15.70

The difference between best and worst was 175% (1.75 Price/1000). Over 40,000 km the cheapest tyre to own (Continental AllSeasonContact 2) works out £283 cheaper than the most expensive (Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21).

How this is calculated

Assumes a typical car using 8 l/100km (with rolling resistance causing 20% of fuel use), fuel at £1.45 per litre and £60 fitting per set of four. Purchase prices are from the time of the 2024 test; financing costs are excluded.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tyre	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Michelin CrossClimate 2	6.98 kg/t	Best	£0
2Dunlop Sport All Season	7.06 kg/t	+0.08 kg/t	£5
3Continental AllSeasonContact 2	7.25 kg/t	+0.27 kg/t	£17
4Fronway Fronwing AS	7.62 kg/t	+0.64 kg/t	£40
5Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3	7.86 kg/t	+0.88 kg/t	£56
6Bridgestone Turanza All Season 6	8.71 kg/t	+1.73 kg/t	£109
7Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21	9.18 kg/t	+2.20 kg/t	£139

The difference between best and worst was 31.5% (2.2 kg / t). Over 19,000 km a year at £1.45/L, the Yokohama BluEarth 4S AW21 uses about 96 L (£139) more fuel than the Michelin CrossClimate 2.

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 → 5 km/h · 15–20 °C
Wet Braking: 80 → 5 km/h · 17–18 °C
Wet Handling: 19–23 °C
Snow Braking: 40 → 0 km/h · -2–0 °C
Snow Traction: 0 → 20 km/h
Snow Handling: -6–-4 °C
Ice Braking: 20 → 0 km/h · -6–-4 °C
Ice Traction: 0 → 20 km/h · -6–-4 °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	55%	16.5%
Dry Handling	35%	10.5%
Subj. Dry Handling	10%	3%
Wet · 40%
Wet Braking	40%	16%
Wet Handling	30%	12%
Subj. Wet Handling	10%	4%
Wet Circle	5%	2%
Straight Aqua	10%	4%
Curved Aquaplaning	5%	2%
Snow · 10%
Snow Braking	30%	3%
Snow Traction	20%	2%
Snow Handling	30%	3%
Subj. Snow Handling	10%	1%
Snow Circle	10%	1%
Ice · 5%
Ice Braking	60%	3%
Ice Traction	40%	2%
Comfort · 5%
Noise	100%	5%
Value · 10%
Wear	30%	3%
Value	30%	3%
Rolling Resistance	40%	4%

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.

Dry Handling

For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC 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. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.

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.

Wet Circle

For wet lateral grip testing, I use a circular track of fixed radius, typically between 30 and 50 metres, broadly aligned with ISO 4138 principles. The surface is wetted in a controlled and repeatable manner. I progressively increase speed until the maximum sustainable cornering speed is reached. I normally record multiple laps in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions to reduce the influence of camber, banking, or directional track bias. I then calculate average lateral acceleration and compare the result with the reference tyre.

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.

Curved Aquaplaning

For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 metres in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.

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.

Snow Circle

For snow lateral grip testing, I use a circular snow track of fixed radius, broadly aligned with ISO 4138 principles. The surface is regularly groomed throughout the session. I progressively increase speed until the maximum sustainable cornering speed is reached. I normally record multiple laps in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions to reduce the influence of surface bias. Because snow surfaces degrade more rapidly, the control tyre is retested at regular intervals and I often use multiple sets of control tyres.

Ice Braking

For ice braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 35 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on a prepared ice surface. Surface temperature is continuously monitored as ice friction properties vary substantially with temperature. My standard programme is twelve runs per tyre set but with ice testing, you often do many more. I analyse the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tyres are run typically every two candidate test sets to correct for changing surface conditions.

Ice Traction

For ice traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared ice 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. 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 ice twice. Surface temperature is continuously monitored. I complete multiple runs per tyre set and average the valid results, with reference tyres run typically every two candidate test sets.

Noise

I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.

Wear

I do not conduct tread wear testing myself; where wear is included in a programme, it is carried out by a contracted specialist test provider using either an on-road convoy method or an accelerated machine-based method. In convoy wear testing, multiple vehicles run a defined public-road route over an extended distance, with tread depth measured at intervals and tyres rotated methodically to reduce positional and vehicle-specific effects. In accelerated machine wear testing, the tyre is run on a specialised roadwheel or rough-surfaced drum system designed to simulate real-world wear under controlled load, speed, alignment, and force inputs. I then use the contracted provider's measured wear rate relative to the reference tyre to estimate projected tread life.

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