Test Publication:
Auto Motor Und Sport
215/55 R17
11 tires
4 categories
Test Size:
215/55 R17
Tires Tested:
11 tires
Auto Motor Und Sport is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, Tire Reviews. This is independent editorial coverage of their published test.
The 2019 Auto Motor und Sport tire test has tested eleven crossover SUV tires in 215/55 R17. While this fitment isn't the most exciting fitment in the world, usually being found fitted to vehicles like the Vauxhall Mokka, Skoda Karoq, Seat Ateca, Hyundai Kona and Audi Q2, it is a high growth segment thanks to the huge sales of these types of cars.
The results of this test are fairly straight forward, with only one note. The Continental PremiumContact 5 tested has been replaced by the PremiumContact 6, which undoubtably would have fared better than the seventh place overall.
Dry
Dry braking was extremely close between the top four tires, with the Michelin just having the edge of the group.
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Nokian WetProof
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Giti GitiPremium H1
Dry handling was also close, with the top eight tires averaging 1km/h difference over the handling lap.
- Nokian WetProof
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
Three tires were awarded the top spot for the subjective dry handling scores.
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Nokian WetProof
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
Wet
Wet braking proved the Nokian WetProof's high safety qualities, winning the wet braking testing to be the best braking tire overall.
- Nokian WetProof
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
While the Bridgestone couldn't place better than mid-pack for wet braking, it was the fastest around the wet handling lap, with the Nokian again proving its wet weather prowess.
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Nokian WetProof
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
The aging Continental PremiumContact 5 proved to be the best during straight aquaplaning.
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Nokian WetProof
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
The Goodyear took the lead during subjective wet handling scores, with the Nokian and Bridgestone just a point behind.
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Nokian WetProof
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Giti GitiPremium H1
Environment
The Michelin Primacy 4 used the least fuel on test.
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Nokian WetProof
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
The Nokian was the quietest tire on test, with the Toyo having its only good placement of the test.
- Nokian WetProof
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
And lastly, the subjective comfort scoring was again very close, but this time Pirelli managed to combine good handling results and good levels of comfort better than any other tire on test.
- Pirelli CINTURATO P7
- Continental Premium Contact 5
- Giti GitiPremium H1
- Michelin Primacy 4
- Nexen N Blue HD Plus
- Toyo Proxes CF2 SUV
- Hankook Ventus Prime 3 K125
- Bridgestone Turanza T005
- Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance
- Falken ZIEX ZE310 EcoRun
- Nokian WetProof
Results
Very high wet grip, good handling in the dry, well balanced.
High rolling resistance, slow steering.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
2nd |
99.72% |
| Dry Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
4th |
88.89% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
1st |
100% |
| Wet Handling |
2nd |
98.86% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
2nd |
90% |
| Straight Aqua |
5th |
97.02% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
11th |
60% |
| Noise |
1st |
100% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
9th |
86.36% |
High lateral stability, good steering speed and accuracy, low rolling resistance.
Relatively long wet braking.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
3rd |
99.18% |
| Dry Handling |
4th |
99.52% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
4th |
88.89% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
8th |
92.91% |
| Wet Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
2nd |
90% |
| Straight Aqua |
8th |
94.53% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
5th |
80% |
| Noise |
8th |
96.36% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
2nd |
98.7% |
Short dry braking, easy to manage.
Poor wet grip, average aquaplaning resistance.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
1st |
100% |
| Dry Handling |
4th |
99.52% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
6th |
96.72% |
| Wet Handling |
8th |
96.59% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
4th |
80% |
| Straight Aqua |
7th |
95.53% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
90% |
| Noise |
5th |
98.21% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
1st |
100% |
Good wet handling, good aquaplaning resistance.
Slight understeer in the dry.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
5th |
96.78% |
| Dry Handling |
9th |
98.76% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
4th |
88.89% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
4th |
98.06% |
| Wet Handling |
3rd |
98.75% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
2nd |
99.01% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
9th |
70% |
| Noise |
7th |
97.95% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
3rd |
97.44% |
Good braking performance, good dry handling.
Average wet performance, sluggish steering reactions.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
3rd |
99.18% |
| Dry Handling |
2nd |
99.81% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
4th |
98.06% |
| Wet Handling |
9th |
95.46% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
7th |
70% |
| Straight Aqua |
11th |
93.29% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
5th |
80% |
| Noise |
3rd |
98.76% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
6th |
89.41% |
Good wet and dry handling, short wet braking distances.
Long dry braking distances, poor aquaplaning resistance.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
7th |
95% |
| Dry Handling |
6th |
99.43% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
1st |
100% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
2nd |
99.72% |
| Wet Handling |
4th |
97.84% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
4th |
80% |
| Straight Aqua |
9th |
93.66% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
1st |
100% |
| Noise |
11th |
95.97% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
4th |
93.83% |
Short wet braking, high aquaplaning resistance.
Long dry braking, high levels of understeer in the dry.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
10th |
92.09% |
| Dry Handling |
10th |
98.66% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
8th |
77.78% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
3rd |
98.61% |
| Wet Handling |
4th |
97.84% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
4th |
80% |
| Straight Aqua |
1st |
100% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
90% |
| Noise |
10th |
96.1% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
9th |
86.36% |
Good in the dry and wet.
Understeer during wet handling, very high rolling resistance.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
6th |
96.27% |
| Dry Handling |
6th |
99.43% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
8th |
77.78% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
7th |
94.91% |
| Wet Handling |
6th |
97.28% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
7th |
70% |
| Straight Aqua |
3rd |
98.26% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
9th |
70% |
| Noise |
5th |
98.21% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
11th |
81.72% |
Good dry handling, good comfort, low noise.
Poor braking results, understeer in the wet.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
11th |
91.86% |
| Dry Handling |
2nd |
99.81% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
4th |
88.89% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
10th |
90.31% |
| Wet Handling |
7th |
96.82% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
11th |
50% |
| Straight Aqua |
4th |
97.14% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
2nd |
90% |
| Noise |
4th |
98.35% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
5th |
90.48% |
Acceptable handling.
Relatively wea dry and wet grip.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
7th |
95% |
| Dry Handling |
8th |
99.04% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
8th |
77.78% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
9th |
92.43% |
| Wet Handling |
10th |
95.35% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
9th |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
10th |
93.42% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
5th |
80% |
| Noise |
8th |
96.36% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
8th |
88.37% |
Acceptable dry performance, good comfort, low noise.
Weak wet grip, worst aquaplaning resistance on test.
| Test |
# |
% |
| Dry Braking |
9th |
93.52% |
| Dry Handling |
11th |
97.99% |
| Subj. Dry Handling |
11th |
66.67% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Wet Braking |
11th |
89.17% |
| Wet Handling |
11th |
93.98% |
| Subj. Wet Handling |
9th |
60% |
| Straight Aqua |
6th |
95.65% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
5th |
80% |
| Noise |
2nd |
99.86% |
| Test |
# |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
6th |
89.41% |
I have a BMW X3 with Pirelli P7s on and they just don't seem to be wearing out! I wouldn't mind if I liked them, but in the wet they don't inspire confidence. They have done over 35000 miles and still have over 3.5mm on. The date code is 4014, so they have likely been on the car for over 4 years. I'm thinking of changing them due to age, although I wouldn't normally change tires until they get below 3mm. I'd like to see an SUV group test that includes the Avon ZX7.
AT 4 years old they're coming to the end of their usable life, so it's best to get them changed :)
Thanks for replying. There's lot of conflicting information on the 'net, which is why I posted here - I'd rather trust your judgement. A very useful resource, a credit to the internet.
https://www.falkentire.com/...
Can you please test Toyo Tranpath MPZ?
How sub. comfort has been calculated?
Nokian are the best for noise but the worst in sub. comfort...
Every magazine has slightly different criteria so I'm not entirely sure how AMS came to their scoring.
The Primacy 4 dfoesn't score that well in the wet. But that's with new tires.
Since Michelin is advertising that the Primacy 4 will keep his wet handling capabilities better that the competitors, a used tire test would have been nice.
There are other tests where it does score well in wet handling, it's all very close at the top at the moment!
Could you possibly do a video/an article about various parameters of the tire? How it can influence the end-result? (as I take the response here would be just too long - well I would hope for a long one ;))
- how load / speed index influences the construction of the tire, and if having way higher than needed might improve/lower comfort/handling etc
- how tire presure can influence the behavior on dry/wet/breaking and how balance of the car can be impacted/improved by having rear/front differ in pressure
Also is there any way of actually know the thread width of individual tires? I've only seen one web page having this listed - www.tirerack.com, but those are US market tires, so will differ to what we have in europe...
Theory here being that some say, 235 width tires will have contact patch (thread width) wider than other manufacturer, but even than different height one (ie 235/45 might be different to 235/35) - which in the end will not reflect various bits of the tests.. (like breaking distances, aquaplaning resistance etc.)
Still waiting for some 225-40-R18 or similar tests for a FWD car. Need new rubber in less than 6 months. I kinda look more to Continental because they're usually strong in wet grip/traction without sacrificing dry performance. But I'm still not sure for the Premium Contact 6 (some test "complain" about wet grip) . I have bad experience with Michelin after 3 years, where wet grip/traction get a major hit (currently running 4 year old PS3, and wheel spin in wet and understeer, is ridiculous in a Ceed GT 1.6 Turbo). On my previous car originally with Michelin Energy (205-55R16)and wet grip... well, butter would provide more grip. Swapped for Continental PremiumContact 5 at the time, and the difference was night and day.
So the contenders for the requirements, Continental PremiumContact 6, Michelin PS4, Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 5 or Goodyear Eagle F1 Supersport if available in 18... it's a tough one.
The wet grip of the PC6 is up there with PS4 and Asym 5. They're all amazing tires.
For example the Auto Bild 2019 Summer tire test puts the PremiumContact 6 in 5 place overall. It gets a 7 place for wet braking and 10 place for wet handling. Even the Falkens FK510 and the Hankook S1 evo3 get better results.
The previous Continental (premiumcontact 5 or sportcontact5) tires were always at the top in the wet compared to the rivals at the time.
The only tire that gets consistent results between tests is the Michelin PS4. So it might be a safer bet.
Sorry for all the doubts, but replacing 4 tires is expensive, and i want to make sure it's a proper fit for the car so i can enjoy it the best.
Thanks for the help. Can't wait for the next video.
Also:
https://www.tirereviews.co....
https://www.tirereviews.co....