Autobild Sports Cars tests are usually nice and simple. Fast car, the best of the UUHP tires, put them together and see what's best.
Thankfully, in the strange year of 2025 testing, Autobild have kept that formula and tested eight performance summer tires in 245/35 R19 using an Audi TTS.
Test Publication:
245/35 R19
8 tires
4 categories
Images courtesy of Auto Bild Sportscars
Test Publication:
Images courtesy of Auto Bild Sportscars
Test Size:
245/35 R19
Tires Tested:
8 tires
As this is a nice and simple test, we'll let the data do the talking.
Dry
The Continental SportContact 7 leads the field with the shortest dry braking distance of 35.5 meters from 100 km/h. The Pirelli P Zero PZ4 follows closely at 36 meters, showing strong performance in this critical safety test. There's a significant gap of nearly 6 meters between the best and worst performers, with the Triangle EffeXSport requiring 41.3 meters to stop.
- Continental SportContact 7
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Double Coin DC100
- Triangle EffeXSport
Continental, Michelin, Goodyear, Pirelli and Vredestein delivered the fastest lap times and received the best subjective ratings. The testers say they perform at similar levels with the Continental slightly edging out the competition at 110 km/h, followed by Michelin at 109 km/h.
The subjective notes highlight "quick lap times and best subjective ratings" for these premium brands, indicating responsive steering feel and excellent balance during cornering.
Triangle and Double Coin show significantly reduced performance in dry conditions. The subjective assessment describes their handling as "noticeably less crisp" around corners. This aligns with their objectively lower speeds of 105.2 km/h and 104.4 km/h respectively.
The gap in dry handling performance between best and worst (5.6 km/h) is less dramatic than in wet conditions (18.6 km/h), indicating that while budget tires struggle in all conditions, their deficiencies become much more pronounced and potentially dangerous in the wet.
- Continental SportContact 7
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Double Coin DC100
Wet
Continental continues its dominance in wet braking, stopping from 100 km/h in just 40.1 meters. Pirelli maintains its strong braking performance with a second-place result of 42.4 meters. The most alarming finding is the massive 29.6-meter gap between Continental and the Double Coin DC100, which needed a dangerous 69.7 meters to stop – nearly 70% more distance than the best performer. This test clearly demonstrates the crucial safety differences between premium and budget tires, especially in wet conditions where grip is already compromised.
- Continental SportContact 7
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Double Coin DC100
Continental SportContact 7 and Pirelli P Zero PZ4 demonstrate exceptional wet handling qualities. The testers note "unbelievably secure" performance on wet surfaces with both tires. They maintain stable front-end grip while the TT's rear end remains predictable and controllable. The Continental achieved the highest average speed of 84.5 km/h, with Pirelli following at 82.7 km/h.
Goodyear, Vredestein and Michelin form the mid-pack with solid performance but noticeable step down from the leaders. They achieved average speeds between 79.7-80.4 km/h, maintaining good balance but without the exceptional grip of the top performers.
The Firestone and Triangle tires show concerning performance deficiencies. The testers specifically mentions that these tires provide "frighteningly little grip" on wet surfaces, with the subjective assessment stating they "slide over the watered handling course like on soap." This correlates with their significantly lower average speeds (74.5-74.9 km/h).
The Double Coin DC100 delivers dangerously poor wet handling at 65.9 km/h, almost 20 km/h slower than the Continental, confirming the subjective assessment of extremely limited grip and control.
- Continental SportContact 7
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Double Coin DC100
In a surprising twist, the budget Triangle EffeXSport outperforms all premium brands in aquaplaning resistance, maintaining traction until 79.5 km/h.
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Continental SportContact 7
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Double Coin DC100
Triangle maintains its impressive aquaplaning resistance in curved conditions, achieving the highest lateral acceleration of 3.44 m/s².
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Continental SportContact 7
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Double Coin DC100
Comfort
The test shows an interesting inversion of performance when it comes to comfort. The comfort test reveals that subjective noise levels inside the vehicle had minimal to no noticeable differences among the tires tested.
Vredestein, Triangle, and Double Coin all received the highest comfort scores of 8 points, despite their varying performance in handling and braking tests. This suggests their compounds and construction prioritize ride comfort and noise suppression. The PDF notes that "in the interior, subjectively no to few differences were audible," indicating that even with measured external noise differences, the cabin experience was relatively consistent.
Michelin, Pirelli, Goodyear, and Firestone all scored 7 points for comfort, placing them in the middle range. These tires balance performance characteristics with reasonable comfort levels.
Continental, which dominated nearly all performance categories, received the lowest comfort score of 6 points. This aligns with a common trade-off in tire design where maximum grip and performance often come at the expense of ride comfort.
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Double Coin DC100
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Continental SportContact 7
The Double Coin DC100 produces the lowest external noise at 73.3 dB, followed closely by Goodyear at 73.4 dB. The results in this test are tightly clustered, with all tires within a 1.7 dB range. Continental and Michelin generate the most noise at 75.0 dB, again demonstrating that performance-focused tires often compromise somewhat on refinement characteristics.
- Double Coin DC100
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Continental SportContact 7
Value
Firestone Firehawk Sport leads in fuel efficiency with the lowest rolling resistance of 7.2 kg/t, followed by Michelin at 7.8 kg/t and Double Coin at 8.1 kg/t. Pirelli has the highest resistance at 10.6 kg/t, while Continental places sixth at 9.5 kg/t.
- Firestone Firehawk Sport
- Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
- Double Coin DC100
- Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6
- Vredestein Ultrac Pro
- Continental SportContact 7
- Triangle EffeXSport
- Pirelli P Zero PZ4
Results
The test winner delivered excellent grip in both wet and dry conditions. It showed outstanding handling qualities with precise steering response and short braking distances in all conditions. The SportContact 7 performed particularly well in wet handling tests, maintaining stability and control. Its only minor drawback was a slightly higher rolling resistance. The tire showed some wear after 5-6 fast laps, likely due to its softer compound that helps deliver maximum grip.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
1st |
35.5 M |
|
|
100% |
| Dry Handling |
1st |
110 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
1st |
40.1 M |
|
|
100% |
| Wet Handling |
1st |
84.5 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Straight Aqua |
5th |
74.4 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-5.1 Km/H |
93.58% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
3rd |
3.13 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.31 m/sec2 |
90.99% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
8th |
6 Points |
8 Points |
-2 Points |
75% |
| Noise |
7th |
75 dB |
73.3 dB |
+1.7 dB |
97.73% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
6th |
9.5 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+2.3 kg / t |
75.79% |
This tire showed strong all-round performance with direct, progressive steering response and good safety reserves during aquaplaning. It recorded very quiet external noise levels and solid handling in dry conditions. Its wet braking performance was mid-range compared to the top performers. The Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 provides balanced performance across all testing categories.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
5th |
38 M |
35.5 M |
+2.5 M |
93.42% |
| Dry Handling |
3rd |
108.9 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-1.1 Km/H |
99% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
4th |
44.2 M |
40.1 M |
+4.1 M |
90.72% |
| Wet Handling |
3rd |
80.4 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-4.1 Km/H |
95.15% |
| Straight Aqua |
2nd |
75 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-4.5 Km/H |
94.34% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
4th |
3.12 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.32 m/sec2 |
90.7% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
4th |
7 Points |
8 Points |
-1 Points |
87.5% |
| Noise |
2nd |
73.4 dB |
73.3 dB |
+0.1 dB |
99.86% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
4th |
8.6 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+1.4 kg / t |
83.72% |
The Pirelli impressed with balanced handling in both wet and dry conditions. It features precise turn-in behaviour, stable lateral grip, and short braking distances. The tire achieved nearly the same wet braking performance as the Continental. The P Zero PZ4 showed minor weakness in the curved aquaplaning test but otherwise performed at the highest level. It was the most expensive tire in the test at approximately €1,080 per set.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
2nd |
36 M |
35.5 M |
+0.5 M |
98.61% |
| Dry Handling |
3rd |
108.9 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-1.1 Km/H |
99% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
2nd |
42.4 M |
40.1 M |
+2.3 M |
94.58% |
| Wet Handling |
2nd |
82.7 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-1.8 Km/H |
97.87% |
| Straight Aqua |
6th |
73.9 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-5.6 Km/H |
92.96% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
7th |
2.87 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.57 m/sec2 |
83.43% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
4th |
7 Points |
8 Points |
-1 Points |
87.5% |
| Noise |
6th |
74.9 dB |
73.3 dB |
+1.6 dB |
97.86% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
8th |
10.6 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+3.4 kg / t |
67.92% |
This tire demonstrated sporty, dynamic handling with stable lateral grip on both wet and dry surfaces. It offers direct steering response and good feedback to the driver. The Pilot Sport 4S needed about two meters more stopping distance than the Continental in wet braking tests and showed some limitations in the curved aquaplaning test.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
3rd |
37.3 M |
35.5 M |
+1.8 M |
95.17% |
| Dry Handling |
2nd |
109 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-1 Km/H |
99.09% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
3rd |
43.7 M |
40.1 M |
+3.6 M |
91.76% |
| Wet Handling |
5th |
79.7 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-4.8 Km/H |
94.32% |
| Straight Aqua |
7th |
73.4 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-6.1 Km/H |
92.33% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
6th |
2.9 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.54 m/sec2 |
84.3% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
4th |
7 Points |
8 Points |
-1 Points |
87.5% |
| Noise |
7th |
75 dB |
73.3 dB |
+1.7 dB |
97.73% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
2nd |
7.8 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+0.6 kg / t |
92.31% |
A well-balanced all-rounder with excellent aquaplaning resistance, good braking distances, and secure handling on both wet and dry surfaces. The Ultrac Pro offered good comfort and quiet rolling noise. Its only comparative weakness was mid-range performance in wet braking tests. Priced at approximately €760 per set, it provides good value among the premium brands.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
6th |
38.7 M |
35.5 M |
+3.2 M |
91.73% |
| Dry Handling |
5th |
108 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-2 Km/H |
98.18% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
5th |
44.8 M |
40.1 M |
+4.7 M |
89.51% |
| Wet Handling |
4th |
80.1 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-4.4 Km/H |
94.79% |
| Straight Aqua |
4th |
74.7 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-4.8 Km/H |
93.96% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
2nd |
3.37 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.07 m/sec2 |
97.97% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
1st |
8 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Noise |
4th |
74 dB |
73.3 dB |
+0.7 dB |
99.05% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
5th |
8.8 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+1.6 kg / t |
81.82% |
This tire showed precise steering response with good feedback on dry surfaces. It offers good comfort and low rolling resistance, which helps with fuel economy. However, it demonstrated limited performance in wet handling and wet braking, with significantly longer stopping distances in the wet compared to the top performers.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
4th |
37.7 M |
35.5 M |
+2.2 M |
94.16% |
| Dry Handling |
6th |
107.7 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-2.3 Km/H |
97.91% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
6th |
49.4 M |
40.1 M |
+9.3 M |
81.17% |
| Wet Handling |
6th |
74.9 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-9.6 Km/H |
88.64% |
| Straight Aqua |
2nd |
75 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-4.5 Km/H |
94.34% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
5th |
2.98 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-0.46 m/sec2 |
86.63% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
4th |
7 Points |
8 Points |
-1 Points |
87.5% |
| Noise |
3rd |
73.9 dB |
73.3 dB |
+0.6 dB |
99.19% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
1st |
7.2 kg / t |
|
|
100% |
This budget tire performed surprisingly well in aquaplaning tests, matching or exceeding some premium brands. It also delivered decent wet handling at the level of premium tires and featured good rolling resistance. Its major weakness was in wet braking, where it needed about 10 meters more stopping distance than the best tire in the test. Manufactured in China.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
8th |
41.3 M |
35.5 M |
+5.8 M |
85.96% |
| Dry Handling |
7th |
105.2 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-4.8 Km/H |
95.64% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
7th |
50.6 M |
40.1 M |
+10.5 M |
79.25% |
| Wet Handling |
7th |
74.5 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-10 Km/H |
88.17% |
| Straight Aqua |
1st |
79.5 Km/H |
|
|
100% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
1st |
3.44 m/sec2 |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
1st |
8 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Noise |
5th |
74.5 dB |
73.3 dB |
+1.2 dB |
98.39% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
7th |
10 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+2.8 kg / t |
72% |
The poorest performer in the test, this budget tire only excelled in rolling noise. It showed dangerous handling characteristics including delayed turn-in with poor balance and unpredictable oversteer on wet surfaces. Braking distances were alarmingly long - nearly 30 meters more than the Continental in wet conditions. The Double Coin also failed the high-speed durability test. Despite its low price the testers deemed it not recommended due to safety concerns.
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Dry Braking |
7th |
40.6 M |
35.5 M |
+5.1 M |
87.44% |
| Dry Handling |
8th |
104.4 Km/H |
110 Km/H |
-5.6 Km/H |
94.91% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Wet Braking |
8th |
69.7 M |
40.1 M |
+29.6 M |
57.53% |
| Wet Handling |
8th |
65.9 Km/H |
84.5 Km/H |
-18.6 Km/H |
77.99% |
| Straight Aqua |
8th |
62.9 Km/H |
79.5 Km/H |
-16.6 Km/H |
79.12% |
| Curved Aquaplaning |
8th |
2.43 m/sec2 |
3.44 m/sec2 |
-1.01 m/sec2 |
70.64% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Subj. Comfort |
1st |
8 Points |
|
|
100% |
| Noise |
1st |
73.3 dB |
|
|
100% |
| Test |
# |
Result |
Best |
Diff |
% |
| Rolling Resistance |
3rd |
8.1 kg / t |
7.2 kg / t |
+0.9 kg / t |
88.89% |