Falken Azenis RS820 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
Ahead in each discipline
The Falken Azenis RS820 and the Vredestein Ultrac Pro have met in one independent test so far, and the Azenis RS820 finished ahead. The Azenis RS820 was stronger in dry and wet, the Ultrac Pro in comfort and value.
Performance profile
9 measurements from the one shared test, each tire shown as its share of the better figure.
Where each is furthest ahead
Azenis RS820
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
In each test the better of the two figures counts as 100% and the other as its share of it, so a 118 ft stop against 112 ft is 95%; each spoke averages the shared tests that recorded it. The scale stops at 92%: a point further in sits on the hub's edge, hollow.
Where each scores higher
Azenis RS820
Not ahead in any category
Ultrac Pro
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Category scores are percentiles among tires of the same season and class: 90 means this tire out-performs 90% of them, measured across every test we hold, not only the ones it appeared in.
Where owners rate each higher
Azenis RS820
Ultrac Pro
Not ahead in any category
Point at or tap any spoke for both tires' figures.
Owners rate the Azenis RS820 91% from 9 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. Each spoke is one question owners answer out of 10; reviews are vetted by hand before publication.
Every measurement, side by side
Both tires' figures from the one test that ran them together, on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The bar grows towards the tire that did better.
| Measurement | Azenis RS820 | Gap | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry Azenis RS820 ahead | |||
| Dry Braking ft | 109 | 6% | 115 |
| Dry Handling mph | 63.1 | 0.8% | 62.6 |
| Wet Azenis RS820 ahead | |||
| Wet Braking ft | 158 | 6.1% | 168 |
| Wet Handling mph | 46.9 | 0.8% | 46.5 |
| Wet Circle s | 11.03 | 2.6% | 11.33 |
| Straight Aqua mph | 62.4 | 4% | 64.9 |
| Curved Aquaplaning ft/s² | 6.1 | 13.4% | 6.9 |
| Comfort Ultrac Pro ahead | |||
| Noise dB | 73.7 | 1.7 dB | 72 |
| Value Ultrac Pro ahead | |||
| Rolling Resistance kg / t | 8.5 | 5.9% | 8 |
Braking distances and lap times are better when lower; speeds, wear and grip figures when higher. A test's figures are its own: sizes, cars, surfaces and temperatures differ from one to the next, which is why the averages here are only ever of tests the two tires shared.
Head to head in 1 test in 2025
Each row is one published test in which both tires ran on the same car, in the same size, on the same day. The line is the whole field, winner on the left.
| Test | Azenis RS820 | Field | Ultrac Pro |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 Autobild Sports Cars UUHP Tire Test | P5 of 7 | P6 of 7 |
Azenis RS820 vs Ultrac Pro: your questions
Is the Falken Azenis RS820 or the Vredestein Ultrac Pro the better tire?
The Falken Azenis RS820 and the Vredestein Ultrac Pro have met in one independent test so far, and the Azenis RS820 finished ahead. On the Tire Reviews Score, which weighs every test and review we hold, the Azenis RS820 scores 8.3 and the Ultrac Pro 9 out of 10.
Which is better in the wet, the Azenis RS820 or the Ultrac Pro?
The Azenis RS820 led 3 of the 5 wet measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which is better in the dry?
The Azenis RS820 led 2 of the 2 dry measurements the shared tests recorded.
Which is quieter and more comfortable?
Owners rate comfort 8.9/10 for the Azenis RS820 and 8.1/10 for the Ultrac Pro.
What do owners say?
Owners rate the Azenis RS820 91% from 9 reviews and the Ultrac Pro 83% from 7. 100% of Azenis RS820 owners would buy it again, against 71% for the Ultrac Pro.
Are they available in the same sizes?
The Azenis RS820 is made in 39 sizes (19 to 21 inch) and the Ultrac Pro in 98 (18 to 24 inch). 31 sizes are available in both. On the EU label the Azenis RS820 is graded A for wet grip and D for rolling resistance in most sizes; the Ultrac Pro A and C.
Which is the newer tire?
The Ultrac Pro is the newer design: it reached the market in 2024, the Azenis RS820 in 2022. The Ultrac Pro replaced the Vredestein Ultrac Vorti+.
More comparisons with these tires
vs 
Continental SportContact 7 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
7-0 in 7 shared tests
vs
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
4-2 in 6 shared tests
vs
Michelin Pilot Sport 5 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
7-0 in 7 shared tests
vs
Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 6 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
8-1 in 9 shared tests
vs
Falken Azenis RS820 vs Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
0-3 in 3 shared tests
vs
Falken Azenis FK520 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
0-6 in 6 shared tests
vs 
Vredestein Ultrac Pro vs Yokohama Advan Sport V107
4-1 in 5 shared tests
vs
Continental PremiumContact 7 vs Vredestein Ultrac Pro
5-0 in 5 shared tests
Run either of these?
Your review is the part of this page no test can supply: how the tire wore, how it aged, what it was like in the rain in year three. It takes about five minutes.
Where this data comes from
Finishing positions and measurements are transcribed from each published test. A test only counts here when both tires ran in it, so every figure was recorded on the same car, size and day as the one it is compared to.
About the TR Score
The Tire Reviews Score rates each tire out of 10 from every independent test result and vetted owner review we hold, so two tires can be compared even before a test has run them together.
Who does the testing
Every test published as a Tire Reviews test is run by Jonathan Benson, who has been testing tires independently since 2007.