Continental PremiumContact 7 vs Falken ZIEX ZE320
The data shows a clear split: Falken often stops shorter in the dry and feels more agile, while Continental consistently rules the wet, offers stronger aquaplaning reserves, and delivers markedly better wear and value. Noise and rolling resistance trade blows depending on test, but the practical implications-safety margin in the wet vs. sportier feel and dry bite-are pronounced.
Test Results
Independent comparison tire tests are the best source of data to get tire information from, and the good news is there have been seven tests which compare both tires directly!
| Tire | Test Wins | Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Continental PremiumContact 7 | five | |
| Falken ZIEX ZE320 | two |
While it might look like the Continental PremiumContact 7 is better than the Falken ZIEX ZE320 purely based on the higher number of test wins, tires are very complicated objects which means where one tire is better than the other can be more important in real world use.
Let's look at how the two tires compare across multiple tire test categories.
Key Strengths
- Class-leading wet braking and aquaplaning reserves
- Excellent longevity and overall value per 1,000 km
- Balanced, predictable handling with strong stability
- Lower rolling resistance in multiple tests vs. Falken
- Outstanding dry braking performance across sizes
- Sporty, confidence-inspiring handling feel
- Competitive wet handling pace in several tests
- Generally quieter in measured noise tests
Dry Braking
Looking at data from seven tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during five dry braking tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 stopped the vehicle in 1.78% less distance than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Dry Braking: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Dry Braking winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [s]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during one dry handling [s] tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was 0.22% faster around a lap than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Dry Handling [s]: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Dry Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one dry handling [km/h] tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 was 0.33% faster around a lap than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Dry Handling [Km/H]: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Dry Handling
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during one subj. dry handling tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 scored 4.88% more points than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Subj. Dry Handling: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Subj. Dry Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking
Looking at data from seven tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during six wet braking tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 stopped the vehicle in 4.87% less distance than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Wet Braking: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Wet Braking winner was calculated >>
Wet Braking - Concrete
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one wet braking - concrete tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 stopped the vehicle in 7.43% less distance than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Wet Braking - Concrete: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Wet Braking - Concrete winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [s]
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during two wet handling [s] tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 was 1.06% faster around a wet lap than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Wet Handling [s]: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Handling [Km/H]
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during one wet handling [km/h] tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was 0.95% faster around a wet lap than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Wet Handling [Km/H]: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Subj. Wet Handling
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during two subj. wet handling tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 scored 5.7% more points than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Subj. Wet Handling: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Subj. Wet Handling winner was calculated >>
Wet Circle
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during one wet circle tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was 0.23% faster around a wet circle than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Wet Circle: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Wet Circle winner was calculated >>
Straight Aqua
Looking at data from six tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during four straight aqua tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 floated at a 1.47% higher speed than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Straight Aqua: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Straight Aqua winner was calculated >>
Curved Aquaplaning
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during three curved aquaplaning tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 slipped out at a 13.71% higher speed than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Curved Aquaplaning: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Curved Aquaplaning winner was calculated >>
Subj. Comfort
Looking at data from four tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during two subj. comfort tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 scored 2.58% more points than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Subj. Comfort: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Subj. Comfort winner was calculated >>
Subj. Noise
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during two subj. noise tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 scored 5.39% more points than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Subj. Noise: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Subj. Noise winner was calculated >>
Noise
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Falken ZIEX ZE320 was better during two noise tests. On average the Falken ZIEX ZE320 measured 1.98% quieter than the Continental PremiumContact 7.
Best In Noise: Falken ZIEX ZE320
See how the Noise winner was calculated >>
Rough Noise
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one rough noise tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 measured 0.55% quieter than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Rough Noise: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Rough Noise winner was calculated >>
Wear
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during two wear tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 is predicted to cover 19.71% miles before reaching 1.6mm than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Wear: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Wear winner was calculated >>
Value
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one value tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 proved to have a 21.49% better value based on price/1000km than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Value: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Value winner was calculated >>
Rolling Resistance
Looking at data from three tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during two rolling resistance tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 had a 2.54% lower rolling resistance than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Rolling Resistance: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Rolling Resistance winner was calculated >>
Fuel Consumption
Looking at data from two tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one fuel consumption tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 used 1.8% less fuel than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Fuel Consumption: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Fuel Consumption winner was calculated >>
Abrasion
Looking at data from one tire tests, the Continental PremiumContact 7 was better during one abrasion tests. On average the Continental PremiumContact 7 emitted 2.82% less particle wear matter than the Falken ZIEX ZE320.
Best In Abrasion: Continental PremiumContact 7
See how the Abrasion winner was calculated >>
Real World Driver Reviews
Continental PremiumContact 7 Driver Reviews
Across 44 driver reviews, the Continental PremiumContact 7 is most often described as a very high-grip, high-confidence tire with excellent wet and dry braking/handling, making the car feel planted and secure in all conditions. Many owners also praise its predictable, progressive behaviour and overall safety-focused performance. The main recurring downsides are higher-than-expected road noise (especially on coarse surfaces or at speed) and, for a noticeable minority, quicker wear/shorter life than expected for a premium tire; some also note the soft sidewalls can reduce steering sharpness/feedback.
Based on 49 reviews with an average rating of 83%
Falken ZIEX ZE320 Driver Reviews
Most drivers rate the Falken ZIEX ZE320 highly for strong dry and wet grip, confident handling, and generally low noise, positioning it as a sporty-leaning touring tire with good value. Comfort is praised by several users, though one hybrid owner reports intrusive high-pitch noise and a harsh, hollow feel. Wear feedback is mixed but limited: one mid-score review reports fast front wear, while others note early days or acceptable longevity. A few note increased fuel consumption versus competitors, but overall sentiment is strongly positive.
Based on 7 reviews with an average rating of 85%
Conclusion
Falken's ZIEX ZE320 excels when you value immediacy and dry stopping: it frequently tops dry braking and subjectively feels sportier and calmer on the limit. However, its weaker curved aquaplaning, inconsistent wet performance across tests, and shorter wear distance curb its overall versatility. For most daily drivers prioritizing safety in mixed conditions, choose Continental; for drivers who want a sharper, sporty feel and excellent dry bite at a typically lower purchase price, the Falken appeals-just be mindful of wet margins and wear.
Key Differences
- Wet braking: Continental consistently shorter; Falken lags in cool/wet conditions
- Aquaplaning: Continental stronger in both straight and curved; Falken weakest in curved in one test
- Dry braking: Falken usually stops shorter; Continental close but second more often
- Handling character: Falken feels sportier and calmer at the limit; Continental more secure but can understeer
- Wear and cost: Continental lasts ~30% longer (46,250 km vs 35,520 km) and offers better value
- Noise/comfort: Falken often quieter; Continental sometimes noisier but rides comfortably
Overall Winner: Continental PremiumContact 7
Based on the tire test data and user reviews we have in our database, the Continental PremiumContact 7 has demonstrated better overall performance in this comparison. However, as you can see from the spider diagram above, each tire has its own strengths which should be considered in your final tire buying choice.Similar Comparisons
Looking for more tire comparisons? Here are other direct comparisons involving these tires:
Continental PremiumContact 7 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Falken ZIEX ZE320 Top Comparisons
No other comparisons available for this tire.
Footnote
This page has been developed using tire industry testing best practices. This means we are only comparing tests which have had both tires in the same test.
Why is this important? Tire testing is heavily affected by things like surface grip levels and surface temperature, which means you can only compare values from the same day. During a tire test external condition changes are calculated into the overall results, but it is not possible to calculate this between tire tests performed on different days or at different locations.
As a result you will see other tests on Tire Reviews which feature both the %s and %s, but as they weren't conducted on the same day, the results are not comparable.
Lots of other websites do this sort of tire comparison, Tire Reviews doesn't.