7 min read
Updated
Error: Article not found
Similar Tire Tests
Show All summer tire tests2025 AutoView Sports Tire Test
May 2026
275/35R19
Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S
5 tires
2026 autozurnal Eco Summer Tire Test
April 2026
215/55 R18
Hankook iON Evo
10 tires
2026 Motor Summer Tire Test
April 2026
225/45 R17
Continental PremiumContact 7
9 tires
2026 AutoBild Track Day Tire Test
April 2026
275/35 R19
Pirelli P Zero Trofeo RS
7 tires
2026 Summer ECO Tire Test
March 2026
195/55 R16
Dunlop Blue Response TG
8 tires
2026 Sport Auto Summer Tire Test
March 2026
205/45 R17
Bridgestone Potenza Sport Evo
7 tires
Can you expalin each category you give scores?
i wonder why in any of this test there is not Bridgestone Potenza RE002
Bridgestone will have chosen to submit the T001 instead of the RE002!
In 2013 European Summer Sports Tire Test Dunlop SportMaxx RT was also at the top in wear and now only 2 of 10? Does that mean that they last 4 times less than Michelin?
I'm afraid we don't know if there is a direct correlation between the score and the number of miles the tire will last, only that the lower the number the less miles they'll last.
And where is the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 2..??
Very very good tires
Goodyear and Dunlop would have chosen what tires to submit, and would have only been allowed 1 tire per brand, so split it across the EfficientGrip Performance and Sport Maxx RT
Where is the Dunlop Blue Response
Michelin Primacy 3
14th: 2012 Autobild 50 Tire Braking Test (225/45 R17)
1st: 2014 Auto Bild Top 15 Summer Tire Test (225/50 R17)
Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
How is that possible????
Tires get updated through their life with improved compounds and technologies. It's extremely unlikely the tire tested in 2014 is the same tire they tested in 2012.
The new label scores has pushed through a lot of new updated to existing patterns in the past 2 years.
Thanks for reply.
Again, I can not believe that the tire can hold up great in the rain and have a little wear. Rain tires are generally softer, and wear out relatively faster compared with stiffer tires.
Anyhow, somebody will buy this tires... and we will have some feedback.... soon....
Plenty of feedback here :)
http://www.tirereviews.co.u...
Michelin are well known for having an excellent wear / wet performance. Their tires often cost a little more than other premium brands, but the price/performance per mile works out well due to the increased mileage.
...wear / wet perfomace...
...price/performance per mile... Arguments are in place.
I'll see what will ADAC say...
Thanks.
If the tires have been updated at some point most of those user reviews are probably still based on the older version of the tire.
Not that it matters to me anyway, I already ordered the SportMaxx RTs before I saw this article - although considering how fast they are said to wear, I might be shopping for new tires again soon. Shame there aren't many performance-oriented tires available in my size (225/55 R16).
That sounds like a great excuse for some new, larger alloys ;)
It does, doesn't it? On the other hand I've avoided moving to larger wheels as the roads around here are not particularly smooth. I guess everything is a compromise in one way or another when it comes to finding the right wheels and tires :)
"Hahahahahahaha!!!!!!!
How is that possible????"
There are several ways that it is possible. The most obvious is that the two tests evaluate different things and in different ways.
Firstly, they seem to give strong emphasis on cost per mile. Most tests, when they consider costs, consider purchase price only and don't give it very much emphasis. You can decide for yourself whether costs are important to you, but, if you decdide that costs are important, it seems to me that this test has the approach correct (and, by implication, the ones that take the simple purchase price approach, don't).
The other very obvious thing is that one test is a braking test. In a braking test, you measure braking, and nothing else. this obviously does not give a balanced or complete view of a tire's performance, but the reason that Auto Bild did that test was to act as a 'prefilter' on the proper testing, presumably on the grounds that anything that was really bad in braking wasn't worth subhecting to the full gamut of tests, because, in the light of its braking test results, it wasn't going to trouble the podium places.
Given the amount of work involved in doing tire testing properly, you have to understand their approach, but that's not the same as saying that you should take the results of a braking test as being the final word on the subject.
(And, the braking test doesn't even seem to take cost into account, never mind whether it takes the 'correct' cost per mile approach, or not.)
Also, the Primacy 3s are scoring top for wear, yet in the customer reviews on this site they get absolutely slated for very low endurance - as low as 6k miles for some reviewers. I don't trust this test at all.
Remember the tests are testing them comparatively to other tires, whereas the reviews are an isolated experience.
As a rule, Michelin and Bridgestone often last longer than competitors, so the claims in this test are believable to us.