Test Charts / EVO

2018 EVO UUHP Tire Test

Compare each discipline in the tested size. See the measured result, position and gap to the best tire, then read the verdict for the trade-offs behind the finishing order.

Tested size: 235/35 R19
Tires tested: 6
Disciplines: 8

Read the measurements, not just the rank

Lower is better for braking distances and lap times; higher is better for subjective scores and aquaplaning speed. Bars start at zero. Read the gap alongside the position: adjacent tires can be separated by very different margins.

Positions and gaps always refer to the full test field within each group. Selecting tires does not recalculate rankings or change the best-in-test benchmark.

Dry

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Sport Contact 6	112 ft	Best
2Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	112 ft	0 ft
3Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	115 ft	+3 ft
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	117 ft	+5 ft
5Falken Azenis FK510	120 ft	+8 ft
6Toyo Proxes Sport	126 ft	+14 ft

The difference between best and worst was 12.9% (14 ft ≈ 1 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Sport Contact 6	84.9 s	Best
2Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	85 s	+0.10 s
3Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	86.8 s	+1.90 s
3Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	86.8 s	+1.90 s
5Falken Azenis FK510	87 s	+2.10 s
6Toyo Proxes Sport	87.6 s	+2.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 3.2% (2.7 s).

Subj. Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Continental Sport Contact 6	62 Points	Best
2Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	60.5 Points	-1.50 Points
3Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	50.5 Points	-11.50 Points
4Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	49.5 Points	-12.50 Points
5Falken Azenis FK510	45.5 Points	-16.50 Points
6Toyo Proxes Sport	43.5 Points	-18.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 29.8% (18.5 Points).

Wet

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	76 ft	Best
2Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	77 ft	+1 ft
2Falken Azenis FK510	77 ft	+1 ft
4Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	79 ft	+3 ft
5Continental Sport Contact 6	79 ft	+3 ft
6Toyo Proxes Sport	86 ft	+10 ft

The difference between best and worst was 13.4% (10 ft ≈ 0.7 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	64.1 s	Best
2Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	64.2 s	+0.10 s
3Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	64.7 s	+0.60 s
4Falken Azenis FK510	65.6 s	+1.50 s
5Toyo Proxes Sport	65.8 s	+1.70 s
6Continental Sport Contact 6	66.8 s	+2.70 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.2% (2.7 s).

Subj. Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	62 Points	Best
2Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	59.5 Points	-2.50 Points
3Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	57 Points	-5.00 Points
4Falken Azenis FK510	52 Points	-10.00 Points
5Toyo Proxes Sport	48 Points	-14.00 Points
6Continental Sport Contact 6	42.5 Points	-19.50 Points

The difference between best and worst was 31.5% (19.5 Points).

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	53.6 mph	Best
2Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	53.1 mph	-0.5 mph
3Toyo Proxes Sport	51.9 mph	-1.7 mph
4Falken Azenis FK510	51.1 mph	-2.5 mph
5Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	51.0 mph	-2.6 mph
6Continental Sport Contact 6	49.6 mph	-4.0 mph

The difference between best and worst was 7.5% (4 mph).

Value

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2	8.76 kg/t	Best	$0
2Goodyear Eagle F1 Asymmetric 3	8.8 kg/t	+0.04 kg/t	$1
3Toyo Proxes Sport	8.92 kg/t	+0.16 kg/t	$5
4Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	9.16 kg/t	+0.40 kg/t	$13
5Continental Sport Contact 6	9.57 kg/t	+0.81 kg/t	$27
6Falken Azenis FK510	9.6 kg/t	+0.84 kg/t	$28

The difference between best and worst was 9.6% (0.84 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Falken Azenis FK510 uses about 8 gal ($28) more fuel than the Dunlop SportMaxx RT 2.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions. These calculators use the full test field, independently of your tire selection above.

Gas/Diesel Electric

Annual Mileage

12,000 mi

km (L)

miles (US gal)

Fuel Price

$3.60/gal

GBP (£)

EUR (€)

USD ($)

Set my vehicle consumption

Estimates based on typical driving conditions. Rolling resistance accounts for approximately 20% of IC vehicle fuel consumption and 25% of EV energy consumption. Actual savings vary based on driving style, vehicle weight, road conditions, and tire age. For comparative purposes only. Lifetime savings based on a 40,000km / 25,000 mile tread life.

Tire shortlist →Read the test →

More tire tests