Ultra high performance tire tests always make us happy, and Auto Bild do some of the best. For 2020, AutoBild have tested nine sports tires in the staggered 245/35 R19 and 265/35 R19 sizes using a Mercedes Benz C63 AMG.

Like our UHP tire test in 2019, Auto Bild have tested the very three best UHP tires on the market, the Continental SportContact 6, Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport, and Michelin Pilot Sport 4S, along with some of the other well know UHP tires from Hankook, Vredestein, Falken and other brands.

The end results are very close, so instead of spoiling the surprise, read on below for all the geeky data! It's particularly important to read the testers notes at the bottom of the page, as these give a small insight into the subjective feel of the tires along side the numbers, but if you'd like to learn more about how these tires differ subjectively, go and watch our video of a very similar test!

One addition Auto Bild have made is the inclusion of the Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 semi slick track day tire. Unsurprisingly this tire dominated the dry testing, with a significant advantage over even the best UHP tires, but couldn't match the best in the wet, especially during the aquaplaning testing where the lack of tread grooves really impacted the tires performance.

Dry

Continental proved to be the best in the dry, offering the shortest braking distance and the fastest lap time. Michelin was close behind, and while the Falken Azenis FK510 placed third in the braking tests, it struggled more during handling.

Goodyear, Vredestein and Hankook were also all very close in the dry, but when looking at the testing notes it was the Goodyear that offered the best steering feel and feedback.

Dry Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	112 ft	Best
2Continental Sport Contact 6	114 ft	+2 ft
3Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	115 ft	+3 ft
4Falken Azenis FK510	118 ft	+6 ft
5Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	118 ft	+6 ft
6Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	119 ft	+7 ft
6Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	119 ft	+7 ft
8Yokohama Advan Sport V105	122 ft	+10 ft
9Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	123 ft	+11 ft
10Nankang Noble Sport NS20	130 ft	+18 ft

The difference between best and worst was 16.1% (18 ft ≈ 1.2 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	77.4 mph	Best
2Continental Sport Contact 6	76.4 mph	-1.0 mph
3Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	76.4 mph	-1.0 mph
4Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	76.0 mph	-1.4 mph
5Yokohama Advan Sport V105	75.9 mph	-1.5 mph
6Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	75.7 mph	-1.7 mph
7Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	74.8 mph	-2.6 mph
8Falken Azenis FK510	74.3 mph	-3.1 mph
9Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	73.9 mph	-3.5 mph
10Nankang Noble Sport NS20	72.3 mph	-5.1 mph

The difference between best and worst was 6.5% (5.1 mph).

Wet

As we've seen before in the wet, a tire which works well in braking doesn't always work as well in handling.

In this test, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S offered the best wet braking performance, but could only manage seventh fastest lap time, while the Goodyear was the fastest in the wet, but took 14 feet longer to stop the car than the Michelin!

The only tire with a balanced performance between braking and handling was the Falken, which finished second in both tests meaning it was the best tire overall.

Wet Braking
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	184 ft	Best
2Falken Azenis FK510	185 ft	+1 ft
3Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	198 ft	+14 ft
4Continental Sport Contact 6	198 ft	+14 ft
4Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	198 ft	+14 ft
6Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	204 ft	+20 ft
7Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	206 ft	+22 ft
8Yokohama Advan Sport V105	208 ft	+24 ft
9Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	225 ft	+41 ft
10Nankang Noble Sport NS20	237 ft	+53 ft

The difference between best and worst was 28.9% (53 ft ≈ 3.6 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	51.6 mph	Best
2Falken Azenis FK510	51.5 mph	-0.1 mph
3Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	51.2 mph	-0.4 mph
4Yokohama Advan Sport V105	50.9 mph	-0.7 mph
5Continental Sport Contact 6	50.8 mph	-0.8 mph
6Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	50.5 mph	-1.1 mph
7Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	50.3 mph	-1.3 mph
8Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	49.5 mph	-2.1 mph
9Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	48.2 mph	-3.4 mph
10Nankang Noble Sport NS20	47.1 mph	-4.5 mph

The difference between best and worst was 8.8% (4.5 mph).

Nankang had a significant advantage during aquaplaning testing, however this doesn't make up for the long wet braking and poor wet handling in the other wet tests.

The rest of the tires were extremely close.

Straight Aqua
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Nankang Noble Sport NS20	58.4 mph	Best
2Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	55.5 mph	-2.9 mph
3Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	55.1 mph	-3.3 mph
3Yokohama Advan Sport V105	55.1 mph	-3.3 mph
5Continental Sport Contact 6	55.0 mph	-3.4 mph
6Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	54.9 mph	-3.5 mph
7Falken Azenis FK510	54.9 mph	-3.5 mph
8Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	54.7 mph	-3.7 mph
9Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	54.6 mph	-3.8 mph
10Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	51.4 mph	-7.0 mph

The difference between best and worst was 11.9% (7 mph).

Environment

Hankook had the lowest rolling resistance on test, with Yokohama having the highest fuel use.

Rolling Resistance
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best	Extra fuel / year
1Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	8.31 kg/t	Best	$0
2Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	8.81 kg/t	+0.50 kg/t	$18
3Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	8.97 kg/t	+0.66 kg/t	$23
4Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	8.98 kg/t	+0.67 kg/t	$24
5Falken Azenis FK510	9.24 kg/t	+0.93 kg/t	$33
6Continental Sport Contact 6	9.39 kg/t	+1.08 kg/t	$38
7Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	9.41 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t	$39
7Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	9.41 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t	$39
9Nankang Noble Sport NS20	9.65 kg/t	+1.34 kg/t	$47
10Yokohama Advan Sport V105	9.82 kg/t	+1.51 kg/t	$53

The difference between best and worst was 18.2% (1.51 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Yokohama Advan Sport V105 uses about 15 gal ($53) more fuel than the Hankook Ventus S1 evo2.

Adjust the assumptions

Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.

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.

Only the Goodyear and Yokohama tires were significantly louder than the others on test.

Noise
Position / Tire	Result	Gap to best
1Hankook Ventus S1 evo2	72.9 dB	Best
2Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2	73 dB	+0.10 dB
2Continental Sport Contact 6	73 dB	+0.10 dB
2Michelin Pilot Sport 4 S	73 dB	+0.10 dB
5Nankang Noble Sport NS20	73.5 dB	+0.60 dB
5Toyo Proxes T1 Sport	73.5 dB	+0.60 dB
7Vredestein Ultrac Vorti	73.9 dB	+1.00 dB
8Falken Azenis FK510	74 dB	+1.10 dB
9Yokohama Advan Sport V105	74.9 dB	+2.00 dB
10Goodyear Eagle F1 SuperSport	75 dB	+2.10 dB

All the tires in the Noise test finished less than 3% apart.

As usual, the Michelin Pilot Sport 4S was the most expensive tire on test. Sadly no wear testing was done, however in previous testing Michelin, Goodyear and Continental all seem to have similar, best in class tread life.

Results

Highly Recommended.

Dry98.5%

Wet95.3%

Comfort99.9%

Rolling Resistance88.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	114 ft	+2 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 10	76.4 mph	-1.0 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	198 ft	+14 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 10	50.8 mph	-0.8 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	5^th / 10	55.0 mph	-3.4 mph
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 10	73 dB	+0.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	6^th / 10	9.39 kg/t	+1.08 kg/t

Price: 855.00

Highly Recommended.

Dry98.4%

Wet97.9%

Comfort99.9%

Rolling Resistance92.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	115 ft	+3 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 10	76.4 mph	-1.0 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	184 ft	Best in this discipline
Wet HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 10	50.3 mph	-1.3 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	6^th / 10	54.9 mph	-3.5 mph
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 10	73 dB	+0.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	3^rd / 10	8.97 kg/t	+0.66 kg/t

Price: 930.00

Conditionally Recommended.

Dry100%

Wet87.6%

Comfort99.9%

Rolling Resistance88.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	1^st / 10	112 ft	Best in this discipline
Dry HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 10	77.4 mph	Best in this discipline
Wet BrakingLower is better	9^th / 10	225 ft	+41 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	9^th / 10	48.2 mph	-3.4 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	10^th / 10	51.4 mph	-7.0 mph
NoiseLower is better	2^nd / 10	73 dB	+0.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 10	9.41 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t

Price: 1085.00

Recommended.

Dry96.4%

Wet95.8%

Comfort97.2%

Rolling Resistance92.5%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	119 ft	+7 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 10	76.0 mph	-1.4 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	198 ft	+14 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	1^st / 10	51.6 mph	Best in this discipline
Straight AquaHigher is better	9^th / 10	54.6 mph	-3.8 mph
NoiseLower is better	10^th / 10	75 dB	+2.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	4^th / 10	8.98 kg/t	+0.67 kg/t

Price: 890.00

Recommended.

Dry95.6%

Wet95.2%

Comfort100%

Rolling Resistance100%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	119 ft	+7 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	7^th / 10	74.8 mph	-2.6 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	3^rd / 10	198 ft	+14 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 10	50.5 mph	-1.1 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	2^nd / 10	55.5 mph	-2.9 mph
NoiseLower is better	1^st / 10	72.9 dB	Best in this discipline
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	1^st / 10	8.31 kg/t	Best in this discipline

Price: 650.00

Dry96.3%

Wet94.4%

Comfort98.7%

Rolling Resistance88.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	5^th / 10	118 ft	+6 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	6^th / 10	75.7 mph	-1.7 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	6^th / 10	204 ft	+20 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	3^rd / 10	51.2 mph	-0.4 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	8^th / 10	54.7 mph	-3.7 mph
NoiseLower is better	7^th / 10	73.9 dB	+1.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	7^th / 10	9.41 kg/t	+1.10 kg/t

Price: 710.00

Good.

Dry95.5%

Wet98.6%

Comfort98.5%

Rolling Resistance89.9%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	4^th / 10	118 ft	+6 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 10	74.3 mph	-3.1 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	2^nd / 10	185 ft	+1 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	2^nd / 10	51.5 mph	-0.1 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	7^th / 10	54.9 mph	-3.5 mph
NoiseLower is better	8^th / 10	74 dB	+1.10 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	5^th / 10	9.24 kg/t	+0.93 kg/t

Price: 565.00

Good.

Dry95%

Wet93.6%

Comfort97.3%

Rolling Resistance84.6%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	122 ft	+10 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	5^th / 10	75.9 mph	-1.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	8^th / 10	208 ft	+24 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	4^th / 10	50.9 mph	-0.7 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 10	55.1 mph	-3.3 mph
NoiseLower is better	9^th / 10	74.9 dB	+2.00 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	10^th / 10	9.82 kg/t	+1.51 kg/t

Price: 740.00

Good.

Dry93.5%

Wet92.8%

Comfort99.2%

Rolling Resistance94.3%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	9^th / 10	123 ft	+11 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	9^th / 10	73.9 mph	-3.5 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	7^th / 10	206 ft	+22 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	8^th / 10	49.5 mph	-2.1 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	3^rd / 10	55.1 mph	-3.3 mph
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 10	73.5 dB	+0.60 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	2^nd / 10	8.81 kg/t	+0.50 kg/t

Price: 595.00

Not Recommended.

Dry89.8%

Wet87.2%

Comfort99.2%

Rolling Resistance86.1%

Category scores (% of best)

All discipline results (7)

Discipline positions compare the ranked tires in this test, not the whole market. These are individual measurements, not weighted overall scores.

Test	Position in discipline	Result	Gap to best
Dry BrakingLower is better	10^th / 10	130 ft	+18 ft
Dry HandlingHigher is better	10^th / 10	72.3 mph	-5.1 mph
Wet BrakingLower is better	10^th / 10	237 ft	+53 ft
Wet HandlingHigher is better	10^th / 10	47.1 mph	-4.5 mph
Straight AquaHigher is better	1^st / 10	58.4 mph	Best in this discipline
NoiseLower is better	5^th / 10	73.5 dB	+0.60 dB
Rolling ResistanceLower is better	9^th / 10	9.65 kg/t	+1.34 kg/t

Price: 420.00

Discussion

5 comments

TireReviews Jul 6, 2020 archived

The impossible question. Without testing that combination, it's impossible to really know, however in a recent test I discovered that the PS4S was a better tire than a * marked PSS

#5924
Adrian Berger Jun 11, 2020 archived

Very interesting, I am looking at Ultrac Vorti R, since Michelins are 2x the money (Canada).

#5875
Scour Mar 16, 2020 archived

Did except better result for the Goodyear in the dry. And the old Hankook did better than expected, the Evo 3 seems to be not so good als the Evo 2

#5642
1. TireReviews Scour Mar 17, 2020 archived
  
  I understand why you think that regarding the Hankook, and I'm not sure what happened in the other test where the Evo3 performed poorly, but I'm confident the Eco3 will be a better tire than the Evo2 when compared directly.
  
  #5643
  1. Scour TireReviews Mar 17, 2020 archived
    
    I should mention in Autobild-Magazines Hankook mostly have better results than in other magazines here
    
    #5645

Menu

Tire shortlist

The evidence behind the verdict

Dry

Wet

Environment

Results

Cross-check this test