Adjust Result Weighting
The overall scores below are calculated using our weighting system. Since the original publication may use a different scoring methodology that wasn't shared, these results may differ from their published rankings. You can adjust the weightings below to explore how different priorities affect the results.
Test Results Data
Good
Below Average
42
BEST
Bar length in each cell shows performance versus the class leader; longer bars mean stronger performance. The class-leading value in each column appears in bold. The Total Score reflects the weighted sum of all categories.
| # | Tire | Total Score |
|---|---|---|
Scroll for more
Not every driver has the same priorities. Adjust the category weightings above to re-rank the tires based on what matters most to your driving style.
Each cell shows a bar comparing the tire to the class leader for that test — a longer bar means stronger performance. Bar colour matches the test category.
The original test ranking is shown in the # column. Arrows indicate how each tire moves when your custom weighting is applied.
When in a test Goodyear loses to Laufenn, the test is "Lauffennaghable". (pun intended)
Smooth ?
What some odd odd test results! Among many items, I noticed that in previous same size tests the Falken and the Nokian always had great scores (if not the best ones) in what noise is concerned, but not in this one, apparently! And that's a very easy item to assess... I wonder how would have they overall rated the Michelin Pilot Sport 4, the Goodyear Eagle F1 Asym 5, the Pirelli P Zero PZ4 or even the brand new Bridgestone Potenza Sport!
Even in this - weird - test the Falken FK510 performs well; very consistent tire in all conditions/sizes/reviews.
Shame they didn't test the (updated) Kumho HS51 or PS71...
I've always said cross reference everything. Tests and reviews, then you find the consistent tires. Each facility has its own surface, climate, and local airborne matter (which settles on the surface) which combined can change results.
Users tend to be a useful counter also, and provide some whole-life info.
Fully agreed, however on the point that "each facility has it's own surface" etc, this was tested at the Contidrome in Germany which has probably done more tests than any other facility!
Indeed, was just meaning in general ?
I can only say: Don´t use the GTÜ-tire-reviews as reference. Since years it´s unusable
Every test has it's uses, and it seems this is a great test if you want a tire that excels in aquaplaning performance at the expense of everything else!
Nokian Wetproof in all test so far wasn't a tire with good aquaplaning results , this time is excelent.
I always take a look at the results in the single disciplines, if possible. So I can choose my favorite tire.
And nah, GTÜ show since years very strange results, maybe it´s useful for fans of weak, cheap tires if the tire looks good in GTÜ. But for others it´s jeust confusing