Menu

Test Charts / EVO

2021 EVO Summer 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
225/40 R18
Tires tested
9
Disciplines
10

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

3

Dry Braking

Dry braking in feet

Lower is better ↓
Dry Braking
Position / TireResultGap to best
111 ft Best
113 ft +2 ft
113 ft +2 ft
114 ft +3 ft
117 ft +6 ft
118 ft +7 ft
120 ft +9 ft
124 ft +13 ft
135 ft +24 ft

The difference between best and worst was 21.5% (24 ft ≈ 1.6 Car Lengths).

Dry Handling

Dry handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Dry Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
66.1 s Best
66.8 s +0.70 s
66.8 s +0.70 s
67 s +0.90 s
67.1 s +1.00 s
67.2 s +1.10 s
67.9 s +1.80 s
68 s +1.90 s
69 s +2.90 s

The difference between best and worst was 4.4% (2.9 s).

Subj. Dry Handling

Subjective Dry Handling Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Dry Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
57 Points Best
56.5 Points -0.50 Points
50 Points -7.00 Points
49.5 Points -7.50 Points
49.5 Points -7.50 Points
49 Points -8.00 Points
48.5 Points -8.50 Points
46.5 Points -10.50 Points
46 Points -11.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 19.3% (11 Points).

Wet

6

Wet Braking

Wet braking in feet

Lower is better ↓
Wet Braking
Position / TireResultGap to best
89 ft Best
93 ft +4 ft
96 ft +7 ft
99 ft +10 ft
100 ft +11 ft
100 ft +11 ft
105 ft +16 ft
106 ft +17 ft
141 ft +52 ft

The difference between best and worst was 58.9% (52 ft ≈ 3.5 Car Lengths).

Wet Handling

Wet handling time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Wet Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
66.3 s Best
66.6 s +0.30 s
66.6 s +0.30 s
67.4 s +1.10 s
67.8 s +1.50 s
68.1 s +1.80 s
69.2 s +2.90 s
72.3 s +6.00 s
73.4 s +7.10 s

The difference between best and worst was 10.7% (7.1 s).

Subj. Wet Handling

Subjective Wet Handling Score

Higher is better ↑
Subj. Wet Handling
Position / TireResultGap to best
60 Points Best
57.5 Points -2.50 Points
57 Points -3.00 Points
57 Points -3.00 Points
55 Points -5.00 Points
54.5 Points -5.50 Points
53 Points -7.00 Points
47.5 Points -12.50 Points
36 Points -24.00 Points

The difference between best and worst was 40% (24 Points).

Wet Circle

Wet Circle Lap Time in seconds

Lower is better ↓
Wet Circle
Position / TireResultGap to best
14.9 s Best
15 s +0.10 s
15.2 s +0.30 s
15.3 s +0.40 s
15.4 s +0.50 s
15.6 s +0.70 s
15.8 s +0.90 s
15.9 s +1.00 s
17.7 s +2.80 s

The difference between best and worst was 18.8% (2.8 s).

Straight Aqua

Float Speed in mph

Higher is better ↑
Straight Aqua
Position / TireResultGap to best
45.5 mph Best
45.5 mph Best
43.3 mph -2.2 mph
42.9 mph -2.6 mph
41.8 mph -3.7 mph
41.8 mph -3.7 mph
41.2 mph -4.3 mph
41.1 mph -4.4 mph
40.5 mph -5.0 mph

The difference between best and worst was 10.9% (5 mph).

Curved Aquaplaning

Remaining lateral acceleration

Higher is better ↑
Curved Aquaplaning
Position / TireResultGap to best
69.2 ft/s² Best
67.3 ft/s² -1.9 ft/s²
61.4 ft/s² -7.8 ft/s²
58.1 ft/s² -11.1 ft/s²
56.8 ft/s² -12.4 ft/s²
51.8 ft/s² -17.4 ft/s²
51.8 ft/s² -17.4 ft/s²
51.8 ft/s² -17.4 ft/s²
39.4 ft/s² -29.8 ft/s²

The difference between best and worst was 43.1% (29.8 ft/s²).

Value

1

Rolling Resistance

Rolling resistance in kg t

Lower is better ↓
Rolling Resistance
Position / TireResultGap to bestExtra fuel / year
8.4 kg/t Best $0
8.5 kg/t +0.10 kg/t $3
8.6 kg/t +0.20 kg/t $7
8.7 kg/t +0.30 kg/t $10
8.9 kg/t +0.50 kg/t $17
9.1 kg/t +0.70 kg/t $24
9.5 kg/t +1.10 kg/t $38
9.7 kg/t +1.30 kg/t $45
9.9 kg/t +1.50 kg/t $52

The difference between best and worst was 17.9% (1.5 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Pirelli P Zero PZ4 uses about 15 gal ($52) more fuel than the Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3.

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.

12,000 mi
$3.60/gal
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.

More tire tests

Cross-check this test

All tire tests

Where these tires were tested again, and how the verdict held up.

Rate your tires

My tires

Saved in this browser on this site. No account needed. Clearing browser data removes your choices.

Vehicle and size

Check the size, load and speed ratings on your vehicle. Saving a size does not confirm fitment.

Saved tires

Save tires from a tire page, test or comparison to keep them here.

Select 2–8 saved tires. Ranked comparisons require at least two shared tests.