Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Show full testing methodology
Recorded test conditions
- Dry Braking
- 62.1 → 0.6 mph
- Wet Braking
- 49.7 → 0.6 mph
- Gravel Traction
- 3.1 → 24.9 mph
- Grass Traction
- 3.1 → 9.3 mph
Score Weighting
Weights express the scoring priorities, not how much each discipline actually changed the finishing order. The size of the performance gaps matters too. Category weights contribute to the overall score. Within each category, discipline weights divide that category’s share. Published finishing positions also need to be read alongside the editorial verdict.
| Test | Within category | Share of overall score |
|---|---|---|
| Dry · 35% | ||
| Dry Braking | 63.2% | 22.11% |
| Dry Handling | 31.6% | 11.05% |
| Subj. Dry Handling | 5.3% | 1.84% |
| Wet · 40% | ||
| Wet Braking | 52.1% | 20.83% |
| Wet Handling | 31.3% | 12.5% |
| Straight Aqua | 8.3% | 3.33% |
| Curved Aquaplaning | 8.3% | 3.33% |
| Off road · 7.5% | ||
| Gravel Traction | 50% | 3.75% |
| Grass Traction | 50% | 3.75% |
| Comfort · 10% | ||
| Subj. Comfort | 25% | 2.5% |
| Noise | 75% | 7.5% |
| Value · 7.5% | ||
| Rolling Resistance | 100% | 7.5% |
Our standard methods
The conditions above are recorded for this test. The descriptions below explain our standard procedures; measurement windows and run counts can vary by test.
Dry Braking
For dry braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 110 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on clean, dry asphalt. I typically use an 100–5 km/h measurement window. My standard programme is five runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. Reference tires are run repeatedly throughout the session to correct for changing conditions.
Dry Handling
For dry handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit with ESC disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable. For more track-focused products, I also do endurance testing, which is a set number of laps at race pace to determine tire wear patterns and heat resistance over longer driving.
Subj. Dry Handling
I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated dry handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, corner-exit traction, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.
Wet Braking
For wet braking, I drive the test vehicle at an entry speed of 88 km/h and apply full braking effort to a standstill with ABS active on an asphalt surface with a controlled water film. I typically use an 80–5 km/h measurement window to isolate tire performance from variability in the initial brake application. My standard programme is eight runs per tire set where possible, although the sequence can extend to as many as fifteen runs if conditions and tire category justify it. I analyze the full set of runs and discard statistical outliers before averaging. To correct for changing conditions, I run reference tires repeatedly throughout the session — in wet testing, typically every three candidate test sets.
Wet Handling
For wet handling, I drive at the limit of adhesion around a dedicated handling circuit. I generally use specialist wet circuits with kerb-watering systems designed to maintain a consistent surface condition. ESC is disabled where possible so I can assess the tire's natural balance, transient response, and limit behavior without electronic intervention masking the result. I usually complete between two and five timed laps per tire set, depending on the circuit, tire type, and consistency of conditions. I exclude laps affected by clear driver error or obvious environmental inconsistency. Control runs are carried out frequently throughout the session, and I often use multiple sets of control tires so that wear on the references does not become a meaningful variable.
Subj. Wet Handling
I also carry out a structured subjective handling assessment at the limit of adhesion on a dedicated wet handling circuit. I score steering precision, steering response, turn-in behavior, mid-corner balance, aquaplaning resistance, breakaway characteristics, and overall confidence using a standardised 1–10 scale used consistently across my testing. The final assessment combines numeric scoring with written technical commentary. I complete familiarisation laps on the control tire before evaluating each candidate.
Straight Aqua
To measure straight-line aquaplaning resistance, I drive one side of the vehicle through a water trough of controlled depth, typically around 7 mm, while the opposite side remains on dry pavement. I enter at a fixed speed and then accelerate progressively. I define aquaplaning onset as the point at which the wheel travelling through the water exceeds a specified slip threshold relative to the dry-side reference wheel. I usually perform four runs per tire set and average the valid results.
Curved Aquaplaning
For curved aquaplaning, I use a circular track, typically around 100 meters in diameter, with a flooded arc of controlled water depth, usually about 7 mm. The vehicle is instrumented with GPS telemetry and a tri-axial accelerometer. I drive through the flooded section at progressively increasing speed, typically in 5 km/h increments, and record the minimum sustained lateral acceleration at each step. The test continues until lateral acceleration collapses, indicating complete aquaplaning. The result is expressed as remaining lateral acceleration in m/s² as speed rises.
Gravel Traction
For gravel traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared gravel surface with traction control active and measure speed and distance using GPS telemetry. Because natural surfaces are inherently variable, I place particular emphasis on repeat runs, careful reference tracking, and averaged results. Results are normalised against the control tire.
Grass Traction
For grass traction, I accelerate the vehicle from rest on a prepared grass surface with traction control active and measure speed and distance using GPS telemetry. Because natural surfaces are inherently variable, I place particular emphasis on repeat runs, careful reference tracking, and averaged results. The surface is prepared to a defined and repeatable condition as far as practical before testing begins.
Subj. Comfort
To assess comfort, I drive on a wide range of road surfaces (often dedicated comfort tracks at test facilities) at speeds from 50 to 120 km/h, including smooth motorway, coarse surfaces, expansion joints, broken pavement, and sharp-edged obstacles. I evaluate primary ride quality, secondary ride quality, impact harshness, seat-transmitted vibration, and the tire's ability to absorb sharp inputs. Ratings are assigned on a 1–10 scale relative to the reference tire.
Noise
I measure external pass-by noise in accordance with UNECE Regulation 117 and ISO 13325 using the coast-by method on a compliant test surface. Calibrated microphones are positioned beside the test lane, and the vehicle coasts through the measurement zone under controlled conditions. I record the maximum A-weighted sound pressure level in dB(A), complete multiple runs over the relevant speed range, and normalise the result to the reference speed required by the procedure.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance is measured under controlled laboratory conditions in accordance with ISO 28580 and UNECE Regulation 117 Annex 6. The tire is mounted on a test wheel and loaded against a large-diameter steel drum. After thermal stabilisation at the prescribed test speed, rolling resistance force is measured at the spindle and corrected according to the relevant procedure. The result is expressed as rolling resistance coefficient, typically in kg/tonne.
We have 8 of the most popular SUV tires in 235/55 R18, including the Michelin Primacy 4, the brand new Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV, the extremely popular Uniroyal RainSport 5, the new Hankook Ventus S1 Evo3 SUV, the Nokian WetProof SUV, the Vredestein Ultrac Satin, the Avon ZX7, the BFGoodrich Advantage SUV, and a budget tire represented by Westlake.
As tires like these aren't intended for serious off-road use, we'll be using a VW Tiguan and focusing on the dry, wet and comfort characteristics of the tires, AND thanks to Goodyear allowing us to use their awesome off-road test facility in Texas, we'll also look at some of the basic off-road performances such as damp grass and gravel, meaning you'll have a complete picture of what SUV tire is best at what, allowing you to make the ideal purchase choice for your own particular needs.
Vehicles which this size applies to are SUV and Crossover SUVs such as the BMW X3, BMW X5, Audi Q3, Volvo XC40 / XC60, Audi A8, Citroen C4 Aircross, VW Tiguan, Jeep Compass, Kia Sportage, Mercedes Benz EQA, GLA, S Class, Nissan Qashqai and many more.
Let's start with the dry and wet performance of the nine sets of SUV tires.
Dry
Dry braking was led by the Michelin Primacy 4, having an impressive lead over the rest of the group. BFGoodrich, Goodyear and Hankook were also good performers, while the budget Westlake had a big deficit to the rest of the group.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 1 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 111 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 114 ft | +3 ft | 14 mph | |
| 114 ft | +3 ft | 14 mph | |
| 115 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 116 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 116 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 117 ft | +6 ft | 18 mph | |
| 118 ft | +7 ft | 20 mph | |
| 130 ft | +19 ft | 31 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 17.1% (19 ft ≈ 1.3 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Westlake SU318 HT would still be travelling at 31 mph when the Michelin Primacy 4 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Handling tests might not be the most important criteria for an SUV, but they do still show us the peak lateral grip of the tires, how safe they will be in emergency maneuvers, and if you're really keen, just how quickly you can get your child to school on a wet or dry morning.
The VW Tiguan is set up for understeer, and in the dry, that's what we got from all the tires, just to different degrees, with the slowest tires also being those with the most understeer.
Avon, Hankook and Goodyear were the nicest tires to drive quickly, having relatively good steering response and balance. Again, the budget tire was the slowest, and the BFGoodrich and Uniroyal had a slow steering reaction and a heavy understeer balance.
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 103.54 s | Best | |
| 103.54 s | Best | |
| 104.06 s | +0.52 s | |
| 104.37 s | +0.83 s | |
| 104.8 s | +1.26 s | |
| 104.96 s | +1.42 s | |
| 105.33 s | +1.79 s | |
| 105.39 s | +1.85 s | |
| 105.71 s | +2.17 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Wet
The wet braking testing had the Uniroyal Rainsport 5 move to the front, narrowly beating the Michelin Primacy 4. Like in the dry, the Goodyear and Hankook were the best of the rest, with the budget tire performing extremely poorly, with the Tiguan still travelling around 25 mph at the point the Uniroyal had stopped the SUV.
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet (50 - 1 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 116 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 117 ft | +1 ft | 6 mph | |
| 121 ft | +5 ft | 16 mph | |
| 123 ft | +7 ft | 19 mph | |
| 123 ft | +7 ft | 19 mph | |
| 127 ft | +11 ft | 24 mph | |
| 129 ft | +13 ft | 26 mph | |
| 130 ft | +14 ft | 26 mph | |
| 156 ft | +40 ft | 40 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 34% (40 ft ≈ 2.7 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Westlake SU318 HT would still be travelling at 40 mph when the Uniroyal RainSport 5 had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
The Uniroyal continued its impressive run in the wet by being the fastest over the wet handling, beating the Goodyear and Hankook.
The Michelin Primacy 4 had trouble with the deeper parts of the wet handling lap, costing the tire important time.
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 68.98 s | Best | |
| 69.22 s | +0.24 s | |
| 69.36 s | +0.38 s | |
| 69.39 s | +0.41 s | |
| 69.71 s | +0.73 s | |
| 69.75 s | +0.77 s | |
| 69.82 s | +0.84 s | |
| 70.98 s | +2.00 s | |
| 72.09 s | +3.11 s |
The difference between best and worst was 4.5% (3.11 s).
The aquaplaning tests highlighted both the Uniroyal's excellent ability in standing water, and the difficulties the Michelin had on the wet handling lap.
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 55.3 mph | Best | |
| 53.4 mph | -1.9 mph | |
| 52.2 mph | -3.1 mph | |
| 52.0 mph | -3.3 mph | |
| 50.7 mph | -4.6 mph | |
| 50.6 mph | -4.7 mph | |
| 48.7 mph | -6.6 mph | |
| 47.0 mph | -8.3 mph | |
| 46.8 mph | -8.5 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 15.4% (8.5 mph).
The Vredestein Ultrac Satin also performed well in aquaplaning, winning the curved aquaplaning test.
Curved Aquaplaning
Remaining lateral acceleration
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 8.0 ft/s² | Best | |
| 7.7 ft/s² | -0.3 ft/s² | |
| 7.5 ft/s² | -0.5 ft/s² | |
| 7.5 ft/s² | -0.5 ft/s² | |
| 7.1 ft/s² | -0.9 ft/s² | |
| 7.0 ft/s² | -1.0 ft/s² | |
| 6.2 ft/s² | -1.8 ft/s² | |
| 6.0 ft/s² | -2.0 ft/s² | |
| 5.7 ft/s² | -2.3 ft/s² |
The difference between best and worst was 28% (2.3 ft/s²).
Off Road
On the slightly moist grass, there was semi correlation with wet braking, with Hankook, Michelin and Goodyear being the best of the best and Avon, Nokian and Westlake struggling a little more. There was over 10% between the best and the worst, which could be the difference of sliding around or getting moving.
Grass Traction
Grass Acceleration Distance in Feet (3 - 9 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 15 ft | Best | |
| 15 ft | 0 ft | |
| 15 ft | 0 ft | |
| 15 ft | 0 ft | |
| 15 ft | 0 ft | |
| 16 ft | +1 ft | |
| 16 ft | +1 ft | |
| 16 ft | +1 ft | |
| 17 ft | +2 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 12.8% (2 ft).
On gravel Goodyear narrowly beat Uniroyal, which is interesting as the Uniroyal was the most "off-road" looking tire, but the Goodyear had the highest starting tread depth which might have helped. Vredestein and Nokian were also good on gravel. Sadly a storm broke just as we were getting to the last set, which is why the data is missing for Westlake.
Gravel Traction
Gravel Acceleration Distance in Feet (3 - 25 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 68 ft | Best | |
| 69 ft | +1 ft | |
| 69 ft | +1 ft | |
| 70 ft | +2 ft | |
| 71 ft | +3 ft | |
| 72 ft | +4 ft | |
| 73 ft | +5 ft | |
| 76 ft | +8 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 10.8% (8 ft ≈ 0.5 Car Lengths).
Environment
Comfort is an important quality for an SUV tire, and the BFGoodrich and Uniroyal led the group, narrowly ahead of the Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
Subj. Comfort
Subjective Comfort Score
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 10 Points | Best | |
| 9.8 Points | -0.20 Points | |
| 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points | |
| 9.2 Points | -0.80 Points | |
| 8.8 Points | -1.20 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points | |
| 8.2 Points | -1.80 Points | |
| 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
The difference between best and worst was 20% (2 Points).
Conversely, the BFGoodrich had the highest external drive-by noise.
Noise
External noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 69.3 dB | Best | |
| 70.3 dB | +1.00 dB | |
| 70.5 dB | +1.20 dB | |
| 70.8 dB | +1.50 dB | |
| 71 dB | +1.70 dB | |
| 71.1 dB | +1.80 dB | |
| 71.1 dB | +1.80 dB | |
| 71.2 dB | +1.90 dB | |
| 71.9 dB | +2.60 dB |
The difference between best and worst was 3.8% (2.6 dB).
The Michelin Primacy 4 had another impressive lead, this time in fuel use, having 7% lower rolling resistance than the second placed Goodyear.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 6.61 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 7.13 kg/t | +0.52 kg/t | $23 | |
| 7.35 kg/t | +0.74 kg/t | $33 | |
| 7.9 kg/t | +1.29 kg/t | $57 | |
| 7.93 kg/t | +1.32 kg/t | $59 | |
| 8.03 kg/t | +1.42 kg/t | $63 | |
| 8.37 kg/t | +1.76 kg/t | $78 | |
| 8.68 kg/t | +2.07 kg/t | $92 | |
| 8.72 kg/t | +2.11 kg/t | $94 |
The difference between best and worst was 31.9% (2.11 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Avon ZX7 uses about 26 gal ($94) more fuel than the Michelin Primacy 4.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
Results
2021 Tire Reviews SUV Tire TestWatch the full video of this test on YouTube Watch on YouTube
Michelin Primacy 4
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 1st / 9 | 111 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 104.8 s | +1.26 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 117 ft | +1 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 69.82 s | +0.84 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 46.8 mph | -8.5 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 5.8 ft/s² | -2.2 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 6th / 8 | 72 ft | +4 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 15 ft | 0 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 9.2 Points | -0.80 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 5th / 9 | 71 dB | +1.70 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 9 | 6.61 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- EU Label
- B/A/69
- Weight
- 11.43 kgs
- Tread
- 6.76 mm
Goodyear EfficientGrip 2 SUV
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 3rd / 9 | 114 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 104.06 s | +0.52 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 123 ft | +7 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 69.22 s | +0.24 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 52.0 mph | -3.3 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 7.1 ft/s² | -0.9 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 1st / 8 | 68 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 15 ft | 0 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 69.3 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 7.13 kg/t | +0.52 kg/t |
- EU Label
- B/A/70
- Weight
- 11.97 kgs
- Tread
- 8.78 mm
Uniroyal RainSport 5
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 5th / 9 | 116 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 105.39 s | +1.85 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 116 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 68.98 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 55.3 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 7.7 ft/s² | -0.3 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 2nd / 8 | 69 ft | +1 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 5th / 9 | 15 ft | 0 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 9.8 Points | -0.20 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 6th / 9 | 71.1 dB | +1.80 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 9 | 7.93 kg/t | +1.32 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/71
- Weight
- 11.52 kgs
- Tread
- 8.5 mm
Hankook Ventus S1 evo 3 SUV
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 4th / 9 | 115 ft | +4 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 103.54 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 121 ft | +5 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 69.36 s | +0.38 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 50.6 mph | -4.7 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 7.5 ft/s² | -0.5 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 7th / 8 | 73 ft | +5 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 1st / 9 | 15 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 8.8 Points | -1.20 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 70.3 dB | +1.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 9 | 8.37 kg/t | +1.76 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/72
- Weight
- 12.7 kgs
- Tread
- 7.94 mm
BFGoodrich Advantage SUV
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 2nd / 9 | 114 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 105.33 s | +1.79 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 127 ft | +11 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 70.98 s | +2.00 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 8.2 Points | -1.80 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 52.2 mph | -3.1 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 7.5 ft/s² | -0.5 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 5th / 8 | 71 ft | +3 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 4th / 9 | 15 ft | 0 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 10 Points | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 9th / 9 | 71.9 dB | +2.60 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 7.35 kg/t | +0.74 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/70
- Weight
- 11.15 kgs
- Tread
- 7.15 mm
Nokian Wetproof SUV
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 5th / 9 | 116 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 104.37 s | +0.83 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 123 ft | +7 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 69.75 s | +0.77 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 50.7 mph | -4.6 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 7.0 ft/s² | -1.0 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 4th / 8 | 70 ft | +2 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 8th / 9 | 16 ft | +1 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 6th / 9 | 71.1 dB | +1.80 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 6th / 9 | 8.03 kg/t | +1.42 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/70
- Weight
- 12.53 kgs
- Tread
- 8.01 mm
Vredestein Ultrac Satin
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 8th / 9 | 118 ft | +7 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 104.96 s | +1.42 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 9 Points | -1.00 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 129 ft | +13 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.71 s | +0.73 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 53.4 mph | -1.9 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 8.0 ft/s² | Best in this discipline |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 3rd / 8 | 69 ft | +1 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 6th / 9 | 16 ft | +1 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 8.2 Points | -1.80 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 70.5 dB | +1.20 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 4th / 9 | 7.9 kg/t | +1.29 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/71
- Weight
- 12.24 kgs
- Tread
- 7.93 mm
Avon ZX7
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (13)
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 | 7th / 9 | 117 ft | +6 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 103.54 s | Best in this discipline |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 9.5 Points | -0.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 130 ft | +14 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 69.39 s | +0.41 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 48.7 mph | -6.6 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 6.2 ft/s² | -1.8 ft/s² |
| Gravel TractionLower is better | 8th / 8 | 76 ft | +8 ft |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 7th / 9 | 16 ft | +1 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 8.5 Points | -1.50 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 8th / 9 | 71.2 dB | +1.90 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 9th / 9 | 8.72 kg/t | +2.11 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/69
- Weight
- 12.73 kgs
- Tread
- 7.68 mm
Westlake SU318 HT
235/55 R18
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (12)
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 | 9th / 9 | 130 ft | +19 ft |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 105.71 s | +2.17 s |
| Subj. Dry HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 7.5 Points | -2.50 Points |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 156 ft | +40 ft |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 72.09 s | +3.11 s |
| Subj. Wet HandlingHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 7 Points | -3.00 Points |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 47.0 mph | -8.3 mph |
| Curved AquaplaningHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 6.0 ft/s² | -2.0 ft/s² |
| Grass TractionLower is better | 9th / 9 | 17 ft | +2 ft |
| Subj. ComfortHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 8 Points | -2.00 Points |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 70.8 dB | +1.50 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 9 | 8.68 kg/t | +2.07 kg/t |
- Weight
- 13.61 kgs
- Tread
- 8.23 mm
Hi
For X5 , between kumho ps71 ecsta , falken azensis fk250l , Dunlop sp sport maxx 050+suv , Dunlop sp sport maxx 060+ , Bridgestone potenza sport , and Bridgestone turanza 6 what's best?
It depends what you're looking for. The Turanza 6 is probably the best all round tire of the bunch but not that sporty.
Hi
Hello - sorry for bumping in on an old thread, but I have an interesting question, hopefully.
I see that in this test some light off-road tests were carried out, while there was also a couple of AT tires tests on your site that also included some gravel and dirt road driving.
Is there a chance we get also a test of AS tires (in European terms, so 3PMSF certified) for SUV vehicles, that also includes some light off-road tests?
Throwing in some mild-AT tires in the loop as well would be a win-win situation. Granted, the "regular" AS tires are not as puncture resistant as the AT tires, but some of them have solid internal constructions (something like: two high strength steel belts and a single ply nylon layer atop a dual-ply polyester body casing), so in SUV sizes, it would be interesting to see how do they fare against each other.
Thanks a lot and continue with the good work!
I would hesitate to suggest that any EU all season tire is suitable for offroad use. Their construction is now so thin punctures would be a major issue.
When owning an SUV (GLB 235x50x19) but using it exclusively on the road (mostly dry / hot conditions) as a family car, what type of tires are more relevant, the SUV ones or the regular Touring/UHP ones? Daily use, no real sporty driving, just appreciating the handling and braking characteristics of UHP tires mostly for safety reasons.
...and just to make it a bit more specific do i go for something like PS4 SUV (or 5 if available or Primacy4+ for less sporty) or a Conti PC7?
Often these days the SUV variant of a tire is just for marketing, so if you have the size and load rating needed, it doesn't really matter if it has an SUV on the sidewall. That said, the PS4 SUV is excellent.
Looks like in 235x50x19 my options in my market are the PZ4, F1 Assymetric 6 and PS4 SUV. Same price pretty much. Which one would you go for on a GLB aiming for best braking and handling on wet and dry? Thank you!
Hard choice between the Goodyear and Michelin in this case.
I note your view but often there is a difference between the variants. My understanding is that the SUV variant is sometimes harder-compounded & more heavily siped to restore a bit of wet grip.
I think that a "is there really a difference?" test comparing a bunch of tire pairs, that nominally differ only by the tag 'SUV' on one, would be a nice exercise. So: GY EGP 2 & GY EGP 2 SUV & so on.
You might even get some manufacturers to comment on what the design differences are (& why) & see how that correlates with test results.
Just got a Nissan Armada and they had put the Westlake SU 318 on the rear. Running at 8/32, in the first big rain of the spring and holy cow they are just garbage, I had no idea they still made anything this bad. Acceleration around a corner with the V8 torque and the rear is suddenly sliding out like I'm 16 again driving an Oldsmobile!
Can't wait to get rid of them. What would you put on the Armada in TX where we see months of extreme heat and occasional massive downpours of rain on torn up roads with lots of highway driving? Thinking about Scorpion AS3+, GY Steadfast or Continental HT or AT.
I'm a big fan of the Continental TerrainContact AT, I use it myself in the summer months in Utah.
How would these touring-type SUV tires compare with H/T tires when it comes to towing a boat up a slippery boat ramp? Which would be the better choice for that application?
In theory these should offer better wet grip
Glad you like them :) IF you get some time please put a review on the site!
Hi I have a Lexus UX 250h with Bridgestone t005 225/50/18 run flats. Is there a true that performed as well but more comfortable and quieter.
Thanks
if you want a big step up in comfort I'm afraid ditching the runflats is the only real solution at the moment!
Hi which tire is good Pilot Sport 4 SUV
225/60R18 100V or Michelin PRIMACY SUV
i have a nissan xtrail ?
Both good tires with different design intentions, depends if you want a bit of sportyness
Hello,
I recently bought a 2018 Lexus RX450h 2018 which needs new tires. I live in the UK but 1 to 3 times a year I drive in the Alps (snowy conditions). My question being, is it worth to buy something like Michelin CrossClimate2 for all year around or something similar (if you have any other recommendations) or I m better with summer tires and then get some budget winter tires and eventually another set of wheels for my occasional trips? If so, what premium summer/budget winter tires I should go for? Just want to mention that although it s a big heavy car I like to throw in the corners every now and then on a country road. Many thanks and you re doing a great job with your reviews, I watched almost all your reviews but still couldn’t decide.
I definitely wouldn't recommend budget winter tires, and I sadly wouldn't recommend an all season tire if you like to throw around a heavy car. That just leaves premium winter tires for your trips (or all season tires as a winter tire)
Hi, which tire would you go for Tiguan front wheel drive 235/55R18? Assymetric 5 or EfficientGrip2?
With that sort of vehicle I would probably opt for the EfficientGrip 2
Thanks 🙏
Efficientgrip 2 SUV or Michelin Primacy 4+ (xl), same size?
Hard question. Which ever is cheaper?!
Tell me about it. Same price both...Exactly. can't make up my mind 😅
Thank you for your comparison & for wide information available on the site.
I would like to know your opinion what summer tires I should buy for my Mazda cx5 2015? I live in Finland & the weather is really awkward. Sometimes, rains & sometimes long dry spells especially in the South. Previously, I have used Michelin latitude sport 3 but experienced the same problems i.e. Best on dry but [almost] worst in wet especially in aquaplains [which are many on Finnish roads]. Considering these conditions, can you please help & suggest which tires to buy & I will really appreciate your help.
P.s: I drive very much both intercity & long trips trips.
Primacy 4 or Pilot sport 4 SUV which one is better there is 5 $ difference btwn the 2 ? What is difference between Good year EG SUV & EG Performance SUV
This is for a Xtrail sport 4wd
I've not tested them back to back, but the assumption is the Primacy 4 will be more comfortable and offer better rolling resistance, and the Pilot Sport 4 SUV will be a little more tuned for handling. There's no better, just different.
Rank Primacy 4, Continental PremiumContact 6 and Pilot Sport 4 SUV with weighting given to dry/wet braking & mileage?
I can get the Pilot Sport 4 SUV for cheapest.
I'd take the PS4 SUV especially if it's CHEAPEST! It's by far the newest
Hello and thanks for the video and test!!
I bought a Ford Ecosport 4x4 SUV AWD (small Size SUV) with 2018 Goodyear EG tires. I will change them and I would like your opinion between Goodyear EG 2 or Michelin Primacy 4, which will be fit better ? (Some other option by sellers here locally they say Falken Azen FK510 or Vredestein Ultrac (New) )
I'm not sure what i'd pick, both are excellent tires!
Thanks for the quick reply. I order Vredestein Ultrac (New model) - 205/50/R17 - Ford Ecosport 1.5 diesel. 4x4. Let's try and see this model! I will add comments and reviews. Thanks. (Ultrac is the nent generation, us you say in the video, its newest tire rather Ultrac Satin or Ultrac old model)
Hello and Thanks for that comprehensive test!
Two questions please:
1. How does the Goodyear EG2 compare with the F1 Eagle ASYM 5 in that size (235/555R18) ?
which one would you pick for an all around tire?
2. for that size 235/55R18 it seems that the older Eagle F1 Asym 3 SUV gets better EU rating than the Asym 5 (A vs B in Wet Braking). does that mean that in this specific size it's better to stick with the older Asym 3?
1) See the latest video on www.youtube.com/TireReviews, the EGP2 will behave a lot like the t005 in that test.
2) No, I would so for the Asym 5.
Thanks for the fast reply.
1. You're link directing to the main channel page. Which particular video shoild I watch?
2. Why? Isn't short braking distance on wet is good anough reason?
I said latest video, which is the most recent one.
There's more to a tire than wet braking, also if you go through all the tests on the site and the wet braking results in the tests compared to the labels, it's not always as clear as you'd expect.
Thanks a lot. I was referring to efficient grip 2 SUV. Does efficientgrip performance 2 is the same?
okay, watch that video :)
I believe you were referring to this..?
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Honestly, I'm a bit confused by you're answer :/
1. From my understanding same tire can be great in one size and less better in different size. I've asked How does the Goodyear EG2 compare with the F1 Eagle ASYM 5 in that size (235/555R18). but on that latest video the test ae for tires in totally different size. So how is it possible to compare it to the Turanza T005..?
2. Since you recommend getting the Asym 5 over the Asym 3 SUV although the Wet braking is "worse" in 235/555R18 size, I would still like to know which one would you pick for this size?
The Goodyear Efficientgrip 2 235/555R18 or F1 Eagle ASYM 5 235/555R18?
Many thanks in advance!
If you say SUV, do you automaticcaly mean 4X4 ? If not, why would you recommend a different tire for let's say a Seat Ateca compared to a Ford Focus Break for example ? To me, this is a bit strange because for an SUV you land on a Michelin Primacy 4 and for a break of hatch you will land on Michelin Pilot Sport 4 for example. Although a front wheel driven SUV has usually les traction on the front wheels compared to lower cars. Wouldn't it make more sence to put the tire with the most grip on the SUV for that reason ?
Nope! Anything classed as an SUV.
I'm not even sure the PS4 is made in many crossover SUV tire sizes, but for the type of tire in this test, "sporty driving" is a lower priority to noise, comfort and rolling resistance, which is why we tested the primacy 4 category of tire.
The is a PS4 SUV, but that's usually for high performance SUVs
The test vehicle for the SUV tire (tire) test seems well enough for the smaller SUV vehicles but will the results be similar for larger SUVs?https://uploads.disquscdn.c...
There should be some crossover where the patterns are available in your size, but I'd be surprised if they all were!
I ended up going with Nokian One HT, pretty much a cross between "what the heck" and "a path less traveled." It was a toss up between Michelins, Continentals and Nokians. Not much info from 3rd party reviews on the Nokian but the price was low enough to take a chance.
Be sure to let me know how you get on with them! :)
Hi all, quick question.
What is the difference between Touring tires vs all-season vs performance vs summer tires?
Many things :) There's quite a few videos on the youtube channel or articles on the website covering it, it's a little much for a comment. A good start - https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Another interesting test.
Are there any plans in the future to test all season tires for performance in various temperatures again and/or different levels of wear?
Would be great to see the new CC2, V4S-G3, 4S2, A005 EVO & Quatrac in these
Do you know when the new CC2 is coming to the UK, and is Conti planning an update to the AllSeasonContact?
Temperatures, unlikely, wear, I hope to do next year, though it's difficult to do properly!
The CC2 is officially launched Sept 2nd I believe, and no there is no update for the ASC for this year.
Great test, once more! Since you couldn't get in this test the Continental PC 6, and the Goodyear Asym 5, what about you ask Continental to test in their facilities the PC6, the Eco Contact 6 (eventually, the Eco Contact 5 SUV as well) and the Sport Contact 5 SUV in this size (in a kind of "old vs new premium+UHP test"), and then do the same with Goodyear and ask them to test the Asym 5, the EfficientGrip 2 SUV (eventually, the Asym 3 SUV as well) and the EfficientGrip SUV. Hopefully, they will arrange you similar cars to the ones on this test.
If you can't get all the tires you want at once, you can always test them separately afterwards in a way tire manufacturers would prefer!... ;)
I'd certainly like to do such a test, a Swedish magazine did it recently with F1 SS, Asym 5 and EGP2 I believe and the results are interesting, though I've not had the time to go through it and get it on the site yet.
I'm glad you enjoyed the idea. I forgot to mention that if you ever convince Michelin to support you in a test like this, and in this size, you should make an effort to get the Primacy 4, the Primacy 3, the Latitude Sport 3, and (why not?) the CrossClimate 2. Too bad they don't make the PS4 SUV in this popular size. It could just be that they have too much offer in their warehouse.
The EcoContact 6 is a terrible tire. I had them as OE with my xc40, from new. I found them fidgety in the wet and I had no confidence in them when it came to aquaplaning. As soon as the tread was halfway worn they started wheel spinning when pulling out at junctions or onto a roundabouts in the wet at anything other than a crawl.