Test setup & methodology
The test setting, the conditions recorded and how the results contribute to the score.
Recorded test conditions
Recorded test conditions
- Dry Braking - Cool
- 62.1 → 0.0 mph
- Dry Braking
- 62.1 → 0.0 mph
- Snow Braking
- 31.1 → 0.0 mph
While this test doesn't have the new Michelin CrossClimate 2 or Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF2, it does have the new Vredestein Quatrac, and even more interestingly, it tested at multiple temperatures. We didn't get precise temperature data, but the magazine did detail that the cooler temperature was under 10c, and the warmer temperature over 20c.
As there's a huge amount of data generated from this test, we've chosen not to database some of the different temperature tests we felt weren't important, such as aquaplaning and noise.
The other caveat is that the split temperature tests were conducted on different proving grounds, with different circuits and grip surfaces so the results aren't directly comparable.
If you'd like to see the full data, head over to the Auto Zeitung website, or there's the key data below.
Dry
The Bridgestone WeatherControl A005 EVO led the way in the cooler dry braking test, and performed well in the warmer dry braking test. The Vredestein Quatrac also performed well at both temperatures, but the Michelin CrossClimate couldn't match its usual dry braking dominance at cooler temperatures, finishing sixth overall. Normal service resumed for the Michelin as the temperature increased, where it led the group.
Nokian, Goodyear and Falken performed poorly at both temperatures.
Dry Braking - Cool
Dry braking at cooler temperatures in feet (62 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 125 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 125 ft | 0 ft | 6 mph | |
| 128 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 129 ft | +4 ft | 14 mph | |
| 130 ft | +5 ft | 17 mph | |
| 131 ft | +6 ft | 17 mph | |
| 135 ft | +10 ft | 22 mph | |
| 135 ft | +10 ft | 23 mph | |
| 136 ft | +11 ft | 24 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 9.5% (11 ft ≈ 0.8 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Nokian SeasonProof would still be travelling at 24 mph when the Bridgestone Weather Control A005 EVO had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Dry Braking
Dry braking in feet (62 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 129 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 129 ft | 0 ft | 6 mph | |
| 130 ft | +1 ft | 9 mph | |
| 132 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 132 ft | +3 ft | 13 mph | |
| 137 ft | +8 ft | 20 mph | |
| 138 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 138 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph | |
| 138 ft | +9 ft | 21 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 7.4% (9 ft ≈ 0.6 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Falken EUROALL SEASON AS210 would still be travelling at 21 mph when the Michelin CrossClimate+ had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
On average, Goodyear and Michelin performed best in the two dry handling tests, with Vredestein also posting a consistent result. Once again, the Nokian SeasonProof struggled at both temperatures.
Dry Handling - Cool
Dry handling cooler temperatures in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 76.6 s | Best | |
| 76.9 s | +0.30 s | |
| 77 s | +0.40 s | |
| 77.1 s | +0.50 s | |
| 77.2 s | +0.60 s | |
| 77.3 s | +0.70 s | |
| 77.4 s | +0.80 s | |
| 77.4 s | +0.80 s | |
| 78.1 s | +1.50 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling - Cool test finished less than 3% apart.
Dry Handling
Dry handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 69.2 s | Best | |
| 69.3 s | +0.10 s | |
| 69.4 s | +0.20 s | |
| 69.6 s | +0.40 s | |
| 69.7 s | +0.50 s | |
| 69.7 s | +0.50 s | |
| 69.7 s | +0.50 s | |
| 69.8 s | +0.60 s | |
| 70.5 s | +1.30 s |
All the tires in the Dry Handling test finished less than 3% apart.
Wet
Wet braking was led by Bridgestone, which had a significant lead in the cooler temperatures. Michelin, Continental and Vredestein again did well.
Wet Braking - Cool
Wet braking at cooler temperature in feet
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 175 ft | Best | |
| 185 ft | +10 ft | |
| 186 ft | +11 ft | |
| 194 ft | +19 ft | |
| 196 ft | +21 ft | |
| 205 ft | +30 ft | |
| 209 ft | +34 ft | |
| 212 ft | +37 ft | |
| 215 ft | +40 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 22.7% (40 ft ≈ 2.7 Car Lengths).
Wet Braking
Wet braking in feet
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 179 ft | Best | |
| 179 ft | 0 ft | |
| 180 ft | +1 ft | |
| 181 ft | +2 ft | |
| 182 ft | +3 ft | |
| 183 ft | +4 ft | |
| 185 ft | +6 ft | |
| 190 ft | +11 ft | |
| 193 ft | +14 ft |
The difference between best and worst was 7.9% (14 ft ≈ 1 Car Lengths).
Wet handling closely matched wet braking, other then the Falken Euroall Season AS210 having a surprise result, winning the wet handling at warmer temperatures when it was nearly last in the cooler temperatures.
Wet Handling - Cool
Wet handling at cooler temperature in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 90.3 s | Best | |
| 90.5 s | +0.20 s | |
| 90.5 s | +0.20 s | |
| 90.6 s | +0.30 s | |
| 91.5 s | +1.20 s | |
| 93.3 s | +3.00 s | |
| 93.5 s | +3.20 s | |
| 93.9 s | +3.60 s | |
| 94.4 s | +4.10 s |
The difference between best and worst was 4.5% (4.1 s).
Wet Handling
Wet handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 64.9 s | Best | |
| 65.1 s | +0.20 s | |
| 65.5 s | +0.60 s | |
| 65.6 s | +0.70 s | |
| 65.9 s | +1.00 s | |
| 66 s | +1.10 s | |
| 66.6 s | +1.70 s | |
| 67 s | +2.10 s | |
| 68 s | +3.10 s |
The difference between best and worst was 4.8% (3.1 s).
The new Vredestein Quatrac led the wet in the straight aquaplaning test, with Hankook and Bridgestone also performing very well.
Straight Aqua
Float Speed in mph
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 48.0 mph | Best | |
| 47.6 mph | -0.4 mph | |
| 47.5 mph | -0.5 mph | |
| 47.3 mph | -0.7 mph | |
| 47.0 mph | -1.0 mph | |
| 46.9 mph | -1.1 mph | |
| 46.4 mph | -1.6 mph | |
| 45.4 mph | -2.6 mph | |
| 44.4 mph | -3.6 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 7.5% (3.6 mph).
Snow
Snow testing was only performed at one temperature.
As we've seen before, the winter specialists Nokian performed well in snow braking, matching the Continental and slightly ahead of the Falken.
Snow Braking
Snow braking in feet (31 - 0 mph)
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Residual speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| 105 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 105 ft | Best | 0 mph | |
| 106 ft | +1 ft | 8 mph | |
| 108 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 108 ft | +3 ft | 12 mph | |
| 108 ft | +3 ft | 14 mph | |
| 109 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 109 ft | +4 ft | 15 mph | |
| 111 ft | +6 ft | 19 mph |
The difference between best and worst was 5.9% (6 ft ≈ 0.4 Car Lengths). From 80 mph, the Maxxis Premitra All Season AP3 would still be travelling at 19 mph when the Continental AllSeasonContact had stopped.
Residual speed is calculated from the measured braking distances, assuming constant deceleration; it is not a separate measurement.
Hankook led the way in snow handling, with Nokian second and three tires tied for third place overall.
Snow Handling
Snow handling time in seconds
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 30 s | Best | |
| 30.3 s | +0.30 s | |
| 30.4 s | +0.40 s | |
| 30.4 s | +0.40 s | |
| 30.4 s | +0.40 s | |
| 30.6 s | +0.60 s | |
| 30.7 s | +0.70 s | |
| 31.1 s | +1.10 s | |
| 31.8 s | +1.80 s |
The difference between best and worst was 6% (1.8 s).
Continental and Nokian also led the way in snow traction, confirming these are the best choice for snow driving.
Snow Traction
Pulling Force in pounds-force
Higher is better ↑| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 504 lbf | Best | |
| 496 lbf | -8 lbf | |
| 485 lbf | -19 lbf | |
| 485 lbf | -19 lbf | |
| 484 lbf | -20 lbf | |
| 484 lbf | -20 lbf | |
| 475 lbf | -29 lbf | |
| 468 lbf | -36 lbf | |
| 463 lbf | -41 lbf |
The difference between best and worst was 8.1% (41 lbf).
Environment
All nine sets of tires were separated by just 3 dB in the external noise test.
Noise
External noise in dB
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best |
|---|---|---|
| 70 dB | Best | |
| 70 dB | Best | |
| 70 dB | Best | |
| 71 dB | +1.00 dB | |
| 71 dB | +1.00 dB | |
| 71 dB | +1.00 dB | |
| 72 dB | +2.00 dB | |
| 72 dB | +2.00 dB | |
| 72 dB | +2.00 dB |
All the tires in the Noise test finished less than 3% apart.
The Nokian SeasonProof led the group in fuel use, with a very low rolling resistance.
Rolling Resistance
Rolling resistance in kg t
Lower is better ↓| Position / Tire | Result | Gap to best | Extra fuel / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7.5 kg/t | Best | $0 | |
| 7.7 kg/t | +0.20 kg/t | $8 | |
| 7.9 kg/t | +0.40 kg/t | $16 | |
| 7.9 kg/t | +0.40 kg/t | $16 | |
| 8.3 kg/t | +0.80 kg/t | $31 | |
| 8.4 kg/t | +0.90 kg/t | $35 | |
| 8.7 kg/t | +1.20 kg/t | $47 | |
| 8.9 kg/t | +1.40 kg/t | $55 | |
| 9.2 kg/t | +1.70 kg/t | $67 |
The difference between best and worst was 22.7% (1.7 kg / t). Over 12,000 miles a year at $3.60/gal, the Maxxis Premitra All Season AP3 uses about 19 gal ($67) more fuel than the Nokian SeasonProof.
Adjust the assumptions
Calculated estimates, not additional measurements. Use the controls to explore the assumptions.
Maxxis, Hankook and Falken were the cheapest tires on test, with Michelin and Continental the most expensive.
Results
Continental AllSeasonContact
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 5th / 9 | 130 ft | +5 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 138 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 5th / 9 | 77.2 s | +0.60 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.7 s | +0.50 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 180 ft | +1 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 5th / 9 | 196 ft | +21 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 5th / 9 | 91.5 s | +1.20 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 65.1 s | +0.20 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 4th / 9 | 47.3 mph | -0.7 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 105 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 504 lbf | Best in this discipline |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 30.4 s | +0.40 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 71 dB | +1.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 7.9 kg/t | +0.40 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/72
- Weight
- 8.5 kgs
- Tread
- 8 mm
- Price
- 310.00
Vredestein Quatrac
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 128 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 132 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 4th / 9 | 77.1 s | +0.50 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 69.2 s | Best in this discipline |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 183 ft | +4 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 186 ft | +11 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 1st / 9 | 90.3 s | Best in this discipline |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 65.6 s | +0.70 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 1st / 9 | 48.0 mph | Best in this discipline |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 108 ft | +3 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 484 lbf | -20 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 30.4 s | +0.40 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 9 | 72 dB | +2.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 7.9 kg/t | +0.40 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/70
- Weight
- 8.1 kgs
- Tread
- 7.6 mm
- Price
- 260.00
Goodyear Vector 4Seasons Gen 3
205/55 R16 91V
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 7th / 9 | 135 ft | +10 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 138 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 1st / 9 | 76.6 s | Best in this discipline |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 69.4 s | +0.20 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 179 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 4th / 9 | 194 ft | +19 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 90.5 s | +0.20 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 65.5 s | +0.60 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 44.4 mph | -3.6 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 109 ft | +4 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 485 lbf | -19 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 30.6 s | +0.60 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 70 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 7.7 kg/t | +0.20 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/70
- Weight
- 8.2 kgs
- Tread
- 7.1 mm
- Price
- 295.00
Michelin CrossClimate+
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 6th / 9 | 131 ft | +6 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 129 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 76.9 s | +0.30 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 69.3 s | +0.10 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 181 ft | +2 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 185 ft | +10 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 4th / 9 | 90.6 s | +0.30 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 68 s | +3.10 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 45.4 mph | -2.6 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 108 ft | +3 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 475 lbf | -29 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 30.7 s | +0.70 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 70 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 6th / 9 | 8.4 kg/t | +0.90 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 8.7 kgs
- Tread
- 7.1 mm
- Price
- 315.00
Bridgestone Weather Control A005 EVO
205/55 R16 94V XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 1st / 9 | 125 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 129 ft | 0 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 6th / 9 | 77.3 s | +0.70 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.7 s | +0.50 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 179 ft | 0 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 1st / 9 | 175 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 90.5 s | +0.20 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 66.6 s | +1.70 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 47.5 mph | -0.5 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 109 ft | +4 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 8th / 9 | 468 lbf | -36 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 31.8 s | +1.80 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 1st / 9 | 70 dB | Best in this discipline |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 5th / 9 | 8.3 kg/t | +0.80 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/A/71
- Weight
- 8.7 kgs
- Tread
- 7.8 mm
- Price
- 290.00
Hankook Kinergy 4S2
205/55 R16 94H XL
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 125 ft | 0 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 132 ft | +3 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 77 s | +0.40 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 69.8 s | +0.60 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 7th / 9 | 185 ft | +6 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 7th / 9 | 209 ft | +34 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 9th / 9 | 94.4 s | +4.10 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 65.9 s | +1.00 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 47.6 mph | -0.4 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 108 ft | +3 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 3rd / 9 | 485 lbf | -19 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 30 s | Best in this discipline |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 71 dB | +1.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 7th / 9 | 8.7 kg/t | +1.20 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 9 kgs
- Tread
- 7.7 mm
- Price
- 250.00
Nokian SeasonProof
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 9th / 9 | 136 ft | +11 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 137 ft | +8 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 9th / 9 | 78.1 s | +1.50 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 70.5 s | +1.30 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 193 ft | +14 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 6th / 9 | 205 ft | +30 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 7th / 9 | 93.5 s | +3.20 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 6th / 9 | 66 s | +1.10 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 7th / 9 | 46.4 mph | -1.6 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 105 ft | Best in this discipline |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 2nd / 9 | 496 lbf | -8 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 2nd / 9 | 30.3 s | +0.30 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 4th / 9 | 71 dB | +1.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 1st / 9 | 7.5 kg/t | Best in this discipline |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 8 kgs
- Tread
- 8.1 mm
- Price
- 260.00
Falken EUROALL SEASON AS210
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 8th / 9 | 135 ft | +10 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 138 ft | +9 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 7th / 9 | 77.4 s | +0.80 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 4th / 9 | 69.6 s | +0.40 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 182 ft | +3 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 9th / 9 | 215 ft | +40 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 8th / 9 | 93.9 s | +3.60 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 1st / 9 | 64.9 s | Best in this discipline |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 6th / 9 | 46.9 mph | -1.1 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 106 ft | +1 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 484 lbf | -20 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 30.4 s | +0.40 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 9 | 72 dB | +2.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 8th / 9 | 8.9 kg/t | +1.40 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/B/69
- Weight
- 9.5 kgs
- Tread
- 7.1 mm
- Price
- 250.00
Maxxis Premitra All Season AP3
205/55 R16 91H
Category scores (% of best)
All discipline results (14)
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 Braking - CoolLower is better | 4th / 9 | 129 ft | +4 ft |
| Dry BrakingLower is better | 3rd / 9 | 130 ft | +1 ft |
| Dry Handling - CoolLower is better | 7th / 9 | 77.4 s | +0.80 s |
| Dry HandlingLower is better | 5th / 9 | 69.7 s | +0.50 s |
| Wet BrakingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 190 ft | +11 ft |
| Wet Braking - CoolLower is better | 8th / 9 | 212 ft | +37 ft |
| Wet Handling - CoolLower is better | 6th / 9 | 93.3 s | +3.00 s |
| Wet HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 67 s | +2.10 s |
| Straight AquaHigher is better | 5th / 9 | 47.0 mph | -1.0 mph |
| Snow BrakingLower is better | 9th / 9 | 111 ft | +6 ft |
| Snow TractionHigher is better | 9th / 9 | 463 lbf | -41 lbf |
| Snow HandlingLower is better | 8th / 9 | 31.1 s | +1.10 s |
| NoiseLower is better | 7th / 9 | 72 dB | +2.00 dB |
| Rolling ResistanceLower is better | 9th / 9 | 9.2 kg/t | +1.70 kg/t |
- EU Label
- C/C/70
- Weight
- 9 kgs
- Tread
- 7.4 mm
- Price
- 240.00
I struggle to see how a tire that is 21 ft worse than the best at cool wet braking and is very average at wet handling in cool conditions and is even more average/poor in dry conditions can be the test winner. Yes its snow performance is excellent but this is not a winter tire test. Even if I lived in central Europe I wouldn't want to risk the Continental in non snowy weather. Surely if you have the sort of climate with winter snow that the Conti excels in you'd go for a winter/summer combo. Just MHO but the Vredestein and Michelin seem much more rounded tires.
Your point in another test that a tire that is poor in key areas can't make that up by excellence in others due to weighting of scores is well made. German tire tests do seem to err in this regard.
I totally agree, however there is one thing to keep in mind. It's super far behind the Bridgestone, which we know from other tests trades wet grip for wear, so it's a bit of a false benchmark!
The Bridgestone braking results are amazing - only 1.4m off the best across the 5 braking results compared to the Contis 11.1m. Wear is important but only within reason, it's not everything. If I'm doing 6K a year then 40K life is fine as I change every 5-6 years come what may. If I'm doing 20K a year then I want 60K life as it's much more important. Having said that safety trumps wear every time for me.
The comment by AZ that the Conti convinced across dry and wet surfaces is just not borne out by the results.
For example the total of the braking distances across the various conditions are:
Bridge +1.4M!!!!
MCC +6.0M
Vred +7.1M
Conti +11.1M
Good + 12.8M
The combined handling times are:
Vred +1.6s
Good +1.6s
Conti +2.9s
MCC +4.5s
Bridge +4.9s
This is where your Tests are so good, Jonathan. I forget which test it was but you marked one tire down from 3rd where its score put it to 4th due to a poor performance in a key test. Otherwise, in the converse to the German tests, you could end up with a situation in a mild climate scoring system in which snow gets say 5%, where a summer tire wins an AS test due to its woeful snow performance being totally eclipsed by its much higher scoring superior dry/wet results which would be equally odd
Basically IMHO there has to be a minimum standard for every key test which a tire cannot fall behind if it wants to win. ADAC, AutoBild, AZ scoring systems seem to ignore dry/wet provided snow is great. Well it doesn't snow in Bavaria in July😁.
I really wonder why the Vredestein Tire get´s such a good rating. I mean it really wears of quickly. Which isnt rated here. But all in all the tire is definitely not better than the allmighty Vectore 4S Gen3!
Especially if it wears of quicker and loses grip during aging.
In tests where you don't test wear, you can't degrade a result based on another tests data (though some days I wish you could!)
This is why I love your Page. I love tires. Written with a Y not I.
I can compare differents tests, weigh them and see every tire compared in bar charts in each specific summary of yours. Your videos are also great.
Through your page I startet weighing my specific needs on a tire. This is how I came to a set of summer tires (for summer) and a set of all season tires (for winter use).
I am about to purchase all-season tires for my Skoda Fabia Estate, 185/60R15, 20,000+ miles per annum, and I live in the West Midlands region of the UK. Snow is rare, but temperatures are regularly below 7c in the winter. My driving is leisurely, and I am interested in good fuel economy and ride comfort, but not interested in sporty performance or handling. The Nokian Seasonproof has some excellent reviews; any other ideas?
I'm not sure where you saw excellent reviews of the seasonproof but it only really does well in the snow, which isn't that useful. Check out our all season test video for recommendations but the usual recommendations are the Michelin, Goodyear, Conti or Pirelli
Thanks; I will compare the Vredestein and the Pirelli for local availability and prices.
Vredestein seems to be on a good way actually. The new Quatrac seems to be good, the Ultrac (Summer Tire) had a good test result in Auto Express and the new Wintrac seems to be also not bad
https://reifenpresse.de/202...
Their' latest gen stuff is really good, it performed well in the tire review as test this year
Very nice to see how they perform at different temp and surfaces. Some of them are less influenced by those variables, so it could make the results more aplicable to the real world of roads and countries. Looking forward to see your own test! Which tire measure have you used for it? 💪
205/55 R16 :)
Yep, agree. 1st test I see with these parameters. It looks like the all season tires going to be more all season tires than winter tires. Maybe I will get in the next years all season instead of winter tires, for summer I will stay with summer tires.
I am thinking about buying an electric car. I know EVs have their own specialized tires that are usually optimized for very low rolling resistance to increase range as much as possible. Would it be a good idea to fit all season tires if you'd rather have better grip in all weather even if range suffers? What's the average rolling resistance of EV optimized tires when compared with the tires in this test?
If you'd rather have better all weather grip, an all season / winter tire is a good option :) The Crossclimate 2 is OE on one of the Volvo EVs so they must be getting there in terms of RR :)