Menu

2022 Auto Bild All Season Tire Test

Jonathan Benson
Data analyzed and reviewed by Jonathan Benson
10 min read Updated
Error: Article not found

Similar Tire Tests

Show All all season tire tests
2026 AutoView All-Season Tire Test
May 2026 255/45R19 Michelin CrossClimate 3 Sport 4 tires
2026 Autobild Mini All Season Test
May 2026 225/40 R18 Goodyear Vector All Season 4 5 tires
2025 Motor All Season Tire Test
November 2025 215/55 R17 Nokian Seasonproof 2 7 tires
2025 TUV Test of Nokian SeasonProof 2 vs Rivals
November 2025 205/55 R16 Nokian Seasonproof 2 5 tires
2025 Auto Bild Sports Car All Season Tire Test
November 2025 225/45 R18 Pirelli Cinturato All Season SF3 12 tires
2025 Tire Rack Extreme Performance Track Tire Test
November 2025 275/35 R18 Bridgestone Potenza RE 71RS 7 tires

Discussion

21 comments
  1. H. Wiedemann archived

    wat is more important, dry braking or wet braking? This depends on where you are living .
    We, in stuttgart have only 31 rainy days a Year.
    And the goodyear is winning the compare. I d'ont understand the conclusion.

    #8829
    1. TireReviews H. Wiedemann archived

      Dry braking is usually much closer than wet and there are far more accidents in wet weather which is why most tests put a higher score weight on wet.

      #8834
  2. Slobodan archived

    When they say projected wear 45.000 km, to what thread depth are they talking? 1.6 mm? Because if you are bellow 4 mm, you can't use that tire any more during winter in Serbia. And since it is an all season tire, yeah...

    #8825
      1. Slobodan TireReviews archived

        Thanks. Well, that is not good, for all season tires at least...

        #8846
  3. Alan archived

    It's a shame we don't know the temperature these tests were done in. I'm more interested in brake distance in cooler wet weather, than warmer wet.

    #8515
    1. TireReviews Alan archived

      My all season test last year had braking at 2 temps

      #8519
      1. Alan TireReviews archived

        Yes, time after time I go back to that one. I presume I've given about 50k in advertising revenue watching all the all season videos :)

        I know this is a little of an odd question, probably impossibile to really answer but I'll ask anyway.

        I'm looking at getting the Quadratic Pros to replace Nexen NFERA SU1. Would you, in your more expert opinion, think they are better in dry and wet for braking all year round than the Nexens (or at least on parr).

        #8522
        1. TireReviews Alan archived

          Wet, quite possibly, certainly in cooler conditions.

          In the dry, no, summer tires always have a good lead in dry braking.

          #8527
  4. Mr E archived

    All this detailed information has left me with analysis paralysis, so let's see what the comments say. I'm in the UK, will mostly be driving north of Edinburgh with a few jaunts down to the North every year. I don't particularly care about price - if a good set of tires stop me from hitting someone or skidding into a ditch once, they've paid for themselves a dozen times over.

    Thoughts? I've been fiddling around with the custom score weights, and I've cut the list down to: Bridgestone Weather Control A005 EVO, Goodyear Vector 4Seasons Gen 3, Michelin CrossClimate 2.

    #8457
    1. TireReviews Mr E archived

      All of them good choices. I hope this helped :)

      Honestly, it's tough. If you plan to use them year round and truly don't care about price I'd go with the Bridgestone, but the wear is high and the snow isn't as good as the other two. Of the other two, you gotta decide if you want dry braking or wet braking I guess. The Goodyear is probably the best all round when you factor in wear too.

      #8458
      1. Mr E TireReviews archived

        Does Auto Bild say what temperature these tires were tested at? Obviously can't be that high for the Snow tests, but wondering about the Dry and Wet tests.

        I've basically accepted that every summer from now on we will be boiled alive in the UK :( so I'm super curious how these tires fare when the heat is turned all the way up.

        #8468
        1. TireReviews Mr E archived

          I didn't see it, sorry.

          #8471
  5. Steve archived

    Interesting results with rolling resistance vs real world fuel economy.

    Perhaps the differences could be explained by:

    Tire weight (there is a weak positive correlation)?

    Drag from the tire sidewalls? I read that Bridgestone purposly designed the sidewalls on the Driveguard runflats to increase drag which would generate more air turbulance to cool the tire better.

    Deflection in the tire?

    Definitely something that needs to be looked into further in future tests if real world fuel economy results are so different than rolling resistance.

    #8392
    1. TireReviews Steve archived

      All the manufacturers take into account sidewall effects on rolling resistance. It seems the fuel use was done during the wear convoy run which also didn't work out too well for Michelin.

      #8395
      1. Steve TireReviews archived

        Any thoughts on the differences?
        Do you think the supposed real world data is more likely to be realistic?

        #8405
      2. WorkonSunday TireReviews archived

        My theory is: michelin talks abit about re-optimising the smaller gap thread pattern for cc2 compared to cc+, perhaps the rubber deformation during cornering is different to straightline to ensure grip characteristic improves in corner? Was RR done in straight line while fuel consumption test done with cornering ? ?

        #8647
        1. TireReviews WorkonSunday archived

          RR is done on a machine and yes the fuel consumption will contain cornering. In this case I believe it was a big circle.

          #8656
  6. Mark Knight archived

    I also struggle to see how the Goodyear which stops 25ft further than the summer tire in dry braking can be described as exemplary!!!!

    I must admit I find German tire tests a combination of the sublime - the extent and depth of their testing regimes which are truly impressive - and the ridiculous - their conclusions which are frequently frankly bizarre.

    For example the Kumho beats the Michelin in only wet handling by one place and wet circle by 7 places. In every other dry, wet, aqua and snow test it is behind the Michelin - often by a margin Yet it is 5th and the French tire 9th. So this test result is totally dependent on cost, wear and fuel consumption.

    To prove my point further let's look at the Falken which is described as good and the Michelin as only fair.

    In the dry tests the Michelin beats the Falken comfortably in both braking 1st to 10th and handling 3rd to 7th.

    In the wet tests the Michelin beats the Falken in both braking 8th to 10th and handling 10th to 12th. In wet circle the Falken comes out on top 12th to 13th.

    In aqua the Falken comes out on top in both straight 3rd to 7th and curved 8th to 12th.

    On snow the Michelin wins comfortably across all four categories. In braking 2nd 12th to traction 1st to 13th, handling 5th to 12th and slalom 1st to 11th.

    So apart from acqua the Michelin is massivly superior. Yet the Falken is good and the Michelin only fair!!!!!

    #8386
    1. TireReviews Mark Knight archived

      It's a shame their background scoring system isn't fixed or shown, the German School System scoring brackets move each test. But it's still an amazing test! ANd they do give us all the data unlike ADAC so we can work stuff out for ourselves!

      #8398
  7. Mark Knight archived

    Fascinating. I just put in a 40% dry, 40% wet and 20% snow ratio and nothing for price/wear and guess who came out top.

    Michelin.

    Clearly the Autobild test massively punishes Michelin and Continental for wear and price. Now these are important but ultimately I want the best tire for braking, handling, traction etc. Given the cost of an accident both physical and monetary that trumps the cost of the tire for me (others of course may have different priorities).

    #8385